Your Title Doesn't Excuse You From the Training Room
Two months before the training started, I spoke with a CEO who wanted leadership training and development for all roles with leadership titles. He was all-in. He acknowledged the importance of being present and being an active participant without judgment.
But when the time came for training, the CEO was fully disengaged. He wasn't logging into the training software. He wasn't physically present. And there was no message saying he was planning to come but something pulled him away. Nothing.
Everyone noticed.
Everyone Notices
Your leaders notice. They make a mental note. Then they share it with their peers.
People don't need a memo to understand what matters to the person at the top. They watch where you spend your time. When the CEO who asked for the training doesn't show up to it, the message is loud and clear, even if you never say a word.
The danger is this: you claimed to want consistency, but your leadership demonstrates inconsistent behavior. Like it or not, that's the reality.
No one said anything to me about his absence. They didn't have to. Throughout the training, participants kept coming back to the same two things: a desire for consistency and a desire for transparency. Those are the exact things his absence called into question.
When leaders ask for consistency and transparency, they're rarely asking for a new policy. They're asking to see the people at the top do what they say. They're asking to understand why decisions are made and whether the rules apply to everyone.
This Isn't About One Missed Session
It would be easy to brush this off as a scheduling conflict. CEOs are busy. Things come up. But your absence doesn't stay in the training room. It shows up in places that are much harder to fix than a calendar.
- An accountability issue. You're asking your leaders to show up, participate, and apply what they learn. Are you being held accountable to the same standard? If not, your leaders will quietly decide the standard is optional.
- A culture of poor communication. No message. No heads-up. No "I planned to be there, but this pulled me away." How are you communicating with the people you've asked to grow? Silence from the top gets filled with assumptions, and those assumptions are rarely generous.
- A lack of transparency. How are you being transparent about your priorities? If leadership development is a priority, your team needs to see it in your behavior, not just hear it in the kickoff meeting.
The list goes on.
Trust rarely breaks in one dramatic moment. SHRM notes that most trust problems build up through small behaviors repeated over time. And that trust is already fragile. SHRM's Global Worker research found that only 52% of employees mostly or completely trust their employer to meet its responsibilities to workers. Another 39% trust their employer only somewhat, and 9% don't trust them at all.
Skipping the training you required is one of those small behaviors. Your team adds it to the tally.
The Investment Already Leans Toward the Top
Here's what makes this harder to justify. Gartner found that at the average organization, executives make up just 5% of leaders but consume 16% of the leadership development budget. Most organizations already invest more in the top seat than anywhere else. Gartner also points out that progressive organizations are adding cohesive development to the customized coaching executives typically receive.
Cohesive means together. The executive learns alongside the leadership team, using the same frameworks and building the same language. I wrote about what happens when that's missing in Price of Growing Without a Leadership Development Strategy: leaders developed in isolation don't support one another. And when development is split by title, you get the "us versus them" mentality I described in Intersection Between Leadership and Employee Development.
When the CEO opts out, training becomes something done to the leadership team instead of with them.
Your Title Doesn't Excuse You
Yes, you earned your CEO seat. That's not in question. But your title doesn't excuse you from sitting next to the people that carry out your organization's mission.
When I work with CEOs, I encourage them to show up, not from a position of judgment, but only to share and learn themselves. You're not there to evaluate your VPs or keep a mental list of who participates and who doesn't. You're there as a learner, sitting alongside them.
Sharing means being open about where you're still growing. Learning means doing the same activities, the same reflections, and the same follow-up work you've asked of your leaders. When your leaders see that, the training stops feeling like an evaluation and starts feeling like development. That shift is what makes it safe for everyone else in the room to be honest too.
Your presence tells your leaders this matters. Your participation tells them you're still learning too. Your engagement without judgment tells them it's safe to be honest about what they don't know yet. None of that can be delegated.
If you truly can't be there, say so. Tell your team what pulled you away and when you'll catch up. Log in and complete the work. Ask them what they learned. Those small actions rebuild the consistency you said you wanted.
Questions to Sit With
Before your next leadership training, ask yourself:
- Am I holding myself to the same participation standard I set for my leaders?
- If I can't attend, how will I communicate that, and to whom?
- What would my leadership team say my behavior communicates about this training?
If those questions made you a little uncomfortable, that's useful information. It may mean your training program isn't the only thing that needs alignment.
Take the free Training Assessment Quiz to get a score-based report on where your training and leadership development stand, and where the gaps are quietly costing you.
.png)
