A growing trend toward disclosure lawyers who are deemed high potentials

The only post here that discusses pros and cons of secrecy about high-potential lawyers comes down on the side of non-disclosure (See my post of June 24, 2007: identification causes problems.). But an article in the Harvard Bus. Rev., June 2010 at 54, observes “a growing trend toward transparency.” As the job market revives, I suspect it will be increasingly useful for general counsel to call out their highest performers for special praise and opportunities.

Other posts here have addressed so-called hi-pos (See my post of July 29, 2007: high potentials with 10 references.). Since that initial compilation, a number of related posts have followed (See my post of Dec. 19, 2007: legal department as incubator for lawyers who move out; April 24, 2009: nine boxes and star lawyers; May 13, 2009: 3M sends three hi-po lawyers a year to a leadership development program; June 26, 2009: a neglected but high priority; Aug. 25, 2009 #5: Novartis and its extensive tracking of hi pos and successors; Dec. 17, 2009: high potential for information processing; Jan. 4, 2010 #2: a definition on ability to move to another area; and March 29, 2010: succession planning is muted recognition of potential.).