Calibration & Governance in Talent Processes

You’ve collected performance ratings. You’ve mapped potential. You’ve built talent pools. But if every function defines “high potential” differently, or one manager consistently over-rates their team, your data becomes meaningless—and your process loses trust.

Calibration and governance are what turn talent processes from opinion into insight.

What Is Calibration?

Calibration is a structured process in which multiple leaders review and compare talent assessments to ensure consistency, fairness, and alignment with defined criteria.

It’s not about squeezing everyone into a bell curve. It’s about challenging assumptions, spotting patterns, and creating a shared understanding of excellence.

Why Calibration Matters

Without it, talent processes can be:

• Inconsistent across departments
• Skewed by unconscious bias
• Inflated or deflated based on individual manager tendencies
• Disconnected from business needs

What Is Governance in Talent Processes?

Governance ensures the talent process is:

• Structured (with clear roles, steps, timelines)
• Accountable (with ownership and documentation)
• Repeatable (not reinvented each cycle)
• Transparent (participants understand the rules and criteria)

Good governance prevents talent processes from being reinvented—or manipulated—every year.

Building an Effective Calibration Process

1. Prework & Preparation

• Provide managers with clear rating guidelines
• Require written justification for ratings
• Use common frameworks (e.g., 9-box, readiness levels)
• Train on bias awareness and decision hygiene

2. Calibration Sessions

Usually facilitated by HRBPs or Talent Partners, sessions include:

• Group-level comparisons of ratings
• Deep dives into high-potential and low-performance cases
• Agreement on final placement (e.g., in the 9-box)
• Notes on development actions or risks

Aim for a healthy mix of challenge and support—not a rubber-stamp exercise.

3. Post-Calibration Actions

• Update talent system with agreed ratings
• Share outputs with managers and create action plans
• Review diversity metrics and patterns (e.g., are women being underrepresented in high-potential boxes?)

Governance Structures That Work

Good governance requires:

• A clearly defined cadence (e.g., annual, mid-year)
• Named owners for each step (HRBP, functional leader, CHRO)
• Documentation templates and audit trails
• Executive sponsorship—especially for succession

Consider establishing a Talent Governance Council that oversees the process, tracks progress, and resolves disputes.

Governance Questions to Ask

• Are all managers trained on the process?
• Are decisions traceable and justifiable?
• Are DEI goals embedded in each step?
• Is there a review mechanism for outlier decisions?

Embedding Calibration and Governance in Culture

It’s not just about running good sessions—it’s about creating a shared language and mindset around talent. That includes:

• Talking about potential in everyday leadership forums
• Using talent data in business reviews
• Making calibration part of leadership capability models

Pitfalls to Avoid

• Over-calibrating (which delays action)
• Token governance (checklists without ownership)
• Ignoring manager pushback (“my people are all high potential!”)
• Letting executive power override the process

Conclusion

Talent decisions carry long-term consequences. Without calibration, those decisions can be distorted. Without governance, they can be derailed. But with both in place, talent reviews become what they should be: a fair, strategic, and future-oriented engine for growth.

Next: What if you’re starting from scratch? Here’s how to launch succession planning in organizations that have never done it before.