Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
in partnership with
2012
LEARNING
AND TALENT
DEVELOPMENT
2012
CONTENTS
Foreword 2
About us
8
11
14
5 Leadership development
17
19
21
24
27
31
34
Acknowledgements 39
3 Talent management
FOREWORD
The CIPD has been tracking learning and talent
many dimensions.
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
profession.
These are testing and compelling times for L&TD
Our latest survey takes place in a year when
a resource-light/challenge-rich environment is
Development, CIPD
2012
ABOUT US
CIPD
Cornerstone OnDemand
professional members.
Cornerstones integrated software offering
Our members include the next generation of
organisations.
business.
cipd.co.uk
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
2012
programmes.
Talent management
key objectives.
engagement surveys.
Leadership development
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
conferences (52%).
as normal.
2012
Economic situation and training spend
development funding.
2T
RENDS IN LEARNING AND
DEVELOPMENT
Development survey is to track changes in
future trends.
Figure 1: Which three learning and development practices do you believe are most effective?
52
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
14
12
18
18
17
18
16
16
14
10
9
E-learning
Audio tapes, videos and learning
resources
1
1
2
2
0
2011: 594
2010: 724
16
16
2009: 859
11
10
12
22
26
24
30
39
47
51
56
53
2012
2011
2010
2009
30
23
19
20
19
27
23
33
54
48
16
21
24
18
14
16
20
40
Percentage
60
2012
by line managers are most commonly ranked in the
lower-cost practices.
Figure 2: What do you anticipate will be the major organisational change affecting learning and
development in organisations over the next two years? (Respondents selected a maximum of three.)
47
36
54
38
40
39
39
30
21
24
10
13
11
11
11
10
10
Other
0
27
17
15
16
15
13
All respondents
Private sector
13
Public sector
Non-profit
2
2
2
0
Base: 763
20
40
Percentage
60
14
32
33
22
21
22
31
32
24
18
42
38
43
29
45
32
33
26
51
effectiveness.
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
10
of these areas.1
2012
3 TALENT MANAGEMENT
effective and strategic management of talent is
employees).7
delivery-focused expenditure.
activities (58%).6
11
Figure 3: Groups of employees that are mostly or all covered by talent management activities (%)
44
45
43
42
All staff
73
High-potential employees
53
38
Junior managers
29
36
32
52
43
62
Senior managers
46
47
39
Technical specialists
20
43
31
51
Graduates
41
15
20
0
Base: 316
79
41
48
Middle managers
58
40
69
All respondents
Private sector
Public sector
Non-profit
56
60
Percentage
11
very ineffective).
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
12
80
2012
programmes among their most effective talent
Figure 4: Of the talent management activities used by your organisation, which are the most effective? (%)
(Tick three only.)
51
Coaching
In-house development programmes
33
26
25
360-degree feedback
22
21
Internal secondments
20
18
16
Development centres
Courses leading to a
management/business qualification
8
4
Assessment centres
0
Base: 401
40
20
Percentage
60
External secondments
13
4M
ANAGEMENT AND
LEADERSHIP SKILLS
and leadership skills are in organisations based
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
14
larger-sized organisations.
15
2012
evaluate management skills informally although
18
all managers.
significant difference.
larger organisations.19
Table 1: How do you evaluate an individuals management and leadership skills? (% of respondents by
organisation size)
Informally
Other
We dont
evaluate them
All respondents
42
46
28
16
14
Fewer than 50
38
53
20
11
50249
29
46
22
18
22
250999
28
56
27
11
14
1,0004,999
47
44
33
17
10
63
36
39
17
14
Base: 658
360 feedback
Through
engagement
surveys
15
Yes
No
Private
sector
Public
sector
Nonprofits
23
17
48
29
11
20
Budget issues
28
30
25
23
38
41
No time
24
26
14
24
19
33
Dont know/no
information
23
25
17
21
31
20
Other
22
24
13
21
27
16
Base: 486
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
16
Sector
2012
5 LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
The previous section highlighted the widespread
development activities.
