Shl talent-report-use (1)

The SHL Talent Report
Big Data Insight and Analysis of the Global Workforce
Eugene Burke and Ray Glennon

Table of contents
shl.com | 3
Foreword from Corporate Executive Board (CEB) 4
Introduction 5
Chapter 1: The global availability of current
and future leaders 7
Chapter 2: The global availability of innovation 19
Chapter 3: The landscape of organizational risk 31
Chapter 4: The landscape of diversity 41
Chapter 5: The global race for skills 53
Conclusion 65
Endnotes 68
Appendix 70
About the authors 71

Foreword from CEB
Since the early 1990s, the performance of major enterprises around the world has been
fueled largely by steady gains in labor efficiency and productivity. Maintaining, and extending,
those gains will be a significant challenge in the face of an increasingly complex work
environment – characterized by unpredictable global economic forces, ubiquitous information,
and rapid technological changes. It is no surprise that talent management has been elevated
to the top of the strategic agenda for corporate boards and executive teams worldwide.
Numerous studies have shown that well led firms – those who are able to attract, retain,
develop and engage the best talent – are more likely to hit their business objectives and
grow. How do you know if your organization is well led? Is your organization’s talent ready to
perform in the new work environment? Are your talent development programs focused on
the right objectives?
The SHL Talent Report for 2012 brings the best in talent analytics to bear to provide new
insights on important talent management topics: leadership, innovation, organizational
risk, diversity, and the distribution of critical employee skills globally. SHL has a privileged
and unique position to help executives understand their current and emerging talent base.
The insights in this report are generated from the work of more than 300 expert industrial
psychologists and data from almost 4 million assessments in close to 200 countries.
The strategic importance of talent data and intelligence was a key driver for CEB’s acquisition
of SHL this past summer. Combined, our two organizations are able to provide unparalleled
insight and advice on leading and managing talent in the new global economy. As the leading
member-based advisory company, CEB equips senior leaders with insight and actionable
solutions to transform their operations. We’ve done this for nearly 30 years by identifying
the world’s best management practices, corporate benchmarks and data-based analytics.
Combining SHL’s unparalleled knowledge of workforce skills, competencies and capabilities
with CEB’s archive of more than 15,000 best practices, will help our members identify and
act on their key talent management challenges – across their enterprises broadly, within their
most important corporate functions (Sales, R&D, Marketing, and Finance), and in their new
and emerging markets.
Conrad Schmidt
Global Research Officer, CEB
4 | The SHL Talent Report

shl.com | 5
Introduction
This report is about knowing. It is about questions that organizations worldwide ask
themselves every day. Questions such as “How do we know that our people can achieve
what we want to achieve?” and “How do we know that our talent management programs
will deliver?”
Knowing requires data and insight
Our mission at SHL is to provide that knowledge and insight through People Intelligence.
That intelligence is delivered through reliable, scientifically valid and objective measures
of people’s talents, ranging from their potential to be an effective leader to the specific
skills and knowledge required for the thousands of daily transactions that make or break an
organization.
With the launch of the SHL Talent AnalyticsTM program this year, we have delivered a new
macro capability in People Intelligence. Organizations can now look at their people against
their industry and across the geographies in which they operate. This has helped leading
organizations articulate their people issues and identify where they need to focus to address
those issues.
The program has also moved the talent conversation on from the cliché that people are our
most valuable asset. Now organizations can see where the value of their people is and what
they need to do to realize that value. SHL Talent AnalyticsTM is about actionable insight based
on hard data about talent.
Delivering millions of assessments globally places SHL in a unique position to share a global
and a local view of talent. In this report, that view is shared in the context of the most
pressing talent questions of today.
• What does the supply of leadership potential look like by geography and by industry
sector?
• What are the talents that drive effective innovation and how are those talents distributed
globally?
• Which sectors are most at risk from the behavior of their people?
• Is the gender imbalance in favor of men for senior positions driven by differences in
leadership potential?
• What are the implications of an aging workforce for the future supply of leaders and the
dynamics of the workplace over the next decade?
• Which geographies are best placed in the global race for skills?
• Where can I find the talent I need?
In the true spirit of big data, this report aims to provide you with a compass to help guide
and improve the effectiveness of your talent programs.
People Intelligence is the
insight into behavior,
ability and potential
SHL offers to help
organizations understand,
benchmark and make
better decisions about
people.

Chapter 1
The global availability of
current and future leaders
shl.com | 7

Perspectives on the supply of leaders
for today and tomorrow
How intelligent is your organization about identifying leaders for today and
for tomorrow?
Major economic shifts, swift social and political change, and accelerating technological and
communications capabilities are driving an ever-greater demand for effective leadership.
Which begs the question: where will top leadership talent come from to meet high demand?
At SHL, we believe that effective leadership is about influencing people so that they share
common goals and work more effectively towards the achievement of the organization’s
mission1. Effective leaders know how to develop a compelling vision that is based on clear
and critical thinking; know how to articulate and communicate goals that motivate others
and provide direction; know how to communicate effectively and to support others through
change; and know how to get things done and realize tangible goals and objectives.
Finding individuals with this rounded repertoire of leadership talents is clearly a challenge,
one recognized by both executives and the employees whom they lead. Recent surveys
show as few as 25% of employees believe their organizations have the leaders to succeed in
the future2 and only 33% identify their executives as being among the top leadership talent in
their industry3.
To help organizations understand the global landscape of leadership talent and to frame
strategies for identifying, acquiring and developing effective leaders, we have harnessed
SHL’s extensive data on leadership potential. We look at the supply of leadership talent from
two perspectives: those with potential to lead today, and those who have potential through
additional development to become the leaders of tomorrow.
Leadership gaps and succession risk
Whether you ask executives looking at their people from above or employees judging
their organizations from below, both express a lack of confidence in the next generation of
leaders4 – or in the ability of their organization to develop leadership talent5. Organizations
acknowledge this succession risk as one of the most critical factors facing them today6.
However, mitigating this risk requires the kind of intelligence about people’s potential that
many organizations are missing or, if they have the data, fail to use effectively.
Effective leaders
• Articulate a compelling vision
• Understand how to motivate others
• Provide clear direction
• Communicate effectively
• Support others through change
• Accomplish goals and objectives
Only 1 in 4
employees
believe their organizations
have the leaders to succeed
in the future.2

Chapter 1: The global availability of current and future leaders
shl.com | 9
The geography of
leaders for today
Leadership potential for today: People with the strongest
potential to be effective leaders. Most likely to respond to
leadership development and realize that investment through
performance in a leadership role.
Table 1: Supply of potential leaders
for today as a % of population:
Top 25 countries7
China (Hong Kong)
Germany
United Kingdom
Australia
United States
Switzerland
Canada
Japan
Singapore
New Zealand
Sweden
China (Taiwan)
France
Thailand
Finland
Belgium
Spain
Turkey
Italy
South Africa
United Arab Emirates
Mexico
Denmark
Brazil
Norway
14.0%
13.4%
10.3%
10.0%
9.9%
9.8%
9.5%
9.4%
8.9%
8.0%
7.4%
7.3%
7.1%
7.0%
6.7%
6.6%
6.3%
6.3%
6.1%
5.7%
5.7%
5.6%
5.4%
5.3%
5.2%
Average
Those in the leaders for today group have the strongest behavioral repertoire to be effective
leaders. They are stronger in the more transactional, managerial and operational behaviors
that build effective relationships with people, can drill down to the essence of a problem and
evaluate the data to identify a solution, can organize and mobilize resources, and can adapt to
challenges and change effectively. They are also stronger in the transformational behaviors
that can engage and influence others to get things done (rather than doing it themselves),
can communicate effectively to gain the support of others, can think laterally and bring
new insights, and have the drive to see things through and achieve their personal career
objectives.
Analysis of the data shows that a very small number – just 6.7% or 1 in 15 managers,
professionals or executives globally – fit this category. We have called them leaders for today
simply because they are the people who, with the right experience, are most likely to deliver
in a leadership position.
Table 1 shows the Top 25 countries for this level of leadership potential. Countries in North
America (Canada and United States), Western Europe (notably Germany, United Kingdom,
Switzerland, Sweden, France and Finland), and Australia and New Zealand emerge as the
global hot spots. While Asia as a region does not emerge as strongly in the supply of this
level of leadership talent, China (Hong Kong), Japan, Singapore, China (Taiwan) and Thailand
are emerging as top hot spots in Asia.
Region9
North America
Australia-
New Zealand
Western Europe
Asia
Africa
Middle East
Eastern Europe
Latin America

Region
North America
Australia-
New Zealand
Western Europe
Asia
Africa
Middle East
Eastern Europe
Latin America
The geography of
leaders for tomorrow
Leadership potential for tomorrow: People with the potential
to become well-rounded leaders, but who have a longer personal
journey to take in order to reach that level of effectiveness.
Table 2: Supply of potential leaders
for tomorrow as a % of population:
Top 25 countries8
Mexico
Turkey
Egypt
Switzerland
Brazil
India
Italy
United States
Germany
Netherlands
China (Taiwan)
Denmark
Sweden
Portugal
Russia
Spain
Ireland
Indonesia
China (Hong Kong)
United Kingdom
Norway
Poland
Canada
China (Mainland)
53.9%
49.5%
44.1%
43.4%
41.8%
41.3%
41.2%
41.0%
40.1%
39.9%
39.4%
39.3%
39.1%
38.6%
37.3%
36.9%
36.8%
36.7%
36.7%
36.6%
36.6%
35.9%
35.2%
34.5%
34.3%
Average
The next tier of potential leaders includes those who exhibit strengths in some of the
key behaviors but lack fully-rounded potential. They may have strength in some of the
transactional facets of leadership and can deliver programs to time, cost and quality, but lack
strength in areas such as communication, influencing and lateral thinking. Or they may have
strengths in these transformational areas but lack strengths in the areas that turn ideas into
effective programs of work.
These are the people who would benefit from additional development and we have called
them leaders for tomorrow simply because they have a longer personal journey to become
effective and rounded leaders.
Organizations ignore this tier of leadership at their peril. From a supply side perspective, 1 in
3 managers and professionals have this level of leadership potential – six times the proportion
in the leaders for today tier of leadership potential. Realizing the potential of leaders for
tomorrow requires targeted learning and development, which in turn requires a deep
understanding of their strengths and challenges.
The landscape changes quite a bit when we look at the supply of leaders for tomorrow (see
Table 2). The availability of leadership potential for tomorrow is strongest among emerging
economies, notably the BRICS countries: Brazil, Russia, India, and China (Taiwan) – with
South Africa at 32.3% falling outside the Top 25. Additional strong geographies for leaders
for tomorrow are found in the newly coined TIMS emerging economies: Turkey, Indonesia,
Mexico, and South Korea. Latin America and the Middle East also feature strongly as hot
spots for leaders for tomorrow (see Figure 2).

