The Leadership Bench Is Thinner Than Anyone Wants to Admit

I was on a call last month with a senior HR VP who walked me through her company’s “leadership pipeline.” She had a slide. The slide had names. The names had little colored dots next to them — green for ready now, yellow for ready in one to two years, red for what she politely called “developmental needs.”

There were a lot of green dots. Suspiciously many.

I asked her, gently, how many of those green-dot people had ever actually run a P&L. Or led a function through a real crisis. Or fired anyone, ever.

The call got quiet.

This is the part of corporate life nobody wants to say out loud: most leadership benches are a fiction. A spreadsheet. A polite arrangement of names that helps the talent review meeting end on time so everyone can get back to their actual jobs.

And the reason is simple. We ran the place so lean we forgot to grow anyone.

For about fifteen years now, the management gospel has been efficiency. Cut layers. Flatten the org. Increase span of control. Demand more from fewer. The metrics rewarded leaders who squeezed the same output out of a smaller team, and punished anyone who carried a single extra body the consultants couldn’t justify.

It worked. It worked great, if you only looked at this quarter.

Leadership and Self-Reflection

Watch Now

The problem is that a fully optimized leader has zero slack. And a leader with zero slack can’t develop anyone. They can’t sit in on someone else’s tough conversation. They can’t hand off a stretch project, because they don’t have time to clean up the rookie mistakes. They can’t mentor, because mentoring is unbillable. They are too busy executing today’s plan to build the people who are supposed to execute tomorrow’s.

So the bench gets thin. Not in some dramatic way. Nobody walks into the boardroom and announces “we have no successors.” It thins quietly, the way a glacier melts. And then one day a key SVP gets a better offer, or has a heart attack, or finally tells the CEO what she really thinks of him, and you discover the next person up has never been further than two levels deep in the function and has the political instincts of a Labrador puppy.

Here’s the trick the org plays on itself. When you ask senior leaders “do we have a pipeline?” they say yes. They say yes because they want the answer to be yes. Because there’s a slide that says yes. Because HR designed the slide and HR’s bonus is partly tied to having a yes-shaped slide. Because saying no would mean explaining why, and nobody has time for that meeting either.

The honest version of a leadership bench audit is humbling. Try this. Pick your top twenty leadership roles. For each one, name (out loud, not on a slide) the person who could step in tomorrow if the incumbent quit. Then name the person who’d be ready in two years.

Then do the thing nobody does. Ask whether the person you just named in slot two has actually been told they’re being developed. Whether they’ve been given the work that develops them. Whether they could pass a basic test on the function they’d be inheriting.

If you can do that cleanly for more than half your roles, you’re an outlier. Most companies can do it for maybe a third. Some can’t do it at all and call the gap “agility.”

I’m not arguing for a return to bloat. I’m not nostalgic for the days when GE had a hundred people in a Crotonville classroom learning how to be future GMs. But somewhere between “executive university for everyone” and “we’re so lean nobody has time to teach anyone anything,” there’s a sane place to live. We’ve been on the wrong side of it for a while.

The cost shows up late, which is why nobody panics. You don’t pay for an empty bench in Q3. You pay for it three years out, when you can’t fill a role internally, so you go external, so you spend a year onboarding a stranger who doesn’t understand your customers, who triggers a wave of departures from the people who got passed over, and who finally produces results in year two — if they don’t quit first because the role wasn’t what the recruiter described.

Then you pay the recruiter again.

A thin bench is the most expensive form of efficiency there is. We just don’t put it anywhere in the budget where anyone can see it.

So what do you do?

Stop pretending. That’s the first thing. Look at your bench the way an opposing GM would scout it. Be the asshole in the room who asks who’s actually ready. The discomfort of that conversation is a gift. It’s the price of not getting blindsided eighteen months from now.

Buy your leaders some slack. Not a lot. Five percent. Enough that they can sit in on someone else’s meeting, take a developing leader to a customer visit, do a walkaround that isn’t on a deliverable. Slack is where development lives. A leader with zero unstructured time is, by definition, not developing anyone. Including themselves.

Stop labeling people “high potential” and start giving them work. Potential is meaningless without reps. Nobody learns to lead from a competency framework. They learn it from running something that might fail, and being held accountable when it does.

And tell the truth in your talent reviews. Even when it makes the meeting longer. Especially then.

The companies that will run the next decade are not the ones that squeezed the last drop of efficiency out of this one. They’re the ones that quietly, expensively, unglamorously kept growing leaders while the rest of us were busy executing.

The bench is thinner than anyone wants to admit. The good news is you can still see yours. The bad news is, if you’re honest about what you see, you have work to do.

Dan Rust is the Vice President of Global Leadership and Commercial Development at Infopro Learning and a recognized thought leader in leadership and organizational development. With over 30 years of experience, Dan has helped organizations develop leaders who can navigate complexity, change, and transformation. He is the author of the bestselling book “Workplace Poker” and the host of the “Leadership Disrupted” podcast, where he explores modern leadership challenges. Dan regularly speaks at industry events and shares insights on leadership, culture, and workplace transformation. His work focuses on helping leaders create environments where employees feel empowered, engaged, and psychologically safe during times of rapid change.