Identifying the Right

8/9/2019 Identifying the Right

1/9

Identifying the RightCourse for Taienti\AanagementBy Special Editor Peter ReillyT alent management has always seemed to me to be a tricky subject. It is at riskof becoming mere hyperbole, as in the War for Talent,'^ or of becoming the fadof the conference circuit because the term lacks a clear definition. Proposeddefinitions are, at worst, a melange of different concepts strung together without a

clear statement of what is meant by talent and how we might manage it. Talent man-agement's very success as a rallying call to managers to give attention to the identifi-cation of the development needs of employees, though, means that we should notdiscard the concept.

Like employee engagement, which irritates some academics because it lacks arigorous theoretical underpinning, talent management seems to play well in theboardrooms of the world. Wno could be against engaging employees or managingtalent? The active-sounding words and the explicit references to engagement andtalent fit with HR mangers' notions of getting the best from people in a meritocraticenvironment. While the definition of employee engagement has become much clearerover time (even if its meas urem ent is abused by som e consultants), talent ma nagem enthas yet to achieve such clarity Peter Cappelli, a keynote speaker at the 2008 IPMA-HRInternational Training Conference, has defined talent management as "simply a matterof anticipating the need for human talent and then setting out a plan to meet it."^ Thisdescription has the great benefits of simplicity and being easy to understand. Thedifficulty rem ains, thou gh, tha t th e term talent is not defined and the planning m etho dis left open. Martha Crumpacker and Jill Crumpacker quote three definitions of talentmanagement, ranging from "developing, and deploying employees who are critical tothe com pany's success" to the "developm ent of all workers" in their article. So, in t hedefinition of talent, is it a case of "you pays your mo ney and you takes your choice"?

This special issue o Public Personnel Managem ent gives us a chance to examinethis question and others relating to talent management, both from an internationalperspective and from a number of different methodological and content standpoints.We hope that readers will find that the concept of talent management emerges withmore practical utility by the end of the journal. Valerie Garrow and Wendy Hirsh'sarticle gets th e collection off to a go od start by raising the fund amental issues of whattalent management is about and the ways in which it can be delivered. Garrow andHirsh challenge organizations to ask themselves two vital questions: (1) What is talent


2/9

whether, in their eyes, talent is an inclusive term that covers the whole workforce, onethat is restricted to, say, candidates for fast-track development to senior positions, oron e that simply describes tho se wh o are already in senior positions in the organization.For example, Ruwayne Kock and Mark Burke answer the questions in theircontribution to this issue by defining talent management as a set of policies andpractices designed to attract, retain and engage "key and leadership talent."It is obvious that the selection of who is included under any definition of talentprofoundly affects the howthe activitiesof a talent management program. Anorganization's definition of talent will also determine the what of managementprograms. If talent is conceived as being those who are either holding seniormanagement positions or who have the potential to hold such positions, then anorganization will need to decide what criteria it wants to use to decide who has thecapacity for growth. (The identification of high-potential employees in top positions isgenerally easier, but an organization will still have to decide which grades of managersare eligible for the talent man agem ent program.)Debate has raged over the years on how organizations should define highpotential. As Marilyn G owing, David M. M orris, Seymour Adler, and Mitchell Gold pointout here, researchers started with notions of innate attributesa set of abilities thatstem from their genetic makeup or early-life experiences and which are set by one'searly 20s. Which of those attributes are conducive to success as a leader it was th oug htcould be inferred from studying the traits of those who have held senior positions.Knowing what made past leaders successful made it easy in theory, to find futureleaders. All an organization needed to do was search for others with attributes likethose of past leaders.

Some organizations, like Shell and its HAIR construct, tried to be more scientificwith the process of selecting these attributes. As an acronym representing what Shellwas looking for when identifying future company executives, HAIR stood for"helicopter," which meant being able to survey the problem from a distance, yet diveinto the detail if necessary; "analytical" ability; "imagination" to be creative in solutions;and a sense of "reality" so that good ideas are well grounded in what will work inpractice.

