UNC Leadership Survey 2013: High Potential Talent


Published on

The UNC Leadership Survey 2013: High Potential Talent explores how companies identify and develop high potential talent.

Published in: Business, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

UNC Leadership Survey 2013: High Potential Talent

  1. 1. UNC Leadership Survey 2013: High-Potential LeadershipQuantitative ReportUNC Kenan-Flagler Business SchoolExecutive Development
  2. 2. Table of ContentsIntroduction 3How to Read this Report 4Section A: Status of High-Potential Process 5Section B: Scale of High-Potential Process 9Section C: High-Potential Competencies 15Section D: High-Potential Selection and Placement 22Section E: Organizational Characteristics 27UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School 31UNC Executive Development 32Contact Information 332013 UNC Leadership SurveyProprietary & Confidential
  3. 3. IntroductionObjectiveIn the 2013 Leadership Survey, UNC ExecutiveDevelopment explores how organizationsidentify high-potential talent. Specifically, thisresearch project examines the demand forhigh-potential talent, the competenciesorganizations use to identify high-potentialtalent, and the challenges organizations face inidentifying high-potential talent.Methodology• The questionnaire was developed by PerceptResearch and UNC Executive Development• The questionnaire was administered via aweb survey hosted by Percept Research• Percept Research processed questionnaires,tabulated data, and provided final reportSegmentationAll questions were run against the followingdemographic cuts to identify statisticaldifferences:• Title of respondent• Ownership of Company (public versusprivate)• For-profit versus not-for-profit• Size of company (# of employees)• Revenue of company• HR professional (yes or no)If the statistical tests showed significantdifferences, it is noted in the report. Unless thecommentary states ‘significant differences’ thenit is referring to general trends that are notstatistically different.Fielding Overview• Fielding Started: 03/12/2013• Fielding Completed: 03/29/2013InvitationsSentQuotaCompletedSurveys% ofQuotaResponseRate30,761 800 1,361 170% 4.4%
  4. 4. How to Read this ReportData within this report includes thefollowing:• N – the number of respondents whoanswered the question. Smaller N sizesrequire larger differences between groups togenerate significance. Also, while 1,361respondents completed the survey, only 755have active programs to identify high-potential employees and were presentedthe full battery of questions.• Mean – the average value of all responses• Standard Deviation (Std Dev) – measureshow far apart the responses are from themean. The greater the standard deviationthe more variability in the results indicatingrespondents have a wide range of opinion.Rating Scale:The rating scales are listed below eachquestion within this report. Typically, 1 isthe lowest rating and 5 is the highest.
  5. 5. Section A: Status of High-Potential Process
  6. 6. Section A: Status of High-Potential Process• Currently, a slight majority have a process to identify high-potential employees.• Of those that used to have a formal process, the main reason they discontinued was the amount of resources required to support theprogram.• Lack of organization support is the main reason organizations have never had a formal process. This was followed by the perceivedamount of resources required to support a program and the lack of understanding in how to assess a high-potential employee. Theother specifies for this question indicate a few other trends: companies site they have informal processes in place, they are too smallfor such a program and lack of organizational support.• Approximately 48% of companies plan to start or restart a process to identify high-potential employees.• There are no significant differences for question QA1-QA3 across company size, ownership and level of respondent.QA1: Does your organization currently have a formal process to identify high-potential employees? (N=1,361)5%39%56%No, we used to have a formalprocessNo, we have never had aformal processYes, currently have formalprocess0%25%50%75%100%
