Employee Development - Society for Human Resource Management

EmployeeDevelopmentSurvey ReportA Study by the Society for Human Resource Management and Catalyst

EmployeeDevelopmentSurvey ReportEvren EsenSHRM Survey AnalystJessica CollisonSHRM Survey Program ManagerApril 2005

This report is published by the Society for Human ResourceManagement (SHRM) and Catalyst. The interpretations, conclusionsand recommendations in this report are those of theauthors and do not necessarily represent those of SHRM orCatalyst. All content is for informational purposes only and isnot to be construed as a guaranteed outcome. The Societyfor Human Resource Management and Catalyst cannotaccept responsibility for any errors or omissions or any liabilityresulting from the use or misuse of any such information.© 2005 Society for Human Resource Management. All rightsreserved. Printed in the United States of America.This publication may not be reproduced, stored in a retrievalsystem or transmitted in whole or in part, in any form or byany means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording orotherwise, without the prior written permission of the Societyfor Human Resource Management, 1800 Duke Street,Alexandria, VA 22314, USA.For more information, please contact:SHRM Research Department1800 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314Phone: (703) 548-3440 Fax: (703) 535-6432Web: www.shrm.org/researchCatalyst120 Wall Street, 5th Floor, New York, NY 10005Phone: (212) 514-7600 Fax: (212) 514 8470Web: www.catalystwomen.org05-0179

Employee DevelopmentSurvey ReportContentsvvvvviviiviiiixxAbout This ReportAbout SHRMAbout CatalystAbout the AuthorsAcknowledgmentsIntroductionMethodologyKey FindingsKey Research Terms1 Survey Results1 Employee Development Methods Used by Organizations3 Who Participates in Employee Development5 HR Professionals’ Perceptions of Employee DevelopmentIssues at Their Organizations9 Employee Development and Return on Investment10 Diversity and Employee Development18 Management Levels by Gender and Race21 Conclusions22 A Look Ahead: A Future View of Employee Development24 Demographics27 Survey Instrument35 SHRM Survey Reports

About This ReportIn September 2004, the Society for Human ResourceManagement (SHRM) and Catalyst conducted theEmployee Development Survey by asking HR professionalsto identify the employee development methodsbeing used by their organizations. HR professionalswho completed the survey also gauged the effectivenessof those programs. For this survey, employeedevelopment was defined as improving employee competenciesand skills over the long term through avariety of methods such as mentoring, coaching andsuccession planning.Findings are discussed in the survey results section.Interpretations about future trends in employee developmentpractices are presented at the end of thereport in the section titled “A Look Ahead.” Statisticallysignificant findings by organization staff size,profit status and sector also are integrated in the surveyreport, where applicable.About SHRMThe Society for Human Resource Management is theworld’s largest association devoted to humanresource management. Representing more than190,000 individual members, the Society’s mission isto serve the needs of HR professionals by providingthe most essential and comprehensive resourcesavailable. As an influential voice, the Society’s missionis also to advance the human resource profession toensure that HR is recognized as an essential partnerin developing and executing organizational strategy.Founded in 1948, SHRM currently has more than 500affiliated chapters and members in more than 100countries. Visit SHRM Online at www.shrm.org.About CatalystCatalyst is the leading research and advisory organizationworking with businesses and the professions tobuild inclusive environments and expand opportunitiesfor women at work. As an independent, nonprofitmembership organization, Catalyst uses a solutionsorientedapproach that has earned the confidence ofbusiness leaders around the world. Catalyst conductsresearch on all aspects of women’s career advancementand provides strategic and Web-based consultingservices on a global basis to help companies andfirms advance women and build inclusive work environments.In addition, Catalyst honors exemplary businessinitiatives that promote women’s leadership withthe annual Catalyst Award. With offices in New York,San Jose and Toronto, Catalyst is consistently rankedNo. 1 among U.S. nonprofits focused on women’sissues by The American Institute of Philanthropy.About the AuthorsEvren Esen is a survey analyst for SHRM. Her responsibilitiesinclude designing, conducting and analyzingsurveys on HR-related topics and assisting in largersurvey projects. She has a graduate certificate in surveydesign and data analysis from The GeorgeWashington University in Washington, D.C.Employee Development Survey Reportv

Jessica Collison is manager of the SHRM SurveyProgram. Her responsibilities include managing theSHRM Survey Program and designing, conducting andanalyzing surveys on HR-related topics. She has a graduatecertificate in survey design and data analysis fromThe George Washington University in Washington, D.C.AcknowledgmentsThis report is the culmination of a team effortbetween SHRM and Catalyst. Steve Williams, Directorof Research, SHRM, provided valuable expertiseadding to the content of the survey report. PauletteR. Gerkovich, Senior Director, Research, Catalyst, contributedto the overall content of the report and wrotethe sections on Catalyst research. Brian Welle, Directorof Research, Catalyst, gave his expertise to conceptualizingthe project scope and content, as well as draftingthe survey instrument. Emma Sabin, Director, AdvisoryServices, Catalyst, also contributed in developing thesurvey instrument. Jennifer Schramm, Manager,Workplace Trends and Forecasting, SHRM, providedinsight on future trends in employee development.viEmployee Development Survey Report

IntroductionThe SHRM 2004-2005 Workplace Forecastreports that among the top 10 trends HR professionalsbelieve will have the greatestimpact on the workplace is the labor shortage thatwill result when baby boomers begin to retire at theend of the decade. 1 Some organizations are projectedto lose executives in record numbers over thenext decade, and many organizations are unprepared.As a result, developing employees for futureroles within the company is imperative for all organizations.However, this often is overlooked or putaside as other challenges of daily business operationstake precedence.What do organizations do to prepare their existingworkforce for future leadership roles? Are someemployee development methods used more than others?Are organizations reaching out to and developingwomen, racial/ethnic minorities and other employeegroups to fill executive positions? Do all employeegroups receive the same opportunities to develop?Many organizations have incorporated successionplanning, mentoring and identification of high-potentialemployees as part of their strategic plans. Arethese programs providing a return on their investment?These are among some of the questions thisresearch attempts to uncover.The results of this survey offer insight, from the perspectivesof HR professionals, on the employeedevelopment methods implemented by most organizationsand their effectiveness in grooming futureleaders and strengthening workforce talent. Effortsmade by organizations to diversify their leadership bypreparing women and employees from racial/ethnicminority groups also are addressed in this report.1Schramm, J. (2004). SHRM 2004-2005 workplace forecast: A strategic outlook. Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management.Employee Development Survey Reportvii

MethodologyThe Employee Development Survey instrumentwas developed by the SHRM Survey Programand Catalyst. An internal committee of SHRMstaff with HR expertise and members of SHRM’sOrganizational Development and Workplace DiversitySpecial Expertise Panels also provided valuableinsight and recommendations for the instrument.A sample of HR professionals was randomly selectedto participate in the survey from SHRM’s membershipdatabase, which included approximately 190,000individual members at the time the survey was conducted.Only members who had not participated inan SHRM survey or poll in the last six months wereincluded in the sampling frame. Members who arestudents, consultants, academics, located internationallyand who have no e-mail address on file wereexcluded from the sampling frame. In September2004, an e-mail that included a link to theSHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey wassent to 2,500 randomly selected SHRM members. Ofthese, 2,011 e-mails were successfully delivered torespondents, and 248 HR professionals responded,yielding a response rate of 12% (the number ofrespondents to each question is indicated by “n” intables and figures throughout the report). The surveywas accessible for a period of three weeks. Three e-mail reminders were sent to nonrespondents in aneffort to increase response rates.The sample of 248 HR professionals was representativeof the SHRM membership population, particularlywith respect to industry. There were slight differencesin organization staff size with more HR professionalsfrom small- and medium-staff-sized organizations representedin the sample than the SHRM membershippopulation.viiiEmployee Development Survey Report

