Publication

In this study, we ask what such a career-long development journey might look like, and suggest  an approach to acquiring the necessary skills. We base our work on existing scholarship, which  has  largely  focused  on  understanding  what  the  characteristics  of  successful  technical  leaders  are,  particularly at  the  highest  levels. However,  our approach  has  been more  deductive  than  previous efforts, which is to say, that we have attempted to establish not what a typical career  has  been  for  successful  technical  leaders,  but  rather,  what  it  should  be. We  have  based  our  conclusions  on  integrative  understanding  from  our  own  extensive  cumulative  experience  as  executives in industry and government, along with insights gained  from numerous colleagues  from a diverse set of institutions.

We do not claim that this is the way others have developed great technical leaders. Although  the  methods  we  recommend  have  been  demonstrated  to  be  effective,  the  sum  total  of  our  recommendations represents a new approach, and our assertion that this is the way we should  proceed.  The  good  news  is  that  the  approach  reported  on  here  can  be  applied  by  individual  aspiring  and  developing  leaders,  by  their  supervisors  and  executive  sponsors,  or  by  entire  agencies or subordinate commands at any level in the Department of Defense. The successful  application  of  the  Framework  and  Career  Model  we  have  developed  does  not  depend  on  a  formal top-down program: indeed, while our study has focused on the Department of Defense,  this  approach  is  applicable  to  any  technical  leadership  situation,  inside  or  outside  of  government.

The Framework recognizes three broadly defined career stages – junior, mid-level, and senior,  modelled  on  the  typical  supervisory  responsibilities  of  leaders  at  each  level,  but  equally  applicable to non-supervisory roles.

The core of  the Framework is a set of 24 carefully curated competencies  that reflect  the dual  nature of the technical leader’s role: each of the 24 is essentially technical in nature, but is also  essentially a leadership competency. It is our belief, based on our own experience, interviews  with  subject matter experts, and  the existing literature,  that any individual who acquires  this  set  of  competencies  will  naturally  perform  at  the  highest  level  in  positions  of  technical  2 leadership  responsibility.  That  is  why  a  formal  program  is  not  required  in  order  to  take  advantage of the Framework, which can be applied by individuals as well as institutions.

To  assist  individuals  and  organizations  in  applying  the  Framework,  we  define  six  broad  categories  of  development  method:  education,  training,  job  assignment,  rotational  assignments, mentoring, and coaching, and we provide guidance on the use of these methods  as tools for development consistent with each career stage.

The Framework is applied through a cyclical process centered on the emerging technical leader,  which  includes a  set  of  best  practices  derived  from  our  observation and analysis  of  technical  leadership programs at a variety of best-in-class companies and agencies  recognized  for  their  success in leadership development. We have assembled these into a Career Model, combining a  number of tools and practices into a single integrated whole, in some cases bringing practices  together for the first time.

The Model incorporates a number of insights, of which perhaps the most important one is that  technical  leadership  development  cannot  succeed  as  an  independent  initiative.  Success  in  building  technical  leaders in  an  organization  requires  that  the  development  process must  be  fully integrated (or at the very least, consistent) with the organization’s formal human resource  management  practices,  including  recruitment,  promotion,  and  job  assignment.  Although  this  finding may appear  to contradict our assertion  that an individual can apply  the Framework  to  their own career planning and execution, this is not so: what we are talking about here is the  application  of  technical  leadership  development  as  an  organizational  policy,  as  opposed  to  leaving the matter up to the initiative and discretion of individuals.

A  second  key  finding  is  that  leadership  development  must  be  associated  with  objective  assessment  techniques  that  are  evidence-based  and  reflective  of  accomplishments,  not  capabilities.  We  offer  a  tool  that  allows  individuals  to  track  their  own  progress  toward  attainment  of  the  24  competencies  at  each  level,  and  that  promotes  the  all-important  conversation  between  the  emerging/developing  leader  and  their  supervisor  regarding  that  progress.

Finally, we have found that the very best technical leadership development programs are highly  tailored. While we do not believe that tailoring can or should involve skipping or replacing any  of the 24 core competencies, we have found that the framing of those competencies within an  organization and the way in which they are applied to specific disciplines and organizational sub  units is very important: it is particularly true that the mission of the organization and the nature  of the technical discipline involved do matter.

The Framework and Career Model we offer here are as complete and well founded as can be,  given  the  state of leadership development  research. We must point out, however,  that  there  are  a  number  of  questions  for  which  our  current  understanding  does  not  provide  answers.  Among these are the following: what evidence is there that a particular development method,  training,  for  example,  or  coaching,  is  effective  in  a  particular  circumstance?  And  how  do  we  3 know  that  a  particular  individual,  having  completed  some  prescribed  development  program,  has  actually  learned  the  concepts  and  behaviors  inherent  in  a  particular  competency?  These  questions are left for further examination and resolution as the result of future investigation.

When it comes to the development of technical leaders at all levels, from the most junior to the  most  senior,  we  have  only  been  able  to  take  the  first  step,  describing  the  landscape  and  offering  some  ideas  based  on  expert  opinion  and  limited  prior research  findings.  Providing  rigorous  technical  analysis  that  confirms  or  refutes  our  finding  will  require  substantial  additional work. We look forward to sharing this journey with our colleagues.