Case study · Assessment and development centres
Improving Talent–Role Fit
The intervention combined role mapping, psychometric inputs and observed assessment exercises to create a clearer view of development needs and internal mobility.
Reference case · Illustrative figuresThe impact
Talent discussions became more specific about fit and development
These reference measures show the movement from the starting condition to the outcome the intervention was designed to strengthen.
The figures are illustrative reference values from the Impact in Action portfolio; they are not independently verified client results.
- Employees assessed
- 150+
- Role families
- 12
- Focus
- Role fit and development
The change in numbers
Before and after.
Each indicator has its own scale and unit.
Changes are shown in plain language.
Confidence in role fit increased by 29 percentage points.
Higher is betterVisibility of mobility options increased by 31 percentage points.
Higher is betterPlan specificity increased by 48 percentage points; this is not plan completion.
Higher is betterThe share identified as candidates, not the share already moved.
Higher is betterThe figures are illustrative reference values from the Impact in Action portfolio; they are not independently verified client results.
How to read these figures
The portfolio provides indicators for confidence, visibility, plan quality and candidate identification. It does not report completed promotions, validated predictive accuracy or intervention duration.
A strong performance rating did not answer every talent question
Employees were often placed according to a vacancy, tenure or the function they already knew. Performance ratings offered a view of contribution in the current role, but a less complete answer about future capability. Leaders needed to understand where people might contribute next and what development would make a move sensible.
The assessment began with the role before interpreting the person
The organisation needed a common way to describe capability. Without that, 'good leader' could mean different things to different managers. Mapping role requirements to competencies established what the assessment needed to examine and gave the final discussion a concrete foundation.
The centre connected assessment with an individual development response
The design combined role-to-competency mapping, psychometric inputs, structured interviews, case simulations, role plays, group exercises and assessor observations. The resulting talent view described capability against role requirements and informed recommendations about mobility, succession and development.
- 01
Map role demands
Define the competencies and complexity associated with each role family.
- 02
Combine evidence
Use interviews, psychometric inputs and observed exercises to build a fuller view.
- 03
Plan development
Connect feedback with individual priorities, mobility options and succession discussions.
Talent discussions became more specific about fit and development
The reference figures show role-fit confidence moving from 52% to 81% and talent mobility visibility from 41% to 72%. Development-plan specificity rose from 38% to 86%, the largest percentage-point change in this case. This describes clarity in plans, not completion of the development itself.