Search results

Current TM literature shows a lack of empirical research on the actual implementation of TM as a mediating step in the TM process, and on the role of the line managers in that stage. Bos, Thunnissen and Pardoen look into this ‘black box’ of TM and focus in their study on the role of line managers in the actual implementation of TM. In particular, the impact of the line manager’s leadership style on employee reactions to TM is investigated, as well as the constraints in the line manager’s role in executing TM. Their exploratory, quantitative study on the role of the line manager demonstrates that the line manager can support employees in deploying and developing their talents, and when they do so employees feel more empowered and committed to the job. Most line managers are willing to support their employees in developing and utilizing their talents, and that they think they have the capability of doing. However, the study shows that in many cases the line manager overestimates his/her actions regarding the mobilization of employee’s talents, and employees often have different perceptions of the line manager’s behaviour to TM than the line manager him/herself. The bigger the gap in perceptions, the more it has a negative effect on employees’ cognitive and affective reactions to TM. The authors call for more research on the role of the line manager in TM, and in particular on this gap in perceptions.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to frame empirical literature on talent management (TM), and to provide a clear and comprehensive picture of the topics under investigation, the conceptualization of TM, and under-explored areas.

The authors adopted a systematic review that covers empirical research on TM which has been published between 2006 and 2014 in academic peer-reviewed journals. A total of 96 articles were included in the review. A bibliometric as well as a content analysis has been carried out.

The results reveal that the Anglo-Saxon context (in particular EU) has a great impact on empirical TM research. Also research foundations and designs are not very rigorous. A slight awareness of context and culture was found. Empirical TM research is predominantly built on an exclusive approach to TM. Yet, how TM works in practice and how well (from the perspective of multiple actors) as well as the role and perceptions of line managers are under-explored areas.

The paper gives vision and direction to practitioners in particular on the definition of talent and TM.

This study frames the extent and nature of empirical research on TM, and it is the first to specifically and objectively examine the advances made in the field and to identify under-explored areas. By doing so, it helps to avoid presumptions and misguided beliefs, to advance the knowledge of TM issues in organizations and regions, and to better channel future research.