Talent Management: What's The Evidence

transcript

Talent Management

What’s The Evidence?

IMI Talent Forum, 28th April 2016, Dublin

30 min Talent Management: What is it what does it

20 min What the problem and solution? What’s your

evidence?

20 min An alternative model: EBP

15 min Case

30 min Discussion / questions

Outline

Dangers of believing things that aren’t true

It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so. (Mark Twain)

The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. (Stephen Hawking)

Some examples

What’s happened to average job tenure in the UK and US over the past 10 years?

Stayed the same?

Some examples: Job satisfaction

What’s happened to job satisfaction in the US over the past 10 years?

Stayed same?

Some examples: VUCA

Is the world moving ever faster – more VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity)?

Faster?

Slower?

The idea that time is speeding up is clearly popular. It is also plausible. There is just one problem. It is very hard to prove that it is actually happening.

Hard evidence of a great acceleration is hard to come by. The Economist has considered a variety of measures by which the speed of business in America can be quantified. A few do show some acceleration. But a lot do not.

UK Patents

Some examples: Generational differences

Are there generational differences in work attitudes?

Big differences?

Small differences?

No differences?

So what?

There are many taken-for-granted assumptions and ‘truths’ in HR that turn out to be wrong or at least overstated

It’s important to examine these assumptions because if they are wrong will lead to poor decisions

Possibly also in the case of Talent Management

evidence?

20 min Case

Outline

All big consulting firms claim it’s important …

You use Talent Management: Right?

But, What Is Talent Management?

0Discuss with your neighbour (1 min)

Discussion

nice pictures ...

… and a plethora of models

Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

Model 5

etc etc

Version 1: More or less exactly the same as strategic HRM – it’s most things HR does

Version 2: One specific thing HR does (e.g., succession)

Version 3: Full-on, hardcore War for Talent – it’s talented individuals that determine organizational success – our focus now

‘Talent Management’: 3 versions

Ariss et al. Talent management: Current theories and future research directions. Journal of World Business, 2014, vol. 49, issue 2, pages 173-179

Talent Management:Where does it come from?

McKinsey (1997 paper / 2001 book)

“If you pick the right people and give them the opportunity to spread their wings and put compensation as a carrier behind it you don't have to manage them.”

How is it assumed to work?

Jack Welch (Straight from the gut)

McKinsey: case study

War on Talent

Talent Management:The scientific literature

Discuss with your neighbour (1 min):

What Is (a) Talent?

H E A L T H W E A L T H C A R E E R

NOVEMBER 23 2015

Iulia Alina CiocaLorenzo Gallì

Milano

A S S E S S M E N T O F H I G H - P O T E N T I A L

R E S E A R C H R E S U L T S

C O N C L U S I O ND E F I N I T I O N O F H I G H P O T E N T I A L

Most definitions come from unreliable sources of evidence, and are not valid. Some examples:

“The employee who leaves tracks in the sand”

“An individual with something special hidden in their lives that, under the right conditions, could emerge and be leveraged for greater success.”

R E S U L T ST H E C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S O F H I G H P O T E N T I A L S

A number of 41 characteristics were mentioned in the literature

Leadership skills (34%) Learning ability (26%)Motivation (24%) Competencies specific to the job or career path they will follow (23%)Risk taking (20%)General cognitive ability (18%) Ambition (to advance, to excel (18%) Adaptability (15%)Fit with the values of the organization (15%) Teamwork (13%) Results orientation (13%) Communication skills (11%)Action-oriented (11%)Curiosity (11%)

Generic competencies (that allow performance in various roles (11%)Broad perspective on the whole business (11%) High performance record (11%) Interpersonal skills (10%) Trustworthiness (10%)Intercultural competencies (8%) Commitment (8%) Creativity (7%) Alternative, different and challenging way of thinking (7%) Seeks/uses feedback (7%)Is available for mobility (7%)Competencies specific to the organization as a whole (7%)Dealing with ambiguity (5%)

Self-confidence (5%)Integrity (5%)Strategic thinking (3%)Using information (to take decisions, to convince, etc. (3%)Assertiveness (3%)Emotional intelligence (3%)Conscientiousness (3%)Proactivity (3%)High education level (3%)Customer orientation (3%)Analytical thinking (2%)Problem solving (2%)Resilience (2%)Tolerance (2%)

Some evidence-based insights …

1. Talent management is an ill-defined construct. It lacks a precise terminology as well as a reliable and valid approach regarding the measurement of its effect.

And if you can’t measure it …

2. The idea that talent (or potential) can be readily identified in relatively complex jobs is plain wrong.

A senior executive may have a splendid track record but how much of their apparent success can be attributed to their abilities?

A junior manager may score brilliantly on every appraisal thrown at them, but how good is the evidence that those scores predict future performance? It’s hard to define or assess talent.

