Sarah was the best operations manager David had ever worked with. Organized, detail-oriented, reliable, she could take any chaotic process and turn it into a well-oiled machine. For five years, she was the backbone of the company’s efficiency efforts.
So, when David needed someone to lead the innovation task force exploring new market opportunities, Sarah seemed like the obvious choice. She’d earned it. Moreover, she knew the business inside and out.
Six months later, the initiative was stalled. The team seemed frustrated. Sarah was working harder than ever but delivering less than expected. In their one-on-one, she finally admitted: “I don’t know why, but I feel like I’m failing at this.”
David had made one of the most common and costly mistakes leaders make: Promoting based on past performance instead of matching talent to future needs.
The Hidden Cost of Misalignment
Here’s what David didn’t understand: Sarah wasn’t failing. She was misplaced.
The skills that made her exceptional at operational excellence—her love of structure, her attention to detail, her preference for proven processes—were exactly what made her struggle with blue-sky innovation work that required experimentation, risk-taking, and comfort with ambiguity.
Furthermore, this wasn’t a reflection of Sarah’s capabilities. It was a mismatch between her CORE working style and what the role required.
The real problem? David was using the wrong measuring stick.
People vs. Talent: A Critical Distinction
Most leaders hire and promote based on who they like working with, who’s been loyal, or who performed well in their previous role. However, the Talent-Driven GrowthÆ framework makes a crucial distinction:
People are just people without context. To identify “talent”, you need context. Context is the measuring stick used to separate people from talent.
You might have great people on your team who aren’t the right talent for your current growth phase. That’s not an indictment of them; it’s a recognition that different growth stages require fundamentally different capabilities. In this case – the growth stage you are in help establish context needed to determine the type of person who represents the talent you need.
The Four Core Talent Types
Through working with hundreds of companies, I’ve identified four primary talent profiles that every organization needs at different points in their journey. These are represented by the acronym CORE:
Curious (C)
These are your visionaries, strategic thinkers, and question-askers. They thrive on exploring what-ifs, connecting dots others miss, and pushing into uncharted territory. Additionally, they’re the ones reading industry trends, bringing new perspectives, and asking “why can’t we?”
When you need them most: Learning phase, Jumping-the-S, entering new markets
Organized (O)
These are your systems builders and process optimizers. They take chaos and create order, build repeatable workflows, and ensure consistency. They’re the backbone of operational excellence.
When you need them most: Transitioning from Early Growth to Mature Growth, scaling operations, working smarter not harder, and gaining efficiency and effectiveness.
Reticent (R)
These are your careful evaluators and risk assessors. They pump the brakes, ask hard questions about assumptions, and protect against reckless moves. While sometimes frustrating, they prevent costly mistakes.
When you need them most: Due diligence, major decisions, protecting established success
Enterprising (E)
These are your action-takers and “MacGyver’s”. They figure things out on the fly, improvise solutions, and make things happen through sheer force of will and action. Furthermore, they thrive in ambiguity, don’t need/want rules, and create movement.
When you need them most: Early Growth, turnarounds, breaking through roadblocks
Sarah’s Story Makes Sense Now
Looking back, David now see the ‘failure’ more clearly. Sarah was predominantly Organized with some Reticent, perfect for what the company needed during its Mature Growth phase. Her talent created the systems that allowed the company to scale efficiently. Her orientation toward managing/reducing risk added a conservative, “safe” flavor to her work.
But the innovation task force needed Curious and Enterprising talent. It required someone comfortable with uncertainty, energized by experimentation, and willing to pursue ideas that might fail.
Sarah wasn’t the wrong person. She was the right person in the wrong seat at the wrong time.
What David Did Next
Once David understood the CORE framework, he made three critical changes:
First, he moved Sarah back to a role that leveraged her Organized strengths—leading the operational scaling needed to support whatever innovations the task force developed. She immediately flourished again.
Second, he promoted Alex from the product team to lead innovation. Alex’s Curious and Enterprising profile was perfect for the exploratory work. Within weeks, the task force had more viable concepts in development than the previous six months combined.
Third, he assessed his entire leadership team through the CORE lens and realized he was heavy on Organized and Reticent talent. Great for their Mature Growth phase, but insufficient for the Jump-the-S move they needed to make.
The results? Within a year, the company had successfully entered two new markets and revitalized its innovation pipeline.
The Questions You Need to Ask
About your business: Where are you on the S-Curve? What type of movement does that require? What’s the core challenge you’re trying to solve right now?
About your people: What’s the CORE profile of your key players? Are they lifters, maintainers, or drag/delayers in your current context? Do you have the right mix for your current growth phase?
About the match: Are you asking Organized people to be Enterprising? Are you frustrating Curious people by keeping them in maintenance mode? Have your lifters become drag/delayers simply because the context changed?
The Real Challenge
The hardest part isn’t identifying CORE profiles; it’s accepting that people who were perfect for yesterday’s challenges might not be suited for tomorrow’s opportunities. Additionally, it means recognizing that moving someone (or yourself) isn’t a demotion, it’s alignment.
Sarah didn’t need to be fixed. She needed to be repositioned where her natural talents could thrive.
Your struggling performers might not need coaching. They might need a different role that matches their CORE to your current needs.
Understanding your people’s CORE is the first step. Systematically matching them to your business needs is the real work. Next week, I’ll share the step-by-step implementation process that leaders use to make these transitions without disrupting what’s working and how to know when you need outside help to execute it correctly.
Want to assess your team’s CORE profiles? You can get your CORE Assessment here or dive deep into the complete framework inside my book Talent-Driven Growth.
