Your executives are probably getting briefed on the measurable traits of high-performing leaders before they going into the talent meetings where they're choosing which individuals in which to invest their development dollars. This is where they discuss, calibrate and agree on the assessed performance and potential of key players in the business. Wouldn't it be interesting to understand their criteria and use it as a way to guide your own leadership development planning?

The premise is that building your development plan to focus on the leadership attributes that have been shown by research to predict who will perform well at higher levels is probably a good bet. It also makes sense to find out what your company uses as its specific criteria to assess talent to guide you as you prioritize your development activities.

Companies use different frameworks to organize their thinking around spotting high potential future leaders. A popular one is the Seven Signposts, by KornFerry, based...

Your executives are probably getting briefed on the measurable traits of high-performing leaders before they're going into talent meetings where they're choosing which individuals to invest their development dollars in.

Wouldn't it be interesting to have these as a way to guide your leadership development plan for yourself?

I'm going to walk you through them. I help women who want to build careers that they love by driving their own development to do that.

So the premise is building your own development plan and focusing on the leadership attributes that have been shown by research to predict high-performing leaders is probably a good way to go.

I have a development planning template that's focused on these, which you can get at fullpotentialrealized.com/leader

These are the Seven Signposts. KornFerry has a framework which is based on 30 years of research. And seven is a lot so I'm not going to say that all leadership teams use all of them, but...

You might use the less-successful career development strategies below when focused on surviving the day-to-day demands of your current role. We’ve all at one point or another succumbed to these default-mode approaches. Recognize any of these?

1. Not understanding how the talent management system in your company works overall – what it is, who is involved, and who is well regarded
2. Not knowing what factors are considered high potential and not using those to inform your development plan
3. Presuming you know what skills and experiences you’ll want or need later or in what direction your career will go
4. Not continuously and actively working on growing capacity and capabilities
5. Failing to intentionally build a portfolio of leadership skills and experiences early in your career when you have more leeway and less pressure to get it perfect
6. Not letting key leaders know what you’re up to and expecting them to discover it
7. Not investing a little at a time to build long...

Understanding the criteria for advancement and emphasizing your aligned attributes accordingly, or working hard and expecting to be recognized for your contributions. Which strategy do you prefer? Many women, myself not excluded, wittingly or unwittingly have employed the latter. I think we can do better.

Two work experiences illustrate the importance of understanding the system and positioning yourself appropriately. In one case I was responsible for Diversity at an Investment Bank where only a handful of women had risen to the highest level title, Managing Director. I was researching how promotions worked so that I could better support creation of more balanced leadership teams.

I found that a large committee reviewed the candidates who were up for promotion to MD each year. The committee broke the list into three groups: those who were an obvious no, an obvious yes, and the maybes. The candidates in the obvious yes and obvious no groups were barley discussed; the...