Skip to main content
Steady at the Top
← All articles

How to motivate high performers who have stopped growing

Motivate a high performer who has stopped growing by designing an assignment that adds learning and usable authority. Remove or transfer existing work to create capacity. If promotion is unavailable, state that boundary honestly and distinguish development from an implied promise of advancement.

A growth assignment agreement is a working record of the capability an employee will develop, the decisions they can make, and the work that will leave their current role. It applies Ryan and Deci’s 2000 account of self-determination theory, which identifies autonomy, competence, and relatedness. It is a practical management method, not a validated assessment.

Development builds capability. Promotion changes a person’s role or level through the company’s process. Additional work increases demand. A single assignment can involve all of these, but leadership should say which one it is offering rather than letting the employee infer an unwritten deal.

Use industrial/organizational psychology, the psychology of work and organizations, to examine the growth assignment itself. Ask what the employee can learn, which decisions become theirs, and what leaves the existing role.

Diagnose the plateau before prescribing a stretch

Ask the employee what they want to learn and where the current role has become repetitive. They may want deeper expertise rather than a management role. They may want a different problem, stronger feedback, or less rescue work. Do not assume every high performer wants the same career path.

Check whether the issue is growth at all. Compensation, unfair opportunity, weak management, or an unmanageable workload can look like reduced enthusiasm. A new project will not necessarily address those conditions. Handle each through its appropriate process.

Look at the employee’s actual portfolio. Reliable people often accumulate exceptions because others trust them to finish. The role may already contain several unofficial jobs. Adding another prestigious assignment can increase the burden while leaving the plateau untouched.

Use What to ask valued employees before they decide to leave for a broader retention conversation. Your goal is to understand the employee’s conditions and interests, not obtain a declaration that the next assignment will make them stay. A credible opportunity remains an offer the employee can evaluate.

The growth assignment agreement method

1. Name the capability to develop

Describe a capability that matters to the employee and the business. Examples include making investment tradeoffs, leading a cross-functional decision, or managing an unfamiliar customer segment. Avoid vague goals such as becoming more strategic without explaining the decisions involved.

Identify what the person can already do. A high performer should not repeat familiar work under a more impressive project title. The assignment needs a real learning edge, supported by evidence from the employee’s interests and current capabilities.

Write the intended learning in observable terms. “Prepare a recommendation that weighs customer benefit against delivery capacity” is more useful than “gain exposure.” The employee and manager can later review the reasoning, feedback, and result.

Agree on why the assignment matters now. A development opportunity should serve a real purpose, but it should not become a pretext to transfer an abandoned problem without resources. Clarify the sponsor’s responsibility before asking the employee to accept.

2. Give authority proportionate to responsibility

List the decisions the employee can make, the people they can convene, and the resources available. State where approval remains necessary. An assignment that requires cross-functional cooperation needs a sponsor willing to resolve boundary disputes.

Do not confuse access to executives with authority. Attendance at senior meetings may provide context, but it does not establish the right to change priorities. Tell the relevant leaders what the employee can decide and what support you expect them to provide.

Use a clear escalation route. The employee should know when to bring a conflict back to the sponsor and what evidence the sponsor needs. Leaving that route ambiguous can turn development into a test of personal influence without accountability.

For the growth assignment, examine the distinction between autonomous and controlled workplace motivation in Deci, Olafsen, and Ryan’s 2017 review before interpreting acceptance as enthusiasm. Make the authority usable. A request to act like an owner while retaining every approval does not grant meaningful choice.

3. Remove enough current work

Name what stops or transfers before the assignment begins. Assign the transferred work to an appropriate owner and account for their capacity too. Moving tasks to an already overloaded colleague does not create capacity for the company.

Include transition effort. The employee may need to document a process, train a replacement, or resolve open items. Give that work a place in the schedule. Do not assume the old role disappears the day the growth assignment is announced.

Use the NIOSH description of job stress to examine demands against resources across both the employee’s continuing responsibilities and the proposed growth project. Review whether the new portfolio is feasible. An exciting project can still create overload if the prior responsibilities remain in practice.

