The S-Curve is a very simple concept.  Over time, a newly promoted employee goes through distinct stages in their performance achievement.  Initially, their performance declines as they grapple with the new set of responsibilities.  Gradually they get the swing of things and start to do well at their new accountabilities.  After a period of becoming comfortable with their role, they start to stagnate as they stop growing. Within these stages are many nuances.  We select people for promotion based on their history and our hope for their future.  We expect that good work and result production in the current role is an important indicator of talent and ability and that these attributes can be transferred into their leadership role.    One of the astounding things about modern business in Japan is that firms abandon these individuals at this point. Puzzlingly, they do not provide their newly promoted leaders with any great assistance to succeed.  The newly promoted are given the baton of command and left to themselves to use trial and error or copying what their previous bosses did, to work out how to lead.  Sounds like a plan except what if their previous boss role models were totally mediocre leaders.  This is how to create generational decline in a business and nobody would be voting for that. You really have to wonder how we could still be using such a failed model in this modern day and age, in such a sophisticated country like Japan?  This country has a constant, savage battle for market share, going on across all industries.  The struggle for survival is real and yet the development of the people in middle management who can make a difference is being hamstrung by inertia.  Companies just keep doing what they have always done.  That is not very smart if your competitor is making the changes to succeed and you are not. Part of the issue is that promoting one person doesn’t fit into any comfortable time frame for the machine. If ten people get promoted at the same time, then perhaps some group training can be arranged.  The green eye shade types hunkered down in the accounting department run the numbers, calculate the per head cost, the per hour numbers and conclude that this is doable. However, if it is just one person, then the calculations blow up and the required training gets the thumbs down as too expensive. Consequently, there is no mechanism for developing these new leaders to play the role they have been handpicked for.  Individual coaching is ruled out as too expensive for such a low-level position.  For the senior Directors of course, an Executive Coach is deemed an acceptable expense, but not so for the newly minted section head. It is a case of “congratulations, work hard and good luck” and that is the full extent of the training programme.  Here is a hint for everyone - look for training companies like us, who offer public classes on leadership, where you can ship the newly promoted person off to a class with others in similar situations, assembled together from other industries and companies.  This is not hard and it is not expensive. In the meantime, the new leader is struggling to work out what they should be doing in this unfamiliar leadership role.  Of course, the section targets haven’t been adjusted down to account for their struggle or lack of experience in this new role.  Initially, they work much harder than before as a player/manager to get to the required numbers.  This works for this first year and then what happens?  The next year the targets are higher again, and they are doing even more individual work. Not much leading is underway to get to the target for which they have responsibility because they don’t have any time.  They are not leveraging the team to produce a team result. Heroically they are trying to do it all by themselves. By year three, they blow-up and can’t match the increase in targets. Then the machine concludes they are a dud as a lead