Developing Talent Strategies: Research Based Practice in Oman

International Journal of HRD Practice, Policy and Research 2016, Vol 1 No 1: 53-64

Developing Talent Strategies: Research Based Practice in Oman
Paul Turner, Leeds Business School, UK
Alison Glaister, The York Management School, UK
Rayya Al Amri, University of Bradford School of Management, UK

Organizations struggle to move from the conceptualisation of talent strategies to practical implementation. This paper proposes the use of a talent management evolution matrix which enables the organization to assess and develop the link between the concept and practice of talent management. Gathering data from thirty-nine semi-structured interviews, the matrix is applied in order to understand the differences between the finance and energy sectors in Oman and how they perceive and practice talent management. The findings suggest that Omani talent management practices are shaped strongly by the institutional environment and the nature of business strategy, yet this has resulted in differences between how the finance and energy sectors conceptualize talent management. Despite these differences the findings show that talent management is practiced in similar ways within both the finance and energy sectors, suggesting convergence at the practice level only.

Strategy Driven Talent Management
The achievement of an organization’s business goals will require leaders who do the right things, managers who do things right and an engaged workforce that has the skills and capabilities to perform business functions effectively. In short there will need to be alignment between the organization’s people and its business strategies. Talent management: “the future proofing of an organization’s human capital pool” (Tatoglu et al., 2016: 278), provides a means through which this alignment can be achieved. This paper proposes that a ‘talent management evolution matrix’ is one way in which an organization can identify its current position alongside a range of strategic options that will facilitate the development of a talent strategy. The paper makes a key contribution to an understanding of how talent management can be evaluated in practice and the matrix connects both the conceptual acceptance of talent management and its implementation. Using empirical evidence gathered through thirty-nine semi-structured interviews this paper examines how the talent management evolution matrix can be applied to organizations in the financial and energy sectors in Oman.

The alignment between business goals and the development of strategic capabilities will be determined by the nature of these goals, the timescales within which they are to be achieved; the geographic footprint over which they are spread and the level of innovation or transformation required. These factors will determine the numbers of people, the level of skills and capabilities and will shape organizational culture. Such a response will lead to people policies and practices that are informed by strategic workforce planning — a comprehensive approach to talent where strategic talent management will be complemented by operational talent activity (Collings et al., 2011). In this respect there is increasing pressure to deliver a talent strategy that is aligned qualitatively (knowledge, skills and behaviours) and quantitatively (return on investment in talent, return on investment in human capital) to business objectives.

However, talent management strategy is influenced by both internal and external considerations including the structure of the organization and the institutional context within which it resides. Organizational structures might include the creation of global matrices or networks that replace traditional hierarchies and these are shaped by demographic and behavioural changes of a workforce comprising multi-generational, mobile and information ‘accessed’ workers (Turner and Kalman, 2014). The nature and strength of these internal dynamics will depend upon the markets or sectors in which the organization chooses to compete. External considerations focus on the increasing need for talented people in both knowledge economies and the more traditional sectors. The World Economic Forum (2011) emphasized the need for ‘highly educated people’ to sustain economic growth and anticipated talent shortages by 2020 in 25 countries, 13 industries and 9 occupational clusters. The universality and diversity of these shortages are striking; ranging from significant shortages of those with supply chain skills at junior, middle and senior management level (Dubey and Gunasekaran, 2015); wide ranging shortages in the five economies of China, Singapore, Thailand, Hong Kong and Taiwan (Tatli et al., 2013); skill shortages in science, technology, engineering and mathematics in the USA (Bayer, 2014) as well as shortages in marketing, construction and health professionals in economies around the world. The effect of labour market forces in both contexts is that the excess demand for leadership, managerial, project, specialist and operational talent highlights the attraction and subsequent retention of this talent.

Thus, internal organizational dynamics and how they combine with and respond to external labour market forces suggests that organizations find it difficult to match the demand for talent with the supply of talent. Even when organizations attempt to do so, they are faced with multiple challenges including the initial identification of talent, the means through which talent can be developed and how to manage this talent resource throughout the organization lifecycle. The alignment objective, clearly laid out in the introduction to this paper, becomes less clear once the objectives for talent management move from conceptualization to operationalization.

Key Constructs of Talent Strategy, Management and Organizational Alignment
There has been a good deal of research on several of the key constructs of talent strategy and management (Tarique and Schuler, 2010). Guidance on the principles of strategic talent management have been set out (Stahl et al., 2011); and how to mobilize the organization to achieve strategic alignment through talent management and human resource development (HRD) is articulated (Alagaraja, 2013). In addition, research outputs include work on the importance of executive and manager engagement in delivering talent strategy (Anderson, 2009; Bjorkmann et al., 2011); the effectiveness of the tools of talent management (Yarnall, 2011; Scott-Ladd et al., 2010) and some of the measures needed to assess its progress (Yapp, 2009). The differences between twentieth and twenty-first century talent strategy have been noted (Capelli, 2008) and advice exists on how to turn organizations into ‘talent factories’ (Ready and Conger, 2007) for talent management in a new era (Cheese, 2010). Strategy driven talent management (Silzer and Dowell, 2010) is high on both the HRD and corporate agenda, but the evidence of the effectiveness of strategic alignment is mixed (Gibb and Wallace, 2014), explained in part, by the key challenges that organizations face in operationalising a talent management strategy.

