Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 16

, 2016

, 2016

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

10

11

12

13

15

- 16

16

2
, 2016

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
45% .
HR-, ,
: (77%),
(75%), (68%).

(81%). (53%).
, ,
(83%) (86%).
(81%)
. 54% HR-, 24%
.
:
1 : / (65%).
2 : (57%), (56%).
3 : (52%), (47%)
(46%).

, ( 1 5):
1 : (3,8), (3,8).
2 : (3,5), (3,5).
3 : (3,4), - (3,4).
(48%)
. 24%
,
.
(55%)
( ..
).

3
, 2016


.
,
.
9-box grid
Blueprint- Potential in Focus,
.
HR-,
. ,
, , .
,
:
Church, A. H., & Rotolo, C. T. (2013). How are top companies assessing their high-potentials and
senior executives? A talent management benchmark udy. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, 65(3), 199223.
Talent Strategy Group (2015). Potential. Whos doing what to identify their be? :
http://www.talentrategygroup.com/application/third_party/ck-
nder/userles/les/NTMN%20Potential%20Study%202015.pdf
Church, A. H., Rotolo, C. T., Ginther, N. M., & Levine, R. (2015). How are top companies designing and
managing their high-potential programs? A follow-up talent management benchmark udy. Consult-
ing Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 67(1), 1747.
CRF Research (2016). Assessing Potential. : http://www.crforum.co.uk/re-
search-and-resources/executive-summary-assessing-potential/

HR-,
-. ,
.

4
, 2016


2016 .
, ,
HR- .
231 . 44,6%
.
.
( .. )
.
.

44,6%

.
10005000 (31%).

31%
27%

15% 16%

11%

100 1001 000 1 0005 000 5 00030 000 30 000

:
( .. FMCG) 16%
, 14%
12%
IT 11%
10%

5
, 2016

17 , 1%
.

( .. FMCG) 16%

, 14%

12%

IT 11%

10%

9%

9%

7%

6%

5% 17 ,
1%
3%

- (80%
). (20%) .

52%


; - 28%

- 20%

6
, 2016

HR-,

, ,
.
(77%), (75%)
(68%). ,
HiPo .
( 48%). ,

. ? ,
.
, .. ,
.
(31%) .
,
. : , ,
.
.

HR-,

77%

75%

68%

48%

48%

31%

25%

18%

7
, 2016



(81%). ,
,
.
(53%) , ..
. ,
.
, .
, (31%)
. ( )
.
.
22%
. ,
.
.
, . ,
,
.
10%
. ,
. HR-
.

81%

53%

31%

22%

10%

1%

8
, 2016


(83%) (86%)
. , ,
, .
(62%) . ,

HR-, .. .
, ,
.
, - 37% .
,
(. 7). - , ..
. ,

-.
-, .
,
,
(Wang, Holmes, Oh & Zhu, 2016).

83% 86%

72%
62%

37%

24%

9
, 2016


(81%) .
(54%) HR-, 24%
, 3% .
. ,
, 3442%
(Church, Rotolo, Ginther & Levine, 2015; Talent Strategy, 2015).
,
, HiPo (Gelens, Hofmans, Dries & Pepermans,
2014; Kotlyar, 2013). ,
:
1. ,
, .
, , ,
(Sonnenberg, van Zijderveld & Brinks, 2014).

.
2. , ,
HiPo (Center for Creative Leadership, 2014).
,
, .
.

24%

54% 3%
HR

,
81%

,
15%

4%

10
, 2016


, ,
.


(15)

(3,83 / 56%)
(3,81 / 25%)
3,54
(3,53 / 37%)
(3,51 / 57%) -

(3,43 / 25%) -
(3,19 / 17%) - (3,32 / 47%) - (3,19 / 52%)

2,93,5 (3,34 / 12%) - (3,22 / 46%) - (3,19 / 65%)
/
(3,17 / 43%) 360o
(3,37 / 21%)

(2,83 / 17%) -

2,42,9
(2,41 / 6%)

025% 2650% 5175%


(65%).


. , , ..
.

.
3,19 .

11
, 2016


(57%) (56%).
, .
(3,83),
.
(3,51). ,
.

(52%), (47%) (46%).

(3,19-3,32). ,
,
.
, .
.
360 (43%), (37%) - (25%).
: ,
. ,
3,53.
, (25%)
, . ,
3,81.



. ,
(Bersin, 2016; Church, Rotolo, Ginther &
Levine, 2015). ,
, ,
.
, 24% .
KPI ,
. , ,
, .
,

12
, 2016


.
48% .
,
, .
, .
,
.
,
.
, .
14% . , KPI
. ,
.
, 12% .
, ..
.
, ,
. ,
( ) ,
.

48%
,
24%

14%

12%

3%



. , .
(55%) ,
. ,
.
, ..
.
-
HR-.

13
, 2016

.
(46%) , ,
. 34% , .
HR- // ,
.
,
, .
40% ,
.
HR- -. - -
. ,
, .
(39%) :
.
,
,
.
, ,
.
.


55%

,
46%


40%


39%

,
28%

14
, 2016

Bersin (2016). What Is a High Potential Anyway? :


http://blog.bersin.com/what-is-a-high-potential-anyway/
Center for Creative Leadership (2014). High-potential Talent. A View from Inside the Leadership
Pipeline. : http://www.ccl.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/highPotentialTalent.pdf
Church, A. H., & Rotolo, C. T. (2013). How are top companies assessing their high-potentials and
senior executives? A talent management benchmark udy. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, 65(3), 199223.
Talent Strategy Group (2015). Potential. Whos doing what to identify their be? :
http://www.talentrategygroup.com/application/third_party/cknder/userles/les/NTMN%20Potentia
l%20Study%202015.pdf
Church, A. H., Rotolo, C. T., Ginther, N. M., & Levine, R. (2015). How are top companies designing and
managing their high-potential programs? A follow-up talent management benchmark udy.
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 67(1), 1747.
CRF Research (2016). Assessing Potential. :
http://www.crforum.co.uk/research-and-resources/executive-summary-assessing-potential/
Gelens, J., Hofmans, J., Dries, N., & Pepermans, R. (2014). Talent management and organisational
juice: employee reactions to high potential identication. Human Resource Management Journal,
24(2), 159175.
Kotlyar, I. (2013). The Double Edge Sword of High Potential Expectations. Europes Journal of
Psychology, 9(3), 581596.
Sonnenberg, M., van Zijderveld, V., & Brinks, M. (2014). The role of talent-perception incongruence in
eective talent management. Journal of World Business, 49(2), 272280.
Wang, G., Holmes, R. M., Oh, I. S., & Zhu, W. (2016). Do CEOs matter to rm rategic actions and
rm performance? A metaanalytic inveigation based on upper echelons theory. Personnel
Psychology (in press).

15
, 2016

, HR-.
1989
. :


( HR-)

HR
, ,
. 1990
; 1996 ;
2013 Potential in Focus.
.

: .


Potential in Focus

. 3 ,
. (, ).
.
assessment.livejournal.ru.


..., ,

HR- . 20
-. MBA
, . DEEP
, HR-
.

16