shl.com | 11
Leadership by region
When we look at the global distribution of leadership potential, we see a marked difference
between leaders for today and leaders for tomorrow.
Figure 1: Regional view: Leadership for today
Figure 2: Regional view: Leadership for tomorrow
Region9
North America
Australia-New Zealand
Western Europe
Asia
Africa
Middle East
Eastern Europe
Latin America
7
6
1 5
8
4 3
2
1
2
8
7
6
5
4
3

Adapting leadership strategies
to regional needs
Viewing the supply of potential leadership talent for today and tomorrow suggests that
organizations need to adapt their strategies to reflect different needs in different regions.
Looking at the supply of leadership in the countries ranked in the Top 25 for today and
tomorrow, and comparing them to the global supply, four distinct groups emerge requiring
distinct leadership acquisition and development strategies.
Leaders for today Leaders for tomorrow
1. Strongest potential overall. In the first group, the supply of leadership for today
and tomorrow is stronger than the average global supply. While competing for
leadership talent remains a challenge in these geographies, the odds of finding
effective leaders for today are significantly higher at 1 in 10 versus the global
average of 1 in 15. With the right intelligence on the leadership potential of their
people, leveraging the supplies of leaders for today and tomorrow offers a source
of competitive advantage for organizations in these geographies as they engage in
an increasingly global economy. This group includes:
• Asia: China (Taiwan)
• Western Europe: Germany, Sweden, Switzerland
• North America: United States
2. Strong today – challenged tomorrow. The second group identified has a
different challenge – stronger than global average supply of people with the
highest potential today to move into a leadership role, but succession risk in terms
of available leadership talent for tomorrow. For this group, the challenge will be to
use People Intelligence to maximize the investment in learning and development
to build leadership bench strength for the future. Geographies facing this
challenge are spread around the globe:
• Asia: China (Hong Kong), Japan, Singapore, Thailand
• Western Europe: France, Finland, UK
• Australia-New Zealand
• North America: Canada
3. Weaker today, but the future looks bright. Flip the challenge around and we
find several countries from the emerging BRICS and TIMS economic blocs with a
short supply of top potential leadership talent today, but showing greater potential
for available future leaders. In order for this group to stay competitive, using
People Intelligence is even more critical to identify leaders now since the odds of
successfully doing so are 1 in 20 – half the odds of the strong group one countries.
Emerging economies have
strong supplies for leaders
for tomorrow, provided
development programs
are targeted to realize
that potential.

shl.com | 13
The data suggests the value of People Intelligence extends beyond the hiring
phase into development programs to strengthen the effectiveness of those in
senior positions; as well as identifying potential in the richer supply of leaders for
tomorrow in these geographies.
• Asia: India
• Western Europe: Denmark, Italy, Netherlands
• Latin America: Brazil and Mexico
• Middle East: Egypt and Turkey
4. Weakest potential overall. This group requires a strategy to build a strong
alignment between talent acquisition and development. In these geographies,
identifying potential leaders early and ensuring they have the personal and career
development to realize their potential is essential. This strategy will also be
critical for companies operating across diverse geographies who wish to avoid
a crucial error: using a one-size-fits-all approach to identifying and developing
leaders everywhere they operate. Such an approach ignores socio-economic and
cultural differences in leadership potential and development needs and that these
differences require a flexible and localized approach (see Figure 3). This group
includes:
• Middle East/Africa: South Africa
• Asia: China (Mainland), Indonesia
• Eastern Europe: Poland, Russia
• Western Europe: Ireland, Norway, Portugal, Spain
Figure 3: The supply of leadership talent in emerging and mature economies10
1
6.3%
5.3%
Percentage of population
Leaders for today Leaders for tomorrow
4
3
3
4
5
2
2
6
5
5
37.4%
38.5%
1
37.0%
42.6%
38.1%
37.0%
4.5%
8.7%
6.8%
6.6%

Which industries have the strongest
supplies of leadership talent?
When looking at the data across both industry sectors and geographical regions, specific
areas of strengths and weaknesses in the leadership talent pools for today and tomorrow
emerge (see Figures 4-6 on pages 15, 16, and 17).
Strongest sectors overall
Banking, Insurance and Financial Services sectors have the advantage of strong supplies
of leadership both today and tomorrow across most geographies, with the exception of
Western Europe.
Weakest sectors overall
In contrast, the Oil & Gas and Utilities sectors face challenges in the supply of leaders for
both today and tomorrow, particularly in Eastern Europe and North America, despite North
America being one of the geographical hot spots for leadership talent.
Strong today – challenged tomorrow
Mining, Professional Services and the Public Sector emerge as sectors attracting stronger
talent for leadership today but face likely succession risks in the future, with risk highest in
Australia-New Zealand for Mining; in the Middle East and Africa for Professional Services;
and in Asia for the Public Sector.
Weaker today, but the future looks bright
Other sectors are weaker in attracting strong leaders for today but attract stronger supplies
of leaders for tomorrow. For these sectors – Consumer Goods, Healthcare, Telecoms and
General Business Services – we see the need for a two-pronged strategy of strengthening
leadership attraction and acquisition programs while also using People Intelligence to meet
development gaps.
The data also suggests that relying on recruiting leaders on the basis of sector specific
knowledge and experience is simply the wrong strategy for many sectors seeking to build a
pool of effective leaders for today and tomorrow. For several sectors, taking a broader scan of
leadership talent including talent pools from outside their traditional sectors is essential.

shl.com | 15
Industries with the strongest
leaders for today
Figure 4: Leaders for today by industry sector globally
The data was cut by 17 industry sectors11 to provide a picture of which sectors are more
effective in attracting strong leadership for today.
Professional
Services
10.3%*
Public Sector
10.3%
Mining
8.8%
Insurance
& Financial
Services
8.6%
Consumer
Goods
(Heavy Goods)
5.8%
Banking
8.4%
Technology
6.6%
Utilities
6.6%
Retail
6.5%
Food,
Beverages &
Tobacco
6.6%
Business
Services
6.1%
Telecoms
5.9%
Healthcare
5.9%
Travel
& Leisure
5.4%
Engineering
5.4%
Consumer
Goods (Leisure
& Personal)
5.7%
Oil & Gas
5.1%
1
1
3
4
5
10
9
6
6
6
11
11
13
14
15
15
17
* i.e. 10.3% of people working in the Professional Services sector have the potential to be leaders today.

leaders for tomorrow
Figure 5: Leaders for tomorrow by industry sector globally
When we look at the supply of leadership for tomorrow, we get
a very different picture by industry.
Consumer
Goods
(Heavy Goods)
46.4%
Consumer Goods
(Leisure & Personal)
59.8%
Insurance &
Financial Services
56.5%
Business Services
55.0%
Banking
52.0%
Mining
Public 32.9%
Sector
22.8%
Healthcare
51.3%
Telecoms
50.5%
Technology
48.2%
Food,
Beverages &
Tobacco
46.6%
Retail
44.1%
Travel
& Leisure
38.9%
Engineering
43.3%
Oil & Gas
29.2%
Utilities
24.3%
Professional
Services
32.2%
1
2
3
4
5
10
9
8
7
6
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

shl.com | 17
Which industry sectors offer the strongest supplies of
leadership talent in the geographies you operate in?
Figure 6: Industries with strongest leaders for today and leaders for tomorrow, by region
North America
Leaders for today:
Retail, Banking, Insurance
& Financial Services
Leaders for tomorrow:
Banking, Consumer Goods
(Leisure & Personal), Telecoms
Western Europe
Leaders for today:
Consumer Goods (Leisure
& Personal), Mining, Public
Sector
Consumer Goods (Leisure &
Personal), Retail, Technology
Eastern Europe
Leaders for today:
Banking, Insurance &
Financial Services, Technology
Insurance & Financial
Services, Technology, Travel
& Leisure
Asia
Leaders for today:
Services, Professional
Services, Public Sector
Banking, Healthcare
and Technology
Latin America
Leaders for today:
Personal), Healthcare, Insurance
General Business Services, Insurance
& Financial Services, Consumer
Goods (Leisure & Personal)
Middle East & Africa
Leaders for today:
Banking, Mining, Oil & Gas
Consumer Goods (Leisure
& Personal), Food, Beverages
& Tobacco, Telecoms
Leaders for today:
Insurance & Financial Services,
Professional Services, Public Sector
Personal), Insurance & Financial
Services, Professional Services

The question is not whether
there is leadership talent
The question is how intelligent is your organization in
recognizing that talent and developing it.
A more hopeful picture of leadership talent emerges from the data when you look beyond
the highest tier of talent to the next tier, where there is potential to be realized if the right
People Intelligence is applied to identify and develop it. This talent pool is much more
evenly distributed globally and much stronger in many geographies, notably the emerging
economies, and will require time and investment to grow. Organizations will need to put in
place clear and targeted programs to address development gaps.
The supply of leadership talent varies by sector
Industry sectors are facing significant challenges both today and tomorrow and need to
reconsider their assumptions about the strength of their leadership talent. Many need to
recognize succession risks. They especially need to develop greater intelligence about
that talent, how to leverage it more effectively, and put in place development programs for
those they hope to move into senior roles.
Geography matters
Finally, organizations need to be aware of future leadership challenges at the country
level. Organizations need to understand the supply of leadership where they operate and
adapt their leadership development and succession programs accordingly. More mature
economies run the risk of relying on the stronger supply of leadership talent for today
but failing to recognize a potential future shortfall of effective leaders for tomorrow. In
emerging economies, with an ever more globalized economy predicted to be as volatile
as our experience in recent years, the demand for effective leaders and the demand to be
increasingly thoughtful about managing leadership talent will only increase.
Data shows that the
demand for effective
leaders and the demand to
be increasingly thoughtful
about managing
leadership talent will only
increase.
Just 1 in 15
managers
or executives globally
have the potential to
become a top leader.

