Here's an "Aha!" About Talent Management

Anyone involved in getting a full-blown Talent Management process in place knows that it can be quite a process in itself.

Whenever I see something appear to be moving more slowly than it has to, it's fairly certain that something simple is being overlooked.

I was just listening to an executive team talking about their impending Talent Management initiative in anticipation of a presentation that was to be delivered to them on the topic.  Here are some snippets of the informal chat:

• "It's good that we're finally going to do succession planning in earnest."
• "That's right. Our Board is nervous about what would happen in the case of a sudden death or serious illness."
• "I need to know who my up-and-coming people are."
• "We'll be able to look at a chart and see 'who's who' when it's time for an important move. "

Hmm. Other Folks Are Thinking. . .

Shortly before that, I was with line managers and HR people who were talking about the same initiative. Heres' what you would have heard:

• "I think this is supposed to make it easier for me to have development discussions with my people."
• "What software program are we going to use to track training and developmental assignments?"
• "This is good. We're going to have more workshops and seminars."
• "What are we going to include that will help with retention?"
• "Does this mean that we'll have a defined career path?"

Didn't We Just Talk About This?

Yesterday's post on the importance of self-interest comes into play here. Not selfish self-interest but the fact that when something new is introduced, we tend to define it from our personal perspective. That perspective emerges from a hope that something we need is going to be fulfilled.

The multiple conversations revealed an Aha!. While everyone across the organization was pretty excited about "Talent Management" as a way of life, they didn't have a simple, common understanding of what it meant. The top level folks were thinking, "Succession Planning." Everyone else had a variety of notions, depending upon one's role, needs, and hopes.

Sooo. . .trying to practice what I preach about Aha!. . .I put together a quick graphic for the person doing the executive presentation. The idea was to simplify what Talent Management is about while acknowledging the validity and distinction of Succession Planning as a part of it. The simplicity is also there to force the need to talk about the underlying elements and arrive at a common understanding:

If any of you are in the early stages of program development--or bumping into what appear to be honest misunderstandings--I hope that this may prove helpful.

Comments

[Jo]

What did people do before they invented Talent Management?

[Steve Roesler]

Jo,

Variations of exactly the same thing but often without a conscious effort to keep all of the elements connected.

[Jackie Cameron]

When I read this the question I had was - Why was each group discussing the same initiative separately? Steve, you know the background of what was going on in this particular situation and it might have been that "all interested parties" had been in a joint discussion and the individual person's "take" you report flows from that. I know that happens...

[Meg Bear]

in fact this just makes me sad to realize how far we really have to go. If you have to spell out how succession planning fits into (but is not the whole of) a talent strategy we are further behind then I would have guessed.

[Steve Roesler]

Jackie,

Actually, they were talking about it in the same room at the same time. The composition of the executive group include a few long-time managers from the company and some fairly new executives recruited from other companies who brought with them an image of talent management based on that of their former employers. The fact that this was a relatively new initiative meant that there were some who needed to be educated to the possibilities; others who wanted to defined it based on a current need in their respective division; and others who had a clear idea of what they had done elsewhere. Thus, the need for some simple terminology and an overview of what the sponsoring CEO wanted to see accomplished.

[Steve Roesler]

Hi, Meg,

Those of us who spend the greater part of our professional lives immersed in issues of Talent see the world through a Talent Management lens. It's probably true for other specialized disciplines as well. So when we come across a situation like this it seems almost other-worldly. In fact, it's "real-worldly."

My take on the Talent Management bandwagon is that "it"gained popularity because the elements of it do, in fact, make sense. At the same time, executives rely on people like us to educate, design, and sometimes help implement talent processes. It's something they believe in because of it's underlying value; but it's not something in which they become educated and deeply involved until the time is upon them.

Don't know about your specific experiences, but early on I learned not to make assumptions about a clients actual level of understanding just because (s)he was tossing the right buzzwords around during our initial meeting. It's not an issue of deception; we have to remember that executives may latch onto new possibilities while scanning a book that they picked up at the airport. They don't digest it but they do get a sense of the inherent worth of the concept.

I'm not sure that we're further behind; I am sure that we need to be aware of the education needed to help newly-enthusiastic people get up to speed.

[Frank Papotto]

Reading over some of the previous comments it sounds like some kind Organization Development intervention is what might be needed. Is there a knowledge system in place that helps Executives and others examine the usefulness and applicability of a new idea for their company, division or group? If there is a way to see if joining the bandwagon makes sense then why not take advantage of the excitement around it? I think it can be a deliberate, not necessarily superficial, act of innovation and vision.

[Steve Roesler]

Hello, Frank,

Good diagnostic! :-)

In this particular instance it really was quite simple: a matter of showing people with different organizational backgrounds how succession planning is simply a part of the overall talent management process. It was a slam dunk and people went "OK, I see."

What is not here because of their proprietary nature are the other 11 slides that would have added a bit more context.

Interestingly, more than one of the exec group had a graduate degree in OD in addition to other advanced degrees. Makes life easy:-)

Thanks for adding to the conversation. . .