Key FindingsAccording to HR professionals, the top employeedevelopment methods used by organizationsencompass some form of training:1) training programs other than leadership training;2) cross-functional training; 3) leadership training;and 4) developmental planning. Formal career mentoringprograms, job sharing and job rotation wereamong the least used programs.About one-half of HR professionals believe that theirorganizations effectively identify which employeesneed to improve their competencies. About two-thirdsof HR professionals, however, indicate that employeedevelopment is mostly an informal process in theirorganizations.About two-thirds of HR professionals report sometypes of diversity programs within their organizations.These programs include either a diversity or inclusioninitiative supported by the organization or an individualwhose function includes diversity and inclusionmatters. These diversity programs are most commonlyfound in large-staff-sized organizations with500 or more employees. In addition, organizationsreport using development planning, apprenticeships/internships and leadership to specifically developand/or prepare women and racial/ethnic minorityemployees for future roles in the organization.Employee Development Survey Reportix

Key Research TermsCorrelation—The degree of connectedness or association between two variables. Is there a relationshipbetween x and y? Correlation does not necessarily indicate causality.Average—The mathematical average of all of the data points or observations in a set, calculated by addingthe data and dividing the resulting sum by the number of data points. A mean may be affected by extremedata values.Random sample—A representative sample of a population where each member of the population has anequal chance to be chosen for the research. A random sample can be generated in a variety of ways. If thepopulation is very small, names could be drawn from a hat. Typically, however, random samples are generatedby statistical software.Sample (represented by “n”)—A subset of a population that represents the population to be studied. Forexample, consider that a researcher wants to study the U.S. population. It would be impractical to studyevery U.S. resident, so the researcher chooses a part of it (a sample) representing the entire population.The sample must have the same characteristics as the entire population. Similarly, it is not prudent tostudy all SHRM members in a single study; therefore, usually a smaller, representative sample is drawn.Standard deviation (SD)—The dispersion of values around the mean. A small standard deviation indicateslow variability and relatively high consensus among responses. A large standard deviation indicates highvariability and a relative lack of consensus among responses.Statistical significance—A condition occurring when the researcher can show (through specific tests forsignificance) that the likelihood is small that the results occurred by chance. For example, if a researcherclaims that the results are statistically significant at p

Survey ResultsThroughout this report, conventional statisticalmethods were used to determine whetherobserved differences are statistically significant.Overall survey findings are discussed first and then,when applicable, results by organization staff size, 2profit status and sector are included for comparison.employ such methods: one-quarter (25%) of HR professionalsreport using formal career mentoring(internal program) and even fewer have an externalprogram (10%). More organizations (35%) have successionplanning programs in place.A glossary of Key Research Terms on the previouspage is provided for readers to reference.Table 1Employee Development MethodsEmployee DevelopmentMethods Used by OrganizationsHR professionals were asked which employee developmentmethods were used in their organizations.Each of the top three methods cited pertained to training.The most frequently used employee developmentmethod is generic training (not including leadershiptraining), which was cited by 84% of HR professionals.Cross-functional training (80%) followed closely, while71% of organizations used leadership training and70% used development planning. These data aredepicted in Table 1.While training is certainly an important component infurthering employee competencies, formal learningopportunities that provide experiential practice arealso thought to be effective since such programs aredirectly focused on the individual. The findings suggest,however, that organizations are less likely to(n = 248) Use MethodTraining other than leadership training 84%Cross-functional training 80%Leadership training 71%Development planning 70%Apprenticeships/internships (to assess potential future hires) 57%Formal coaching 55%Matching employees with “stretch” assignments/opportunities 47%High-visibility assignments/opportunities to work withexecutives (e.g., executive task forces) 47%Leadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individualsto meet with senior executives in organized events orsemiformal settings) 44%Formal identification of high-potential employees 40%Formal succession planning processes 35%Job rotation 30%Formal career mentoring (internal program) 25%Job sharing 25%Formal career mentoring (external program) 10%Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report2The organization staff size categories are as follows: small organizations (1-99 employees), medium organizations (100-499 employees) and large organizations (500 or moreemployees).Employee Development Survey Report1

Programs that groom employees to become futureleaders, such as formal succession planning, takesolid investment and focus. Succession planning programsthat allow high-potential employees in theorganization the opportunity to be coached and mentoreddemonstrate such an investment. They alsosecure strong candidates with requisite skills toimmediately fill vacant senior management positions.Yet, very few organizations have succession plans inplace for executive-level positions. In fact, an SHRMWeekly Survey revealed that fewer than two out of 10HR professionals indicated that their organizationshad succession plans in place for job titles rangingfrom vice president to CEO. 3Employee development methods were analyzed byorganization staff size. Table 2 compares the methodsused by large, medium and small organizations. Theorder of priority in which organizations utilize employeedevelopment methods is almost identical. There aredifferences, however, in the percentage of organizationsusing particular methods. Larger organizationsuse leadership training and development planningmore frequently than smaller organizations. Largerorganizations also are more likely to utilize successionplanning and identification of high-potential employees.It is not surprising that these organizationsemploy more structured methods for employee development.Larger organizations invest more in successionplanning and are more likely to have theresources necessary to devote to these programs.While developing human capital is crucial for all organizations,it is even more crucial for larger organizations,which tend to have specialized and highlyintegrated job functions necessitating high-potentialemployees to be targeted early on to increase theirunderstanding of the organizational structure.3Society for Human Resource Management. (2004, December 16). SHRM weekly online poll: Succession planning levels. Retrieved fromwww.shrm.org/surveys/At%20what%20levels%20of%20your%20organization%20are%20succession%20plans%20in%20place_.ppt.Table 2Employee Development Methods (By Organization Staff Size)Small Medium Large(1-99 Employees) (100-499 Employees) (500 or More Employees) Differences by(n = 95) (n = 77) (n = 56) Staff SizeLarge > smallLeadership training 50% 81% 88% Medium > smallLarge > smallDevelopment planning 57% 76% 79% Medium > smallLeadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individuals to meetwith senior executives in organized events or semiformal settings) 32% 42% 59% Large > smallLarge > smallFormal succession planning processes 18% 41% 55% Medium > smallLarge > smallFormal identification of high-potential employees 23% 46% 54% Medium > smallLarge > smallJob rotation 15% 38% 44% Medium > smallFormal career mentoring (internal program) 15% 26% 38% Large > smallFormal career mentoring (external program) 9% 1% 16% Large > mediumNote: Percentages are column percentages. Data are sorted by the “large organization” column. Multiple methods were selected, and each method was treated as aseparate question, therefore percentages will not total 100%. Sample sizes of the organization size categories are based on the actual number of respondents answeringthe organization size question; however, the percentages shown are based on the actual number of respondents by organization size who answered this question using theprovided response options.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report2Employee Development Survey Report

A few differences were found between private andpublic sector organizations with respect to employeedevelopment methods used. Public sector organizationsuse formal career mentoring (external program)more frequently than private sector organizations. Theprivate sector, however, is more likely to matchemployees with “stretch” opportunities that providethem with a chance to hone their skills while directlyworking on a challenging project. Although eachmethod has its advantages, mentoring is formal, ongoingand tailored to the individual, providing theemployee with guidance from a seasoned professional.The formal career mentoring approach is especiallysalient for women employees and employeesfrom racial/ethnic minorities who may find it morechallenging to find high-level executives within theirorganizations with whom they can identify and fromwhom they can informally seek advice.Who Participates in Employee DevelopmentThe employee’s supervisor has the primary responsibilityfor employee development, as indicated by 64%of HR professionals. According to about one-half(49%) of HR professionals, secondary responsibilityis held by HR staff who work with supervisors andsometimes oversee the organization’s employeedevelopment process. These data are depicted inFigure 1.Figure 1Primary and Secondary Responsibility for Employee Development64%49%24%5%9%13%17%10%2% 2%1% 2% 2%0% 0%1%No oneEmployee’ssupervisorDepartmenthead(excludesemployee’ssupervisor)HR staffInternalcoach(excludesemployee’ssupervisor)Mentor(excludesemployee’ssupervisor)OutsideconsultantOther Primarily Responsible (n = 246) Secondarily Responsible (n = 243)Note: Percentages may not total 100% due to roundingSource: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportEmployee Development Survey Report3

