Talent designation in practice: an equation of high potential, performance and mobility

Abstract

Effective identification of talent is a central element of talent management. Talk of talent often involves two distinct, yet interrelated dimensions: performance and potential. The talent management literature has however provided limited consideration both conceptually and empirically concerning the delimitation between these two dimensions. This paper looks to address this by examining how the talent construct is operationalised in practice. It considers two key research questions; what indicators of performance and potential are applied by key organisational stakeholders in discerning what talent is? What factors impact talent designation? We adopt a multilevel case study design encompassing 73 interviews with senior organisational leaders in three multinational hotel corporations. Our findings demonstrate that the dimensions of high performance and high potential were commonly spoken about when referring to talent. However, there was a substantial lack of clarity around potential with a conflation between it and performance common. Moreover, mobility emerged as a critical contextual factor in being labelled as talent or not. The paper contributes to talent management scholarship by providing a more nuanced approach in understanding how talent is enacted in practice in an underexplored empirical context.

IJHRM after 30 years: taking stock in times of COVID-19 and looking towards the future of HR research

“…As a result of the stringent short-listing and selection rounds, the Best paper for 2020 was awarded to Jooss et al (2019) for their study: 'Talent designation in practice: an equation of high potential, performance and mobility'. The Selection Committee selected this paper because it offers an interesting account 'that draws on a very rich basis of qualitative data and is highly original.…”

“…In addition to the Best Paper by Jooss et al (2019), the Committee also selected two 'Highly Commended' papers as the runners up for the Best Paper Award. They are authored by Garcia-Arroyo and Osca (2019): 'Big data contributions to human resource management: a systematic review'; and by Staniland et al (2019): 'Indigenous and boundaryless careers: cultural boundaries in the careers of M aori academics'.…”

Managing Talent: A Critical Appreciation

“…Hence, the practice of exclusive TM attracts criticism for being divisive and for its potentially adverse effects on both the talented and the employees that talent systems overlook (De Boeck, Meyers, & Dries, 2018;Kickuk, Brown, & Ladkin, 2019;Pfeffer, 2001). Furthermore, search practices for executive talent stand accused of being gendered (Tienari, Meriläinen, Holgersson, & Bendl, 2013) and the meaning of 'talent' in organisational contexts is, in practice, vague (Jooss, McDonnell, & Burbach, 2019). The same can be said of 'talent management' which has come to mean almost anything.…”

Mind the gap: line managers as effective or non‐effective talent spotters

“…The effectiveness, in this case, is defined in terms of outcomes, but we still wonder how effective spotters achieve those results. In turn, prior research offers several factors that hinder the talent identification process, and, consequently, its outcomes, among others: organisational politics (Cappelli, 2008; Soni, 2014); homophily or similarity bias (Mäkelä et al ., 2010); unclear differentiation between performance and potential (Dries & Pepermans, 2012; Joos et al ., 2019; Silzer & Church, 2009); bounded rationality as well as cultural and institutional distance (Mäkelä et al ., 2010; Mellahi & Collings, 2010), line managers’ preference to rely on their own judgement (Wiblen et al ., 2012), and line managers’ overconfidence of their talent identification skills – ‘I know potential when I see it’ – (Dries, 2013). Nevertheless, this literature does not describe the line managers’ identification process and the factors involved, and then, it does not contribute to understand the behaviours of effective talent spotters.…”

“…(2018) propose a line managers’ talent identification model; Joos et al . (2019) study how the talent construct is operationalized and perceived by line managers; Tyskbo (2019) identifies the competing institutional logics in the talent identification process at headquarters and a subsidiary; Pantouvaki and Karakasnaki (2019) show the implications of the innate and exclusive talent philosophies on the identification tools; and finally, Cadigan et al . (2020) examine whether managers and Human Resources professionals show a preference for promotion for those with higher performance or those with higher potential.…”