TALENT MANAGEMENT: A

CRITICAL REVIEW
SUBMITTED TO THE:
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, ROHTAK

BY KARTIK TANDON
 ABSTRACT
Practitioners in the field of human resources are now primarily in the
business of talent management. But what is talent management and what
basis does it have in scientific principles of human resources and
management? The paper has addressed the issues regarding the talent
management and the lack of data supporting many practitioner claims. The
support system oriented definition of talent management that focuses on
the strategic management of talent has been highlighted. And what future
work can be done in the field of Human Resource Management with context
to large work in SHRM.

There have been several research on Talent Management that has served
as the basis of a rigorous, scientifically based approach. Certain
suggestions have been stated that complement the literature in strategic
HRM and tie it more closely to a strategically based Talent Management
framework.
 WHAT IS TALENT MANAGEMENT?
Talent Management according to various writers has been narrowed down into three stages-
STAGE 1- The first defines talent management as a collection of typical human resource
department practices, functions, activities or specialist areas such as recruiting, selection,
development, and career and succession management.

STAGE 2- A second perspective on talent management focuses primarily on the concept of

talent pools. TM is a set of processes designed to ensure an adequate flow of employees
into jobs throughout the organization. These approaches are often quite close to what is
typically known as succession planning or human resource planning.

STAGE 3- A third perspective on TM focuses on talent generically; that is, without regard for
organizational boundaries or specific positions. Within this perspective two general views on
talent emerge.
A. The first regards talent (which typically means high performing and high potential talent)
as an unqualified good and a resource to be managed primarily according to
performance levels.
B. The second perspective of generic talent regards it as an undifferentiated good and
emerges from the both the humanistic and demographic perspectives.
 PROBLEMS WITH TALENT MANAGEMENT
It is apparent from the above that the term “talent management” has no clear meaning.
Following are the problems-
1. Defining TM in terms of the functions of traditional HR executed more adds nothing to the
understanding of how to “manage talent”. Managing recruiting, selection, and staffing via
the internet may require some new skills to an HR or recruiter's skill set but does not
fundamentally change the principles underlying good recruiting, selection, and staffing. It
does serves the purpose of re-branding HR practices to keep them seemingly new and
fresh, but it does not advance the understanding of the strategic and effective management
of talent.
2. It just simply repeats much of the work done in succession and workforce planning and
therefore fails to advance the theory or practice of HR. What simply could be suggested that
calling these approaches “talent management” causes the same problems as the first
perspective; it provides no incremental understanding and is therefore unnecessary.
3. The most problematic stage. It has two-
A. maxim to manage the “talent inherent in each person” is well intended but not strategic. It
offers no guidance to determine how many resources should be allocated to uncovering
each employee's talent and seems to assume that all employees are equally valuable to the
firm from an economic and developmental perspective.
B. If managing each person's talent so it is fully actualized means finding a tactful way of
separating low performers from the organization while providing relevant opportunities to
 GROUNDING TM IN RESEARCH
Despite the impressive nature of these results, issues remain. Many of these studies are
based on cross-sectional and retrospective designs and thus do not address whether HR
practices lead to organizational outcomes or organizational outcomes provide the resources
to invest in HR practices.
Many measures are one-source self-reports that make it difficult to specify magnitude of the
HR practice/outcome and there is controversy regarding the organizational level at which HR
effectiveness criterion data should be collected. It is believed the significant flaw in
establishing TM as a strategic and value-added term for if practicing TM, broadly defined, is
simply responding to strategic or environmental demands with high quality HR practices that
produce business results then the term TM, once again, fails to add incrementally to our
current understanding of how a highly functioning HR department operates.

MAKING TM STRATEGIC
DIFFICULT TO REPLACE DIFFICULT TO REPLACE
Difficulty LOW VALUE ADDED HIGH VALUE ADDED
to replace
EASY TO REPLACE EASY TO REPLACE
LOW VALUE ADDED HIGH VALUE ADDED

Value Added
 THE HC BRIDGE FRAMEWORK
Decisions at three independent levels of analysis (impact, effectiveness, and efficiency)

ANCHOR LINKING
POINTS ELEMENTS
Sustainabl
e
Advantage
IMPACT Resource
& Process
Talent Pools
& Structure

EFFECTIVENES Aligned
S Action
Human
Capacity
Policies &
EFFICIENCY Practices
Investment
 NOTE ON TALENT MANAGEMENT ANALYTICS
If proper workforce analytics and planning is done, then organization knows how to move,
whether to hire someone externally or promote someone from within, and whether look for
a contingent worker, contractor, or full-time worker. Workforce-planning analytics can help
to make the best talent-management decisions and align those with the corporate
objectives.
The drive to develop TM “analytics” seems to be a result of the growing use of enterprise-
wide software systems. Boudreau and Ramstad (2004) outline the conditions under which
“analytics” can yield valid organizational conclusions. Their “LAMP” framework outlines
the Logic structure, Analytics, Measures, and Process considerations necessary to influence
talent decisions.
LOGIC- or conceptual model linking talent pools to an organization's competitive
advantage is necessary to generate meaningful questions regarding talent.
ANALYTICS- Relates with statistics and research design, but it goes beyond them,
identifying and articulating key issues, gathering and using appropriate data from within
and outside the HR function, setting the appropriate standards for rigor and relevance, and
enhancing the analytical competencies of HR throughout the organization.
MEASURES- includes typical HR measurements such as headcount and turnover rates.
PROCESS- addressing the change management process typically overlooked in discussions
of analytics.
 FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH
1. TM DECISION ARCHITECTURE-

TALENT MANAGEMENT RELEVANT QUESTIONS

COMPONENT MOVING DOWN LEVEL

STRATEGY SUSTAINABLE What market opportunities exists? Which resources

COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE yield advantage?
STRATEGY IMPLICATIONS Where will improvements in talent quality drive
FOR TALENT strategic gains?
Where will improvements in Talent Fungibilty drive
strategic gains

TALENT POOL STRATEGY How do we position various talent pools?- What combination
of performers (A vs.
B vs. C) do we need?
What compensation policy should we
adopt (above/below/at market)?
Which pools should be linked in career
ladders?
Should we “informate” certain jobs?

How do we implement talent pool strategies across

TM SYSTEMS the company? -Competency architectures
• Enterprise-wide data systems

Selection
• Recruiting
TALENT PRACTICES • Performance management
• Compensation administration
2. THE SPECIAL CASE FOR TALENT POOL STRATEGY RESEARCH