One approach I have taken is to build development plans around capability rather than simply the next box on an org chart.
In a small company, career growth cannot always mean another title. Sometimes growth means broader scope, deeper expertise, greater visibility or exposure to parts of the business an employee would not normally see. I try to personalize development by asking three questions: What is this person naturally good at? Where do they want to grow? And what does the business need more of?
From there, we look for real experiences that sit at the intersection of those three things.
For one newer employee, we intentionally built development around cross-functional exposure rather than placing them immediately into one narrow lane. They spent time learning different parts of the business, developed relationships across functions, and took ownership of meaningful work that required them to understand how decisions in one area affected another.
That accelerated their understanding of the company far more than a traditional training program alone could have. They were not just learning a role; they were learning how the business works, where value is created, and how to contribute across boundaries.
That experience reinforced something I believe strongly about development in smaller organizations: one of our greatest advantages is access. We can often give employees proximity to leaders, customers, business problems and cross-functional work much earlier than they might receive in a larger organization.
So I do not think of personalized development as choosing a different training course for each employee. I think of it as changing their field of vision.
When people are given the opportunity to see more, own more and understand more of the business, development becomes much more relevant, and growth does not depend solely on promotion.