The majority of HR professionals (85%) state that theemployee’s supervisor also takes a leading role in formallymeasuring the outcomes of employee development.This is not surprising, given that supervisorsare uniquely positioned to understand employeepotential and identify burgeoning leaders. According to43% of HR professionals, employees themselves areresponsible for the measurement of their own careerdevelopment. The most likely scenario is that employeesand supervisors work together in measuringemployee development as part of employee performancereviews. These data are depicted in Figure 2.Employee performance reviews provide an opportunityfor employees and supervisors to work togetheron devising a plan for the employee’s continuingdevelopment. Research indicates that employees aremore motivated when they are highly involved in theperformance review process and in setting their individualgoals. Ideally, employees should be encouragedthrough informal or formal mentoring and coachingfrom their supervisors to gain additional expertiseas they prepare for leadership positions. Theemployee-supervisor relationship is necessary notonly to encourage employees to improve their abilities,but also because it serves as the organization’sdirect link to each of its employees.About one-half (52%) of HR professionals report thatemployees are encouraged to set their own developmentgoals. Although department heads play a smallerrole than supervisors with respect to their responsibilityand measurement of employee development, theywere reported by 47% of HR professionals to have aprominent role in setting employee development goals.It is probable that department heads work in conjunctionwith supervisors to set goals and that a large partof their role includes providing the final approval foremployee participation in employee development programs.These data are shown in Table 3.Figure 2Responsibility for Formal Measurement of Employee Development(n = 222)Employee’s supervisor85%Employee (i.e., self-assessment)43%Department head (excludes employee’s supervisor)37%HR staff27%No one10%Mentor (excludes employee’s supervisor or HR staff)Outside consultantInternal coach (excludes employee’s supervisor or HR staff)Other4%2%2%4%Note: Percentages do not total 100% due to multiple response options.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report4Employee Development Survey Report

HR Professionals’ Perceptions of EmployeeDevelopment Issues at Their OrganizationsThis section examines the effectiveness of organizationsin identifying the specific development needsof employees and helping employees develop.Results are expressed in terms of whether HRprofessionals agreed with statements about theirorganizations. 44Both the “agree” and “strongly agree” categories are combined to form the agreed response and “disagree” and “strongly disagree” form the disagreed response in thissection.Table 3Encouragement or Requirement in Setting Employee Development Goalsn Encourages Requires Neither Encourages nor RequiresDoes your organization encourage or require employees to setdevelopment goals for themselves? 240 52% 32% 16%Does your organization encourage or require department heads(excludes employee’s supervisor) to set development goals for employees? 217 47% 22% 31%Does your organization encourage or require supervisors to setdevelopment goals for their employees? 241 39% 49% 12%Does your organization encourage or require HR staff to set developmentgoals for employees? 205 26% 6% 68%Does your organization encourage or require internal coaches (excludesemployee’s supervisor or HR staff) to set development goals for employees? 138 23% 4% 73%Does your organization encourage or require mentors (excludes employee’ssupervisor or HR staff) to set development goals for employees? 131 23% 4% 73%Does your organization encourage or require outside consultants to setdevelopment goals for employees? 104 13% 2% 86%Note: Percentages are row percentages and may not total 100% due to rounding. Results were calculated by removing respondents who indicated “Not Applicable” foreach option.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportFigure 3Organization Effectively Identifies Employees’ Development Needs(n = 245)44%27%18%7%4%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportEmployee Development Survey Report5

Figure 3 depicts HR professionals’ perceptions aboutthe effective identification of employee developmentneeds in their organizations. While about one-half(48%) of respondents respond “agree” or “stronglyagree” that their organizations successfully identifythe needs of employees, only 4% indicate strongagreement. About one-third (34%) disagree.Fifty-two percent of HR professionals agree that theirorganizations are effective in helping employeesFigure 4Organization Is Effective in Helping Employees Develop(n = 245)49%22%20%6%3%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportFigure 5Organization Effectively Identifies High-Potential Employees(n = 244)42%25%18%7%7%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report6Employee Development Survey Report

develop, although very few strongly agree. These dataare shown in Figure 4.Forty-nine percent of HR professionals agree thattheir organizations effectively identify high-potentialemployees, while 25% disagree. These data aredepicted in Figure 5.Identifying high-potential employees is an importantstep to grooming targeted employees for roles withgreater responsibility in the organization. While 44% ofHR professionals agree that their organizations areeffective in helping high-potential employees develop,29% disagree. Data are depicted in Figure 6.Figure 6Organization Is Effective in Helping High-Potential Employees Develop(n = 245)38%22%27%7%6%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportFigure 7Organization Is Effective in Aligning Employee Development With the Organization’s Business Goals(n = 245)41%20%25%7%7%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportEmployee Development Survey Report7

Effectively developing employees as human capital inalignment with business goals provides a criticalstrategic advantage to organizations. Forty-eight percentof HR professionals agree that their organizationsare effective in accomplishing this objective.Data are shown in Figure 7.According to HR professionals, 65% of organizationsoften assign employee development opportunitiesinformally (see Figure 8). This finding suggests thatflexibility in determining appropriate employee developmentopportunities is the norm in organizations.Although having designated employee developmentgoals is beneficial, much of an employee’s developmentis probably determined in an ad-hoc fashion atthe discretion of an employee’s supervisor or at theemployee’s request to work on specific projects.Table 4 compares the average levels of agreement forthe employee development issues depicted in FiguresFigure 8Organization Often Assigns Employee Development Opportunities Informally(n = 245)59%18%12%6%6%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportTable 4Levels of Agreement on Organizations’ Handling of Employee Development IssuesIssue Average Standard DeviationOrganization often assigns employee development opportunities informally 3.48 0.98Organization effectively identifies high-potential employees 3.24 1.07Organization is effective in helping employees develop 3.21 1.01Organization is effective in aligning employee development with the organization’s business goals 3.20 1.07Organization is effective in helping high-potential employees develop 3.13 1.05Organization effectively identifies employees’ development needs 3.12 1.06Note: Averages are based on a scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report8Employee Development Survey Report

3 through 8. Overall, more HR professionals agreethat organizations often informally assign employeedevelopment opportunities and that organizations areeffective in identifying high-potential employees. Theyare least likely to agree that organizations are effectivein identifying employee development needs.Employee Development and Return on InvestmentTable 5 illustrates the percentage of organizationsthat conduct analyses to determine the return oninvestment (ROI) of employee development methods.The results indicate that most organizations do notcollect ROI data. For those organizations that do collectROI, the outcomes result in positive gains forthe organization, regardless of the employee developmentmethod utilized.The employee development practices that produce thehighest ROI are: 1) apprenticeships/internships (20%);2) formal coaching (18%); and 3) leadership training(18%). These methods are also among the employeedevelopment methods that a greater percentage oforganizations collect ROI data for to begin with. Theseparticular methods may be more amenable for collectionof ROI because the costs are measurable and theoutcomes tangible. Apprenticeships/internships tendto have high rates of return for organizations becausethey serve as cost-effective and low-risk methods ofidentifying high-potential upcoming graduates or recentgraduates for positions within the organization. Giventhe positive ROI, it is surprising that only 57% of organizationsuse this employee development method.Formal coaching, which also has a positive ROI, is utilizedby only about one-half (55%) of organizations.Leadership training’s positive ROI is probably attributedto the selection process. Employees who participate inleadership training have been slated for leadershiproles or may already be in leadership positions.Table 5ROI and Employee Development Methodsn Positive ROI Negative ROI No Analysis of ROIApprenticeships/internships (to assess potential future hires) 123 20% 2% 78%Formal coaching 118 18% 1% 81%Leadership training 148 18% 3% 78%Leadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individuals to meet with senior executivesin organized events or semiformal settings) 120 17% 2% 82%Training other than leadership training 162 17% 3% 81%Cross-functional training 154 16% 1% 83%Development planning 150 15% 1% 84%Job rotation 102 15% 3% 82%Formal identification of high-potential employees 116 14% 3% 83%High-visibility assignments/opportunities to work with executives (e.g., executive task forces) 117 14% 3% 83%Formal succession planning processes 107 13% 5% 82%Formal career mentoring (internal program) 95 11% 5% 84%Formal career mentoring (external program) 74 10% 1% 89%Matching employees with “stretch” opportunities 113 9% 2% 89%Job sharing 86 8% 7% 85%Note: Percentages are row percentages and may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportEmployee Development Survey Report9

Diversity and Employee DevelopmentLeading U.S. corporations understand that internaldiversity creates competitive business advantages.Among other things, they report increases in creativity,innovation and morale as a result of diverse teamwork.A recent Catalyst study, The Bottom Line: ConnectingCorporate Performance and Gender Diversity, 5 confirmsthe competitive advantage that diverse leadershipteams produce. By examining financial anddiversity data amongst Fortune 500 companies overa five-year period, the study found a very strong connectionbetween gender diversity and organizationalperformance. Specifically, those organizations with ahigher than average representation of women in topmanagement significantly financially outperformedthose companies with a lower than average representationof women in terms of both return on equity andtotal return to shareholders.However, it is not enough to just have diversity at thetop—or throughout—an organization. Diversity needsto be managed well: individuals need to have accessto a range of development and advancement opportunitiesto truly flourish.Despite the increasing importance of diversity to businesssuccess, only 38% of HR professionals reportthat their organizations have formal diversity and inclusioninitiatives, as shown in Figure 9. Additional analysisby organization staff size reveals that about twiceas many large organizations (62%) have these initiativesin place as small (23%) and medium (35%)organizations, suggesting that larger organizationshave more resources to devote to diversity.5Catalyst. (2004). The bottom line: Connecting corporate performance and gender diversity. New York: Catalyst.Figure 9Existence of Formal Diversity and InclusionInitiative and Manager in OrganizationFigure 10Organization’s Diversity Component andEmployee Development62%69%61%68%38%39%32%32%YesNoYesNo Diversity and Inclusion Initiative (n = 245) Diversity and Inclusion Manager (n = 235)Note: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report Diversity and Inclusion Initiative Includes Employee Development (n = 188) Diversity and Inclusion Manager Involved in Employee Development (n = 170)Note: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report10Employee Development Survey Report

Thirty-two percent of organizations have a diversityofficer or diversity manager. Large organizations(55%) have diversity officers or managers at morethan double the rate of small (16%) and medium(27%) organizations.Of those HR professionals who report that their organizationshave formal diversity and inclusion initiatives inplace, 39% report that employee development is partof the program. About one-half (53%) of large organizationsreport that employee development is part of theirformal diversity program, compared with 26% of smallorganizations. HR professionals in organizations thathave diversity managers indicate that managers areinvolved in employee development practices (32%).These data are illustrated in Figure 10.Table 6 demonstrates the proportion of organizationsthat offer development programs targeted to specificemployee groups. In general, it appears that organizationsattempt to involve both women and racial/ethnic minority groups in the same types of employeedevelopment programs. The top three programs thatorganizations use to particularly reach out to womenand racial/ethnic minority groups are: 1) developmentplanning (29% each); 2) apprenticeships/internships(26% each); and 3) leadership training (25% each).These results are different from the employee developmentmethods used by organizations overall (seeTable 1). Formal career mentoring for women (14%)and for racial/ethnic minorities (13%) appear to beunderutilized, suggesting an area for improvement.Mentoring often is regarded as a crucial component oforganizational diversity initiatives. Opportunities forwomen and racial/ethnic minorities to gain access toinformal networks and tiers within an organization canbe gained through mentors who can introduce them tokey players. Mentors can also work in conjunction withan employee’s supervisor to determine appropriatedevelopment opportunities.Table 6Employee Development Methods That Organizations Use When Reaching Out to Specific Employee GroupsRacial/Ethnic Employees From Outside(n = 248) Women Minorities the United StatesDevelopment planning 29% 29% 7%Apprenticeships/internships (to assess potential future hires) 26% 26% 7%Leadership training 25% 25% 6%Training other than leadership training 25% 25% 8%Cross-functional training 25% 25% 8%Formal identification of high-potential employees 20% 21% 6%Formal coaching 17% 18% 4%Formal succession planning processes 17% 17% 5%High-visibility assignments/opportunities to work with executives (e.g., executive task forces) 17% 15% 4%Matching employees with “stretch” opportunities 17% 16% 5%Leadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individuals to meet with senior executives inorganized events or semiformal settings) 16% 15% 5%Formal career mentoring (internal program) 14% 13% 4%Job rotation 13% 12% 3%Job sharing 9% 8% 3%Formal career mentoring (external program) 3% 2% 1%Note: Data are sorted by the “women” column. Percentages will not total 100% due to multiple response options. Percentages are column percentages.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportEmployee Development Survey Report11

HR professionals also were asked if their organizationsfeatured targeted development programs foremployees who had immigrated to the United States.The results suggest that very few organizations reachout to this group of employees with tailored developmentprograms. Such efforts may intensify as demographicchanges lead to a greater need for highlyqualified and educated employees, necessitating aninflux of foreign workers to the United States.Analysis by profit status suggests that more for-profitthan nonprofit organizations are attempting to groomwomen and racial/ethnic minorities for leadershiproles through formal identification of high-potentialemployees and formal succession planningprocesses. This suggests that corporate initiativespromoting diversity may already be impacting—andwill have future impact—on women and racial/ethnicminorities and their ability to move up the corporateladder. As will be demonstrated later in this report,women and racial/ethnic minorities in leadershippositions are largely underrepresented in for-profit,compared with nonprofit, organizations. Initiatives infor-profit organizations that focus on these demographicgroups are likely to increase the proportion ofwomen and racial/ethnic minority groups at the manageriallevel and above.Large organizations are attempting to involve womenin employee development programs at much higherTable 7Employee Development Methods That Organizations Use When Reaching Out to Women(By Organization Staff Size)Small Medium Large(1-99 Employees) (100-499 Employees) (500 or More Employees) Differences by(n = 95) (n = 77) (n = 56) Staff SizeLarge > smallDevelopment planning 18% 25% 50% Large > mediumLarge > smallLeadership training 13% 22% 46% Large > mediumLarge > smallLarge > mediumFormal identification of high-potential employees 5% 18% 45% Medium > smallLarge > smallCross-functional training 15% 21% 43% Large > mediumTraining other than leadership training 16% 22% 41% Large > smallApprenticeships/internships (to assess potential future hires) 16% 22% 39% Large > smallLarge > smallFormal succession planning processes 6% 14% 38% Large > mediumLarge > smallFormal coaching 6% 14% 34% Large > mediumHigh-visibility assignments/opportunities to work with executivesLarge > small(e.g., executive task forces) 12% 12% 29% Large > mediumLeadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individuals to meet withsenior executives in organized events or semiformal settings) 11% 13% 29% Large > smallLarge > smallMatch employees with “stretch” opportunities 12% 10% 29% Large > mediumFormal career mentoring (internal program) 8% 9% 23% Large > smallNote: Percentages will not total 100% due to multiple response options. Percentages are column percentages. Data are sorted by the “large organization” column. Samplesizes of the organization size categories are based on the actual number of respondents answering the organization size question; however, the percentages shown arebased on the actual number of respondents by organization size who answered this question using the provided response options.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report12Employee Development Survey Report

