When Global Mobility Gets Talent Strategy Wrong 

What if we’re looking at the ROI of Global Mobility all wrong? 

We spend an enormous amount of time calculating the cost of an international assignment. But perhaps the bigger question isn’t “How much did this assignment cost?” It’s “What happened to the talent we invested in?” 

I’ve spent much of my career watching organizations invest heavily in their people through Global Mobility. Done well, international assignments are extraordinary investments. They build leadership capability and international experience, deepen organizational knowledge, expand networks, and prepare people for roles they might never have been ready to take on otherwise. 

But I’ve also watched companies get that investment spectacularly wrong — in two very different ways. 

The talent we fail to plan for 

The first scenario is the one most mobility conversations focus on. 

You have a high-performing employee. The company invests in them for years — multiple international assignments, leadership development, relocation support, and significant compensation and tax costs. They build deep organizational knowledge and become genuinely valuable to the business. 

Then the assignment ends. And the question becomes: “What’s next?” 

Except nobody has a good answer. There’s no role waiting. No succession plan. No career conversation. No clear path forward. Eventually, that person leaves — and all of that investment walks out the door, potentially straight to a competitor. 

I’ve seen it happen far too many times. 

The talent we shouldn’t have invested in 

But there’s a second scenario that gets far less attention — and it’s every bit as costly. 

I’ve watched organizations move people who were already struggling in their current roles into international assignments — sometimes promoting them in the process. The thinking seems to be: maybe a new role will help. Maybe a new country will motivate them. Maybe a fresh start will change the outcome. 

But a new location doesn’t fix a performance problem. 

And yet the organization keeps investing — assignment after assignment, year after year — even though the underlying issue hasn’t changed. Eventually, the employee is terminated. Which raises a very different question: why did we make such a significant investment in someone we were never prepared to retain? 

Two mistakes, one root cause 

In the first scenario, the organization loses great talent because it failed to plan for what comes next. In the second, it invests in mobility without first asking whether this is the talent it should be investing in at all. 

Both are expensive mistakes. And both tell me the same thing: Global Mobility cannot operate in isolation from Talent, Performance and Succession Planning. 

Before an assignment begins, we’re good at asking the operational questions: Where are we sending this person? How much will it cost? What support will they need? 

We’re far less disciplined about asking the strategic ones: Why this person? What are we developing them for? What does success look like? And, most importantly — what comes next? 

Because an international assignment shouldn’t be a reward, a retention tactic, or a reset button. It should be a deliberate investment in talent, and part of a much bigger career strategy. 

That’s where I believe Global Mobility can create far more value than simply moving people from A to B.

If you are reassessing how your global mobility program integrates with workforce planning, succession, and retention, let’s talk. Schedule a consultation to align your mobility investments with measurable talent outcomes.