Development of High Potential Employees

Introduction The identification, development, and retention of high-potential employees is one of the most important areas of research in industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology. Whereas the vast majority of the workforce will perform in ways that do promote organizational goals, the top performers in any organization are those that provide the firm with its competitive advantage. On the contrary, organizations that do not actively seek to identify, develop, and retain high-potential employees stand to lose a lot as top talent may seek opportunities to maximize potential elsewhere—often a competitor.

Moreover, the high potential employees are those with the greatest potential to lead the firm in the future, paving the way for effective succession training and management. Research on the identification, development, and retention of high-potential employees is burgeoning, but there are significant gaps in the literature. Filling those gaps would help organizations create and implement evidence-based practices to ensure the success of the organization, future-proofing it via succession planning. Moreover, organizational practices have yet to keep up with I-O research on developing and retaining high-potential employees.

Surveys show that current human resources processes “suffer from subjectivity, bias and disagreements,” (Palshikar, Sahu & Srivastava, 2016, p. 208). On the other hand, research has been increasingly pointing to the need for transparent, formalized processes and procedures that identify high-potential employees and openly cultivate those employees via mentoring, special assignments, and other methods (Zhu & Manjarrez, 2017). It is important to know how high-potential employees respond to specific types of incentives, mentoring methods, and formal approaches to employee training and development.

Organizations that apply evidence-based practices to developing and retaining high-potential employees are more likely to receive returns on their investments. Review of Literature Somewhere between 40 and 60 percent of global organizations have formal high potential employee development programs, such as fast-tracking, in place (Dries & DeGieter, 2013).

The reason these programs are being increasingly put into place in spite of their additional costs is that high-potential employees are known to be “twice as valuable to an organization” compared to the average employee, and are “75 percent more likely to succeed in a senior position,” (Downs, 2015, p. 349). The return on investment in high-potential employees is obvious, particularly when leadership stability and future proofing a company are taken into account as strategic advantages.

Some of the most important factors influencing high-potential employees to remain in an organization relate to structural and organizational culture variables including leadership, cohesive organizational purpose, formal development opportunities, the perception of meaningful work, and collegiality in the workplace environment (Letchmiah & Thomas, 2017). Organizational supports play a crucial role in the decisions made by high-potential employees, whether they are formally identified as such or not. Formal identification procedures are more common in organizations than formal employee retention procedures.

To identify high-potential employees, human resources managers may use a variety of methods including performance appraisals, performance reviews, individual development plans or career mapping, and even anecdotal data (Downs, 2015). Among organizations that do have formal high-potential employee development programs, some also have active succession planning with transparent methods of communicating intent. For example, PepsiCo has a formal leadership development center, and admission to the leadership development center is based on performance on various HR metrics (Zhu & Manjarrez, 2017).

Empirical research has been demonstrating the advantages of formal identification and employee training for high-potential personnel. Research has also been increasingly focusing on the organizational culture and formal practices of high-potential employee identification, training, and retention. The most important theme in the literature is related to transparency and communication. Zhu & Manjarrez (2017) found that informally recognized high-potential employees are 19% more likely to actively seek employment elsewhere versus those who have been formally identified and who are being actively and openly cultivated for leadership.

In spite of the potential benefits of transparency in high-potential employee development, many organizations remain committed more to a policy of “strategic ambiguity,” whereby the company retains the power of information, sometimes with the goal of reducing the potential for interpersonal conflicts between group members (Dries & DeGieter, 2013, p. 137). Strategic ambiguity can have some ironic benefits, such as promoting greater flexibility in leadership decisions, and even occasionally increasing employees’ motivation to work harder (Dries & DeGieter, 2013).

However, lowered morale, stress, burnout, and suspicion may erase all potential benefits of strategic ambiguity (Dries & DeGieter, 2013; Zhu & Manjarrez, 2017). On the other hand, work engagement through formal recognition and training programs causes high-potential employees to perform to the high expectations set for themselves, and to which their coworkers and colleagues also expect (Van Zalk, 2016). The goal of high-potential development programs is relational in nature: to encourage employees to envision themselves as having a career trajectory that most certainly depends on the fusion of personal and professional goals.

