9-Box Grid

How the 9-box grid works

Each employee gets two ratings, usually on a low, moderate, high scale:

• Performance (typically the horizontal axis): results and behaviors in the current role over the last 12 months. This should come from evidence such as performance reviews, scorecards and goal attainment.
• Potential (typically the vertical axis): the likelihood that the person can succeed in a bigger or broader role within a defined time, often two to three years. This is a judgment about the future, which is why it needs more discussion.

The two ratings place the person in one of nine boxes. Leaders then discuss placements together in a talent review, adjust them based on evidence and agree on actions for each person. Some organizations flip the axes; it does not matter as long as everyone uses the same layout.

What each box means

Labels vary by company. A common set, numbered from the bottom left:

1. Low performance, low potential: Not meeting expectations and not showing capacity to grow. Usually a performance plan, a move to a better-fitting role or an exit.
2. Moderate performance, low potential: Doing part of the job. Clarify expectations and coach; reassess in six months.
3. High performance, low potential: Strong experts and reliable operators who are best where they are. Recognize and pay them well; do not push them into management they do not want.
4. Low performance, moderate potential: Often new in role or in the wrong role. Look for a fit problem before a capability problem.
5. Moderate performance, moderate potential: The core of most workforces. Steady development, clear goals.
6. High performance, moderate potential: Strong contributors who could grow with targeted development. Good candidates for stretch projects.
7. Low performance, high potential: Often a rough patch, a bad manager match or a recent move. Investigate before rating them down further.
8. Moderate performance, high potential: Growing into the role. Coach and give a clear goal for the next 12 months.
9. High performance, high potential: Future leaders. Name them in succession planning, give them visible assignments and watch their flight risk closely.

In most healthy populations, the bulk of employees sit in boxes 5, 6 and 3. If a third of a team lands in box 9, the ratings are inflated.

Rating potential without guessing

Potential is where 9-box sessions go wrong. Without a definition, managers rate confidence, visibility and similarity to themselves.

Define potential in observable terms before the meeting. A practical set of indicators: learns new tasks quickly, handles ambiguity, takes on work beyond the role without being asked, influences peers, and wants a bigger role. Ask managers to bring one or two specific examples for every high-potential rating.

Separate aspiration from ability. Someone with high ability and no interest in leading people is not a box 9 for a management pipeline, though they may be for a senior specialist track. The high-potential employee page goes into how to assess this more rigorously.

Running a 9-box talent review

A workable format for a site or function with 40 to 80 people:

• Before the meeting: each manager pre-places their people with a one-line justification for each axis.
• In the meeting: HR shows the combined grid. Discuss boxes 9, 7 and 1 first, since those carry the biggest decisions. Then sample a few placements in the middle.
• Challenge, do not rubber-stamp: if a manager places everyone in the top row, ask for evidence. This is the same discipline as performance calibration.
• Agree actions: every person in boxes 7, 8 and 9 leaves with a named development step and an owner. Every person in box 1 gets a plan with a date.

Budget 60 to 90 minutes for a group that size. Larger groups should be split by function.

Bias and fairness risks

The 9-box is only as fair as the inputs. Known risks:

• Recency and visibility: people who present to leadership get higher potential scores than people doing quieter, equally valuable work.
• Affinity bias: managers see more potential in people like themselves.
• Leave and flexible schedules: employees returning from parental or medical leave, or working part-time, can be marked down on potential without evidence.
• Age assumptions: rating potential based on how long someone has left in their career invites age discrimination claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, which protects workers aged 40 and over.

Check the final grid by gender, race, age band and work arrangement. If one group is consistently placed lower on potential with similar performance ratings, revisit the evidence.

Sharing placements with employees

Most organizations do not share the box label itself. A label like low potential can demotivate someone permanently, and placements change year to year. What managers should share is the substance: how performance is viewed, what development is planned and what the realistic next step looks like. That gives the employee useful information without a permanent tag.