Talent management: Quo vadis?

Tilburg University

Talent management

Farndale, Elaine; Morley, Michael J.; Valverde, Mireia

Published in:

BRQ Business Research Quarterly

DOI:

10.1016/j.brq.2019.06.001

Publication date:

2019

Document Version

Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Link to publication in Tilburg University Research Portal

Citation for published version (APA):

Farndale, E., Morley, M. J., & Valverde, M. (2019). Talent management: Quo vadis? BRQ Business Research

Quarterly, 22(3), 155-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2019.06.001

General rights

Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain

• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal

Take down policy

If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

www.elsevier.es/brq

BRQ

Business

Research

Quarterly

EDITORIAL

Talent

Management:

Quo

Vadis?

Background

to

the

Special

Issue

Thefundamentalintellectualutilityoftalentmanagement, coupledwithitsmanifestationsinprofessionalpractice,and howaspectsofboth mightbetterbe observedand under-stood,lieattheveryheartofthisspecialissue.Inproposing thespecialissueoriginally,andinsubsequentlydeveloping and framing our thinking in order toensure that our ini-tial ideascoalesced intoa fully-fledgedand coherentcall for papers, we had several questions which we felt were worthpursuingandwhichultimatelyinformedthatfinalcall. Thosequestionscanbebroadlyclassified intothree wide-ranging domains. Firstly, therewere questionsrelating to theconceptualization, theoreticaldevelopmentand fram-ingofthefield.Secondly,therewerethosefocusedonthe exactcontoursandanatomyofpracticeimplementationand evaluation.Finally,therewereparticularquestionscentring onstakeholderperceptionsandprioritiesrelatedtotalent managementadoption.

Withrespecttoconceptualizing, developingtheoryand framing, we were especiallyinterested in the theoretical utility of talent management and the evidence regarding theestablishmentoftheboundariesofthephenomenon.In addition,we were curious about which theoretical lenses mightofferparticularexplanatorypowerinexplicatingthe mechanisms governing talent management systems,along with which specific constructs and research designs were being employed to capture talent management practices andtheirconsequencesforvariousstakeholders.

Ourquestionsonthecontoursof practiceandits eval-uation hadan equallyfoundationalquality. Herewe were interestedinexploringwhattheadoptionof talent mana-gement within the organizational setting entails and how it has been witnessed. We were seeking tobetter under-standwhetherempiricalworksupportedpractitionerclaims aboutthevalueoftalentmanagementasapractice-led phe-nomenon.Andwewonderedaboutcomplementaritieswith other areas andwhetherthe work ontalent management servedtoadvancepreviouslygeneratedinsightsfrom prox-imalfields suchasstrategichuman resourceplanning and competency-basedmanagement.

Our interest in stakeholder perceptions centred on whetherandhowtheemergingbodyofworkontalent mana-gement furtheredourunderstanding ofthe contemporary employment relationship at micro, meso and macro lev-els.Inadditiontolevelsofanalysisissues,we wereeager to understand what contextual exigencies shape talent management processes and preferred practices in differ-ent settings and locations. Moreover, we were keen to uncoverempiricalevidenceofanyunintendedconsequences oftalentmanagement,andwhatthecumulativedatafrom evaluation studies might tell us about the impact of the adoptionoftalentmanagementpractices,aswellastalent managementpractitioners,onperformance.

The

Trajectory

of

the

Field

of

Talent

Management

Theinitialquestionsabove,whichguidedourthinking,are themselves of course very muchrooted in an active and livelydebateintheevolvingbodyofacademicand practi-tionerliteraturedealingwithtalentmanagement.Effective talentmanagementisproposedasoneofthecritical capa-bilitiesthatwilldistinguishsuccessfulglobalfirms(Garavan,