ates than small and medium organizations. This isespecially evident through examination of the topmethods used by large organizations: developmentplanning efforts, leadership training and the formalidentification of high-potential employees. Largeorganizations, which have more diversity initiativesand/or staff devoted to diversity issues, are morethan twice as likely to use formal succession planning,formal coaching and high-visibility assignments,compared with small and medium organizations.These data are shown in Table 7.Table 8 illustrates how organization staff size relatesto the methods used to target specific employeedevelopment programs for racial/ethnic minorities.The efforts made by large organizations for racial/ethnicminority groups closely correspond with theirefforts for women in terms of development planningand formal identification of high-potential employees.Organizations appear to use apprenticeships/internshipsmore frequently for racial/ethnic minoritygroups than for women.Table 8Employee Development Methods That Organizations Use When ReachingOut to Racial/Ethnic Minorities (By Organization Staff Size)Small Medium Large(1-99 Employees) (100-499 Employees) (500 or More Employees) Differences by(n = 95) (n = 77) (n = 56) Staff SizeLarge > smallDevelopment planning 15% 26% 52% Large > mediumLarge > smallLarge > mediumFormal identification of high-potential employees 5% 20% 50% Medium > smallLarge > smallApprenticeships/internships (to assess potential future hires) 15% 21% 45% Large > mediumLarge > smallCross-functional training 15% 22% 45% Large > mediumLeadership training 13% 25% 43% Large > smallTraining other than leadership training 16% 22% 41% Large > smallLarge > smallLarge > mediumFormal coaching 4% 18% 38% Medium > smallLarge > smallLarge > mediumFormal succession planning processes 5% 17% 38% Medium> smallHigh-visibility assignments/opportunities to work with executivesLarge > small(e.g., executive task forces) 10% 12% 29% Large > mediumLeadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individuals to meetwith senior executives in organized events or semiformal settings) 10% 13% 29% Large > smallLarge > smallMatch employees with “stretch” opportunities 12% 10% 29% Large > mediumFormal career mentoring (internal program) 7% 10% 23% Large > smallNote: Percentages will not total 100% due to multiple response options. Percentages are column percentages. Data are sorted by the “large organization” column. Samplesizes of the organization size categories are based on the actual number of respondents answering the organization size question; however, the percentages shown arebased on the actual number of respondents by organization size who answered this question using the provided response options.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportEmployee Development Survey Report13

A large percentage of organizations do not comparethe effectiveness of employee development programsfor specific employee groups. Nearly nine out of 10(88%) HR professionals indicate that their organizationsdo not examine program effectiveness by eithergender or racial/ethnic minority groups. These resultsare shown in Table 9.HR professionals were asked whether they agreed thatspecific groups of employees in their organizationsreceived the same development opportunities. 6Table 9(n = 240)Employee Development ProgramEffectiveness and DiversityWe compare employee development effectivenessbased on gender ONLY 0%We compare employee development effectivenessbased on racial/ethnic minority groups ONLY 2%We compare employee development effectivenessbased on BOTH gender and racial/ethnic minority groups 10%We DO NOT compare employee development effectivenessfor either gender or racial/ethnic minority groups. 88%Note: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportSeventy-eight percent of HR professionals agree thatwomen employees in their organizations receive thesame development opportunities as men employees;15% disagree. These data are shown in Figure 11.As mentioned earlier in this report, mentors provideemployees with access to key players in the organization.In organizations that have fewer women in managerialand executive-level positions, it may be harder forwomen to find mentors of the same gender. Fifty-sevenpercent of HR professionals, however, indicate that it isno more difficult for women employees, compared withmen employees, to find mentors in their organizations;17% disagree. Figure 12 shows these data.Figure 13 shows that 83% of HR professionals agreethat racial/ethnic minorities in their organizationsreceive the same development opportunities aswhite employees; only 8% disagree. Almost twice asmany HR professionals disagree (15%) that womenemployees have the same opportunities as menemployees (see Figure 11), compared with racial/6Both the “agree” and “strongly agree” categories are combined to form the agreedresponse and “disagree” and “strongly disagree” form the disagreed response inthis section.Figure 11Women Receive the Same Development Opportunities as Men Employees in Organization(n = 235)39% 39%5%10%8%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report14Employee Development Survey Report

ethnic minority employees and white employees (8%).This suggests that HR professionals perceive womenas being slightly disadvantaged, compared withracial/ethnic minorities, in terms of opportunities foremployee development.Figure 14 shows that 48% of HR professionals agreethat it is no more difficult for employees fromracial/ethnic minority groups, compared with whiteemployees, to find a mentor in their organizations;20% disagree. These data suggest that it may bemore difficult for racial/ethnic minority employees tofind mentors, compared with women employees.Gay and lesbian employees receive the same developmentopportunities as heterosexual employees,according to 75% of HR professionals; only 3% disagreewith this statement. These data are shown inFigure 12It Is No More Difficult for Women Employees to Find a Mentor in the Organization Than It Is for Men Employees(n = 231)27%29%28%7%10%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportFigure 13(n = 236)Racial/Ethnic Minorities Receive the Same Development Opportunities asCaucasian/White Employees in Organization45%38%5%3%9%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportEmployee Development Survey Report15

Figure 15. Forty-six percent of HR professionals agreethat it is no more difficult for gay and lesbian employeesto find a mentor in their organizations than it isfor heterosexual employees; 14% disagree with thisstatement. Data are shown in Figure 16.Table 10 compares the average levels of agreement forthe data depicted in Figures 11 through 16. The averagessuggest that HR professionals believe thatracial/ethnic minority employees have an advantageover gay and lesbian and women employees in termsof having equal opportunities for employee development.This may indicate that organizations are placinggreater emphasis on ensuring that racial/ethnic minorityemployees receive the development opportunitiesthey need. This group, however, is disadvantaged infinding mentors within the organization, compared withwomen and gay and lesbian employees.Figure 14(n = 232)It Is No More Difficult for Racial/Ethnic Minority Employees to Find a Mentor in the OrganizationThan It Is for Caucasian/White Employees33%23%25%9%11%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportFigure 15(n = 235)Employees Known to Be Gay or Lesbian Receive the Same Development Opportunities asHeterosexual Employees in Organization35%40%22%3%0%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report16Employee Development Survey Report

Figure 16(n = 231)It Is No More Difficult for Gay or Lesbian Employees to Find a Mentor in the OrganizationThan It Is for Heterosexual Employees41%22%24%7% 7%StronglydisagreeDisagreeNeitheragree nordisagreeAgreeStronglyagreeNote: Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportTable 10Levels of Agreement on Organizations’ Employee Development Opportunities for Specific Employee GroupsAverageStandard DeviationIn my organization racial/ethnic minority employees receive the same development opportunities as white employees 4.14 1.06In my organization employees known to be gay or lesbian receive the same development opportunitiesas heterosexual employees 4.08 0.95In my organization female employees receive the same development opportunities as male employees 3.96 1.15In my organization it is no more difficult for female employees to find a mentor than it is for male employees to find one 3.61 1.18In my organization it is no more difficult for employees known to be gay or lesbian to find a mentor than it is for heterosexualemployees to find one 3.49 1.13In my organization it is no more difficult for racial/ethnic minority employees to find a mentor than it is for white employeesto find one 3.44 1.22Note: Averages are based on a scale where 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportTable 11Percentage of Organization’s Employees Promoted Within Past 12 MonthsPercentage of TOTAL Employees Percentage of Female Employees Percentage of Racial/Ethnic Minority EmployeesPromoted Within the Last 12 Months Promoted Within the Last 12 Months Promoted Within the Last 12 Months(n = 166) ( n = 150) (n = 145)Average 9% 10% 6%Range 0 – 100% 0 – 100% 0 – 100%Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportEmployee Development Survey Report17

