TALENT MANAGEMENT:

A CRIT IC AL R EV IE W
Robert E. Lewis, Robert J. Heckman
Human Resource Management Review 16 (2006)

Presented by:
NAMDAR Kimiya, OKUPE Yewande and OROZCO Tatiana
 TATS

CONTENTS

Abstract
Definitions of Talent Management
The 3 TM perspectives
About the Research

Making TM Strategy
Two streams of research
Talent Management Analytics
Future direction for research

Summary
 ABSTRACT
Research question: What is talent management and what basis
does it have in scientific human resources and management?

HR practitioners are primarily in the business of talent management (TM).

Talent management is a popular and growing field (8 million hits on

internet).
Growing number of consulting firms, articles and books dedicated to TM.
Review of the problems with the definition of TM and lack of data
supporting this practice.
Lack of clarity regarding the definition, scope and overall goals of
talent management.
The authors support a system oriented definition of TM, focusing on
strategic management of talent.
Propose future avenues of research: 3 lines.
 D E F I N I T I O N S O F TA L E N T M A N A G E M E N T

“Talent management”, “talent strategy”, “succession planning” and “human

resource management” are used interchangeably. They focus on managing
employees but refer to different things:

“… ensure the right person is in the right job and in the right time”
(Jackson & Schuler, 1990, p. 235) – Human Resources Planning:
Outcome

“… a deliberate and systematic effort by an organization to ensure

leadership continuity in key positions and encourage individual
advancement” (Rothwell, 1994, p. 6) – Succession planning:
Process

“… managing the supply, demand, and flow of talent through the
human capital engine” (Pascal, 2004, p. ix) – Talent management:
THE 3 TM PERSPECTIVES

1. Collection of typical human resource department functions:

• Recruitment, selection, development, and career succession management
• Doing HR functions faster (via Internet or outsourcing)

2. Talent pools
• Close to what is typically known as succession planning and HR planning.
• Can also include typical HR practices like recruiting and selection.
• Understanding of the internal workforce: use of enterprise software systems.
• Approach known as “manpower” or “workforce planning”: involves modeling
organizational staffing/career flows by hierarchy, rules and parameters (cost,
supply& demand).

3. Talent generically
• Divided into 2 general views:
• talents (performance levels: “war of talent” and “topgrading”)
• undifferentiated good (emerges from the humanistic and demographic perspective: manage
people to high performance or demographic and business trends make talent more valuable.
 Perspectives Criticism
Collection of typical human Superfluous: replacing the
resource department functions traditional term “Human
Resources” with “Talent
Management”
Talent pools Repeats much of the work done in
succession and workforce
planning
Talent generically Performance categories are non-
strategic (top, competent, bottom)
Misapplication of talent review

No clear meaning /Unsatisfying

Talent Management has not being linked to peer-reviewed, research-based findings.
Broad definitions that do not contribute to the understanding of managing talent in organizations.
 ABOUT THE RESEARCH

 Has examined the link between HR investments and practices and organizational
outcomes (strategic human resource management).
Findings have been replicated within industry or across industries.
Derived in models that attempt to integrate strategy, HR practices, and talent.
This studies do not address whether HR practices lead to organizational outcomes or
organizational outcomes provide the resources to invest in the HR practices.
Most significantly, studies of HR practices have not explicitly investigated how the
choice of practices is tied to strategy.
 MAKING TM STRATEGIC
 TM as architecture: explicit ties need to be made between strategy and talent.

Difficult to replace Difficult to replace

Difficulty to replace

Low value added High value added

Easy to replace Easy to replace

Low value added High value added

Value added

Talent classified by difficulty-to-replace and value (adapted from Zuboff, 1988).

TWO STREAMS OF RESEARCH
1. Barney
• Resource-based view
• Sustained competitive advantage accrues to firms that develop
resources that are valuable, rare, and hard to imitate.
• Resources: financial, physical, human, and organizational assets.

2. Boudreau and Ramstad

• Talentship: integrated principles of strategy, economics, and
human resources to develop a decision science.
 ANCHOR LINKING
POINTS ELEMENTS

Sustainable
Strategic Advantage

Resources
Impact & Processes

Talent Pools
& Structures

Aligned Actions
Effectiveness
Human Capacity

Policies & Practices

Efficiency

Investments

HC BRidge Decision Framework from Boudreau and Ramstad (2005).

