Talent Management Case Study Essay
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Talent Management Case Study Essay
Chapter 6 – Talent Management
Learning Objectives
Develop an understanding of various definitions of talent and what these potentially mean for employee perceptions of self and others, engagement and motivation.
- Identify the main approaches to talent management and conceptualize potential implications for HR practice and organizational strategy.
- Learn to identify challenges faced by organizations in identifying, putting into operation and retaining talent.
- Develop a critical understanding of talent management as a strategic tool in developing human resources.
- Identify and critically assess challenges arising from applying talent management approaches to the development of employees in intercultural contexts.
Introduction
Talent management has received increasing attention from academics and practitioners alike in HRM, global HRM and OB commentary. Talent management has been associated with core HRM processes such as recruitment and selection, performance management, retention, career development and succession management. The assumption here is that managing talent effectively would generate value to an organization’s performance and development. Although the notion of talent management has been around for over a decade, there seems to be an air of ambiguity about it. It has been criticized for being merely a fad with nothing truly novel to offer to people management practice. However, we suggest here, as Scullion and Collings (2011) imply, that part of the difficulty in situating talent management in the broader management discourse, and the reason why it is left open to critique, is that talent management not only lacks consensus in definition and theoretical development, but is also often equated with HRM. One can argue, as we will later in this chapter, that the two are inherently distinct despite their numerous similarities. However, in building the case to demonstrate that talent management warrants attention from academics, practitioners and corporate leaders alike, this chapter will argue that talent management must be seen as part of the wider HRM agenda, rather than somehow separate or in competition with it. The purpose of human resources is to add value to organizations, but for some reason HR as a function seems to be continually trying to prove that it is worth the investment and position as a business partner rather than merely an administrative function (Lawler, 2005). It is the HR function’s job to create policies and practices that enable the recruitment, development, deployment and retention of the kind of human capital that will improve organizational effectiveness and create value for the company (Lawler, 2005). In this chapter we argue that one of the ways in which HR can contribute to organizational effectiveness is by enabling the recruitment, development and retention of key talent through talent management processes. Furthermore, it is HR’s responsibility, together with middle and senior management, to identify key roles for which talented individuals are needed. Most importantly, we propose that although the development of processes and practices from a traditional HRM perspective can contribute to the management of talent, successful talent management requires a more holistic approach that recognizes the influence of and consequences for individual perceptions, behavior and motivation to work. Talent management as strategy, practice and method can be applicable to all areas that are traditionally grouped under the OB cannon, but in this chapter the discussion focuses on just a few: perception, motivation and employee engagement. Successful management of talent requires multiple perspectives in that it is relevant as much at organizational level (structural and functional) as it is at individual and group level.
Simply put, organizations have the opportunity to build sustainable competitive advantage by selecting, developing and retaining the right people. There is an entire body of literature dedicated to demonstrating the link between HRM, human resources development (HRD) and competitive advantage (for example Ulrich, 2001). If we follow the logic of ‘an organization is only as good as the people in it’, then we can assume that organizations would endeavor to select the most capable and talented individuals. However, this raises several questions. How can and do organizational leaders and HR professionals determine who is talented and who is not? Three practical management problems can be identified:
The first is definitional and relates to identification of talent. Even if the parameters of talent are somehow narrowed and agreed upon, how can organizational leaders then develop strategies that put these ‘talented’ human resources into operation in a way that is conducive to organizational success?
- The second problem is therefore concerned with developing strategic approaches to talent management.
- The third problem is then concerned with implementation of practices and policies defined by strategy that will be effective in creating and sustaining talent pools as well as recruiting, developing and retaining the individuals organizations have invested in.
In starting to address the practical management issues highlighted here, we feel that exploring some basic concepts from OB, such as perception and motivation, is helpful in understanding what are some of the consequences of how talent is managed and, as a result, they will also enable us better to understand why talent management approaches are useful for organizations and people management practitioners. Furthermore, it will help us understand why talent management warrants a place in the people management rubric.
