A systems model to Talent Management, Staff Retention and Bench Strength

A systems model to Talent Management, Staff Retention and Bench Strength Raman K. Attri International Learning and Training Consultant Abstract: Numerous attempts to formalize the talent management as a strategic practice by the corporate have been mostly focused on corporate framework, policies and overall organization model and systems to drive talent management and succession planning. Mostly talent management has been presented from a HR manager’s perspective. Major issue with such approaches is that it does not provide simple to use toolset to the direct manager to manage the talent, succession planning and bench strength. The practical approach to talent management starts with right pre‐hiring process, on‐boarding, performance evaluation and review of long‐term potential. This paper presents a practical model with a set of processes and activities a direct manager need to perform to ensure management of key talent, ensure systematic development of succession plan and developing bench strength. This paper deals with practical aspect of talent management and succession planning from a direct supervisor perspective rather than from a HR manager’s perspective. A simplistic tested model has been presented to equip present day busy management professionals with the ability to align hiring, on‐boarding, performance review and talent review practices with talent management goals. 1. Introduction the best people because they are the true creators of value Talent management for developing staff Retention and (Taleo Research, 2009). creating bench strength is a critical area in human resource (Lockwood, 2006). Although the staff retention, bench Talent management has become the part of the job of every strength, succession planning and overall talent leader. The talent management brings its own challenges management comes under the human resource during the downturns and tough toughs. The average management and in one way assumed to be duty of a corporations suffer from a systematic approach to talent human resource manager (Handfield‐Jones et al 2007). management. Usual and traditional approach to talent Practically it is not that true. When it comes to retaining the management have been taken in past is typical HR approach staff, it falls under the responsibility of the direct manager. If of hiring and rewarding talent. The issue spring up when direct manager fails to manage the talent reporting to him talent management and retention are confused together and make bench strength, company faces the consequences. (Anonymous, 2006). Both the terms, even if falling in the So it is very important for direct managers to understand the same domain, the spectrum of impact is different. Talent underlying concepts and practices of talent management. management is a process and a strategy where as the staff retention is an absolute necessity (Tucker et al, 2005). Although there are number of talent models, however, there is need for a practical model for use by the direct managers Berk (2004) cited a practical data driven approach in value of rather than an HR practice (Luthans & Peterson, 2002). This human capital by translating the value of human talent in paper is targeted to corporate managers who are not full dollars and emphasized the importance of talent time human resource mangers, but are directly managing management with right use of talent. the most important assets of the company – the human talent. The paper presents a practical, systematic and Over the years number of talent management models has scientific model to long term talent management which any been floated to structure the talent management practices manager can use in his routine managerial job with little in the corporate. The focus has been on a systematic model adaptation. of Talent evaluation and development. An early work by Scheweyer (2004) elaborates best practices in Talent 2. Background management systems and emphasized the importance of technology solutions for the same. One of the early works McKinsey (1997) study coined the term: war for talent. Now on systematic talent and succession planning is cited by in the new millennium, we find ourselves in the talent age. Jackson Leadership Systems (2005). 9‐box grid looks talent During the agricultural age, the economy was based on land, management from the perspective of mapping the talent a truly physical and very tangible asset. The industrial age whereas it plots potential and performance on different axis followed with a manufacturing‐driven economy. Higher to spot out the talent that should be ‘retained’ or business performance was derived through the most ‘developed’. Morrison (2008) and Lamoureux (2009b) effective use of factories and distribution networks. The advocate use of 9‐box grids for talent management and knowledge age moved the basis of economic value to calibration. The 9 box matrix is a good tool to evaluate information assets through integrated communications and performane plus for succession planning, it helps managers computer technology. Now the competitive battlefront is for to create development paths and plan for succession in the roles. It is a good tool to evaluate retention risk as well. Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri 1