  7. 7. Section A: Status of High-Potential ProcessQA2: Why did your organization discontinue efforts to identifyhigh-potential employees? Please check all that apply. (N=74)28%16%3%27%31%Required too many resourcesNot effectiveNot neededOtherDon’t know0% 25% 50% 75% 100%QA3: Why has your organization decided that it does notcurrently need a formal process for identifying high-potentialemployees? Please check all that apply. (N=532)38%19%15%6%2%24%24%Lack of organizational supportLikely to require too many resourcesDon’t know how to assess high potentialNot likely to be neededNot likely to be effectiveDon’t knowOther0% 25% 50% 75% 100%QA4: Does your organization plan to (re)start a process toidentify high-potential employees? (N=604)Yes,48%No,52%
  8. 8. Section A: Status of High-Potential Process• Increased demand and retention of key talent are the top reasons an organizationstates for identifying high-potential employees. These are closely followed byimproving overall organizational performance. The most senior individuals (basedon their corporate titles from QE5) site adapting to changing business conditions asa key driver at a slightly higher rate than others in the organization.• Companies are only moderately satisfied with their current process. Respondents ina talent development function are significantly more satisfied than those not in asimilar function. While not statistically significant, there is a trend that the moresenior the individual in the organization the more satisfied they are with the currentprocess.QA5: What are the key drivers for your organization to identifyhigh-potential employees? Please check all that apply. (N=755)83%83%76%57%51%16%6%1%To meet increased demand forfuture leadersTo retain key talentTo improve overall organizationalperformanceTo meet changing skills required forleadersTo adapt to changing businessconditionsTo increase overall HReffectiveness and accountabilityOtherDon’t know0% 25% 50% 75% 100%QA6: Overall, how satisfied are you with your organization’scurrent process for identifying high-potential employees? (N=755)2%27%52%16%3%Extremely satisfiedVery satisfiedModerately satisfiedSlightly satisfiedNot at all satisfied0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
  9. 9. Section B: Scale of High-Potential Process
  10. 10. Section B: Scale of High-Potential ProcessQB1: What percentage of your current employees who are eligible for this designation have been formallyidentified as having high potential? (N=755)25%1%3%3%3%4%5%8%9%31%34%Mean91-100%81-90%71-80%61-70%51-60%41-50%31-40%21-30%11-20%0-10%0%25%50%75%100%QB2: How does your current pool of high-potential talent align with your future leadership needs? (N=755)18%35%47%Don’t knowMeets or exceedsanticipated futureneedsDoes not meetanticipated futureneeds0%25%50%75%100%
  11. 11. Section B: Scale of High-Potential ProcessQB3: How has the demand for high-potential employees inyour organization changed in the past five years? (N=755)• On average, 25% of current employees are eligible forhigh potential designation. Approximately 65% ofcompanies state 20% or less of employees are eligible.Not-for-profit organizations have a significantly higherpercentage of eligible employees than for-profitorganizations.• Almost 50% of companies stated that current pools ofhigh-potential talent will not meet future needs. For-profit companies are significantly more likely than not-for-profits to state this viewpoint. This also holds truefor the middle management layer of organizations.• There is no doubt the demand for high-potentialemployees is growing. Publically-owned companies aremore likely to see less demand than privately-ownedcompanies. The inverse is true for stating greaterdemand. Not-for-profits also see less demand at asignificantly higher rate than for-profit organizations.2%14%84%There is less demandNo changeThere is greaterdemand0%25%50%75%100%
  12. 12. Section B: Scale of High-Potential ProcessQB4: What has driven the increase in demand for high-potential employees? Please check all that apply. (N=634)74%61%50%44%39%36%8%GrowthCompetitive pressuresDynamic business modelsGlobalizationAttrition/turnoverTechnological advancementOther0% 25% 50% 75% 100%QB5: What has driven the decrease in demand for high-potential employees? Please check all that apply. (N=18)61%50%33%Lack ofturnover/attritionLack of businessgrowthOther0% 25% 50% 75% 100%• Growth is the main driver of the increase in demand for high-potential employees. This is followed bycompetitive pressures and dynamic business models. For-profit organizations site globalization and dynamicbusiness models at a higher rate than not-for-profit organizations.• Of those that stated there is lower demand, lack of turnover/attrition is the main reason selected for thisviewpoint. Lack of business growth is not far behind. Small sample size for this question prevents furtheranalysis.
