- Nicky Dries - Different ladder, different story? VU – UVA session June 4th, 2009 Building talent management theory within a postmodern career framework

VU - UVA session June 4th, 2009 | pag. 2 Research interests talent management and career management >> >> the interplay of organizational-strategic and individual-psychological factors in shaping careers; >> the meaning of "career success" within the post-modern career context (i.e. boundaryless careers, protean careers...); >> diversity in careers, not (just) in terms of attending to minorities, but in terms of appreciating different orientations and subjective career success definitions people may have; >> meta-competencies (EQ, LQ) and their links to talent development.

VU - UVA session June 4th,2009 | pag. 3 And so…

VU - UVA session June 4th, 2009 | pag. 4 2 research themes & 2 paradoxes 2 research themes in PhD (1) the classification of employees into different “talent categories” (e.g. high potentials, key experts, average performers) by organizations; and (2) the career patterns of employees who have, in effect, been classified into these different talent categories. 2 paradoxes in the talent management literature (1) talent management is simultaneously considered as outdated, and as more pivotal than ever to the competitive advantage of organizations; and (2) talent management practices are aimed at retaining exactly those employees, who are most likely to leave.

VU - UVA session June 4th, 2009| pag. 5 Chapter 1 Organizational classification of employees into different talent categories 1.Identification of leadership potential: Is there consensus about “the” criteria? A model of leadership potential was conceptualized, comprising 77 items mapped onto a two-dimensional structure (cognition-conation vs. extrapersonal-intrapersonal). The model was found to have 4 factors (information processing, learning agility, drive, and charismatic leadership) and 13 subfactors (input-seeking behavior, insightfulness, decision making, problem solving, willingness to learn, emotional stability, personal adaptability, drive for results, persistence, personal dedication, people management, inspirational management, and stakeholder management). 2. Using emotional intelligence to identify high potential: A metacompetency perspective EQ-i subscales assertiveness, independence, optimism, flexibility and social responsibility were found to be “covert” high- potential identification criteria, separating between high potentials and regular managers. Furthermore, high potentials displayed higher levels of job performance and, evidently, less boundaryless career attitudes. 3. Learning agility and high potentials: The case for a developmental approach to talent management Employees identified as high potentials were found to demonstrate higher overall learning agility than non-high potentials. Furthermore, this effect was only partially mediated by on-the-job learning, indicating that the effect could not be fully explained by actual, observed, learning behavior on the job. Finally, learning agility was found to be a more or less stable trait that does not increase with age or experience. In addition, people with high learning agility tend to seek out more learning opportunities by pursuing career variety.

VU – UVA session June 4th, 2009 | pag. 6 Chapter 2 Career patterns of employees classified into different talent categories 4. “Real” high potential careers: An empirical study into the perspectives of organizations and high potentials High upward mobility, low inter-organizational mobility and career self-management emerged as key features of real high- potential careers. These findings imply that the traditional career is far from dead, at least for high potentials. 5. Different talent, different story: Antecedents and outcomes in careers of high potentials, key experts and average performers The study findings indicate that talent category can be predicted by supervisor-rated performance, and to a much lesser extent by career orientation. As for objective career success, it was found that high potentials receive more internal promotions, and at a higher speed, than key experts and average performers; effects of talent category on current salary or on salary increase were not found. Furthermore, no significant differences were found in terms of subjective career success. High potentials were found to be less inclined to change employers under high boundaryless mobility preference, where they were expected to report the highest mobility. These findings might point to aspects outside of mobility preference in determining expected future mobility, such as the psychological contract and the organizational support and commitment related to being assigned the high-potential label. 6. Psychological contracts of high potential employees: Are they getting the better deal? Analyses in progress.

VU – UVA session June 4th, 2009 | pag. 7 Appendix The meaning of “career success” 7. Career success: Constructing a multidimensional model A model incorporating the different idiosyncratic meanings interviewees attached to the career success construct was constructed. A two-dimensional configuration (affect – achievement vs. intra-personal – inter-personal) comprising 9 regions (performance, advancement, self-development, creativity, security, satisfaction, recognition, cooperation and contribution) was concluded upon as the optimal solution.

VU – UVA session June 4th, 2009 | pag. 8 Building a theoretical framework resource-based view psychological contract social exchange theory self-fulfilling prophecies social constructionism talent categorization

VU – UVA session June 4th, 2009 | pag. 9 Discussion for an overview of completed and ongoing studies, check out: