Leadership training design, delivery, and implementation: A meta-analysis.
verifiedrich profile · Journal of Applied Psychology · 2017
Lacerenza, Christina N.; Reyes, Denise L.; Marlow, Shannon L.; Joseph, Dana L.; Salas, Eduardo
How this was studied
A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.
What this article reports
The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.
training → task performance
Models this article informs
The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.
In the authors’ words
The article’s own abstract.
Recent estimates suggest that although a majority of funds in organizational training budgets tend to be allocated to leadership training (Ho, 2016; O'Leonard, 2014), only a small minority of organizations believe their leadership training programs are highly effective (Schwartz, Bersin, & Pelster, 2014), calling into question the effectiveness of current leadership development initiatives. To help address this issue, this meta-analysis estimates the extent to which leadership training is effective and identifies the conditions under which these programs are most effective. In doing so, we estimate the effectiveness of leadership training across four criteria (reactions, learning, transfer, and results; Kirkpatrick, 1959) using only employee data and we examine 15 moderators of training design and delivery to determine which elements are associated with the most effective leadership training interventions. Data from 335 independent samples suggest that leadership training is substantially more effective than previously thought, leading to improvements in reactions (δ = .63), learning (δ = .73), transfer (δ = .82), and results (δ = .72), the strength of these effects differs based on various design, delivery, and implementation characteristics. Moderator analyses support the use of needs analysis, feedback, multiple delivery methods (especially practice), spaced training sessions, a location that is on-site, and face-to-face delivery that is not self-administered. Results also suggest that the content of training, attendance policy, and duration influence the effectiveness of the training program. Practical implications for training development and theoretical implications for leadership and training literatures are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record
What the literature says about it
Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.
supports “Leadership training and development programs have been shown to improve the skills and knowledge of leaders, which in turn lead to better performance and outcomes [8].”
supports “Leadership training is a core TDI that has beenmeta-analytically found across 335 evaluation studies to not only contribute to a 25% improvement in learning, but a 28% improvement in on-the-job leadership behaviors, a 20% improvement in overall job performance, and a 25% improvement in organizational outcomes [15].”
supports “To enhance local team leadership and collective performance, one can use structured simulation and training exercises to investigate how team behavior and leadership adapts to a dynamic situation in training or in real-life situations (Lacerenza et al., 2017).”
supports “To enhance local team leadership and collective performance, one can use structured simulation and training exercises to investigate how team behavior and leadership adapts to a dynamic situation in training or in real-life situations (Lacerenza et al., 2017).”
supports “Leadership training and development programs have been shown to improve the skills and knowledge of leaders, which in turn lead to better performance and outcomes [8].”
supports “Leadership training is a core TDI that has beenmeta-analytically found across 335 evaluation studies to not only contribute to a 25% improvement in learning, but a 28% improvement in on-the-job leadership behaviors, a 20% improvement in overall job performance, and a 25% improvement in organizational outcomes [15].”
supports “Thus, in combination, the design and outline of the training focused on increasing the chances of training transfer (Lacerenza et al., 2017) and increase performance of a successful change leadership (Higgs & Rowland, 2011), across the organizations.”
supports “Thus, in combination, the design and outline of the training focused on increasing the chances of training transfer (Lacerenza et al., 2017) and increase performance of a successful change leadership (Higgs & Rowland, 2011), across the organizations.”
Ancillary research
Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.
- 10.1186/s12909-024-05031-y
- 10.1017/cts.2021.874
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1041387
- 10.1080/1359432x.2024.2412357
Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.