Strategic ambiguity is surprisingly common practice, in spite of the known benefits of openly cultivating top talent. Dries & DeGeiter (2013) note that only about a third of organizations surveyed disclose information about high potential employee development programs at all, and most organizations that do disclose do so selectively and informally. The informal disclosure of information can create problems for the organization, most notably in that ambiguity can lead to miscommunication, frustration, and ultimately the loss of the high-potential employee.

A number of theoretical frameworks can be used to examine what organizational behaviors and practices work best, including motivation theories, symbolic interactionism, and signaling theories. Theoretical Foundations The primary theoretical foundation for exploring the factors most important to high-potential employees is related to motivation.

Rooted in core psychological motivation theories like that of Maslow, motivation theories can testify to employee-level variables such as perceptions of organizational support, collegial support within the workplace, finding meaning in not just daily work but also the organization’s mission and ethical commitment, and also the perception of higher meaning and purpose in the career trajectory. Extrinsic motivation for employees may also be critical for high-potential personnel retention.

For instance, Miller (2016) found that opening satellite offices in geographically strategic locations helped companies retain top talent interested in maintaining a healthy work-life balance. Motivation is therefore a critical factor in retaining top talent, but does not necessarily account for all of the organizational culture variables at stake in creating cost-effective human resources programs for the identification, development, and retention of high-potential, high-value employees. Symbolic interactionism refers to the ways individuals construct meaning from their interactions and experiences.

When combined with signalling theory and social exchange theory, symbolic interactionism can illustrate some of the top organizational culture variables implicated in best practices for retaining high-potential employees. The “norm of reciprocity,” is also important in the construction of organizational culture variables that help to retain top talent (Van Zalk, 2016, p. 3). The norm of reciprocity refers to the practice of actively demonstrating respect and appreciation for high-potential employees, which leads to increased motivation and company engagement (Van Zalk, 2016, p. 3).

Likewise, Dries & De Dieter (2013) note that employees are formally or informally engaged in the organization through “psychological contracts,” which “express employees’ inferred interpretations of explicit and implicit promises made by their organizations,” (p. 138). Information asymmetry—the underlying principle of strategic ambiguity—essentially serves as a breach of the psychological contract, and an affront to the norm of reciprocity. Therefore, strategic ambiguity works in exactly the opposite way that organizational leaders want.

If the goal is to motivate and retain top talent, then leaders need to disclose their intentions, formally recognizing and training high-potential employees via mentoring and support. Although there are individual differences, as well as differences due to gender and ethnicity, generally all high-potential employees will be motivated by an organizational culture that supports them, and which has clear and definite pathways of professional development.

Obviously, organizations will want to know that their investment in high-potential employees will pay off; few leaders would want to spend money on training and mentoring programs only to find that the participants had jumped ship and transferred their skills to a competitor. Therefore, creating an organizational culture that is responsive, adaptable, and collaborative in nature will help the future leaders feel and act fully engaged, remaining committed to the organization because the organization fulfills its mutual commitment to employees.

Notwithstanding the fact that some high-potential employees may need to leave the organization for any number of personal reasons such as illness, family emergency, or any other dramatic life change, generally the pathways for success remain stable over time due to the fundamental principles of I-O psychology.

Research Questions Based on a review of the literature and theory, the research questions are as follows: Does the process of identifying high-potential employees matter? Should these processes consist of interviews with direct questions or anonymous surveys? Does immediate disclosure of leadership development and other high-potential employee development programs serve the best interests of an organization, based on measurable performance outcomes over time? Once high-potential employees have been identified, what are the main factors that prevent employees from seeking employment outside of the organization.

Alternatively, what are the main features that motivate employees to stay? Are there any situations in which strategic ambiguity is preferable, leading to more harmonious workgroups? To examine these questions systematically, the best approach will entail a qualitative study. A qualitative study can include the perceptions of managers and employees alike, and ideally includes multiple methods of data collection. Interviews and focus groups would both be helpful methods of exploring the interactions between organizational culture variables and employee motivation variables.

Location and Methods The location should ideally be a large metropolitan area, to study the effects of organizational culture and formal HR programs on high-potential employee retention in different companies. The researcher should randomly select.