Emerging Leaders logo

Emerging Leaders’ Program Development Handbook

Creating a Program for Developing and Supporting

Emerging Public Health Leaders

Collaborative Leadership logo and link back to the Collaborative Leadership home page

Home | Key ELN Features | Minnesota's ELN | Creating an ELN | Resources

Creating an ELN


  Creating an Emerging Leaders’ Network

The following is a description of the steps we took — and the issues we addressed — in developing the ELN in Minnesota. The rollout of our program did not necessarily happen in the linear fashion illustrated below; likely yours will not either. Life is rarely so tidy.

Get Started

Create a Planning Structure

Design the Program

Identify the Faculty 

Design the Application Process

Recruit the Participants

Review the Applications

Measure Success

Plan for the Future

I appreciate the Emerging Leaders’ Network for the ‘forced’ self-reflection. In this day and age, when we’re surrounded by increasing amounts of technology that are meant to increase our productivity and efficiency, we are not simultaneously taught to maximize human capacity to think about our own actions and possibilities for self-improvement.
—Comment from a first year participant

Addressing the issues and questions that will be raised in developing an emerging leaders’ network will be challenging. We recommend you identify concrete objectives for what you want to accomplish and a clear set of principles to guide discussions when they become muddy. Although our training framework centered on three key principles (collaborative leadership, professional networking, and personal planning), each state will need to independently determine a framework that reflects local circumstances.

Get Started

Questions to consider when getting started:

  • What are the current and future leadership needs in the workforce?
  • What is being done to meet these needs?
  • Is there a niche to fill?
  • What would an Emerging Leaders’ Network accomplish?
  • Who needs to be involved in its development and operations? Who has the political power to get this going? (We used existing organizations that had a stake in the outcome of the program. The organizations we identified as initial partners were all facing huge demographic shifts that, if left unaddressed, would result in gaping holes in leadership positions in about five years.)
  • What is a reasonable timeline for developing an Emerging Leaders’ Network? (Minnesota’s steering committee allowed six months to get up and going. This aggressive timeline allowed the group to dive in to form a product and not get bogged down in a lengthy planning process.)
  • Where will you get start-up funding? Is there an existing funding stream that can be tapped, or will you need to generate a new funding stream? Is there a way to partner with an existing leadership institute, or will the network stand alone?
  • How will funding allocation decisions be made? How will funding be used? How much money is available to each participant? Will faculty be paid or volunteer? Will course materials be donated or purchased?

Return to top

Create a Planning Structure

Questions to consider when creating a structure:

  • What do you call your structure (a governing board, a steering committee, a board of directors etc.)? (We called our group a steering committee.)
  • What skills are needed to plan a program? (For the program’s design and early development, we looked for a balance between persons who are visionary, big picture thinkers and those who can connect the big picture to detail. We also needed people with knowledge of adult learning, leadership, and program development, and other related skills.)
  • What rules and guidelines are needed? The steering committee will take on its own life, so it is important to identify rules of engagement, expectations about how the committee will function, ground rules, length of service expectations, and rewards. (Because our steering committee was made up of volunteers, it was important to remember to thank and reward them in as many ways as possible. Simple gestures such as offering coffee and food at meetings were helpful.)
  • What subcommittees are needed to accomplish the work? (We developed these subcommittees: application/review, evaluation, curriculum, sustainability, and logistics.)
  • How often do you meet and for how long?
  • Is there a director, chair, staff? (Our steering committee operated informally without a chair. Staffing was provided by state health department employees for a total of approximately 0.6 FTEs.)

Design the Program

Questions to consider when designing the program:

  • What are the program goals and objectives and the benefits that you will provide?
  • What is your vision for a network of emerging leaders? What do you want the network to look like? Accomplish?
  • How will you promote the program to reach the intended audiences?
  • Which terms need definition to help create clarity of meaning (e.g., emerging, leaders, network)?
  • What are your learning objectives? How will this knowledge result in behavior change?
  • What learning format/structure will you employ? What is the best learning environment?
  • What underlying theories and concepts are important (adult learning)? What is the appropriate balance between individual and group learning? What individual activities should take place?
  • Which self-assessment activities are needed? Does the program provide the tools or encourage Web-based access? Who chooses the tools? (We used the Myers-Briggs self-assessment tool.)
  • What tools are needed to help participants design a personalized leadership development plan? Who needs to help them?
  • When should the cohort meet for the first time? How often should they meet? How long should each meeting last? What will they do during that meeting? Where will they meet?
  • What role do participants take in defining the curriculum?
  • What role should the participants’ supervisors take? (Although letters of recommendation were requested from the supervisors during the application process, we formally engaged supervisors at the final retreat of the program. From supervisors’ evaluations, we learned that some wanted to be engaged in the process throughout the year. Nevertheless, we recommend taking an individualized approach to engaging supervisors in order to lessen the stress for participants. For example, early on, participants are nervous about the process in general, hesitant about sharing personal skills and improvement goals, and sometimes anxious about acquiring the skills. Moreover, there may be some supervisor/emerging leader situations where it would be detrimental to include the supervisor.)
  • What obligation does a participant have to the public health community in return for taking the training? Do they participate in a group project? Do they have a responsibility to share in their work environment?
  • What responsibility does each partner organization have in identifying collaborative activities for participants?
  • What is the budget? How much money is needed to get what you want in the program? How much is available for each individual? Can participants use that money to decide what professional growth activities they want? Do participants research their own professional growth plan and then receive mentoring?
  • What will you charge participants to take part in the program? (Our steering committee agreed that because neither the emerging leaders nor their organizations were likely to have funds designated for this type of training, the program should be offered, at least in the pilot phase, at no cost to participants.)

