Fast-Tracking: Upsides, Downsides and

Implications for Talent Management

Author Khoo Ee Wan and Goh Hui Chin

Topic Leadership and Management

SYNOPSIS
A central interest of leadership development professionals is in designing training programmes that
result in more effective leadership and ultimately, improved organisational outcomes. However,
research has shown that often times such interventions do not achieve their full potential in effecting
change. The aim of this report is to highlight and address some of the challenges associated with
transfer of learning back to the workplace, that have the most relevance for leadership development in
the Singapore Public Service.

CONTENT

INTRODUCTION

Fast-tracking, done right, offers organisations a three-fold advantage (Gritzmacher, 1989): improved
organisational performance, sustained business edge and a positive culture that in turn attracts new
talent. However, the traditional deal for fast-trackers, in terms of long-term employment and upward
mobility within the organisation in exchange for their loyalty and commitment (Iles, 1997), appears to
be a quickly eroding one. In the new business reality characterised by greater globalisation and the
emergence of career types that span different organisations (Dries & Pepermans, 2008), not only are
individuals becoming less inclined to settle for lifelong employment within a single company,
organisations are also increasingly unwilling to give out such promises (Viney, Adamson & Doherty,
1997).

Given this evolving context, it is timely to review the approach of fast-tracking. This issue has
relevance for the Singapore Public Service as well, since fast-tracking is a cornerstone of its talent
management strategy, and questions have arisen about whether our system has generated the right
leaders. Thus, this critical assessment will re-examine the objectives and features of fast-tracking, as
well as highlight some of the major pitfalls associated with fast-tracking, thereby allowing us to
consider ways in which we might refine the system for the Singapore Public Service.

WHAT IS FAST-TRACKING?

It is widely accepted that a fast-track programme refers to some sort of talent management system set in
place by organisations to develop and deploy their high potential employees. The assumptions
underlying this approach, often unspoken, are that people can become more than what they currently
are, and that different people have different levels of potential. Thus, if an organisation can identify as
early as possible those people with a higher level of potential, it can then concentrate resources on
quickly developing these people to help them realise their potential, and through this process,
efficiently build up a pipeline of talent who can eventually be the leaders of the organisation.1

Specifically, a formalised fast-track programme is “a planned, organised set of diverse experiences

designed to accelerate the development of individuals having executive-level potential in order to make
their talents more quickly available to the organisation" (Feild & Harris, 1991, p. 261). Such high
potential employees are usually singled out early (Kiechel, 1984) and leadership development is then
accelerated by using frequent job rotations and other special opportunities not commonly available to
other employees, all within a condensed timeframe (Larsen, 2007). The underlying premise of fast-
tracking is that hard work and the display of exceptional talent will be rewarded by a steady progression
along the organisational hierarchy (Dries & Pepermans, 2008). The model of fast-tracking, however, is
evolving, and the philosophy behind fast-tracking is gradually shifting from a paternalistic stance
towards a more collaborative approach between organisations and individuals. In the contemporary
model, the organisation offers challenging work and development opportunities in return for employee
commitment (Iles, 1997; Ready, 2008). Career management is increasingly seen as an individual
responsibility (Iles, 1997), and the organisation's emphasis is not so much on ensuring upward
progression as on providing opportunities for individuals to develop core skills, increase marketability
or enhance employability (Viney et al, 1997).

OBJECTIVES OF FAST-TRACKING

From the perspective of the organisation, the ultimate objective of fast-track schemes is to develop high
quality employees with the potential to succeed to senior management positions (Viney et al, 1997).
This would sustain and ensure continuity in the business of an organisation. Thus, the internal
grooming of high potential individuals establishes a pipeline of talent for the organisation that meets
both short-term succession planning goals and longer-term managerial needs (Herriot, 1992; Knights &
Raffo, 1990).

Two related goals arise from the need for leadership succession and business sustainability: 1) talent
recruitment and retention, and 2) accelerated leadership development. Firstly, given the intense
competition for leadership talent that organisations currently and will continue to face (Avolio, Avey &
Quisenberry, 2010), attracting the right people and getting them to stay and contribute to the
organisation is an essential step towards succession planning. Fast-tracking is attractive to capable
individuals because of the mobility within the organisation as well as greater and more frequent career
progressions offered by such a scheme. These possibilities meet the expectations of a new generation of
employees looking for “rapid growth, unique experiences, and a constantly changing environment"
(Gandossy, 2001, p.32–33). The features of fast-tracking that attract talent usually also entice them to
stay (Feild & Harris, 1991). In support of this, Campbell & Smith (2010) reported that an
“overwhelming" (p. 17) proportion of high-potential individuals who are fast-tracked are highly
committed to their organisations and motivated by their jobs.

The second crucial aspect to maintaining a steady leadership pipeline is accelerated development. As
mentioned earlier, it is increasingly unrealistic to expect employees to stay over an extended period of
time with the same company. In fact, it is “highly likely an employee hired won't be with the company
in 5 years" (Gandossy, 2001, p.35). To reap the greatest returns, therefore, companies need to
“aggressively develop their talent from day one, immediately engage them in meaningful work and
offer them opportunities to grow" (Gandossy, 2001, p.35). Accelerated development is also
instrumental in preparing high-potentials to manage in complex environments. By efficiently
developing the leadership competencies of their high-potentials and creating a savvy top management,
organisations can enhance their responsiveness to an increasingly complex business environment
(Burke, 1997). Fast-track programmes cater for accelerated development through the greater range of
opportunities that high-potentials can move quickly through to gain the necessary experiences for key
management positions. The transitions provided by fast-tracking are valuable because they are able to
stimulate transformative self and leadership insight (Khoo & Tham, 2011) more quickly than can
otherwise be achieved through individuals' own efforts.

Feild & Harris (1991) highlighted the importance of carefully considering and clearly specifying an
organisation's goals for implementing fast-tracking. They found that even though organisations may
argue that they pursue both objectives of recruitment and retention, as well as development, in their
programme, one objective may actually be dominating the other. For example, it is possible for an
organisation to be pre-occupied with incentivising high-potentials to join and stay through the perks of
fast-tracking, and neglect the quality of learning that these individuals are able to glean from their
professional encounters. What needs to be realised, however, is that both development and
recruitment/retention are crucial to successfully building a leadership pipeline within the company. In
addition, organisations and individuals look towards fast-tracking to fulfil somewhat different priorities:
the former understandably more concerned with succession planning and business advantage, and the
latter with professional development and career progression. While these goals may not be at odds,
alignment between an organisation and its fast-trackers is essential in order for fast-track programmes
to flourish.