In the course of exploring the three management problems that we have identified, we will discuss what perspective the OB lens can offer to the talent management debate, particularly in relation to experiences of being talent managed, what we mean by ‘talent ideology’, definitions of talent, the concept of talent management and what it means for organizational strategy as well as for people management practice. Let’s begin by setting the scene for you and briefly introducing the ongoing debate on talent management versus HRM, which will enable you to understand where our discussion sits in the wider management rubric. We will identify and explore some of the emerging issues from the OB perspective in terms of the consequent experiences of being talent managed for individuals, such as employee self-perceptions, motivation and potentially on performance. We will then critically explore how talent may be defined and how its definition consequently influences the kind of talent management strategies available to organizations. Finally we will conclude by discussing how talent can be managed.
Talent management versus human resources management
The talent management rubric is often accused of merely trying to rebrand what is essentially HRM. Although talent management and HRM are both concerned with how people are recruited, managed, developed and retained in order to achieve organizational as well as individual objectives (Cascio, 1998; Chuai, Preece and Iles, 2008) it could be argued that talent management is a more detailed and focused approach to managing individuals (human resources) that have been identified as having the potential to contribute to an organization’s core competencies (Chuai, Preece and Iles, 2008). HRM may be argued to adopt a more egalitarian approach to the management and development of people in organizations (Chuai, Preece and Iles, 2008). The focus of talent management on the other hand is to differentiate the skills and capabilities of individuals and develop their talents strategically in line with the company’s corporate strategic objectives. However, talent management is also about identifying key positions that have the potential to contribute to organizational effectiveness and ensuring that such positions are fulfilled with the right people. Talent management is often also equated with strategic HRM; however, talent management offers a more ‘segmented approach to managing people in strategic roles’ and therefore the emphasis is on integrated approaches to ‘attracting, developing and retaining key employees and potential organizational leaders’ (Kock and Burke, 2008). That being said, we argue here that talent management, although distinct, is a component of the broader HRM agenda in one way or another.
Iles, Chuai and Preece (2010) identify a set of policies and practices to attract, retain and engage key talent, as opposed to a focus on HR in general that can help us make sense of differences between the two:
Talent management involves getting the right people in the right job at the right time and managing the development of people, which does not necessarily make it different from HRD or HRM.
- However, talent management may use the same tools as HRD but focus on a relatively small group of employees – the talent pool.
- Finally, talent management involves organizationally focused competence development through managing and developing talent. The focus here is on talent continuity that is linked to succession planning and HRM planning, which we discuss later in the chapter.
For some organizations systematic approaches to talent management are limited to individuals in leadership roles (Barlow, 2006), in which case it is hard to tell the difference (if any) between talent management and leadership or management development. To distinguish talent management from HRM or management development, we should consider talent management to be based on some form of exclusivity, but one that is not merely defined by leadership or managerial positions. Furthermore, an organization may have more than one ‘pool’ of talent that are each defined differently. For example, according to a Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) report on talent management, Cargill, an international provider of food, agricultural and risk management services, has divided its talent into three different ‘pools’: ‘Next generation leaders’, ‘Emerging leaders’ and ‘High impact performers’ and therefore make varying decisions about how each of these ‘pools’ are resourced, developed, deployed and retained (Tansley et al, 2006). Identifying and accordingly recruiting, developing and retaining individuals who have been somehow deemed to be higher potential or specifically capable from the rest of the work population seems to be key in differentiating talent management approaches from other HR activities, even if the terms by which talent is defined is somewhat ambiguous and contextual.
The OB perspective
We would encourage you to look back at Chapter 2 on perception and decision making and Chapter 3 on motivation. Although these chapters do not discuss talent management explicitly, it is easy to see how the notion of perception and motivation are inherently linked to the way talent is identified, managed and developed as well as the resultant consequences as you work your way through this chapter. The underlying assumption here is that the way in which we perceive the world around us influences the decisions we take and the options we see as available to us. It should not, therefore, be difficult to see that the way in which we define ourselves and the way we think others in the organizational context, particularly managers, perceive us and our efforts would influence our motivation to work and our efforts in the workplace. If we feel valued and our efforts are noticed and recognized through intrinsic or extrinsic rewards (see Chapter 3), we are inclined perhaps to work harder and perform better. Therefore, if individuals have been identified as ‘talented’ by management and are aware of such classification, one might argue that their self-confidence may be enhanced, they may feel that their capabilities and efforts are being recognized and, as a result, they may feel more motivated to produce results. What are the consequences then if one is aware of not being identified as ‘talented’ in organizations that clearly have a formal or at least a semi-formal approach to managing and developing ‘talented’ individuals? In the realization that one’s efforts and skills are not recognized or that managerial expectations of an employee do not match the employee’s self-perception, considerable room exists for dissatisfaction and potentially loss of motivation and effectiveness. If we take an intercultural approach, for example, in some cultural contexts that are considered hierarchical, status and position can be very important in determining where one sits in not only the organizational hierarchy, but in wider society (see Hofstede, 1980; Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, 1997). Being perceived and categorized as somehow talented potentially means better development and promotion opportunities, or at least one may perceive these to be better. Therefore one could assume that the lack of the ‘talent status’ implies limited opportunities to develop and progress professionally.