2012) and is viewed as consequential for our ability to

deliveronthepotentialoftheknowledgeeconomy(Tolich,

2005).Callshavebeenmadeforthedevelopmentofatalent

science(BoudreauandRamstad,2005)tounderpinand

but-tresswhathasbeen characterizedasthedominanthuman

capitaltopicofthe21st_{century(CascioandAguinis,2008).}

Consequently,theliteratureontalent managementhas

beengrowingcontinuously,thoughtosomeinasomewhat

haphazard way (Cappelli and Keller, 2014). It has been

observed tobe built upon a widerange of academic and

appliedperspectives(Nijsetal.,2014;TariqueandSchuler,

2010),somethingwhichmayoverthecourseoftimeprove

tobeastrengthor aweaknessdependingonourcapacity

to coalesce dispersed theoretical insights and engage in

robust evaluation studies. A recent retrospective analysis

of the empirical effort todate suggests that the insights

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2019.06.001

156 TalentManagement:QuoVadis?

generated are scattered over a wide range of different

academicoutlets(Gallardo-GallardoandThunnissen,2016).

Theresultisdescribedasasomewhatfragmentedbody

ofknowledgethatremainsimpreciseandcharacterizedby

arathervague, andat the sametime,appealing rhetoric

(Dries,2013). Arising fromthis,therehave been calls for

a more significant degree of critical scrutiny of the

phe-nomenon (Iles et al., 2010) in orderthat we might more

fullyevaluate its true value froma science-practice

per-spective.SparrowandMakram(2015:249) concludedthat

because such ‘‘different values, assumptions, allegiances

andphilosophiesarebeingsurfaced’’in theevolvingfield

oftalentmanagement,‘‘answeringquestionsaboutvalue’’

isthe corechallenge thatmust nowbeaddressedfor the

fieldtodevelopfurther.

Fundamentaldefinitionalchallengesarecentraltomany

ofthecontestationsthathavearisen todate.Althoughby

nowthedefinitionbyCollingsandMellahi(2009)isamong

themostwidelyacceptedintermsofestablishingaspectsof

theboundaryofthephenomenonandfield,talent

manage-menthasnotyetfullysheditsfoundationalquality.Thishas

broughtaboutcommentariessuggestingthatitmayinvolve

elements of re-branding which will run their course as a

managementfashion.Additionally,asaportmanteauterm,

talentmanagementisemployedinsuchadiversityofstudies

withtheresultthat,thoughemployingthesamelabel,they

maynotnecessarilybestudyingthesamephenomenon.This

challengecanbeexpectedtoincreaseinthetimeaheadand

mayactasaconstraintonthecoalescingofthefieldasthe

umbrellaterm becomesthe chosenpointof departurefor

anincreasinglydiverse,looselyconnected,rangeofstudies

of variousindividual and systems phenomenain different

organizationsandcontexts.

Arising from the definitional challenge is an

underly-ing conceptual ambiguity. This, in part at least, may be

accounted for by both what Thunnissen (2016) identifies

as the lack of a stable theoretical foundation and what

Meyers and van Woerkom (2014) highlight as overlooked

talentphilosophies.Thereislittledoubtthat,froma

con-ceptualperspective,progressidentifyinglensesandlevels

throughwhichthephenomenoncanbeobserved,assessed

andevaluatedhasbeenmadeoverthepastdecade(Collings

andMellahi, 2009;Farndale etal.,2010; Farndaleetal., 2014;Gallardo-Gallardoetal.,2013;SparrowandMakram, 2015;Tarique and Schuler, 2010),but few would disagree

withthepremisethat morefundamentaltheoretical

scaf-foldingismeritedinordertofullyappraiseitsplaceinthe

lexiconofmanagementscholarship.

Empirically, a great deal has also been attempted but

it does have a bricolagetype quality. This has prompted

calls for a more evidence based approach (Allen et al.,

2010;Briner,2015).Inaddition,therehavebeencallsfora

morecriticalperspectiveontalentmanagement,something

which could pay dividend in terms of markedly

improv-ing‘‘thequalityof talentconversations inorganizations’’

(LewisandHeckman,2006:152)andwhichcouldshapeand

refinethedirectionofacademicenquiry.

