Are you willing to mentor a junior employee or do you prefer to hire externally for a more senior position?

I'm a big fan of developing talent from within, I work on the basis that if the internal applicant has around 70-80% of the skill set, then it will take them around the same time to learn the new skills as it would for an external applicant with the skills to learn the company and then I promote the internal candidate.

If it's too big a leap for an internal candidate, it is worth considering hiring on an interim basis from outside and having them mentor the internal candidate for a year with a view to promoting them then.

In my opinion many companies leave much to be desired when it comes to truly valuing their workforce and rewarding loyalty and commitment with growth opportunities.

Watching your best people quit because you can't be bothered to develop them is always a huge waste of your investment so far.

It has been in the past easy to hire in resources. The down side is that current staff feel they have no future and will walk to another job that may give them a "promotion".
I have always believed that developing your staff to their position is the best philosphy. Staff are more motivated, know your org culture, systems and processes.
I have now replaced myself 8 times in over 35+ years in HR. I could never have logically moved along my career path without developing a successor.
In Australia full employment is coming, so it will be essential to develop internal staff, rather than having to compete for scarce resources.

Peter McLean FAHRI

The decision of whether to hire an external resource or train and promote an internal candidate will always depend on the fact of how mature the organization is. The more mature, the best the company will have already in force methods and procedures to value, reward, train and promote its own human capital so as to perform a successful knowledge management and not reinventing the wheel.

However, there are circumstances within the organization or within the environment where business is developed, in which the lack of time or a specific competency is needed to add value, and it is interesting to bring some fresh air into the working group.

As always, to choose the appropriate alternative will depend on how well you have prepared your own managers to make clever decisions on human capital, as each area responsible should be an HR manager as well.

I support having employees with passion to add value for the customer. Passion for the position, industry, field of expertise, innovation, and the company is often the difference in filling a position, including promotion.

Assuming the only variables are an internal and an external candidate, the individual with passion to bridge his or her knowledge and/or skills gap is the one that will bring the quickest and highest value to the organization.

The risks with either candidate are that he or she will not receive the mentoring/coaching as well as the support needed to develop the required skills and knowledge to be successful in the position. Internal individuals are not developed for the new skill set required of the new role. External candidates do not receive cultural aspects of the job beyond the on-boarding orientation.

I will take the individual with the passion to inspire me to ensure she or he develops into the individual needed to support organizational goals.

My experience is that the best bet is internal talent that already knows the company and is a cultural fit. It also demonstrates that the company truly invests in its people and will promote from within (including lateral transitions that facilitate development opportunities) whenever possible. Conversely, hiring external talent can be a motivation/engagement killer unless it is clear that the skill set doesn't exist and can't be developed quickly and well enough to meet the position requirements.

I completly agree with Don. As I look back over both the people I have hired as well as those I encourage hiring managers to look at, the decision is completly circumstantial.
Each time we have the opportunity to add talent to our organization, it is important to evaluate the expected and needed contributions of the role as well as the state of the team they will be joining. It is imperative that the the right combination of skill sets be present to really be effective. Understanding that each individual brings a unique contribution to include skills and years of experience, there will be a variable each time a role is be added.

If I have an extremely experienced team, than I really try to bring a more junior executive to the team that can grow and develop and be mentored by others. If the team needs experience and direction, then a new mentee isn't going to be best. I try not to take the cookie cutter approach but really evaluate each circumstance and opportunity.

I agree that circumstance often dictates which is the best route. But I would strongly suggest partnering with the existing talent in a positive and constructive way, to help to alleviate a great deal of their stress (which can have a negative impact on the business). In addition, it is immensely rewarding to work with people that are willing to learn and improve themselves. The feelings of accomplishment for both the mentors and the facilitators are most gratifying (which can have a positive impact on the business)!

Ultimately, whether mentoring internally or hiring externally, the process should nurture and reinforce existing human potential along with the importance of creating work settings that allow both people and organizations to flourish.