#leadershipdevelopment

Posts mentioning hashtag #leadershipdevelopment

Below are all the posts — topics as well as replies — that mention the hashtag #leadershipdevelopment.

Mention #leadershipdevelopment in your post to continue the discussion!

Ten Years. No Accountability. How Is Chris Koster Still Centene's General Counsel?

There is an old leadership principle: A leader's competence is measured by what they build, but their accountability is measured by what they ignore.

For nearly a decade at Centene, General Counsel Chris Koster has held primary responsibility for legal and regulatory oversight. Yet under his watch, the company has paid millions of dollars in state and federal settlements while the compliance infrastructure scrambled to contain the fallout.

To understand how a health plan incurs ten-figure regulatory penalties, one need only examine the appointment of Ashlee Knuckey as Chief Compliance Officer.

When Koster tapped Knuckey for the CCO seat, he elevated an individual directly from a law firm background, a litigator with no operational tenure in corporate compliance programs, no track record in managed care execution, and no prior experience as a Chief Compliance Officer.

What followed was four years of organizational turbulence disguised as a "compliance transformation."

Repeated internal escalations warned that the program lacked basic execution standards, structural clarity, and the foundational knowledge required to build an effective managed care compliance framework. These warnings were brushed aside. For four years, the enterprise operated in a state of compliance compromise, a persistent vulnerability that no amount of settlement checks can permanently ensure against.

Now, following Knuckey's exit, Koster has embarked on a series of "listening sessions" across the department. The timing invites obvious skepticism: where was he for the last four years?

Centene cannot pay its way out of fundamental governance failures indefinitely. Listening after the damage is done is not oversight, it is reputation management. If leadership failed to act on internal warnings when the compliance program was being dismantled, these listening tours are not a course correction. They are optics management.

Real protection requires leadership that understands what compliance actually entails on the ground. As Centene searches for a new Chief Compliance Officer, one directive must remain non-negotiable: do not hire another law firm attorney without operational compliance managed care experience. The next CCO must be a proven industry veteran who has successfully built and led compliance programs inside complex healthcare payers.

If Koster wants to demonstrate actual accountability now, he should step back from isolated decision-making and bring frontline Compliance team members directly into the interview process for the next CCO.

Otherwise, Sarah London needs to ask the hard question: after ten years and a billion dollars in regulatory costs, what, exactly, has Chris Koster been doing?!


If you have tenure, are old, using an accommodation or using too much insurance, listen

You are going to lose your job. I didn’t say get displaced—I said lose your job.

The directive from the top is to get below 200,000 employees by year-end. Too much money was spent on displacement last year, and they cannot afford to repeat that. So this time, the strategy appears to be reducing headcount without formally displacing as many people.

You may have already noticed it. A coworker is suddenly gone. Your previously solid performance is now being documented as mistake- or behavior-ridden. Your manager suddenly moves you into work that is outside your normal scope. Expectations change. Documentation increases. If that is happening, pay attention—you may already be on the list.

The new check-in system can also be used to create the documentation needed to support termination. These processes used to be centered around a plan designed to help employees improve and keep their jobs. That does not appear to be the priority anymore when the larger objective is headcount reduction.

And AI complicates the picture. We do not yet have the clean workforce data needed to formally identify every position for displacement based on AI-related changes. Meanwhile, redeploy team does not redeploy everyone. The team works with the populations and employees it has been directed to retain.

We were honest on the employee survey about what we were experiencing, and instead of leadership seriously examining why employees feel the way they do, we were characterized as entitled.

Maybe we are entitled—to transparency. We are entitled to understand the direction of the company we work for, what is expected of us, and whether decisions about our careers are being made fairly.

Pay attention to what is happening around you, not just what is being said publicly. Document changes to your responsibilities, expectations, feedback, and performance history. Protect yourself professionally. Update your résumé. Strengthen your network. Keep your options open.