Overall,earlycriticismspointingtothedisjointednature ofthefieldremain(McDonnelletal.,2017),questions

refer-ringtothe‘‘theoreticalpedigree,theempiricalfoundations

andthepractical implicationsforstakeholderstothe

pro-cessremainopen’’(Morleyetal.,2015:3)andthe‘‘limited

robust evidence on effectiveness’’ (Powell et al., 2013:

292). It is also argued that talent management is a field

thatismaturingasaresultofsignificantdebatesaboutits

breadthandfocus(SparrowandMakram,2015)anditis

pre-ciselythisgrowthanddevelopmentthat nowprovidesthe

opportunity toreflect onthe implicitvalue claims andto

takestockofwhathasbeenachievedinacriticalmannerin

ordertomovethefieldforward.

The

Response

to

our

Call

Againstthebackdropoftheseon-goingdebates,andguided

bytheinitialquestionsthatwereexercisingourownthinking

aboutthefield,weinvitedmanuscriptsforthisspecialissue

thatwouldcriticallyreflectonwhathasbeenaccomplished

intalentmanagement.Ourmotivationforencouragingthe

adoption of a more critical perspective centered on the

valueandutilityofidentifyingalternativeapproachesthat

canhelpustounderstandthephenomenainquestionand,in

generatingsuchunderstanding,offertheprospectof

open-ingnewlinesofenquiry.Inparticular, wewereinterested

in manuscripts that held the prospect of offering deeper

insightsonpromisingtheoreticallensesthatmightserveto

unearth the conceptual utility of talent management and

furtheritstheoreticalbase. The latterissue ofexpanding

andstrengtheningtheoryinthedomainareaisviewedasa

particularlyimportantendeavorinordertoprovideapoint

ofdepartureforfutureempiricalwork(Dries,2013).

Ourinitial call for papers generated muchinterest by

wayofprospectivesubmissions.Aseriesofbilateral

conver-sationsbetween theGuestEditors andscholars whowere

considering submittingtookplace, largelyfocusingonthe

coreideaunderpinningthesubmissionthattheauthorwas

planning tomake andwhetherit mightfit withthe initial

call.Theextentandthedepthofmanyofthoseexchanges

confirmed for usas an editorial team both the scale and

spreadofthenetworkofscholarswhoarenowactively

con-tributingtothefieldoftalentmanagement,alongwiththe

diversityofresearchinterestswithwhichtheyareengaged.

However,becauseofourdesiretosurfacecriticalissuesas

leversforconstructivetheorizingor empiricalassessments

whichwefeltmightserveakeypurposeinmovingthefield

forward,inevitably anarrowerandmorefocused rangeof

scholarshipemerged.

Afterthesemultipleinteractions,thespecialissuethat

wenowcuratehereformallycommencedwithatotalof23

initialsubmissions,allofwhichwerereadbytheeditorial

teamandassessedbothfortheirfitwiththecallforpapers

andtheirpotentialcontributiontothefield.Followingthis

initialprocessofassessing,reviewing,critiquingand

evalu-ating,tenofthosemanuscriptswereenteredintothereview

processandsenttoatleasttwoexpertreviewers.Following

onfromafirstroundofdevelopmentalreviews,ninewere

subsequentlyofferedtheopportunitytoreviseandresubmit

inlightofthefeedbackreceived,allofwhomtookupthe

challengeandresubmittedasubsequentrevision.Ofthese,

sixmovedontoasecondroundofreviews,afterwhichfour

were accepted, makingup the collectiontogether witha

firstinvitedpaper.Thisprocessculminatedinthecollection

The

Contributions

to

the

Special

Issue

ThespecialissueopenswithSparrow’scontribution,A

histo-ricalanalysisofcritiquesinthetalentmanagementdebate.