TYPICAL ELEMENTS OF FAST-TRACKING

Despite the apparent consensus, fast-track systems are more accurately a label used to denote diverse
combinations of organisational experiences strategically strung together for different individuals, rather
than a set of standard practices that all fast-trackers undergo. Practically speaking, this has led to
multiple, sometimes conflicting, interpretations about what fast-tracking involves and even what it is
(Gunn, 1998). In the following section, we identify and describe in greater detail the typical
characteristics of fast-tracking.

Early identification of fast-trackers

Just as commercial advantage can be generated by a speed-to-market product strategy, sustained

competitive edge can be created by an organisation's ability to develop leadership talent efficiently
(Burke, 1997). The shorter the lead time needed to identify leadership needs, select current talent and
develop potentials, the more cost-efficient the process and the sooner an organisation can begin reaping
the returns of investment in its talent. For this reason, fast-trackers are typically high-potential
employees singled out early in their careers or at entry-level for accelerated development (Williams,
2004).

An extensive and/or formal selection procedure—involving elements such as psychometric

assessments, structured in-depth interviews and assessment centres—is usually entailed in identifying
suitable candidates (Larsen, London, Weinstein & Raghuram, 1998). Fast-trackers are shortlisted not
only on the basis of their work performance and potential, but their desire to be fast-tracked and
motivation to succeed are usually taken into account as well (Campbell & Smith, 2010; Iles, 1997).

Special status within the organisation

As organisational investments are higher for fast-trackers, more effort is made to prevent them from
leaving the organisation (Dries & Pepermans, 2008). Part of the lure of fast-tracking systems lies in the
exclusivity and privileges that they offer, which in turn contribute to their success as a recruitment and
retention strategy. Fast-track programmes are often publicised as difficult to get into, selecting only
those employees who represent the cream of the crop in the organisation. These selected individuals
enjoy high visibility and access to senior management (Larsen et al., 1998), and their preferential
treatment goes beyond formal recognition. Other more subtle behaviours have also been observed, such
as the opinions of fast-trackers being sought after more frequently (Campbell & Smith, 2010). Given
their special status, fast-trackers also face higher expectations from superiors and subordinates to
succeed.

Privileged access to developmental opportunities and experiences

A key function of fast-tracking is the levelling up of managerial competence among its participants
within the shortest time possible (Burke, 1997; Larsen et al., 1998). Thus, fast-trackers are typically
provided with a range of developmental opportunities and experiences that are not easily accessible to
other employees. Such developmental opportunities and experiences often include systematic job
rotation and greater responsibilities. For instance, fast-trackers may be given special projects to
complete, which can constitute either high-profile work that is important to top management or stretch
assignments. A stretch assignment is one that requires the individual to move out of his comfort zone
and take on a new role that can potentially broaden his current capabilities. Because of the learning
potential offered by stretch assignments, organisations often make use of stretch assignments to develop
and groom leadership talent.

To help them perform on their different postings and additional projects, fast-trackers usually receive
differentiated training and mentoring opportunities (Larsen et al., 1998), and may also be exposed to
specially designed performance feedback systems, such as 360-degree reports (Herriot, 1992; Moulton
& Fickel, 1993). These tools and interventions are meant to enable fast-trackers to better understand
their strengths and limitations as leaders, as well as encourage self-reflection and self-directed learning,
so that they may continually improve on their effectiveness and impact within the organisation.

High mobility within the organisation

In order to accelerate leadership development and build organisational perspective, fast-trackers

undergo regular movement within the organisation. These deployments can be both lateral and diagonal
(or vertical), and are designed to help high-potentials understand the business of the organisation better
as well as socialise these future leaders into a strong corporate culture (Forbes & Piercy, 1991).
Therefore, fast-trackers tend to stay a shorter duration in each posting compared to peers not on the fast
track (Larsen et al., 1998), with each posting usually lasting a couple of years. They may also be
promoted faster (Larsen et al., 1998) and for slightly different reasons: Forbes and Piercy (1991)
highlighted that promotions may often be given to these individuals for developmental more than
business reasons.

DOES FAST-TRACKING WORK?

While fast-tracking has laudable aims, its actual impact on the organisation is debatable. To date, there
are few published studies that evaluate the extent to which fast-tracking meets its stated objectives for
the organisation. Nonetheless, there is some evidence of its success. Since fast-trackers are typically
groomed for leadership positions, a common metric that is used involves examining the percentage of
fast-trackers who stay with the organisation and eventually reach middle and senior management
positions. Using this metric, an example of a success in fast-tracking includes the Accelerated
Promotion Scheme for United Kingdom police officers (Oliver, 1997). Over a 30-year period, the
scheme boasted a high retention rate of 94% within the police force of former course members, and did
groom some future leaders as 29% of those who attended the course between 1962 and 1972 reached
chief officer ranks, which were the highest positions in the organisation. When we examine the
statistics for Singapore, we find that most of the public service leader positions (namely, the most
senior and critical service appointments in the ministries and statutory board) are occupied by
Administrative Officers, who are fast-tracked in their careers. In particular, in 2009, 16 of the 20
permanent secretaries heading ministries were scholars, a key pool of talent for the fast-track scheme
(Teo, 2009). Such indicators are sometimes used to justify fast-tracking.

However, such metrics have been questioned (e.g., Dries & Pepermans, 2008; Larsen, 1997). A key
issue is that they provide no information as to whether the best people in the organisation have indeed
been identified and effectively developed; self-fulfilling prophecy could explain why fast-trackers
succeed. Those who are put on the fast track are often assumed to be superior performers and given
more opportunities, thus it may be no great surprise that a large proportion of them end up in top and
middle management positions. In addition, it may be more politically correct for managers and the
organisation to endorse the performance of fast-trackers because these people have often gone through
a rigorous selection process and expensive development programmes, and they may be appraised by the
same people who were involved in their selection in the first place.

