Why Most Leadership Training is Complete Rubbish (And What Actually Works)

Our Favourite Blogs:

• Medium Leadership Insights
• Dev.to Leadership Commentary

The consultant walked into our boardroom wearing a blazer that probably cost more than my monthly mortgage payment, clutching a tablet full of "revolutionary leadership frameworks" and speaking in management-speak that would make a McKinsey partner blush.

That was three years ago. The company spent $47,000 on leadership development that quarter. Know what changed? Absolutely nothing. Well, that's not entirely true—our managers got really good at using phrases like "circle back" and "low-hanging fruit" in meetings.

The Leadership Training Industrial Complex is Broken

Here's what nobody wants to admit: 82% of leadership training programs deliver zero measurable improvement in team performance within six months. I've seen this play out across Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane—doesn't matter where you are, the story's the same.

The problem isn't that leadership training doesn't work. It's that most of it is designed by people who've never actually led anything more challenging than a university tutorial group.

Think about it. When did you last see a leadership course taught by someone who's pulled a team through redundancies, managed angry customers during COVID lockdowns, or convinced a burned-out workforce to embrace change? Instead, we get theoretical frameworks from consultants who learned leadership from other consultants who learned it from... you get the picture.

What Actually Works: The Uncomfortable Truth

Real leadership development happens in three places, and none of them involve PowerPoint presentations or trust falls.

First: Crisis Management

Nothing teaches leadership like genuine pressure. I learned more about managing people during a six-week product recall than in five years of formal management courses. When your team's looking at you and asking "What now?"—that's when leadership actually develops.

The best leaders I know all have war stories. Not from actual wars, obviously, but from times when everything went sideways and they had to figure it out. Customer service training that focuses on real conflict resolution beats theoretical leadership models every time.

Second: Mentorship from People Who've Actually Done It

Find someone who's led teams through actual challenges. Not someone who talks about leadership—someone who's lived it. The CEO who rebuilt after the GFC. The team leader who navigated workplace restructures. The supervisor who turned around a toxic department.

These people don't teach from frameworks. They teach from scars.

Third: Leading Small Before Leading Big

This sounds obvious, but you'd be amazed how many companies promote high performers straight into senior leadership roles without ever letting them practice on smaller stakes. It's like asking someone to perform surgery after they've only watched Grey's Anatomy.

The Australian Problem: We're Too Nice About Bad Leadership

Here's something that'll ruffle feathers: Australian workplace culture enables mediocre leadership because we're too polite to call it out directly.

We'll complain about our managers over coffee, but when it comes to 360-degree feedback, everything's "constructive" and "developmental." We dance around the truth instead of saying "This person shouldn't be managing people."

I've worked with teams where everyone knew the manager was hopeless, but the feedback forms were all diplomatically worded suggestions for "growth opportunities." Meanwhile, productivity tanked and good people left.

Some people aren't cut out for leadership. That's not an insult—it's a fact. Being excellent at your job doesn't automatically qualify you to manage others who do that job. Yet we keep promoting our best individual contributors into management roles and wondering why everything falls apart.

The Skills That Actually Matter (And Aren't Taught)

Having Difficult Conversations Without Making Them Personal

Show me a leader who can tell someone their performance isn't acceptable without destroying their confidence, and I'll show you someone worth following. This isn't about being "nice"—it's about being clear, direct, and respectful simultaneously.

Most leadership courses spend two hours on this topic. It deserves two days. Minimum.

Reading the Room (And the Individual)

Some team members need detailed instructions. Others need to be left alone to figure it out. Some respond to public praise; others find it embarrassing. Good leaders adjust their approach based on the person, not the handbook.

This adaptability can't be taught in a workshop. It develops through experience and observation.

Making Decisions with Incomplete Information

Business schools love case studies where all the information is provided and there's a "correct" answer. Real leadership means making calls when you've got 60% of the data and the clock's ticking.

This tolerance for ambiguity separates real leaders from managers who need everything spelled out.

Why Most Training Programs Miss the Mark

They're designed for compliance, not competence. HR departments love them because they tick boxes and create documentation. "We provided leadership development to all managers"—check.

But the content is generic, theoretical, and completely disconnected from the actual challenges these managers face daily. When did you last see a leadership course that covered "How to manage someone going through a divorce while hitting quarterly targets" or "Keeping team morale up during a restructure you can't discuss yet"?

The training industry has convinced us that leadership is about models and frameworks. DISC profiles, situational leadership, emotional intelligence assessments—all useful tools, but they're not leadership development any more than a hammer is carpentry.

What Companies Should Do Instead

Stop buying off-the-shelf programs. Every organisation faces different challenges. Leadership development should address your specific problems, not generic management theory.

Identify your best leaders and have them mentor others. Your top performers already know what works in your environment. Get them teaching others instead of sending people to external courses that ignore your company culture.

Create real challenges with real consequences. Project leadership, cross-functional team assignments, problem-solving initiatives where failure actually matters. Leadership skills programs work best when they're connected to genuine workplace situations.

Measure what matters. Forget the training evaluation forms asking if people "enjoyed" the session. Track team performance, retention rates, and employee engagement six months later.

The Inconvenient Reality

Most people in leadership roles shouldn't be there. Not because they're bad people, but because they lack the specific skills required to guide others effectively. We've created a system where the reward for being good at your job is being moved into a completely different job—managing people—with minimal preparation.

The solution isn't more training. It's better selection, honest assessment, and development programs that actually develop leadership capabilities rather than just checking boxes.

But that would require admitting that our current approach isn't working. And in a world where everyone's trying to be positive and constructive, that's a conversation most organisations aren't ready to have.

Yet.

The companies that figure this out first will have a massive advantage in attracting and retaining talent. Because nothing drives good people away faster than bad leadership, and nothing keeps them engaged like working for someone who actually knows what they're doing.

The question isn't whether we need leadership development. It's whether we're brave enough to do it properly.