The leadership pipeline model is a framework that defines what leaders must do differently at each organizational level. Ram Charan, Stephen Drotter, and James Noel developed it. It describes passages, such as moving from individual contributor to leader of others. Each passage changes a leader’s skills, time application, and work values. Organizations use it to select, develop, and promote leaders based on the requirements of the next level.
In one large study, firms weighed past results heavily when they promoted people into management. That habit can weaken leadership development, selection, and succession. The model gives HR leaders and executives a shared language for judging readiness instead.
What Is the Leadership Pipeline Model?
A passage is the move from one leadership level to the next. The model treats each passage as a change of job, not a step up in rank. A person must learn new skills, spend time differently, and hold different views about which work matters.
Organizations use these differences to set standards for selection, development, performance management, and succession planning. The standards describe the next job before anyone is promoted into it.
Origin and Research Base
Charan, Drotter, and Noel published The Leadership Pipeline in November 2000, according to O’Reilly’s catalog record. Some guides give 2001 instead. A second edition followed in January 2011. Wiley published a third edition in February 2024, adding a fourth author, Kent Jonasen.
Drotter’s publisher biography calls him one of the original designers of General Electric’s succession planning process.
The third edition’s opening chapter describes the authors’ evidence. Assessments covered more than 1,500 leaders who were candidates for CEO, business general manager, CFO, and other C-suite roles. An ongoing research project that began in 2010 has involved more than 15,000 leaders in structured workshops. The authors present this as their own research. The opening pages describe no outside evaluation, so readers should treat it as practitioner evidence.
The Core Idea: Each Level Is a Different Job
Each chapter in Part II of the third edition includes a section titled “The Job to Be Done.” That structure reflects the model’s central claim. A leader of leaders does not simply do more of what a leader of others does. The work itself changes.
The pipeline metaphor follows from this claim. Leaders move upward through a series of turns. A leader who has not made a turn blocks the people behind. A later section offers tips for unclogging the pipeline.
Five or Six Passages? How the Editions Differ
The first and second editions describe six passages. Part II of the third edition covers five roles. They are leading others, leading leaders, leading a function, leading a business, and leading an enterprise. Mindtools, Rework, and Shortform still teach six. Both versions rest on the same logic about skills, time application, and work values.
| Career move | Second edition (2011) | Third edition (2024) |
| Individual contributor becomes a leader. | Managing self to manage others | Leading others |
| The first-line leader manages other leaders. | Managing others to manage managers | Leading leaders |
| The leader takes charge of a department. | Managing managers to functional managers | Leading a function |
| The function leader runs a business. | Functional manager to business manager | Leading a business |
| The business leader oversees several businesses. | Business manager to group manager | No separate role listed |
| Executive leads the whole company. | Group manager to enterprise manager | Leading an enterprise |
The third edition has no separate group manager passage. The enterprise chapter notes that organizations are flattening. As they do, the enterprise leader handles much of the work once tied to group leaders. Chapter 11 lists a group leader among five unique roles. Check the book to see how it defines that role.
Choose the version that fits your structure. Six passages suit companies where a group head oversees several businesses. Five passages suit companies without a portfolio layer. This is a practical reading, not guidance from the authors.
The Three Requirements That Change at Every Passage
Every passage requires three changes: new skills, a new use of time, and new work values. Work values here means what a leader believes deserves attention and reward. The second edition’s first chapter describes the skills, time applications, and work values that each passage demands. The third edition’s enterprise chapter names work values first.
| Requirement | Question it answers | Illustrative mismatch |
| Skills | What must the leader be able to do? | A new manager cannot give clear feedback |
| Time application | How should the leader spend the week? | A manager spends most days on personal output |
| Work values | What deserves attention and reward? | A leader treats coaching as a distraction |
The examples are illustrative, not drawn from a study.
Skills can be taught in a course, and time can be reset with a calendar. Work values shape what a leader notices, rewards, and ignores. They probably change through experience and feedback more than through instruction. This is an analytical reading of the model, not a measured finding.
Shortform’s summary describes managers who work hard on the wrong tasks. They keep doing the work of the stage below, the work they did before promotion. Their own responsibilities go unfilled, and their subordinates miss experience they need. Habit is a plausible driver, which is this article’s inference.
The Passages in Detail
The sections below follow the third edition’s five roles. They draw on the book’s contents and chapter previews, plus guides from Mindtools, Rework, and Shortform.