If we refer to the typical objectives of fast-tracking, other indicators that could be employed to study
fast-track programme effectiveness include the degree of growth of fast-trackers, peer and subordinate
ratings of fast-trackers' leadership effectiveness, or surveys of stakeholders' perceptions of fast-tracking
effectiveness in succession planning. Feild & Harris (1991), for instance, studied the views of fast-
trackers, their supervisors and company executives on perceptions of the effectiveness of the fast-track
programme in their respective organisation. They found that fast-tracking was generally perceived to be
effective in developing managers, and in recruiting and retaining talent, though there might be trade-
offs if both goals were to be achieved concurrently. Apart from this study, there was little rigorous,
published research that measured the effectiveness of fast-tracking. A further complication is that fast-
tracking is a label that covers a wide range of practices and two different organisations that implement
fast-tracking could have widely different practices, which makes questions about fast-tracking
effectiveness somewhat contextual.

On the whole, there is little indication that organisations are actively gathering information on the
impact of their fast-tracking programmes. Yet, what we do know is that fast-tracking is associated with
potential challenges and pitfalls which, if not managed or avoided, may reduce or even nullify the
benefits promised by the heavy investments poured into accelerated talent development. These
challenges and pitfalls will be explored in the following section.

DOWNSIDES AND CHALLENGES OF FAST-TRACKING

Organisations often implement fast-tracking because of the potential benefits. However, the very
features that define fast-tracking have their downsides for both the fast-trackers themselves as well as
the organisation as a whole.

Challenges with the early identification of fast-trackers

Fast-trackers are usually singled out early in their careers or at entry-level positions. However, the
qualities emphasised in the identification and selection, and even rewarding, of fast-trackers may have
their downsides. Often, fast-trackers are noticed and rewarded because of their strong performance and
the dominating characteristics that they display, such as a drive for mastery and accomplishment, a
sense of self-confidence and self-efficacy, assertiveness, high levels of energy and a strong sense of
initiative (e.g., Kovach, 1986; Iles, 1997). However, these characteristics that make them strong
individual contributors in their current roles may become liabilities when they advance to leadership
positions. This may happen if they over-value these characteristics and fail to learn new skills which
would allow them to handle the changing demands of work, particularly in terms of working with
others and building a team (McCall & Lombardo, 1983). As a result, many fast-trackers derail when
they reach mid-levels of management (Kovach, 1986). For instance, a task-oriented individual may
achieve stellar results on his own but as a manager, the downside of the same approach is that he may
treat his staff as instrumental resources and overlook their personal needs, thus causing staff to be
disaffected and disengaged.

It is also common to select fast-trackers by identifying young staff who possess the competencies that
match the success profile of current leaders (e.g., McCall, 1998; Viney et al, 1997), with the assumption
that these are the people with the potential to become future leaders. This is problematic because the
expectations and demands of future leaders could be different from those of current leaders, meaning
that a different set of competencies might be important. In addition, people change and may develop
both new competencies and undesirable characteristics over time (McCall, 1998). These issues raise the
questions of what criteria to use as the basis for selection and when the identification of talent should
take place.

Finally, the practice of early identification could inadvertently exclude deserving individuals who are
late developers and those who have made a career switch and joined the organisation later in life
(e.g., Clark, 1992). A substantial pool of talent upon which the organisation could leverage may be
overlooked as a result.

Exclusivity may lead to individualism and elitism among fast-trackers, and discontent among
those not on the fast track

The exclusive nature of fast-tracking schemes is intended to help organisations attract and retain high-
calibre individuals, as well as to help organisations invest their resources more judiciously. It is
however a double-edged sword as some fast-trackers may develop an unhealthy self-centred focus and
an unrealistic sense of entitlement (Bottger & Barsoux, 2010; Iles, 1997). This is often referred to as the
“crown prince syndrome" as the fast-trackers may believe they have the rights to ascend the
organisational hierarchy and receive plum assignments without putting in the necessary effort. This is
particularly pertinent as there is evidence of increasing levels of narcissism in the younger generation,
including younger Singaporeans (Goh & Hennessy, 2011). This may prompt some fast-trackers to focus
more on their own prospects rather than broader organisational goals, and they may be more inclined to
leave the organisation when they feel that they are not receiving what they are entitled to Bottger &
Barsoux, 2010). This would defeat the purpose of putting them on the fast track in the first place, which
is to retain key staff and ensure leadership continuity.

The exclusivity of the fast-track scheme may also foster a feeling of superiority and intellectual
arrogance among the select group, which could have a detrimental influence on the decisions they are
making in key managerial and leadership positions. This is because a key danger of elitism is that those
in the elite group may “get caught up in their own mental models to such a degree that they cease to
observe accurately what is going on around them" (Schein, 1996, pp. 220–221) and discount the
perspectives of others not in the elite group. This is dangerous for the organisation as research on
strategic decision making has shown that decision quality improves when divergent opinions are sought
and multiple perspectives are considered (Amason, 1996).

In addition, there are potential ripple effects if such an undesirable culture is allowed to form and
perpetuate. Fast-trackers as a group may be perceived as elitist and arrogant (Clark, 1992), contributing
to unhealthy divisions in the organisation between the “anointed" and those who are not and
consequently regarded as second-class citizens. Those not on the fast track, which would be the
majority of an organisation's staff, may suffer from low morale as their own development and careers
may be overlooked even though their performance might be good (Clark, 1992; Thompson, Kirkham &
Dixon, 1985). This could lead to performance issues in the organisation as well as retention problems
amongst other good staff.

The exclusivity and benefits of the fast-track scheme may also make it less rewarding to pursue a
specialist career, even though such roles are still important in many knowledge-intensive organisations
(Larsen, 1997), and some may choose to pursue a managerial career regardless of their interests and
preference because of the attractiveness of the fast-tracking, and consequently derail or plateau off
(Ramos, 1994). Thus, the exclusivity of the fast-track scheme may lead to overall detriment of the
organisation, if not properly managed.