HR professionals from nonprofit organizations, comparedwith HR professionals in for-profit organizations,are more likely to agree that women in theirorganizations receive the same development opportunitiesas men. This suggests that the nonprofit environmentis more favorable at developing women forleadership positions. Results from this research alsoreveal that more women hold top-level executive positionsin nonprofit organizations, compared with forprofitorganizations.HR professionals were asked to provide the percentageof employees in their organizations who had beenpromoted within the past 12 months. Table 11 depictsthe results. Overall, 9% of all employees were promoted.Of the women employees in organizations, 10%were promoted. Six percent of racial/ethnic minorityemployees were promoted within the past 12 months.Management Levels by Gender and Race 7Table 12 illustrates management levels by gender.Gender representation among nonmanagerial employeesis relatively equal. The representation of womenin managerial positions, however, decreases as thelevel of management increases. For example, nearlythree-quarters (72%) of top-level executives are men,leaving only 28% of the leadership in the hands ofwomen. Representation of women drops rapidly asone looks further up the corporate ladder. Accordingto the 2003 Catalyst Census of Women BoardDirectors, 8 which examines gender representationwithin Fortune 500 companies, only 13.6% of thesepositions are held by women. The 2002 CatalystCensus of Women Corporate Officers and Top Earners 9reports that 15.7% of the Fortune 500 corporate officerpool are women, while 7.9% of the highest titlesare held by women, and a mere 5.2% are top earn-7In this survey, management levels were divided into three categories: top-level executives, managerial-level employees and nonmanagerial-level employees.8Catalyst. (2003). Catalyst census of women board directors. New York: Catalyst.9Catalyst. (2002). Census of women corporate officers and top earners. Retrieved from www.catalystwomen.org/knowledge/titles/files/full/financialperformancereport.pdf.Table 12Management Levels by GenderTop-Level Executives Managerial-Level Employees Nonmanagerial-Level Employees(n = 185) (n = 178) (n = 174)Males 72% 60% 48%Females 28% 40% 52%Note: Percentages are column percentages and may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey ReportTable 13Management Levels by RaceTop-Level Executives Managerial-Level Employees Nonmanagerial-Level Employees(n = 160) (n = 153) (n = 152)African-American/Black (not of Hispanic origin) 5% 8% 13%Asian/Pacific Islander 2% 3% 6%Caucasian/White (not of Hispanic origin) 87% 81% 68%Hispanic/Latin 4% 5% 9%Native American (American Indian or Alaskan Native) 1% 2% 1%Other 1% 1% 2%Note: Percentages are column percentages and may not total 100% due to rounding.Source: SHRM/Catalyst Employee Development Survey Report18Employee Development Survey Report

ers. 10 As of this printing, there are only nine (1.9%)women CEOs in the Fortune 500.Analysis by employment sector indicates that womenhold higher level positions in the public than in theprivate sector. Thirty-seven percent of the top executiveroles in the public sector are held by women,compared with 26% in the private sector. The resultsare more striking by profit status. Forty-seven percentof the top-level executives in nonprofit organizationsare women, compared with 21% in for-profit organizations.In general, women (65%) are more likely towork in nonprofit organizations than men (35%),whereas in for-profit organizations women and menare represented approximately equally (48% womenand 52% men). 11 Yet, only 20% of top executive positionsand 34% of managerial positions in for-profitorganizations are held by women.American/Black and 9% are Hispanic/Latin. 12 Only8% of managerial-level and 5% of top-level executiveemployees are African-American/Black, and evenfewer employees at these levels are Hispanic/Latins.The same trend is evident for all races, except forCaucasian/White. Almost nine out of 10 (87%) toplevelexecutives are Caucasian/White.Analysis by employment sector and profit status indicatesthat twice as many nonmanagerial African-American/Black employees work at nonprofitorganizations (22%) than at for-profit organizations(10%). Sixteen percent of African-American/Blackemployees hold managerial roles in public sector andnonprofit organizations, which is almost three timesmore than in private and for-profit organizations.More African-American/Black employees work in thepublic sector (18%) than in the private sector (12%).Management levels by race are shown in Table 13.HR professionals indicate that 13% of the nonmanagerialemployees at their organizations are African-10Top earners are defined as the five most highly compensated individuals within an organization.11These percentages refer to nonmanagerial employees in nonprofit organizations.12According to 2000 Census Bureau data, approximately 13% of the U.S. population is represented by African Americans/Blacks and another 13% is comprised ofHispanic/Latins. Although these percentages include both employed and unemployed individuals, they may be a useful gauge for comparison.Employee Development Survey Report19

ConclusionsEmployee development programs are of strategicimportance to both organizations andemployees. Organizations that offer employeesopportunities to evolve increase the likelihood ofretaining their talent and, in turn, create a cadre ofworkers equipped to grow within the organizationalstructure.Developing employee groups that have been traditionallyunderrepresented in the echelons of executivemanagement is also a priority as workforce diversitybecomes a competitive business advantage. Womenand African-Americans/Blacks, Hispanics/Latins andAsian/Pacific Islanders are underrepresented acrossthe ranks of management, especially in the top executivepositions. Women and minorities appear tohave more prospects for high-level posts in nonprofitand public/government institutions. Still, their numbersare significantly lower than their representationin nonmanagerial roles. As a result, more organizationsmay need to institute formal succession planningprocesses and career mentoring programs thatspecifically include women and minorities to increasetheir representation across all levels of management.These study findings suggest that although organizationsvalue the importance of human capital, structured,formalized avenues for development are notthe norm. HR professionals indicate that organizationseffectively identify high-potential employees andalso help develop employees, yet they are less confidentthat organizations effectively identify actualemployee development needs. This may be an areain which HR professionals can expand their sphere ofinfluence by actively working with managers touncover and recognize individual employee developmentneeds.This research shows that HR professionals are secondin line (after an employee’s supervisor) in termsof responsibility for employee development in organizations.The responsibility of HR generally includesresearching and providing meaningful developmentprograms for the organization. It is unclear, however, ifHR’s role often extends much further. Only about onequarterof HR professionals indicate that HR staff setdevelopment goals for employees. Practically speaking,it makes sense that employees themselves, alongwith their supervisors, are primarily responsible forsetting development goals, but HR could improve theprocess by participating more fully in goal-setting. Thiscould be an opportunity for HR to provide guidance toemployees, ensuring that the potential of all employeesis recognized.Employee Development Survey Report21

A Look Ahead:A Future View of Employee DevelopmentBy Jennifer Schramm, Manager, Workplace Trends and ForecastingSeveral factors are makingemployee developmentmore critical in determiningthe success of an organizationthan it has been in the past.First, the shift to a knowledgeeconomy makes the knowledge,skills and competencies ofemployees the most significantdriver of company value. However,because the increase in knowledgeturnover is now so rapid, agreater investment in skills developmentis required. Thoughemployees take on some of thisburden through their own investmentin education, the growth ofspecialized knowledge meansthat employers will increasinglyneed to take on the responsibilityof providing more specializedbusiness or sector-specific trainingand education.Another factor that will contributeto the relative importance ofemployee development will be theshifts in workforce demographics.Over the last few years, HR professionalshave grown more concernedwith how to prepare for apotential labor shortage as babyboomers begin to retire. TheSHRM 2004-2005 WorkplaceForecast shows that HR professionalsrate preparing for the nextwave of retirement as the thirdmost important trend in the HRprofession, and a large numberplan on investing more in trainingand development to boostemployee skill levels, as well asuse succession planning to agreater extent. 13 However, the findingsfrom the Employee DevelopmentSurvey Report indicatefew HR professionals say theirorganizations have successionplans in place for top executives.HR professionals’ awareness ofthe need for employee developmentstrategies to meet futurechallenges in the labor marketwill have to translate into concretesteps as shifts in the labormarket occur. The aging of theworkforce will create the need tofind new sources of talent tomake up for the knowledge andtalent being lost through retirement.However, the surveyreveals that equally important willbe finding ways to grow existingtalent through new forms ofemployee development. As notedin this report, there is a considerabledisparity between the percentageof women and minoritiesin management roles and the percentagein executive positions.This may indicate that currentapproaches to employee developmentare not working at an optimallevel for the large (andgrowing) proportion of the workforcemade up of women andother minorities.Finding ways to develop the talentsof underrepresented groupswill become increasingly important.The generations that willpick up where the baby boomersleave off are much more culturallydiverse, and education levels aremore similar between men andwomen. If anything, women areoutperforming men on many educationalmarkers. In some professionaldegree courses, womenare outnumbering men by a widemargin. Organizations that areunable to use employee developmentmethods that help womenand other minorities advancecould have the most difficulty indealing with any potential labor orskills shortages.Because the employee’s supervisorcurrently has the primaryresponsibility for developing hisor her staff, greater emphasis onmanagement training may be necessaryto ensure that the processof identifying high-potentialemployees is done well.Problems in this area may be drivingwomen and ethnic and racialminorities to break away fromtheir employers in order to formtheir own businesses. The reasonsbehind this phenomenon13Schramm, J. (2004). SHRM 2004 -2005 workplace forecast: A strategic outlook. Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management.22 Employee Development Survey Report

may increasingly be linked toproblems in the corporate culturewith identifying and developinghigh performers in these groups.Interestingly, in some ways, nonprofitorganizations seem to haveless of a problem identifying highperformers among women andminority groups and moving themup into the executive levels ofthe organization. However, forprofitorganizations are morelikely to have formal programsaimed at targeting high performers,as well as formal successionplanning. Both sectors mayhave something to teach theother when it comes to employeedevelopment. Employee Development Survey Report23

