At CCC we recently completed our annual performance reviews, and it’s gotten me thinking about talent.  More specifically, our high-potential talent and how to keep them around.  Sure, some folks tell me career options are limited in the service world – and there’s ‘healthy’ attrition of individuals who aren’t good fits.  But our top frontline staff, the ones who can just get it done – don’t we want to do everything in our power to keep them?

And the news from one of our sister programs, the Corporate Leadership Council (CLC), isn’t good.  In a recent article in the Harvard Business Review, their study of over 20,000 ‘emerging star’ employees found some startling facts:

• 1 in 3 high-potential employees are disengaged from their job – and are far less productive as a result
• 1 in 4 intends to leave their current company within the next year
• 1 in 5 see a misalignment between what the company wants and their own personal aspirations

Sound scary?  Well, it definitely got my attention.  And it got me thinking about what we can do to swing these statistics back in our favor.

CLC outlines six key mistakes organizations make when developing high-potential employees – and ways organizations have overcome these barriers.  I urge you to give it a read, but one caught my eye in particular –  Mistake 2: Equating Current High Performance with Future Potential.

CLC data found almost 70% of high-performing staff don’t have what it takes to be successful in their next role.  We know who those people are – and we likely promote them all the time, like the stellar problem-solving frontline rep who as a supervisor doesn’t listen to his team.

How do you screen for someone who has high future potential?  CLC has three attributes to look for:

• Ability: Our best talent must have the required knowledge to succeed in more advanced responsibilities.  But, interestingly enough, emotional skills are also mentioned.  Thinking of the supervisor/coach role, emotional attributes (like the ability to have tough conversations) are key – yet few innately do them well.  Many emotional skills need to be honed – and CCC sees members embed supervisor candidates in coaching roles for several months to both identify innate ability and further develop skills.  We need to coach our coaches, not just expect they’ll perform well from day 1.
• Engagement: Our top talent needs to be committed to our organization and put forth maximum effort in their jobs.  As Jacob mentions in his recent post, there are several ways to drive engagement.  I want to add the need to measure it – and it’s not enough to simply ask about job satisfaction.  Instead, ask them about their intent to leave and what will cause them to switch to another company.  Their answers may surprise you.
• Aspiration: Finally, tomorrow’s leaders must actually aspire to their new role.  The supervisor who doesn’t like to coach and doesn’t care about recognition or advancement?  Probably not a good fit.  Melissa has talked about screening for coaching reluctance in a past post, and I agree –we can just ask high-performers about their goals.  But we also have to find ways to see them in action to make sure no one is gaming the system – and that’s were coaching mentor programs fit in

Many of us just consider our highest performers to be our top talent, but these three attributes teach us that these two pools don’t have 100% overlap.  First step, let’s start measuring these three attribute to see who within the organization has all three.

So, what are your big takeaways from the article?  How are you thinking about retaining your top talent?

CCC Members, check out our Engagement Portal – including an Engagement Pulse Survey for your frontline staff.

Related posts:

1. Will Applicant X be a Good Coach? Just ask her.
2. Can Staff Retention Be Bought?
3. Coaching – Be Careful What You Assume
4. Good Role Plays Are Hard to Find
5. Frontline Reps: The Next Great Innovators?