Great companies grow talent even faster than revenue. Sometimes that means hiring stars from outside. More often it means sharpening the in-house talent pool -- using whatever blends of formal programs and ad-hoc explorations seem best suited to the market's newest demands.
That's not an easy feat to pull off. Industry dynamics can change fast, while talent-development pipelines remain stuck with old-time priorities that are losing relevance. Hospital systems, for example, are well-stocked with people who have risen through the ranks of in-patient care. That's fine, until the day that the brightest growth prospects involve outpatient services. Who's ready, then, to seize those opportunities? 
I've been talking lately to a wide cross-section of people who are thriving in knowledge-based or managerial jobs that didn't exist 10 years ago. Most have succeeded in spite of the system -- rather than because of it. They got ahead by ignoring the traditional career ladder and choosing instead to make the most of a self-defined career lattice.
If a single employer can't create all these opportunities, these pioneers don't mind signing on with different employers to pick up the eclectic skills that make them successful today. They're active in areas such as user experience, ed-tech, genetic counseling, online marketplaces and content marketing. Tech has influenced the fields they work in, but the pioneers aren't strictly in tech-centric careers. Instead, they are bridge-builders, finding ways that traditional disciplines can benefit from digital-era breakthroughs.
Could well-established companies take a bolder approach -- and benefit more systematically from these new types of hybrid skills and hybrid careers? I put the question earlier this month to Adam Miller, the founder and CEO of Cornerstone on Demand, which specializes in software-based talent development for major corporations.
Miller's assessment: old-style succession planning has become "an out-of-date concept." He's right -- and while it's charming to watch timeless changing-of-the-guard rituals in major European capitals (i.e. the Kremlin photo above) -- there's no reason big companies should be nearly so rigid in trying to march generation after generation of future leaders through the same drills.
The better path, Miller argues, is for management to move high-potential employees into new areas -- both geographically and functionally -- that may be quite different from the traditional path to the top. That's as it should be. In the same way that revenue growth occurs by selling new products to new customers, talent growth involves a lifelong commitment to mastering new and unexpected skills.