DemographicsCensus Region(n = 226)Midwest (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin) 19%South (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina,Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia) 23%West (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming) 36%Northeast (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont) 23%IndustryTitle(n = 219) (n = 224)Construction and mining/oil and gas 1% President/CEO 3%Educational services 6% Vice President/Deputy CEO 9%Finance 6% Assistant or Associate Vice President 0%Government 6% Director 25%Health 9% Assistant or Associate Director 5%High-tech 4% Manager/Supervisor 36%Insurance 6% Specialist 12%Manufacturing (durable goods) 11% Representative 4%Manufacturing (nondurable goods) 9% Other 7%Newspaper publishing/broadcasting 1%Services (nonprofit) 4%Services (profit) 11% Organization Staff SizeTelecommunications 1%Transportation 3%(n = 228)Utilities 1%Small (1-99 employees) 42%Wholesale/retail trade 8%Medium (100-499 employees) 34%Other 15%Large (500 or more employees) 25%24 Employee Development Survey Report

HR Department Size(n = 227)67%20%10%2% 1% 0%Fewer thanfive employees5-9employees10-24employees25-49employees50-99employees100 ormoreemployeesUnionized EmployeesSector(n = 218)Yes12%(n = 220)Public/government22%No88%Private78%Employee Development Survey Report25

Profit StatusGender of Respondents(n = 222)Nonprofit organization26%(n = 221)Male25%For-profit organization74%Female75%Race of Respondents(n = 218)85%0%2% 2%5% 6%OtherAsian/PacificIslanderNativeAmerican(AmericanIndian orAlaskanNative)Hispanic/LatinAfrican-American/Black(not ofHispanicorigin)Caucasian/White(not ofHispanicorigin)26 Employee Development Survey Report

Survey InstrumentSHRM/Catalyst Employee Development SurveyFor this survey, we define employee development as improving employee competencies and skills over thelong term through a variety of methods such as mentoring, coaching, succession planning, identification ofhigh-potential employees, etc.Please answer the following questions in terms of the location of your organization at which you currentlyspend the majority of your time.1. Which of the following employee development methods are used in your organization? (Check “UseMethod” or “Do Not Use Method” for each method.)Use MethodDo Not Use MethodApprenticeships/internships (to assess potential future hires)Cross-functional trainingDevelopment planningFormal coachingFormal identification of high-potential employeesFormal career mentoring (internal program)Formal career mentoring (external program)Formal succession planning processesHigh-visibility assignments/opportunities to work with executives (e.g., executive task forces)Job rotationJob sharingLeadership trainingLeadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individuals to meet with senior executives in organizedevents or semiformal settings)Matching employees with “stretch” assignments/opportunitiesTraining other than leadership trainingOther (please specify): _______________________________________________________Employee Development Survey Report27

2. Who is PRIMARILY and SECONDARILY responsible for employee development at your organization (inaddition to the employee’s self-assessment)? (Check one option for primarily responsible and one forsecondarily responsible.)No OneEmployee’sSupervisorDepartmentHead(ExcludesEmployee’sSupervisor)HR StaffInternalCoach(ExcludesEmployee’sSupervisor)Mentor(ExcludesEmployee’sSupervisor)OutsideConsultantOther1. Primarily responsible2. Secondarily responsible3. Does your organization encourage or require… (Check one per statement.)Yes,EncouragesYes,RequiresNo, NeitherEncouragesnor RequiresNotApplicableEmployees to set development goals for themselves?Supervisors to set development goals for their employees?Department heads (excludes employee’s supervisor) to set development goals foremployees?HR staff to set development goals for employees?Internal coaches (excludes employee’s supervisor or HR staff) to set developmentgoals for employees?Mentors (excludes employee’s supervisor or HR staff) to set development goals foremployees?Outside consultants to set development goals for employees?4. Who formally measures an employee’s development? (Check all that apply.) No one Employee’s supervisor Employee (i.e., self-assessment) Department head (excludes employee’s supervisor) HR staff Internal coach (excludes employee’s supervisor or HR staff) Mentor (excludes employee’s supervisor or HR staff) Outside consultant Other (please specify): __________________________28Employee Development Survey Report

5. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?My Organization…StronglyDisagreeDisagreeNeitherAgree norDisagreeAgreeStronglyAgreeEffectively identifies employees’ development needsIs effective in helping employees developEffectively identifies high-potential employeesIs effective in helping high-potential employees developIs effective in aligning employee development with the organization’sbusiness goalsıOften assigns employee development opportunities informally6. Does your organization conduct analysis to determine its return on investment (ROI) in the followingemployee development methods? If so, has the ROI been positive or negative? (Check either “Yes, PositiveROI,” “Yes, Negative ROI,” “No Analysis of ROI” or “Do Not Use Method” for each of the methods.)Yes, PositiveROIYes, NegativeROINo Analysisof ROIDo Not UseMethodApprenticeships/internships (to assess potential future hires)Cross-functional trainingDevelopment planningFormal coachingFormal identification of high-potential employeesFormal career mentoring (internal program)Formal career mentoring (external program)Formal succession planning processesHigh-visibility assignments/opportunities to work with executives (e.g., executivetask forces)Job rotationJob sharingLeadership trainingLeadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individuals to meet with senior executivesin organized events or semiformal settings)Match employees with “stretch” opportunitiesTraining other than leadership trainingEmployee Development Survey Report29

7. Does your organization compare the effectiveness of its development programs across gender and/orracial/ethnic minority groups?Yes, we compare employee development based on gender ONLY.Yes, we compare employee development based on racial/ethnic minority groups ONLY.Yes, we compare employee development based on BOTH gender and racial/ethnic minority groups.No, we DO NOT compare employee development for either gender or racial/ethnic minority groups.8. Does your organization have a formal diversity and inclusion initiative in place?YesNo Skip to question 109. Is employee development included in your organization’s diversity and inclusion initiative?YesNo10. Within your organization, is there someone whose function includes diversity and inclusion matters(such as a Diversity Officer or a Diversity Manager)?YesNo Skip to question 1211. Is the person responsible for diversity and inclusion at your organization involved, in any way, inemployee development?YesNo30Employee Development Survey Report

12. Does your organization particularly try to reach out to women, racial/ethnic minorities or employeesfrom outside the United States to participate in any of the following employee development methods?(Please check all that apply for each method.)WomenRacial/EthnicMinoritiesEmployeesFrom Outsidethe UnitedStatesDo Not UseApprenticeships/internships (to assess potential future hires) Cross-functional training Development planning Formal coaching Formal identification of high-potential employees Formal career mentoring (internal program) Formal career mentoring (external program) Formal succession planning processes High-visibility assignments/opportunities to work with executives (e.g., executivetask forces) Job rotation Job sharing Leadership training Leadership forums (i.e., opportunities for individuals to meet with senior executivesin organized events or semiformal settings) Match employees with “stretch” opportunities Training other than leadership training Employee Development Survey Report31

13. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following?In my organization…Racial/ethnic minorities receive the same development opportunities aswhite employeesStronglyDisagreeDisagreeNeitherAgree norDisagreeAgreeStronglyAgreeGay and lesbian employees receive the same development opportunities asheterosexual employeesFemales receive the same development opportunities as male employeesIt is no more difficult for racial/ethnic minority employees to find a mentorthan it is for white employees to find oneIt is no more difficult for gay and lesbian employees to find a mentor than itis for heterosexual employees to find oneIt is no more difficult for female employees to find a mentor than it is formale employees to find one14. Approximately what percentage of employees have been promoted in your organization within the last12 months?% of TOTAL employees promoted within the last 12 months _________% of female employees promoted within the last 12 months _________% of racial/ethnic minority employees promoted within the last 12 months _________DEMOGRAPHICS15. What is the ZIP code for the location for which you are responding? __________16. How many total employees (full and part time) are employed within your ENTIRE organization, includingyour location?___________17. How many total employees (full and part time) are employed at YOUR LOCATION only?________18. How many employees (full and part time) comprise the HR department at your location? ___________19. In each of the following levels at your location, what percentage of the workforce are males andfemales? (Totals must equal 100%.)Top-Level ExecutivesManagerial-LevelEmployeesNonmanagerial-LevelEmployeesMales _______ _______ _______Females _______ _______ _______Total 100% 100% 100%32Employee Development Survey Report

20. In each of the following levels at your location, what percentage of the workforce are in each of thefollowing groups: African-American/Black (not of Hispanic origin), Asian/Pacific Islander,Caucasian/White (not of Hispanic origin), Hispanic/Latin, Native American (American Indian orAlaskan Native), other? (Totals must equal 100%.)Top-Level ExecutivesManagerial-LevelEmployeesNonmanagerial-LevelEmployeesAfrican-American/Black (not of Hispanic origin) _______ _______ _______Asian/Pacific Islander _______ _______ _______Caucasian/White (not of Hispanic origin) _______ _______ _______Hispanic/Latin _______ _______ _______Native American (American Indian or Alaskan Native) _______ _______ _______Other _______ _______ _______Total 100% 100% 100%21. Are any of the employees at your location unionized (under a collective bargaining agreement)?YesNo Skip to question 2322. What percentage of employees at this location are unionized?___________%23. Which industry best describes this location’s main business? (Check only one.)Construction and mining/oil and gasEducational servicesFinanceGovernmentHealthHigh-techInsuranceManufacturing (durable goods)Manufacturing (nondurable goods)Newspaper publishing/broadcastingServices (nonprofit)Services (profit)TelecommunicationsTransportationUtilitiesWholesale/retail tradeOther (please specify) ____________________________Employee Development Survey Report33

24. Is your organization in the public/government or private sector?Public/government sectorPrivate sector25. Is your organization for profit or nonprofit?For-profit organizationNonprofit organizationPersonal Demographics26. What is your gender?MaleFemale27. What is your race/ethnicity? (Check only one.)African-American/Black (not of Hispanic origin)Asian/Pacific IslanderCaucasian/White (not of Hispanic origin)Hispanic/LatinoNative American (American Indian or Alaskan Native)Other (please specify:) __________28. Which of the following best describes your current title? (Check only one.)President/CEOVice President/Deputy CEOAssistant or Associate Vice PresidentDirectorAssistant or Associate DirectorManager/SupervisorSpecialistRepresentativeOther (Please specify:) __________34Employee Development Survey Report

SHRM Survey ReportsAvailable to members and the public1. SHRM/CareerJournal.com Workplace Privacy PollFindings (47 pages, January 2005)2. Workplace Productivity Poll Findings (17 pages,January 2005)3. 2004 U.S. Job Recovery and Retention PollFindings (33 pages, November 2004)4. Employee Trust and Organizational Loyalty PollFindings (14 pages, July 2004)5. Job Negotiation Survey Findings (41 pages, April2004)6. Job Opportunities Survey (39 pages, September2003)7. Job Recovery Survey (28 pages, August 2003)8. Job Opportunities Poll (39 pages, April 2003)9. Job Satisfaction Poll (74 pages, December 2002)10. HR Implications of the Attack on America (23pages, September 2002)11. Corporate Credibility and EmployeeCommunications Survey (14 pages, August 2002)12. Job Opportunities Poll (30 pages, August 2002)13. Workplace Romance Survey (24 pages, February2002)14. School-to-Work Programs Survey (16 pages,January 2002)15. HR Implications of the Attack on America:Executive Summary of Results of a Survey of HRProfessionals (13 pages, October 2002)16. Negotiating Rewards Poll (14 pages, October 2001)17. Search Tactics Poll (8 pages, April 2001)Available to members only1. 2005 HR Technology Report (37 pages, March2005)2. The Maturing Profession of Human Resources:Worldwide and Regional View Survey Report(33 pages, February 2005)3. 2004 Reference and Background CheckingSurvey Report (41 pages, January 2005)4. Job Satisfaction Series Survey Report(192 pages, August 2004)5. Generational Differences Survey Report(29 pages, August 2004)6. Employer-Sponsored Investment Advice SurveyReport (43 pages, July 2004)7. Human Resource Outsourcing Survey Report(28 pages, July 2004)8. 2004 Benefits Survey Report (67 pages, June2004)9. Health Care Survey Report (29 pages, June 2004)10. SHRM/CNNfn Job Satisfaction Series: JobSatisfaction Survey Report (52 pages, April 2004)11. SHRM/CNNfn Job Satisfaction Series: JobCompensation/Pay Survey Report (36 pages,February 2004)12. The Maturing Profession of Human Resources inthe U.S. Survey Report (48 pages, January 2004)13. Workplace Violence Survey (52 pages, January2004)14. SHRM Eldercare Survey (40 pages, December2003)Employee Development Survey Report35

15. SHRM/CNNfn Job Satisfaction Series: JobBenefits Survey (57 pages, December 2003)16. Undergraduate HR Curriculum Study (45 pages,October 2003)17. SHRM Equal Employment OpportunityCommission Survey (10 pages, October 2003)18. Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Survey (20pages, August 2003)19. SHRM/SHRM Foundation 2003 Benefits Survey(81 pages, June 2003)20. SHRM Job Satisfaction Series: Job SecuritySurvey (41 pages, June 2003)21. SHRM/NOWCC/CED Older Workers Survey (53pages, June 2003)22. March 2003 Current Events Survey (28 pages,May 2003)23. 2003 FMLA Poll (20 pages, April 2003)24. 2003 Business Ethics Survey (48 pages, April2003)25. Employer Incentives for Hiring Individuals WithDisabilities (66 pages, April 2003)26. Fun Work Environment Survey (56 pages,November 2002)27. Aligning HR With Organizational Strategy (53pages, November 2002)28. Recruiter Cost/Budget Survey (30 pages,October 2002)29. 2002 SHRM/Fortune Survey on the ChangingFace of Diversity (16 pages, October 2002)30. Workplace Demographic Trends Survey (37pages, June 2002)31. Global Leadership Survey (36 pages, June 2002)32. SHRM 2002 Benefits Survey Results (57 pages,April 2002)33. A Study of Effective Workforce Management (36pages, February 2002)34. Human Resource Strategies, Stages ofDevelopment and Organization Size Survey (46pages, January 2002)35. Job Security and Layoffs Survey (76 pages,December 2001)36. World Events Survey—Impact on Global Mobility(4 pages, November 2001)37. Religion in the Workplace (58 pages, June 2001)38. Employee Referral Programs (40 pages, June2001)39. Impact of Diversity Initiatives on the Bottom Line(41 pages, June 2001)40. 2001 Benefits Survey (59 pages, April 2001)41. 2000 FMLA Survey (51 pages, January 2001)42. Workplace Privacy Survey (51 pages, December2000)43. Performance Management Survey (43 pages,December 2000)44. Impact of Diversity Initiatives Poll (5 pages,October 2000)45. 2000 Retention Survey (40 pages, June 2000)46. SHRM Cover Letters and Resume Survey (39pages, May 2000)47. 2000 Benefits Survey (52 pages, April 2000)www.shrm.org/surveys36 Employee Development Survey Report

SHRM members can download this survey report and many others free of charge at www.shrm.org/surveys.If you are not an SHRM member and would like to become one, please visit www.shrm.org/application.

SHRM/CatalystEmployee DevelopmentSurvey Report$79.95 member/$99.95 nonmember62.17083