High potential (HiPo) programmes play a critical role in preparing organisations for the future. When done well, these programmes create a steady flow of future-ready talent, accelerate development for key roles, and drive long-term organisational success. When done poorly, they can drain resources, frustrate employees, and ultimately undermine trust in talent management. Unfortunately, HiPo programmes are often not as effective as they could be. One analysis revealed that as many as 40% of HiPo talent may be misidentified.
The challenge is that HiPo programmes are deceptively complex to design, deploy, and maintain. Small mistakes can significantly limit their utility and appeal and, in some cases, create unintended consequences such as employee disengagement, burnout, or turnover. The good news is that many of these pitfalls are avoidable with a thoughtful plan and approach.
HiPo programme mistakes and how to overcome them
Talogy recently undertook a global research study combining expert focus groups, survey responses from organisational leaders, HR professionals, and HiPo employees, combined with a review of the latest academic research, to truly understand the pitfalls organisations encounter when designing HiPo programmes.
Below are eight of the most common mistakes organisations encounter throughout the HiPo programme lifecycle — and how to avoid them.
1. Failing to clearly define ‘high potential’
The first fundamental mistake is launching a HiPo programme without a shared definition of what ‘high potential’ means. When leaders, HR professionals, and employees lack a clear and shared understanding of high potential, their expectations can become misaligned which can undermine the purpose of the programme before it even begins.
What to do instead:
Prioritise defining high potential in a way that reflects your organisation’s strategy, values, culture, and future needs. Then, communicate that definition clearly and consistently across the business.
2. Using weak identification criteria
A second mistake is relying on poorly justified or unsubstantiated indicators of potential. When criteria are vague or not grounded in evidence, organisations risk misidentifying talent and misdirecting development efforts.
What to do instead:
Determine the specific knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics that truly signal readiness and willingness for greater responsibility. Consider conducting a job analysis or leveraging existing data from a prior job analysis to ensure those indicators are fair, up-to-date, and directly support your business objectives.
3. Relying on a single method to identify HiPo employees
Performance ratings and manager nominations are common starting points for identifying high potential talent, but they do not provide enough information on their own. Both are vulnerable to bias and rarely provide a complete picture of an employee’s future capability.
What to do instead:
Adopt a multi-method approach. Combine performance data with tools such as structured interviews, 360-degree feedback, assessments, and measures of motivational fit to gain a more holistic view of potential. Don’t forget to ultimately have a conversation with the employee to ensure that this is a path they are interested in pursuing. There is a big difference between a high professional vs. high potential.
4. Lacking clear ownership of the identification process
Some organisations struggle with ambiguity around who is responsible for HiPo identification. Leaders, managers, and HR often have different views and assumptions about who owns this task. Misalignment and disagreement can lead to inconsistent decision-making and impasses.
What to do instead:
Be explicit about roles and responsibilities. Clearly define who is accountable for identifying HiPo talent, how decisions are made, and how outcomes are communicated. Be sure to routinely update this as promotions, internal mobility moves, and turnover will inevitably result in new owners being introduced into the process.
5. Failing to deliver meaningful opportunities
Being labelled as high potential raises expectations. Programme participants anticipate stretch assignments, coaching, mentoring, visibility, and other opportunities to grow. When organisations fail to deliver, HiPo employees often feel frustrated, disappointed, and disengaged which can lead to the unwanted phenomenon known as boreout at work.
What to do instead:
Plan development experiences in advance and space them out over time. Ensure HiPo employees have the capacity to engage in development alongside their day-to-day responsibilities without becoming overwhelmed or alternatively feeling underutilised.
6. Ignoring the risks and ripple effects
HiPo programmes can unintentionally bring about stress, entitlement, or attrition among programme participants. They can also lead to disengagement or resentment among non-identified individuals if the process feels unfair or exclusive.
What to do instead:
Manage expectations carefully and transparently. Avoid positioning HiPo status as favouritism and be sure to recognise the critical contributions of all employees. Remember gratitude in the workplace goes a long way in any capacity. Further, work to preserve team cohesion and ensure development opportunities exist for everyone.
7. Insufficiently evaluating the programme
Many organisations do not systematically evaluate the ROI of their HiPo programmes, leaving them with limited visibility into their true impact. When evaluations are conducted, companies tend to rely primarily on business-level outcomes, such as revenue growth or the strength of the succession pipeline. While these metrics are important, they are often conflated with broader business performance and capture only part of the programme’s effect. As a result, organisations may overlook important individual and team-level outcomes that directly demonstrate whether the programme is working.
What to do instead:
Create a clear plan for how to evaluate the programme’s success before implementing it. The plan should balance business-level metrics with individual- and team-level metrics, such as skill development, readiness, commitment, and participant experience. This provides a more accurate picture of programme effectiveness.
8. Focusing on immediate results
HiPo programmes are long-term investments, yet organisations often want and expect quick returns. While short-term gains matter, overemphasising immediate results can obscure valuable outcomes that emerge over time, like a resilient leadership pipeline and a culture of excellence.
What to do instead:
Evaluate success across multiple timeframes. Track early indicators of progress while also measuring long-term impact on talent, culture, and organisational capability.
Building HiPo programmes that truly deliver
HiPo programmes can be powerful tools for shaping the future of an organisation, but only when they are thoughtfully designed, executed, and evaluated. By avoiding these common mistakes, companies can have HiPo programmes that are not only credible and fair, but genuinely beneficial for both employees and the organisation for many years.
High Potential, High Impact: Insights to Build Better Programmes
72% of leaders believe their high-potential (HiPo) programmes are effective. Employees often feel differently and this disconnect could be costing organisations their best talent.
Talogy’s 2025 global research study explores what makes HiPo programmes effective. Drawing on scientific literature, survey data from over 1,000 professionals, and insights from expert consultants, this executive summary highlights four critical components of successful HiPo strategies:
- Defining high potential: What does ‘high potential’ really mean and how does it differ from high performance?
- Identifying talent: Who is responsible, what methods are used, and how is HiPo status communicated?
- Developing and retaining HiPo employees: What works, what doesn’t, and how can organisations keep top talent engaged?
- Evaluating programme impact: How do organisations measure success and ensure long-term value?