Click here to take survey

Click here to take survey

TPC provides unique leading-edge services founded on solid research. We are the only consultancy that combines expert knowledge of talent management AND talent psychology. One is not effective without the other. TPC provides unique leading-edge services that are truly new and reliable. Great numbers of talent programs across the globe are failing–a huge waste of money and effort. Why? Did you know that nearly all of the talent approaches in use today were designed more than 50 years ago! They were created for an organizational environment that no longer exists. Despite glitzy repackaging and new buzz words, these approaches are obsolete and designed to fail. For example, if you have been told that the Nine Box Grid is a measure of potential you have been fooled. In reality, the Nine Box Grid is a measurement of nothing, and merely a tool for subjectively categorizing employees into boxes. TPC is the pioneering consultancy that offers entirely new and evidence-based ways of identifying and developing talent. And because we really understand talented people we know what it takes to bring them into your organization and help them to thrive and deliver on their potential. We also know from our own research why top-talent employees really leave organizations (the reasons are probably not what you think). We are the only consultancy that combines expert knowledge of talent management AND talent psychology because one cannot be effective without the other. Please contact us today.

Click here to take survey.

Click on the picture to

TAKE THE QUIZ . . .

WHICH OF THESE COMMON DESCRIPTIONS OF

HIGH POTENTIAL EMPLOYEES ARE TRUE?

big-headed         arrogant         know-it-all        elitist            think they’re superior

hyperactive     impatient       impulsive           pushy          controlling       nit-picky

insistent            demanding     pig-headed       narrow-minded           intolerant    uncooperative

overly-opinionated      argumentative           poor team player        unmanageable

no E.I.      can’t communicate          withdrawn       socially inept      clueless       weird

nerd             geek            egghead        crazy ideas      unrealistic            head-in-the-clouds

obsessive      over-thinks everything        self-absorbed      out of step       unaware

temperamental         thin-skinned        neurotic        over-reactive        touchy

troublemaker     too questioning       undercuts authority        maverick

ANSWER: ZERO! All of the labels are faulty automatic assumptions that subtly and seriously undermine any talent program.  Nevertheless, these are the prevailing views of high potential people that continue to be held by most organizations, no matter the country or sector.

Now, ask yourself this question: If a slanted and incorrect view of top talent is the premise upon which talent management is based, are your programs designed to fail? Is there a way to correct these embedded biases and reduce the likelihood of program failure?  Yes, we have the answers you need. For more information about about solutions to these questions, see Why Talent Development Must Be Turned Inside Out. or contact us today

• 89% of managers believe employees leave for more money. But, in fact, the survey found that 88% of employees leave for reasons other than money. ¹ —Leigh Branham,   The 7 Hidden Reasons Employees Leave

• 62% of CEOs say they need to change the way they recruit, motivate, and develop employees.² — PriceWaterhouseCoopers

• Even as companies take significant steps to lower their workforce costs through staffing cuts and other measures, talent shortages remain ³—Towers Wyatt

• Only 4 out of 10 CEOs believe HR is adequately prepared to support change…  CEOs report a 57% lack-of-confidence vote in HR.⁴ — PriceWaterhouseCoopers

• Important studies show that a major reason why newly hired employees struggle and ultimately leave employers is a failure to establish key connections and build strong interpersonal relationships within the company. ⁵ —Saratoga Institute

• The very definition of human capital is that it walks out the door every evening, and exits permanently with an employee who leaves a company. . . You cannot separate a person from his or her knowledge, skills, health, or values the way it is possible to move financial and physical assets while the owner stays put.⁶ —Gary S. Becker, Nobel Prize winning economist Gary S. Becker, who coined the term ‘human capital’

• Nearly 1/3 of newly hired employees do not last a year with the organization. ⁷ — PriceWaterhouseCoopers

• The manager needs to look at the employee not as a problem to be solved but as a person to be understood. ⁸ — Nicholson, Nigel (Jan., 2003).  How to Motivate Your Problem People. Harvard Business Review, pp. 57-65

Sources:

¹ Branham, Leigh (2005).  The 7 Hidden Reasons Employees Leave. AMACOM publishers.

² PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. (2009).  Establishing a Workforce Intelligence Center of Excellence. Retrieved from pwc.com.

³ Towers Wyatt (2010), Balancing Cost and Talent Needs: Tough Solutions for Tough Times. Retrieved from Towers Wyatt.com.

⁴ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. (2009).  Establishing a Workforce Intelligence Center of Excellence. Retrieved from pwc.com.

⁵ Saratoga Institute (2006). Best practices for retaining new employees: New approaches to effective onboarding.

⁶ Becker, Gary S.  (2^nd Edition, 1983).  Human Capital, University of Chicago Press.

⁷ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. (2009).  Establishing a Workforce Intelligence Center of Excellence. Retrieved from pwc.com.

⁸ Ibid.

⁹ Nicholson, Nigel (Jan., 2003).  How to Motivate Your Problem People. Harvard Business Review, pp. 57-65.