An employee whose symptoms persist or affect daily life should consult a licensed clinician; the development review should address the assignment, rather than attempting to diagnose its recipient. The manager’s task is to make the assignment workable and provide appropriate support. It is not to diagnose the employee from changes in energy or responsiveness.

4. Build feedback and support into the work

Choose a sponsor who can provide relevant feedback and make decisions. Put review points on the calendar. The employee should not have to seek help only after a visible failure. Learning requires a route to test assumptions before consequences become difficult to reverse.

Define what mistakes the assignment can tolerate. A development exercise should not place the employee alone with a risk they lack authority or expertise to manage. Use specialist review for legal, financial, security, or other consequential decisions.

Ask the sponsor to discuss reasoning, not only outcomes. A well-reasoned decision can meet an unfavorable market event. A weak process can produce a lucky result. The assignment should develop judgment rather than teach the employee to imitate whatever happened to work.

Give feedback the employee can use in the next cycle. Name the evidence missed, tradeoff handled well, or stakeholder issue left unresolved. Avoid relying on a broad label such as executive presence when a concrete behavior can be described.

5. State the career implications honestly

Explain whether the assignment affects compensation, eligibility, succession consideration, or none of those under the current process. Have appropriate people specialists review formal terms. Do not imply that successful delivery guarantees a role the company has not authorized.

If no promotion is available, say so. You can offer valuable development without disguising the boundary. Ask whether that opportunity still fits the employee’s goals. A person may reasonably decide that it does not.

Use Should you promote internally or hire an outside executive? when comparing internal and external candidates for a future role. Development should generate evidence, not a private guarantee that bypasses the company’s selection standard. Explain how the evidence will be considered.

At the close, review the capability developed, authority exercised, and employee’s next interest. Decide what returns to the original role and what changes permanently. An assignment without an ending can become an unpaid expansion of responsibility by default.

A hypothetical growth assignment with a real boundary

A strong finance manager wants broader business experience. The company has no director vacancy. The CEO offers responsibility for a cross-functional pricing recommendation, with access to customer and delivery evidence and authority to convene the relevant managers.

The manager transfers a recurring reporting package to a trained colleague whose workload has been adjusted. The commercial leader sponsors the assignment and resolves disputes about participation. The agreement states that the project provides development evidence but does not guarantee promotion.

The manager can now evaluate a concrete opportunity. The company has made room for learning instead of adding a second job. The outcome remains uncertain, but the terms are clear enough for both parties to judge the assignment fairly.

The private-life composite

A founder tells a dependable employee about a high-profile project during a weekend call. The employee agrees quickly, then spends the evening moving family plans around the existing workload. The founder interprets the immediate yes as renewed motivation.

This composite shows why acceptance alone is weak evidence of a workable assignment. Ask the employee to review the full portfolio before confirming the terms. Give them a real chance to identify work that must leave and support they will need.

The same standard applies to you. A project that interests you can still exceed your own capacity. Protecting a learning opportunity requires an operating choice, even when the person involved is capable, willing, and accustomed to carrying difficult work.

Evaluate the manager’s contribution too

Use Why morale varies so much between teams in one company to examine whether motivation varies with manager quality. A high performer may stop growing because feedback and opportunity have become narrow. The manager should not assign another project while keeping the same unhelpful relationship intact.

Assess the stretch project alongside the broader practices in How CEOs can build motivation that survives hard quarters before treating another assignment as the answer to stalled development. A growth assignment is one intervention. It cannot replace fair treatment, credible compensation decisions, or an honest career discussion. Keep those responsibilities visible even when the new work is attractive.

Before launch, have the employee explain the agreement in their own words. They should be able to name the capability, decisions, support, work removed, and career boundary. Correct any mismatch before the project becomes a test of an unwritten promise.

During the assignment, protect the agreed boundaries when other leaders ask for the employee’s old work. The opportunity becomes credible through those ordinary enforcement decisions. Development requires room to learn, authority to act, and an accurate account of what comes next.

Make declining possible

Ask whether the employee wants the assignment under the stated terms. A respectful refusal should lead to a clearer career discussion, not a penalty disguised as concern about ambition. The employee may prefer specialist depth or need a different timing. Record that preference without treating it as a permanent judgment about potential. Revisit it when the role or the employee’s interests change.

Sources

Steady at the Top