Don’t wait until the decision has already been made for you. RUN


Bring back good — ditch the bad

Can we bring back good leaders to Nike? Those who left or RIF’d people actually liked and/or at least did great work and delivered results? Ones who their teams liked working for? I don’t even care if liked, but if delivered can we petition to get them back?!?

Who do we go after? I just want to have competent leadership again.


R2B is an unbearable joke, are we merging with B2B

The R2B role has become extremely difficult to sustain. Leadership appears to still be struggling with the transition and, rather than developing a clear strategy for the new model, much of the focus has shifted toward call volume. At times, it feels less like strategic business development and more like a fundraising phone bank where activity is valued over meaningful results. There seems to be a significant disconnect between what the role is supposed to accomplish and how teams are actually being managed.

It also feels as though some of this pressure may be coming from uncertainty surrounding the future of R2B leadership and the possibility of teams eventually being moved under B2B.


Farewell RobertaB

Sad to see a real pep+ leader like RB retiring. She led with passion and knew the business cold. She actually knew her stuff and cared about doing good.

What’s worse is watching her responsibilities go to a complete sycophant of a lady who hasn’t earned it. Giving more power to rotten leadership isn’t just tone-deaf, it shows JA is delusional and has no clue what good leadership looks like.


Bye Mije

We at Fiserv are so grateful that the the empty suit, cowatd Mike Lyons has moved on. He destroyed the retirement accounts of so many people, was the master of vapid nonsense- coordinate, collaborate, execute- blah blah blah. No work ethic, lazy and entitled- good luck Truist


IBM Should Develop a leadership academy named after Mr Gerstner

When Mr. Gerstner became CEO, IBM was facing one of the most challenging periods in its history. He made difficult decisions, refocused the company, preserved IBM as an integrated enterprise, and helped restore its competitiveness. His leadership demonstrated that successful executives must balance long-term strategy, financial discipline, innovation, and customer focus.

A Lou Gerstner Leadership Academy could teach future leaders about:

Leading through major organizational change.
Making tough decisions under pressure.
Putting customers first.
Driving accountability and execution.
Building a culture focused on long-term success rather than short-term popularity.

Whether someone agrees with every decision he made or not, Mr. Gerstner's turnaround of IBM remains one of the most significant corporate leadership stories of the modern era. There are valuable leadership lessons that today's and tomorrow's IBM leaders can still learn from his example.


I haven't had a boss in years

I report to someone, but after they flattened the hierarchy and got rid of all the middle managers I ended up reporting directly to the director in my org.

He's not interested in or capable of leading a team. I never see him except during our monthly 1:1 (which is basically just a monthly recap so he can tell his boss what I do).

There's no leadership here at 3M anymore. Just a bunch of disinterested, self-important jagoffs having meetings because they didn't know what else to do. And nobody can get promoted, so it's never to change.


Leadership Conundrum

In most organizations, you will typically find two groups of people. Those that are desperate to lead and those that are not interested in leading. Most times, your best leaders are in the latter group. The question is, how do you convince the latter group to want to lead?


HIPO Talk

DW in the first Your Growth Powers our Future” video: “I am very fortunate to have the career that I had with the company. I think early on, I was lucky in that senior managers took an interest in me and made sure and made sure that I got some of these experiences. “ (referring to a diverse set of roles across the org).
So admitting his career was built on luck and being deemed a hipo by senior management early on. If you’re lucky enough to be a chosen one early on, you’ve got it made. Perhaps you started with the right manager over you that was also a high flyer. Or you made a connection with someone by happenstance and they took a liking to you. Guess that’s life.


Town Hall Meetings with Leaders

This latest request to fill out a form in preparation for a town hall at the branch level is a classic example of a "disconnect" in leadership. After two years of managing a team, a leader is expected to have moved beyond surface-level resumes and into an understanding of their team’s specific strengths, career aspirations, and personalities. When a manager asks for a bio this late in the game, it signals that the recognition might be performative and just a check box that she did it.
We now know we are just a set of bullet points and that she is more concerned with the optics of the meeting than the reality of our team’s work.


