Google’s approach optimizes a sub-optimal model. A poor performer is less bad after a year of coaching. Our data show that talent occurs in predictable combinations, each combo in predictable frequency. Some combos DO NOT exist at all. The talents of great leaders (envision future, inspire followers) does not exist in the same person as a great manager (sees unique talents in others, applies and develops the talent, fosters purposeful collaboration). Google should have asked: What talents do our best managers posses? How do we find and develop more, faster? See http://methodteaming.com/did-google-miss-the-forest-for-the-...