Capstone Project Sample

Overcoming Bias and Amplifying Hidden Talent: Best Practices in Identifying High-Potential Senior Leaders capable of Driving Unprecedented Organizational Performance

Author’s Note

I would like to take a moment to thank my advisor Clay Spinuzzi for his incredibly effective teaching style, his undying patience and willingness to keep me between the ditches. Art Markman as my second reader added incredible value. Clay’s expertise in persuasion and argumentation combined with Art’s prowess in cognitive psychology, psychometric assessments and the essential attributes of an effective leader constituted a dream team for my capstone.

I came to HDO to transform myself, and by extension my firm. The leadership at HDO, my professors and cohort mates exceeded my expectations. When I heard “a multidisciplinary approach to leading organizations”, I had no idea what that meant. Now I do. Elizabeth Richmond-Garza taught me how to appreciate diversity in corporate culture through literature and art. Becca North taught us how to look for talent more effectively and how to reframe failure as a means to innovation. Jeremi Suri taught us to think historically, to learn from the triumphs and defeats of past leaders and civilizations.

John Traphagan, with whom I disagreed on everything, taught me more about qualitative research in organizations than I ever imagined. Mary Rose taught us the finer points of quantitative research and Dan Bonevac taught us how ethical leadership can be a powerful competitive advantage. Art Markman taught us more than I can describe about organizational change and inertia, and Casey Boyle shared his groundbreaking work about accessibility, team building, idea creation and corporate storytelling. Zach Elkins helped us understand how structures of organizations can affect literally everything. To wrap things up, Polly Strong taught us more about corporate culture in one class than most get from an entire business school curriculum.

To my wife, Liz, who was reasonably certain I’d lost my mind when I signed up for HDO and had her suspicions confirmed when she found out I’d applied to five different doctoral programs. Thank you for your incredible patience as I essentially put our personal lives on hold for a year.

To my fabulous colleagues at Allen Austin, who supported me unconditionally while I took off every other Friday to run off to Austin—I am truly grateful for your unwavering support. My grown daughters Staci and Demi were terrifically supportive and only questioned my sanity a couple of times.

The Problem/Opportunity

My hypothesis is that high potential senior leaders (HPSLs), those who have the potential to lead effectively from the C-Suite, are often overlooked because they don’t fit an unnecessarily restrictive mold, are not self-promoters, and are not adequately exposed to leadership development opportunities. My research question is: What are the best practices in identifying high potential senior leaders?

Gartner, one of the world’s largest human capital consulting firms, reports that only 3% of organizations have an effective method for identifying high potential senior leaders (HPSLs). Other major consulting firms say essentially the same thing. Accenture says the costs of not being able to effectively identify HPSLs exceeds $10 trillion annually, or 11.3% of global GDP.

Over the past two years, I’ve explored this question with over 100 CEOs, board members, and CHROs. The consensus is clear: this is a critical issue with no definitive solution. Though this is an immediate and painful problem, there is no “aspirin” for it. The problem is also a tremendous opportunity. My research indicates that conscious and unconscious bias, combined with inadequate systems to mitigate them, are largely to blame. We are amid a leadership crisis the likes of which the world has never known, which exacerbates the problem. The problem of bias, and its corresponding opportunity is so complex, there is no simple solution, and no established set of best practices on which to rely. My capstone project aims to fill that gap.

Don Gates: A Leader Who Repeatedly Delivered Unprecedented Performance

I include the story of Don Gates because, in today’s business environment, he probably would have been overlooked. Gates didn’t check any of the boxes you’d typically find on most executive position descriptions. He didn’t have what some call “executive presence,” nor did he have a meteoric career trajectory. The only reason he was promoted from produce department manager—a position he had occupied for ten years—to store manager was that his produce merchandiser recognized his exceptional leadership and brought it to the attention of the Southern California division president. Intrigued, the president decided to engage in what he called an “interesting experiment.”

Once Gates was placed in a position where he could have a broader impact, his career took off like a rocket. He managed three stores so well that his district manager, who had worked with him for eight years, said, “Let’s give Don a district. He’s so good, I wish I could clone him.” Gates was given responsibility for a district that included South Central Los Angeles—a problem area that no one seemed able to lead. In 18 months, he had the best-looking and best-performing stores in the division and was subsequently promoted to director of retail operations in Houston. There, he faced another difficult assignment: growing a division from scratch. Under his leadership, the Houston Division expanded from 3 stores to 90 and captured 25% of the greater Houston market—a market share lead never before held by any one supermarket group.

Gates didn’t have a college degree, and he spent ten years as a produce department manager—not exactly someone you’d find in central casting for an executive role. What he did have were exceptional leadership qualities. He was an outlier who became one of the most effective division presidents in the history of Safeway Stores, Inc. Gates set records as president of five divisions and produced more senior leaders than any other senior executive in Safeway’s history.

My first jobs in retail, including those at Safeway, gave me firsthand experience with various management styles and taught me valuable lessons about what worked and what didn’t. It was during my first year at Safeway that I encountered Don Gates, who taught me more about leadership than anyone I worked for in subsequent years.

Gates was a fiery, passionate leader who combined good management with outstanding leadership, producing spectacular results. In 1978, when Gates was promoted to division president in Butte, Montana, he transformed a struggling division into a profitable one for the first time in its history. He repeated his successes in the Kansas City, Southern California, Eastern, and Phoenix divisions, setting records for same-store sales and profits.

Gates’ leadership style epitomized “total performance leadership.” He wasn’t just about strategy or operations—he was deeply involved in all critical aspects of the business. He inspired trust, connected with the workforce, and ensured everyone understood the mission. Gates wasn’t a micromanager, but he was fully aware of the business’s inner workings. He encouraged his teams to stretch and achieve, holding everyone accountable for their performance and behavior.

What set Gates apart was his ability to cope with ambiguity, focus on the end objective, and provide clear direction. He knew his strengths and weaknesses, delegated effectively, and wasn’t afraid to admit mistakes. Gates was a storyteller, using anecdotes and metaphors to teach and inspire. He was confident yet humble, constantly in touch with his organization, and treated everyone with dignity and respect.

Don Gates exemplified the traits of a high-performance leader—decisive, communicative, and mindful of his employees and customers. His leadership style was one of empowerment, not fear, and he left a lasting impact on many aspiring leaders, including myself. Gates set a standard for leadership that has guided my own career and my assessments of others’ leadership.

I will always be grateful for the opportunity to learn from such a powerful leader early in my career. Don Gates’ legacy is a testament to the idea that true leadership isn’t about fitting a mold—it’s about character, integrity, and the ability to inspire others to achieve great things.

The Importance of Overcoming Bias and Looking Beyond the Obvious for High-Potential Senior Leaders

In today’s complex business environment, identifying high-potential senior leaders is crucial for sustaining competitive advantage and fostering innovation. However, many organizations struggle with this process due to pervasive biases that often cloud judgment and lead to overlooking capable leaders who do not fit traditional molds. Overcoming these biases and looking beyond the obvious is not just a matter of fairness; it’s a strategic imperative for identifying the leaders who will drive future success.

Understanding and Addressing Bias

Substantially all human capital-related consulting firms, including retained search firms like Korn Ferry, human capital firms like Mercer, management consulting firms like McKinsey & Company, and major change firms like Accenture, have, in one form or another, jumped on the high-potential talent identification bandwagon. While each of these firms brings us one step closer to solving the problem, they all fall short of addressing its root causes—primarily the ten forms of bias that can impede accurate identification of high-potential leaders. These biases include affinity, confirmation, gender, racial, age, halo effect, cultural, visual, status quo, and visibility biases.

Adam Grant, an organizational psychologist at Wharton, has highlighted how unconscious biases, such as affinity and confirmation bias, often lead to a preference for candidates who are similar to the decision-makers in terms of background, personality, and even appearance. This phenomenon can result in homogenous leadership teams that lack diversity of thought—a critical component for innovation and effective problem-solving. Grant’s work emphasizes the importance of structured and objective assessment processes to mitigate these biases.

Similarly, Harvard Business School professors Francesca Gino and Max Bazerman have extensively studied the role of biases in decision-making. Their research shows that even well-intentioned leaders are susceptible to biases like confirmation bias, where they favor information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs while disregarding evidence to the contrary. This can lead to the exclusion of leaders who may not have followed a conventional career path but possess the skills and attributes necessary for success at the senior level.

