Where employees' and employers' development priorities are misaligned

Source: HR Daily (15.07.2025) - Subscription service

New data highlights some misalignment between the capabilities employees want to build in themselves, and the areas employers would prefer them to develop.

The EZRA Coaching data, based on analytics from more than 5,300 participants across 180 organisations, shows that in Australia and New Zealand, employers are often keen for employees to develop their capability in areas such as leading for DEI, and decision-making.

But few individuals request coaching in these areas, the data shows.

There's numerous potential reasons for this, according to EZRA APAC solutions lead Andrew Calvert.

It might be because individuals are already competent in these areas, or at least think they are, he tells HR Daily.

Another explanation is that the organisation hasn't succeeded in convincing people of the benefits of diversity and inclusion, or the need for better decision-making.

"A reflection question I always take back to HR is: When you look at what you wanted, versus what people actually chose, what does that suggest?"

As for areas where they were more likely to need coaching, the data suggests ANZ employees' capability in the areas of decision-making, managing conflict, and influence are lower than the global average.

Calvert notes that local businesses are under increasing regulatory and compliance pressures, making decision-making "a more cautious and bureaucratic process".

Further, remote and hybrid work have made conflict resolution more complex, as misunderstandings tend to arise more easily in digital communication.

"Articulating ambition" a major focus for employees

A key finding in the report is that ANZ-based employees are nearly twice as likely to seek coaching on "articulating ambition" than their global counterparts.

Employers might assume this is a bad thing – thinking that employees' newfound confidence, clarity and drive might lead to their departure, Calvert notes.

But he says a desire to better articulate ambition doesn't mean a person wants more money or a better role.

"It might mean, 'Give me more meaning, give me more purpose, give me greater utility'," he explains. It can be less about planning to leave the organisation, and more about asserting, "This is what I want, this is the value I'm seeking to add".

Ideally, an employee's ability to articulate ambition will prompt the organisation to give them a stretch assignment or hobby project, or time off for volunteer work, he says.

"That's what articulating ambition means, it's not just about getting promoted, it's: how do you find greater fulfillment?"

Calvert adds that while it could also lead to attrition, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Some CEOs still resist investing in coaching because they think, "What if we invest in all these people and they leave?" but the adage, "What if we don't invest and they stay?" holds true, he explains.

Calvert knows of one large organisation that offers employees coaching on 'purpose', and has found that within six months of completing it, 10% of its participants resign.

"You'd think that would be a bad thing, but HR had the valid analysis that those were the people at risk of quiet quitting, so by getting people to articulate ambition, you get really clear: Are these people going to stay longer, and be the future leaders of the organisation? Or are they only there because they can't find anything better?

"And whether they decide 'I want to go do something different', or 'I want to stay', they see 'something will give me fulfilment'."

Today's workforce is so mobile that employers can't "make" people stay anyway, Calvert says.

"All you can do is create an environment where they say, 'I want to stay', and by getting them to articulate ambition, you can find where you have alignment."