 TA LE NT MANA GE ME NT
ANALYT ICS
 Definitions of workforce analytics:
A new class of business intelligence that ties human capital
Performance analytics
●

management to financial performance

Analytics Gain deep visibility into staffing processes to analyze and

●

optimize the whole system or improve individual aspects

Standard metrics and dashboards for various categories of users including

●

recruiters, business executives, hiring managers,human recources and more

WORKFORCE ANALYTICS
By doing a proper workforce analytics and planning

 Who to recruit

 Who to develop
 Who to redeploy

 Where to redeploy
 If there is any need for new hire

 Promotion
 Can help make the best talent-
management decisions and align
those with your corporate
objectives (Schweyer).
 How the software works?
 Capture human resources,
finance and operations data
 The data will be minded to gain
insights with respect to talent

 There should a conceptual model

 to guide which questions should
be researched
 Which data should be linked
 THE LAMP FRAMEWORK
Boudreau & Ramstad(2004) conditions under which ‘Analytics” can
yield valid organizational conclusions

Logic structure (conceptual • Link the talent pool to an organization’s competitive advantage in
structure) order to generate meaningful questions regarding talents.
• These questions concern the decisions that might be made with
respect to the talent pool

Analytics • draws on statistics and research design and goes beyond to include
skill in identifying and articulating key issues
• gathering and using appropriate data.
• Analytics requires savvy in drawing from sources of data to address
questions guided by the logic structure

Measures • Typical HR measurement(headcounts, turnover rate)

• The challenge is to balance precision with usefulness
• More exacting measures may not increase the quality of
talent decisions

Process considerations • Change management process typically overlooked in

discussions of analytics
 FUTURE DIRECTIONS
FOR RESEARCH

1. Core elements of the TM decision architecture need to be fully

identified and tested.
2. Analytical techniques that permit a system-level of analysis must be
investigated and more fully incorporated into talent management work.
3. Measures consistent with talent architectures and system analyses must
be developed and held to professionally recognized standards of
reliability and validity.
TM DECISION ARCHITECTURE

Most of the researches are about the strength of the relationship

with strategically relevant or tactically relevant outcomes
The decisions that led to that initial state are left unexamined

There are well developed practices that can have an effort on

organizational outcomes there is not clear theory or principle to
guide when or which organizational pools should be targeted
 Talent Management Component
TM DECISION
Strategy sustainable Competitive Advantage What market opportunities exist?
Strategy Implications for Talent
Talent Pool Strategy
Talent Management Systems
Talent Practices
Relevant Questions Moving down levels
ARCHITECTURE
Which organizational resources yield advantage?
Where will improvement in talent quality drive strategic
gains?
Where will improvements in talent fungibility drive strategic
gains
How do we position various talent pools?
• What combination of performers do we need?
• What compensation policy should we adopt?
• Which pools should be linked in career ladders?
• Should we “informate” certain jobs?
How do we implement talent pool strategies across the
company?
• Competency architectures
• Enterprise-wide data systems
Which practices efficiently meet our talent goals and can be
captured by our systems?
• Selection
• Recruitment
• Performance management
• Compensation administration
2. - TH E SPEC IA L CA SE FOR TALE NT
PO OL ST RATE GY R E SE AR CH

 The Strategic HRM researches have

Multi-store
not pursued research examining the Manager
impact of managing across multiple
levels of talent within an
organization.
 Individual factors are usually ignored Store manager
 Research is needed to pursue
development of models and analytical
approaches that permit a system Assistant
manager
analysis of talent decision throughout
the organization
Entry level
clerk
DE VE LO PING R EL IABL E A ND
VA LID TM MEA SURE S

Fulfilling the promise of a rigorous, science-based approach

requires adhering to scientific standards of measurement
Poor measurement appears not to be a characteristic only of newly
created measures
No literature was found that examines processes for ensuring that
metrics are fed back to decision-makers regarding the talent decision
that frequently make
 SUMMARY

TM is a popular topic that lacks coherence and rigor.

TM as it is used is a term without value

TM in a strategic decision framework that can markedly
improve the quality of talent conversations in organization
 REFERENCE

Lewis, R., Heckman, R. (2006) Talent

management: A critical review. Human Resource
Management Review, 16, 139-154.
Thank you