The Case for Diverse Leadership Profiles

Despite the efforts of major consulting firms, the root causes of bias in leadership identification remain largely unaddressed. In his book Rebel Talent, Francesca Gino argues that leaders who defy traditional norms—whether by temperament, background, or career trajectory—often bring unique perspectives that can be invaluable in today’s rapidly changing business environment. These “rebel” leaders challenge the status quo, drive innovation, and help organizations adapt to new challenges. However, their potential is frequently overlooked because they do not conform to the traditional profile of a senior leader.

Adam Grant echoes this sentiment in Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World, where he discusses how unconventional thinkers often face resistance within their organizations, despite their potential to lead transformative change. Recognizing and nurturing such talent requires leaders to look beyond traditional indicators of potential, such as educational pedigree or “executive presence,” and instead focus on qualities like resilience, creativity, and emotional intelligence.

Leveraging Data and Technology

Another way to overcome bias is by using data and technology. In The Rise of HR, a book edited by Dave Ulrich, William A. Schiemann, and Libby Sartain, the authors advocate for leveraging analytics to support more objective talent identification processes. By analyzing patterns of success across a broad range of leaders, organizations can identify attributes that correlate with high performance, rather than relying on subjective assessments that may be influenced by bias.

This approach can help address biases such as the halo effect, where an individual’s performance in one area disproportionately influences perceptions of their overall potential, and visibility bias, where more visible employees are favored for promotion regardless of their true capabilities.

Looking Beyond the Obvious

To identify high-potential leaders effectively, organizations must actively seek out and develop individuals who may not fit the typical executive profile. In his book The Leadership Pipeline, Ram Charan emphasizes the importance of looking beyond conventional career paths when identifying future leaders. He argues that organizations should focus on identifying and developing potential early, rather than waiting for employees to reach certain milestones or titles.

Furthermore, Susan Cain’s work in Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking sheds light on the value that introverted leaders can bring to organizations. Cain argues that introverts are often overlooked for leadership positions because they do not fit the extroverted ideal that many organizations unconsciously favor. Yet, introverted leaders are often deeply thoughtful, excellent listeners, and can create environments where their teams feel empowered to contribute their best ideas.

Overcoming bias and looking beyond the obvious when identifying high-potential senior leaders is essential for building leadership teams that are not only diverse in thought but also equipped to navigate the complexities of the modern business world. While many human capital consulting firms have made strides in this area, they often fall short by not addressing the underlying biases that hinder effective identification. By adopting a more inclusive and objective approach to talent identification, organizations can ensure they are recognizing and cultivating leaders who will drive exceptional performance and sustain long-term success.

How Many High Potential Employees Fall Through the Cracks?

It has been my experience that exceptional high potential employees often fall through the cracks. Two cases in point: In 1988 and 1989, while running a 516-store convenience division for NCS, then the third largest C-Store operator in the world, I promoted two people to senior level positions. One went on to become an extraordinarily effective SVP of Stores, the other the most effective and successful division president in the company’s 36-year history. These two individuals made the company tens of millions of incremental profit dollars, and here’s the punch line: Both people had been, and would have continued to be overlooked for three reasons:

They didn’t fit the NCS “corporate mold”, they were not self-promoters, and there was no mechanism that enabled them to self-select into a leadership development plan.

The Corporate Mold

The corporate world has long been plagued by an unspoken set of criteria that extends far beyond qualifications, experience, or potential. These criteria often show up in the form of a rigid corporate mold, dictating not only how leaders should behave but also how they should look, dress, and present themselves. This mold can include everything from wearing a particular brand of suit, such as a tailored Armani or Oxxford, to sporting Hermes ties, donning wingtip shoes, or adhering to specific hairstyles. While these outward symbols may project an image of professionalism and authority, they are ultimately superficial markers that have little to do with a person’s ability to lead effectively.

The absurdity of these corporate molds lies in the false sense of security they provide for those who adhere to them. There’s an implicit belief that wearing the “right” suit or tie will somehow translate into better decision-making, superior leadership, or enhanced credibility. However, the reality is that these external trappings often serve as nothing more than a veneer, masking the true qualities that make a leader exceptional, such as integrity, empathy, creativity, and strategic thinking. By focusing on these superficial characteristics, organizations risk overlooking individuals who may not fit the stereotypical executive image but possess the qualities necessary to drive real change and innovation.