Research com m issioned in the 1960s sugg ested that having HAIR qualities in highme asure was indicative of potential for top ma nagem ent.Some organizations persist in using this sort of approach, but there is less faith in

the robustness of its theoretical underpinnings than there was. More organizationshave moved toward a competency-based method of looking for employees with theskills and behaviors necessary to succeed. The advantage of this is that there is morechance that competencies can be improved through learning and developmentinterventions. There has been recent criticism^ of this method, too, not least for itsoversimplification and generic approach.

In this issue of Public Personnel Management, Kock and Burke report mixedresults for competency-based talent management in South Africa. One risk is that


3/9


4/9

the process they will not buy into the results, and this may prove tru e for the successfulas well as the unsuccessful. Assessment systems may also introduce biasesa pointalso made later by Kock and Burke. Face-to-face or resume-driven approaches to talentidentification may prejudice ass essors against particular types of candid ate. Web-basedtools get roun d this problem but favor th e co m pute r literate, which m ight work againstolder, non-office based applicant. Both Crumpacker, in relation to gender differences,and Tom Calo, regarding the aging workforce, emphasize the requirement to besensitive to the au dience for talent assessments, which includes both the assessors andthe assessees in the particular organizational context. These considerations willdetermine, for instance, whether assessment tools will be high or low tech andwh ether the assessm ent will involve a high or low proportio n of knowledge w orkers.

Calo emphasizes another aspect of context, namely the demographics of anorganization's workforce. Organizations may be aware of the challenges they face inthis regard, but others, as Calo notes, may be in denial, delaying their response, ordoing nothing at all. In a U.S. or European setting, the principal worry is the aging ofthe labor supply, whereas in othe r p arts of the world, there is an oversupply of youngworkers. Both situations presen t challenges that dem and respon ses.

The tight labor markets in many countries during recent years found has giventhis issue mo re urgency. Writing this article just after the Lehman Br oth ers' co llapse, itmight be that, for th e time being in the West, the pow er in the labor m arket has m ovedback to employers. And just as the demographic time bomb of the 1970s did notexplode, so external change may bail out the deniers and the organizations that havedon e nothing. However, a mo re short-term imperative may pro m pt action.

Workforce reductions by organizations may mean that much quality talent will belost and their knowledge with them. This may be particularly true where there areincentives for early retirement, thereby making the older workers who remain feelexpendab le. The eco nom ic d ow nturn may initially offer the public sector a bigger poolto recruit from, bu t will eventually squeez e th e public purse an d lead even g overn m entagencies and other public sector organizations to pursue efficiency drives and cost-saving that will involve cutting jobs. The risk then is that talent is inadvertently lost inpoorly specified "right-sizing" progr am s.

Avoiding this situation seems to be to a good argument for organizations to doworkforce planning, to establish t he flow down their talent pipelines, and to c onstruc ta number of scenarios to describe possible future realities. Account should be taken ofthe age profile ofthe organization's workforce and the number and nature of those onshort-term or temporary contracts. Organizations must be willing to reconsider theirviews regarding older workers' fitness and motivations and on the commitment ofthose on "atypical" contracts. Negative stereotypes can inadvertently lead organizationsto make false assumptions that adversely influence resourcing decisions.

Calo also asks a vital question that applies in normal times: In downsizingexercises and where a cohort of baby boomers is retiring, how can an organizationtransfer knowledge? As with workforce planning, raising the need for knowledge


5/9

organizational performance. So, as Calo suggests, organizations must estimate thenumber of departures, establish who among those who might be leaving holdimp ortant information, and establish m echanisms for capturing and passing on what isin those people's heads. A broader talent m anagement program would fosterknowledge transfer as well as the retention of older workers, while also maximizing thecontributions new recruits can add to the o rganization's existing store of expertise.

