PHWP: Abstract Detail: Are “high potential” programs an anachronism?

Focuses on the need to eliminate programs to identify and label employees as “high potential.” The author argues that there is growing debate among HR professionals as to the utility of such programs – and the investment that comes with labeling someone as high potential. She suggests that there are two primary problems with such programs. First, she argues that people have the potential to grow in multiple areas. Yet, growth does not necessarily mean that the person must (or even should) be moving up. Many organizations are becoming flatter, yet “high potential” programs assume that people should be developed and promoted, rather than developed and left in their current position (or developed and moved laterally). Second, more employees are becoming interested in growth and development that may involve lateral moves rather than vertical moves. Many contemporary workers are interested in growth and development even if it does not lead to a promotion. Also, investing in only a small percentage of the workforce focuses only on current needs rather than considering future work and leadership challenges. By investing in only a select few based primarily on the needs and competencies of today, organizations may be missing out on developing workers who can contribute to the needs of tomorrow.

Erickson, T. (2010, February 12). Are “high potential” programs an anachronism? Harvard Business Review [Online]. Retrieved February 14, 2010, from blogs.hbr.org.