Chapter 2
The global availability
of innovation
shl.com | 19

Looking for innovator
potential around the world
In a world full of volatility and challenges, innovation has become the single most important
factor for both private and public sector organizations to transform a crisis into an opportunity.
Additionally, rapidly changing business models highlight the importance of innovation
to the success and survival of today’s organizations. The ability to innovate impacts the
organization broadly; whether in the application of technology, development of new products
and services, marketing, or day-to-day operations. As business management expert Gary
Hamel has said, “Every company worth its low-salt lunch has identified innovation as a core
competency.”
There are at least three conditions that determine whether the investment in innovation will
deliver value to an organization:
• Organizational processes to stimulate, support and translate the innovation of its people
into tangible value
• Geographical context – both economic and social – for supporting innovation
• People with the right talent to be true innovators
Much has been written about innovation processes. Global indices such as those produced
by the INSEAD and the Boston Group12 (discussed in detail on page 28) have recently been
developed to tell organizations what the state of play is geographically in terms of the
economic and social conditions for innovation. But equally important, what talent is available
to become innovators? How is that talent distributed geographically and across industry
sectors? These are the questions we will address in this chapter.
“Management knows it
and so does Wall Street:
The year to year viability
of a company depends
on its ability to innovate.
Given today’s market
expectations, global
competitiveness, and
the extent and pace of
structural change, this is
truer than ever.”13
Harvard Business Review
The ability
to innovate
impacts the organization
broadly, whether in
the application of
technology, development
of new products and
services, marketing, or
day-to-day operations.

Chapter 2: The global availability of innovation
shl.com | 21
The DNA of the innovator and the SHL Innovation
Index
When you think of innovations in recent years, do Apple products come to mind? If so, you
share a common association with the iconic status of Steve Jobs as an innovator, and he
would more than likely point out that effective innovation calls for more than just coming up
with new ideas.
Effective innovators need the intellectual capability to see new associations and possibilities,
and the analytical skills to interpret and translate market and customer data into specific
offerings. They must be able to focus, to persist in the face of initial failures, to be able to
make right hand turns in thinking, to articulate a need, be able to persuade, influence and sell
an innovation to others, and to work collaboratively as well as work through potential conflict.
Innovation is, after all, about change.
To capture this unique blend of talents that mark the true innovator, we have explored
behaviors that drive effective innovation and captured these in the SHL Innovation Index.
This index takes into account two key domains of innovator talent in Table 3 below.
Table 3: Index for behaviors that drive effective innovation
Focus & Insight Networking & Collaboration
Ability to reason Capacity to build effective relationships
Capacity to think laterally – or ‘outside
the box’
Ability to navigate social networks effectively
Capacity to focus on a particular need Strong communication skills required for
influencing others
Ability to adapt to new data Ability to sell an innovation into an organization
or to raise investment capital
Ability to persist through those moments
when an initial idea does not work, or when
an experiment presents challenges
You will find more on the SHL Innovation Index in the Appendix.
“Every company worth
its low-salt lunch has
identified innovation as
a core competency.”
Gary Hamel

Region
North America
Australia-
New Zealand
Western Europe
Asia
Africa
Middle East
Eastern Europe
Latin America
Mapping the supply of
innovator potential
As illustrated in the previous chapter, the supply of talent to be an effective top leader is
scarce at 1 in 15 of the assessed population. Similar results are found when examining the
data from the SHL Innovation Index for innovator potential. Just 1 in 17 or 5.8% of graduates,
managers and professionals have the potential to be a true innovator.
What does the supply of innovator talent by geography look like?
North America, Western Europe and Asia featured heavily on the list. Countries in Eastern
Europe emerge as centers for innovator talent, with Hungary, Poland and Russia featured in
the Top 25 (see Table 4).
Though individual countries such as China (Hong Kong), Japan, Singapore and South Korea
rank in the Top 25 list for innovator potential, Asia as a region factors lower than North
America, Australia-New Zealand, and Western Europe. In spite of its reputation as an IT
powerhouse, India did not feature strongly in talent for innovation.
Table 4: Supply of innovator talent:
Top 25 countries by % of population14
United States
China (Hong Kong)
Australia
Germany
Singapore
United Kingdom
Sweden
Canada
Netherlands
Denmark
New Zealand
Switzerland
Ireland
France
Japan
Italy
Spain
Belgium
South Korea
Hungary
China (Mainland)
Russia
Iceland
Poland
China (Taiwan)
11.1%
10.6%
10.5%
10.1%
9.8%
9.7%
9.4%
9.1%
8.6%
7.3%
7.1%
7.1%
6.9%
6.3%
6.1%
6.0%
5.9%
5.8%
5.8%
5.7%
5.7%
5.6%
5.4%
5.4%
5.2%
Average

shl.com | 23
Talent for innovation
by region
With the United States and Canada both ranking in the top 10, North America understandably
rates as the top global region for overall innovation, followed by Australia-New Zealand and
Western Europe.
Figure 7: Innovator talent by geographical region
1
2
3 5
4
7
6
8
North America
Western Europe
Asia
Region15
Eastern Europe
Middle East
Africa
Latin America
10.1%
8.8%
7.0%
4.9%
4.7%
3.0%
2.6%
1.0%

Developing
innovation talent
Investing in learning and development to close the
geographical gap in innovator talent.
This raises questions as to what should organizations focus on to be able to strengthen
innovation among their employee populations.
Developmental needs for those with innovator talent in Asia for example, lie in the
Networking & Collaboration domain of the SHL innovator model and index. Specifically,
talent management programs designed to leverage innovator talent potential in this region
need to focus on improving competencies such as Building Effective Networks, Influencing
& Persuading, and in Communication. This enables those charged with innovation to
understand how to navigate the culture of their organizations and leverage social networks
locally and internationally, as well as within and outside their organizations.
A need for learning and development is also apparent when we compare the more mature
and emerging economies (see Figure 8).
Figure 8: The supply of innovator talent in emerging and mature economies16
TIMS 6
Percentage of innovators for today
G8
OECD
G20
EU
BRICS
5
2
4
2
1
This data shows how important it is for organizations to understand regional variations in the
bench strength and availability of ‘true innovator’ talent so they can create programs that
strengthen their ability to execute innovation projects effectively.

shl.com | 25
Industries with the greatest supply
of potential innovators
Innovation can take many forms: from creating new products and services, to finding new
supply sources, developing new markets and new ways to reach existing markets, or
identifying new ways of organizing. This means the supply of innovator talent is critical across
all aspects of economic activity and not just in the most obvious ones such as R&D.
Figure 9 shows which industry sectors are strong in attracting and employing innovator
talent, and which sectors are not.
Technology ranks No.1, but we see Professional Services, Food, Tobacco & Beverages,
Retail, and Insurance & Finance sectors also ranking high.
Regarding the Public Sector ranking near the middle of the list: significant economic, social
and political challenges place increasing pressure on how public services are financed,
delivered and measured in terms of value. Finding new ways of organizing has become a key
mission for governments and their agencies, particularly in Europe and North America, and
that means innovation.
For the Public Sector as well as Banking, attracting and developing innovator talent appears
to be a key priority for talent management programs. These and the sectors that rank lower
down the list need to reconsider the profile of talent they have traditionally attracted and
employed in order to create the talent profile they will need to move forward and succeed in
today’s increasingly volatile environment.
Variations across sectors appear when we factor in geographical region (see Figure 10)
showing that organizations need to be aware of and sensitive to the supply of innovator talent
where they operate, and have the People Intelligence to know where to invest in their people
to build their talent strength locally.
For the Public Sector as
well as other sectors such
as Banking, attracting
and developing innovator
talent appears to be a
key priority for talent
management programs.
‘True innovator’
potential is just
1 in 17
or
5.8%
of the population

Industries with the greatest
supply of potential innovators
Figure 9: Innovator talent ranked by industry sector globally, as a percentage of population
Consumer Goods
(Personal &
Leisure)
5.3%
Telecoms
4.6%
Mining
5.6%
Retail
5.9%
Technology
6.4%*
Professional
Services
6.2%
Food, Beverages
& Tobacco
5.9%
Consumer Goods
(Heavy Goods)
5.8%
Insurance &
Financial Services
5.6%
Public Sector
5.4%
Business
Services
4.9%
Banking
4.6%
Healthcare
4.8%
Engineering
4.2%
Oil & Gas
4.2%
Utilities
4.3%
Travel
& Leisure
4.1%
1
2
3
3
5
10
9
8
6
6
11
12
12
14
15
15
17
* i.e. 6.4% of people working in the technology sector have the potential to be true innovators.