47
33
Coaching/mentoring/developing staff
40
56
Communication/interpersonal skills
24
Innovation
11
Motivational skills
None
0
Base: 603
20
40
Percentage
60
17
28
Figure 6: What will be the focus of leadership development activities within your organisation in the next
12 months? (Please select a maximum of three.) (%)
Improving the skills of leaders to think in a
more strategic and future-focused way
39
39
19
18
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
18
17
16
23
43
25
25
29
20
16
6
6
6
6
3
1
1
19
20
13
2
2012
2011
2010
4
4
0
* Option introduced in 2011
** Option introduced in 2012
40
37
39
42
42
37
38
54
Base: 607
40
20
Percentage
60
2012
methods used.
30
53
International conferences
52
Webinars
40
Teleconferencing
37
31
19
0
Base: 107
20
40
Percentage
60
Figure 7: Which, if any, of the following methods are used to develop the skills of managers with
international responsibilities?
19
Figure 8: Which, if any, of the following programmes do you use to nurture leadership talent internationally?
(% of those who operate in more than one country)
Company-wide talent management
programmes for high-potentials
Coaching and mentoring to help international
staff move into key roles
Accelerated learning and talent development
for internationally based staff
Experienced expatriate staff to mentor and
develop local talent
60
52
29
25
Dont know
Other
0
Base: 99
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
20
40
20
Percentage
60
2012
natural sciences.
psychometrics.
Figure 9: How often do you use the following methods of learning analysis/diagnostics in your practice?
(% of respondents)
Systematic approach
(such as Plan' Do Check)
24
12
14
14
13
7
3
31
40
48
15
54
50
5
7
17
51
12
29
75
100
Percentage
Base: 726
Frequently
27
33
20
25
20
14
15
6
18
29
25
24
20
32
37
OPQ (psychometric)
15
Occasionally
Rarely
Dont use
Never heard of it
32
21
them.32
development practice.
Figure 10: How aware are you of the following methods of learning analysis? (% of respondents)
17
12
20
20
14
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
14
39 2
30
38 3
55 2
38
60 3
33
14
0
Base: 738
52 3
21
55
17
13
71 3
20
25
46
50
Percentage
63 2
27
10
11
32
16
15
23 1
17
24
20 2
27
32
25
21
22
37
75
22
100
2012
Of the new methods we listed, organisations were
most aware of the connection between exercise
and increased learning performance, with one in
six integrating this into their practice. The idea of
learning states during game-based learning was
integrated into practice in 12% of organisations.
Three-fifths or more had not heard of the
concept of flow and blissful productivity, the
concept of deep practice and expertise (10,000
hours rule) or neurochemistry of learning (for
example myelin sheath).
Organisations were given the option to state
if they had used other methods of learning
analysis. Four reported the use of Neuro Linguistic
Programming (NLP), one the use of Neuro
Psychology in relation to change management and
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) in relation to
coaching and one the use of psychological models
such as Transactional Analysis.
23
Figure 11: As an L&TD practitioner, how would you describe the innovation strategy in your organisation?
40
43
51
21
36
30
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
24
31
24
40
33
32
23
24
45
41
All respondents
12
Other
Private sector
Public sector
0
0
Base: 755
Non-profit
20
40
Percentage
60
2012
The size of an organisation also appears to have
larger organisations.
36
Figure 12: What types of innovation strategy/approach are used in your organisation?
53
63
55
45
47
45
54
54
24
49
74
41
16
15
25
51
26
17
10
16
All respondents
Public sector
32
Non-profit
19
0
Base: 723
20
40
Percentage
60
80
36
25
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
26
All
respondents
Manufacturing
and
production
Private
services
Public
sector
60
57
67
47
66
38
56
34
38
28
37
41
37
34
38
28
55
30
13
17
23
23
22
22
32
We employ technical
specialists to deliver
innovation
22
36
24
12
13
We engage specialist
consultants to help deliver
innovation
15
19
15
14
15
We collaborate externally,
licensing others to work with
us (outbound)
15
28
12
14
15
We afford employees
allocated time to innovate
Other
11
Base: 693
Non-profits
2012
Economic circumstances
All respondents
10
Private sector
36
50
14
Public sector 2
Non-profits
43
38
18
45
25
Base: 729
50
75
76
44
100
Percentage
About the same as before
No info
Figure 13: How would you describe the economic/funding circumstance facing your organisation in the
past 12 months? (%)
6
27
Figure 14: Changes to available resources, funds and headcount in L&TD departments over the past
12 months (% of respondents)
All respondents
15
51
Private sector
Available
resources
65
64
16
Private sector
62
18
Private sector
28
33
17
All respondents
38
51
Non-profits
54
29
53
29
22
60
Public sector
18
34
60
22
Non-profits
19
46
21
Public sector
23
31
17
All respondents
Headcount
57
Non-profits
Available
funds
34
19
Public sector
63
25
50
15
75
100
Percentage
Base: 712
Increased
Decreased
Training budgets
department.