If entry-level jobs disappear, who becomes a CEO?

Story by Ruth Umoh

The path to the corner office has long followed a familiar pattern. Start at the bottom, learn the business from within, and advance step by step. That model is now changing, and artificial intelligence is the primary reason.

AI is rapidly absorbing the routine work that once defined early career roles. Data entry, basic financial analysis, customer support triage, and even junior coding are increasingly automated.

The result is a shrinking base of entry-level positions and rising expectations for those who remain. Graduates are being asked to demonstrate experience that they have fewer opportunities to acquire.

This is not only a labor market shift. It is a leadership shift.

Entry-level roles did more than fill operational needs. They functioned as an apprenticeship in how organizations actually work. They taught how decisions move through systems, where incentives distort behavior, how customers respond, and where risk accumulates. As those roles recede, so does the informal training ground that once produced experienced executives.

As a result, future CEOs will be shaped more deliberately than their predecessors. In conversations with several executive recruiters and HR bosses, they noted that companies are moving away from the assumption that leadership will emerge naturally through long tenure. Instead, they are beginning to identify potential earlier and develop it more intentionally. This takes the form of accelerated development tracks that emphasize strategic thinking, judgment under uncertainty, ethical reasoning, and the ability to manage human and machine systems together.

Future leaders will also begin their careers differently. Rather than spending years executing routine tasks, they will enter closer to the decision layer of the firm. They will supervise automated processes, interpret outputs, and make trade-offs about risk, capital, and values earlier than previous generations. Training will rely less on gradual exposure and more on structured rotations, scenario planning, and simulated decision environments.

At the same time, companies are widening the pool from which leaders are drawn. Entrepreneurs who have managed risk and capital firsthand, technical specialists who shape digital infrastructure, operators from sectors that are still developing frontline leadership, military veterans trained in high-consequence decision-making, and career switchers with transferable strategic skills are all becoming more common sources of executive talent.

None of this means companies are losing the ability to develop leaders. It does mean they are losing the luxury of doing so passively.

The future CEO is unlikely to follow a single standardized path. Some will rise internally through redesigned development models, while others will arrive from outside with experience formed elsewhere. But what’s clear is that the role of an organization will shift from producing leaders through long service to cultivating and integrating leadership capacity drawn from a broader and more varied set of experiences.

https://fortune.com/article/entry-level-jobs-disappear-ai-corporate-ladder-ceo/


Leadership blind spots

The decision-makers at Mattel are stuck thinking one quarter at a time. There is no long-range vision, just constant reaction. It’s like they’re having trouble realizing that popular trends can last anywhere from a month to years and you can’t base a whole business strategy on just that. That lack of foresight is painful to watch.


The day Jennifer retired, the building felt staged

Friday afternoon brought the usual choreography. A polite email chain. A cake that looked like it came from the same vendor everyone uses when they want to appear thoughtful without actually being thoughtful. Handshakes, laughter that arrived a half second late, compliments delivered like obligations. Jennifer smiled the way people do when they are leaving a place they have already emotionally left behind months ago.

I remember thinking that the goodbyes were too smooth. Too clean. Like the floor had been swept already.

By Monday morning the layoffs started.

That is what made it feel cruel, not just business. The timing had the sharpness of intent. There was no breathing room between the farewell and the damage, no pause that might suggest humanity, only a clean cut that made it obvious someone had been waiting for the moment the gate swung open.

People talk about reorganizations as if they are weather. Something that happens above us. Something inevitable.

But this did not feel like weather. It felt like a decision.

Salim’s new structure was being sold as alignment, as simplification, as focus. The slogans were familiar. The language was polished. Yet the shape of it was unmistakable. Power was consolidating. Regional teams were being pulled into functions under Salim’s organization, a transfer presented as efficiency but experienced as control. In the hallways and in quiet chats between meetings, people didn’t call it a transition. They called it a takeover.

