2017 SHRM Vermont Human Resources State Conference Using the “9 box” Performance and Potential Matrix to Assess Talent Dan McCarthy, Director Executive Development Programs The University of New Hampshire Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 1
My background: • Leadership Development, OD and HR for RG&E, Kodak, Paychex • The University of New Hampshire: Exec Ed • Leadership writer, executive coach, consultant • 30 years of management experience (and stupid mistakes) • My “9 - box” experience: Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 2
Succession Planning: The “Perfect Storm” • Low unemployment + • Retiring “boomers” + • Training cutbacks from 2008 downturn + • Exciting plans for growth + • = “thin benches” !! • Gen X/Y expectations for development Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 3
The “Ostrich” approach • Ignore it and hope for the best • We’ll cross that bridge when we get to it • We have more urgent fires to deal with Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 4
Facing Reality: the Proactive Approach • Forecast your leadership needs – Growth, retirements, attrition, etc… • Identify a “pool” of potential candidates 2-3X greater than the projected need • Start getting them ready now Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 5
Leadership Talent: Make or Buy? • Advantages of buying talent? • Disadvantages of buying talent? • Advantages of developing your own talent? • Disadvantages of developing your own? Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 6
Who are your Rising Stars? Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 7
Questions: • Could you and your CEO identify your potential senior leaders? • How confident would you be in the accuracy? Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 8
Why “Talent Reviews” • Multiple perspectives = more accurate assessment • Low cost assessment methodology • Shared ownership and teamwork • More likely to uncover hidden talent • Calibration of “performance” and “potential” • Better development plans Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 9
The “9 - box”: L EADERSHIP A SSESSMENT Below Average Average/good Outstanding PERFORMANCE 1C 1A 1B High 2C 2B 2A Too new to rate: POTENTIAL ____________________________________ Moderate 3C 3B 3A Limited Performance = results and leadership capability over the last year; use leadership competency model Potential = promotable to a significantly larger leadership role; use potential attributes, consider aspirations, relocatibility, tenure Include “readiness” indicator for each person: H = ready now; M = 1-2 years; L = >2 years Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 10
L EADERSHIP A SSESSMENT Below Average Average/good Outstanding PERFORMANCE 1C 1A 1B High 2C 2B 2A Too new to rate: POTENTIAL ____________________________________ Moderate 3B 3A 3C Limited Performance = results and leadership capability over the last year; use leadership competency model Potential = promotable to a significantly larger leadership role; use potential attributes, consider aspirations, relocatibility, tenure Include “readiness” indicator for each person: H = ready now; M = 1-2 years; L = >2 years Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 11
The Performance and Potential Matrix • Widely used and considered a “best practice” • Simple, cost-effective, and effective L EADERSHIP A SSESSMENT • More accurate than one opinion Below Average Average/good Outstanding PERFORMANCE 1C 1B 1A High • Considers performance and potential 2C 2B 2A Too new to rate: POTENTIAL • A catalyst for robust dialog ____________________________________ Moderate 3B 3A 3C • Helps define what’s important Limited Performance = results and leadership capability over the last year; use leadership competency model Potential = promotable to a significantly larger leadership role; use potential attributes, consider aspirations, relocatibility, tenure Include “readiness” indicator for each person: H = ready now; M = 1-2 years; L = >2 years • Allows for a relative assessment • Facilitates teamwork and shared ownership • A diagnostic tool for development Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 12
Assessing Talent: Performance vs. Potential Performance: • The past • Measurable results and viable behaviors (what and how) Potential: • The future • Very hard to measure and assess! • Success in one role does not guarantee success in another Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 13
How to use it • Pre-meeting • Data collection and consolidation • Initial meeting: 2-4 hours • Facilitation • Start with your poster child (1A) • Move to your problem child (3C) • Discuss development needs and actions • Follow-up Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 14
Key Decisions • Who to assess? • Who to invite? • Identification of high potential, poor performers, or both? • Forced distribution? • Degree of transparency? Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 15
Key Decision: Forced distribution? Or not? Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 16
Meeting Dynamics Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 17
Talent Review Group Dynamics Challenges: How to Handle? • Lack of trust • Silence • Unequal participation • Power • Lack of understanding/confidence in the process • Impatience • Too much focus on process • Others? Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 18
Let’s Give it a Try! L EADERSHIP A SSESSMENT Below Average Average/good Outstanding PERFORMANCE 1C 1A 1B High 2C 2B 2A Too new to rate: POTENTIAL ____________________________________ Moderate 3B 3A 3C Limited Performance = results and leadership capability over the last year; use leadership competency model Potential = promotable to a significantly larger leadership role; use potential attributes, consider aspirations, relocatibility, tenure Include “readiness” indicator for each person: H = ready now; M = 1-2 years; L = >2 years Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 19
Research from the Center for Creative Leadership Challenging Assignments 48 % 17% Other 18% Events Significant 17% Other People Hardships Executive Development Programs – Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics 20
Recommend
More recommend
