HR professionals share talent management views

Citation

Burbridge, M. (2009), "HR professionals share talent management views", Strategic HR Review, Vol. 8 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/shr.2009.37208dab.006

HR professionals share talent management views

Article Type: HR at work From: Strategic HR Review, Volume 8, Issue 4

Short case studies that demonstrate best practice in HR

Given the recent changes within the global economic environment, it comes as no surprise that the attraction, development and ultimately retention of talent has risen up the priority list for most organizations. It can be a hugely expensive process trying to locate new talent from outside the organization and employees need now to be even more creative in the way they solve problems and introduce innovations into the workplace.

Research conducted by global professional services firm Towers Perrin across 90,000 employees in 19 countries showed that “those companies with the lowest percentage of engaged employees showed year-to-year declines of 33 percent in operating income and 11 percent in earnings per share” (Towers Perrin, 2008). This is stark reading in times when cash flow is being squeezed and exchange rates are taking slices out of profits.

As a result of this, training company Oakridge set up a series of “Think Tank” sessions to discuss the issue of talent management with a wide spectrum of senior HR representatives covering a range of global industry sectors. Their purpose was to share key issues affecting talent management, and to make use of the shared knowledge, views and experience within the Think Tank sessions to develop suggestions and identify current best practice in handling these issues. Although many issues were identified, they have been distilled into the following five key areas.

1. What is talent?

Different organizations will invariably have their own views and definitions of talent. The UK’s Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) defines the management of talent as: “The systematic attraction, identification, development, engagement/retention and deployment of those individuals with high potential who are of particular value to an organization” (CIPD, 2006).

This definition provides a general overview of the process of talent management, however, Think Tank discussions challenged whether talent management should be limited to just “high potential” employees. Does an organization not require good performance from a wider range of employees in addition to those with high potential? Cappelli offers a succinct view: “At its heart, talent management is simply a matter of anticipating the need for human capital and then setting out a plan to meet it” (Cappelli, 2008). Cappelli’s definition implies that talent may well be present in any form of human capital, independent of grade, even crossing global managerial and technical boundaries – stressing the importance of getting the right people in the right roles. This throws up the need to consider “technical development ladders” and “high performing teams” as part of talent.

The Think Tank discussions concluded that there may be a need to look at the whole organization, but under the banner of talent specific attention needs to be given to those with ambition and capability to grow into broader leadership roles.

2. How do we attract talent?

Getting the right talent into an organization is perceived as dependent on robust recruitment processes. This, however, forms part of the picture and there are other areas to consider.

In attracting talent, there is a need to understand exactly what the target group wants from a role in an organization. With much talk about Generation Y and its need to have a more flexible lifestyle, the attraction of younger talent has to be based around the offering of remuneration that can flex to meet their requirements – pension, leave, sabbaticals, hours of attendance and global location all become important factors. This flexibility, however, does not just appeal to certain age groups, but to all, which may require HR professionals to seriously reconsider their expectations of employee packages. Other factors to consider include career advancement opportunities, learning and development support, workload and even the financial health and status of an organization. All of these led to the conclusion that good talent management must be based on solid HR practices.

There is also the issue of attracting talent that does not fit the standard “framework”. If creativity and innovation are truly important factors then there may be a need to attract the “mavericks, eccentrics and those with the wow-factor”. This brings about a new set of challenges in balancing how these individuals deliver with the outputs they produce, especially if cross-cultural factors are considered. What is seen as “achieving” within one country may be perceived as not acting as a team player in another.

3. Nominating employees into a “talent pool”

There is clearly a motivational factor for any individual told that they have been nominated into a “talent pool”, as well as spin-off benefits as they realize the implications of this and compare themselves with other talented employees. Healthy competition and benchmarking can be important tools in encouraging talent to stretch itself further. Bringing global talent pools together can also provide a great opportunity for cross-fertilization of ideas and concepts.

In the Think Tank discussions, however, it was found that not every organization is open about who exactly is nominated into the talent pool, even to the extent that some individuals are not made aware that they are actually part of the talent group. Understandably there will be differing reasons as to why this happens; for example, the rivalry brought about through having a talent pool may be counter-productive for some individuals. Even so, it makes sense for the talent nominees to be absolutely clear as to why they have been nominated, but even more importantly, for them to be sure of the ground-rules, processes and expectations that are placed upon them.

A key consideration is that nomination into a talent pool may not be a permanent arrangement. Performance and potential may well vary as individuals grow into new roles, and it is important to be mindful of the impact upon individuals of being taken out of the talent pool.

4. Developing talent

The Think Tank group felt that good talent would always take control of their own career development. Managers do still have a critical role to play in nurturing and coaching talent and this can be tricky if managers feel threatened by the impact that talented individuals may have, as they may perceive this as undermining their position.

Managers may need to be reassured in their roles and may need coaching in how to handle talented individuals (especially if they are one of the mavericks). Managers should be encouraged to look beyond functional barriers when talent needs to be moved on into more challenging roles.

Based on group experiences, development interventions that appear to work best for a talent pool include coaching, mentoring, action learning groups, secondments and access to further education.

5. Return on investment

HR may have several roles to play in nurturing talent; acting as a central, coordinating body, facilitating in certain areas or setting up development interventions on a global scale. Managers will also be required to help by spotting talent in the first case as well as growing that talent. All of this involves time and energy throughout the organization, which in turn carries a cost.

The payback on this investment may not be immediate, but good evidence of internal succession planning and raised performance levels should be captured as a benchmark of the impact of talent management. Broadly, having talented individuals performing at their best for an organization for at least a two-year period would be a good return on the investment.

Inevitably some of that talent will move into new roles beyond that timeframe, and not always within the current organization. At this stage, it may still be useful to track an individual’s career externally, as a return to the organization at a more senior position in the future may not be ruled out. Facilitating this type of “boomerang career” can be a very effective way of re-engaging an individual with experience of an organization but with a fresh perspective.

Ongoing discussions

The talent management Think Tank program has generated enormous enthusiasm around the topic and the desire to discuss many of the issues in more depth within the forums continues. The sessions will continue throughout 2009, with further discussions to follow and it is likely that the group will benefit from the information that it shares. What is clear from the Think Tanks to date is that good talent, when harnessed for the benefit of the organization, can lead to better business results. Getting there involves having robust processes in place for managing talent and enough flexibility to allow that talent to express itself in creative and innovative ways.

Mark BurbridgeOakridge Training and Consulting, Macclesfield, UK.

About the author

Mark Burbridge has been principal consultant with Oakridge Training and Consulting for over three years. With more than 18 years’ experience in learning and development, Burbridge has coached, facilitated and trained individuals and teams at all levels of organizations. A member of CIPD for more than 10 years, he is also a fellow of the Institute and has attained a Master’s Degree in HR management. Mark Burbridge can be contacted at: mark.burbridge@oakridgecentre.co.uk