(Powell & Lubitsh, 2007). Although HR and hiring manager In its report, Oracles Inc (2008) explained a systematic needs to work hands‐to‐hand in talent development, process driven system for creating a database on Talent succession planning and building bench strength, the Management came in international HR with Oracle’s ultimate execution responsibility lies with the direct comprehensive suite on integrated talent management. An manager (Baumruk et al 2006). integrated approach was introduced for the forward‐ thinking organization expanding its talent management In this paper we have addressed the needs of direct scope or for an organization exploring talent management supervising managers to provide a tested and practical for the first time. This is a holistic view of talent model on integrated but systematic approach to talent management enables HR to address urgent problems in the management, succession planning and building bench context of a roadmap where all aspects of talent strength. The efforts have been done to highlight how the management fit together long term. With this, a database practical approaches at a direct manager’s level can be fit approach to integrated talent management system broke into mainstream hiring, on‐board, performance evaluation down the traditional silos in HR. processes already established in the company. Taleo Research (2009) introduced a model which 3. New model for talent management emphasizes the mandate of strategic talent management to respond to business goals and consequently be the driver of The model starts with right approach to hiring and managing business performance. Talent management is depicted as a the career progression through out in form a system of circular set of activities in 4 process areas: Acquire Develop, elements. Four essential elements of proposed Talent Align and Assess. This research looked at business management model are:‐ performance as a function of efficiency of the talent management infrastructure. 1. Pre‐Hire Talent Profiling 2. On‐board Motivator Profiling Lore Management Institute (Doherty et al, 2006) presented 3. Critical Performance Appraisal a Talent Management Audit which is next milestone in an 4. Systematic Talent Review framework effort to standardize industry talent management practices and processes. In line with CMM, this Talent maturity model The new model is depicted in Fig [1] which shows integrated is based on nine attributes and it introduced the concept of systems Talent Management as function of Talent, Talent Maturity Audit. This established a framework of Motivation, Performance and Development. integrated processes on Acquisition, Integration, Performance Management, Mobility, Retention and Exit. This established a framework to assess the talent management practices and processes deployed in various companies to increase the focus on integrated process of talent management. On the similar lines, Bersin & Associates (Lamoureux, 2009) presented a Succession Planning Maturity model which outlined various maturity levels seen in corporate in the succession planning practices. Chugh & Bhatnagar (2006) stressed the strategic importance of talent management to HR strategy as well as to corporate. They postulated talent management as high performance work practice which gives a strategic edge to HR practices. Bersin (2007) conducted a research on market best practices, trends and market situation on talent Fig [1]: Systems Talent Management Framework spread across development and revealed top 10 biggest talent Talent, Motivation, and Performance and Development domains. management problems faced by the companies at that The model is built around 4 core processes a direct supervisor or hiring manager handles: Hiring, On‐boarding, Performance Review tomes. The study presented as Talent Management and Talent Review. Framework for developing talent management strategies. 3.1. Pre‐hire talent profiling There have a numerous advances in Talent management, however, either those are too focused on processes or too 3.1.1 Issues with traditional hiring approach focused on the organizational level implementation. One of the issue with models referred in the literature are that it The very purpose of staff retention and long term bench does not give a simplistic practical approach from a hiring strength starts with correct hiring model. One of the issue manager’s perspective what could be a workable technique with current interview models is a basic question – “how Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri 2