3. The idea that the best organisations have the best people just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny..

Success depends on a whole range of factors, not least having good systems, processes and co-ordination.

Having talented individuals may help a little bit in some roles, but other things are likely to be much more important. In other words, we over-rate our ‘stars’

4. There is even evidence that selecting and promoting people at random may work just as well

Pluchino, A., Rapisarda, A. and Garofalo, C., “The Peter Principle Revisited: A Computational Study,”, Physica A, vol. 389, no. 3, February 2010, pp. 467-72.

Haslam, S. A, C. McGarty, R. A. Eggins, B. E. Morrison, & K. J. Reynolds, “Inspecting the Emperor’s Clothes: Evidence that Randomly Selected Leaders can Enhance Group Performance”, Group Dynamics: Theory, Process and Research 2 (1998): 168-18

… and some critical questions

1. Why do we need to recruit the most talented person? Isn’t a good enough person, well, good enough?

In almost all performance domains, having more ability only makes a difference to performance up to a point. So why spend time recruiting or developing the most talented people?

2. Given the fact that ‘talent’ is hard to measure / identify: have you considered the consequences of false positives and false negatives?

3. What might be the unintended negative sides-effects of identifying talent on those who are not identified as talent? All HR practices that have any effect may also have negative side-effect.

Great! …….now what?

evidence?

20 min Case

Outline

Returning to your own organization and what YOU mean by talent management

At some point your team made a decision about some problem that needed to be fixed and a TM solution that would fix it

We are going to consider (discussing in pairs) your evidence for

The problem(s) you identified which you TM activities are aiming to fix

The solutions (your TM activities) you chose to fix those problems

Exercise: What’s your evidence?

What’s the evidence for the problem(s) you identified? (ask each other these questions)

What exactly was the problem? Be as specific and precise as possible (probe!)

What types of evidence or information did you have about the problem (internal data, external, professional judgement and experience, scientific, stakeholders)

How much evidence?

How trustworthy or reliable was that evidence?

Overall how confident were you that you identified a real, specific, important and pressing problem?

What’s the evidence for the TM solution(s) you identified (ask each other these questions)

What exactly was the solution? Be as specific and precise as possible (probe!)

What types of evidence or information told you that the solution was likely to work (internal data, external, professional judgement and experience, scientific, stakeholders)

How much evidence?

How trustworthy or reliable was that evidence?

Overall how confident were you that you identified an effective and relevant solution?

evidence?

15 min Case

Outline

Evidence based management:What is it?

Evidence-based managementCentral Premise:

Decisions should be based on the ‘best available evidence‘.

Evidence?

information, facts or data supporting (or contradicting) a claim, assumption or hypothesis

Evidence?

outcome of scientific research, organizational facts & figures, benchmarking, best practices,

personal experience

All managers and leaders base their decisions on ‘evidence’

But…many managers pay little or no attention to

the quality of the evidence they base their decisions on

and use too few sources of evidence

Trust me, 20 years of management experience

Multiple sources of evidence

problem solution

Practitionersprofessional expertise

Organization internal data

Stakeholdersvalues and concerns

Scientific literature empirical studies

AskAcquire

AppraiseAggregate

ApplyAssess

Evidence based practice:Where does it come from?

Evidence-Based Practice

1991Medicine

1998Education

2000Social care, public policy

Nursing, Criminal justice,

Policing, Architecture, Conservation

2010Management

Evidence-Based Practice

Evidence-based … whatever =

the use of evidence from multiple sources to increase the likelihood of a

favourable outcome

Focus on the decision making processThink in terms of probability

In general: managers don’t seem to like EBMgt

Undermines formal authority (JFDI, HiPPO)

They feel it constrains freedom to make

managerial decisions

Speed valued and rewarded more than accuracy

Managers not necessarily rewarded for doing

what works (organizations rarely evaluate)

SEEM TO LOVE FADS & QUICK FIXES

Why don’t managers like EBMgt?

Evidence-Based Decision-Making Why do we need it?

Advice: lie babies down to sleep on their belly(unanimous support through to the 1990s)

Example: medicine

Nr of cot deaths (Holland)

Collateralized Debt Obligations > AAA

p = 0.12 (about 1 chance in 850) default in 5 years

Example: finance

Forecasted Actual

Forecasted and actual 5-year default rates for AAA-rated CDO tranches

Scared straight

Example: policy / prevention

Example: HR management

1. Incompetent people benefit more from feedback than highly competent people.

2. Task conflict improves work group performance while relational conflict harms it.

3. Encouraging employees to participate in decision making is more effective for improving organizational performance than setting performance goals.

Likely or unlikely?

ALL NOT LIKELY !

959 (US) + 626 (Dutch) HR professionals 35 statements, based on an extensive body of

evidence true / false / uncertain

HR Professionals' beliefs about effective human resource practices: correspondence between research and practice, (Rynes et al, 2002, Sanders et al 2008)

Likely or unlikely?

