Independent professionals as talent: Evidence from individual views of working as a contractor

Abstract

In this article we challenge the assumption that independent professionals (IPros), that is professionals who work as contractors, freelancers, and self‐employed individuals, are not within the remit of talent management (TM) theory and practice. The TM literature is almost exclusively focused on traditional employees and largely ignores the external workforce, even if like IPros, they epitomize high‐value talent. Moreover, much of the TM literature takes an organizational perspective while the individual perspective remains marginal. Advancing the notion of institutional factors in the macro environment suggested by King and Vaiman, we draw on interviews with 52 IPros in two contrasted institutional contexts to provide an agentic view of TM from outside of the standard employment relationship. Our findings reveal the importance of volition, emotional stability, internal locus of control, and self‐efficacy play in IPros effectively managing personal TM strategies. These strategies allow IPros to overcome the empowerment/powerlessness tensions Daubner‐Siva et al. call the “talent paradox.” Importantly, the results do not vary between the two national contexts, suggesting that embracing a “total TM” strategy, attentive to the personal characteristics of talent, regardless of the regulatory issues linked to employment status, will produce superior outcomes for all.

Dynamism and realignment in the HR architecture: Online labor platform ecosystems and the key role of contractors

“…The side‐lining of contractors from HRM scholarship is linked with the view embedded in the HR architecture that they offer low value to organizations. Despite growing evidence that contractors add significant value to organizations, drive innovation, and augment the capabilities of internal employees (Burke, 2012; McKeown & Pichault, 2021; Sulbout et al, 2021), HRM scholarship continues to view contractors through the architecture lens and fails to engage seriously with the HRM implications that contractors raise for organizations. Our contribution is to challenge the proposed links between value/uniqueness of human capital, employment mode, and HRM practices that are assumed by the HR architecture model but which no longer hold.…”

“…The HR architecture predicts that workers inside the organization's boundaries are core workers, and therefore subject to the HRM principles of the firm (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Lepak & Snell, 1999), while those workers “outside” the organization are non‐core and subject to limited or no HRM (principles or activities) at all (Kinnie & Swart, 2020; McKeown & Pichault, 2021). Workers with valuable human capital are subject to high‐commitment (Quadrant 1) or productivity‐based HRM systems (Quadrant 2) (Lepak & Snell, 1999), while those with human capital of limited value are managed by means of compliance‐based (Quadrant 3) or collaborative‐based HRM system (Quadrant 4).…”

“…In the highly influential HR architecture model, Lepak & Snell (1999, p. 39) propose that organizations adopt a contractor employment mode for “human capital that is generic and of limited strategic value.” In a footnote to their work extending the model, Kang, Morris & Snell (2007, p. 244) reinforce this stating: “Contract workers generally offer noncore and low‐level skills and knowledge, and thereby have relatively little potential to help modify and renew core knowledge bases of a firm.” Lepak & Snell (1999, p. 40) originally conceived that limited or no HRM activities apply to contractors due to “limited value‐creating potential.” The message reinforced by the model is that contractors are not key to value creation. By default, they are excluded from (many) HRM activities (Cross & Swart, 2022; McKeown & Pichault, 2021).…”

“…The message reinforced by the model is that contractors are not key to value creation. By default, they are excluded from (many) HRM activities (Cross & Swart, 2022;McKeown & Pichault, 2021).…”

How Gig Worker Responds to Negative Customer Treatment: The Effects of Work Meaningfulness and Traits of Psychological Resilience

“…For some gig workers, they engage in career self-management and are prone to act as owners and agents of their own careers ( Sammarra et al, 2013 ). Customer satisfaction is closely related to their own earnings and influences their reputation on the platform ( McKeown and Pichault, 2020 ). Even when confronted with negative customer treatment, they may not be likely to engage in service sabotage like full-time workers.…”