Return to top

Identify the Faculty

Questions to consider when identifying the faculty:

  • Who has the skills and ability to facilitate and present on the topics you have chosen? (Our program was designed to include a significant experiential component; therefore, we looked for faculty who were comfortable orchestrating experiential learning, as opposed to presenting in a didactic manner.)
  • How will you find faculty who reflect the diversity you want to honor?
  • Who will interview the faculty?
  • How will you prepare the faculty? (We learned it is important to meet with your speakers/faculty up front so they understand the curriculum and how their information fits into the overall program objectives.)
  • Who is affordable? (We decided that while a $10,000 speaker may offer credibility and a recognizable name, it would also force the elimination of participant slots. We looked for windows of opportunity in identifying the faculty roster, such as nationally known experts coming to town for another function. A well-connected steering committee can be especially helpful in this effort.)

Design the Application Process

Questions to consider when designing the application process:

  • What qualities do you want in your emerging leaders?
  • How will you locate the people who meet the qualities you want in an emerging leader?
  • How important is diversity? What do you mean by diversity?
  • What will the application process include?
  • How will you describe the Emerging Leaders’ Network program to create interest?
  • What are the questions you will use to obtain the information you need about each applicant?
  • Will you require letters of recommendation? (Designing application questions that get at what you need to know about people is a challenge. Letters of recommendation proved to be the most valuable reality check for the application.)

Recruit the Participants

Questions to consider in recruiting participants:

  • Where are the emerging leaders?
  • Who are you trying to attract? (Although applicants need to see personal leadership qualities in themselves, it is important to find candidates whose leadership potential is recognized by others as well. Members in the first pilot who already had an interest in leadership realized a powerful, transforming experience when they learned that others also believed in them.)
  • Who has the power to influence future leaders? (We learned that a lot of the people who applied did so because someone suggested that they apply. Consider using current leaders to help identify people who could benefit from the program.)
  • What are the best ways to get information out? (Consider scheduling promotions to local, regional, and state public health and health-related organizations.)
  • Who are the people who have access to the communities you are trying to reach? What is the best way to get information to them (e.g., hard copy, electronic)?
  • What public relations materials will be helpful? (We learned that when you are promoting a new program, there is no track record to boast about, so you need to sell the vision. Clearly state the benefits and limitations of attending the program.)

Return to top

Review the Applications

Questions to consider in reviewing the applications:

  • Which current leaders can be asked to help identify emerging leaders? Who is in the best position to judge potential leaders? (We attempted to identify reviewers who reflected the overall criteria for the program.)
  • What is the most feasible way for the group to review applications and engage in a conversation to objectively pick the best people? (You will need to have a plan for dealing with the conflicts of interest that emerge. We asked all reviewers to recognize that although every applicant should be viewed as a potential leader, some candidates are in a better position than others to immediately benefit from, and contribute to, the program.)
  • What criteria are important in determining the make-up of the final cohort? Will you develop individual criteria and group criteria to judge candidates? (We designed an application review tool to provide objective measures by which to score and rank individual applications. We also use subjective and group-level criteria to select the final cohort (e.g., what experience does each candidate bring to contribute to the energy and vitality of the group, how will the group will fit together, are diversity criteria met).
  • How much time do you allow for application review? (We allowed individual reviewers four weeks to study the applications and then scheduled a six-hour meeting to discuss the applications and determine the final cohort.)
  • How will the review meeting be conducted? (During the review team meeting, the group discussed their rationale for scoring, and met in teams and later as a full group to balance the individual and group criteria and determine the final roster.
  • What ground rules are needed to provide a fair and respectful review process? (We established a number of ground rules for the review process. For example, respect for the applicants and their privacy were of utmost importance in this process. We also set guidelines addressing conflicts of interest and required that all reviewers attend the review meeting, because it is very difficult to use reviewer written comments when the decisions are close.)

Measure Success

Questions to consider when measuring success:

  • How will you continuously evaluate?
  • How will you define what success looks like? What are the indicators for the program as a whole and for individuals who go through the program? (There is a lot of literature available about measuring leadership development. We chose to measure change in awareness and what participants found valuable about the process, as opposed to knowledge gained.)
  • How will you determine the measurability of the indicators?
  • When will you measure? (We evaluated participants at the beginning of sessions, at the end of sessions, at the end of the program, and again six months after completion of the program.)
  • How much money do you have available for evaluation?

Plan for the Future

Questions to consider when planning for the future:

  • What is your vision for the future and what needs to be done to sustain the program in the long run? (We found it helpful to review the vision for the program, set specific yearly goals to guide workplan development, and identify the structure needed to meet goals.)
  • What skills are needed on the planning committee to sustain the program? (As we transitioned from a start-up to a sustainable program, the knowledge and skills needed on the planning committee changed to include expertise in public relations and marketing, financial development and fundraising, governance, alumni development, and ongoing program evaluation and enrichment.)
  • How will you continue to promote the program and build support from key stakeholders? (We created a governance structure that identified future planning as a collaborative effort involving a number of key public, private, and academic stakeholders. We identified partners and other key stakeholders, secured their commitment to the program, created promotional materials, developed a Web page, and created a fundraising plan that included strategic planning around the most influential spokespeople as well as appropriate fundraising targets.)
  • What evaluation feedback should be used to determine changes needed to the program?

Return to top

TurningPoint logo

The Leadership Development National Excellence Collaborative is sponsored by Turning Point
and funded by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Turning Point National Program Office
University of Washington School of Public Health and Community Medicine
6 Nickerson Street, Suite 300, Seattle, Washington 98109-1618
(206) 616-8410; (206) 616-8466 (fax)

Updated 8/13/04