Passage 1: Individual Contributor to Leader of Others
A first-time leader’s job is to create results through other people. The measure of success shifts from personal output to the team’s output. The third edition’s chapter on leading others gives an example. When an individual contributor improves output by 10 percent, that person alone makes the difference. If a leader of others owns a 10 percent gain, the whole team must be involved.
Mindtools lists skills that first-time managers need: planning short and long-term goals, managing conflicting priorities, and giving feedback. The practical test of the shift is delegation. Work that stays with the manager cannot become the team’s experience.
More than 80 percent of all employees report to a leader of others, the third edition states. Most people’s daily experience of management therefore depends on this level.
Passage 2: Leader of Others to Leader of Leaders
At this level, a leader’s output is the performance of other leaders. The third edition says leaders of leaders must select and develop leaders of others. They must also hold them accountable. In this article’s reading, the shift runs from coaching individuals to developing managers who coach.
The same chapter describes what happens when the transition goes badly. The leader of leaders ends up doing the work of the leaders of others. The workforce is then confused and poorly led.
Rework’s guide describes a related failure. A leader gives individual contributors direct feedback, skips the middle manager, and gradually makes managers irrelevant.
Passage 3: Leader of Leaders to Function Leader
A function leader runs a department such as sales, finance, or engineering. The third edition’s chapter gives the primary purpose: delivering function capability that gives the business a competitive edge. The leader reports directly to a business leader, who may be the CEO, and belongs to the business team. Peers are now other function leaders.
Two translation tasks follow. Business guidance becomes function plans. The leader also advises the business leader on the function’s capability and state of the art.
Mindtools adds that functional managers must learn to think strategically and over the long term. This passage therefore calls for strategic thinking across the whole function.
Passage 4: Function Leader to Business Leader
A business leader typically carries responsibility for both cost and revenue, according to the third edition. The role centers on producing short-term and long-term profit while strengthening the organization. In practice, this is profit and loss responsibility.
Mindtools notes that complexity and visibility are high, and many business managers receive little guidance from senior leaders. This article reads the shift as moving from advocating for one function to integrating all of them. Business leaders must understand how functions interact and where the business earns its profit.
A hypothetical example shows the risk. Imagine a former sales leader who now runs a business unit. If that leader keeps favoring sales, other functions lack resources. The leader is still doing a function leader’s work.
Passage 5: Business Leader to Enterprise Leader
An enterprise leader is responsible for the whole organization. The audience widens. Mindtools lists groups the leader must satisfy: the board, financial analysts, investors, partners, the workforce, direct reports, and local communities. This makes stakeholder management a core task.
Some enterprise leaders lacked the work values, time application, and skills the level demands, according to the third edition. They may also lack an enterprise mindset, and the chapter includes a section on developing one.
The second edition places a group manager between business leader and enterprise leader. Rework describes that role as overseeing several business units. Its duties include portfolio thinking, capital allocation, evaluating business strategies, and developing business manager talent. Organizations with a portfolio structure may keep this passage as a separate step.
What the Evidence Supports
Independent research bears on three assumptions behind the model. They concern how firms promote, how much managers matter, and how internal moves compare with outside hires. None of the studies below tests the model directly.
Promotion Based on Current Performance
Benson, Li, and Shue studied sales workers at 131 firms (Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2019). They found evidence consistent with the Peter Principle. Firms weighed current job performance heavily in promotion decisions, at the expense of traits that better predicted managerial performance.
The study also found that firms placed less weight on sales performance when managerial roles carried greater responsibility. The same held when frontline workers earned strong pay for performance. This article reads the first pattern as fitting pipeline logic. Higher passages need different capabilities, so past output counts for less. The study does not draw that conclusion.
Limits apply. The data cover sales workers who moved into management. They do not cover every passage, and they do not test the pipeline model.
Managers and Team Outcomes
Gallup’s 2015 analysis estimates managers account for at least 70 percent of variance in employee engagement scores across business units. The figure describes differences between units. It does not mean managers cause 70 percent of any one person’s engagement.
Gallup also reports that many US managers cite earlier non-managerial success, or tenure, as reasons for their roles. Gallup argues that those reasons do not show managerial talent. Readers should treat that argument as Gallup’s interpretation.
Combine this with the third edition’s statement that more than 80 percent of employees report to a leader of others. Weak selection at the first passage then reaches many teams. This is an inference from two separate figures.
Internal Promotion Versus External Hiring
Bidwell analyzed personnel data from the US investment banking arm of a financial services company (Administrative Science Quarterly, 2011). The data cover 2003 to 2009. Workers promoted into jobs performed significantly better for the first two years than external hires in similar jobs. After that, the two groups’ performance converged.