In this detailed and integrating account, he traces the

historical development of the talent management field,

highlighting how, over time, a stronger theoretical base

isgraduallyandincrementallyemerging.Raisingthe

ques-tionofwhetherthetalentmanagementfieldisfragmented,

asmanyhave claimed, or whetherit isundergoinga

pro-cess of steady development,Sparrow highlights the need

tostay focused notonly on developing strong theoretical

argumentsbutalsostayingconnectedtodynamicpractice.

Opportunities to expand the field from its meso

(organi-zational) roots to micro (employee) and macro (societal)

contexts abound. The article explores the various

criti-cisms that talent management has faced as its language

hasbeenadopted inscholarlywork,callingforfuture

cri-tiquestobemoretightlyfocused,basedonevidence,and

clearinsuggestingpotentialsolutionstomovethefield

for-ward. Overall, Sparrow argues that through a process of

developing arguments and counterarguments, the field is

becomingincreasinglycoherent;atraditionthatshould

con-tinue,andwhichisexpoundedbythearticlesinthisspecial

issue.

In the next article, the focus turns to the empirical

contributions that the literature on talent management

has brought forth to date tocomplement more

theoreti-caldevelopments.Thus,inRigorandrelevanceinempirical

talent management research: key issues and challenges,

ThunnissenandGallardo-Gallardoofferacriticalreflection

onthewayin whichtalentmanagementis investigatedin

practice.Basedonacontentanalysisof174peer-reviewed

articlespublishedbetween2006 and2017,thepaper

out-linesninecriticalissuesregardingthequality(intermsof

relevanceandrigor)oftheextantempiricaltalent

manage-mentresearch.Despite theenormous growthinacademic

interest in talent management, Thunnissen and

Gallardo-Gallardocometotheconclusionthatthequalityoftalent

management research is, in many cases, worrisome and

hindering the progress of the academic field.In order to

securethequalityofempiricaltalentmanagementresearch,

theirprimaryrecommendationisthatscholars,ingeneral,

needtobemoreprecise,rigorousandcriticalinhowthey

approachtheirresearch,highlightingthe needto

collabo-ratebetweenexpertsinthefield.

In line with the opening article’s call for focused and

evidence-based critiques and our desire for more

crit-ical talent management perspectives, Makarem, Metcalf

and Afiouni contribute with A feminist poststructuralist

critique of talent management: towards a more gen-der sensitive body of knowledge. From this lens, and

based on an analysis of talent management foundational

texts, they offer a critique on the gendered nature of

much of the talent management research, dominated by

exclusivity,individualization,performativity,andmasculine

attributes, highlighting the many voices and experiences

that remain marginalized in the talent management

dis-course.Fromthis,theysuggestalternativewaysthatcould

assistinboththe validationoftalentmanagement

knowl-edge and in the incorporating of different sensibilities.

With such approaches, it would be possible to integrate

gender and differenceconsiderations into the conceptual

andpracticaladvances oftalent managementasthe field

matures.

A recent turn injected into the broader talent

mana-gement literaturerelates tothe developmentof a macro

perspective and the extent to which adopting such an

approachmight surface newlinesof enquiry. Khiljietal.

(2015:237),inmakingthecaseforincorporatingthemacro

viewinglobaltalentmanagement,defineitas‘‘the

activi-tiesthataresystematicallydevelopedbygovernmentaland

nongovernmental organizations expressly for the purpose

ofenhancingthequalityandquantity oftalentwithinand

across countries and regions to facilitate innovation and

competitivenessof their citizens and corporations’’. King

andVaiman,intheircontributioninthisissuetitledEnabling effectivetalentmanagement throughamacro-contingent approach:Aframeworkforresearchandpractice,takeup

thechallengeofexplicatingthevalueofamacro

perspec-tive.Theyarguethattheforcesandsystemsthatshapethe

available supply, compositionand flow of talent into and

outoforganizationshavebecomeincreasinglycomplexona

rangeoffronts,notleastpolitical,institutional,

technolog-ical,andculturalones.Referredtoasthe‘architectureof

externalmacrotalentmanagementsystems’,theyidentify

threepivotal elements that serve asconstraints, namely:

