Conduct interviews with senior executives, review strategic plans, and analyse the external environment to determine which leadership behaviors will drive future success. Reference established models such as Zenger and Folkman's leadership competency research, which identifies 16 differentiating competencies.

Define distinct competency expectations for each leadership tier — e.g. first-line managers focus on team execution and coaching, middle managers on cross-functional collaboration and change leadership, and senior leaders on strategic vision and enterprise thinking. Ram Charan's Leadership Pipeline model provides an excellent framework for this differentiation.

Select a focused set of competencies (e.g. Strategic Thinking, People Development, Results Orientation, Collaboration, Change Leadership, Communication, Business Acumen, Inclusive Leadership) and write 3-5 observable behaviors per level for each. Fewer, well-defined competencies are more actionable than an exhaustive list.

Embed competencies related to diversity, equity, and inclusion — such as creating psychological safety, challenging bias, and leveraging diverse perspectives. These are not optional add-ons but essential leadership capabilities supported by research from Amy Edmondson and others.

Test the draft framework by assessing whether the organization's recognised top leaders would score highly on the defined competencies. If the framework does not differentiate between effective and ineffective leaders in practice, the definitions need refinement.

Deploy a multi-rater feedback process where each leader receives input from their manager, peers, direct reports, and optionally clients or stakeholders. Align every survey question to a specific competency to generate a competency-level profile rather than just an overall score.

Use psychometric tools (e.g. Hogan, SHL, Korn Ferry assessments) alongside structured interviews and simulations to assess leadership capability against the competency framework. External assessment is especially valuable for senior hires and succession candidates.

Aggregate individual assessment data into an organizational view showing the overall leadership bench strength by competency. Identify which competencies are well-represented and which represent systemic gaps that require investment in development or external hiring.

Hold cross-functional calibration sessions where HR and senior leaders discuss assessment results to ensure consistency. Without calibration, rating standards can diverge significantly between business units, undermining the comparability of leadership data.

Translate each leader's competency profile into a targeted development plan with specific actions for the coming 6-12 months. Plans should include a mix of on-the-job experiences (70%), coaching and mentoring (20%), and formal learning (10%), aligned with the 70-20-10 model.

Create distinct programs for emerging leaders, new managers, mid-level leaders, and senior executives. Each program should address the specific competencies required at that level and include experiential learning, business simulations, and cohort-based peer learning.

Assign real business challenges as action learning projects within leadership programs. Participants work in cross-functional teams to solve actual problems, presenting recommendations to senior leaders. This approach develops multiple competencies simultaneously while delivering business value.

Provide one-to-one coaching engagements with certified executive coaches (ICF-credentialed) for leaders at director level and above and for identified high-potential individuals. Coaching should be aligned to specific competency development goals and include measurable outcomes.

Establish structured mentoring programs where senior leaders mentor emerging talent in group or one-to-one formats. Cross-functional mentoring broadens perspectives and builds the enterprise-wide relationships that senior leadership requires.

Identify and catalogue high-impact developmental experiences (e.g. leading a turnaround, managing a cross-cultural team, launching a new product) and deliberately assign leaders to these experiences as part of their development plan. Research from CCL confirms that challenging experiences are the most powerful driver of leadership growth.

Ensure that interview scorecards, panel evaluations, and hiring decisions for leadership roles explicitly reference the competency framework. Every leadership hire should be assessed against the same competencies used for internal development to maintain consistency.

Use leadership competency assessment data as a primary input to the talent review, alongside performance data. The combination of what leaders deliver (performance) and how they lead (competencies) provides a more complete picture for succession decisions.

Make demonstration of competencies at the next level a prerequisite for leadership promotions. This incentivises competency development and ensures that promotions are based on readiness rather than tenure or technical skill alone.

Create formal recognition programs (e.g. leadership awards, public acknowledgement, spot bonuses) that celebrate leaders who exemplify the competency framework. Recognition reinforces the behaviors the organization values and makes the framework culturally relevant.

Assign a senior HR leader (typically the Head of Talent or L&D) as the framework owner, accountable for maintaining the competency definitions, managing the assessment process, analysing data, and recommending updates. Clear ownership prevents the framework from becoming orphaned.

Conduct a systematic review of the competency definitions, behavioral indicators, and assessment tools to ensure they remain aligned with the organization's evolving strategy. Involve external OD or leadership consultants to provide independent perspective.

Measure whether leaders who participate in development programs show measurable improvement in competency assessments over time. Track the correlation between competency scores and business outcomes such as team engagement, retention, and performance.

Monitor evolving leadership scholarship — including adaptive leadership (Heifetz), authentic leadership (George), and digital leadership — and assess whether the competency model needs new dimensions. The leadership capabilities that drove past success may not be sufficient for future challenges.

For multinational organizations, validate that leadership competency definitions and behavioral indicators are culturally appropriate across all operating regions. Engage local HR and leadership teams to adapt language and examples while maintaining a globally consistent framework.