External hires started with about 18 percent higher pay. They also left at higher rates, and they were promoted faster.
The study is consistent with building leaders internally, which is the aim of a leadership pipeline. It does not make internal mobility a universal rule.
The main data come from one firm. The author repeated the analyses at an investment bank and a publishing company. Those data were less detailed. External hires again earned more and were rated lower.
One finding bears on passage design. Workers who were promoted and transferred at the same time performed worse than other internal movers. The study did not find higher exit rates for them. This suggests that stacking two transitions in one move may weaken performance. That reading is an inference, not a tested claim of the study.
What These Studies Do Not Show
No study reviewed here tests whether adopting the pipeline model improves financial results or retention. Some guides cite large figures without links or full citations. Rework, for example, names Bersin by Deloitte, the Association for Talent Development, and McKinsey as sources. Those figures could not be traced to primary publications, so this article does not repeat them. Organizations should measure their own results.
How to Apply the Leadership Pipeline Model
Apply the model in five moves: map roles, write standards, align HR processes, diagnose problems, and measure results. Part III of the third edition covers leadership portraits, implementation degree, tips for unclogging the pipeline, and performance dialogues. The five moves here are this article’s synthesis.
Map Roles by Work, Not by Title
Place each leadership role on a passage according to the work it requires. A director who manages individual contributors works at the first passage, whatever the title. A vice president who manages managers works at the second.
Then compare each leader’s actual time use with the role’s requirements. A leader who spends most days on personal output has not made the passage. Calendar reviews and 360-degree feedback can reveal this pattern. Ask raters about behaviors that belong to the role’s level.
Write Standards for Each Passage
In the third edition, designing leadership portraits and choosing an implementation degree are separate sections of Part III. This article uses “standard” for any written description of what a passage requires.
A typical leadership competency model lists capabilities. A standard built on pipeline logic would also cover time allocation and work values. It would add the transition problems leaders usually face at that level. Keep each standard short enough for a manager to use in a conversation. Review it when the organization changes structure.
Connect Four HR Processes to the Passages
The second edition has chapters on diagnostics, performance improvement, succession planning, and coaching. The table below applies passage logic to four HR processes. It is this article’s synthesis.
| HR process | Passage-based practice |
| Selection | Judge readiness for the next passage’s work, not only past results |
| Development | Teach the specific shift, such as developing other managers at the second passage |
| Performance management | Review how leaders spend time, not only what they deliver |
| Succession | Build a bench of ready leaders for each passage |
Shortform’s summary describes a test before promotion. A boss gives a strong manager some responsibilities of the next stage. The manager becomes eligible for promotion only after handling them well. This practice targets the risk that the Peter Principle describes.
The same lens helps identify high-potential employees. Define potential as readiness to learn the next passage’s skills, time habits, and values.
Diagnose Pipeline Problems
The second edition has a chapter titled “Diagnostics: Identifying Pipeline Problems and Possibilities.” The third edition includes tips for unclogging the pipeline. The table links common symptoms to likely passage problems. It is an analytical aid, not a validated instrument.
| Symptom | Likely passage issue | First check | Response |
| Team members wait for the manager to solve technical problems | First passage not made | Count tasks the manager performs personally | Coach on delegation and set time targets |
| Middle managers feel bypassed | Second passage not made | Ask who gives teams their direction | Clarify accountability and coach through managers |
| One function wins while the business loses | Fourth passage not made | Compare decisions with whole-business goals | Build cross-function exposure and standards |
| A strong performer struggles soon after promotion | Skipped or mismatched move | Identify which passages the person skipped | Assign targeted stretch work and a coach |
| Capable people stall under one leader | Clogged pipeline | Count promotions out of the leader’s team | Hold the leader accountable for developing successors |
No single symptom proves a diagnosis. Confirm patterns across several observations before acting.
Measure Pipeline Health
Measure outcomes at the passage level. Useful indicators include the share of leadership roles filled internally and the early performance of new leaders. Voluntary exits among new leaders also help. Track early performance over the first two years. Bidwell found that the gap between hiring routes appears in that window.
Also track time spent at each level, and compare new leaders’ feedback scores with their passage standards. These indicators are this article’s suggestions. The Knowledge Academy lists employee retention, promotions, lateral movements, engagement, feedback, and learning outcomes as similar metrics.
Common Implementation Mistakes
These are analytical observations drawn from the model’s logic, not study findings.
Standards written without changed rewards stay on paper. Work values follow what an organization pays and praises. If bonuses still reward personal output, a manager has a reason to keep doing the level below.
