Talent or Not

Abstract

It is assumed that employees display favorable attitudes (e.g., high organizational commitment) and behaviors (e.g., high work effort) when identified as organizational talent. If they did not, the idea that talent management creates value by making disproportionate investments into organizational talent would need to be reconsidered. We reviewed the literature to explore whether the assumed favorable reactions among talent are valid and the results are not straightforward. Many studies found evidence for the assumption; however, several studies revealed that talent designation bears considerable risks: Being identified as talent creates (overly optimistic) expectations of receiving rewards and benefits from the organization and it increases the felt pressure to meet high performance standards. We discuss the findings in the light of social exchange theory, psychological contract theory, and others commonly used in talent-management research, highlighting key issues regarding talent designation and identifying avenues for future research.

Talent designation as a mixed blessing: Short‐ and long‐term employee reactions to talent status

“…Second, this study reveals how psychological processes evolve dynamically over time. Specifically, it distinguishes between short‐term reactions and delayed reactions, affirming Meyers et al.’s (2017) proposition that time is important for understanding talent reactions. As such, it contributes to the understanding of employee reactions as a “journey” and how and why these reactions can evolve over time (King, 2016; Sumelius et al., 2020).…”

“…This study responds to recent calls in TM research to investigate how employee reactions to talent designation change over time (King, 2016;Meyers et al, 2017;Sumelius et al, 2020) and provides a theoretically-nuanced elucidation of the dynamics underlying these reactions. The two main contributions of the study are presented below.…”

“…According to a review by Meyers et al. (2017), employees identified as talents develop heightened expectations about future benefits from the organization. These perceived future obligations, albeit subjective, become part of talents’ framework for judging the organization’s role in fulfilling, or breaching, the PC over time (King, 2016).…”

Employee perception of talent management practices and turnover intentions: a multiple mediator model

“…Elites are treated with a different (more favorable) set of terms and conditions based on the exclusive view of TM, leading to a larger wage disparity in favor of talented employees (Collings, 2014), a negative perception of favorability among the non-elites (Marescaux et al. , 2013), a comparative atmosphere and possible damage to employee relations (Meyers et al. , 2017).…”

“…Kivimäki and Kawachi, 2015). Receiving additional benefits or investments from the organization in the form of TM practices, such as overseas assignments or special training and development opportunities, could be construed as rewards that should stimulate positivity or a challenge (eustress); however, these rewards often come at a certain price (Meyers et al. , 2017).…”