Apr
28
Talent Management
Filed Under Human Architecture | Leave a Comment
There is a lot of interesting writing lately about Human Capital and Talent Management. In the March 2008 Harvard Business Review, Peter Cappelli’s “Talent Management for the 21st Century” provides a nice insight into current thinking on the subject.
Cappelli offers four principles adapted from Operations management for managing talent (my Comments in parentheses) –
1) Make and Buy to manage talent risk – undershoot your anticipated future needs and make up shortfalls with external hires. (This is a common practice in most companies for at least most of my career. Where it is not, companies like P&G, the whole culture of the company would need to change).
2) Adapt to the uncertainty in Talent Demand – rethink internal development and deployment strategies. For example breaking up management development programs into smaller chunks, stagger bringing on new college hires, creating an organization wide talent pool that can be allocated as needs arise, … (I agree with all of the points here – makes great sense. I would extend the idea to embrace all employees – Deming’s point 13).
3) Improve the ROI in Developing Employees – Get employees to share the cost of development by having them do things like volunteer to work on AdHoc project with senior managers WHILE doing their existing job. Also maintain relationships with former employees. (In theory I agree, the employee must take responsibility for their own career and their own continued education, the wise company will choose to participate and benefit from the employee’s growth. However heed the advice of Adhocracy in how to manage and act in the AdHoc projects. The single biggest failure of projects is the lack of time given to employees. Period. The employee will need intelligent, mature guidance in making sure adequate time is set aside).
4) Preserve the Investment by balancing Employee-Employer Interests – give the employee a say in advancement decisions. For example, allow employees to frequently change jobs through open postings instead what Cappelli calls the Chess Master strategy. This is where there is an annual planning process where HR and senior leadership decides WHO advances to what job. (I again agree 100%; the age of the patriarch leader is past, at least in the US. It is worth noting that many companies have had this practice in place for decades. At Motorola, the employee could choose to change their job every 18 months. It kept many who would have gone outside inside).
If you are interested in this, the HBR articles can be downloaded in a PDF format at -
http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/b01/en/common/item_detail.
jhtml;jsessionid=B1WLGDJLW01IUAKRGWCB5VQBKE0YOISWid=R0803E&
referral=2342
and there is a newly published book by Peter Cappelli, Talent on Demand, ISBN 978-1-4221-0447-7 which further expands on the HBR article.
I am interested in two points Cappelli did not make that I believe are absolutes –
1) There are right people for certain jobs based on measurable attributes of drives that are part of a person’s DNA. Companies would do well to start understanding the drives of their existing employees and of the ones they hire. All employees should be taught to understand their own drives and those of their associates and development programs should be planned to a person’s inherent drives. One size definitely does not fit all. Training should be tailored to some basic drive patterns. For example, an employee with a drive to dominate needs different team training than one who seeks to avoid conflict. A process oriented employee needs different training in change management than one whose drive is always looking for something more interesting.
2) Cappelli asserts that employees leave organizations because they find better opportunities elsewhere. I believe that is dead wrong. My experience of why people leave is either because they are scared, frustrated or because they are burnt out. Three different root causes and three different solutions, but this must be taken seriously. In the US, we are free men (and women of course). We have the right to feel a part of the organization (a basic human need). We have a right to have our thoughts known and to be treated with respect. We also have the right to a life beyond the organization. More on these points to come.
The most interesting point Cappelli makes is about a company maintaining relationships with former employees. One of his examples is Deloitte paying to keep accounting credentials of former employees current. This plays out in two ways. First, the grass is not always greener, and this provides a path back to Deloitte with an employee with a broader range of experience. It also makes the former Deloitte employee more marketable. This is the ultimate act of faith in developing employees – as the employee is more valuable to the employer; they are also more valuable to others.
Cool.
I think this is one of the most valuable conversations I see developing in our changing economy.
Companies take care of your employees. Treat them with respect and help them learn – read Deming’s 14 points.
Gary