So HR professionals sho uld b e strategizing ab out w hat the labour m arket contextwithin which talent management is taking place; conducting risk managementexercises to identify resource vulnerabilities (individuals and groups); designingapproaches that are adaptable to the changing external environmentbe it "boom" or"bust."

Crumpacker focuses on the issue of gender diversity, and asks whether additionallegislation is needed to get a better balance in the Senior Executive Service of the U.S.Federal Government. Crumpacker describes how the SES Diversity Act would requirefederal government agencies to develop a diversity plan to improve the position of "ofminorities, women, and individuals with disabilities" and to identify and eliminatebarriers impairing th e ability of these g roups to obtain a ppo intm ents.

In the context of legislation, readers working in othe r geographies might po nde rwhether stronger legislation might be the right approach to creating a diverseworkforce and especially within senior management, be it from the perspective ofethnic minorities, gender or age. Research in the UK trying to explain the disparity infemale pay compared to male, suggests that outright discrimination against womendoes occur, but is less important than is occupational segregation (the career choicesmade by women) and the effect of their non-work lifestyle choices, domesticresponsibilities (especially cliild rearing). In this context, legislation may have highsymbolic value but may be a blunt instrument to effect change, unless a policy ofpositive discrimination is adoptedand that brings another set of problems. Theexisting policies of measuring diversity performance and identifying obstacles to fairrepresentation seem to have made some progress, but to move further forward mayrequire addressing the sort of social and educational issues described by the MeritSystems Protection Board report 'A Question of Equity^Women and the GlassCeiling," quo ted by Crumpacker. In her conclusions she doe s indeed argue that o ne ofthe main weaknesses of the SESDiversity Act is the fact that it has not established theactual cause(s) of the shortfall of women in executive positions, and moreover thatdata collection in the recruitment process will not be geared to giving some answers towhere the problems lie.

Individual public sector organizations must indeed do that and perhaps look atwhat success the private sector has achieved, or not, and draw lessons from thatquarter too.Like the aging workforce, the challenge of getting more women into seniorma nagem ent positions cries out for good workforce planning and succession p lanning.Organizations should know the gender composition of their employee base, ascertain


6/9

management it will almost certainly have to take action to improve the supply Like thesuggestions for a diversity plan, set out in the SESDiversity Act, this might be throughinternal development programs or through external hiring, but based on anunderstanding of what are the impediments to creating a better balanced, morerepresentative workforce.

This issue o Public Personnel M anagement includes a case study of how talentmanagement has been implemented in a non-Western country. Kock and Burkedescribe talent management programs in the post-apartheid South Arica, focusing onthe country's Public Service. The article exemplifies the importance of context. SouthAfrica suffers from high unemployment and serious skill shortages, not least becausethe country's education and training systems are not yet up to the task of producinglarge numbers of highly skilled workers. Kock and Burke describe how in thesecircumstances the state has a development role. Its activities in policy formulation,enacting legislation, and delivering services place the state in the role of working toachieve social transformation. In parallel, the state must work to improve workers'skills and remove barriers to business growth in order to facilitate the transformation.For the g ove rnm ent to fulfil its role, Kock and B urke believe that the re has to b e a shiftfrom public administration to public management and that people are central tomaking this shift happen.

In this context we can again see the imperative of aligning talent managementefforts with an organization's strategic goals, other HR systems, and culture as apreco nditio n for success. Organizations also must have sufficient professionalcapability to make and sustain change, gain high-level sponsorship of developmentactivities to give them legitimacy and impetus, improve the data upon which decisionsare based, and make proper use of technology. Kock and Burke commend what theysee as the private sector's integrative and incremental implementation of talentmanagement programs. They argue for a step-by-step building up of the support fortalent m anag em ent so that wh en a program is laun ched , it is likely to be well received.

While perhaps more problematic in South Africa than in some other countriesthat have been at this task longer, the lack of good policies and processes for HRfunctions like succession planning and career management and the emphasis on HRmanagement as a controller rather than a facilitator of career management areubiquitous problems, as is the short-term focus of many managers. Readers may wellsymp athize with Kock and Burke's plea "get line mana gers to talk as passionately abo uttalent as they do abo ut organizational resu lts."