does your experience or background relate to this position?” employers. However, this kind of interviews suffers from a or “how would you add value to this position?” The basic very obvious bias to gig into relevant details to “assess” the issue with most of the interviews is that an insight about the candidate’s background experience in relation to current job which is given to new candidates during interview is not job. enough for correct mapping of candidate with the job requirements. But mostly, however, this description or Here is the important piece of this approach when insight is too generic and high level overview at first place implemented correctly. Using traditional approaches of that it hardly gives any useful operational information to the selection decision of hiring has already been made. This candidate unless candidate has performed exactly same job exploratory interview essentially is platform to prepare an earlier. On the other hand, the biggest issue of modern day inventory of Talent Profile which is the most essential interviews is the “catch factor” where applicants tends to element of long‐term talent management. “zoom in” the specific relevant experience related to job, at time overshadowing their rest of the passions. In such A typical Talent Inventory is shown in Fig [2]. This pertains to “skewed” profiles, the important aspects of candidate’s discrete events, achievements, facts and information on aspirations, achievements, drives and experience get over‐ new hire’s past achievements, honors, drives, digging in looked which may NOT be in line with the current position detail his past experience, drives behind why he took a (Martin et al, 2009). What does it result in? It results in a specific courses. My experience with new hires is that they constant thrives in the applicant to pursue his natural start revealing “key marketable” information towards later passion and use the current position as the stepping stone part of their career when they are on the edge of transition to march forward (Hirsch, 2006). So it is very important that to new role or company. Many of them expressed that they all round exploratory assessment is done about the did mention their skills and qualifications and many other candidate’s personality and professional behavior, achievements on their resume which got over‐looked in the achievements and aspirations. It is important to understand light of manager’s tendencies to “look” for relevant what motivated him in past at various points rather than experience only. manager re‐learning him after joining what could potentially motivate him (Glen, 2006). One point worth noting is a; “relevant” or “irrelevant” job experiences. This is a difficult paradigm shift. Most of the 3.1.2 Proposed hiring model: Pre‐hire talent profiling managers prefer to stick to what is required by job under question, assess the candidates against those standards, if We propose a proven practical model which direct hiring meets that’s enough. However, there is a need to go one managers can apply fairly well without having to become as step further to spend additional energy on profiling the a HR manager. talent of this candidate. After all he is what he is because of his all relevant and irrelevant experiences. As traditional approach, to pre‐screen and assess the suitability of a candidate, hiring managers use a range of At no point this interview should be used to draw out methods in short listing and systematic selection “conclusions” rather this is a pre‐employment database to procedures, written tests, technical interviews, behavioral be used for long‐term talent management. Before a interviews, personal interviews or otherwise as appropriate manager formally hires the candidate, he needs to make methods for the positions. These traditional methods have sure what range of talent candidate comes with. This deep rooted in corporate cultures and in many cases the approach is the answer. various elements of selection process becomes a trademark of a company in regards to acquiring new talents (Martel, It is very important to keep this kind of interview too 2003). informal be conducted by a gentle and friendly person in non‐interview room environment. The findings are We propose to add pre‐offer round of discussions which documented in a pre‐defined format and usually keep scope called “Exploratory Interview” after decision of hiring has for free flowing information which may not fit into specified been made based on standard set of selection procedures. categories. Usually no point systems or ranking or scoring is This is a powerful intervention and typically looks informal done. The emphasis is on the information supported with but is treated to understand the candidate as a facts and events. At any point, the outcome of such “professional”. Many companies have been using this kind interview should not affect the hiring decision, if already of interviews to dig into details and approaches of the made. One important element of this model is that this person to understand how he has handled projects in the information documented in the system is made available to past and how he has tackled problems in the previous hiring manager well before a candidate joins the company. Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri 3

Fig [2]: A typical pre‐hire talent profiling tool‐ talent Inventory. Typically includes past achievements, roles, positions, achievements, failures, learning, awards, professional activities, relevant and non‐relevant qualification and training. 3.2. On‐board motivator profiling (Falcone, 2006). Real issue here is that a systems approach to talent management, long term alignment, developing the 3.2.1 Issues with traditional on‐board process skills for career progression and alignment in terms of personal and professional goals is missing (Cappelli, 2000). Traditionally, all companies have some kind of orientation and induction training for new hires. After having gone 3.2.2 Proposed model: Motivator profiling through the rigorous interviews, selection process and finally coming on‐board, applicant very much have the feel The proposed model essentially builds upon the Talent of what behavior and attitude is expected of him and at Profile database gather during the pre‐hire round. That data times applicants do over‐exhibits those just ending up is made available to hiring manager. Hiring manager can get misleading the supervisors how passionate and enthusiastic a overall perception of the past achievements, success they are about the new positions. This actually may not be a stories and some special attributes of candidate’s talents. long term truth. An important piece is missing here the This essential is a close‐to‐facts case file. Now it is critical to “alignment of personal goals of new hire with the build a database that what are his motivator which made professional goals as specified by the job” (Reese, 2005). The him perform or achieve those successes. Thus builds a traditional approach is usually aligning the person to the motivator profile database which complements the talent company goals and during the process manager miss out the profile database. inherent passions and intentions of the candidates. Ultimately, if the job profile is not in line with personal Essentially it is an exploration but structured one to find passions and goals of the candidates and if he feels not what could be most important aspects of his personality getting his full potential used in the job, chances are some which Second purpose is to dive into passions, aspirations, day this guy will walk into manager’s cabin and hand‐over motivations of the applicants‐ this will pay in long run for the resignation. The big surprise happens to these managers talent management. In the proposed model, the stress on when all the way, while talking to these guys, all they find developing a “live” talent inventory for the new hire. The using their traditional management techniques is that new direct managers need to let the new hire through the usual hire is so much interested and aligned with the new job orientation and induction programme. However, at this (Martin & Lombard, 2009). While the truth may be little stage it is very important when to start giving the otherwise, it is usually not understood till end and managers assignments to new hire. A very important piece is to sit end up pondering upon shocking revelation of “misaligned with new hire on regular basis for first few days and develop personal vs given career goals” during exit interviews a database on his talent. Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri

Fig [3]: A typical framework for Motivator Profile includes achievements, personal preferences, aspirations & motivators and professional preferences. This does not necessarily mean a psychological interview. It considered as the part and parcel of the job rather than is pretty much common sense in understanding the drives of career progression and motivational tool (Tansley et al, the person. Special attention is to be paid in career or 2007). One important aspect of performance appraisal is not profession change made by applicant in his career. Equally the ‘motivation and control’ by providing insights into past important are his achievements he is excited about. A typical year’s performance as viewed by management. Another framework for Motivator Profiling is shown in figure [3]. piece which is usually left addressed is “thorough insights of achievements and misses”. Major limitation with traditional However, this may not be a one‐time sitting. This may be performance is the “documentary” approach followed by 1‐accomplished on daily basis touching different aspects of to‐1 review with the supervisor. Other version of candidates’ professional career, achievements and activities. performance appraisal that exists is 360 degree feedback Care should be taken not to note down any thing explicitly, method which takes inputs from peers, supervisors and otherwise candidate may think it as some kind of interview. subordinates. Author’s survey indicates that most of the It should be a building stone to develop rapport between hires are particularly unhappy with ‘documentary’ nature of the manager and the employee. critical appraisal and missing ‘touch of thoroughness’. As a corollary to this model, the regular 1‐to‐1 and other 3.3.2 Proposed model: truly critical appraisal project interactions may reveal more about the personality, motives and some additional pre‐existing skills or recently Model proposed here is to develop a session on verbal acquired skills, the talent profiling and motivator profile appraisal to complement the written performance appraisal. database should be updated. Supervisor, manager of the supervisor and some senior stake holders (like project managers, programme managers, One point worth emphasizing here is that not only the divisional head) under who said employee performed some performance, but talent and motivation also need to be part of his duties. The care is taken to involve only those recorded. The later two databases will help in long term stake holders who have vertical relationship with the talent management, succession planning whereas employee on some or all projects. performance recoding is base of selection the candidates for succession planning. The stake holders and participants meets in a congenial environment with the employee and employee’s supervisor 3.3. Performance appraisal: truly critical appraisal chair the session. Without revealing his ranking, grading and other data, discussions flows to keep the focus on activities’ 3.3.1 Issues with traditional performance appraisal performed by the employee, various stake holders giving practice their realistic inputs on how did they perceive the activities and achievements, bringing out some of the best actions How many of the managers believe that performance taken by him, how he added the value, where he made the appraisal which is usually also termed as ‘critical appraisal’ is mark. This is most motivational inputs by various segments truly done in ‘mission‐critical’ manner? Probably it is of the people for this individual and whole new experience. Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri

He is free to add his points and approaches to the extent b) Last Year’s performance rating‐ This is important supervisor allow controlling the defensive approaches. objective information which forms many of the managerial Another important advantage of this model is the inputs are decision. IN standard practice the quarterly forced ranking constructive criticism in the presence of stake holders and includes the performance rating of last year as one of the establishing the value of contribution this employee has parameter too. However, the performance rating for the last made. year in itself provides vital information of consistency of performance. On the flip side, this provides a ground for employees falling under “need improvement” to set the direction and These forced rakings are presented in quarterly talent expectations of stake holders which get defined as the review meetings. Essentially these reviews are conducted by action plan of improvement of this individual. In general, top management in association with senior and middle various aspects of past years’ activities are brought out in management. During the review, the downstream limelight for this particular employee with a focus on employees are rated on criticality to the company and their achievements, values, contributions, specific outcomes, out future potential. of way efforts, specific qualities, specific skills, results, approaches and lesson learnt, mistakes and misses. This way 3.4.2 Output rating from Talent Review critical appraisal is used as introspection as well as motivational tool. Both technical and leadership potential is rated. The outcome of talent review is flagged and non‐flagged One important aspect of successful deployment of this employees. The output to Talent Review meetings are as model is that the inputs from stake holders and such under:‐ discussion should not come as surprise to the candidate; rather it should be a regular affair in the management style. a) Criticality Rating‐ A matrix where criticality on 1 to 3 scales is assigned based on how critical an The success of this model lies in long term staff retention. employee is for current and future success of the Efforts must be made to document the proceeds of the company. The critical employees must be engaged discussions to capture the achievements, skills, learning and suitably and should be given suitable long‐term other contributions of the individual to update the “live” benefits. talent profiling database. b) Single Point Failure/ High Risk of Attrition rating‐ Rating is assigned to each employee to identify if a 3.4. Systematic talent review framework particular employee is a single‐point failure or has high chance of leaving the company based on his One thing to remember is that talent may not be in‐born. At reactions and feedbacks. A back‐up plan and bench‐times in big or small corporate companies, it is learnt and strength plan is needed immediately to cover such acquired and then used for other domains to produce employees. results. This underlines the basis of proposed model of long c) Potential Ratings‐ this rating deal with identify the term talent management and staff retention. In the employees who have long term potential in proposed model, a quarterly talent review is conducted for technical or leadership domain. Technical and all the employees. The proposed model is shown in the Fig leadership potential is assessed separately and is [4]. given separate ratings. A career development & progression plan is needed for employees with high 3.4.1 Inputs to Quarterly Talent Review technical potential, whereas employees with high leadership potential are the candidates as There are two major inputs to the quarterly review:‐ successors for next level roles. The candidates with high technical as well as leadership potential are a) Quarterly Forced Ranking‐ Middle managers the business leaders and are slated for developing prepare a quarterly forced raking for the employees succession plan for them. reporting to them. Essentially various job attributes, attitudes, values are rated for all the employees to fit into a A typical sample worksheet for assigning ratings and forced ranking. To good extent such rating is objective; defining the appropriate talent management plan is given in however, at time subjective information is also used to drive the Fig [6]. such forced ranking (Grote 2005). The output of these sheets is a unique ranking position of each of the employee in the team relative to each other. Such ratings include job performance and attitude aspects affecting the on‐job behavior and results. A typical Forced ranking looks like Fig [5]. Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri

Fig [4]: Proposed Talent Review Approach in a complex corporate. The proposed model aims at developing engagement plans, cross‐training plan, career development plan and leadership development, succession plan based on Criticality rating, Risk rating, SPF rating and Potential ratings. Fig [5]: A typical forced ranking worksheet, where the employees are given discrete ranks even if their point score is same. Fig [6]: A typical rating worksheet to assign Criticality Rating, Potential Rating and SPF rating to develop a suitable plan Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri

Fig [7]: Criticality vs Potential Talent Management Matrix. A guiding tool to define long‐term and short term talent management strategies, type of plans required for the employees falling on different ranges of the criticality and potential ratings. 3.4.3 Talent Management Plans from Review ratings • Leadership Development / Succession Plan for High Leadership Potentials: As an example, the employee These output matrixes are used to develop a set of ABC, even though has low technical potential, development and engagement plans based on the ratings. scores high on criticality rating and leadership Here are some of the talent management plans those are potential. He is an ideal caudate for a long‐term developed. leadership plan and may be successor to next level promotion. • Engagement Plan for the employees who are • Cross‐Training/ Bench strength building back‐up marked as currently critical to company success. plan for the employees marked as high risk to This ensures that the employees who are vital for attrition or single point failure. As an example in current success should be engaged meaningfully. previous figure, employee KLM is such a candidate The correct engagement lies in direct manager’s which may pose substantial risk to operations in the hands. This is import to curb such employees to even he leaves. Engagement plan though helps a lot look out for other avenues due to lack of suitable here to retain him for a longer time, but to prepare engagement. As an example in previous figure, the for eventualities, a back‐up bench strength need to employee GHI scores high on critical scale, even be built for this role. though he is rated low on other scales, since he is currently critical to business, he should be engaged On the other hand the employee NOP scores high on suitably to avoid any humping around the role from criticality rating as well as risk to leave. Such kind of such employee. employees would need to have right engagement so • Career Development Plan for Technical Potentials: that company keep them engaged and at the same time As an another example, employee DEF scores very create a back‐up bench strength plan for the same. high on technical competence and a technology company would want to manage such highly talented employees by making a suitable career progression/ development plan for him. Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri

3.4.4 Talent Management and Retention Strategies 4. Conclusion This structured approach to Talent Review leads to a very The Talent Management Framework discussed in this paper scientific base to further development plan. The type and and Talent Management Matrix (Criticality vs Potential) has range of development plan and mechanism can vary from been used as a successful method of managing the talent. organization to organization. Thus approach targets to provide a systematic, data driven scientific methodology to talent management. The model is Based on the rating, various retention/ talent management applicable to small and large corporation with some and career development strategies have been shown in Fig adaptation. The most attractive feature of the approach is [7]. This is a Talent Management Model developed as part of that the strategies are fairly simple yet effective and can be the existing research. The matrix plots criticality vs potential aligned with mainstream HR practices in the companies. This to define various talent management plans such as retention does not demand drastic infrastructure change, rather a plan, career development, succession plan and risk process on the part of HR and direct manager. Another good management plan. The advantage of this talent feature of this model is that without having applied management matrix is that it also integrated usual corporate wide, still direct managers can practice the same operational plans like deployment plan, leadership plan and within their groups for more effective talent management of job enrichment/ enlargement plan under the same their group. umbrella. 5. References The whole success to talent management lies in aligning these three elements together. 1. Anonymous (2006) , “Critical issues in HR Drive 2006 Priorities: #1 is Talent Management”, HR Focus, Volume 83, No. 1, Pg 1 & 13‐15. 2. Berk, J., (2004), “Talent Management: Valuing Human Capital: A a) Long term talent management strategy as defined Practical Approach”, CLO Magazine available at from Talent Review Matrix http://www.knowledgeadvisors.com/archives/talent‐management‐ st b) Reward, recognition and monetary aspect of the valuing‐human‐capital‐a‐practical‐approach/ (accessed 1 July 2009) compensation 3. Bersin, J., (2007), “High Impact Talent Management‐ High‐Impact c) Career Aspiration of the employee as seen from the Talent Management: State of the Market and Executive Overview”, Bersin & Associates Industry Report, Bersin & Associates available at Talent Profile database http://www.bersin.com/Lib/Rs/Details.aspx?docid=10334906&id 4. Cappelli, P. (2000), "A market‐driven approach to retaining talent", a) Above plans, in an integrated manner forms the Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 No.1, pp.103‐11. long‐term talent management and retention plan for all 5. Chugh, S., Bhatnagar, J. (2006), "Talent management as high performance work practice: emerging strategic HRM dimension", level of employees. Some of the talent management Management and Labour Studies, Vol. 31 No.3, pp.228‐53. strategies are as under: 6. Doherty, W., Noah Rabinowitz, N., Michael Pilnick, M., Hogan P. D., (2006). ”The Lore Talent Management Maturity Model”, Lore • Critical Employee: Engagement plan, project International Institute available at assignments http://www.feedbacknet.com/assessment/TMMMDescription.cfm (Accessed 1st July 2009) • Technical Potential: Team leadership assignments, 7. Falcone, P. (2006), "Preserving restless top performers: keep your project leadership top performers engaged so they dont jump ship once job • Leadership Potential: people management, opportunities arise", HR Magazine, available at: business development, strategic roles 8. Glen, C. (2006), "Key skills retention and motivation: the war for talent still rages and retention is the high ground", Industrial and • Single Point Failure: Tactical operations, mentorship Commercial Training, Vol. 38 No.1, pp.37‐45. for other employees, 9. Grote, R., (2005) Forced Ranking: Making performance management work, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, available at b) Above ratings governs the compensation elements http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/5091.html (Accesses 1st July 2009) to retain the talent for the long time in the company such 10. Handfield‐Jones, H., Michaels, E., & Axelrod, B. (2001), “Talent Management: A Critical Part Of Every Leader’s Job”. Ivey Business as:‐ Journal, Vol 66, No. (2), Pp 53‐58. • Project involvement bonus 11. Hirsch, M.S. (2006), "Tomorrows world of recruitment", available • Stocks and RSUs at: www.peoplemanagement.co.uk • Increments and annual bonus 12. Jackson Leadership (2005), “Using Jackson’s Performance / Potential Matrix for Succession Planning & Talent Management”, Jackson • Promotion/ Job grade change Leadership Systems available at • Overseas assignments http://www.jacksonleadership.com/pdfs/JacksonLead_PerfPotMatri • Spot bonus xWhitePaper.pdf 13. Lamoureux, K., (2009a), “Bersin & Associates Succession • Awards and recognition Management Maturity Model”, Bersin & Associates. Available at: http://www.bersin.com/Lib/Rs/Details.aspx?docid=10339884&id= c) Some companies do have a separate development st (Accessed 1 July 2009) plan system for developing a personal goals charter for the 14. Lamoureux, K., (2009b), “The Nine‐Box Grid: An Essential Tool for employee to help track and fulfill his personal and Talent Calibration”, Bersin & associates available at http://www.bersin.com/Lib/Rs/Details.aspx?Docid=10339432 professional goals along with his job. st Accessed on 1 July 2009. 15. Lockwood, N.R. (2006), "Talent management: driver for organizational success HR content program", SHRM Research Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri

Quarterly, available at: 11. Forman, D.C. (2006), "Talent metrics measure what matters", www.shrm.org/research/quarterly/2006/0606RQuart.asp available at: www.leaderexcel.com 16. Luthans, F., Peterson, S.J. (2002), "Employee engagement and 12. Frank, F.D., Taylor, C. (2004), "Talent management: trends that will manager self efficacy: implications for managerial effectiveness and shape the future HR", Human Resource Planning, Vol. 27 No.1, development", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 21 No.5, pp.33‐41. pp.376‐87. 13. Gardner, T.M. (2002), "In the trenches at the talent wars: 17. Martel, L. (2003), "Finding and keeping high performers: best competitive interaction for scarce human resources", Human practices from 25 best companies", Employee Relations Today, Vol. Resource Management, Vol. 41 No.2, pp.225‐37. 30 No.1, pp.27‐43. 14. Gifford, L., (2008), HCI white Paper, “Support Your Talent Management Strategy,” Human Capital Institute, available at: 18. Martin, K. & Lombard, M., (2009). “Fully On–Board”: Getting the Most from Your Talent in the First Year, Aberdeen Group. Available Http://Www.Futurestep.Com/Pdf/Talent%20strategy_Reporting.Pdf 15. Heinen, J. S. & O’neill, C. (2004). “Managing Talent to Maximise at: http://www.taleo.com/research/get‐analyst‐reports/aberdeen‐ Performance”. Employment Relations Today, Page 67‐82. fully‐board‐getting‐the‐most‐98.html 16. Heinen, S.J., ONeill, C. (2004), "Managing talent to maximize 19. Martin, K., Saba, J., and Madden, K., (2009). Assessments in Talent performance", Employment Relations Today, Vol. 31 pp.2. Management, Strategies to Improve Pre and Post Hire Performance, 17. HR Focus (2006), "Critical issues in HR drive 2006 priorities: number Aberdeen group. Available at: http://www.taleo.com/research/get‐ 1 is talent management", HR Focus, Vol. 83 No.8, pp.8‐9. analyst‐reports/assessments‐talent‐management‐strategies‐ 18. HR Focus (2007), "Talent management is on HR agenda for 2007 and improve‐pre‐99.html beyond", HR Focus, Vol. 84 No.4, pp.8. available at 20. Oracle Inc (2008), Integrated Talent Management: Extending the Http://Www.Talentmgt.Com/Succession_Planning/2009/February/8 Value of a Strategic Framework, An Oracle White Paper. Available at: 57/Index.Php http://www.oracle.com/media/peoplesoft/en/pdf/whitepapers/inte grated‐talent‐management‐white‐paper.pdf (accessed 1st July 2009) 19. Integrated Talent Management Part 1: Understanding the 21. Powell, M., Lubitsh, G. (2007), “Courage in the face of extraordinary opportunities for Success. (2008 July). IBM, Institute For Business talent: Why talent management has become a leadership issue”, Value. Available Online At Www.Ibm.Com. Strategic HR Review; Volume: 6, No. 5. 20. Kevin J. (2009), Sensenig succession Planning, Talent Management 22. Reese, V. (2005), "Maximizing your retention and productivity with Magazine, available at: on‐boarding", Employment Relations Today, Vol. 31 No.4, pp.23‐30. Http://Www.Talentmgt.Com/Succession_Planning/2009/February/823. Scheweyer, A. (2004), Talent Management Systems: Best Practices in 57/Index.Php Technology Solutions for Recruitment, Retention and Workforce 21. Kevin S. Groves (2007), “Integrating leadership development and Planning, Wiley, New York, NY, . succession planning best practices”, Journal of Management 24. Taleo Research, Strategic Talent Management. Available at Development; Volume: 26 Issue: 3 Http://Www.Taleo.Com/Research/Articles/Strategic/What‐Talent‐ 22. Likierman, A. (2007). “How To Measure the success of Talent Management‐121.Html (Accessed 1st July 2009) Management”. People Management. Vol 13, No 4, Pp46‐47 25. Tansley, C., Turner, P. And Foster, C. (2007) Talent: Strategy, 23. Morton, L., Ashton, C., And Bellis, R. (2005) , “Differentiating Talent Management, Measurement. Research into Practice. London: Management: Integrating Talent Management To Drive Business Chartered Institute Of Personnel and Development. Available At: Performance”, CRF Publishing, London. http://Www.Cipd.Co.Uk/Bookstore 24. Richard S. Wellins, Audrey B. Smith, Scott Erker ( ) White Paper —26. Tucker, E., Kao, T. and Verma, N. (2005), “Next‐Generation