November is crunch time for talent leaders. You’re finalising budgets, reviewing the year’s diversity data, and preparing to explain progress (or the lack of it) to the board. Meanwhile, every line in your L&D budget is under scrutiny, and programmes that can’t demonstrate clear ROI are the first to be cut.

If you’re planning your 2026 leadership development investment, here are three questions that will help you separate genuine impact from expensive theatre:

1. Does this programme have measurable outcomes beyond satisfaction scores?

“Participants enjoyed the session” tells you very little about whether the programme changed anything. Yet I see organisations spending tens of thousands on interventions measured solely by post-workshop surveys asking people if they’d recommend it.

Look for programmes that track tangible outcomes: promotion rates, confidence increases in specific areas, behavioural changes reported by managers, career progression 12-18 months post-programme.

When we worked with Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust on their Excel positive action programme, we didn’t just measure satisfaction (though 100% would recommend it). We tracked that 95% of participants felt they could be their authentic selves at work after the programme, compared to just 21% at the start. We measured career progression. We followed up with managers and sponsors to understand systemic change, not just individual development.

2. Will this address our leadership pipeline gaps or just train current leaders?

Many inclusive leadership programmes inadvertently reinforce the status quo. They develop the leaders you already have, rather than building the diverse pipeline you need.

If your leadership team doesn’t reflect the diversity of your organisation, ask yourself: does this programme actively develop talent from underrepresented groups whilst equipping their managers and senior sponsors to unlock that potential?

At Centrica, we worked with 90 talented staff from underrepresented groups over two years. Before the programme, fewer than 40% of senior leaders felt confident creating growth opportunities for diverse talent. Afterwards, their readiness score increased to 63%. Critically, their team members became “more alive,” generating ideas and challenging ways of working, exactly what inclusive leadership should achieve.

3. Can we prove ROI to the board?

When budget conversations get difficult, you need to answer: “What did we get for this investment?”

Effective leadership development programmes should demonstrate returns that matter to your organisation: increased internal promotions (cheaper than external hires), improved retention of diverse talent, stronger succession pipeline, measurable culture shifts.

Our Tri-Level™ approach, which develops diverse talent, their line managers, and senior sponsors simultaneously, consistently achieves 35%+ promotion rates. That’s not just a nice to have. That’s talent you’ve invested in progressing into roles you’d otherwise recruit externally, whilst building an inclusive culture that retains them.

What this means for 2026

As you finalise your leadership development budget, resist the temptation to tick boxes with one off workshops or webinars. Sustainable change requires sustained, systemic interventions that develop talent whilst transforming the environment they’re working within.

The organisations seeing genuine results aren’t just training individuals in isolation. They’re creating the conditions, through manager capability, sponsor accountability, and long-term commitment, for diverse talent to thrive and progress.

The question isn’t whether to invest in inclusive leadership development. It’s whether your current approach is fit for purpose.

Jenny Garrett OBE is Founder of Jenny Garrett Global, a leadership development consultancy specialising in inclusive, entrepreneurial, and AI-ready leadership.

FAQs:

What’s the difference between leadership development and inclusive leadership development?

Traditional leadership development trains your existing leaders to be more effective. Inclusive leadership development does two things simultaneously: it develops diverse talent who are underrepresented at senior levels whilst equipping their managers and sponsors to create genuinely inclusive environments. The focus isn’t just on individual skill-building – it’s on removing systemic barriers and creating the conditions for diverse talent to progress. When done well, inclusive leadership development directly addresses pipeline gaps rather than reinforcing the status quo.

How long should an inclusive leadership programme run to see results?

Sustainable inclusive leadership programmes typically run for 6-12 months minimum. Shorter interventions – one-off workshops or webinars – might raise awareness but rarely create lasting behaviour change or career progression. Participants need time to apply learning, build relationships, receive feedback, and embed new approaches. Our Excel programme at Guy’s and St Thomas’ ran for eight months, allowing genuine transformation rather than temporary enthusiasm. Post-programme support is equally important to maintain momentum.

What ROI should we expect from inclusive leadership investment?

Look for three types of return: measurable career progression (promotion rates, internal moves to more senior roles), improved retention of diverse talent (reducing costly external recruitment), and demonstrable culture change (confidence scores, manager capability, sponsor accountability). Our Tri-Level™ programmes consistently achieve 35%+ promotion rates during or within 18 months of completion, compared to 10-15% for talent-only interventions. At Centrica, manager confidence in creating growth opportunities for diverse talent increased from under 40% to 63% – that’s systemic change that multiplies across the organisation.

What is the Tri-Level™ approach to inclusive leadership?

The Tri-Level™ methodology develops three groups simultaneously: the diverse talent participating in intensive leadership development, their line managers who learn to unlock potential and become effective allies, and senior sponsors who are trained in active sponsorship and advocacy. This creates systemic change because you’re not developing individuals in isolation – you’re transforming the environment they’re working within. That’s why our approach achieves significantly higher promotion rates: the whole system is supporting progression, not just the individual trying to navigate barriers alone.

How do you measure the impact of inclusive leadership programmes?

Effective measurement goes beyond post-workshop satisfaction scores. Track quantitative outcomes like promotion rates, confidence increases in specific areas (authenticity at work, discussing race/ethnicity, career conversations), and long-term career progression. Capture qualitative feedback through focus groups that reveal personal transformation and behaviour change. Measure systemic indicators like manager capability shifts and sponsor engagement. At Guy’s and St Thomas’, we tracked everything from “percentage who feel they can be their authentic selves at work” (which jumped from 21% to 95%) to actual promotions secured and ongoing peer networks formed.