afirm-level orientationto talent management that limits

the cross-level integration of talent strategy and results

ina micro-macro gapin thenested talent systems;a

pri-marilyHR-centricorientationtowardsorganizationaltalent

management, which may serve to constrain the primacy

of talent management as a business strategy lever; and

apredominantly intra-organizational focusthat may limit

managementagencyduetoalack of integrationwiththe

external talent management context. As a

countermea-sure to these constratints, they suggest that adopting a

macro-contingent view for further cross-level

conceptu-alization and empirical study is required in order to lift

current constraints on the topic’s conceptual utility and

tobridgethe micro-macro gap in thetalent management

literature.

In the final contribution in this special issue, we

designedlyavailedoftheCounterintuitivePerspectives

sec-tion offered by Business Research Quarterly. In it, Claus

paintsa picture, in her article titled HR disruption: Why

wemustreengineertalent management,ofhowthe field

ofpracticehasdevelopedandwilldevelopfurther.It

land-scapesparticularaspectsofwhatbothtalentmanagement

practiceandhuman resourcemanagementmight looklike

in thefuture. The contribution, in particular, helps us to

thinkaboutthelinkbetweenfutureacademicresearchand

practice,asrecommended by Thunnissenand Gallardo in

theirpaperinthisissue.Thearticlepushestheboundaries

ofourthinking,exploringhowprogressiveorganizationsare

creatingmoremeaningful employee experiences for their

talentedemployees. To do so,Claus assemblesa suite of

ideasfromadjacentfieldssuchasdesignthinking,

experi-encemapping,touchpointmanagement,rapidprototyping,

agilemanagement,behaviouraleconomics,andHR

analyt-ics to address the challenges faced by changing patterns

158 TalentManagement:QuoVadis?

micro,mesoandmacrolevelreasoning,futureopportunities

andchallengesfortalentmanagementareidentified.

Concluding

Remarks

As you willread in theissue, each of these contributions

addresskeyaspectsofouroriginalcallfor papers,

provid-inginsights regardingthe theoretical developmentof the

field(Sparrow) and a critical evaluation of the empirical

evidencetodate(ThunnissenandGallardo-Gallardo),

help-ingtoclarify the boundariesof whatwe already know or

donotyetfullyknowabouttheconceptoftalent

manage-ment.Astrongcriticaltheoryperspectiveisaddedthrough

Makarem,MetcalfandAfiouni’scontributionfromafeminist

perspective,developingthatrangeofstakeholder

percep-tions that we believe is essential for moving the field

forward.Finally, thecontours ofpracticeof talent

mana-gementareclearlydelineated(Claus),providingdirection

forbothfuturepracticeandresearchinan academicfield

thathastraditionallydevelopedhand-in-handwithdynamic

practice.Interestingly,allcontributionstothisspecialissue

areconceptual,whichonceagainunderscorestheneedfor

morerobustempiricalstudiesgoingforward(asarguedby

ThunnissenandGallardo-Gallardointhisissue):thebalance

betweendevelopingthefieldbothconceptuallyand

empir-icallyremainscritical(McDonnelletal.,2017).

Lookingtothefuture,webelievethatthetimehascome

toconcretizeourthinkingandmodellingintalent

manage-mentresearch.Wehavecritiquedtheemergentdefinitions

duringthefield’sinfancyandarereachingapointof

grow-ingconsensus regarding whattalent management entails.

Wenow need toshift ourfocus torefiningour

conceptu-alisationsanddevelopingappropriatetheorytostrengthen

the field further. In so doing, we should be particularly

mindful of adopting different stakeholder viewpoints and

differentlevelsofanalysis,thecombinationofwhichcould

proveespeciallyuseful; indeed,thisshouldbeencouraged

toensurethatwearebeingbothcriticalandconstructivein

ourcommentaries.