Talent Nine Best Practices For Effective Talent Management, Development Management‐ Insights on How Workforce Trends Are Changing ‐ The Dimensions International, Inc.Available at: Face of Talent Management”, Hewitt Associates available at Http://Www.Ddiworld.Com/Pdf/Ddi_Ninebestpracticetalentmanage http://Www.Cdi‐ ment_Wp.Pdf Tm.Com/Media/Whitepaper_Nextgentalenmanagement.Pdf 25. Robert E. Lewis, Robert J. Heckman (2006), Talent management: A (Accessed 1st July 2009) critical review, Human Resource Management Review, Volume 16, Issue 2, Pages 139‐154 26. Saba, J. & Martin, K. (2008., Succession Management: Addressing FURTHER READING The Leadership Development Challenge. Aberdeen Group Research Report Available online at www.Aberdeen.Com. 1. Berger, D. R. (2004), “The Journey To Organisation Excellence: 27. Teng, A. (May 2007). Making The Business Case for HR: Talent Navigating The Forces Impacting Talent Management”, D. R. Berger Management Aids Business Earnings. HRO Today Magazine. & L. A. Berger (Eds.), The Talent Management Handbook, Ch.3. Retrieved From Mcgraw‐Hill, New York. Http://Www.Hrotoday.Com/Magazine.Asp?Artid=1693 on April 17, 2. Boudreau, J.W., Ramstad, P.M. (2005), "Talentship, talent 2009. segmentation, and sustainability: a new HR decision science paradigm for a new strategy definition", Human Resource Management, Vol. 44 No.2, pp.129‐36. 3. Boudreau, J.W., Ramstad, P.M. (2005), "Talentship, talent Author Details: segmentation, and sustainability: a new HR decision science paradigm for a new strategy definition", Human Resource Author is Global Learning and Training Consultant Management, Vol. 44 No.2, pp.129‐36. specializing in the area of performance technology. His research and technical experience spans over 16 years 4. Brittain, S. (2007) “How To Manage Key Talent”. People of project management, product development and Management. Vol 13, No 12, Pp 46‐47. scientific research at leading MNC corporations. He 5. Cannon, J.A. And Mcgee, R. (2007), “Talent Management and holds MBA in Operations Management, Executive Succession Planning”, CIPD Toolkit, Chartered Institute Of Personnel MBA, Master degree in Technology and Bachelor degree in Technology with specialization in Electronics and Development. and Communication Engineering. He has earned 6. Cappelli, P. (2008), “Talent Management for the Twenty‐First numerous international certification awards - Certified Century”, Harvard Business Review. Vol 86, No. 3, Pp74, 76‐81. Management Consultant (MSI USA/ MRA USA), 7. Cattell, A., (2008), “Talent on Demand ‐ Managing Talent in an Age Certified Six Sigma Black Belt (ER USA), Certified Quality Director (ACI USA), Certified Engineering of Uncertainty”, Industrial and Commercial Training, Volume: 40, No. Manager (SME USA), Certified Project Director (IAPPM USA), to name a few. In 7 addition to this, he has 60+ educational qualifications, credentials and 8. Conger, J. A., & Fulmer, R. M. (2003). “Developing Your Leadership certifications in his name. His interests are in scientific product development, Pipeline”. Harvard Business Review, 81(12), 76‐84. technical training, management consulting and performance technology. 9. Dell, D., Hickey, J. (2002), Sustaining the Talent Quest, The Contact: +44 20 7979 1979 Conference Board, New York, NY E-mail: rkattri@rediffmail.com 10. Donahue, K.B. (2001), “It Is Time to Get Serious about Talent Website: http://sites.google.com/site/ramankumarattri Management”, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rkattri/Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri

Copyright InformationWorking paper Copyrights © 2005 Raman K. Attri. Paper can becited with appropriate references and credits to author. Copying andreproduction without permission is not allowed. Any collaboration,project work, dissertation discussions and consulting enquiry onsubject matter is welcomed.Copyright © 2010 Raman K. Attri

A systems model to Talent Management, Staff Retention and Bench Strength

by Raman K. Attri

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

Statistics

A systems model to Talent Management, Staff Retention and Bench Strength Document Transcript