And the pattern of who benefited was obvious enough that it stopped being a rumor and started becoming something you could map.

The regional vice presidents were now clearly tied to Salim’s orbit. Soufiane ran Central West, and it was no secret that he and Salim were close. Not close in the way corporate leaders pretend to be close on stage. Close in the real way. Fifteen years of shared history, private conversations, vacations and dinners, familiarity so deep that it didn’t need to be explained. Their friendship did not stay outside the office. It lived in the room with them.

Bob ran Northeast South and had his own history with Salim, a relationship that had grown in Bellevue the way these things always grow. Proximity becoming trust, trust becoming access, access becoming protection. People called it networking. People who weren’t invited called it something else.

Under Salim’s umbrella, the functional leaders stood like pillars around him. Naveen led Field Engineering. Jon handled Field Operations and Resilience. Craig ran Customer and Stakeholder Engagement. Jeff drove Network Build Strategy and Execution. Pankaj owned Insights Enablement Strategy.

On paper it looked like a clean machine. In real life it felt like a court.

I had worked for Harlan for many years. Harlan was not a performer. He didn’t need a spotlight to be effective. He was one of those leaders who could walk into a problem and understand it from the inside out, not because he had read a summary but because he actually knew the work. He could speak in specifics and still respect the larger mission. He was demanding, sometimes exhausting, but his intelligence felt honest. It made you sharper. It made you better.

So when Harlan was replaced and Bob moved into the space he left behind, it hit me like a personal insult. Not because Bob was incompetent. Bob was fine. But fine was not the point. The point was that it didn’t feel earned. It felt selected.

It felt like the kind of choice that happens when the decision is already made before any interviews are scheduled. When the criteria is not performance or vision but belonging. Being inside the circle. Being the familiar face that doesn’t threaten the center.

That is what broke something in me. Not the change itself, but the reason underneath it.

Jeff was another kind of story. Jeff could talk. He had that smooth tone that made everything sound inevitable and exciting, like the future was a place he had already visited and you were lucky he came back to describe it. People laughed at his jokes even when they weren’t funny. People nodded while he spoke even when his points were thin. His confidence was persuasive, and that is what made him dangerous.

To me, Jeff lacked the ability to truly imagine the future of technology. He could repeat what was popular. He could package an idea. He could drive change with force. But too often the vetting was half cooked, the risks minimized, the unknowns waved away as if skepticism itself were a character flaw. He moved fast and demanded agreement, and when reality pushed back, the cost landed on everyone else.

Worse than that, he took disagreement personally.

If you challenged him, he didn’t argue like an engineer. He didn’t test the idea. He tested you. He smiled while he did it, as if he were being helpful, as if he admired your passion, and then he found quieter ways to punish you. Your name disappeared from a thread. Your project got reassigned. Your feedback became concerns about alignment. Your performance review suddenly included words like attitude and collaboration.

He didn’t have to raise his voice. He just had to decide you were inconvenient.

I remembered stories from Sprint, the ones people told when they thought nobody important could hear. How budgets were treated like personal allowances. Trips that were always justified as necessary. Dinners that were always framed as stakeholder building. Complaints delivered as if the organization existed to soothe him. And the constant sense that someone else would eventually be held responsible for whatever didn’t work.

Craig played a different game. Craig knew how to lean upward. He knew how to speak in the language leadership wanted to hear. He also knew how to keep his team in the shadows.

He didn’t protect them out of kindness. He protected them out of control. Visibility creates independent relationships. Visibility creates recognition. Visibility creates options.

Craig preferred to be the only bridge. Work traveled up through him and credit traveled back down as vague praise. He would take what you built and present it with his fingerprints on it, then later he would tell you privately how much he appreciated you, as if appreciation could substitute for acknowledgment.

That kind of leadership doesn’t just drain people. It teaches them to stop trying.

Then there were the ones everyone stopped defending.