Outcome: not better than random chance

Relying on only 1 source: bad idea!

problem solution

AskAcquire

AppraiseAggregate

ApplyAssess

Discuss with your neighbor (1 min)

Over a 5 year period,

why is an orthopedic surgeon's experience, as a rule, more trustworthy than an change manager’s experience?

60595857565453525150494847464544434241403938373635343332313029282726252423222120191817161514131211109876543210

Developing expertise

1. A sufficiently regular, predictable environment

2. Numerous opportunities to practice

3. Receive accurate (objective) feedback

The management domain is not highly favorable to expertise!

Bounded rationality

How your brain works

System 1 Fast Intuitive, associative heuristics & biases emotional

System 2

Lazy Slow Deliberate Rational

dominant

System 1: short cuts

System 1 or system 2?

10 seconds

System 1 or system 2?

A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total.

The bat costs $1 more than the ball

How much does the ball cost?

System 1: necessary to survive

Pattern recognition Overconfidence bias Halo effect False consensus effect Group think Self serving attribution bias Sunk cost fallacy Cognitive dissonance reduction

System 1: cognitive errors

Confirmation bias Authority bias Small numbers fallacy In-group bias Recall bias Anchoring bias Availability bias

Pattern recognition Overconfidence bias Halo effect False consensus effect Group think Self serving attribution bias Sunk cost fallacy Cognitive dissonance reduction

System 1: cognitive errors

Confirmation bias Authority bias Small numbers fallacy In-group bias Recall bias Anchoring bias Availability bias

When it is your job to make decisions,

you need to know how your brain works

when making decisions!

“I’ve been studying judgment for 45 years, and I’m no better than when I started. I make extreme predictions. I’m over-

confident. I fall for every one of the biases.”

AskAcquire

AppraiseAggregate

ApplyAssess

Four sources of evidence (not only 1)

evidence?

15 min Case

Outline

The performance of knowledge workers

A Practical Example

Discuss with your neighbour

What are the strongest predictors of future

performance?

Predictors (r & R2)

1. Work sample test .54

2. General mental ability .51

3. Structured interviews .51

4. Peer ratings

.49 24%

5. Job knowledge tests .48

6. Job try out

.44 19%

7. Integrity test

.41 17%

Predictors (r & R2)

8. Employment interview

.38 14%

9. Assessment centers

.37 14%

10. Reference check

.26 6%

11. Job experience

.18 3%

12. Years of education

.10 1%

13. Interests

.10 1%

14. Age

-.01 0%

Predictors (r & R2)

GMA & work sample test .63

GMA & conscientiousness .60 36%

But how about contextual /

job related predictors?

Knowledge workers

Whether nurses, lawyers, engineers, managers, or staff members, nowadays most workers in organizations are highly dependent on information and communication technology and are involved in

work that involves a high level of cognitive activity.

Discuss with your neighbour

“Which of the factors that are related to the productivity of

knowledge workers are most widely studied and what is known of

their effect?”

I Don’t Know(but I know how to find out)

The 3 hardest words in management

Step 2: ACQUIRE

Search for the best available scientific evidence

ABI, BSP, PsycINFO

Scholarly journals, peer reviewed

1980 – 2013

English

performance, productivity, knowledge work*

ACQUIRE

step 3: APPRAISE & AGGREGATE

Effect size?

Largest effect

1. Social cohesion .5 / .7

2. Perceived supervisory support .5

3. Information sharing / TM.5

4. Vision / goal clarity.5

5. Trust.3 / .6

step 3b: CROSS VALIDATE

Step 4: APPLY

Three examples

social cohesion supervisory support

information sharing

Social cohesion

… a shared liking or team attraction that includes bonds of friendship, caring,

closeness, and enjoyment of each other’s company.

Social cohesion

Measuring social cohesion

Perceived supervisory support

…how employees feel the supervisor helps them in times of need, praises

them for a job well done or recognizes them for extra effort.

Perceived supervisory support

Measuring perc. sup. support

Information sharing

Information sharing?

…refers to how teams pool and access their knowledge and expertise – which positively

affects decision making and team processes. This has led to the idea of a team ‘Transactive

Memory System’ (TMS), which can be thought of as a collective memory in a collective mind - enabling a team to think and act together

Information sharing

Measuring information sharing

The departments with the lowest performance scored under average on most factors

Step 5: ASSESS

Reactions

Who knew?

evidence?

15 min Case

Outline

Postgraduate Course

www.cebma.org

Postgraduate Course

> 80 Fellows

CEBMa: what we do

Promote (seminars, papers, blogs, tweets)

Educate (universities & business schools)

Train & coach (companies > projects)

Support / REAs (companies)

Support / 2nd opinion (BS detector)