In conclusion, there have been continuous challenges

over the last quarter century, attempting to distinguish

talentmanagement fromstrategic humanresource

mana-gement in particular. In reality, in some contexts, the

term‘talentmanagement’hasbecomesimplyasubstitute

for strategic human resource management. What should

we doabout this? Or isit at all necessary todo anything

aboutthis?HeretheearlierreflectionsbyDyerandBurdick

(1998) on the then protracted debate on the distinction

between ‘personnel management’ and ‘human resource

management’mayproveinstructive.Theyhighlightedthat

theenergyspentondebatingtheemergingdifferenceover

twodecades between personnel management and human

resource management culminated in a conclusion by the

endofthe 1990’sthatthefunction wasthe samebutthe

activities were deliveredin an increasingly individualized

manner.Importantly, the energy and vigor which

charac-terized that debate engaged in by scholars at that time

wascertainlynotwastedasitallowedforthedevelopment

ofclear conceptualizationsofthe phenomenaofinterest;

however, there was a clear point in time beyond which

that debate became somewhat redundant. We are not

convincedthatthedistinctionbetweentalentmanagement

and strategichuman resourcemanagementis yet entirely

clear or even absolutely necessary, but the field appears

tobeonthecuspofanadvancethatwilldefinethefuture

ofadealofresearchonhowhumanresources(talent)are

managedinorganizationsworldwide.

Acknowledgements

AsGuestEditors,wewouldliketothankBusinessResearch

Quarterlyfordedicating oneoftheirissuesof thejournal

tothetopicofthisspecialissue,andfortheirunwavering

supportandassistanceinthesoliciting,handlingand

devel-opmentofmanuscriptswhichcriticallyaddressedfacetsof

ouroriginalcallforpapers.

Ourmain acknowledgementsmust go, however, tothe

active academic community who has participated in this

process;fromthoseprospectiveauthorswhoengagedwith

usinexploringtheinitialopportunity tocontributetothe

call, to those who eventually offered their submissions,

throughtothosewhounreservedlyanddiligentlyengagedin

successiveroundsofrevisions.Lastbutnotleast,our

partic-ularthanksmustgototheextensiveteamofhighlyexpert

reviewerswhoseconstructive,developmental,timely

feed-back proved highly formative in the crafting of the final

manuscriptsthatnowmakeupthespecialissue.

References

Allen, D.G., Bryant, P.C., Vardaman, J.M., 2010. Retaining tal-ent:Replacingmisconceptionswithevidence-basedstrategies. AcademyofManagementPerspectives24,48---64.

Boudreau,J.W.,Ramstad,P.M.,2005.Where’sYourPivotalTalent? HarvardBusinessReview83,23---24.

Briner, R., 2015. What is the evidence for...talent manage-ment? HRM Magazine. http://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/article-details/whats-the-evidence-for-talent-management.

Cappelli, P., Keller, J.R., 2014. Talent management: Conceptual approachesandpracticalchallenges.AnnualReviewof Organi-zationalPsychologyandOrganizationalBehavior1(1),305---331.

Cascio,W.F.,Aguinis,H.,2008.Researchinindustrialand organi-zationalpsychologyfrom1963to2007:Changes,choices,and trends,Journalof.AppliedPsychology93,1062---1081.

Collings, D.G., Mellahi,K., 2009. Strategic talent management: Areview andresearch agenda.Human ResourceManagement Review19,304---313.

Dries,N.,2013. Thepsychologyoftalent management:Areview andresearchagenda.HumanResourceManagementReview23, 272---285.

Dyer,L.,Burdick,W.E.,1998.Personnelandhumanresource mana-gement.In:McKelvey,J.,Neufeld,M.(Eds.),Industrialrelations atthedawnofthenewmillennium.StateSchoolofIndustrial andLaborRelations,IthacaNY:NewYork,pp.62---83.

Farndale,E.,Scullion,H.,Sparrow,P.R.,2010.Theroleofthe corpo-rateHRfunctioninglobaltalentmanagement.JournalofWorld Business45,161---168.

Farndale,E.,Pai,A.,Sparrow,P.,Scullion,H.,2014.Balancing indi-vidual and organizationalgoalsin global talentmanagement: A mutual-benefitsperspective.Journal ofWorld Business 49, 204---214.