shl.com | 27
talent for innovation by region
North America
Stronger innovation talent:
Retail, Technology,
Telecoms
Weaker innovation talent:
Consumer Goods (Personal &
Leisure), Travel & Leisure
Western Europe
Professional Services,
Technology
Banking, Oil & Gas, Telecoms
Eastern Europe
Consumer Goods (Personal
& Leisure), Professional
Services
Oil & Gas, Retail
Asia
Services, Professional
Services
Oil & Gas, Travel & Leisure
Latin America
Food, Beverages & Tobacco,
Public Sector
Engineering, Telecoms
Middle East & Africa
Food, Beverages & Tobacco,
Mining, Oil & Gas
Consumer Goods (Heavy
Goods), Travel & Leisure
Insurance & Financial Services,
Professional Services
Retail, Travel & Leisure
Figure 10: Talent for innovation by industry sector and region

A comprehensive view of
global innovation
Recognizing the growing importance of innovation, the past few years have seen the
development of global innovation indices to provide policy makers and business leaders
with a view of the global landscape for innovation readiness. These indices combine data
on the ‘inputs’ for innovation readiness, such as the infrastructure to support innovation and
business sophistication, and data on the scientific and creative ‘outputs’ to rank countries in
terms of the economic, financial and social context for innovation.
We have looked at data from two such indices, one from the United States produced by the
Boston Consulting Group with the National Association of Manufacturers in the U.S., and
one from INSEAD located in Europe and Asia17. We extend this view of human capital by
adding SHL intelligence on innovator potential and the behaviors and attitudes that turn the
knowledge inputs to innovation into tangible outputs that create value.
Analysis shows both the Boston and the INSEAD indices correlate strongly with the SHL
Innovation Index. It also shows that insight into the ‘talent to innovate’ combined with data on
economic and social conditions provides a more comprehensive view of the global innovation
landscape. Of note is the strong correlation we found between both economic indices and
the Networking & Collaboration component of the SHL Innovation Index, emphasizing how
critical social and interpersonal factors are to effective innovation.
We combined data on both the Boston and INSEAD indices to create an overall score we
called ‘context for innovation’ (business confidence, social, economic and financial factors).
Figure 11 shows the results when this was plotted against the SHL Innovation Index18.
What we found were four distinct clusters. Cluster 1 countries have both stronger economic
context and stronger supplies of innovator talent, and are countries with a clear global
competitive advantage for innovation. This cluster includes:
• Asia: particular strength in China (Hong Kong) and Singapore
• Australia
• Western Europe: particular strength in Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and the U.K.
• North America: both Canada and the U.S. featuring strongly
Cluster 2 countries have the economic and social infrastructure in place but have weaker
supplies of innovator talent. Clearly identifying and developing innovator talent will yield a
higher economic return from the investment potential available in these countries. In this
cluster we find:
• Asia: China (Mainland)
• Western Europe: Finland, Norway and Portugal
• Eastern Europe: Hungary
• Middle East: United Arab Emirates
Cluster 3 involves just three countries – Italy, the Netherlands and New Zealand. These are
countries with stronger supplies of innovator talent but weaker infrastructure to realize the
potential that a stronger supply offers.

Cluster 2 Cluster 1
China (Hong Kong)
Cluster 4 Cluster 3
shl.com | 29
Cluster 4 countries have stronger challenges in both the economic and social conditions
for innovation as well as weaker supplies of innovator talent. For this cluster, a key priority
has to be the identification and development of innovator talent to sustain and build on the
economic growth that many of these countries have enjoyed in recent years. This cluster
includes:
• Africa: South Africa
• Asia: India, Indonesia and Thailand
• Eastern Europe: Poland, Romania and Russia
• Western Europe: Greece
• Latin America: Brazil and Mexico
• Middle East: Egypt and Turkey
Figure 11: Combined data on the economic and social conditions for innovation with the supply of innovator talent.19
Indonesia
Egypt
Italy
Poland
Russia
Greece
Turkey
South Africa
India
Romania
Brazil
Thailand
Mexico
China (Mainland)
Spain
Hungary
Portugal
New Zealand
Sweden
Canada
Netherlands
Switzerland
Finland
Denmark
Ireland
Japan
Norway
Belgium
France
U.S.
U.K.
Germany
Australia
Context for innovation
Supply of innovator talent
Singapore
Lower Higher
Lower Higher

Innovation isn’t an option
– it’s a must do
Events in recent years have forced governments, the public sector, and private businesses
in the more mature economies to think hard about how they are organizationally and
financially structured. Adopting new technologies in the search for productivity gains and
cost reductions has driven efficiencies. In Europe, North America and Australia-New Zealand
organizations are already leaner or will be soon. However, more is necessary to ensure a
secure future. New ways of working, new and more sophisticated goods and services, as
well as innovative ways of delivering those goods and services are becoming critical globally.
In the emerging economies, product driven growth achieved by scalable and low cost
production processes is set to come under increasing pressure for two reasons.
First, broader economic growth globally will bring new challenges to the powerhouses of
China and India. Other countries will become more competitive for a share of the global
market for goods and services. From a talent perspective, SHL’s data indicates that China is
better positioned to weather this competition, India less so. Our research also points to the
countries in Eastern Europe being well placed, with the innovator talent to compete for a
greater share of the global market.
The second reason is what the Economist has recently called a “third industrial revolution”
in which digital manufacturing will change the landscape for manufacturing, service delivery
and ways of working. To quote “... some of the business of making things will return to rich
countries.”20 Despite their travails, the older economies are not finished yet and results from
our study indicate they have the talent to make this third industrial revolution happen.
Innovation will be key to moving up the value chain from more traditional goods and services
to more value-intensive goods and services in the future, particularly under challenging
economic and trading conditions.
Knowing that innovation is a critical core competency will not be enough for organizations to
succeed.
SHL’s data shows that the sectors with the greatest need to recognize this and take action
include Travel & Leisure, Oil & Gas, Banking, and the Public Sector. They face significant
challenges, including reduced consumer spending, environmental concerns, distrust of their
products and services, and a need to work within constrained government budgets.
Whatever the geography or sector, those organizations with the People Intelligence to
identify, acquire and develop innovator talent will be the organizations to thrive.

Chapter 3
shl.com | 31
The landscape of
organizational risk

The landscape of
organizational risk
“Fortune favors those who dare” – or does it?21
Typically, analyses of risks by geography and industry look at regulation, legislation, and
a variety of social, economic, political and financial factors. Few indices of organizational
risk look at the behavior of the people employed by organizations. This is a key flaw in
how organizations approach risk. There is a wealth of scientific research showing that it is
precisely what people do or fail to do that are key to an organization’s resilience to risk. With
recent news of a judicial inquiry into telephone hacking by the media22, the continued fallout
in the finance sector resulting from Lehman Brothers bankruptcy23, and a parliamentary
commission in the U.K. into the banking sector24, we are again seeing evidence that how
people act at all levels in an organization is a fundamental driver of risk.
How confident are you that your organization is
resilient to risk?
While many organizations are waking up to the need to understand the behavioral
risk profiles of the people they employ, most are at an early stage in developing that
understanding. Few have begun to look to their talent management programs as a significant
contributor to their risk management strategies.
The Lloyd’s Risk Index surveys business leaders’ sense of how well they are prepared
to manage operational risks. To quote their 2011 survey, “More than 70% of survey
respondents report that their company is better prepared to manage business and production
line risks than they were two years ago... One should not ignore the fact that, for many
companies, there will be a difference between actually25 being prepared and simply believing
they are prepared.”
The goal of this chapter is to fill this gap between perception and reality by providing
business leaders, risk managers and talent managers with data on levels of behavioral risk
from three perspectives: by employee job level, industry sector and geography. The note of
caution about confusing the perception that you are prepared and actually being prepared
is backed up by what our findings show, and that gap is likely to be greatest in sectors that
rank highest in our analysis of behavioral risk.
“Perceptions of risk have
evolved significantly
in the intervening two
years. In all regions of
the world, across all
sectors, business leaders
now perceive the world
as an inherently riskier
place.”26 Lloyd’s Risk Index
2011

Chapter 3: The landscape of organizational risk
Average level of high
behavioral risk
1/8 employees
shl.com | 33
Behavioral risk by
job level
In contrast to our indices for leadership and innovation, SHL’s behavioral risk index flags the
proportion of people who are most likely to create risk. At the manager and professional level,
the greatest risk comes from lower decision quality and lower communication quality. SHL’s
data shows that 12.2% or 1 in 8 managers and professionals exhibit high levels of these
behavioral risks.
The greatest risks at the production line and front line level are lower compliance and quality
and lower commitment. Data from assessments of production line and front line employees
shows that 12.5% or 1 in 8 exhibit high levels of these behavioral risks.
Table 5: Behavioral risk components by job level
Managers and professionals Production line and front line
Decision quality risk:
• Miss or ignore data
• Ignore decision impact on organization
• Fail to seek other views and opinions
Compliance and quality risk:
• Failure to comply with procedures
• Lack of attention to detail
Communication quality risk:
• Inability to articulate decisions
objectives
• Inability to persuade or influence
• Lack of credibility
• Failure to build networks/relationships
Commitment and teamwork risk:
• Inability to accept individual or shared
responsibility
• Lack of team orientation