Access to privileged developmental opportunities does not guarantee development will take place

Fast-tracking schemes typically provide fast-trackers access to a range of privileged developmental

opportunities and experiences that can help build competence and leadership skills, as well as a
generalist and broad-based perspective. However, this access in and of itself does not guarantee that the
desired learning will take place.

One consideration is the individual's level of developmental readiness, which is a multi-faceted

construct that influences the extent to which people learn from their experiences. An earlier research by
the Civil Service College on developmental readiness (Chia & Khoo, 2010) concluded from a survey of
literature in the leadership development field that individuals who have clearly defined and meaningful
career aspirations, are aware of their developmental needs, believe that personal change is possible and
would lead to positive outcomes, and have the necessary psychological resources (such as an openness
to challenges and tolerance for failure, as well as the capacity to reflect on and regulate one's cognitive
processes), are more likely to learn from their experiences. As different individuals have different levels
of developmental readiness, not all fast-trackers would benefit to the same extent from the
developmental opportunities offered and there is the risk that the developmental opportunities provided
might end up being merely a list of assignments that look good on fast-trackers' resumés.

In addition, beyond mere access to privileged developmental opportunities, the match between a
particular developmental opportunity and the fast-tracked individual matters: exposure to a particular
experience may be highly developmental for an individual because it is disorienting and evokes a sense
of introspection within the individual on his identity and competencies, and prompts him to identify
developmental needs and to learn and grow (Musselwhite & Dillon, 1987). However, the same
experience may not be useful to another individual who finds the task less demanding or whose
previous experiences enable him to find immediate solutions to the current problems (Larsen, 1997).

Accelerated development may hamper effective learning

A key tenet of fast-tracking is accelerated development, which entails moving people quickly through a
variety of developmental assignments. There will always be a performance gap when people take on
new roles, and individuals vary in the time they take to reach full performance. It is estimated that,
depending on the level of seniority and the industry sector, an individual typically takes an average of
six to nine months from the start of coming into the role, to learn the ropes and begin to contribute more
value to the organisation than he has taken from it (Chari, 2008). Thus, when the transitions are too
frequent, there may be insufficient time for in-depth learning or consolidation of new skills before
moving to the next posting.

In addition, short-term developmental assignments may inadvertently lead to a focus on launching low-
risk, short-term initiatives and obtaining quick results that would give the fast-trackers credit and
visibility, with a neglect of longer term goals (Kovach, 1986; Thompson et al, 1985), and insufficient
time to experience the consequences of their decisions, which would limit their ability to fully
appreciate the assignment's complete business cycle or broader picture (Bottger & Barsoux, 2010). This
suggests that the fast-trackers may not develop the perspectives and attitudes needed for upper-level
management work, where the emphasis is on broader, long-term goals.

The learning that can be gleaned from each developmental assignment is not restricted to skills and
perspectives that would help them directly with their work. Hall (1999) pointed out that time is needed
to develop a network of relationships that would provide support and learning. With whistle-stop tours,
fast-trackers would not have the time to develop this network, which would limit their ability to learn
from mistakes and setbacks, and to receive good developmental feedback that would enhance their self-
understanding. These, Hall (1999) argued, are meta-competencies that are critical throughout one's
career.

In short, when the pace at which fast-trackers are being rotated is poorly considered, the resultant
incomplete learning could hinder success at subsequent levels as essential skills, perspectives and
relationships that are needed at higher levels are not properly developed (Kovach, 1986; Rhinesmith,
2010).

High mobility of fast-trackers could have a negative impact on the organisation

The high mobility resulting from moving fast-trackers quickly through a variety of assignments can
pose problems for the organisation. For one, the relatively short stint in any one assignment could lead
to a lack of technical expertise, which impedes effective leadership as the fast-trackers may not have a
sound understanding of his staff's work and may be unable to offer substantial help on technical
problems beyond general concepts and solutions that could be applied in any situation (Thompson et al,
1985).

In addition, the inadvertent focus on short-term results is detrimental because longer-term projects that
are strategically important might not be embarked on, or if they are embarked on, there may be a lack
of continuity when managers move to other positions and new managers, eager to make their own
mark, take over and introduce changes (Thompson, et al, 1985). Oliver (1997) also cited companies
such as ICI which found that frequent changes in leadership could have a negative impact for the
customer base. In the public service, the focus on short-term results could translate to an emphasis on
introducing new initiatives, writing papers, or helping to pass new policies and bills through parliament,
rather than a genuine concern for what public policies actually achieve (Lusk, 2010).

Furthermore, as a fast-tracker has limited time in each developmental posting and usually faces great
pressure to achieve results, the primary focus tends to be on maximising his own learning and
performance, and proving his capabilities to his bosses, or even strategising for his next posting.
Consequently, the fast-tracker might end up completing most of the plum assignments and critical work
himself, and the development and empowerment of his subordinates might be neglected, particularly
because monitoring and coaching staff are time-consuming and take time to show results; there may
also be less effort in fostering trusting relationships (Bottger & Barsoux, 2010; Iles, 1997; Thompson et
al, 1985). In support of this, there is some evidence that managers who focus on developing their
subordinates and building teams enjoy less career success, in terms of progression, than managers who
focus on achieving short-term goals and relying on their own capabilities to succeed (Graves, 1980).
Similarly, Gratton and Pearson (1994) found that empowering others was a developmental need for
many fast-trackers, with subordinates frequently citing the fast-trackers' inability to share responsibility
and control. This is undesirable for organisations as managers should be actively developing future
leaders and building future teams, so that the organisations would be sustainable in the longer term.
Moreover, disaffected subordinates may leave the organisation, resulting in a depletion of talent, or
some may put in less effort in their work and simply wait for the fast-tracker to move on (Bottger &
Barsoux, 2010).

Emphasis on fast progression may result in leaders who are promoted before their time

The possibility of rapid promotions and the opportunity to take on significant responsibilities earlier in
life are intended to retain high calibre individuals in the organisation and entice them to perform their
best. The hazard is that when promotions are too fast and frequent, leaders may be limited by the values
and perspectives that accompany their relatively early life stage, and lack the necessary experience and
emotional maturity to be effective leaders.

