Leadership development
that actually works

What does sustainable leadership development mean?

Leadership development is more than a seminar. In Switzerland, where companies frequently operate in multilingual and internationally shaped structures, sustainable development means above all: leaders change attitudes, develop new perceptions and integrate insights into their leadership practice — within the Swiss context with its particular demands on consensus and personal responsibility.

I accompany organisations across Central Switzerland, Zurich and the DACH region in the design and implementation of leadership development programmes that actually work — because they fit your organisation and are carried from within.

My offering in leadership development

• Leadership workshops and impulses — on leading through change, decision culture, feedback and learning culture
• Team development for leadership teams — clarifying roles, strengthening collaboration, developing shared values
• Blended learning concepts — combining in-person, online and individual coaching
• Development programmes for emerging leaders — structured development paths for high potentials
• Transition accompaniment — supporting leaders entering new roles

Leadership and culture change

Leadership development and culture change are closely connected. When organisations want to change their culture, it begins with the people who lead. I accompany organisations through this connection: leadership behaviour that shapes culture, and culture work that strengthens leadership.

Leadership development for companies and SMEs

My clients come from large corporations such as Robert Bosch, NORDEX SE and SEG Automotive — but especially from the Swiss mid-market and SMEs in Central Switzerland. Many Swiss SMEs have no in-house HR academy. For them, I offer tailored development solutions that grow with the company — from Lucerne to Zurich.

Developing leadership culture in Switzerland

Swiss leadership culture differs substantially from German or Anglo-American models. Where German companies often rely on clear hierarchies and detailed processes, and Anglo-American ones on fast, top-down decisions, Switzerland is dominated by the consensus principle. Decisions are supported more broadly, but are also carried more sustainably as a result.

For leadership development this means: programmes that simply adopt German or American models often fail against Swiss reality. My development programmes instead build on the strengths of Swiss leadership culture – personal responsibility, pragmatism, reliability – and develop these further in a targeted way.

Particular attention goes to leading multilingual teams. In many Swiss companies, German-speaking Swiss, Romands and international employees work together. Leaders must learn to use this diversity not as an obstacle but as a strength. This is exactly where my programmes begin.

Why programmes evaporate

The most common reason a development programme leaves no trace has little to do with content. It lies in the contradiction between what is taught in the module and what the organisation actually rewards. Someone who learns to name mistakes openly and then experiences consequences for doing exactly that in the next objectives review will not apply the method – however good the training was.

Every programme therefore starts by clarifying context: which leadership behaviour does your organisation in fact reward? Which decisions contradict your own leadership principles? Where do structures need to change so the desired behaviour becomes possible at all? These questions are uncomfortable – and they are the precondition for a programme to achieve more than good atmosphere.

How a programme is built

An effective programme follows no fixed number of modules but one principle: there must be practice between learning units, and that practice must come back into the group.

A typical twelve-month design: a kick-off with the sponsor to clarify goals, three to four two-day in-person modules, peer consulting groups of three or four people meeting independently in between, one or two individual coaching sessions per participant, and a transfer module at the end where concrete undertakings are reviewed.

Between modules each participant works on a real undertaking from their own remit – not a case study, but a change that is due anyway. This is the point at which development and day-to-day business stop competing for the same hours.

Leading between consensus and pace

Swiss leadership culture is built for durability: decisions are broadly supported, and the collegial principle within the executive board ensures nobody can move ahead alone. That is a strength – once taken, decisions get carried. It is also the most frequent complaint in development programmes: it takes too long.

A recurring theme is therefore the deliberate distinction between decisions that need consensus and those that do not – and how to take the latter without damaging the culture. Closely related: handling conflict, which in consensus-oriented organisations is rarely fought out openly and tends to get displaced instead.

Programmes for Swiss SMEs

Many of my engagements come from mid-sized companies in Central Switzerland: 50 to 500 employees, often owner-managed, with no people development function and little experience of external programmes – but short decision paths and the ability to get very concrete very quickly.

For these organisations I start small: one format for the executive board that has to prove itself before being extended to further levels. What works gets built out; what does not gets dropped rather than pushed through. And where succession in a family business is approaching, developing the second leadership tier often becomes the real subject – because a handover without it rarely works.

Measuring impact

Participant satisfaction is not evidence of impact. Indicators are therefore agreed with the sponsor at the outset: employee survey results in the areas concerned, turnover, decision cycle times, changes in 360-degree feedback before and after, internal succession rates.

Not all of this can be attributed causally to a programme, and I do not claim otherwise. But a programme that touches none of these measures has not earned its budget – and that question is worth asking beforehand, not afterwards.

When a different format fits better

Where an individual leader has a specific concern, executive coaching is the more individual and usually faster route. Where it first needs establishing who brings which potential, a development centre comes first. And where a leadership team does not work together, no programme for everyone will help – targeted team development with that specific team will.