Moreover, the tacit approval of such molds perpetuates a narrow and exclusionary view of leadership, one that favors conformity over diversity of thought and experience. This emphasis on appearance can discourage potential leaders from diverse backgrounds—who may not have the means or inclination to conform to these arbitrary standards—from pursuing leadership roles. It also reinforces a culture of sameness, where individuals feel pressured to fit into a predetermined image rather than bringing their authentic selves to the table. In doing so, companies not only limit the pool of talent they can draw from but also stifle the creativity and innovation that come from diverse perspectives.

Consider the impact of these molds on leadership development programs. When organizations unconsciously prioritize appearance over substance, they may miss out on nurturing leaders who could bring fresh ideas and approaches. A talented engineer or creative marketer who doesn’t own a tailored suit or prefers a more casual hairstyle might be passed over for promotion, not because of their lack of ability but because they don’t “look the part.” This narrow focus can lead to a homogenous leadership team that is ill-equipped to navigate the complexities of a diverse and rapidly changing global market.

The fixation on corporate molds also raises questions about what it truly means to be an effective leader. Should leadership be judged by the brand of a suit or the polish of wingtip shoes, or should it be measured by one’s ability to inspire, to make tough decisions, and to lead with vision and integrity? The best leaders throughout history have often been those who defy convention, who are willing to challenge the status quo and bring a unique perspective to the challenges they face. By clinging to outdated notions of what a leader should look like, organizations risk missing out on the very people who could lead them into the future.

In a world that is increasingly valuing authenticity and diversity, it’s time to question the validity of these corporate molds. True leadership is not about fitting into a narrow, preconceived image; it’s about harnessing the strengths and talents of individuals, regardless of their appearance. By moving beyond these superficial standards, companies can cultivate a more inclusive, innovative, and dynamic leadership culture—one that values substance over style and is better equipped to meet the challenges of the modern business landscape.

The Self- Promoter

The corporate landscape is littered with stories of leaders who have risen to prominence through sheer force of personality, charisma, and self-promotion, only to later implode, leaving behind a trail of destruction in their wake. These leaders, often narcissists, excel at promoting themselves and their supposed accomplishments, but their leadership style is typically more about self-aggrandizement than true organizational stewardship. The allure of these individuals lies in their apparent confidence and decisiveness, qualities that can captivate boards and shareholders eager for quick results. However, the long-term consequences of elevating such leaders can be disastrous, as the cases of Bob Nardelli, Lee Iacocca, and “Chainsaw” Al Dunlap vividly illustrate.

Bob Nardelli’s tenure as CEO of Home Depot is a prime example of the dangers of placing a self-promoter at the helm. Hired in 2000 after a successful stint at General Electric, Nardelli was seen as a decisive leader who could replicate GE’s efficiency-focused success at Home Depot. He aggressively pursued cost-cutting measures and centralized decision-making, which initially boosted the company’s profits. However, Nardelli’s abrasive leadership style, obsession with metrics, and disregard for Home Depot’s customer-centric culture began to erode employee morale and customer satisfaction. His focus on short-term financial gains over the company’s long-term health led to his ouster in 2007, leaving Home Depot in need of a costly turnaround.

Similarly, Lee Iacocca’s rise to fame as the savior of Chrysler in the 1980s masked the deeper flaws in his leadership style. While Iacocca’s ability to secure government loans and revitalize the company earned him widespread acclaim, his later years at Chrysler revealed a more troubling side. Iacocca became increasingly enamored with his public persona, cultivating a cult of personality that prioritized his personal brand over the company’s well-being. His autocratic leadership style stifled dissent and discouraged innovation, contributing to Chrysler’s stagnation in the 1990s. By the time Iacocca left the company, his legacy was tarnished by a series of poor decisions that ultimately led to Chrysler’s decline.

