Search results

Conducting relevant research is a cornerstone of good academic practice. However, considering academics and practitioners’ divergent paradigms and social systems, it is challenging to undertake impactful research. Indeed, the research–practice gap remains an essential issue in human resource management research. There have been several calls for translating research for dissemination, making it more societally relevant, and beginning conversations and activities that move beyond the confines of the academic context. In fact, research on talent management (TM) has been accused of lagging in offering organizations vision and direction. Understanding the perceived causes and potential solutions for relevant problems is a real need to successfully narrow the TM research–practice gap. Thus, the purpose of this chapter is to offer an in-depth discussion on the research–practice gap in TM. To do so, we first identify the critical dimensions of research relevance that will help us to ground our discussion regarding the applicability of current academic TM research. By doing this, we seek to understand better what is happening with TM research, which should then help provide insights into how its practical impact can be improved.

There is little doubt that practitioners and academics care about talent management (TM). The significant impact that the Fourth Industrial Revolution has on the work environment, combined with a set of broader socioeconomic, geopolitical, and demographic changes, emphasize the importance of managing talent extremely well. However, it seems that practitioners and managers are still seeking answers to the practical issues in handling TM and the chapter questions how much academic research is addressing this concern. In particular, this chapter offers a critical reflection on the relevance (visibility and impact) of TM research. Although the field has evolved significantly, practical implications for stakeholders remain unanswered. In other words, the Academic-Practitioner Gap in TM remains wide. Current TM research is lost in and before translation. In order to overcome these issues, scholars will require hard self-examination, and engagement with practitioners. The future of TM will be brighter and its role more effective when stakeholders work more closely to chart a consistent pathway forward.