個案總覽

New research shows that factors unrelated to employees' knowledge, capabilities, and behavior such as who they report to, their access to accelerator roles, and whether they take advantage of flexible working arrangements play a leading role in who gets promoted. When managers understand the circumstances that contribute to or block paths to promotion for women and people of color, they can apply proactive career management to help position employees for advancement more equitably.

Rotate up-and-comers through various functions, business units, and locations, conventional wisdom suggests, and you'll give them a chance to round out their skills and prepare for general management. However, mobility as a leadership development strategy can go wrong in many ways. It can disrupt operations and undermine accountability, demoralize managers who don't get to change roles, and cost a lot to implement. Perhaps worst of all, it can become an end in itself, causing other strategic and operational aims to get lost in the shuffle. Mobility can be an excellent development tool when companies use it wisely - as Marriott International, Corning, and UnitedHealth Group have done. The authors cite these successes and several failures, and offer a framework for solving the mobility equation in a way that's right for your organization. Developing an appropriate mobility strategy entails answering three questions: What kind of mobility? Mobility for whom? And how much mobility? Your answers will depend on your company's circumstances and overarching objectives. For instance, to figure out what kind, you'll need to consider that changing a manager's function within a unit may help that person acquire the knowledge and skills to run that unit one day, whereas switching someone to a different unit may help develop broader leadership capabilities. To decide for whom, you can try "sponsored mobility," which means directing investments toward a chosen few individuals; "contest mobility," which means opening up opportunities to many; or a combination of the two. The approach you choose will depend partly on how robust a system you already have for identifying and retaining high potentials. Finally, to determine how much, you'll need a solid fix on which areas of the enterprise require the developmental benefits of mobility. Targeted analysis will show the likely impact on retention, promotions over time, and operational efficiency.

In the late 1990s, Fleet Bank was facing high and rising employee turnover, particularly in its retail operations. Overall turnover had reached 25% annually, and among some groups, such as tellers and customer service reps, turnover was as high as 40%. Using a new methodology developed by Mercer Human Resource Consulting, Fleet set out to determine why so many employees were leaving and what could be done to retain them. Fleet's analysis showed that people were leaving not so much for better pay but for broader experience, which they thought would enhance their marketability. Additionally, the analysis revealed a link between the turnover problem and the company's busy history of mergers and acquisitions. Fleet's mergers and acquisitions frequently meant that it had to consolidate operations. That consolidation resulted in layoffs, which provoked higher levels of voluntary turnover, perhaps because remaining employees began worrying about their job security. Although the obvious solution to the turnover problem might have been to compensate the remaining employees--say, with higher pay--the more effective and less costly solution, Fleet discovered, was to focus on employees' career opportunities within the company. Those who moved up the hierarchy, or who even made lateral moves, stayed longer. Its solutions required only modest investments that, in the end, saved the company millions of dollars.