Perhaps the most infamous example of a self-promoter who wreaked havoc on an organization is Al Dunlap, known as “Chainsaw Al” for his ruthless cost-cutting strategies. Dunlap’s reputation as a turnaround specialist was built on his ability to slash jobs and close plants, which temporarily boosted the stock prices of companies he led, such as Scott Paper and Sunbeam. However, Dunlap’s approach was less about sustainable leadership and more about creating the illusion of success to inflate his own reputation. At Sunbeam, his aggressive tactics resulted in accounting scandals, legal troubles, and the eventual bankruptcy of the company. Dunlap’s tenure at Sunbeam serves as a cautionary tale of how a charismatic but narcissistic leader can drive a company to the brink of collapse.

These examples underscore the folly of falling prey to self-promoters who often rise through the ranks by virtue of their charisma and self-confidence, rather than their genuine leadership abilities. Narcissistic leaders are skilled at creating a narrative that centers on their own importance, often taking credit for successes that belong to the team and deflecting blame when things go wrong. Their focus on self-promotion can lead to short-term gains but often comes at the expense of long-term organizational health.

Moreover, narcissistic leaders can create toxic work environments characterized by fear, mistrust, and a lack of collaboration. Their need for constant admiration and control can stifle innovation and drive away talented employees who feel undervalued or oppressed. In the end, these leaders often leave organizations worse off than they found them, having prioritized their own ambitions over the needs of the company.

The lesson here is clear: while self-promoters may shine brightly in the short term, their leadership often lacks the substance and integrity needed for sustainable success. Organizations must be wary of elevating individuals who are more focused on their own image than on the health and success of the company. Instead, companies should seek out leaders who demonstrate humility, empathy, and a genuine commitment to the organization’s mission—qualities that lead to enduring success rather than a fleeting moment in the spotlight.

Enabling Mechanisms That Encourage Hidden Leaders to Begin Their Leadership Journey

Identifying and nurturing hidden leaders within an organization requires more than just an eye for talent—it demands the creation of enabling mechanisms that actively encourage individuals to step into leadership roles. These mechanisms can take many forms, from structured programs to simple but impactful gestures from senior leaders. The key is to create an environment where potential leaders feel empowered and supported to embark on their leadership journey, regardless of their current position or visibility within the organization.

One compelling example comes from an engineering firm whose CEO has made it a personal mission to connect with every new hire. This CEO addresses each new hire class personally, welcoming them to the team and, more importantly, making them aware of the various leadership opportunities available within the firm. By doing so, the CEO not only sets a tone of inclusivity and openness but also plants the seed of leadership ambition in every new employee. This practice sends a clear message that leadership is not reserved for a select few but is an open path for anyone willing to pursue it. The impact of this simple, yet powerful, gesture is profound—it fosters a culture where leadership potential is recognized early and where employees feel encouraged to aspire to leadership roles from the moment they join the company.

Similarly, a retailing CEO has implemented a practice that democratizes access to leadership development across the entire company. This CEO addresses each new hire class, laying out the leadership training opportunities available to anyone in the company, provided they are willing to attend classes on their own time. This approach is particularly effective in the retail sector, where many employees may not have formal educational backgrounds or prior leadership experience. By offering these opportunities to all employees, regardless of their starting position, the CEO ensures that leadership development is accessible to everyone who is motivated to grow. This not only uncovers hidden talent but also promotes a culture of continuous learning and development.

Another example comes from a global technology company that has established a “Leadership Shadowing Program.” This initiative allows employees at any level to spend a day shadowing senior leaders within the company. The program is designed to give participants firsthand exposure to leadership challenges and decision-making processes. More importantly, it helps demystify the path to leadership by showing employees that leaders are not infallible and that leadership skills can be learned and honed over time. By providing this kind of access, the company breaks down barriers between senior leaders and potential future leaders, encouraging employees to see themselves in leadership roles and to pursue those opportunities with greater confidence.

In the healthcare industry, a large hospital system has introduced a “Leadership Rounds” program, where senior executives regularly visit different departments to engage directly with front-line staff. During these rounds, executives not only listen to the concerns and ideas of staff but also identify individuals who demonstrate leadership qualities, such as problem-solving abilities, initiative, and the respect of their peers. These informal interactions often lead to the nomination of employees for leadership development programs, providing a pathway for those who may not have previously considered themselves as potential leaders. This program is particularly effective in a high-stakes environment like healthcare, where leadership at all levels is critical to patient outcomes and organizational success.

