Talent pools consisting of novices, experts, and very little in between are becoming more and more common. This all presents both a future and present threat to staffing for critical roles and to the volume and quality of talent needed to keep organizations alive¹. Given the widespread nature of this issue, organizations will not be able simply acquire the talent they need, they need to develop it.

For those who like to skim, this article will address What’s going on, What this looks like, and 3 ways leaders can address follow any of the links here to skip ahead.

It takes 9 months to make a baby no matter how many men you put on the job.

We increasingly find ourselves with a workforce of people who are either underchallenged and bored, experts who are overwhelmed and burn out, or a sink or swim approach of throwing highly unequipped folks into roles and seeing who floats. There are a slew of reasons starting with the trend in boomer retirements (see also “Trend #1 – The Great Transfer That Wasn’t”) and the impending leadership gap² but this challenge extends far beyond key leaders. In the trades, for example, for every 1 person entering the trades 5 are retiring³. Note, this is not just a matter of butts in seats, these roles are skilled roles, requiring years training and expertise to fill.

During the panicked hiring of the great resignation in the wake of the pandemic, employers frantically hired heads to “fill roles” and then consequently laid off those heads⁴ when they learned “more” does not equal quality.  However, not before burning out those who had the skills to keep the workplace afloat. We are seeing a rise in sabbaticals or micro-retirements⁵ with 65% of millennials siting personal well-being and work/life balance as reasons for job changes and increasingly millennials and gen Z reporting higher levels of burnout⁶.

This problem is expected to be further exacerbated by rise of AI technology which is lauded for replacing entry-level tasks. However, it is exactly those entry-level tasks that many use to build the skills needed to develop the well-rounded experts that AI relies on to audit its work⁷.  

Somewhere in a van on some dusty highway in Asia, I found myself in a conversation with an accomplished CPA. In her 40’s she definitely had much of her career ahead of her, but with over 20 years in the space, was the kind of expert that makes up the core of any accomplished accounting firm. As I inquired about her career, the burnout quickly became evident.

Unable to simply buy their way out

Pressing her further the she expressed that the workload simply was not realistically achievable. When I asked about hiring the response was revelatory. Prior to the pandemic, the firm had been slow to hire, and even slower about building the capacity to develop that talent in-house as they primarily relied on acquiring newly minted CPAs out of school and paring them with senior staff to learn on the job.

Once the pandemic hit, a flood of work brought that model crashing to the ground. In response, the firm did rapidly hire new grads to meet the need. The issue was, the over reliance on just a handful of seasoned experts. My friend and her colleagues had not only found themselves struggling to breath under the oversized load of work, but responsible for a 10 to 1 training ratio of entry-level staff.

When the cure makes you sick

The same staff that were meant to ease their burden, actually had the effect of increasing it. The firm found itself in a dire dilemma. Without new staff, there was no way to keep the business going. Yet, their failure to develop intermediary talent that could be quickly deployed meant hiring was the only way forward. While hiring experienced talent from other firms may have been a costly but viable option, their peers in the industry were facing the same dilemma. Those who had prepared, were not likely to lose that talent to a competitor any time soon.

In that van I watched my friend’s mind work as I could see her contemplating her own future forward with her firm. Committed to her firm for over a decade, one could see she didn’t want to abandon them; however, it was obvious that the toll it had taken on her was taxing her not only mentally but physically as well and no amount of money was going to fix that. Joining another firm once she returned home that had better developed talent over time would. 

Start with a top to bottom review of your org chart to identify bottlenecks, bloat, and “elephants” that need to be discussed. Most importantly, in order for your leaders to help properly load balance their teams, you must first free them up to do so by reviewing spans of control and layer depth in the org to set them up for success.  Secondarily, assess demand for key talent, determine what is truly needed through objective metrics, and clearly define staffing gaps as well as areas of overstaffing.

Note, it is fully possible and increasingly common for organizations to have talent gaps in one area of the organization while actively cutting in other areas⁸. This can be true of both employees and volunteers, just because you have 50 volunteers doesn’t mean you have the 5 you need. Managing 50 volunteers that don’t fit your organization’s need can drain precious resources and focus from the core of your mission. Eagerness does not equal skill. A good, trustworthy, consultant can be an invaluable resource when doing such assessments to see past blind spots, broach difficult conversations, and drive an unbiased approach to solution development.

To reconcile talent gap organizations can acquire, borrow, automate, or build. Competitive talent strategies must go beyond immediate needs and ensure the organization will be able to compete long-term.

