Identifying high potentials early: case study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Driven by a shortage of leadership capacity, companies are seeking to identify leadership talent earlier. Some companies are introducing programs to identify leadership potential among university students and then hire “high potentials” directly into management designate roles. The purpose of this paper is to explore one such early-stage leadership development program. Currently, little information is available about these initiatives. Design/methodology/approach Case study based on interviews with 18 managers and director of HR and archival employee records. Findings This case study provides a detailed description of an early-stage leadership identification and development program. This program has been developed to identify leadership talent among senior university students prior to hiring and onboarding, provide support, training and development and fast-track them into leadership positions. The study provides insight into the challenges and effectiveness of an early-stage leadership program and offers some practical implications. Originality/value To the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to document a leadership development program that identifies “high potentials” among university students for the purpose of developing them into company leaders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it