The talent management discourse seems to further perpetuate a managerial perspective rather than an employee perspective. What we mean by this is that very little research seems to be focused on how individuals feel about being identified and, consequently, managed as talented. It has been argued that in order for talent management to succeed, organizational objectives must coincide with the employee’s personal objectives (Kock and Burke, 2008). There is little point in planning out an employee’s careers: no matter how great a plan, if it does not fit in with the future that those employees had envisioned for themselves; any investment by the company may be a wasted one. So in addition to encouraging discussion on why organizations should pay due attention to strategically recruiting, developing and retaining talented individuals, we also want to explore what it means to the individual to be talent managed.
The notion of being identified as talented is interesting and relevant not only for its implications for corporate success, but also because of what it potentially means for individuals and their perceptions of themselves and others. Are individuals aware that they have been identified as high potential and placed in some kind of a ‘talent pool’? Is the talent identification process somehow explicit and evident, for example by individuals being placed in particular development programs? This may be the case in organizations that have adopted a more formal and strategic approach to the way their key human resources are managed. However, our suspicion is that in many companies that lack a formal approach to talent management, some individuals are implicitly assumed to be high flyers based on the kinds of attitudes and personality traits they display coupled with the ‘right’ professional experiences and educational background. In such organizations, development opportunities are likely to be presented on a more ad hoc and haphazard basis and the relationship between employees and managers becomes an increasingly important factor in talent management decisions.
Chapter 2 looked at perception and explored the notion of self-fulfilling prophecies. Following this logic, it could be argued that if individuals feel that they have been identified as high achievers, they are more inclined to behave and take action in ways that are conducive to professional success. On the flipside, the reverse may also be true. If the skills and abilities of talented individuals remain explicitly unacknowledged, this may have a negative effect on their level of motivation and even self-confidence. As McLean (2009) points out, the basic idea of a ‘talent pool’ is that ideally the ‘pool’ should be greater than the demand and therefore inevitably there would be high flyers who are passed over for promotion. Attention therefore also needs to be paid to the reaction of key human resources that are not utilized in what they themselves may see as key positions and significant to their professional career development. Employees in such positions may have low morale, feel less committed to their jobs and underperform (McLean, 2009). Although the impact on employees’ morale of being passed over for a position is a concern, there is some evidence to suggest that it is not as ‘detrimental’ as often assumed (CIPD, 2010b; McCartney, 2010). A recently published CIPD report on talent management experiences suggests that participation in talent management programs is associated with high engagement levels and that ‘structured selection processes serve to increase talent programs perceived value and the motivation of participants to perform’ (McCartney, 2010). However, over and above formal talent management activities, the CIPD research findings suggest that among the senior level participants, mentoring, coaching and networking were particularly valued methods in talent management programs (McCartney, 2010).
Ensuring that employees feel engaged is an essential part of long-term talent management as employee engagement has been linked with commitment, job satisfaction, performance and retention. There seems to be little question that people who feel engaged with their work and organization are more productive than those that feel disengaged (Bhatnagar, 2007). It is also recognized that, in addition to financial reward, development opportunities are a increasingly significant factor in engaging and retaining talent (Bhatnagar, 2007; Orr and McVerry, 2007).
However, as the discussion to follow will show, there is no one set definition of talent and even when we think we have arrived at one, particularly in international contexts we should question to what extent our definitions are applicable or perhaps shaped by Western ideology. Moreover, each organization and industry differs and requires different approaches to the way in which it selects, manages, develops and retains individuals or groups of individuals (ie talent pools) that corporate leaders think possess the kind of skills needed to enhance their company’s business success. In the next section we will introduce the concept of talent ideology and how it shapes the way in which talent is defined and what are some of the implications for individuals and organizations.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!