One financial services firm implemented a “Leadership Acceleration Program” that is open to all employees, regardless of their role or tenure. This program offers a series of workshops, mentorship opportunities, and project-based learning experiences designed to equip participants with the skills needed for leadership positions. What sets this program apart is its focus on inclusivity—employees from all departments and levels are encouraged to apply, and the selection criteria emphasize potential over past performance. By focusing on potential, the firm uncovers hidden leaders who might otherwise have been overlooked and provides them with the tools and support they need to succeed in leadership roles.

These examples illustrate how enabling mechanisms can play a crucial role in uncovering and nurturing hidden leaders within an organization. Whether through personal engagement from the CEO, democratized access to leadership training, shadowing programs, leadership rounds, or inclusive development programs, these initiatives share a common goal: to create an environment where leadership potential is recognized and cultivated at all levels. By fostering such an environment, organizations not only unlock the potential of their employees but also build a pipeline of capable leaders who are ready to guide the company toward future success.

Existing Solutions  

Substantially all human capital related consulting firms, including retained search firms like Korn Ferry, human capital firms like Mercer, management consulting firms like McKinsey & Company, and major change firms like Accenture, have, in one form or another, jumped on the high potential talent identification band wagon. While each of these firms bring us one step closer to a solution to the problem, they all fall short of addressing the root causes of the problem, including 10 forms of bias: affinity, confirmation, gender, racial, age, halo effect, cultural, visual, status quo and visibility.

The Solution

I have spent most of my life as a student, researcher, consultant, teacher, coach and practitioner of exceptional leadership and peak performance cultures. In June 2023, I began a master’s degree in human dimensions of organizations (HDO) at The University of Texas at Austin. HDO is the only program of its kind in the nation, taking an interdisciplinary approach to driving organizational performance. I will present my results of capstone study on November 22, 2024, the objective of which will be to help organizations of all types effectively identify HPSLs.

My capstone, “Best Practices in Identifying High Potential Senior Leaders,” addresses a critical gap, which has been acknowledged by substantially all of the  top consulting firms: only 3% of organizations have effective methods for identifying HPSLs. This inadequacy costs the global economy over $10 trillion annually. My research, grounded in my extensive experience and the interdisciplinary Human Dimensions of Organizations program at UT Austin, seeks to develop practical solutions. Through a mixed-methods approach, including a thorough literature review, Likert scale surveys, and 1 on 1 interviews, I aim to uncover effective identification practices that mitigate biases, ultimately enhancing organizational performance, employee engagement and talent management. The final report will offer actionable recommendations for organizations across all capital structures and industry sectors.

The Value Proposition

For boards, CEOs and senior officers who recognize the need for an entirely new approach to identifying high potential senior leaders, the product of this exhaustive study will comprise the most current thought leadership and best practices the subject. Unlike current solutions that utilize the same model that is largely responsible for today’s leadership crisis, our objective is to present a suite of solutions that enable organizations minimize bias, uncover hidden talent and maximize their human capital resources.

Likert Scale Statements for Survey

1. Strongly Disagree 2. Disagree 3. Somewhat Disagree 4. Neither Agree nor Disagree 5. Somewhat Agree 6. Agree 7. Strongly Agree

Organizational Practices and Policies:

1. Our organization has a well-defined process for identifying high potential senior leaders.
2. Our current identification methodology for identifying high potential senior leaders effectively minimizes substantially all forms of bias.

Leadership Development Opportunities:

3. High potential senior leaders at all levels exposed to leadership development in our organization.
4. The leadership development opportunities in our organization are tailored to individual needs and potential.

Visibility and Self-Promotion:

5. In our organization, high potential senior leaders are often overlooked because they are not self-promoters.
6. Self-promotion plays a significant role in the identification of high potential leaders in our organization.

Bias and Fairness:

7. Our organization effectively mitigates the impact of biases (e.g., gender, racial, affinity, age) in leadership identification.
8. Senior leaders in our organization are evaluated based on objective criteria rather than personal biases.

Assessment and Evaluation:

9. Our organization uses data-driven methods to assess the potential of aspiring senior leaders.
10. Behavioral interviews, 360-degree reviews and psychometric assessments are integral to our senior leadership evaluation process.

Interview Questions

Identification Process:

1. Can you describe your organization’s process for identifying high potential senior leaders?
2. Who in your organization is responsible for identifying high potential senior leaders?

Challenges and Biases:

3. What challenges do you face in identifying high potential senior leaders, and how do you address them?
4. How does your organization work to mitigate conscious and unconscious biases in the identification process?

Leadership Development:

5. What leadership development and/or coaching opportunities does your organization offer to high potential senior leaders?
6. Do you tailor these opportunities to meet individual strengths, aspirations and potential?

Criteria and Self-Promotion:

7. What criteria does your organization use to identify high potential leaders?
8. What role does self-promotion play in your organization’s identification process for high potential leaders?

Effectiveness and Improvement:

9. What would you suggest enhancing the efficacy of the processes of identifying high potential senior leaders in your organization?
10. In your view, what are the consequences of inefficacy in identifying high potential senior leaders?

Initial Research Best Practices:

1. Gaining a 360-degree view of the candidate
2. Assessing culture fit
3. Psychometric Assessment Suite
4. Behavioral Interviews
5. Motivators
6. What’s Important and What’s Not
   1. Analytical Ability vs. Analysis Paralysis
   2. Confidence vs. Arrogance
   3. Visionary vs. Delusional
   4. Being vs. Doing
   5. Growth vs. Fixed Mindset
   6. Decisiveness vs. Impulsiveness
   7. Empathy vs. Overidentification
   8. Passion vs. Obsession
   9. Resilience vs. Stubbornness
   10. Persistence vs. Open-mindedness
   11. Integrity vs. Rigidity
   12. Delegation vs. Abdication
   13. Humility vs. Insecurity
   14. Courage vs. Recklessness
   15. Influence vs. Manipulation
   16. Adaptable vs. Adrift
   17. Potential vs. Performance
   18. Distance Traveled/Adversity Overcome
   19. Service vs. Politicking
   20. Followership vs. Blind Obedience
   21. Team Player vs. Fear of Dissention

Literature Review

O’Leary-Kelly, D. M., & Jones, J. L. (2018). Linking leader behaviors to follower performance: A multi-level examination. Journal of Management Development, 37(3), 240-257. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-12-2017-0404

This research identifies several leader behaviors that positively affect follower performance:

1. Transformational Leadership: Leaders who inspire and motivate followers by creating a compelling vision, fostering creativity, and encouraging personal development tend to enhance follower performance. Key behaviors include:
   • Inspirational Motivation: Articulating a vision that inspires and energizes followers.
   • Intellectual Stimulation: Encouraging followers to think critically and challenge the status quo.
   • Individualized Consideration: Providing personalized support and development opportunities to followers.
   • Idealized Influence: Serving as a role model by demonstrating high ethical standards and commitment.
2. Supportive Leadership: Demonstrating empathy, understanding, and providing emotional support to followers can improve their performance by creating a positive work environment.
3. Participative Leadership: Involving followers in decision-making processes and valuing their input can enhance their engagement and performance.
4. Effective Communication: Clear, transparent, and open communication helps align followers with organizational goals and reduces misunderstandings, leading to better performance.

These behaviors contribute to a supportive and motivating work environment, which in turn boosts follower performance and overall organizational effectiveness.

Gallup, Inc. (n.d.). State of the American workplace. Retrieved from https://www.gallup.com/workplace/238085/state-american-workplace-report-2017.aspx

Gallup’s research shows that companies with high levels of employee engagement, driven by effective leadership and talent identification, see substantial benefits in productivity and profitability. Their studies indicate that employees who feel their talents are recognized and utilized are more engaged and less likely to leave the organization. Effective identification and development of high-potential leaders contribute to stronger organizational cultures and higher engagement levels, leading to better overall performance.

McKinsey & Company. (2020). The future of work after COVID-19. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/the-future-of-work-after-covid-19
McKinsey’s reports on leadership and talent management emphasize that companies that excel at identifying and nurturing high-potential employees often see improvements in culture and engagement. Their studies, such as “The War for Talent,” underline that effective talent management practices are linked to stronger organizational performance and employee satisfaction. High-potential leaders drive positive cultural shifts and enhance employee engagement, which translates into better business outcomes.