Applying the model only at the moment of promotion comes too late. Readiness takes time to build. A leader who first hears the new standards on day one has no chance to practice the shift. Next-level assignments before promotion, as Shortform describes, give practice time and give the organization evidence.
Passages are not steps that everyone completes in order. Some leaders skip a level, and others move across functions. A skipped passage can leave a gap in skills, time habits, or values. Use the diagnostic table above to locate the gap, then plan targeted development.
Leadership Pipeline Model vs Related Frameworks
These tools answer different questions. The table compares them.
| Framework | Question it answers | Unit of analysis | Main limit |
| Leadership pipeline model | What does each leadership level require? | Role level and transition | Assumes distinct levels; evidence is practitioner based |
| 9-box grid | How does this person rate on performance and potential? | Individual | Potential is harder to measure objectively than performance |
| Succession planning | Who could fill key roles, and what do they need first? | Roles and candidates | Needs clear role standards to judge readiness |
| Leadership competency model | Which capabilities do leaders need? | Capability list | May omit time use and work values |
The 9-box grid places individuals on performance and potential. The pipeline model defines the next job. Succession planning links people to specific roles and timelines.
Used together, the grid can identify candidates. The pipeline model can set the readiness standard. The succession plan can assign timing. This combination is an analytical suggestion, not a published method.
Limits and Conditions for Use
The model assumes distinct layers of leadership. Toye Sobande argues in BusinessDay that it may reinforce a hierarchical and linear view of leadership. Flatter organizations have fewer fixed positions, so one leader may carry the duties of two passages.
The third edition adds a chapter on unique roles, which may help. It lists five: project leader, scaled agile organizations leader, leader of contractors, section leader, and group leader. Organizations that use agile leadership practices should read that chapter before mapping roles to passages.
The model also describes levels of work, not individuals. It does not decide who has the aptitude or the wish to lead. Selection still needs judgment about the person. Assessment and interviews can supply it. Gallup’s talent argument, noted above, points the same way.
The evidence base is another limit. The authors’ evidence comes from their own research project and workshops. Researchers have adapted the model outside business. Mabel Gonzales’s 2019 Western Sydney University doctoral thesis adapted it to school leadership in New South Wales. Adaptation is not evaluation, so outcome evidence remains thin.
Finally, passages should guide judgment, not replace it. A rigid checklist may block lateral moves that build breadth.
Conclusion
The model asks organizations to treat each promotion as a change of job. The promoted leader needs new skills, a new use of time, and new work values. Skills are the easiest of the three to teach, in this article’s reading. Time and values need calendars, feedback, and rewards that point at the new job.
The edition question shapes the standards. Organizations with a portfolio layer can keep six passages. Others can start from the third edition’s five.
Independent studies fit the model’s premises but do not test it. Firms weigh past performance heavily when they promote. Managers shape engagement differences between units. Internal movers outperformed external hires early in one firm. Each organization must measure whether passage standards change its own results.
Treat the passages as a maintained standard. Review them when structure, strategy, or work design changes. Every promotion then raises one practical question: what must this person do differently next?
Passage standards define what the next job requires. They do not show who is ready or when. Closing that gap means linking key roles, candidate readiness, and development timelines. That work belongs to succession planning, which extends the pipeline from standards to named successors.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the leadership pipeline model only for large organizations?
No. The Knowledge Academy says small and medium-sized organizations can benefit. Shortform notes that in smaller companies one manager may need to do the jobs of two stages. Someone must still own each passage’s duties.
Which leadership passage is the hardest?
Guides disagree. Mindtools says the step from functional manager to business manager may be the hardest. FourWeekMBA says the authors call the first step the hardest, but that claim is unconfirmed. Difficulty likely depends on how far the new job departs from a leader’s habits. That is an analytical reading.
Is the leadership pipeline model the same as the five levels of leadership?
No. They are different frameworks. John Maxwell’s five levels are Position, Permission, Production, People Development, and Pinnacle. They describe growing influence as a leader. The pipeline model describes the work that organizational roles require at each level.
Can I use the leadership pipeline model for my own career planning?
Yes. Mindtools says the model helps with planning your own career path. Compare the next role’s time use and work values with your current habits. Then ask for a next-level assignment. That last step is a suggestion, not guidance from the authors.
Where can I find a leadership pipeline model template?
Some sites offer leadership pipeline templates, including slide decks. Check pricing and license terms before use. A simple version needs one row per passage and three columns for skills, time application, and work values.