High Performer vs High Potential

We often hear these two terms used interchangeably, but they aren’t the same thing. The difference is important, because it affects how you develop your employees.

High Performer generally refers to someone who is great at the job they have. They are talented in their specialty, they do great work, they put in a lot of discretionary effort, they meet or exceed goals. When you do their performance review, they’re at the top of the pack. These are often the people you go to when a big job is coming or something needs to be done urgently.

But don’t confuse them with High Potentials.

If a High Performer is someone who does great in their current job, a High Potential has shown you something that makes you think they’ll be great in the next job (and, ideally, in the one after that). These are employees who have turned in a strong performance up until now and seem to have the ability to do even more when you promote them. We tend to think of High Potentials as moving into leadership roles, but some companies consider people who have the potential to do more within their technical specialty as High Potentials, too.

In general, High Potentials tend to also be High Performers, but High Performers aren’t necessarily High Potentials.

For many companies, identifying someone as a High Potential means you start developing them for future leadership, whereas High Performers are more likely to be developed within their specialty, focusing on technical training. The distinction is important. You have the opportunity to develop people in the way that’s likely to offer the greatest return on your training investment by acknowledging where their greatest ability lies and building upon that.

By the way, one of the key differences between High Performers and High Potentials is that the latter should have the desire to move into leadership positions and out of a strictly technical role. If you look at any country’s Air Force, for instance, you’ll find plenty of fighter pilots who only want to be the best fighter pilots they can be, without worrying about all the requirements necessary for moving into a command role. The same is true for many of your employees who want to be the best in their field and don’t want to leave that work in order to manage and lead others.

It’s best for you, and best for them, if you create development paths for your people based on their desires and true capabilities. So be careful how you throw around these terms, because they actually do mean something.