Behavioral risk at the managers
and professionals level
With a global average of 12.2%, here is how 17 industry sectors rank in terms of behavioral risk in
the people they attract and employ.
Manager and professional roles
Figure 12: Levels of behavioral risk for managers and professionals by industry sector globally
Healthcare
11.3%
Engineering
Public Sector
9.9%
11
Consumer
Goods
(Personal
& Leisure)
8.3%
* i.e. 18.2% of people working in the Travel & Leisure sector exhibit high levels of behavioral risk.
Travel & Leisure
18.2%*
Technology
8.8%
Oil & Gas
16%
Utilities
14%
Professional
Services
12.9%
Retail
12.4%
Mining
11.7%
Consumer
Goods (Heavy
Goods)
11.5%
11.4%
Business
Services
10.7%
Banking
10.2%
Telecoms
10.5%
Food,
Beverages
& Tobacco
9.2%
Insurance
& Financial
9.8%
1
2
3
4
5
10
9
8
7
6
12
13
14
15
16
17

shl.com | 35
Turning from the analysis of risk in various sectors, Figure 13 illustrates which job levels most
indicate behavioral risk among managers and professionals, from individual contributor to
executive level.
On a positive note, it appears that behavioral risk is lower at more senior levels: calculated to
be 1 in 15 of executives and 1 in 10 of senior managers.
As organizations depend upon senior leaders to account for and mitigate risk, finding that
those leaders exhibit lower levels of behavioral risk should be reassuring. However, there is
still behavioral risk at the top, which means organizations should examine how effective their
senior leaders are when managing behavioral risk.
Additionally, the increasing level of behavioral risk from middle managers down indicates
that organizations cannot rely on the effective communication of decisions from the C-suite.
Middle managers sit at the intersection between strategy and operational execution. They
must be able to translate executive decisions into effective action or execution fails.
Given the higher levels of behavioral risk at the team leader and individual contributor
levels, organizations need to ensure middle managers are equipped to identify and address
behavioral risk from the people who report to them.
Figure 13: Where behavioral risk sits among managers and professionals by job level
Senior Manager
1/10 10.4%
Global Average 12.2%
Executive
1/15 6.7%
Middle Manager
1/8 13.2%
Team Leader
1/7 14.7%
Individual Contributor
1/7 14.2%
Percentage of high behavioral risk

Behavioral risk at the production
line and front line level
Levels of behavioral risk increase as one moves from the C-suite to lower levels in an
organization. The next set of data shows trends in behavioral risk on the production line and out
on the front line. Figure 14 shows how industry sectors rank when looking at SHL’s index for
production line and front line employees.
While the global average rate for behavioral risk on the production line is about the same as for
managers and professionals, the rankings by sector differ. Consumer Goods (Personal & Leisure)
and Technology move up when we look at the production line and front line, while Oil & Gas,
Retail and Utilities move down, as does Travel & Leisure. What do these differences mean? As
we will explore in more detail later, having a full understanding of where behavioral risk exists is
critical for organizations to have a clear view of where they are most at risk from the actions of
their employees.
Production line and front line roles
Figure 14: Levels of behavioral risk for production line and front line roles by industry
sector globally27
2
4
Consumer
Goods
(Heavy Goods)
3
20.8%
5
Banking
15.7%
15
12
1
5
14
Retail
8.4%
Consumer
Goods
13
(Leisure & Personal)
24%
Telecoms
23.9%
Technology
21.4%
Engineering
15.3%
10
Insurance
& Financial
Services
15.3%
Travel
& Leisure
12.9%
8
8
7
Food,
Beverages
& Tobacco
15.6%
Business
Services
15.7%
11
Healthcare
11.9%
Oil & Gas
11.3%
Utilities
9.9%
Public
Sector
7.1%

shl.com | 37
The geography of
behavioral risk
As shown, levels of behavioral risk can vary significantly at different job levels and across
industries. Combining both of those indices gives a more complete understanding of the
geography of behavioral risk.
Managers and professionals in Australia-New Zealand rank highest for behavioral risk. And
while much lower levels of risk are found at the manager level in Africa and the Middle
East, those same regions exhibit increased rates of behavioral risk at production line and
front line level.
These trends are illustrated in Figure 15. This graph shows that for most geographies
the levels of behavioral risk are higher on the production line than at the managerial and
professional levels. However, Australia-New Zealand bucks the general trend by having
higher levels for managers and professionals than on the production line, while for
organizations in Western Europe, behavioral risk between job levels is generally aligned.
Behavioral risk varies
by region:
• Managerial risk is highest in
• Front line risk is highest in the
Middle East
Figure 15: Levels of behavioral risk by geographical region28
Africa
2
10.8
24.1
17.5
North
America
3
12.9
19
16
Asia
5
11.6
18.9
15.3
Eastern
Europe
3
12.3
19.6
16
Western
Europe
7
12.7 12.1
12.4
Middle
East
1
8.7
28
18.4
Percentage high behavioral risk
Managers & professional
Front line & production line
Average
Overall ranking for risk globally
13.5
6
17.2
9.7
Australia-
New Zealand
11.3
See
Endnote 28
Latin
America

Behavioral risk by
industry sector
The role of talent management in mitigating
organizational risk
In 2004, SHL conducted a research project with the Future Foundation29 and found that, in
the U.S. alone, 23% of people surveyed saw their colleagues as incompetent and that 68% of
mistakes made by workers were hidden from their managers.
To address the gap between perception and reality in terms of preparedness for risk,
organizations need valid metrics through which they can understand behavioral risk at all levels
within their organization. In Figure 16 patterns emerge in terms of which sectors show higher
levels of behavioral risk at the managerial level and which sectors show higher levels of risk on
the front line.
What do the results tell us about where organizations and their managers need to focus to better
manage behavioral risk? In Western Europe, while levels of risk are generally aligned between
managers and professionals and those in production line and front line roles, there is still risk to be
managed.
In Australia-New Zealand, the focus has to be the managers and professionals who lead and
task organizations. Key priorities here include adopting behavioral risk measures in selection
processes, as well as focused coaching and development programs.
For the other geographical regions where behavioral risk appears more strongly in production line
and front line roles, the ability of managers to identify that risk is clearly important. What will be
equally critical are the decision-making skills of managers and professionals to ensure goals and
expectations are clearly understood by those on the front line.
Figure 16: A comprehensive view of behavioral risk by industry sector
Behavioral risk: managers & professionals
Public
Sector Banking
Behavioral risk: production line & front line
Business Services
Insurance
Food, Beverages
& Tobacco
Consumer
Goods
Telecoms
Technology
Engineering
Healthcare
Retail
Utilities
Travel &
Leisure
Oil & Gas
Mining
Risk higher at
managers and
professionals level
Risk higher at the
production line and
front line level
Lower Risk
Higher Risk

shl.com | 39
Ranking behavioral risk by industry sector
Figure 17 ranks fifteen sectors by the average across SHL’s two behavioral risk indices
(the average across our index for managers and professionals and our index for production
line and front line employees) to give a final industry sector ranking. A note about the
lower ranking sectors: these represent sector averages. An analysis of the data shows
considerable variation across organizations within sectors, which is not detailed in this report.
Complacency is also a risk.
Figure 17: Aggregated data showing overall behavioral risk for all job levels by industry
sector globally30
1
17.2%
2
16.1%
Consumer goods (Heavy Goods)
3
15.6%
4
15.1%
Technology
5
13.7%
Oil & Gas
6
13.4%
7
13.2%
* Global average of these two indices is 12.4%.
Business Services
8
13%
Banking
9
12.6%
Food, Beverages & Tobacco*
Utilities
Healthcare
Mining
Retail
Public Sector
Insurance & Financial Services
Engineering
Telecoms
Travel & Leisure
10
12.4%
11
12%
12
11.6%
13
10.9%
14
10.4%
15
8.5%
Lower Risk
Higher Risk
Global Average

Talent management as
risk management
Talent managers, those in recruitment, selection and succession, have always been in
the business of risk management. Placing the wrong person in the wrong role is a critical
organizational risk they have traditionally been employed to manage.
We hope this chapter points to the next evolution in talent management by helping
organizations articulate the key driver of risk – what people do. The data in this chapter points
to two ways that talent managers can grasp this opportunity and realize it.
The first is to provide People Intelligence that goes beyond the perceptions captured by risk
and safety surveys by providing data and insight based on how employees are likely to act.
That is what SHL’s risk indices address.
The second point is to ensure that evaluations of behavioral risk are incorporated throughout
talent management processes – from acquisition through performance and development, and
on to succession and promotions.
As we hope this chapter illustrates, the know-how exists. Talent managers need only step up
to the plate and use that know-how.
Putting a number on
behavioral risk
SHL’s 2004 research showed that:
• 68% of mistakes made by employees
were hidden from U.S. managers
• U.S. managers spent up to 8 weeks
a year dealing with performance
issues
• The cumulative cost to the U.S.
economy amounted to ~1% of U.S.
GDP or $105 billion a year

Chapter 4
The landscape of diversity
shl.com | 41

Diversity, diversity,
diversity...
In this chapter, we look at what our data reveals about one of the key factors that will
shape the future for global organizations within both the public and private sectors. Their
capabilities in recognizing, managing and leveraging diversity. We have focused on two
important areas, gender and generational differences.
Let’s start with the U.S. as an example. “By 2025 over 76 million Baby Boomers will have
retired from the American workforce and by 2030 the U.S. is set to face a shortfall of 30
million workers.”31 The same trends are apparent in other countries. Emerging economic
superpowers such as China face significant challenges with the declining population
numbers accompanying greater economic and social expectations of Chinese consumers32.
Technology and innovation may aid in mitigating challenges such as these. But from a gender
standpoint, it will be critical to understand and leverage diversity as more women enter the
workforce33. In the U.S. and U.K. the workforce is nearly 50:50 male/female, though women
remain under-represented in certain sectors, on boards and in senior roles34. We are likely
then to see not only a generational transition from the well-known Boomers to the Gen Xers
and Millennials (also known as Gen Y35) but a gender shift as well.
Recognizing and working intelligently with diversity
in talent management
SHL approaches diversity as a talent management issue through the lens of business need.
As we explored in the chapter on leadership, our leaders for today potential is rare at 1 in
15 job applicants and employees. So, what does our data say about gender differences
in the supply of leadership potential globally? We will see why it points to women as an
increasingly important source of leadership talent not to be overlooked. For countries with
aging populations, ignoring women as potential senior leaders may become a critical failure
point.
Motivation to succeed is just as important as having the talent to perform in senior roles. We
uncover what our data says about the differences between men and women in the critical
motivational factors36 that are key to succeeding to a senior position in an organization.
We then look at the global workforce from a generational perspective to address these
questions:
1. What will organizations need to understand to keep employees across three generations
engaged over the next years and decades?
2. How will the supply of talent with leaders for today potential shift as the generational
transitions take effect?
3. Which learning and development priorities will organizations need to focus on Millennials,
the true leaders for tomorrow, to realize the talents of younger potential leaders?
Leadership gender gaps
favoring men will put
increasing pressure on
organizations in regions
with aging populations.
The difference in
leadership potential
for women and men is
less than 1%
but men hold senior
positions 3 to 1 over
women.

Chapter 4: The landscape of diversity
shl.com | 43
Gender and leadership
The 2012 Olympic Games were remarkable for many reasons. In the context of this
chapter, it was a milestone. With the introduction of women’s boxing, men and women
are now represented in every sport at the Olympics. There is now equal opportunity for
both genders to realize the ambition to be an Olympian and to be a winner in every event.
Yet, while every other person in the world is a woman, we are a long way from equal
representation at the most senior levels in business, government, the law and in science.
Evidence is mounting that greater gender equality at the top is associated with better
financial performance of businesses37. It is widely acknowledged that the recovery from
today’s economic woes will require nations to capitalize on the full range of talent they
have available. As noted in a 2010 report by the European Commission: “As Europe
collectively strives to recover from the recent recession and build a platform for future
growth and stability ... One crucial resource for future growth lies in the untapped
economic potential of women and their full integration into the decision-making process in
all areas of the economy is crucial.”38
While the exact numbers may vary, most reports are consistent in showing that women
are far less likely to hold a senior position in either public or private sector organizations.
A just released global survey cited the proportion of women holding senior positions has
dropped to 2004 levels at 1 in 539.
As in sports, career achievement is affected by potential, motivation and opportunity.
Table 6 shows how men and women compare at the top level of potential we have called
leaders for today, across the 25 countries with the strongest supply of this potential. We
have calculated the differences between these proportions and then compared them to
statistics on the proportion of women holding senior positions in those countries40.
One of the barriers identified for women succeeding into a senior role is gender-based
stereotypes of personal characteristics and abilities41. This was the highest factor
identified in one survey and ranked above family commitments as a stumbling block42.
Our data says there is no evidence to support stereotypes, a finding backed up by other
independent research43. The supply of leadership potential is generally as strong for
women as it is for men across our Top 25 countries for leaders for today.
The average difference between men and women across the Top 25 countries is a mere
-0.8%, a negligible difference in favor of women. Yet, 76% of senior positions are held
by men.
The supply of leadership
potential is generally as
strong for women as it is
for men across our Top 25
countries.

Gender and leadership
Table 6: Top 25 countries for leadership potential – broken down by gender
Leaders
for today
rank
Country % Men
leaders
for today
% Women
leaders for
today
Difference in
leaders for
today (+%
favor men,
-% favor
women)
%
Leadership
roles held
by men44
1 China (Hong Kong) 13.5 13.3 0.2 67
2 Germany 12.7 14.0 -1.3 87
3 U.K. 9.5 11.7 -2.2 80
4 Australia 8.5 12.5 -4.0 76
5 U.S. 8.6 11.8 -3.2 83
6 Switzerland 9.9 9.3 0.6 78
7 Canada 7.7 9.9 -2.2 75
8 Japan 9.3 6.8 2.5 95
9 Singapore 9.7 8.0 1.7 77
10 New Zealand 6.7 9.6 -2.9 72
11 Sweden 7.4 8.2 -0.8 77
12 China (Taiwan) 7.6 6.8 0.8 73
13 France 6.6 6.4 0.2 76
14 Thailand 8.2 5.9 2.3 61
15 Finland 6.9 6.7 0.2 73
16 Belgium 6.6 6.2 0.4 79
17 Spain 6.3 6.4 -0.1 76
18 Turkey 5.1 8.3 -3.2 69
19 Italy 5.5 5.5 0.0 64
20 South Africa 4.5 6.8 -2.3 72
20 United Arab Emirates 5.0 6.5 -1.5 85
22 Mexico 5.3 8.0 -2.7 82
23 Denmark 4.5 6.1 -1.6 85
24 Brazil 6.9 5.5 1.4 73
25 Norway 4.5 6.5 -2.0 58
Average 7.5 8.3 -0.8 76
Leaders for today is our definition for the highest level of leadership potential reflecting a rounded repertoire of
both transactional and transformational behaviors. Differences shown as positive favor men and those shown as
negative favor women.
Globally, men hold 52%
more senior positions than
women.

shl.com | 45
Do men and women differ in their motivation to be
a leader?
So, if it isn’t the supply of potential that’s the barrier to women succeeding to senior
positions, is it a factor of motivation? A survey of 60 leading companies suggests this might
be so and why only 7,000 of 150,000 women professionals or 1 in 21 have achieved Vice
President or higher senior positions in those companies45. Responding to the question “I have
the desire to advance to the next level in my organization”, 69% of women said yes compared
to 74% of men. Yet, when asked “If anything were possible, I would choose to advance to
C-level management”, 18% of women said yes compared to 36% of men – exactly half.
Interestingly, we see some differences across the globe with men in the U.K. seeing
advancement to the next level as fundamental to developing their career compared to
women, but the reverse for women in the U.S. and Australia46.
To understand which motivating factors distinguish those holding senior positions, we looked
across five job levels: individual contributor (employee), team leader, middle manager, senior
manager, and executive47. We found six motivational factors that increased systematically at
each level48. People that succeed to higher job levels value these motivational factors more
(see Figure 18).
While the differences in motivational factors between executives and other employees are
significant, we did not find the same to be true when comparing genders49. Overall, we found
an average three percentile difference in favor of men, which is negligible. None of these
differences are either statistically or substantively significant.
Figure 18: The key motivational factors for executives*
Level of activity
Working at a fast pace and
multi-tasking with pressure to
deliver against deadlines
Power
Opportunities to take
responsibility, exercise
authority and influence others
Immersion
Work that requires a personal
commitment above and beyond
the norm
Interest
Work that provides variety and
stimulation
Flexibility
Environments that allow for
more fluid ways of working and
less structured and procedural
approaches
Autonomy
Independence and scope for
determining how they approach
and organize their work
People higher across all 6
motivational factors are
three times more likely to
hold an executive position.
The difference between
men and women on those
factors is negligible.
* Refer to the Appendix for the data

The journey to the top
We found no substantial overall differences between men and women on the motivational
factors that distinguish those who succeed to the executive level. Are there differences in
other motivational factors that help to explain why women are not progressing to more senior
roles? The answer is yes.
Let’s go back a for a moment to the survey of those 60 companies and the results that
showed that men and women were equally interested in a move to the next level but men
were twice as interested as women in an opportunity to reach the C-suite. In recent SHL
research, reasons for not being interested in a C-suite position included: “When you see it
up close… It’s not clean at the top. Motives are not always enterprise-related. It’s more about
personal agendas.” And “Members of the executive management team above me are all
men and I feel they see strong women as a threat.”50
This concern with politics at the top resonates in our data when we compare four
motivational factors showing the largest differences between men and women. Power
showed the largest difference between men and women when we looked at the motivational
factors that distinguish those holding executive positions. While the difference between men
and women is modest, it is in favor of men and contrasts with Ease and security, which holds
greater motivational value for women (see Figure 19). There is also a clear contrast between
Recognition, stronger for women, and Fear of failure, stronger for men.
The importance of individual differences is key in assessing motivational patterns and
strengths, so it is important to highlight that not all men or all women are motivated to
succeed in the same way. However, our data suggests that if the C-suite is dominated by
those who are more motivated by Power and Fear of failure, then this environment will be a
natural turn-off for people wanting a constructive environment where they will be recognized
for achieving. Our data shows that the people who are most likely to experience that turn-off
are women.
That means the culture of the C-suite or perceptions of that culture have to change if it is
going to attract aspiring female leaders. There’s been much talk about the need for values-driven
and authentic leadership, and the time has come for organizations to make that a
reality. The research we have cited from those such as McKinsey shows that is the type of
leader women want to work for and to be. Not only are women more likely to value Ease and
security and Recognition, they are likely to reflect those motivational factors in the way they
manage and incentivize others.
The development and preparation of people for senior roles must take into account that
motivational factors are going to be especially important transitional hurdles for women,
though our data also recognizes the need for attention to development of male leaders too.
For either gender, an organizational shift from a culture framed by Fear of failure to one
founded on Recognition for contribution and performance will be a stronger attraction for
potential leaders.
The C-suite culture has
to change if it is going to
attract aspiring female
leaders.