According to adult developmental life stage, late twenties or early thirties is typically the period of life
when people are focused on themselves and their self-achievement—how they can assert their
independence and gain competence—rather than feel a sense of social responsibility for others and be
interested in helping them and the organisation succeed (Kovach, 1986). Thus, fast-trackers who are
managing other managers during this life stage may find it harder to make the value shift to focus on
creating energy within the team by getting the managers to manage and having a total organisational
view, because they are not developmentally ready to handle such complexities. They may be seen as
green, arrogant, pushy, and unwilling to be part of the team, and may consequently alienate others
(Bunker, Kram & Ting, 2002; Hall, 1999; Kovach, 1986).

Emotional competencies, such as the ability to negotiate with peers, regulate own emotions in times of
crises, and win support for change, are similarly gained over time with practice and diligence (Bunker
et al, 2002). Hence, promoting fast-trackers too rapidly may limit them of the opportunity to develop
the emotional intelligence and people skills that will facilitate their working with peers, subordinates
and others, which is essential for leadership success in the long term.

In addition, leaders require personal power to lead, in terms of technical and organisational information
or knowledge, personal skills, established relationships and networks, or good track records (Kotter,
1985). Early career is typically the time to build up one's power base, middle career the time to utilise
it, and later career the time to hand it over to others. Fast-trackers, however, would have reached
leadership positions which require them to utilise their power before they have had the opportunity to
fully acquire it. This relatively short runway that fast-trackers have before assuming leadership
positions means that despite their cleverness, they may have not built up enough personal power. As a
result, they do not have enough depth and breadth of experience, which would have granted them
greater wisdom and honed their judgement (Li & Ong, 2010). For instance, Li and Ong (2010) cited
Prof Neo, a Singapore governance expert, who attributed recent stumbles in the Singapore
government's policy-making to having younger leaders who were less aware of the subtleties of
implementation challenges, and who lacked the experience and judgement to be able to anticipate
certain risks and consequences.

The above challenges may contribute to a perceived lack of credibility for fast-trackers managing staff
who are older or who have been in the organisation for a longer time, or when working with external
stakeholders. Community leaders in Singapore, for instance, are more inclined to trust a public service
leader whom they have worked with for a long time as they would have built up a certain relationship,
and they perceive that he is more likely to be able to reconcile different points of view while keeping
the bigger picture in mind (Li & Ong, 2000).

High expectations and high visibility may lead to stress and burnout

There is no doubt that fast-trackers often have to face high expectations from their organisations, and
even from their managers and colleagues. This can lead to enormous pressure on fast-trackers to
succeed. Such pressure can lead to excessive stress, particularly in the face of stretch assignments
where fast-trackers have to move out of their comfort zone and struggle with a significant competence
gap (Dotlich, Noel & Walker, 2004). Stretch assignments are part and parcel of fast-track programmes
because they can potentially broaden an individual's current capabilities, and the emphasis should
ideally be on the learning and improvement that can be gained. However, the steep learning curve
means that failure is a real possibility, and failure is probably a difficult prospect for fast-trackers who
are used to being high-flyers and high-achievers (or over-achievers) who succeed in all that they do.
The focus on proving their worth by demonstrating a certain performance standard and the consequent
fear of failure may even cause them to experience counterproductive reactions, such as feeling anxious
and victimised, which may lead them to exhibit maladaptive, helpless behaviours or perform less well
(e.g., Button, Mathieu & Zajac, 1996; Diener & Dweck, 1978, 1980; Dotlich et al, 2004; Dweck &
Leggett, 1988).

In addition, in the name of accelerated development, fast-trackers might be given multiple stretch
assignments concurrently or in quick succession, and such challenges would add to their stress. To
aggravate the situation, some managers may believe that fast-trackers are "smart enough to do without
training in the development of different skills" (Gritzmacher, 1989, p. 427), and thus provide little
guidance or support for their staff during a stretch assignment, leaving them to sink or swim on their
own. Ultimately, the demands on fast-trackers may prompt them to put in additional time and effort to
succeed, particularly because fast-trackers often have a strong drive for mastery and accomplishment
(Iles, 1997). However, this may be done at the expense of their personal life, making these fast-trackers
prime candidates for burnout (Kiechel, 1984). Hence, accelerated development may be particularly
daunting if it is not accompanied by the appropriate support, assurance and guidance.

Misalignment between organisations and fast-trackers may lead to disengagement and

resignations

Fast-tracking is supposed to be a win-win arrangement for organisations and high-calibre individuals, in

that, organisations get to enjoy leadership continuity while individuals enjoy opportunities to develop
their professional skills and achieve career success in terms of fast progressions and leadership
positions. However, there may be tension when individuals' interest in particular job assignments and
organisational needs do not coincide, when there is a lack of perceived job challenge and responsibility,
and when fast-trackers and management have different expectations about career timelines (Feild &
Harris, 1991; Gritzmacher, 1989; Thompson et al, 1985). Furthermore, given the trend for organisations
to have flatter hierarchies, it may be more difficult for organisations to ensure upward mobility for fast-
trackers (Weber, 1990). This is likely to run counter to the aspirations of those who are young, capable
and ambitious and who are less inclined to toil a lifetime before gaining the top jobs. Such tensions may
cause fast-trackers to end up being disengaged or be prompted to leave the organisation (Bottger &
Barsoux, 2010). In Singapore, for instance, fast-trackers in the government used to face limited
progression opportunities arising from a limited number of top public service leadership positions that
were usually held till retirement by those appointed (Lee, 2000), leading to frustration and a higher than
desired resignation rate (Li & Ong, 2000) until a new leadership scheme was proposed in which senior
leadership had a limited-time tenure in office.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MANAGING FAST-TRACKING

As we have seen, fast-tracking has potential benefits for both the organisation and the individual.
However, when fast-tracking is not well-managed and fast-trackers flounder, there are negative
consequences for the organisation in terms of loss of investment, depletion of its talent pool (due to the
derailment of fast-trackers or from "collateral damage" when other good performers who are frustrated
with fast-trackers or fast-tracking itself leave the organisation) and a consequent inability to fill its
talent pipeline. This suggests that fast-tracking schemes need to be carefully designed and managed so
that organisations can reap the full benefits and avoid the pitfalls. Our recommendations for the
selection and development of fast-trackers are described below, together with recommendations for the
broader support that organisations could offer.

Selection

Selecting for a broader range of competencies and greater diversity in fast-trackers

Fast-trackers are usually singled out early in their careers or at entry-level positions. However, the
qualities emphasised in the identification and selection, and even rewarding of fast-trackers, may not
always have a positive impact. Thus, there needs to be a more conscious consideration of how the
positive qualities displayed by a bright, young individual could be potential risks for derailment when
overplayed or become liabilities when the individual assumes more senior management positions. Some
focus should also be given to the individual's level of developmental readiness, particularly in terms of
ability to adapt to different situations and to grow and learn from experience, as these qualities would
help a fast-tracker benefit from the different developmental opportunities offered. All these mean that
selection criteria taking into account a wider range of competencies may prove to be more useful.
Ensuring that there is diversity in the pool of fast-trackers selected may be another worthwhile measure,
so that an overall broader capability base is achieved by the leadership, and the strengths of individual
leaders can complement one another.

Greater fluidity in fast-tracker pool

Furthermore, as people develop new skills over time and discover new aspirations, it would be useful to
constantly review who is being fast-tracked and who is not, as those who were deemed unsuitable at a
particular time may be late bloomers who could turn out to be valuable talent for the organisation.
Having multiple points of entry to the fast-track programme would help to mitigate this problem. It
would also serve to motivate good performers who are not currently on the fast track. In addition,
organisations could allow for exits from the fast-tracker pool such that those who no longer aspire to be
on the fast-track scheme are able to leave without being stigmatised. This would help ensure that those
who are fast-tracked are genuinely driven to become leaders.
Development

Focus on developing a well-rounded suite of technical and emotional competencies in fast-

trackers

The success of fast-tracking lies in the effective development of fast-trackers to unleash their leadership
potential. Organisations and individuals, however, sometimes focus too much on the form of fast-
tracking (such as speed of promotions and mechanical rotations on a fixed timeline or cohort basis)
when the substance (that is, effective development) is more central to the success of fast-tracking.
Supervisors and fast-trackers need to recognise that the real fast track is one that effectively develops
the appropriate leadership skills and interpersonal relationships in its participants (Kovach, 1986).
Hence, the focus of top management should be on how best to develop fast-trackers on a well-rounded
suite of technical and emotional competencies for leadership success, rather than the speed at which
fast-trackers are promoted to leadership positions.

Fast-trackers do not all possess the same strengths and limitations. Depending on the unique set of
strengths and limitations that a fast-tracker starts out with, effective development may entail lateral
opportunities to ensure holistic development (Bunker et al., 2002), allowing him to spend more time in
each role (Oliver, 1997), and promoting only when he is ready and demonstrates both technical and
emotional competencies (Charan, Drotter & Noel, 2001). The aim is essentially to help each fast-
tracker achieve a minimum standard of the suite of technical and emotional competencies required for
effective leadership, and at a pace that is right for him. Doing so would also minimise some of the
problems associated with high mobility within the organisation.

Help fast-trackers maximise the lessons learnt from experience and developmental opportunities

To enable fast-trackers to assume top leadership positions at an accelerated pace, organisations and
supervisors need to help fast-trackers learn at an accelerated pace as well. This can be accomplished
using a two-pronged approach: teaching fast-trackers how to learn from experience, and intensifying
learning from each developmental encounter. A suite of tools and intervention strategies is available for
this purpose, and some of the underlying principles are listed here.

First, inculcate a sense of ownership in fast-trackers about their own development. This includes
encouraging fast-trackers to acquire useful career habits, such as seeking out coaching and mentoring
relationships to support their growth and cultivating informal networks. In the words of Taylor (2004),
"help ambitious staff find good networks and develop connecting points that will enrich their expertise
now and later" (p. 36). Partnerships with peers and mentors will expose young leaders to different
leadership styles and perspectives, as well as supply them with honest and ongoing feedback.

Second, steps may need to be taken to enhance the level of developmental readiness of high potentials
so that they are better prepared to learn from their experiences. These could include enhancing their
level of developmental efficacy, fostering an openness to learning and failure, and building up habits of
metacognition (Chia & Khoo, 2010). Heightening the self-awareness of fast-trackers through
personality instruments and multi-source (360-degree) feedback (Bunker et al, 2002) may also provide
the impetus for them to address personal blind spots that they uncover.

Third, fast-trackers can be trained to think about every professional encounter as a potential lesson on
leadership. Effort could be made to deliberately and systematically internalise the learning, such as
through post-assignment reviews that get fast-trackers to articulate what they have learnt (Bottger &
Barsoux, 2010). Peters and Smith (1996) also proposed orientating fast-trackers to Action Learning
paradigms to help them "capture experience and force through the processing of it, and the learning
from it" (p. 6). Specifically, it is a framework that allows participants to systematically draw from their
available sources of information to aid them in making sense of an experience, generalising the
replicable points, and planning for future actions based on the learning gathered.

Finally, organisations and supervisors must be prepared to take risks in allowing their fast-trackers to
experience failure (Taylor, 2004). The fear of failure to experiment and move out of their comfort zones
often limits learning. Thus, to realise their potential, fast-trackers must be given the latitude to exercise
their judgment, make their own mistakes, and figure out ways to rectify the situation for themselves, in
order to "mature into their jobs" (Taylor, 2004, p. 39). A safe-fail culture may just be what takes the
Singapore Public Service forward, because it supports the generation of creative, adaptive solutions to
changes in the business environment. Indeed, a Singapore Public Service-wide leadership gap indicator
survey conducted earlier this year found leaders rating risk-taking and innovation to be among the top
competencies important to their effectiveness within the organisation in the next 5 years (Goh & Goh,
2011).

Organisational support

Prepare fast-trackers for their role transitions

Given the frequency of job postings and the relative speed at which they move into new positions up
the leadership pipeline, fast-trackers are likely to spend a relatively short span of time in each role.
Thus, it would be useful to put in place a structured on-boarding programme that would help them
better manage each rotation and become net contributors sooner. Such programmes should be designed
to help fast-trackers become more aware of the shifts in expectations as they progress from one career
phase to another, thereby preparing them to handle the demands and challenges that are likely to be
faced in their new roles. Another key focus of on-boarding programmes should be to help advancing
leaders re-align personal values and worldview with their evolving identities, which would allow them
to assume their leadership roles more adequately (Khoo & Tham, 2011).