  13. 13. Section B: Scale of High-Potential ProcessQB6: How confident are you in your organization’sability to fill mission-critical roles? (N=755)• Organizations are only moderately confident in their ability to fill mission-critical roles and develop high-potentialtalent. There is a direct correlation between these two questions indicating dependency on high-potential talentto fill mission-critical roles.• Slightly more than a third of organizations believe it is harder to identify high-potential talent in emergingmarkets. Not-for-profit are most likely not to identify high-potential talent in these markets.• Companies feel their ability to forecast skills / competencies and shortages in talent pipeline is good.• The more senior the leader the more confident they are in the organizations ability to both fill mission-criticalroles and develop high-potential talent. They are also more likely to have a higher opinion of their organizationsforecasting abilities.4%16%50%28%3%2%16%49%31%2%Not at allSlightlyModeratelyVeryExtremelyNot at allSlightlyModeratelyVeryExtremely0%25%50%75%100%QB7: How confident are you in your organization’sability to develop high-potential talent? (N=755)
  14. 14. Section B: Scale of High-Potential ProcessQB8: How would you characterize your organization’s ability to identify high-potential talent in emerging markets? (N=755)QB9: How would you rate your organization’s ability to forecast each of the following over the next 3-5 years?(5 = Excellent, 3 = Good, 1 = Poor)28%8%26%38%Not currentlyidentifyingIt is easierThere’s nodifferenceIt is harder0%25%50%75%100%QB9a: Skills andCompetencies Needed forSuccess (N=755)3.1(standard deviation = 0.9)QB9b: Potential Shortages inTalent Pipeline (N=755)3.1(standard deviation = 1.0)
  15. 15. Section C: High-Potential Competencies
  16. 16. Section C: High-Potential CompetenciesQC1: Which of the following competencies are most important in selecting high-potential employees in your organization?Please check up to five. (N=755)69%67%44%41%41%39%36%30%29%26%25%17%12%12%Strategic Thinking/InsightDrive for ResultsCollaborative LeadershipBuilds Effective TeamsChange LeadershipInspires/Motivates OthersFlexibility/AdaptabilityLearning AgilityEmotional IntelligenceBig-Picture PerspectiveLeads Through AmbiguityOrganizational/Political SavvyRisk TakingMulti-Cultural Sensitivity/Awareness0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
  17. 17. Section C: High-Potential CompetenciesQC2: Which of the following additional factors are most important in selecting high-potential employees in your organization?Please check up to five. (N=755)70%66%59%47%40%32%31%30%28%23%19%9%6%Future Performance PotentialCurrent/Sustained PerformanceCulture FitCommitmentAbility to Participate in Stretch AssignmentAmbitionTechnical ExpertiseOrganizational KnowledgeReceptivity to FeedbackGeographic MobilityReputationInternational ExperienceTenure Within Organization0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
  18. 18. Section C: High-Potential CompetenciesQC3: How proficient is your typical employee - and your typical high-potential employee - in each of the competencies youpreviously checked as most important? (5 = High, 3 = Medium, 1 = Low) (N=493)• Participants that believe their currentprogram meets or exceeds anticipatedfuture needs give higher ratings than thosethat believe their programs will not meetanticipated future needs.• The only attribute where there is asignificant difference is big-pictureperspective. for ResultsLearning AgilityFlexibility/AdaptabilityCollaborative LeadershipEmotional IntelligenceBuilds Effective TeamsInspires/Motivates OthersBig-Picture PerspectiveMulti-Cultural Sensitivity/AwarenessLeads Through AmbiguityOrganizational/Political SavvyStrategic Thinking/InsightChange LeadershipRisk Taking0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0QB2: Does not meet anticipated future needsQB2: Meets or exceeds anticipated future needs
  19. 19. Section C: High-Potential CompetenciesDrive for ResultsLearning AgilityFlexibility /AdaptabilityCollaborativeLeadershipEmotionalIntelligenceMulti-CulturalSensitivity /AwarenessBuilds EffectiveTeamsInspires /Motivates OthersStrategic Thinking /InsightLeads ThroughAmbiguityOrganizational /Political SavvyBig-PicturePerspective Change LeadershipRisk Taking60%65%70%75%80%85%10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%ProficiencyImportanceHow to Interpret Importance vs Proficiency MapsImportance (X-Axis): Results from QC1 and QC2 –most important competencies when selecting high-potential employees in your organization.Proficiency (Y-Axis): Converted results from QC3 –proficiency of