30 70
30 70
Percentile
Percentile
shl.com | 47
Figure 19: Motivation by gender
Numbers represent percentile ranking
What gets me out of bed in the morning?
Ease and security
Power
45 57
44 56
When it comes to the supply of leadership talent, the
gender math isn’t complicated
The top tier of leadership talent that we have called leaders for today is in short supply. Failing
to leverage the potential of women is only going to make the supply of leaders even smaller.
The data shows the differences between men and women is negligible across our Top 25
countries. All the research says that one of the key challenges for organizations is addressing
the motivation of women to step up to the C-suite. Our data does supply evidence of
motivational differences between men and women. Women look to Ease and security
and Recognition more than men. Simply flagging that women are less attracted to senior
positions isn’t going to change the gender balance at the top. We can identify tangible ways
in which organizations can address the imbalance.
The first step is to understand what motivates women to become leaders and how it varies
between individuals. The second is to use that People Intelligence earlier in the career
path to shape mentoring, coaching and learning experiences. This will equip women with
leadership potential for the times when they meet inevitable motivational roadblocks. And, of
course, the same advice applies to potential male leaders. Indeed, enabling potential leaders
to understand what makes them and others tick will strengthen their leadership talent
irrespective of their gender. The arithmetic is simple, ignoring what is effectively 50% of the
global talent pool just makes the search for leaders all the more challenging.
Percentile
What brings me back the next day?
Recognition
Fear of failure
Percentile
46 57
40 49
30 70
30 70
Ease and security
Constructive and pleasant
working conditions and a
sense of job/role security
Power
Recognition
Recognition and praise
for their contributions and
achievements
Fear of failure
The need to avoid failure
and associated loss of
self-esteem
Men Women

Talking about “my” generation
Let’s turn to the much debated generational differences and the impacts that the shift from
the Boomer generation to the Millennials is having and will continue to have on the world of
work. This section focuses first on motivation, and concludes by returning to what our data
reveals about the ongoing supply of leadership potential as a generational shift occurs over
the next decade and a half.
Understanding the engagement and retention
challenges of the multi-generational workforce
Despite much that has been said and written about the differences between the work
attitudes of the three generations, the research data is mixed and often conflicts51. The
simple reality is that organizations need each of these generations. They can reap the
benefits of the wisdom of aging workers and the fresh ideas and perspectives of younger
workers if they understand the differences and how to respond to them appropriately.
Where the broader research data is more consistent is in showing a general trend towards
declining employer loyalty from generation to generation: 65% of Boomers would consider
staying with an organization throughout their working lives in contrast to 40% of Gen Xers
and only 20% of Millennials52. Clearly, this trend shows organizations and their managers
need to be astute in their understanding of what motivates and engages employees, and
be able to reflect that understanding in the way that work is rewarded and contribution
recognized.
We looked at our data on motivation to see what differences would help inform organizations
about how to engage a multi-generational workforce. We found six factors any organization
needs to be aware of (see Figure 20).
Just as the war for talent is set to become more intense as workforce shortages emerge, the
retention of skilled talent is clearly going to be more important. Flexibility is and will continue
to be key to how organizations reflect these differences in their reward and recognition
processes to address retention issues.
So what does this mean for organizations that need to build a sustainable, diverse leadership
pipeline, which does not peter out? Among the strongest motivational factors for the
Millennials is progression and personal growth. Sustaining career progression, therefore, is
the most singular challenge organizations face in energizing and retaining younger talent who
are hungry to learn and compete for opportunities53. Since any organization will only have so
many senior positions open at any one time, reframing what career progression means has
become a critical must-do for talent managers54.
And what of the Boomer generation that will remain as the largest inhabitants of the
workplace for at least the next 15-20 years? These are the people who are most likely to have
broader skills and experiences from which they can draw insight. They are also the people
who hold much of the intellectual property that drives knowledge work, much of the social
capital in terms of key networks inside and outside the organization, and the tacit knowledge
of “how things really get done around here”.
Declining
employer loyalty
Who would stay with an
employer throughout their
working lives?
Boomers
65%
Gen X
40%
Millennials
20%

Our data shows that reward and recognition that emphasizes Competition (they’ve already
been there and done that), Progression (most of them will be at their maximum career
point) and Personal growth (they’ve already developed skills and knowledge) is not going to
motivate the Boomers.
At first glance and reflecting the way generational differences have tended to be portrayed,
these differences may be seen as potential sources of conflict. This is not necessarily the
case. The effective manager will be sensitive to these differences and know that they require
flexibility in how people are managed. And the manager who is most likely to be impacted
by these differences is the Gen X manager. They bridge the Boomers on the one hand and
the Millennials on the other. Understanding differences and managing diversity is now a
critical competency for these managers in driving performance and sustaining employee
engagement.
41 52 55
30 70
Percentile
Percentile
Percentile
Percentile
Percentile
shl.com | 49
Figure 20: Motivation by generation
Power
Competition
Opportunities to distinguish
themselves from others and
to show they are the best
Autonomy
Independence and scope
for determining how they
approach and organize their
work
Progression
Opportunities for career
progression and promotion
Personal principles
Environments which promote
ideals, high ethical standards
and quality
Personal growth
Opportunities to learn,
acquire skills and for personal
development
What gets me out of bed in the morning?
Power
Competition
Percentile
What brings me back the next day?
Autonomy
Progression
4142 57
40 53 59
What will make me stick around?
Personal principles
Personal growth
Boomers Gen X Millennials
30 50 54 59
70
30 70
30 70
30 70
32 42 50
30 70
37 48 54

The supply of leadership potential as
the Millennials inherit the earth
Just as the workplace becomes more diverse, the need for effective leadership will increase.
When we look forward, what does our data say about the supply of leadership potential for
the coming decade and a half? On the whole, for the technically savvy and digitally driven
Millennials, the prospects are good – the supply of leadership talent is improving overall.
While 6.3% or 1 in 16 of the Boomers in our data have the leaders for today level of potential,
7.4% or 1 in 13 of Gen Xers and 8.4% or 1 in 11 of Millennials possess this level of leadership
potential.
What drives this trend is greater potential among the younger generations for the
transformational competencies underpinning innovation, entrepreneurial thinking as well as
a focus on execution. However, we also see a need for focused learning and development
programs to harvest the potential of young leaders. Using the SHL Corporate Leadership
Model55, we looked at how the three generations compared across four key management
and leadership functions: Developing the vision, Sharing the goals, Gaining support and
Delivering success (see Figure 21).
We found modest differences in the talents that underpin the creation of ideas and proposals
(Developing the vision), and negligible differences in the talents required to socialize those
ideas effectively (Sharing the goals). Significant and substantive differences appear in the
talents required to mobilize others in support of ideas and proposals (Gaining support) with
the differences favoring the older generations, and in turning those ideas into actions and
deliverables (Delivering success) favoring younger generations.
Figure 21: Management & leadership functions
44 50 53
42 52 64
40 49 56
Boomers Gen X Millennials
Developing the vision
Percentile
30 70
Sharing the goals
Percentile
30 47 52 52
70
Gaining support
Percentile
30 70
Delivering success
Percentile
30 70

Potential to
become ‘leaders
for today’
shl.com | 51
Boomers
1/16
Gen X
1/13
Millennials
1/11
It’s not really about gender
and generations
Does this mean that the workplace of the future is set to become one in which execution
supersedes the niceties of collaboration and getting the buy-in of others? The demands of
an increasingly global and networked working world would suggest not. Framing objectives
that motivate and develop others, empowering people and inspiring them with the trust
to succeed will grow rather than diminish in importance and, ironically, these are the very
leadership qualities required to meet the motivational needs of the younger generations for
Personal growth and Progression.
Here is where the wisdom to leverage differences will be key in the development of
leadership potential. Mentoring and coaching programs that will pay a dividend are the ones
that understand the motivational and competency profiles of the different generations and
can bring those differences together to effect the transfer of the softer skills that are most
likely to be the greatest hurdles for younger aspiring leaders in realizing their ambitions.
It’s about the best person for the job and having managers
who know how to leverage differences effectively
We began this chapter by noting that 76 million American Boomers are set to exit the
workforce in the coming years, a trend that will be followed in other mature economies. That
means many organizations will have to face a simple fact – there is going to be an even bigger
shortage of talent.
A shortage of talent means a rethink. That rethink will have to include re-framing the world of
work and many of the assumptions we hold today about that world will have to be discarded.
But, discarding one set of assumptions for another set of assumptions will not serve
organizations well. There is a need to develop clearer and more evidence-based perspectives
on people and their talent. Organizations would be better served by understanding where
differences matter and what those differences mean for employee performance and
engagement.

Chapter 5
The global race for skills
shl.com | 53

The supply and quality
of key hard skills
In this chapter, we look at the hard skills of employees who administer and carry out the
thousands of daily transactions that can make or break an organization. These hard skills are
essential if the aspirations of leaders and the great ideas of innovators are to become a reality
and deliver value.
The supply and quality of key skills has become critical on a number of fronts. The most
obvious need is for employers to find people who can execute and achieve organizational
goals. Leading staffing firm Manpower reports that the search for skilled labor is proving
difficult in many geographies: “Despite the continuing caution exercised by many
organizations amid ongoing economic uncertainty, a substantial proportion of employers
around the globe identify a lack of available skilled talent as a continuing drag on business
performance. Overwhelmingly, a lack of available candidates with the right technical expertise
and employability skills continues to vex employers.” 56
The Manpower report also states more than 1 in 3 employers across geographies are unable
to find talent with the necessary skillsets. The most acute shortages occur in both mature
and emerging economies, including Australia, Brazil, India, and Japan. Almost half of the
employers in the U.S. report difficulties filling jobs. In contrast, Europe, the Middle East and
Africa report less critical talent shortages.
Two other key factors are driving the dynamics in the global market for skilled labor –
increased competition in the outsourcing market for services and IT, and the start of an
insourcing trend among mature economies, which are looking to bring jobs back home. In a
recent survey by The Engineering Employers Federation57 in the U.K., 2 in 5 companies were
restoring domestic production.
Valued at U.S. $62.4 billion in 201058, the IT outsourcing market has played a significant role
in the growth of many emerging economies in Asia, Eastern Europe and South America.
Today the trend may be in reverse, as insourcing is the option many companies are exploring
while they regroup and rethink their business strategies.
Increased demand for skills coupled with perceived shortages in supply has created an
international competition for skilled labor. Employers facing shortages at home may also
face competition for skills from outside their home geographies, creating what has been
described as the global race for skills59.
1 in 3 employers across
geographies are unable
to find talent with the
necessary skillsets.

