We need a way for managers to be able to prioritize their promo nominees as either P0, P1, P2 or perhaps indicating a time period could be another way, like ready now, ready next quarter, ready in 2 quarters etc.
We gave specific guidelines around promotions to our managers when we conducted the last performance review cycle, see below. After reviewing the guidelines they can determine when an employee should be nominated for promotion, and have the supporting evidence to justify that promotion.
- Promotions typically occur every 2-3 years
- There should be a change/elevation in job duties and responsibility
- Organizational need – there is a demonstrated business need for an additional resource at the higher-level position
- Individual readiness – the employee has demonstrated the ability to perform at a higher level, their norm is sustained performance at Exceeds level or higher
- Management training – will this employee need training for a management role
- No “fear-based” promotions – don’t give promotions as a retention effort or after threats to leave
Using these guidelines a manager can decide what actions might need to place to ensure the individual is ready for a promotion based on performance and company needs.
Hope this helps!
Hi @Marwan! What are you hoping to accomplish by managing promo nominees this way? We are currently structuring a process very similar to what @Bshea posted above with a significant emphasis on organizational need. At my previous company, we did use a classification system similar to what you’re describing during the talent review process. We didn’t use an official 9-box model but the discussions could have been mapped accordingly just focusing more on future action, and we had accountability metrics to ensure we were fulfilling our commitments since it’s extremely disengaging to be told you’ll be promoted soon when you aren’t. That process was based on the individual rather than the business, which would be a challenge to implement in a smaller, flatter organization like my current company. The categories were along the lines of new to the company (too soon to tell), well-placed, shows potential, likely ready in 1-2 years, and promote this year. Each also had an alphanumeric tag similar to your description. At my current company, we are moving away from “potential” language, though, and focusing more on growth trajectory. The other consideration is whether you are connecting this process with succession planning or any other talent planning and development efforts. We had used an annual cadence in line with our talent reviews vs. quarterly, and because of the accountability piece a quarterly cadence would have been a bigger commitment to track against. Happy to discuss further if interested!