45
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
28
profits: 69%).47
2012
Figure 15: In what ways, if any, has your L&TD department undergone changes in the last 12 months? (%)
35
35
34
13
31
22
25
21
35
19
19
12
Redundancies of staff
38
12
15
17
21
16
15
36
10
23
16
3
9
14
15
10
22
3
5
6
6
3
3
Outsourcing of department
1
Closure of department
3
3
38
All respondents
8
Private sector
23
0
Base: 695
Public sector
29
Non-profit
29
20
40
60
Percentage
2011: 349).
250 employees).
29
next year.
Table 4: How do you expect the funding of learning and talent development to change in the next
12 months? (%)
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
30
All respondents
Private
sector
Increase
12
45
Decrease
Dont know
Base: 737
Public
sector
Non-profits
15
13
51
26
55
37
27
65
23
2012
31
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
32
engage. The CIPD will do its bit to try and lift this
Inspiring innovation
2012
relatively widespread in the private sector though
operating within
emerging science.
33
APPENDIX 1:
BACKGROUND TO THE SURVEY
This is the fourteenth annual CIPD Learning and
(18%) in 2010.
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
34
Sample profile
Respondents worked for organisations of all sizes
this is still the case, this year the bias has reduced
2012
Table A1: Profile of respondents, by size of
organisation
Number of employees
Fewer than 10
1049
50249
19
250999
21
1,0004,999
22
24
Base: 764
Number of respondents
111
14
12
37
14
General manufacturing
Textiles
Other manufacturing/production
20
363
47
98
13
61
20
IT services
21
Private services
Call centres
19
24
22
84
11
Communications
Other private services
Public sector
213
28
Central government
39
Education
38
Health
55
Local government
38
43
Non-profit
79
10
Care services
Charity services
28
Housing association
18
Other voluntary
24
Base: 766
35
16
Senior manager
16
16
22
Line manager
12
Other: HR
Other
Base: 764
extreme outliers.
significance, p<0.05.
1
organisational change: public sector 36%; private sector: 51%; non-profit sector: 54%. 2 = 14.9;
df = 2, p < 0.01, n = 766. Linking of learning and talent development with performance management and
organisational development: public sector 30%; private sector: 42%; non-profit sector: 38%. 2 = 9.2;
df = 2, p < 0.05, n = 766. Closer integration of learning and talent development activity and business
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
36
strategy: public sector 25%; private sector: 32%; non-profit sector: 43%. 2 = 8.8; df = 2, p < 0.05, n = 766
2
Sector and high-potential employees: 2 = 15.9, df = 2, p < 0.001, n = 316; Sector and senior managers: 2 =
12.8, df = 2, p < 0.01, n = 294; Sector and graduates: 2 = 11.1, df = 2, p < 0.01, n = 272;
10 2
11
Developing high-potential employees: Eta = 0.19, n = 404; Growing future senior managers/leaders:
Eta = 0.21, n = 404
= 9.9, df = 3, p < 0.05, n = 377
12 2
2012
13
High-potential development schemes: SMEs 16%, larger organisations: 28%; Eta = 0.17, n = 401; Graduate
development programmes: SMEs 8%, larger organisations: 19%; Eta = 0.23, n = 401
14
Courses at external institutions: SMEs 18%, larger organisations: 6%; 2 = 10.5, df = 1, p < 0.01, n = 401;
Action Learning Sets: SMEs 16%, larger organisations: 7%; 2 = 4.6, df = 1, p < 0.05, n = 401
= 13.4, df = 3, p < 0.01, n = 485
15 2
16
17
18 2
19 2
20 2
21
No additional training needed: 2 = 15.8, df = 2, p < 0.001, n = 486; Budget issues: 2 = 14.9, df = 2, p < 0.01,
n = 486
22
23
24
