Names Titles Time in Present Positions

К оглавлению
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 
68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 
102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 
119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 
136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 
153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 
170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 
187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 
204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 

an individual potential assessment form, perhaps like the one shown in Exhibit

9-9.

An alternative is to conduct critical incident interviews with organizational

strategists. This approach is based on critical incident analysis, which has been

used in training needs assessment. Critical incidents were first identified for

pilots during World War II. They were asked what situations (incidents), if

ignored, might lead to serious (critical) consequences.

If this approach is used, individual interviews should be conducted with

strategists with a structured interview guide like the one shown in Exhibit 9-8.

The results should then be analyzed and become the basis for establishing

success factors. These, in turn, can be used in assessing individual potential

and, when appropriate, identifying developmental opportunities.

Three Approaches to Individual Potential Assessment

There are three basic approaches to assessing individual potential. Each is

based on a different philosophy. They are worth reviewing.

Exhibit 9-8. A Worksheet to Identify Success Factors

Directions: Use this worksheet to identify success factors. A ‘‘success factor’’ is a

past experience or personal characteristic linked to, and correlated with, successful

advancement in the organization. Identify success factors by asking individuals who

have already achieved success—such as key position incumbents—about their most

important developmental experiences and about what they did (or skills they demonstrated)

in the midst of those experiences.

Pose the following questions to key position incumbents. Then compile and compare

the results. Ask other key position incumbents in the organization to review the results.

1. What is the single most difficult experience you encountered in your career?

(Describe the situation below.)

2. What did you do in the experience you described in response to question 1?

(Describe, as precisely as you can, what actions you took—and what results you

achieved as a result.)

3. Reflect on your answer to question 2. What personal characteristics do you feel

you exhibited or demonstrated in the action(s) you took? How do you feel they

contributed to your present success?

Leader-Driven Individual Potential Assessment

The first approach might be called leader-driven. It is the traditional approach

that was probably first used in business. Individual potential is assessed by the

organization’s strategists—and often solely by key position incumbents for

their own subordinates in their immediate areas of responsibility.

The process may be a formal one, in which the organization has established

forms for this purpose that are completed periodically on all employees

or on a select group of employees (such as those designated as high potentials).

Alternatively, the process may be informal: Each function or organiza-

Exhibit 9-9. An Individual Potential Assessment Form

Directions: Individual potential may be assessed through many different approaches.

One approach is to ask their immediate organizational superiors to rate

employees—particularly those felt to be high-potentials—against various success

factors, skills, competencies, values, or abilities that are felt to be correlated with

future success at a higher level of responsibility.

Ask key job incumbents to rate their subordinates on each of the following generic

success factors. (It is better to use success factors specific to the unique organizational

culture.) A separate form should be completed on each high-potential. The

completed forms may then be used as one source of information about individual

strengths/weaknesses.

Ask the raters to place an x in the appropriate spot in the right column below the

scale and opposite the success factor listed in the left column. Then ask raters to

send their completed forms to the HR Department or to the organization’s Succession

Planning Coordinator. There are no ‘‘right’’ or ‘‘wrong’’ answers in any absolute

sense. However, raters may vary in their potential assessments, depending on how

they interpret the success factors and the rating scale.

Scale

Success Factors

(or competencies Needs Exceeds

needed at a Improvement Adequate Requirements

targeted level) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Appraising

Budgeting

Communicating

Controlling

Dealing with Change

Developing Employees

Influencing Others

Making Changes

Making Decisions

Managing Projects

Effectively

Organizing

Planning

Representing the

Organization

Effectively

Staffing the Unit/

Department

tional unit is asked to submit names of individuals who have advancement

potential.

This approach is characterized by secrecy. Employees have little or no say

in the process; indeed, they are not always aware that it is being carried out.

No effort is made to double-check individual potential assessment results with

individual career aspirations or plans to ensure that an appropriate match exists.

An advantage of this approach is that it can be done quickly. Leaders

simply fill out forms and return them to the human resources department, the

SP&M coordinator, or a designated executive. Employees do not challenge the

results because they are unaware of what they are. The organization thus retains

strong control over SP&M and its results.

A disadvantage of this approach, however, is that employees have no stake

in outcomes they did not help to shape. If the results are ever used in making

succession decisions, employees may refuse promotions or transfers that conflict

with their perceptions of their own desired work-life balance or their own

career goals.