Human resource (HR), Learning and Development (L&D), and Organisational Development (OD) professionals are frequently tasked with designing leadership development (LD) programs to improve workplace leadership effectiveness. Meta-analytical findings show that certain program design features yield greater effectiveness in producing organisational results (Lacerenza et al., 2017). However, little is known about how professionals make choices regarding LD program design.
We conducted a series of studies to investigate factors influencing differing perceptions of LD program design effectiveness among professionals and how these factors contribute to the decisions made about the design and delivery of specific LD interventions.
The first study was informed by dual-process theory and proposed a novel first-stage moderated-mediation model to investigate how HR professionals’ prototypical and anti-prototypical implicit leadership theories (ILTs), leadership myth (LM) acceptance and exposure to scientific information about leadership relate to LD program design choices. We surveyed 291 HR professionals from Australia, the UK and the US and uncovered that many professionals demonstrated a commitment to evidence-based decision-making. Yet there were significant gaps in design choices and best-practice evidence. We found that only 23% of respondents frequently consulted scientific-based information about leadership.
The second study aims to uncover more nuance in how professionals think and make decisions about the design of LD interventions. Specifically, we investigate three key factors: social conformity, bounded rationality and beliefs. First, we adopt social identity theory (SIT) to examine whether social conformity impacts LD decisions. Second, we consider if bounded rationality (i.e., availability bias, satisfying) limits professionals from making optimal design decisions. Finally, following recent work investigating alternative rationales and criteria people use to justify leadership development programs (Vongswasdi et al., 2023), we probe into the impact of the four belief profiles on design decisions. We employ a qualitative design and conduct in-depth interviews with professionals involved in the design and delivery of LD programs.
Overall, this research sheds light on the nuanced decision-making processes that shape LD program design. By elucidating the multifaceted influences at play, our findings hold implications for enhancing the efficacy and alignment of LD interventions with organisational objectives, ultimately contributing to both research and practice in leadership development.

1. Develop a nuanced understanding of the factors influencing professionals' perceptions of leadership development (LD) program design effectiveness, including implicit leadership theories (ILTs), acceptance of leadership myths (LM), and exposure to scientific leadership information.
2. Explore the interplay between social conformity, bounded rationality, and underlying beliefs in the decision-making processes of HR, L&D, and OD professionals regarding LD intervention design.
3. Acquire insights into evidence-based decision-making practices and strategies to bridge the gap between theoretical insights and practical implementation in LD program design, contributing to enhanced efficacy and alignment with organisational objectives.