The first challenge — defining the meaning of talent and talent management — arises because of the inconsistent definitions of talent at the national, regional or global level leading to contradictions in advice and fragmentation in theory (Tarique and Schuler, 2010). On the one hand, talent management can be defined as “the systematic attraction, identification, development, engagement/retention and deployment of those individuals with high potential who are of particular value to an organization” (Tansley et al., 2007: xi); or in a global context talent management may be considered as the “activities and processes that involve the systematic identification of key positions which differentially contribute to the organization’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 organization” (Collings and Mellahi, 2009: 304-313.) Such definitions depend upon the predominant philosophy of the end user and whether they adopt pools, practice, people or positions in their approach to talent management (Collings and Mellahi, 2009; Scullion and Collings, 2010; Sparrow, Scullion, and Tarique, 2014). These approaches hinge on the idiosyncrasies of the operating environment and the opinions of key stakeholders and decision makers (Zhang and Bright, 2012). Such philosophies place the concept of talent on a continuum ranging from an approach which is exclusive, involving only a few people- normally the executive cadre, successors and high potentials, to one that is inclusive where everyone is talented. In a recent study of talent management in multinational companies, Iles et al., (2010) found that the majority adopted an exclusive approach to talent management resulting in integrated and selective human resource management systems. For some, this involved an ‘exclusive-people’ focus on certain groups of high-performing or high-potential people, whilst for others it meant an ‘exclusive-position’ focus on certain key positions in the organization. A minority of organizations had an inclusive approach and a few were more organizationally focused moving towards a social capital perspective (Iles et al., 2010).

The challenge facing HRD and talent management professionals is that, in spite of this continuing debate about the meaning of talent and talent management, there is an expectation from the organization’s executives that those associated with delivering talent management will add value to the achievement of organization goals. For some, the expectation is to become talent factories (Ready and Conger, 2007), ensuring a continuing supply of people to fill key positions. This will require a dual focus, first a focus on functionality (rigorous talent processes that support strategic and cultural objectives) and second, a focus on vitality (the emotional commitment of managers, reflected in daily actions). Yet, for others, the objective of their talent strategy will be operational – to provide replacements or successors to key positions; to attract and retain graduates; to deliver management and leadership development. Both the importance of talent and its effective management are critical success factors (Vaiman et al., 2012) that will be shaped by an organization’s context including the evolution and cultural attributes of the organization and the unique characteristics of the competitive environment.

Therefore, to resolve many of the issues organizations face when developing their talent strategy there is a need to ensure an alignment with their own context. Each organization will have a different starting point from others, as such, a different set of expectations of what is meant by and what is included under the headings of talent strategy and management. Given these differences, organizations will adapt academic insight and practical learning to their own experiences. Despite these differences, strategists and decision makers in the organization need to consider the following issues: how well is talent and talent management understood and supported in the organization? And how effective is the organization at executing talent strategy — i.e. turning the concept into practice?

A Construct for Assessing the Effectiveness of Talent Management — the Talent Management Evolution Matrix
Developing a talent strategy and associated talent management activity will be heavily influenced by both the environment in which the organization operates and the position of that organization in respect of its talent management evolution. It will depend on both the definition of talent and the objectives set within the organization for talent management. Once these have been identified then it will be incumbent on those delivering the strategy to ensure coherence between idea, strategy and execution, an alignment critical to success. As we have described above, coherence and consistency in approach are not always in evidence in the field of talent management.

In response to this and to provide a framework against which a talent strategy can be delivered, a talent management evolution matrix was developed in 2014 and 2015 and subsequently used to facilitate discussions about talent strategy in organizations (Turner, 2015: a and b) across the UK, Europe and the Middle East. The matrix is based on the assumption that there are two important sets of criteria in determining the position of an organization in respect of its talent management (and see also Figure 1). The first is the extent to which talent is understood to be an important consideration in the delivery of an organization’s strategy and the way in which it manages its people; the level of executive and management knowledge and commitment; and the level of resourcing and workforce engagement. These factors form the basis of the first requirement of the talent management evolution matrix i.e. conceptual acceptance, which became one of two axes on the matrix. include the extent of agreement on the definition of talent, the extent of agreement on the definition and scope of talent management, the roles and responsibilities of senior executives for talent management, and the measures that are used to monitor the process of talent management.

The second is how well an organization delivers, or is resourced to deliver, its talent management programmes and activities. Coherence in delivery means “the balancing of natural internal competition to get there first or to show more benefits than others against the need to make the idea one that is accepted enthusiastically throughout the organization” (Turner and Kalman, 2014: 131). This is referred to in the talent management evolution matrix as practical implementation. Initial dialogue with talent practitioners suggests the need to assess the degree to which talent management and its associated activity are aligned to business goals as well as the level of coordination of actions and policies within and without the talent management function. In addition, there is a need to consider the extent to which talent management roles are delineated and understood amongst people management specialists and their respective organization managers. On this axis, a full suite of well-supported leadership programmes, a wide range of online training options, useful career maps and transparency in opportunity (membership of projects, job moves and so on) would result in a high rating on the scale of practical implementation. Once again, agreement of practical implementation is contextual, will use benchmarking data as ‘evidence’ and will have the support of executives and managers in its determination.

Within the talent management evolution matrix, individual organizations self-assess their position on the conceptual acceptance scale. HRD and talent management professionals can provide evidence of what takes place in other organizations through their own benchmarking and this can provide some kind of talent context in which the discussion about progress can be made. The important assumption is that the process of establishing conceptual acceptance is an inclusive one; that it has the support of executives and managers and there is an element of workforce feedback — possibly through performance management data or employee attitude or climate surveys. Once the terms of reference for the two axes have been agreed, the organization will be able to identify their current position and decide a target point for the future, crafting a talent strategy accordingly. The following narrative shows how the matrix was used to evaluate talent management evolution in organizations operating in the finance and energy sectors in Oman.

Volume 1, Number 1