Hello all!

Anonymous

April 22,2021 at 8:34PM UTC

Welcome to Fairygodboss!

We’re the largest online career community helping women achieve their career goals. Gain access to articles, jobs, events, and a supportive network of women and allies. Membership is free, always.

Hello all! It's been so wonderful being a part of this Fairygodboss community. I am seeking advice from those who may be able to contribute:

I am currently working on succession planning as part of our initiative to develop employees. As we build career paths for every role in the organization, one question came up as to how we can determine if an employee is ready for promotion. So then, we created a scorecard to rate each employee against the information on their career paths. I am seeking suggestions or guidance from you all as to what you think an acceptable rating for promotion purposes is? Should employees be meeting 80% of the next role's metrics to be deemed ready for promotion? 75%? 50%? There will be a requirement for managers to also draft a written proposal as to why they feel the individual is ready, but for performance metrics purposes, how do you deem an individual ready for promotion?

Thank you all in advance!

Why women love us:

Daily articles on career topics
Jobs at companies dedicated to hiring more women
Advice and support from an authentic community
Events that help you level up in your career
Free membership, always

9 comments

Share your insight

Join an authentic community that helps women support each other at work. Share your professional experience or ask for advice — you can even post anonymously.

9 Comments

Join the conversation

AnonymousApril 23,2021 at 12:09AM UTC
Ensure the metrics are consciously unbiased, e.g. looking for collaborative as well as competitive. In my organization only folks who "self-promote" were promoted. It was accepted exclusive criteria. I tried to explain to the EVP that that one could promote ideas and other people, and the org needed more of that, but it fell on deaf ears. Three levels of my management were biased and their "metrics" supported it, e.g. she doesn't make the big bucks (b/c they gave those accounts to their buddies who only worked for themselves and I did the dirty, hard projects and work that benefited the team). On the team of 15, I was one of two people whose top strength was "Strategic Thinking" and yet my mgmt could not see or didn't want to b/c it did not align with their way of thinking. Their loss. Be careful you don't lose people to bad mgmt.
Like
AnonymousApril 23,2021 at 3:34PM UTC
Interesting idea on the "self-promotion"! I hadn't thought of that. While metrics are part of the promotion process, it's not the end all, say all. We do have a 360 feedback process in place, along with a rationale behind why promotion is warranted, involvement in culture initiatives, completion of leadership training, etc. I definitely agree about losing people to bad management and that's actually one of the reasons we're putting more of an effective performance management process in place. We're hoping to build more initiatives that support others' development, but also train everyone to ensure alignment.
Like
AnonymousApril 23,2021 at 10:25PM UTC
I am so glad you have the 360, that helps more (or less depending on how far the bias goes). I recommended that to my company. I am so glad you are seeking thoughtful relevant metrics. Get people thinking about what makes a good leader! Perhaps if my managers had a piece of paper that asked who created efficiencies for others, who shared expertise, who mentored new team members, who enabled team harmony and lifted morale, who energized the team, who created a space for open team input --- they might have been able to "measure" positive impact rather than relying on stereotypes of leadership (the "boss").
Like
Sarah OpitzApril 23,2021 at 10:05AM UTC
I'm not an HR person, but would also be careful basing promotions on numbers only. Do you also conduct 360 evaluations (input from reports/colleagues/collaborators, etc) and self-evaluations? This may help with generating a more holistic portfolio of each employee up for promotion. You may also want to look into whether your company offers the appropriate opportunities for growth, especially if certain metrics are demanded for promotions.
Like
AnonymousApril 23,2021 at 3:32PM UTC
Hi Sarah,
Thank you for your response! Yes, there is definitely more to the promotion process than just numbers and metrics, though it is one part to utilize data to support performance expectations. We do have a 360 feedback process in place along with Managers needing to prepare a rationale behind why they feel their employees are ready for promotion. If it's a Manager promotion or higher, the employee would, too, go through a panel interview process to assess readiness but also must show other attributes (actively involved with culture initiatives, completing a leadership training, etc.). But for the purposes of data-specific, was interested in seeing how other companies do it.
Thank you for your insight!
Like
AnonymousApril 23,2021 at 8:11PM UTC
One aspect I think might be helpful here is an aspirational aspect—does this employee seem eager and willing to go to the next level? How have they gone above and beyond in their role? Do they have demonstrated interest in moving up?
These things can be measured as well, and as someone else said, should be done so as unbiased as possible. I think promotion considerations can also encompass a willingness and desire to get to the next level! What do you think?
Like
Lucy DawsonApril 25,2021 at 12:38PM UTC
From my observations, being "ready" is more a function of an individual's maturity, knowledge of and ability to work well in the company's culture, and energy and drive than it is checking off boxes...and these things are difficult to quantify. But perhaps that's not what you meant!
Like
Nicole FortuneApril 25,2021 at 12:40PM UTC
I view succession planning and promotions as separate things. I agree develop metrics snd desired behaviors and performance goals to be standard across the board. However, when I think of succession planning I think of more a leader role and I feel that should be a question that is frequently asked as path the person is interested in pursuing. I have experienced people who are poor leaders but great individual contributors but due to years of experience they were next in line and it wasn't a great fit. Develop a program for those who desire to follow that path in addition to standard performance metrics so that you have an internal candidate pool that is already identified.
Like
Stephanie YoungApril 25,2021 at 3:05PM UTC
well, I'd tell you that if they're meeting 80% already that you need to closely examine what their current manager is doing. If there's no differentiation between what a manager is doing and a subordinate is doing, then why are you paying a premium for a manager?
In any case, I don't think you can set a blanket number that's going to cover everything for the simple reason that not all roles at the same level are created equally. For the purposes of succession planning, someone moving from technical doer to an architectural role needs a lot higher number than a person moving from a finance individual contributor to a supervisor, or from a supervisor to a manager. At higher levels, technical metrics probably don't matter as much as things you can't measure easily with metrics - vision, ability to inspire, relationship management.
By definition, if you're worried about succession planning then making sure you get the right person is place is the goal because you need them to succeed. That isn't a place I'd leave to some kind of blanket metric.
Like