Robert had built one of the most respected architecture firms in his region. The firm attracted top talent from the best universities, delivered award-winning projects, and maintained a reputation for design excellence. As demand grew, Robert realized he needed more structure. His architects were brilliant, but they lacked day-to-day direction. To solve this, he created a new leadership role: Architect Manager. The position would serve as a bridge between the leadership team and the architects, providing mentorship, holding people accountable, and ensuring projects moved efficiently.
Shaun was an obvious choice. He had been with the firm for five years and consistently outperformed his peers. He was efficient, talented, and respected for the volume and quality of his work. Promoting him seemed logical. But within weeks, the decision began to unravel.
Shaun wasn’t managing. He was still doing design work, now under the added pressure of team oversight. His peers—now direct reports—were unsure how to take direction from someone who had been an equal just weeks earlier. Accountability suffered. Morale declined. Deadlines slipped. Shaun wasn’t failing from lack of effort. He was failing because no one had equipped him with the skills required to lead. Robert had lost a top-performing architect and inadvertently gained a struggling manager.
This scenario is common. Organizations routinely promote high performers into leadership roles based on past performance, not future potential. Of course, the skill set required to manage and lead is not the same as the one needed to execute technical work. Failing to recognize this distinction creates costly gaps in performance, engagement, and retention.
In this article, you will learn:
- Why High Performers Often Struggle in Leadership Roles
- The Business Impact of Poor Promotions
- How to Evaluate Leadership Readiness Before Promotion
- The Role of Leadership Development Programs in Transition
- What CEOs Must Do to Avoid Talent Misalignment
Why High Performers Often Struggle in Leadership Roles
Individual contributors rise through organizations by excelling in execution. They are subject matter experts. They meet deadlines. They do great work. But leadership involves a different set of capabilities. Managers must influence, coach, delegate, and hold others accountable. They must navigate interpersonal dynamics, deliver difficult feedback, and develop their team.
Shaun’s challenge was not unique. He went from being a high-performing architect to managing his peers without clear expectations, training, or support. What made him great in one role did not automatically transfer to the next. Technical excellence does not equate to leadership competence. In fact, the two are often in conflict. Leaders must let go of doing the work themselves and focus on enabling others.
Without this shift in mindset, new managers either micromanage or retreat. They may feel isolated, uncertain, or overwhelmed. This has a cascading effect on their teams, who begin to sense the insecurity and lack of direction.
The Business Impact of Poor Promotions
When a promotion fails, the organization suffers in multiple ways. First, it loses a high-performing individual contributor. This alone can cause a drop in productivity. Second, it gains a manager who may lack the skills to lead effectively, creating friction in the team and confusion about roles and expectations.
These situations often lead to disengagement. Employees become frustrated with inconsistent management. Communication weakens. Deadlines slip. Performance issues go unaddressed. In some cases, top performers leave the organization altogether.
There is also reputational damage internally. Other employees see the failed promotion and begin to question leadership decisions. Some may hesitate to step into leadership roles themselves, fearing a lack of support. Others may believe advancement is based on favoritism rather than fit.
Poorly executed promotions are expensive. They not only reduce individual and team performance, but they also require additional time, coaching, or even re-hiring if the transition ultimately fails.
How to Evaluate Leadership Readiness Before Promotion
The first step in avoiding these outcomes is clarity. Organizations must define what success looks like in a leadership role before filling it. This is where a job scorecard becomes essential. The scorecard outlines the accountabilities, outcomes, and competencies required for the position. It also provides a shared standard against which candidates—internal or external—can be evaluated.
CEOs must go beyond subjective opinions about who “deserves” the promotion. They need to evaluate behavioral competencies, emotional intelligence, and leadership potential. Tools such as hiring assessments, behavioral interviews, and leadership simulations can help identify strengths and gaps - even for internal candidates.
Equally important is the conversation with the candidate. The individual must understand what the role requires and decide whether it aligns with their goals. A superstar contributor may not want to become a manager once they fully understand what it entails.
Promotions should never be a reward for past performance. They are a bet on future potential. That bet must be informed and supported.
The Role of Leadership Development Programs in Transition
Even when a promotion is the right decision, the transition from contributor to manager requires support. Leadership training programs are essential for building the skills necessary to manage people effectively. These programs should include foundational topics like conducting one-on-one meetings, delivering feedback, managing performance, coaching employees, and navigating difficult conversations.
Leadership development is not a single workshop. It is a process. Newly promoted managers need time, mentorship, and access to resources. They benefit from peer learning, feedback loops, and regular check-ins with senior leaders. This support reduces the risk of failure and accelerates the manager’s effectiveness.
Organizations serious about developing leaders must invest in structured programs. Whether through internal training, external leadership development classes, or executive leadership coaching, the message should be clear: leadership is a discipline, and we train for it.
What CEOs Must Do to Avoid Talent Misalignment
The responsibility for successful promotions lies with leadership. CEOs and executive teams must recognize the difference between performance and potential. They must slow down the decision-making process, create scorecards, and involve candidates in evaluating the opportunity.
Once the decision is made, the organization must commit to developing the new leader. This includes formal training, regular feedback, and clear expectations. It also includes patience. New managers need time to adjust. They will make mistakes. The role of the CEO is to support that learning curve without lowering the standard.
Misaligned talent decisions cost more than just lost productivity. They erode culture, weaken morale, and delay growth. But when done well, internal promotions can be among the most powerful drivers of engagement and performance.
With the right training, expectations, and support, a high-performing individual contributor can become a high-performing manager. And when that happens, the entire organization benefits.
Takeaways
Promoting strong individual contributors into leadership roles is a natural impulse. But it is not always the right move unless approached with care.
Leadership requires a different skill set, one that must be assessed, trained, and supported. CEOs must invest time in defining the role, evaluating readiness, and ensuring alignment between the candidate’s goals and the position’s demands.
Leadership development programs are not optional. They are critical infrastructure for companies that want to scale without sacrificing performance.
The transition from contributor to manager is a defining moment in an employee’s career. Handled well, it strengthens the team, boosts morale, and drives results. Handled poorly, it compromises both people and performance.
Organizations that promote with discipline and support with intention are far more likely to build strong, sustainable leadership at every level.
Topics:
