Talent management tools: the 9-box grid
- Ready for a bigger role now: high potential with high or moderate performance
- 11
- People placed on the grid
- 64
- Stars, as a share of the grid, percent
- 9
- High-potential pool (the right-hand column)
- 13
Every figure on this page is computed from the inputs entered, by the method stated below it. Ninebix publishes no rating rule, no pay benchmark, no replacement-cost rate and no time-to-fill figure: the counts and the assumptions are yours, and the defaults are a worked example to replace with your own figures.
The figures above start from a worked example (11). Change any input and the answer updates as you type.
Download the Talent management tools: the 9-box grid worked example (CSV)
This is a 9-box grid worksheet that counts a talent review, for a team of any size. Enter the number of people you placed in each of the nine boxes at the last calibration, performance across and potential up, and it returns the total placed, the stars as a share of the grid, the high-potential column, the people ready for a bigger role now, the core share and the low-performer row with its share. Every count is yours; the worksheet publishes no rating scale and no target distribution. Free, on the page, no account; the paid plan saves every grid against the review cycle it was counted in.
The stars and the high-potential pool, the column the succession plan reads
The top-right box, high performance and high potential, is the stars; the whole right-hand column is the high-potential pool. Sixty-four people with six stars is 9% of the grid, and a pool of thirteen when the moderate and low performers with high potential are added. The pool is the column the succession plan draws successors from; the worksheet counts it and decides nothing about who is in it.
Ready now: high potential with high or moderate performance
The people the review can slate for a bigger role today are the high-potential people already performing at a high or moderate level: six stars and five moderate performers with high potential is eleven. The low performers with high potential are on the list to develop, not to slate. Whether eleven is enough turns on how many critical roles you have, which is the succession plan worksheet's question.
The core and the bottom row, the shares the calibration meeting argues about
Twenty of sixty-four in the centre box is a core of 31%; nine in the bottom row is a low-performer share of 14%. A grid with most people in the centre and a thin bottom row is what most calibrations produce; whether that is right is the meeting's decision, and the worksheet shows the shares so the meeting argues about names with the counts in front of it.
Talent management tools: the 9-box grid: common questions
Is this a free 9-box grid template?
It is a free worksheet, not a template: enter the nine box counts and it works the total, the stars share, the high-potential pool, the people ready now, the core share and the low-performer share on the page with no account and no card. It carries no rating scale. Ninebix Pro adds your company name and saves every grid against the review cycle.
What are the nine boxes of a 9-box grid?
Three levels of performance across, three levels of potential up, nine combinations: from low performance with limited potential at the bottom left to high performance with high potential, the stars, at the top right. The labels are the ones most reviews use; the worksheet works whichever counts you enter under them.
What should the distribution across the boxes be?
Whatever the calibration finds: the worked example uses a large centre and a thin bottom row to show the arithmetic and nothing more. A grid with no stars, or one where half the team is in the top right, is the thing to check before the placements are confirmed, and the worksheet shows the shares so you can read which it is.