• Acquire – Acquiring or recruiting new staff often can be cost prohibitive with external hires often costing 18% – 20% more vs. promoting existing workers. Additionally, they typically preform lower for the first 2 years⁹.

• Borrow – While engaging contractors, is often a recommended route for temporary spikes in labor needs or for capabilities outside your core business, they are a very costly route when used in core functions or on an ongoing basis. Not to mention the cost and risk of instilling your institutional knowledge and culture into an external company.

• Automate – While automation is all the rage, true impactful automation often is a long-term proposition with implementation taking considerable time, and technology is not free either.

• Build – So that leaves build, and developing talent is a muscle that an organization needs to grow over time. Doing so well requires a clear strategy for talent development, proper investment of time, focus, and an iterative process for identifying development needs and assessing effectiveness of talent development efforts.

Most people of the millennial generation and older will recognize the phrase “Wax on, wax off” from the movie the Karate Kid where Mr. Miyagi has his young protégé wax his car to build the muscle memory needed to be a champion fighter. While it may seem cliché, knowledge alone is not enough to develop true expertise, one has to put the reps in.Whether it’s an accountant running audits, welder running a straight bead, a minister connecting with people, or the comfort I have when my divemaster tells me he has over 100 dives under his belt.  Repetition and practice over time are what make a true expert.

The nuance, breadth of abilities, and the knowledge of how to best apply capabilities to your organization that is gained from applying those skills over time cannot be shortcut. However, they cannot be developed without real world tangible opportunities. It is important to not only have resources and strategy to develop talent, but to review your organizations’ potential career journey including role definitions to create the necessary rungs in the ladder to allow mid-level talent to excel and ensure your organization will have the talent it needs not only today, but tomorrow as well. 

Your talent, is your organization. A failure to invest in that talent is a failure to invest in your organization. As the talent market becomes increasingly complex and competitive those organizations with a long-term minded view will ultimately win out.

¹ Bryan Robinson, “6 Obstacles 2024 Gen Z Graduates Face In The Job Market,” Forbes, June 6, 2024, https://www.forbes.com/sites/bryanrobinson/2024/06/06/6-obstacles-2024-gen-z-graduates-face-in-the-job-market/.

² Forbes Coaches Council, “As Baby Boomers Near Retirement, Companies Risk A Leadership Shortage,” Forbes, October 15, 2019, https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbescoachescouncil/2019/10/15/as-baby-boomers-near-retirement-companies-risk-a-leadership-shortage/.

³ ISHN, “Baby Boomers Retiring, Leaving Many Open Trades Positions,” Industrial Safety & Hygiene News, June 11,2019, https://www.ishn.com/articles/110888-baby-boomers-retiring-leaving-many-open-trades-positions.

⁴ Fast Company, “The Unseen Consequences Of The Great Resignation’s Hiring Frenzy,” Fast Company, June 6, 2024, https://www.fastcompany.com/91136178/the-unseen-consequences-of-the-great-resignations-hiring-frenzy.

⁵ Amanda Miller Littlejohn, “Millennials Take Advantage Of Sabbaticals To Reset After Burnout,” Forbes, May 29, 2024, https://www.forbes.com/sites/amandamillerlittlejohn/2024/05/29/millennials-take-advantage-of-sabbaticals-to-reset-after-burnout/.

⁶ Fortune, “While Boomers Are Unretiring, Exhausted Gen Z And Millennials Are Taking A ‘Micro-Retirement’ From Their Careers,” Fortune, January 3, 2025, https://fortune.com/2025/01/03/while-boomers-are-unretiring-exhausted-gen-z-and-millennials-are-taking-a-micro-retirement-from-their-careers/.

⁷ Wharton Magazine, “How To Develop Talent In A GenAI World,” Wharton Magazine, accessed January 22, 2024, https://magazine.wharton.upenn.edu/digital/how-to-develop-talent-in-a-genai-world/.

⁸ Nicole Braun, “Employer Integrity In Turbulent Times: What To Do When You Must Reduce Headcount,” LinkedIn, April 12,2023, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/employer-integrity-turbulent-times-what-do-when-you-must-nicole-braun/.

⁹ Knowledge@Wharton, “Why External Hires Get Paid More, and Perform Worse, Than Internal Staff,” Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, accessed March 28, 2012, https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/why-external-hires-get-paid-more-and-perform-worse-than-internal-staff/.