Almost all organizations believe they must improve high-potential development in the next one to two years, according to Brandon Hall Group’s research study, Developing Your High-Potential Talent.
Employers are in drastic need of more inclusive and collaborative leaders who can drive business results and help develop and retain top talent. It is critical to identify and develop high-potential employees to be future leaders.
However, less than half (44%) formally identify these high-potential employees and are transparent about the high-potential development process and the progress candidates are making.
A majority of organizations opt not to formally identify high-potentials even though most organizations believe formal identification has significant benefits:
Some respondents did see problems with formally identifying high-potential talent, but the percentages are significantly lower.
Whether high-potentials are identified formally or informally, far more organizations use highly subjective factors such as leader nominations and recommendations and performance evaluations rather than assessments, demonstrated capabilities and employees’ stated aspirations and demonstrated levels of engagement.
The research shows that most organizations believe high-potential selection is biased and that the diversity of the talent pipeline is sorely lacking.
How can we make our processes as thorough and objective as possible?
How do we build a talent pipeline that represents the diversity of our workforce and customer base?
Here are three essential strategies to improve identification of High-Potential Talent.
Commit to Increasing the Diversity of the Talent Pipeline
Employers must fully commit to having a pipeline of diverse talent so they have future leaders who can be representative of an increasingly diverse workforce. That is not happening now: almost 60% of organizations say the diversity of their talent pipeline needs improvement or great improvement, and 60% also say their high-potential identification and development processes are biased.
Organizations must stop talking about diversity, equity and inclusion and act. The current and future workforces are the most diverse in history, not only in terms of demographic categories but also in their experience, education and opinions. It’s well-documented that diversity and inclusion drive innovation, which businesses must rely on to survive and thrive in an uncertain future.
However, less than half of organizations (47%) plan to increase the diversity of the leadership pipeline over the next one to two years, according to Brandon Hall group’s latest Leadership Development Benchmarking Study.
Commit to Formally Identifying High-Potentials
Employers must fully commit to having a pipeline of diverse talent so they have future leaders who can be representative of an increasingly diverse workforce. That is not happening now: almost 60% of organizations say the diversity of their talent pipeline needs improvement or great improvement, and 60% also say their high-potential identification and development processes are biased.
How serious can organizations be about developing high-potentials when more than half won’t even go on record identifying them and being transparent about what being a high-potential means and how they will be evaluated?
The majority of employers (62%) identify less than 10% of their workforce as high-potentials. Certainly, they can formally commit to providing opportunities for development that can help these elite prospects realize their potential — for themselves and the organization. Making a formal commitment to high-potentials can positively impact engagement and talent retention, which are two of the top challenges organizations face.
Commit to Deeper Assessment of Potential
Though most organizations concede that managers often exhibit bias in evaluating employees and traditional performance management methods don’t evaluate the full scope of an employee’s value, eight in 10 employers rely on leader recommendations and performance reviews to identify high-potentials who may very well determine the organization’s ability to thrive in the future of work.
While no process is perfect, Brandon Hall Group research shows that using this three-pronged model is a more objective and thorough way of evaluating potential.
How Employers Should Assess Employee Potential
Capability/Ability
Ability includes performance, which demonstrates at least some — but not necessarily all — of a person’s capacity. The employee may have other capabilities that are not apparent in ob performance but might be a great fit for another role. For example, someone may have high emotional intelligence that you have not assessed for or that is not easily demonstrated in the person’s current role.
Aspiration
Aspiration is important because it helps determine whether the person’s interests and objectives aligned with the organization’s needs. Employee’s career ambitions are important to understand, but their aspirations outside of work are also important because they could impact their career goals and their level of engagement.
Engagement
Whether someone is great at their current job or only good or average, engagement is an important indicator of potential. For example, high-potentials must have an appetite to tackle challenges and high-pressure situations, contribute beyond their specific job roles, collaborate well with others, be curious and take the initiatives to change and innovation.
