Who You Name Manager Isn't Just A Promotion. It's A Culture Decision

Forbes

a day ago

Human hand picking up a person from the row.
Gallup's most recent workforce study uncovered a pressing concern for organizations focused on future-ready leadership. Gallup found that only 26 percent of current managers in the U.S. exhibit high natural talent for the role.
This finding, based on Gallup's validated management talent screener, measures five critical dimensions: motivation to lead, drive for results, relationship-building ability, accountability, and systems thinking.
This data is not just a research finding. It is a wake-up call for any organization committed to strategic talent development, succession planning and performance culture.
That's why investing in high-potential talent matters. Gallup found that these managers are significantly more likely to engage in behaviors that create real value—sharing advice and ideas, mentoring others, building networks, going above and beyond, staying customer-focused, and offering meaningful feedback. And the effect multiplies when they're also engaged at work. These aren't soft perks. They're mission-critical behaviors in today's volatile, fast-changing business environment.
As leadership roles evolve amid disruption, hybrid work, wellbeing demands and early-stage AI adoption, organizations must take a more intentional, evidence-based approach to selecting who leads. Right now, too many managers are being placed in roles based on tenure, technical success, or timing. And it's not working.
Even among high-talent managers, only 51 percent say their current role is a great fit. That's not the average. That's the best. These are the individuals most likely to thrive. Yet nearly half feel miscast, underutilized, or disconnected from the role they've been given. It's not a lack of ambition. In fact, 42 percent say it is extremely important for them to become a senior leader or lead other managers someday.
Meanwhile, 77 percent of those same high-talent managers report feeling confident in their ability to do their current job. But confidence without context is not a reliable indicator of effectiveness—especially as the role continues to shift. The core challenge is not capability, but alignment.
Importantly, confidence in meeting today's expectations doesn't guarantee continued performance in a disruptive future. What's needed is a higher degree of future readiness—and that's where things get difficult. Gallup research found that only about 1 in 3 high-potential managers strongly agree they understand the gaps between what they know now and what they'll need to lead in the future. Even the most promising managers need structured guidance, focused coaching and intentional confidence building to close that gap.
The question organizations must be asking is: Are we matching the right people to the right roles, at the right time and in line with what the future demands?
Gallup also found that 30 percent of employees are actively seeking new roles within their current organization. Of those, 72 percent are looking for a promotion over a lateral move.
This reflects a longstanding cultural narrative: advancement equals up. But that assumption can backfire—especially when management is viewed as the default step forward.
Leadership is not the right next move for everyone. When employees are placed in people-leader roles based on tenure, ambition, or availability, it creates downstream risk. Teams underperform. Culture fragments. Burnout and disengagement rise.
Misfit roles aren't just a hiring mistake. They're often a result of old habits. Promotions get handed out based on tenure, loyalty, or urgency to fill a gap. Sometimes it's just easier to move someone up than pause and ask if they're truly wired to lead.
There's also a quiet bias at play. When someone wants to lead, we assume they can. But ambition isn't the same as ability. Without a clear look at motivation and natural talent, good people land in the wrong roles for the wrong reasons.
If lateral pathways are going to become part of an internal mobility strategy, then talent must become the non-negotiable filter. Lateral movement should be designed to stretch strengths, not patch internal gaps or offer placeholder promotions — or worse pseudo-promotions — titles or roles with limited or no real authority. They are still called managers. But they do everything but manage.
Gallup's findings show clear differences in why individuals pursue leadership. High-talent managers are far more likely to cite motivations like developing others, fostering team success, and creating a better work environment.
Others, on the other hand, more often mention compensation, title, or organizational pressure. While all motives are human, only some are sustainable. When people step into leadership without a people-first mindset, the risk is not just poor performance. It is cultural erosion.
Organizations must evaluate not just if someone can manage, but why they want to.
The expectations placed on managers today are broader, more human-centered even as they are increasingly tech-driven, and more complex. Yet, managers are less engaged than before and many are looking for change. They are also struggling more than the people they lead. And even with all that they are still expected to:
And yet, many selection processes are still designed around static role descriptions, past performance, or organizational convenience.
Technology is accelerating this gap. Gallup reports that only 15 percent of white-collar employees use AI weekly, yet 45 percent of those who do report greater productivity and efficiency. While AI is not the main story here, it is a signal. Managers who are more naturally adaptive—those with higher leadership talent—are also more likely to engage with new tools and you still the pizza in the lead differently because of them.
AI will not replace managers, but it will make clear who is learning, growing, and leading effectively in a changing environment.
Here are five strategic shifts organizations can make to close the gap:
Leadership should not be a thank-you for past performance. It is a specialized role requiring the right match of talent, motivation, and organizational need.
Growth does not always mean promotion. Design lateral roles with intent, and use talent as the starting point—not the fallback plan.
Relying on instinct or tenure leads to misalignment. Use validated assessments to understand natural leadership ability before making selection decisions.
High-talent managers need challenge, mentorship, and runway. Others may need targeted support, or a different kind of growth path altogether.
Focus on indicators like adaptability, systems thinking, resilience under pressure, and the ability to elevate others. These matter as much as technical skill or functional success.
Managers account for as much as 70 percent of the variance in team engagement and performance. Who you choose to lead your teams has an outsized impact on your culture, your brand, and your bottom line.
Right now, many managers are in roles that don't match their talent or their motivation. Others are stepping into leadership because it's the only visible form of progress. And even your highest-potential leaders may be feeling disconnected from the role they're in.
That is not a pipeline problem. That is a perspective problem.
It is time to replace default promotion paths with deliberate selection strategies. It is time to reward stewardship, not just ambition. And it is time to ask better questions—about who is built to lead, why they want to, and how we can help them do it well.
The future of your culture depends on the choices you make today about who you trust to lead it.
Disclosure: My day job is focusing on leadership development and strategy research for Gallup.