Luis had earned his fall. Too much posturing, too little substance. Too many speeches, too few results. He always had a reason, always had a story, always had someone else to point at when the numbers didn’t match the claims. When the demotion came, nobody looked surprised. Some people looked relieved.

And John, who once said, back at Sprint, that he liked us, that we were good, that we just needed the right structure, had also been quick to blame Marcelo when things collapsed. Marcelo became the convenient name to carry the weight. The scapegoat that made failure feel explainable.

But Marcelo wasn’t here anymore. So I found myself asking a question I didn’t say out loud in meetings, a question that burned anyway. Now what. Now that you cannot blame him, what will you call it.

People were tired. Not the kind of tired that a weekend fixes. The kind of tired that gets into your bones after years of being told you are lucky to be here while you are worked past your limits, after watching friendships win promotions while competence gets cut, after realizing that loyalty only matters when it flows upward.

And the thing that hurt most was how normal everyone tried to make it sound.

They called it optimization. They called it efficiency. They called it the future.

But it felt like exploitation.

Work until you have nothing left, then watch the ones with the right relationships keep their seats while the rest of you are treated like a cost line. It makes you start thinking in ways you never planned to think. It makes you look at competitors you used to dismiss and feel a strange longing for basic dignity.

I found myself thinking I would rather pay more elsewhere if it meant being treated like a human being. I found myself imagining what it would look like to stop defending a brand that no longer defended its people.

By the end of that Monday, it wasn’t just the layoffs that changed the room. It was the clarity.

The organization had a new shape now, and it was obvious who it was built around. The rest of us were just expected to fit ourselves into the empty spaces.


Cascade 3

Next cascade should focus on redoing cascade 1. Since cascade 2, we’ve seen the same incompetent leadership coming through. How about doing cascade 1 correctly before shaving associates first? As they say, it all starts with leadership and we have it seen one in a while. Btw… doing listening posts is not enough.


Leadership Change

Those of you saying that without a leadership change this won’t be a big deal. Steve Llewellyn‘s retirement was announced Friday. John Dean is coming to Frito US from Beverages.

That’s probably the first domino. Since it’s PEPNA, that’s the US and Canada. Prob some realignment and HQ roles being shifted to GBS


Leadership advice from Ivan Seidenberg

Reflecting back on the past 25+ years....wow we really had great leaders who built Verizon the right way in Seidenberg and Denny Strigl. They literally started from the bottom and moved up to CEO. It's been downhill in leadership ever since .....

From Ivan:

“Leadership is all about standards . . . those people who watch you . . . they watch how you do your work. Do you cut corners?”

“Leadership is also about respect – how you treat other people. Do you treat others as equal?”

"...when you're in a position of power, what you think is right and correct doesn’t always mean it’s right and correct. To earn respect and trust, a good leader performs the job according to the needs of the people around them, rather than their own ideas. “It wasn’t what I thought was a good job, it was what the people around me thought was a good job.”

Leading by serving the needs of others may sound counter-intuitive, but it’s an effective technique.

It was a rough 8 years watching Hans post his daily morning runs, weekly sporting events and late night concerts. We wasted 8 years with him. He was a Trojan horse.


Official Wealth Management Firm of Big XII

Penny Pennington announced Edward Jones is the official Wealth Management partner of the Big XII Conference. This figures. A third class wealth management firm for a third class athletic conference. Everyone knows the top two conferences are the Big 10 and the SEC. Come on, Penny, if you really mean business you should do better. Everyone knows you are not a real leader and you are in over your head. That is why you could only secure a deal with the Big XII. While the Big 10 and the SEC have been adding programs leading the NCAA in positive growth the Big XII has been losing programs and been scrambling to pick up third tier programs to fill the holes. This sounds very similar to Penny Pennington's leadership at Edward Jones. While top leaders at Schwab, Raymond James, and LPL take talent from Edward Jones Penny Pennington is scrambling to fill the gaps as best as she can. Penny Pennington is just not adding up. Penny Pennington has already sealed her fate as a doomed leader in firm history.