In previous articles, I wrote about high potential ratings from both the corporate and academic perspectives.
When a company rates an employee as high potential as part of succession planning, the employee benefits. Those benefits often include invitations to leadership development programs, promotions, visibility and prime project assignments.
Is it ethical?
This raises an interesting ethical question.
Is it ethical to differentiate among people and provide unique opportunities to a select few?
If you want a simple answer to that question, you won’t find it here.
In many ways, the value of processes like succession planning depend on your position and perspective.
An outside perspective on unremarkables
Today, I listened to a podcast that touched on this topic.
On the podcast Good Life Project (episode Reimagining Success dated 7/2/2019), host Jonathon Fields interviewed Scott Galloway who is a professor at NYU Stern School of Business.
They covered a wide range of topics – including the trend away from supporting ‘unremarkables’. They defined unremarkables as people who were not the best or brightest, but who could succeed with the right mentoring and support.
The conversation focused on college – unremarkables getting into college and getting job opportunities. At about 18 minutes into the podcast, they also discussed how unremarkables get overlooked in the corporate world due to the high potential trend.
Fields and Galloway did not provide any solutions. But they raise interesting questions
My perspective
I actually agree with their perspective.
The hipo label targets a small subset of employees. Many capable people could be overlooked. Sometime employees are overlooked for innocent reasons and sometimes due to bias.
From a purely ethical perspective, one could argue that companies should provide development and stretch goals to all employees. And many do provide those opportunities, but not necessarily the same ones to all employees.
What is the right question?
Is asking if hipo designations are ethical even the right question?
Hard to say.
What is the ‘right’ balance of ethics and practicality and commerce and social responsibility?
Other questions are important as well, such as:
- How should the company prepare pipeline of talent for future needs?
- What talent management processes will support company growth?
- What is best for the broader populations of customers, stakeholders and employees?
- How should the company best allocate scarce resources?
- Which employees want career growth and will embrace learning opportunities?
- Who will provide great leadership to their direct reports?
Purpose of Science of Working
At Science of Working, I provide analysis of academic research articles, so they can be applied to real world workplaces. In addition, I write ‘Work Smarter’ tips to help you navigate complex work situations.
Understanding the succession process and hipo ratings can help you manage your career. Knowledge is power.
But there is often a dark side to corporate life.
Personally, I have mixed feelings about many corporate talent management practices. In my 20+ years in the corporate world, I have witnessed and experienced excellent practices and terrible ones.
We can discuss and debate those here as well. Maybe we will find some solutions along the way.
There are no simple answers. But the discussion is important.
