U.S. companies spent $82.5 billion on workplace training in 2020. Estimates suggest that executives budget the majority of funds in organizational training for leadership development. The question is, are they getting a good return on investment?

Evidence from meta-analyses suggests that individuals' leadership behaviors, skills, and styles are essential predictors of employees' productivity and satisfaction, team performance, and overall organizational performance. However, popular press articles often imply that training programs are minimally effective at developing these leadership skills. Instead, there is the familiar notion that "managers are created, leaders are born." On the other hand, the research literature presents more optimistic findings. The research demonstrates that people can learn from leadership training programs, apply what they learn to the workplace, and enjoy enhanced performance as a result.

Nonetheless, not all leadership training programs are created equal. Studies have found that programs developed using a needs analysis (i.e., determining the exact kinds of leadership skills needed) result in more significant learning and transfer of skills to the workplace. Furthermore, evidence suggests that mandatory programs are better at achieving organizational outcomes than voluntary programs. Moreover, programs that allow employees to practice what they learned are more effective than those that merely present information on what it means to be a successful leader. Thus, while the evidence is clear that training can build leadership skills, organizations should purposefully design these programs based on best practices if they hope for a return on their investment.

How can leaders be trained? In about a paragraph, explain your rational and provide examples