Employers are desperate to maximise the return on investment with any HR spend and L&D is no different. What works best then: an all-encompassing strategy or focusing greater resources on top performers and high-potentials?
There isn’t a right or wrong answer. It will depend on the company and the particular talent pool. It is about finding the best fit for your organisation, rather than simply applying best practice. This topic stirs up a healthy debate – I look more closely at the merits of different approaches in an HR Magazine article.
What is your view? Will having one or two star performers generate a better return than developing a group of skilled – but not necessarily standout – employees?
