Rethinking leadership (again): What CHROs need to know

The advent of every business evolution has been accompanied by proclamations that the need for effective leadership has never been greater. Think about the significant shifts that redefined the workplace in each of the past five decades.

• 1970s: Compliance and Regulation—Equal Employment Opportunity, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Affirmative Action, Employee Retirement Income Security Act.
• 1980s: Strategic Emergence—Performance management systems, early HR technology (e.g., HRIS), employee assistance programs (EAPs).
• 1990s: Talent and Culture—Employer branding, global HR operations, increased focus on diversity and inclusion.
• 2000s: Flexibility and Digitization—Talent management systems, employee engagement initiatives, work-life balance programs, and flexible work arrangements.
• 2010s: Experience and Analytics—Employee experience design, people analytics and workforce dashboards, evolution of DEI strategies.
• 2020s: Agility and Sustainability—Hybrid work models, organizational focus on wellbeing and mental health, skills-based workforce strategies, AI integration in HR functions.

One thing is true of each new era: Many organizations struggle to develop leaders who can truly meet the moment.

Why leaders are struggling

Despite the billions spent on leadership development each year—the global corporate leadership training market is projected to be worth more than $72 billion by 2032—we still can’t seem to get it right.

A recent study by the Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp), Leading from Anywhere: Driving Results in the Age of Distributed Work, found that 58% of the professionals surveyed perceived their leaders as only “somewhat effective” at managing within the context of the six dimensions of distributed work—physical distance, time zones, capabilities, organizational lines, cultural and socioeconomic.

See also: How HR can help bring out the best in a globally distributed workforce

The study examines the widening gap between traditional leadership models and the skills required to lead in today’s complex work environment, where the demand for collaboration and the volume and pace of interactions is increasing rapidly.

Many leaders are overwhelmed and underperforming, and solutions such as deploying new technology, mandating office returns or introducing new leadership competencies miss the mark in addressing the root causes of leadership strain.

See also: 4 ways to build organizational resilience

Despite the best intentions, traditional leadership programs often fall short

Customary approaches to leadership development tend to do five things.

1. Treat all leaders the same. Generic, one-size-fits-all training doesn’t account for leaders’ unique challenges based on their specific context, such as team structure, workflow, distribution type or objectives.
2. Emphasize behavior without adjusting the environment. Changing a leader’s mindset matters, but it’s not enough without changing the team dynamics, structure and workload realities in which they operate.
3. Focus on top performers. While high-potential leaders are essential, the most significant productivity and engagement gains (32% and 33%, respectively, according to the data analysis) come from raising bottom-quartile leaders to average.
4. Confuse delegation with distributed leadership. Simply handing off tasks isn’t enough. Distributed leadership means sharing accountability for outcomes, culture and decision-making—at scale.
5. Fail to address toxic leadership patterns. i4cp’s study identifies several problematic archetypes that can erode team performance unless addressed through targeted interventions. These behaviors include:

• Micromanaging and failing to delegate.
• Ignoring bad behavior and avoiding conflict and difficult conversations.
• Focusing narrowly on task execution while neglecting development, recognition and engagement.
• Lacking structure and clear direction, often overreacting to external demands.
• Failing to align or prioritize work, resulting in confusion, inefficiency and team overwhelm.

Practical solutions for developing an effective leadership model

While it may seem like a statement of the obvious, the most potent, data-backed insight from the study is this: Work has become so distributed that leadership itself must be distributed.

When leaders of distributed teams use select (localized) practices in talent, leadership behavior and project/program-based structure, performance jumps by 34%. That makes the adoption of these practices one of the most statistically significant predictors of long-term business success.

In real-world practice, this means:

• Sharing ownership of culture-building, stakeholder engagement and innovation with team members.
• Establishing clear team norms and fostering peer-to-peer trust and accountability.
• Leveraging one-on-ones and team retrospectives to align expectations and reinforce team norms.
• Designing performance processes that reward not just outcomes, but collaboration and network contributions.

What can CHROs do now?

The message is clear: Leaders must stop trying to do everything themselves. By distributing leadership responsibilities and enabling others to lead, organizations can create healthier, more agile, connected and sustainable teams.

The data found that effective leaders provide more autonomy and are clear about decision-making authority within their distributed teams. To support leadership effectiveness in a distributed world, CHROs should consider the following practices:

• Invest in diagnostics before development. Use tools that assess a leader’s context and specific challenges across the six dimensions of distributed work (e.g., time zone, capability, culture).
• Embed culture and performance accountability. Shift from evaluating leaders solely on business outcomes to also measuring how well they cultivate sustainable team cultures and dynamics.
• Elevate the bottom quartile. Identify and support underperforming leaders through peer coaching, archetype assessments and contextual leadership playbooks. The study found that organizations can achieve a 32% productivity improvement and a 33% impact on engagement by simply improving the performance of bottom-quartile leaders to average.
• Scale distributed leadership. Facilitate team-based sessions that define what leadership looks like when shared, and codify the interaction norms needed to sustain it.

As distributed work, hybrid models and AI redefine the future of work, CHROs have a unique mandate to redefine the future of leadership, ensuring their organizations thrive.