According to BlessingWhite’s coaching practice leader Cathy Earley, micromanaging “is a real concern in today’s organization because it goes to the heart of the challenge of how to motivate and empower individuals in order to get the best performance. . . The result is a disengaged worker who puts in time but little else, and the person’s apathy eventually infects colleagues in the workplace.” (see blessingwhite.com).

Why then, would a supervisor engage in micromanaging?  Do managers really believe control tactics are the best way to support HPs so they might successfully deliver on their exceptional abilities?  Are they well-intentioned managers who are stuck in outdated practices and misconceptions?  Do managers who over-control still believe their job is to critique and tell vs. encourage and inquire?  The answer is more likely lurking under the surface.

At Talent Psychology Consulting, Ltd.  we have worked with many organizations that genuinely want to provide talent programs that support HP development, not hinder it. Nevertheless, in most of these organizations success is not a possibility given the prevailing mind set.  Misinformation and stereotypes are the true culprits that undermine talent development instead of unleashing it. [Please see post: "Are Stereotypes Killing Your Talent Program?"]

Left unchecked, bias and distorted thinking cause untold problems whether the company realizes it or not.  In our view, any talent development program that does not address this issue is destined to fail, right from the start.  Unfortunately, most organizations and even TM advisors have no idea what the real problem is, much less how to prevent it or fix it.  Fortunately, we at TPC know the research inside and out, how to design and deliver successful TM programs, and how to create an atmosphere where HPs thrive and contribute in key ways that keep organizations moving into the future and ahead of their competitors.  [Please see post: "It Pays (Literally) to Hire Top Talent"]

To illustrate this point, I have included a summary of a recent book review at Amazon.com. Although I have never before written a negative comment about someone’s published work, I could not stand idly by in the face of a recently published book that flies in the face of what research reveals about high-potential people.  Sadly, this manuscript only reinforces outdated and unsupportable assumptions about HPs—the very thing we at TPC have been working to undo for the past several years.  Included below is a summary of my review on Amazon.com.

Review of Clever: Leading Your Smartest, Most Creative People (R. Goffee & G. Jones):

Virtually NONE of the characterizations and slanderous remarks about high-ability people that are professed in “Clever”are evidence-based or supported in the professional literature.  Biased and extreme opinions never constitute believable claims. To anyone who has actually taken the time to read the research and professional literature on gifted adults, talent psychology, and leadership excellence, it is patently obvious that “Clever” is nothing more than a destructive repackaging of outdated strategies and last century’s thinking. Indeed, if the authors had hurled such unfounded insults at any other group of people they would undoubtedly find themselves facing a lawsuit.  Readers’ heads will ache from being tossed back and forth between two contradictory perspectives.  While the authors repeatedly stress the enormous value of bright, creative people in today’s organizations (one of the few accuracies in the book), they simultaneously pour scorn on them.

As with most forms of prejudice, the writers begin by assigning HPs a derogatory label: “clevers”!  They further belittle them as “recalcitrant”, “needy”, “obsessive”, hostile toward their organizations, “resistant”, “incessant interrogators of those who hope to lead them”, “organizational innocents”, and on and on. If they had bothered to investigate their biased views they would know there is no credible evidence or research to support these insults. In fact, many of the claims are actually opposite the truth.  Furthermore, the authors depict clever people as a tawdry collection of socially inept narcissists: “Communicating with clevers is always a challenge because they are totally absorbed by their own agendas”. Even worse, these top talent people are portrayed as a band of menacing insurgents: “good at gaming“, and inclined to “poison a culture very quickly“. One of the authors’ many ridiculous recommendations even warns organizations to “give clever people resources and space“—not in support of their exceptional creativity, but because it is “the only way to prevent them from using their Machiavellian talents to extract what they need“!

Tragically, the understanding of bright, creative people promised by “Clever” is nowhere to be found. Indeed this book is merely a slapdash money-making scheme comprised of opinions glued together by very bad misinformation. Altogether, its claims and recommendations are a prescription for TM and OD failure. Anyone who works for an organization that accepts these unfounded, backward views should run for the nearest exit and never look back.

Especially at senior leadership levels, for at least the next ten years “companies in industrialized markets will face labor shortages and brain drain of dramatic proportions (Watkins, 2007)”.  Business experts including Jay Conger (2009), confess that even with decades of experience in talent management and leadership development, “this war for talent is like nothing we’ve ever seen before.”

Talent is the driving force of any organization’s success.  It pays (literally) to have top talent people onboard.  The evidence is overwhelming:

• Investing in high-potential employees can contribute to as much as a 15.4% advantage in total shareholder return. (Corporate Leadership Council (2006).

• Relative to executives with average performance, high performers provide an additional $25 million in value to their organizations during their tenure. (Barrick, Day, Lord, & Alexander, 1991).

Furthermore, top talent employees:

• produce as much as 10 times more than the average worker.

• generate most of the innovation and new ideas.

• help others improve their performance and strive for excellence because they serve as mentors, trainers, and role models (Sullivan, 2007).