“Managers are overseeing more people as companies large and small gut layers of middle managers in the name of cutting bloat and creating nimbler yet larger teams…. According to data from research and advisory firm Gartner, there was one manager for every five employees in 2017. That median ratio increased to one manager for every 15 employees by 2023, and it appears to be growing further today, Gartner says.” – “Your Boss Doesn’t Have Time to Talk to You,” by Chip Cutter and Lindsay Ellis, The Wall Street Journal, August 29, 2025

If you’re managing 15 employees, you don’t have the time or bandwidth to give tailored guidance to each person reporting to you. For self-preservation – especially if you’re also doing work in addition to managing — you’ve got to make adjustments, especially around developing your people.

The days of “manager as a coach” are sunsetting. The replacement? Probably a distributed model with employees, peers, tech, and systems all taking on bigger roles. That’s the point of view based on my lived experiences confirmed by other experts as well as GenAI.

This shift – whether explicitly stated or assumed – will have huge ripple effects for employees as well as their managers. For example, managers will have to stop being coaches and start being  “development enablers and connectors.”  This means designing systems, recommending development opportunities, and encouraging learning at scale.

Also, development will vary widely by organization, depending on how committed employers are to grow and develop their staff, especially mid-level. For example, employee development might sort out into three big buckets with different experiences and varying results:

1. Minimalist approach to learning and development 

• Organizations will provide employees basic training, such as compliance, communication skills, and technical upskilling as new technology or processes get introduced.
• The goal will be to keep operations running.
• The risk to employees and the organization: Employees won’t be stretched to adapt and grow into higher-level roles. Employees can plateau or even stagnate as they and their organization start to lag in innovation.

2. Self-service growth and development

• Other organizations may lean heavily on digital platforms and peer networks to support employees in learning more advanced skills, such as leadership, systems thinking, and change agility.
• The intent will be to make opportunities available to self-starters, those identified as high potential, and maybe others who want to take advantage of the learnings.
• The risk to employees and the organization: The development can be uneven. Motivated employees will dive into cutting-edge content, while others may stick to the basics.

3. Intentional growth through cutting-edge leadership development options

• Future-focused organizations may opt to decentralize and democratize leadership development to provide more opportunities to all who show interest.
• As with the just-described model, development will focus on those willing to invest in themselves. In this case, their opportunities could involve:

• • Cohort-based experiences that are available on their own without relying on managers.
  • Cross-functional action-learning projects that encourage multiple perspective-taking.
  • AI-supported coaching to help increase self-awareness, improve emotional intelligence and adopt reflective practices on scale.
  • Communities of practice where employees challenge their assumptions and expand their ability and capacity to deal with more complexity.
  • The intent will be to provide advanced development to the high potential employees plus those eager to grow.
• The risk to employees and the organization: This development also can be uneven. And employees may choose areas that interest them yet don’t necessarily support the organization’s strategic goals.

Yet even when organizations commit to employee development in a distributed model, they may face some additional risks. These include losing some of the valuable benefits available today, especially if organizations don’t track their employee development outcomes. It will be more challenging to match employees to current and anticipated job openings. Some other downsides include:

• Less individualized coaching and feedback

Employees may receive less tailored on-the-job guidance. The lack of frequent, targeted feedback can slow learning and development.

• Greater reliance on peer-to-peer development, which may be irregular and inconsistent

Peers can step into informal coaching, mentoring, and feedback roles. These structured peer-learning methods (buddy systems, communities of practice, cohort-based training) can help replace their managers’ coaching. However, will the quality be commensurate with the efforts and time?

• Technology and systems don’t rise to the challenge

With AI-based tools improving exponentially, AI can supplement what managers can no longer provide one-on-one. But if these tools are not designed or introduced intentionally, they can provide misleading content.

• Potential widening of equity gaps

High-performing, high-potential employees and vocal, visible employees may still get their manager’s limited attention, while quieter or less assertive employees may miss out.  This could exacerbate inequities in development opportunities unless organizations intentionally design fair processes.

There could be  a silver lining. Future-focused organizations that decentralize and democratize leadership development might provide access to cutting-edge growth opportunities. These practices could combine peer-based learning and experiences with AI and minimal oversight from managers, such as:

• Cohort-based experiences that don’t rely on a single manager.
• Cross-functional action-learning projects that build perspective-taking.
• Well-designed AI-supported coaching that scales reflective practices as well as supports development of critical thinking, emotional intelligence, problem solving, and collaboration.
• Communities of practice where employees challenge assumptions and expand mental models.

So what’s going to happen?

No one can predict. However, I’ll bet a nickel that for the next few years firms will pull back from personalized mid-level employee development in favor of basic skill training and scalable self-service digital learning.

Over time, progressive companies will realize that they can benefit by differentiating themselves by offering more customized development opportunities. They’ll reimagine their development offerings, which can be a win/win – increased innovation and higher retention.

Longer term, I hope organizations will figure out how to embed leadership development in the flow of work. For example, imagine learning sprints, safe-to-fail experiments, and after-action reviews. Also self-awareness exercises, guided reflection, and stretch assignments can help individuals develop their “being side” in addition to their “doing side.”

And let’s also wish that organizations return to appreciating the value of employee development at all levels for attracting and keeping talent as well as improving performance.  As I explained recently, adult learning and development needs to be a life-long practice—not just a nice-to-have—because of the speed at which technology, work, and geopolitical conditions are changing.

What’s your take?