Kock and Burke offer a Talent Wheel with employee engagement at its core as amodel of how to conduct talent management processes. The processes themselves areunlikely to be contentious, but not all organizations would see employee engagementas the core activity. Making it the core, however, does raise a debate about how muchtalent management is about securing the right resources in the right place to improveorganizational performance and how much talent management is a more people-centric, developmental system at the individual level. Most organizations would


7/9

talented em ployees pre pare d to stay and are motivated because if not th e organizationwill suffer.

Kock and Burke are also concerned about the ability of public sectororganizations to compete with private sector organization for talent. They encouragepublic sector employers to grow their own talent so that they do no t nee d to me et thiscompetition head on.

Another question is whether talent management should be organization- orpeople-centric. Kock and Burke seem to incline towards the latter approach, whereasoth er co mm entators , such as Pan Kim (forthcoming) argue that HR managers "shouldfit talent to the task." This suggests taking a more directive approach toward workallocation, but it might simply be a wish to align individual skills better witli anorgan ization's activity. The UK civil service's recognition that the re a re different caree rpaths for different skill sets would be a similar approach. Certainly, the Enronexpe rience so graphically descrilDed by Gladwell sho ws the risks of letting talent loosewithou t ensuring p rope r performan ce man agem ent or organizational alignment.'*Certainly, in the context of the public sector, a talent management programshould emphasize that employees should not just have the knowledge, skills, andabilities, but also the proper values. This may act as a bulwark against corruption ornep otism , bu t it also is a way of preventing the self-indulgence of the E nron highfliers.Public service should com e before p ursuing on e's own interest.

This issue o Public Personnel Managem ent will, we hope, give readers ideas forresolving some of the difficult issues in handling talent management. As with so muchin good ma nagem ent, th e way on e starts a journey is key on e's sub sequ ent successfularrival: head off dow n a cul-de-sac or a winding byway and on e will either never arriveat one's destination or if one does, one will surely be exhausted by the effort. Oneshould ask oneself why one has any talent management program, to what businessobjectives it is aligned; who will be part of it as a consequence of answering the firstquestion; and through what processes and by what criteria will one decide what is"talent" in the organization. Again, like good management practice, one needs to trackprogress (having decided your Key Performance Indicators) and evaluate theperformance ofthe program against one's objectives.

This series of journal articles will hopefully be helpful to readers in selecting theright path for the journey.Notes> Michaels, E., Handfield-Jones, H., & Axelrod, B. (2001). The war for talent. Boston: HarvardBusiness School Press.2 Cappelli, R (2008, March). Talent management for the twenty-first century. Harvard BusinessReview, March, 74-81.5 Beverly Alimo-Metcalfe and John Alban-Metcalfe (2008). Engaging leadership: Creatingorganizations that maximize the potential of their people. Chartered Institute for Personnel and

Development, London.^ Gladwell, M. (2002, July 22). The talent myth. The New Yorker, pp. 28-33.


8/9

AuthorPeter ReillyDirector of HR Research and ConsultancyInstitute for Employment StudiesMantell BuildingUniversity of SussexBrighton BNl 9RF, UK+44 (0) 1273 678183peter. reilly@employment-s tudies .co.ukPeter Reilly joined the Institute for Employment Studies in 1995 after a 16-year careerwith Shell where he held a number of HR posts in the UK and abroad. At the Institutehe is director of HR research and consultancy He leads the both consultancy andresearch work on reward/performance managem ent and on the HR function. He alsocontributes to projects on HR and skills planning. Clients come from all sectors and hisinvolvement ranges from facilitation, through expert advice to design and evaluation.Reilly has written various articles and books on these subjects, but especially on the HRfunction.


9/9

Identifying the Right

Documents

Transcript of Identifying the Right