In this section, I present how ‘talent management’ has been described and debated in the literature by outlining the many definitions developed in an attempt to define the boundaries and scope of TM.
Since its origins in the late 1990s, TM has been extensively debated in the literature, with an increased interest in how it is defined (Collings, 2014b). A review of the literature reveals the various debates around the conceptual boundaries of TM, and indicates that there “isn't a single consistent or concise definition” (Ashton and Morton, 2005, p. 30), of TM. Indeed, one of the factors that have hindered the development of TM has been the lack of consensus around its definition and the absence of a uniform understanding of its conceptual boundaries (Al Ariss et al., 2014, McDonnell et al., 2017). This is perhaps evident in the number of streams of thinking which have endeavoured to define TM. A review of the literature points to wide variations in how TM is defined in the academic literature (Scullion and Collings, 2011, Vaiman et al., 2012, Cappelli and Keller, 2014), as well as in how it is explained and understood in practice (Cascio and Boudreau, 2016).
For example, in their influential article, Lewis and Heckman (2006), propose three different streams of thought to describe TM. The first stream simply defines TM as a collection of typical
32
THE VALUE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT ARCHITECTURES TO MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES
HRM practices (Chowanec and Newstrom, 2011). The second stream describes TM as a process to ensure the flow of talent in organisations and adopts concepts from succession planning and HR planning (Jackson and Schuler, 1990, Rothwell, 1994). The third stream relates to performance management, where employees are classified in relation to their performance as 'A', 'B' or 'C' Players, and suggests that organisations should strive to fill all positions with 'A performers' or those with 'top-grading' (Smart, 2005), while managing out 'C Players' or 'poor performers’ (Michaels et al., 2001). The problem with these streams of thought is that they focus on addressing a single aspect of TM and accordingly fail to develop a clear and widely accepted definition of TM.
In addition to these three streams, Collings and Mellahi (2009), introduce the fourth stream in an attempt to broaden the approach taken in TM and take into account the strategic roles which talent might occupy. They define TM as the “activities and processes that involve the systematic identification of key positions which differentially contribute to the organisation's sustainable competitive advantage, the development of a talent pool of high potential and high performing incumbents to fill these roles, and the development of a differentiated human resource architecture to facilitate filling these positions with competent incumbents and to ensure their continued commitment to the organisation” (p. 304). What this definition tells us is that the starting point for any TM system should be the identification of critical key positions (those which contribute to the sustained competitive advantage of an organisation), thus differentiating between strategic and non-strategic roles. Organisations should then develop a pool of high performers and high potentials to take on these strategically critical roles. This definition is premised on the idea of differentiation.
33
THE VALUE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT ARCHITECTURES TO MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES
Another definition by Silzer and Dowell (2010), suggests that “talent management is an integrated set of processes, programs, and cultural norms in an organisation designed and implemented to attract, develop, deploy, and retain talent to achieve strategic objectives and meet future business needs” (p. 18). While this definition lists the set of processes that constitute TM, it also makes an important reference to the role played in TM by cultural norms within an organisation. This raises the need to explore potential linkages between TM and the culture of an organisation, a less developed area in the TM literature which requires more attention from academics.
Another definition, by the UK Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, defines TM as a systematic approach that includes any activities related to the attraction, identification, development, engagement, retention and deployment of those individuals recognised for their potential to have long-term or immediate impact on organisational performance (Clake and Winkler, 2006).
Swailes (2013) also makes an important contribution in his differentiation between TM and general HRM. He argues that TM uses distinctive practices to identify, develop and deploy ‘high potential’ employees, and that its main purpose is to develop the organisation's leadership capabilities to maximise the contribution of high potentials in critical roles (i.e. succession planning). By contrast, HRM covers all HR functions, including the development of policies and procedures for effectively managing the employment relationship with all employees (regardless of grade or role). According to Swailes, then, the boundaries and scope of TM are defined on the basis of the group of employees it focuses on, which is the high potential and high performing employees.
34
THE VALUE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT ARCHITECTURES TO MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES
Finally, from a global perspective, Scullion and Collings (2011) refer to global TM as the organisational activities used to attract, develop and retain talent into strategic positions on a global scale. This recognises the global challenges which organisations face in attracting and acquiring talent (Farndale et al., 2010, Hartmann et al., 2010), and therefore the need to manage the highly competitive global environment by developing a unique set of HR practices to attract, retain and develop global talent. Similarly, Tarique and Schuler (2010) draw on the SHRM literature to define global TM in the context of IHRM as “systematically utilizing IHRM activities (complementary HRM policies and policies) to attract, develop, and retain individuals with high levels of human capital (e.g., competency, personality, motivation) consistent with the strategic directions of the multinational enterprise in a dynamic, highly competitive, and global environment” (p.124).
A notable feature of the literature on TM is that it continues to position TM as the process through which organisations anticipate their need for talent to take on critical and strategic roles (Cappelli and Keller, 2014). The policies and practices of TM are specifically created and implemented to meet the TM challenges organisations face, such as the attraction, selection, retention and development of the most talented employees (Schuler, 2015).