typical high-potential employees.Results shown here are the % of the maximum ratingof 5 that the particular attribute received. For example– drive for results had a mean of 4.2 on the five pointscale – 4.2/5.0 = 84%.Quadrants were formed by plotting the averageimportance and performance across all attributes.Quadrants should be interpreted as follows:Quadrant I (red): Areas of immediate focus. This iswhere average performance is below average and theimportance is above average.Quadrant II (yellow): Both performance andimportance are above average. It is imperativeperformance does not slip due to the high level ofimportance.Quadrant III (green): Areas of low focus. Highperformance levels on areas with low importance.Resources should not be focused on these attributes.Quadrant IV (grey): Area of low focus. Performancematches importance and both are lower than average.Resources should not be focused on these attributesImportance vs Proficiency Map
  20. 20. Section C: High-Potential CompetenciesImportance vs Proficiency Map• Areas of immediate focus include the following:• Strategic thinking / insight• Builds effective teams• Inspires / motivates others• Change leadership• Areas where performance should be monitored:• Drive for results• Collaborative leadership• Flexibility / adaptabilityDrive for ResultsLearning AgilityFlexibility /AdaptabilityCollaborativeLeadershipEmotionalIntelligenceMulti-CulturalSensitivity /AwarenessBuilds EffectiveTeamsInspires /Motivates OthersStrategic Thinking /InsightLeads ThroughAmbiguityOrganizational /Political SavvyBig-PicturePerspective Change LeadershipRisk Taking60%65%70%75%80%85%10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%ImportanceProficiency
  21. 21. Section C: High-Potential CompetenciesQC4: Compared to today, in 3-5 years how important do you expect each of the following competencies to bein selecting high-potential employees? (5 = Much More Important, 3 = Equally Important, 1 = Much Less Important) (N=493)• Across the board, the importance of allattributes are growing in importance.• The attributes with the highest increase inimportance are change leadership,strategic thinking/insight and collaborativeleadership.• Change leadership is the lowest ratedattribute in terms of proficiency for high-potential employees. The other twoattributes with the highest growth inimportance are some of the highest interms of proficiency among high-potentialemployees. leadershipStrategic Thinking/InsightCollaborative LeadershipBuilds Effective TeamsFlexibility/AdaptabilityLearning AgilityBig-Picture PerspectiveDrive for ResultsInspires/Motivates OthersMulti-Cultural Sensitivity/AwarenessEmotional IntelligenceLeads Through AmbiguityRisk TakingOrganizational/Political Savvy0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
  22. 22. Section D: High-Potential Selection & Placement
  23. 23. Section D: High-Potential Selection and PlacementQD1: How consistent is your organization in applying high-potential selection criteria? (5 = Extremely Consistent, 3 =Moderately Consistent, 1 = Not at all Consistent) (N=755)(QD2 on following page)QD3: Do you tell your employees that they have beenidentified as having high potential? (N=755)• Organizations are moderately consistent in applying high-potential selection criteria. Within divisions /departments are the most consistent.• Slightly more companies inform individuals if they are high-potential. There are no significant differences acrossownership or size of company.• There is little separation in selection frequency challenges in identifying high-potential talent. Almost 50% ofindividuals, however, did select relying exclusively on current performance metrics as the most significantchallenge. time (volatility)Acrossdivisions/departmentsWithindivisions/departments012345Yes,58%No,42%
  24. 24. Section D: High-Potential Selection and PlacementQD2: Which of the following are the most significant challenges for your organization in identifying high-potential talent?Please check up to three. (N=755)47%41%40%38%36%33%18%6%Relying exclusively on current…Using inconsistent criteria to define potentialAchieved a balanced, organization-wide…Having vague criteria to define potentialRelying on one person’s unchallenged…Lack of attention to potential derailersLack of selectivityOther0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
  25. 25. Section D: High-Potential Selection and PlacementQD4: What one thing would improve your ability to identify high-potential talent? (N=586)The word cloud below represents a dynamic keyword search that examines each answer to identifycommon trends. The larger the word the more often it was mentioned.
