High-Potential Programs
Finding the future leaders the informal system was overlooking.
A multinational was running a well-regarded HiPo program. On paper it was rigorous. In practice, the list of nominees looked a lot like the list of people who worked closely with the executives who nominated them.
The situation
A HiPo program that was internally credible and quietly homogeneous. The talent pipeline reflected who leaders spent time with — not who was ready to grow.
The question we set out to answer
“If we assessed capability directly, would the list of high-potentials look the same as the list nominated by their bosses?”
How the work was done
- 01
Opened HiPo assessment to a broader nomination pool — including self-nomination.
- 02
Applied Penta Personality and the Leadership Assessment to every candidate on the same standard.
- 03
Compared the assessment-derived HiPo list to the traditional one.
- 04
Ran a joint calibration with executives to reconcile the two views honestly.
What changed
Roughly a third of the final HiPo list changed. The people who moved onto it had been there all along — the process had missed them.
-
HiPo pool became more representative of the actual talent base.
-
Two of the newly identified HiPos were promoted within 18 months.
-
Executive nominators reported the calibration conversation had changed how they scouted talent day-to-day.
The principle behind the case
“The most common failure mode of a high-potential program is not being unfair. It is being blind — and calling that objective.”