Pinsight ads

Interview answers have never been easier to rehearse. Candidates can prepare with AI, practice with AI, and even get real-time assistance during interviews. The answers may sound better than ever. But that doesn't mean candidates are better prepared to lead. This matters for Talent Acquisition, especially as Director-level roles evolve. Companies need Directors who can translate AI strategy into new ways of working. Yet our research across 14,000 leaders shows that 39% of Directors struggle to implement strategy. A strong track record tells you someone succeeded in a previous environment. A good interview tells you they can talk about leadership. Neither necessarily shows how they'll respond when priorities shift, stakeholders push back, or the mandate itself is still taking shape. To understand that, you need to see how people actually behave in realistic leadership situations. On November 12, Brandy Benak, PhD, and I will share three leadership gaps that can stall AI transformation—and how to identify them in candidates before you hire. Including one that rarely surfaces in an interview. If you're responsible for hiring Director-level roles, I hope you'll join us. LinkedIn Live | Nov 12 | 9:30 AM MST / 11:30 AM EST https://lnkd.in/d8RgWq5g

L&D often manages executive development, high-potential development and manager development as distinct portfolios. Transformation doesn't experience them that way. Executives create the conditions for change. Directors translate strategy into execution. Frontline leaders turn change into everyday behavior. Our analysis of 14,396 leaders found different readiness gaps at each layer. Individually, each gap is manageable. Together, they can compound. We call this the Compounding Adaptation Gap, and it raises a different question for L&D: Are we optimizing individual programs, or building a leadership system capable of continuous transformation? Explore the research: https://lnkd.in/d9_YAX2G

The executive who successfully led the last transformation isn't necessarily the executive best equipped to lead the next one. Our research found a notable readiness gap among VP+ executives: 27% show gaps in promoting continuous learning. That's consequential because transformation is no longer episodic. AI. New operating models. Automation. New competitors. New customer expectations. The executive leadership challenge is increasingly about creating an organization capable of learning and adapting continuously, not simply delivering one transformation program. That should influence what TA looks for in VP+ candidates. Download the research: https://lnkd.in/d-GFKudq

Most mid- and senior leader hiring processes are very good at answering one question: Has this person succeeded before? Transformation creates a different question: How will this person perform when the environment is unfamiliar, the strategy is evolving, and the answer isn't obvious? Experience, references and interviews remain important. But they are predominantly evidence from the past. For Talent Acquisition leaders responsible for consequential leadership hires, transformation readiness may require another source of evidence. Our latest analysis of more than 14,000 executive assessments explores what that evidence should look like. Read more: How executive hiring can become a transformation bottleneck. https://lnkd.in/d3RnbYVz

Executives may set the transformation agenda. But Directors determine whether it becomes operational reality. Our analysis of 14,396 leaders found that 39% of Directors struggle to translate strategy into implementation plans. For Talent Acquisition, that changes the question behind Director hiring. Management experience alone isn't enough. Can the candidate prioritize when conditions change? Align competing stakeholders? Turn an ambiguous mandate into coordinated execution? Maintain momentum when resistance appears? Those capabilities are difficult to infer from an interview and increasingly important to observe before the hiring decision. Explore the research: https://lnkd.in/d-GFKudq

L&D has more leadership data than ever. The challenge is turning it into development priorities that matter to the business. Imagine starting the planning cycle knowing: Where transformation-critical leadership gaps are concentrated. Which HiPo populations need the most attention. Which behaviors are limiting Director and executive readiness. And whether development is actually moving those leaders closer to readiness. That changes the conversation from: “What leadership program should we run?” to: “Where is leadership readiness creating business risk, and what should we develop first?” That's the shift from leadership development as a portfolio of programs toward leadership intelligence as an enterprise capability. Explore how: https://lnkd.in/dME_nzdW