Individual career pathing to align individual goals with organisational ones

Frustrations experienced by fast-trackers can greatly limit the effectiveness of fast-tracking in building
employee engagement and succession planning. As mentioned above, there may be tension when
individuals' interest in particular job assignments and organisational needs do not coincide, when there
is a lack of perceived job challenge and responsibility, and when fast-trackers and management have
different expectations about career timelines (Feild & Harris, 1991; Gritzmacher, 1989; Thompson et
al, 1985).

Consequently, it is important that organisations and fast-tracked individuals come to an agreement

about the form that the latter's accelerated development will take, before embarking on the process, so
that organisational goals are being met while taking into account fast-trackers' preferences and interests.
Doing so also encourages open communication and timely feedback, two attributes which are highly
valued by fast-trackers (Campbell & Smith, 2010).

Such individual career pathing could be achieved through development planning and review
conversations held regularly with fast-trackers. More specifically, thought must go into the kind of
exposure and the pace at which each individual may be developed (based on factors such as his
experience, career stage, strengths and limitations), so that he can acquire the relevant skills and
interpersonal relationships that would help him become more effective. Fast-trackers who wish to exit
or make temporary detours from the fast-track, such as sabbaticals, would then also have an avenue to
explore the feasibility of these possibilities. Career guidance in the manner described above has been
found to be essential to their continual engagement. For instance, a recent survey of high potential
managers found that most respondents believe their organisation could increase their engagement and
commitment by providing a clear career path that identifies the next steps in terms of development,
experience, and movement (Campbell & Smith, 2010).

A more flexible fast-track programme can also be created by inviting employees to "fast-track
themselves" (Fojt, Parkinson, Peters & Sandelands, 2008, p. 148), which is essentially about providing
employees with the space to initiate organisational improvements that they feel confident about
undertaking. According to Fojt and his associates, this is known as push development, which proposes
that after equipping leaders with the abilities to take on bigger roles, they may be challenged to start
thinking about real business opportunities which will enable them to exercise these skills. The authors
cited the example of Emerald Group Publishing UK, where a fast-tracker initiated a social networking
project that, with the support and endorsement of senior management, eventually expanded into a
successful commercial application.

Beyond the fast-tracking pool

Develop a broader talent base

Importantly, organisations also need to consider how best to leverage their entire talent pool. An
organisational culture that supports developmental opportunities for all employees is likely to be more
sustainable (Iles, 1997), due to the organisation's larger skill base (Larsen, 1997), and would help
organisations to succeed in the long term Campbell & Smith, 2010). Providing developmental
opportunities for all would also help mitigate the morale and performance issues that could potentially
stem from the perceived unfair exclusivity of the fast-track scheme. As part of this endeavour, fast-
trackers should be made aware that successful leadership extends beyond developing their own
competencies—it also involves developing others. Campbell and Smith (2010), for instance, suggested
that fast-trackers should optimise their potential in learning to use challenging assignments and
coaching to develop the talent around them. In addition, there is value in grooming specialists as they
have an important role to play in knowledge- and service-intensive organisations.

CONCLUSION

It is easy and common for organisations to introduce fast-tracking for the advantages it promises, but as
we have seen, fast-tracking can bring about benefits as well as potential pitfalls. Thus, it is important to
approach fast-tracking in a more considered manner and review how it is designed and managed, so
that it will be truly effective in achieving organisational goals and will continue to stay relevant for a
new generation of workers and evolving business environment.

This paper has examined the key elements of fast-tracking, as well as explored the potential benefits
and challenges of fast-tracking. Further research could help to shed light on the impact of fast-tracking
on the organisation by evaluating its effectiveness to retain talent and generate future leaders, and to
explore the upsides and downsides of the fast-tracking experience for individuals themselves and the
people around them. A study in the context of the Singapore Public Service would be particularly
meaningful since fast-tracking is a cornerstone of its talent management strategy. In addition, further
research could be conducted to understand how best to bring about accelerated and effective
development in fast-trackers. The insights from such research could then feed into improving
organisational efforts to harness the potential of their fast-trackers.

Khoo Ee Wan and Goh Hui Chin are respectively, Senior Consultant, Selection & Assessment, and
Consultant, Leadership Development, in the Centre for Leadership Development in the Civil Service
College. The Centre provides leadership assessment, leadership development and leadership research
services.

NOTES
01 For a fuller discussion on defining and identifying talent in an organisation, please refer to the earlier
. research report by the Centre for Leadership Development: Khoo, E. W. (2011) Perspectives on
High Potentials: Defining and Identifying Talent in an Organisation [research report]. Singapore:
Civil Service College.

• Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on

strategic decision making: resolving a paradox for top management teams. The Academy of
Management Journal, 39(1), 123–148.
• Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B. & Quisenberry, D. (2010). Estimating return on leadership development
investment. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 633?644.
• Bottger, P. C. & Barsoux, J.-L. (2010). The fast track to failure. The Conference Board Review, 2–4.
• Bunker, K. A., Kram, K. E. & Ting, S. (2002). The young and the clueless. Harvard Business
Review, 80(12), 80.
• Burke, L. A. (1997). Developing high-potential employees in the new business reality. Business
Horizons, 40, 18–24.
• Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E. & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organisational research: a
conceptual and empirical foundation. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 67,
26–48.
• Campbell, M. & Smith, R. (2010). High potential talent: A view from inside the leadership pipeline.
Colorado Springs, CO: Center for Creative Leadership.
• Charan, R., Drotter, S. & Noel, J. (2001). The Leadership Pipeline: How To Build The Leadership-
Powered Company. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Chari, S. (2008). Handling career role transitions with confidence. The International Journal of
Clinical leadership, 16, 109–114.
• Chia, N. N. & Khoo, E. W. (2010). Understanding developmental readiness [research report].
Singapore: Civil Service College.
• Clark, F. A. (1992). Total career management. Berkshire, UK: McGraw-Hill.
• Diener, C. I. & Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in
performance, strategy, and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 36, 451–461.
• Diener, C. I. & Dweck, C. S. (1980). An analysis of learned helplessness: II. The processing of
success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 940?952.
• Dotlich, D. L., Noel, J. L. & Walker, N. (2004). Leadership Passages: The Personal and
Professional Transitions that Make or Break a Leader. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Dries, N. & Pepermans, R. (2008). "Real" high-potential careers: An empirical study into the
perspectives of organisations and high potentials. Personnel Review, 37, 85–108.
• Dweck, C. S. & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and
personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256?273.
• Feild, H. S. & Harris, S. G. (1991). Entry-level, fast-track management development programs:
Developmental tactics and perceived program effectiveness. Human Resource Planning, 14, 261–
273.
• Fojt, M., Parkinson, S., Peters, J. & Sandelands, E. (2008). The "push-pull" approach to fast-track
management development. Journal of Workplace Learning, 20, 146–152.
• Forbes, J. B. & Piercy, J. E. (1991). Corporate mobility and paths to the top: Studies for human
resource and management development specialists. New York: Quorum Books.
• Gandossy, R. (2001). The talent edge in the 21st century. Workspan, 12, 32–35.
• Goh, H. T. & Goh, H. C. (2011). Leadership Gap Indicator Study [research report]. Singapore: Civil
Service College.
• Goh, H. T. & Hennessy, J. (2011). Generations and leadership [research report]. Singapore: Civil
Service College.
• Gratton, L. & Pearson, J. (1994). Empowering leaders: Are they being developed? In C. Mabey &
P.A. Iles (Eds.), Managing Learning (pp. 87–104). London: Routledge.
• Graves, J. P. (1980). Managerial behavior and career performance. In C. B. Derr (Ed.), Work, family
and the career: New frontiers in theory and research. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger publishers.
• Gritzmacher, K. J. (1989, Autumn). Staying competitive through strategic management of fast-track
employees. National Productivity Review, 8 (4), pp. 421–432.
• Gunn, E. P. (1998, August). The fast track is where to be, if you can find it. Fortune, 138(2).
• Hall, T. H. (1999). Accelerate executive development — at your peril! Career Development
International, 4, 237–239.
• Herriot, P. (1992). The Career Management Challenge: Balancing Individual Needs and
Organizational Needs. London: Sage.
• Iles, P. (1997). Sustainable high-potential career development: A resource-based view. Career
Development International, 2, 347–353.
• Khoo, E. W. & Tham, C. (2011). Career transitions: Challenges, transformative learning and
implications for the Singapore Public Service[research report]. Singapore: Civil Service College.
• Kiechel, W. III. (1984). The fast-trackers. Fortune, 109, 377–379.
• Knights, D. & Raffo, C. (1990). Milkround professionalism in personnel recruitment. Personnel
Review, 19, 28?37.
• Kotter, J. (1985) Power and influence: getting things done without formal authority. USA: Free
Press.
• Kovach, B. E. (1986). The derailment of fast-track managers. Organisational Dynamics, 15, 41–48.
• Larsen, H. H. (2007). Do high-flyer programmes facilitate organisational learning? Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 12(1), 48–59.
• Larsen, H. H., London, M., Weinstein, M. & Raghuram, S. (1998). High-flyer management-
development programs: Organizational rhetoric or self-fulfilling prophecy? International Studies of
Management & Organisation, 28, 64–90.
• Lee, H. S. (2000). Public sector salary revisions and review of salary benchmarks. Ministerial
statement at Civil Service NWC Award. Singapore, 29 June 2000.
• Li, X. & Ong, A. (11 Sep 2010). Are the mandarins retiring too soon? Retrieved September 6, 2011,
from The Straits Times. http://www.straitstimes.com/Insight/Story/STIStory_577214.html
• Lusk, S. (2010). Of summits and slippery paths: why leadership in the Civil Service has to be about
more than getting to the top. Retrieved September, 2011, from The National School of Government.
http://virtual.nationalschool.gov.uk/StrategyExchange/Documents/Public%20servant%20article
%201%20-%20February%202010.doc
• McCall, M. W. (1998). High flyers: Developing the next generation of leaders. Boston: Harvard
Business School Press.
• McCall, M. W. & Lombardo, M. M. (1983). Off the track: Why and how successful executives get
derailed. Greensboro, NC: Centre for Creative Leadership.
 • Moulton, H. W. & Fickel, A. A. (1993). Executive development: Preparing for the 21st century.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Musselwhite, W. C. & Dillon, L. S. (1987). Timing, for leadership training, is everything. Personnel
Journal, 66, 103–110.
• Oliver, J. (1997). The new-look fast track. Management Today, 86–89.
• Peters, J. & Smith, P. (1996). Developing high- potential staff — an action learning
approach. Employee Counselling Today, 8(3), 6–11.
• Ramos, J. (1994) Why Executives Derail. Across the Board, 31(10), 16.
• Ready, D. A., Hill, L. A. & Conger, J. A. (2008). Winning the race for talent in emerging
markets. Harvard Business Review, 86(11), 62–70.
• Rhinesmith, S. H. Managing Your Transitions Up the Leadership Pipeline. Civil Service College,
Seminar. Singapore, 18 October 2010.
• Schein, E. H. (1996). Strategic Pragmatism: The Culture of Singapore's Economic Development
Board. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
• Taylor, K. (2004, December). Putting leaders on the fast track: Overcome the hurdles to spotting,
grooming, and keeping talented staffers. Association Management, 32–40.
• Teo, E. (2009). Defending scholarships but not all scholars. Singapore Seminar, London, 31
October 2009.
• Thompson, P. H., Kirkham, K. L. & Dixon, J. (1985, Spring). Warning: The fast track may be
hazardous to organisational health. Organisational Dynamics, 21–33.
• Viney, C., Adamson, S. & Doherty, N. (1997). Paradoxes of fast-track career
management. Personnel Review, 26, 174–186.
• Weber, J. (1990, December). Farewell fast track. Business Week, 192–200.
• Williams, D. (2004, May 8). Rise: Skids under fast tracks: David Williams detects changes in
recruitment policy which could spell the death of the graduate training scheme. The Guardian, 2.
© 2017 Civil Service College Singapore