  26. 26. Section D: High-Potential Selection and PlacementQD5: What one thing would improve your ability to develop high-potential talent? (N=593)The word cloud below represents a dynamic keyword search that examines each answer to identifycommon trends. The larger the word the more often it was mentioned.
  27. 27. Section E: Organizational Characteristics
  28. 28. Section E: Organizational CharacteristicsQE1: Which one of the following ranges best describesyour organization’s total employment in 2012? Pleaseestimate in full-time equivalents (FTEs). (N=755)QE2: Which one of the following ranges best describesyour organization’s total revenue in 2012? Please estimatein US dollars. (N=755)9%17%16%14%13%29%2%500 FTEs or less501-2,000 FTEs2,001-5,000 FTEs5,001-10,000 FTEs10,001-20,000 FTEsMore than 20,000 FTEsDon’t know0% 25% 50% 75% 100%4%3%7%20%29%28%10%Less than $5 million$5.0 - $10 million$10.1 million - $100 million$100.1 million - $999 million$1 billion - $5 billionMore than $5 billionDon’t know0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
  29. 29. Section E: Organizational CharacteristicsQE3: Is your organization publicly or privately owned? (N=755) QE4: Is your organization for profit or not for profit? (N=755)PubliclyOwned,60%PrivatelyOwned,40%For Profit,86%Not-for-profit, 14%
  30. 30. Section E: Organizational CharacteristicsQE5: Are you in a talent development function (e.g., HR,leadership development, human capital, training, organizationaldevelopment) in your organization? (N=755)QE6: Finally, which of the following best describes your currentjob level? (N=755)Yes,83%No,17% 2%9%23%54%12%Chairman, CEO, or PresidentCHRO, CLO, COO, CIO, CMO, orCFOEVP, SVP, or VPDirector, Manager, or SupervisorCoordinator, Assistant, or Other0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
  31. 31. UNC Kenan-Flagler Business SchoolThe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the nation’s first state university, is a leader ineducational excellence, consistently ranking among the top five best public universities.UNC’s Kenan-Flagler Business School is ranked among the top 20 in the United States for executiveand full-time MBA programs and provides:– Research with business impact from renowned faculty whose work is shaping the future ofbusiness– Teaching from professors devoted to the growth of knowledge and analytical skills ofstudents and executives– Experience and leadership skills gained in a challenging and supportive setting that helpspeople take career and company success to new levels
  32. 32. UNC Executive DevelopmentThe University of North Carolina’s Kenan-Flagler Business School has delivered customized and openenrollment executive education programs with excellent results for over fifty years to a wide range oforganizations.UNC Executive Development has provided unique learning experiences to create solutions for thebusiness challenges facing our partners and participants. Our approach to program design anddelivery teaches the way executives learn most effectively – by drawing upon the power of real-world,applicable experiences from our faculty and staff, and integrating the knowledge our participants shareabout the issues they face with new concepts and business strategies in programs designed toproduce practical skills.Clients consistently rank UNC Executive Education in the top 20, citing our partnership approach toprogram design, teaching effectiveness and customer service.
  33. 33. Contact UsAny media questions and requests should be directed to:Allison AdamsMedia Relations DirectorUniversity of North Carolinas Kenan-Flagler Business SchoolChapel Hill, NC 27599-3490+1.919.962.7235aadams@unc.eduIf you’re interested in learning more about UNC Executive Development, please contact:Kip Michael KellyDirector of Marketing & Business DevelopmentUNC Executive DevelopmentUniversity of North Carolinas Kenan-Flagler Business SchoolChapel Hill, NC 27599-3445+1.919.843.6061kip_kelly@unc.edu