Deloitte. (2023). Global Human Capital Trends 2023: Leading with purpose. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/human-capital/articles/global-human-capital-trends.html
Deloitte’s Human Capital Trends reports highlight the connection between leadership development, employee engagement, and organizational culture. Their findings suggest that organizations with robust talent identification and development processes create more positive work environments and higher levels of employee engagement. Organizations that effectively identify and develop hidden talent tend to foster more inclusive and motivating work cultures, which boosts engagement and retention.

Harvard Business Review. (2018). The impact of leadership on employee engagement. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2018/06/the-impact-of-leadership-on-employee-engagement
Articles from Harvard Business Review often explore the benefits of effective talent management. For example, studies published in HBR discuss how organizations that recognize and cultivate their high-potential leaders can achieve significant improvements in organizational culture and employee morale. Identifying and leveraging high-potential talent is crucial for building a positive culture and enhancing employee engagement.

SHRM. (n.d.). How to identify and grow high potentials: A CEO’s perspective. Retrieved August 27, 2024, from https://www.shrm.org/executive-network/insights/people-strategy/how-to-identify-grow-high-potentials-ceos-perspective-proven-results

In this article, SHRM outlines strategies for identifying and developing high-potential employees from a CEO’s perspective. It emphasizes assessing both performance and future potential, highlighting behaviors such as a drive for results and leadership capabilities. The article suggests tailored development plans, mentorship, and creating a supportive organizational culture as key strategies. It also stresses the importance of regular reviews to adapt development plans. This resource is valuable for understanding effective approaches to nurturing high-potential employees within organizations.

Gartner. (2019) Agile High Potential Strategies: High Potential Employee Programs are Underperforming retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/en/human-resources/insights/leadership-management/high-potentials

This research indicates there are seven major causes for the underperformance of HIPO programs:

1. Misidentification: High-potential programs sometimes mistakenly include employees who may not actually have the potential for future leadership roles. This misidentification can lead to wasted resources and missed opportunities for truly high-potential employees.
2. Lack of Clear Criteria: Without well-defined criteria for identifying high potential employees, organizations will struggle with consistency and fairness in their selection process.
3. Development Gaps: Even if high potentials are correctly identified, they may not receive the tailored development they need to reach their full potential. Development programs are often generic or insufficiently challenging.
4. Retention Challenges: High potentials are often in high demand, and if an organization fails to provide adequate career progression and growth opportunities, these individuals may leave for better prospects.
5. Bias and Favoritism: The identification and development process can be influenced by unconscious biases or favoritism, leading to unfair advantages for some individuals and neglect of others who might also be high potential employees.
6. Overemphasis on Immediate Performance: Organizations may focus too much on current performance rather than potential for future roles, leading to missed opportunities for growth and development.
7. Inadequate Support: High potentials might not receive the necessary support from their managers or the organization, leading to disengagement or underperformance despite their potential.

Research Methodology

• Research Methodology
  • Qualitative research methods in the form of open-ended interviews.
  • Description of interviews with over 100 CEOs, board members, and CHROs.
• Data Collection
  • Approach to gathering insights from leaders.
  • Use of surveys, interviews, and organizational data.
• Data Analysis
  • Techniques for analyzing qualitative and quantitative data.
  • Strategies for identifying patterns and best practices.

Findings

• Key Insights from Interviews
  • Summary of significant findings from interviews.
• Best Practices Identified
  • Detailed analysis of best practices in identifying high-potential leaders.
• Impact of Biases
  • Examination of how biases affect identification and development processes.

Discussion

• Interpretation of Findings
  • Analysis of how findings align with or diverge from existing literature.
• Application of Results
  • How identified best practices can be implemented in organizations.
• Ethical Considerations
  • Discussion on the ethical implications of leadership identification.

Conclusion

• Summary of Key Points
  • Recap of findings and their implications for organizations.
• Recommendations
  • Specific recommendations for improving identification of high-potential leaders.
• Personal Reflection
  • Connection to your aspirations within the Executive Ed.D. programs.

Appendices

• Interview Transcripts
• Survey Instruments
• Additional Data Analysis

capstone