Chapter 5: The global race for skills
shl.com | 55
An objective view of
key global skills
Much of the information available to date on skills by country is based on perception and
expert judgment60. We do not question the value of those judgments. What SHL contributes
is hard data to understand objectively how countries, geographical and economic regions
compare on skills levels. The data is based on standardized certifications administered
globally, providing a common set of metrics to make comparisons. We have grouped the data
from different certifications to ensure they are equivalent in terms of the skills levels they
measure.
Skill certification scores indicate the likely results achieved from training programs in terms of
expected pass rates and average scores achieved by different populations globally. Our data
shows where regions are placed in the global race for skills. Where pass rates and average
scores are high, organizations have stronger skills pools to draw upon.
Conversely, where we see lower pass rates and lower average scores, greater investment in
training and education is required to create the volume of skilled labor to meet demand.
Two critical skills areas – business administration & IT
Both Manpower and Hays61 agree that among the skills employers are finding most difficult
to source are those in business administration and IT, which is where we have focused our
analysis. In this chapter, we examine results from certifications delivered between 2006 and
2011 to view the global supply of talent in these two skills areas62. Business administration
data covers administrative/clerical and essential business skills, and IT certifications are for
programming, database development, and systems and networking.
Since these skills areas are critical to all organizations regardless of region, we have used our
data to develop a global view for comparison. We provide an overview by geographical region
of where the supply of skills is strongest and where it is weakest.
Table 7: The two critical skills areas
Business Administration Information Technology (IT)
Administrative/clerical skills
Bookkeeping, Microsoft Office, office
management & procedures, typing speed &
accuracy
Programming & database development
C, C#, COBOL, Java, UNIX, .NET, XML, HTML,
JavaScript
Essential business skills
Business mathematics, business writing &
communication, marketing, presentation skills
Systems & networking
MS SQL Server, Oracle, RDBMS concepts, business
analysis, software configuration management,
networking concepts, network security, LAN/WAN
communications, CISCO network design and support,
LINUX administration, MS desktop and server
administration

The global supply of business
administration skills
To get a view of general business administration skills globally, we constructed an overall
ranking of certification results by country that represents the two subsets: administrative/
clerical and essential business skills. The rankings in Table 8 are derived from the combined
pass rates and average scores for each subset.
This ranking has significant meaning when one considers the dynamics driving the race
for skills. Eastern European countries appear to have strong talent pools for administrative/
clerical and essential business skills, giving them an advantage in their home markets as
well as offering strong sources of skilled labor to other neighboring economies as Europe
emerges from the current economic downturn.
Western European countries also rank as hot spots for administrative/clerical and essential
business skills. One factor that would support the forward growth of European economies
is the mobility of skilled labor across that region. To be effective, this requires clear People
Intelligence on available skill levels. Organizations across Europe need to understand the
skills available in their home and neighboring markets.
The picture elsewhere is more mixed. Asia shows a divergent range in skills levels impacting
both the more mature economies in this region as well as the emerging ones. India, ranking
in the Top 25 for essential business skills (see Table 10) does not make it into the Top 25
overall due to lower levels of administrative/clerical skills (see Table 9). China does not make
it into our Top 25 whether we look at specific skills sets or take an overall view of skills levels.
The data suggests at best an imbalance in the skills profiles for these countries.
For Latin America and Africa, there are emerging talent pools with Mexico, South Africa and
Brazil in our overall rankings. But, there are challenges for these countries with lower pass
rates and average skills scores that speak to a need for greater investment in training and
education to raise skills levels. Similar challenges emerge in the Middle East whether we look
at the data at a macro regional level or at an individual country. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the
United Arab Emirates all sit outside our top 25’s for specific skills and overall, showing that
the gap is particularly severe in this region for the key skills that enable the smooth day-to-day
running of any organization.
Breaking down the business administration skills area into subsets of administrative/clerical
skills and essential business skills, the macro perspective shows additional differences
by region. Beginning with administrative/clerical skills, the landscape is clearly polarized
between the emerging and mature economies, and between geographies (see Figure 22).
Certification results are higher in terms of both pass rates and quality among the more
mature economies in Australia-New Zealand, both Eastern and Western Europe, and in North
America.
Skills strength in Eastern European nations is notable given the transition over the past two
decades as they have adopted more open labor markets, with many joining the European
Union (EU), and moved towards more free market economic models.
The lower overall skills levels for Asia mask significant diversity across that region. Looking at
specific countries in more detail shows this region spans the spectrum from high pass rates
and high average scores to much lower levels.
Table 8: Top 25 countries for combined
business administration skills*
Japan
Netherlands
Germany
Poland
Sweden
U.K.
Russia
Czech Republic
Australia
Estonia
Bulgaria
Singapore
New Zealand
Romania
Latvia
Argentina
Italy
Lithuania
Ireland
Canada
U.S.
Ukraine
Mexico
South Africa
Brazil
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
21
23
24
25
Region
North America
Western Europe
Asia
Africa
Middle East
Eastern Europe
Latin America
* Final rank was determined by summing rankings by
pass rate and average score, and then by re-ranking
countries from smallest to largest summed rank.

Chapter 5: The global race for skills
shl.com | 57
A look at administrative/
clerical skills
Table 9: Top 25 countries for administrative/
clerical skills certifications
Rank* Country Pass
Rate
Average
Score
1 Japan 85.0% 3.97
2 Netherlands 80.5% 3.38
3 Germany 75.6% 3.24
4 U.K. 73.6% 3.21
5 Australia 72.3% 3.23
6 Argentina 75.3% 3.13
7 Singapore 73.3% 3.20
7 Sweden 74.3% 3.13
9 Poland 71.4% 3.18
9 Russia 68.4% 3.21
11 New Zealand 73.5% 3.11
12 Bulgaria 68.1% 3.12
12 Czech
Republic
68.6% 3.11
14 Italy 70.4% 3.08
15 Latvia 64.3% 3.16
15 Ukraine 66.2% 3.12
17 Romania 67.7% 3.06
18 Estonia 67.5% 3.04
19 U.S. 65.8% 3.06
20 Ireland 63.8% 3.08
21 Mexico 67.1% 3.00
22 Canada 65.5% 3.03
22 Lithuania 61.8% 3.07
24 South Africa 63.9% 2.95
25 Brazil 60.2% 2.92
Table 9 shows the Top 25 countries ranked by pass rate and average score for administrative/
clerical skills. Two countries in Asia rank in the Top 25 – Japan and Singapore – with China
and India notably absent. Average pass rates for these two countries are below the global
pass rate at 54.1% and the average score across both countries ranks just above the pass
mark for certification in administrative/clerical skills at 2.81.
The Netherlands, Germany, the U.K. and Sweden rank high from Western Europe, joined
by Poland, Russia, Bulgaria and the Czech Republic in the top 12 overall. Australia and New
Zealand also have high rankings. Stronger quality of administrative/clerical skills is shown
for Argentina with Mexico and Brazil coming in the second half of our table, supporting an
emerging skills base in Latin America. South Africa’s ranking at 24th reflects lower, athough
above global average, pass rates, but with average scores approaching the pass rate
minimum of 2.75.
The U.S. and Canada rank in the lower half of the Top 25. This seemed counterintuitive, so
we looked for supporting data from other sources. The PISA program results for 2003 and
2009 showed the U.S. ranked middle to lower for reading and science literacy, with one of
the widest gaps seen between most and least-proficient students across OECD countries63.
For both Canada and the U.S., higher skills levels cited in other reports tend to focus on
university graduates. Data on skillsets of those without a university degree is scarce, and
those are the people most likely to take the certification tests covered in this chapter.
Figure 22: Administrative/clerical skills pass rates by geographic region
71.2%
69.8%
66%
65.8%
54.8%
54.7%
44.8%
49.9%
Australia-
New Zealand
Western
Europe
Eastern
Europe North
America
Latin America
Africa
Asia
Middle East
Global average pass rate is 60.3%
Low High

The view of essential
business skills
Figure 23 shows the macro landscape for essential business skills. The pattern that emerges
is similar to that for administrative/clerical skills. The macro view by geography becomes
clearer when we look at the strongest levels of essential business skills by country (see Table
10). Countries in Eastern and Western Europe dominate the upper rankings, sharing the top
with Japan. Australia-New Zealand, North America, Latin America and individual nations
scattered by geography populate the lower half.
One distinct feature of the business skills landscape is the strong representation of countries
in Eastern Europe with Estonia, Poland, the Czech Republic, Russia, Romania and Bulgaria all
ranking among the top 10 countries.
Again, Japan ranks near the top of our table, with Singapore and Malaysia ranking lower,
showing that, even among the strongest Asian countries for essential business skills, there is
a wide range in skills throughputs and levels.
This diversity is also shown for Western Europe and North America, with countries in these
regions spanning the range from higher to lower rankings.
Figure 23: Essential business skills pass rates by geographical region
Table 10: Top 25 countries on essential
business skills certifications
Rank* Country Pass
Rate
Average
Score
1 Estonia 96.9% 3.75
1 Japan 93.7% 4.25
3 Poland 92.7% 3.80
4 Netherlands 94.5% 3.59
5 Czech
Republic
92.3% 3.71
6 Russia 87.4% 3.58
6 Sweden 85.75 3.62
8 Germany 88.3% 3.53
9 Romania 87.2% 3.56
10 Bulgaria 83.6% 3.45
10 U.K. 83.3% 3.48
12 Latvia 83.8% 3.44
13 Australia 84.5% 3.42
14 New Zealand 83.3% 3.44
15 Singapore 82.1% 3.45
16 Lithuania 81.9% 3.43
17 France 82.5% 3.29
18 Canada 80.8% 3.40
19 Ireland 78.4% 3.32
20 Italy 79.7% 3.27
21 South Africa 70.9% 3.24
22 India 72.1% 3.12
23 Brazil 64.9% 3.18
23 Malaysia 68.6% 3.11
23 Mexico 65.0% 3.12
23 U.S. 67.9% 3.11
83.4%
82.8%
76.3%
69.8%
68.2%
66.1%
58.1%
59%
Australia-
New Zealand
Western
Europe
Eastern
Europe
North
America
Latin America
Africa
Asia
Middle East
Global average pass rate is 68.7%
Low High

Shl talent-report-use (1)

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Shl talent-report-use (1)

Semelhante a Shl talent-report-use (1) (20)

Mais de BFSICM

Mais de BFSICM (20)

Último

Último (15)

Shl talent-report-use (1)