Understanding the talent wave
T
he Talent Wave is the metaphor for talent management and succession planning in the second decade of
this millennium. While talent “pools” are associated with shallowness and stagnation, and “leadership pipelines” with constriction into narrow, inflexible paths that can easily get blocked, a wave is pure energy. On the sea, it is not the water that moves, but the energy waves that pass through it. For HR and for corporate leadership, the choice in identifying, growing and retaining talent lies between largely ineffectual attempts to control this energy and finding imaginative ways to harness and work with it.
My forthcoming book, The Talent Wave, (to be published by Kogan Page in August 2012) reveals the findings of five years of research into corporate approaches to succession and talent management. The starting point was a starkly challenging question, which became increasingly relevant as once-admired company names were brought to their knees by arrogant, incompetent leaders: “If succession planning and talent management work, why is it that the wrong people so often get to the top?”
This question was rapidly followed by: “If succession planning and talent management work, why – in spite of so much effort to bring about change – is the diversity at the bottom of organisations not reflected at higher levels?”
My research has led to conclusions that question the whole basis of corporate approaches in succession and talent. Firstly, I looked for evidence that the paraphernalia of this aspect of people management – for
62 Management Today | May 2012
example, the nine-box grids, the succession charts, 360-degree feedback and leadership competency frameworks – delivered what they promised. This evidence was woefully thin. Indeed, it was a lot easier to gather evidence that they did not work. Some examples illustrate the point:
• The nine-box grid is based on the assumption that it is possible and practical to measure individual performance and individual potential. The reality is that we can at best make a time-based best guess at both these
“If succession planning and talent management work, why is it that the wrong people so often get to the top?”
measures. Among factors that upset the neatly lined up calculations are the inability of line managers to recognise talent (unless it is like them), the impossibility of clearly separating out individual and collective performance in many roles, and the poor transportability of high performance between roles.
• Leadership competencies. A female head of OD expresses the point very well: “Our leadership competencies are based on the characteristics of successful male leaders 15-20 years ago. They are in practice a significant barrier to the advancement of
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106