Giving appropriate feedback and a learning and improvement plan: 2 = 7.9, df = 2, p < 0.05, n = 661; Penalising
through performance review for poor leadership and management: 2 = 9.2, df = 2, p < 0.01, n = 661
= 32.4, df = 2, p < 0.001, n = 603
25 2
26 2
27 2
28 2
29 2
30 2
Honey and Mumford Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ): public sector 54%, private sector 41%, non-
31
profit sector 49%, 2 = 11.0, df = 2, p < 0.01, n = 725; Belbin Team Roles: public sector 56%, private sector
44%, non-profit sector 56%, 2 = 10.1, df = 2, p < 0.01, n = 719; Myers Briggs Type Inventory (MBTI): public
sector 52%, private sector 39%, non-profit sector 38%, 2 = 11.1, df = 2, p < 0.01, n = 726; Saville Wave:
public sector 14%, private sector 7%, non-profit sector 6%, 2 = 8.2, df = 2, p < 0.05, n = 608
Belbin Team Roles: = .13, p < 0.01, n = 717; Honey and Mumford Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ) :
32
= .13, p < 0.01, n = 723; Myers Briggs Type Inventory (MBTI) : = .21, p < 0.01, n = 724; Kolb Learning Style
Inventory (LSI) : = .19, p < 0.01, n = 695; OPQ (psychometric) : = .13, p < 0.01, n = 669; Team Management
System (psychometric): = .08, p < 0.05, n = 678
Business was quite slow moving and they operate in an environment where its not prioritised: 2 = 18.1,
34
df = 3, p < 0.001, n = 755; We dont have an innovation strategy: 2 = 32.0, df = 3, p < 0.001, n = 755
= 25.1 with Yates correction, df = 1, p < 0.001, n = 753
35 2
36 2
37 2
38 2
39 2
40 2
We have key project teams which focus on these areas: 2 = 20.4, df = 3, p < 0.001, n = 693; Certain
41
departments, such as product development, deliver innovation in partnership with others:2 = 62.3, df = 3,
p < 0.001, n = 693
We employ technical specialists to deliver innovation: 2 = 27.7, df = 3, p < 0.001, n = 693; We collaborate
42
externally, licensing others to work with us: 2 = 15.8, df = 3, p < 0.001, n = 693
33 2
37
43 2
44
Economic situation and changes in resources for learning and talent development = .44, p < 0.001,
45
n = 666; economic situation and changes in funds for learning and talent development = .40, p < 0.001,
n = 691; economic situation and changes in headcount in the LTD department = .37, p < 0.001, n = 678
= 22.7, df = 2, p < 0.001, n = 695
46 2
47 2
Direct comparison is not possible as in previous years training was measured in days while this year it was
48
49
changes in funding for learning and talent development over past 12 months and changes in funding for
next 12 months = .50, p < 0.001, n = 726
= 103.3, df = 6, p < 0.001, n = 737
50 2
cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey
38
2012
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The CIPD wishes to thank its engaged community
reporting.
involvement.
39
2012
OTHER TITLES IN THIS SERIES
ABSENCE MANAGEMENT
The annual Absence Management survey
provides useful benchmarking data on
absence levels, the cost and causes of
absence, and how organisations are
managing absence. The latest report
is brought to you in partnership with
Simplyhealth.
REWARD MANAGEMENT
The annual Reward Management survey
provides practical insights into current
trends, practices and issues affecting reward
management in the UK. It examines strategic
reward, base and variable pay, bonuses,
incentives, pensions, reward measurement
and total reward issues. The latest report is
brought to you in partnership with Benefex.
Issued: April 2012 Reference: 5688 Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development 2012