There is a familiar conversation in organisations of every size. A position becomes vacant, and someone suggests the obvious candidate. She knows the business inside out. He consistently exceeds his targets. Clients trust her. Nobody works harder than he does.

The promotion is announced, everyone congratulates the successful employee, and the organisation feels it has made a prudent decision.

Six months later, the conversation sounds rather different.

“She is brilliant at the technical work, but she struggles with her team.”

“He avoids dealing with performance issues.”

“We thought he would be a natural.”

That last statement is worth examining. Why did we think that?

Technical competence and management competence are not interchangeable. The qualities that make someone an outstanding individual contributor do not automatically prepare them to set expectations, delegate work, give difficult feedback or develop other people.

Time and again, some of the habits that made a person successful in their previous role become obstacles once they are responsible for team success.

The employee who always solved problems independently may now need to let someone else work through an imperfect first attempt. The person who built a reputation for being available at all hours may struggle to establish reasonable boundaries for others. The expert who can spot an error in seconds may find it frustrating to explain the process and transfer their knowledge.

None of these are character flaws. It is a change in the job.

I have seen organisations handle promotions by providing a revised title, a salary adjustment and perhaps an introduction to the team, then assume the rest will follow. There is no discussion about decision-making authority, no coaching on employee relations and no agreement on what success should look like after three or six months.

When difficulties emerge, the response is often disappointment. We expected more from someone so capable. Yet the organisation has asked the individual to perform in a different position, carrying new responsibilities, without providing a road map.

There is another aspect of these promotions that deserves attention. Too often, the employee retains much of their former workload while assuming responsibility for managing other people.

The organisation has effectively given them two jobs. They are still expected to be the technical expert, respond to the same clients and deliver the same output, while also supervising staff, reviewing work, addressing performance concerns and developing their team.

We then wonder why they struggle to delegate, have little time for coaching or spend their evenings catching up on work. In some cases, the very behaviour we criticise is a predictable consequence of how we structured the promotion.

If we want someone to succeed as a manager, we need to create the capacity for them to manage. That may require redistributing responsibilities, adjusting individual performance targets or accepting that their personal output will change as their contribution increasingly comes through the performance of others.

This is not always an easy adjustment for the employee either. Someone accustomed to being recognised for their individual results may find it difficult to step back and measure success differently. That transition needs to be acknowledged and supported.

A poorly supported promotion can affect the new manager, the employees reporting to them and the clients who depend on the team’s performance.

It can also cost us a good employee. Some eventually conclude that management is not for them. That may be a perfectly valid decision, provided it is based on genuine preference or aptitude rather than an avoidable experience that damaged their confidence or reputation.

The good news is that much of this is preventable.

Before promoting someone, ask whether they actually want to manage people. Is this the right next step? Are there other ways to recognise and reward their contribution? Give potential managers opportunities to lead projects, coach colleagues or supervise limited assignments before making the responsibility permanent.

Once promoted, establish clear expectations. What decisions can they make? What must be escalated? What does success look like during the first three to six months?

An experienced mentor, targeted training and regular conversations with their own manager can provide valuable support. A short development plan that identifies the skills they need to build is often more useful than a workshop and a policy manual followed by silence.

We should also stop treating entry into management as the only credible reward for technical excellence. Advancement need not always mean acquiring direct reports.

Promoting from within is often the right decision. It demonstrates confidence in employees and creates opportunity. Leaders must remember, however, that their responsibility does not end with the announcement.

If we believe someone is ready for a larger role, we should be equally prepared to invest in their success. That includes giving them the time, authority and support to do the job they have been promoted to do.

• Kelly Francis is founder and managing director of Performance Solutions Ltd. She advises boards, business owners and leadership teams on the people decisions that shape organisational performance. Kelly can be reached at 441-232-5270 or kelly_francis@psolutions.bm