Gallardo-Gallardo,E.,Dries,N.,González-Cruz,T.F.,2013.Whatis themeaningof‘talent’intheworldofwork?HumanResource ManagementReview23,290---300.

Garavan,T.N.,2012.Globaltalentmanagementinsciencebased firms:Anexploratoryinvestigationofthepharmaceutical indus-tryduringaglobal downturn.International JournalofHuman ResourceManagement23,2428---2449.

Iles,P.,Preece,D.,Chuai,X.,2010.Talentmanagementasa mana-gement fashion in HRD: towards a research agenda. Human ResourceDevelopmentInternational13,125---145.

Khilji,S.E.,Tarique,I.,Schuler,R.,2015.Incorporatingthemacro viewinglobal talent management.Human Resource Manage-mentReview25,236---248.

Lewis,R.E.,Heckman,R.J.,2006.Talentmanagement:Acritical review.HumanResourceManagementReview16,139---154.

McDonnell,A.,Collings,D.G.,Mellahi,K.,Schuler,R.,2017. Tal-entmanagement: A systematic reviewand future prospects. EuropeanJournalofInternationalManagement11,86---128.

Meyers,M.C.,vanWoerkom,M., 2014.Theinfluenceof underly-ingphilosophiesontalentmanagement:Theory,implicationsfor practice, andresearchagenda.JournalofWorldBusiness 49, 192---203.

Morley,M.J.,Scullion,H.,Collings,D.G.,Schuler,R.S.,2015.Talent Management:Acapitalquestion.EuropeanJournalof Interna-tionalManagement9,1---8.

Nijs,S.,Gallardo-Gallardo,E.,Dries,N.,Sels,L.,2014.A multi-disciplinaryreviewintothedefinition,operationalization,and measurementoftalent.JournalofWorldBusiness49,180---191.

Powell, M.,Duberley,J., Exworthy, M., Macfarlane, F.,Moss,P., 2013.HastheBritishNationalHealthService(NHS)gottalent? AprocessevaluationoftheNHS talentmanagementstrategy. PolicyStudies34,291---309.

Sparrow, P.R., Makram, H., 2015. What is the value of talent management?Building value-driven processes within a tal-ent management architecture. Human Resource Management Review25,249---263.

Tarique,I.,Schuler,R.S.,2010.Globaltalentmanagement: Litera-turereview,integrativeframework,andsuggestionsforfurther research,.JournalofWorldBusiness45,122---133.

Thunnissen,M.,2016.Talentmanagement:Forwhat,howandhow well?Anempiricalexplorationoftalentmanagementinpractice. EmployeeRelations38,57---72.

Tolich,M.,2005.Themismanagementoftalent:employabilityand jobsintheknowledgeeconomy.AdministrativeScience Quar-terly50,306---308.

ElaineFarndalea,∗,1_{,MichaelJ.Morley}b,∗,1_,

MireiaValverdec,∗,1 a_{SchoolofLabor&EmploymentRelations,501cKeller,}

PennsylvaniaStateUniversity,UniversityPark,PA16802, USA&DepartmentofHumanResourceStudies,Tilburg University,TheNetherlands

b_{KemmyBusinessSchool,UniversityofLimerick,Limerick,}

V94T9PX,Ireland

c_{DepartmentofBusinessManagement,UniversitatRovirai}

Virgili,FacultyofBusinessandEconomics,Avinguda Universitat1,43204Reus,Catalonia,Spain

∗_{Correspondingauthor.}

E-mailaddresses:euf3@psu.edu(E.Farndale),

michael.morley@ul.ie(M.J.Morley),

mireia.valverde@urv.cat(M.Valverde).

1_{ElaineFarndaleisAssociateProfessor,SchoolofLaborand}

EmploymentRelations,atthePennsylvaniaStateUniversity

(USA),wheresheisalsoFounderandDirectorofthe

CenterforInternationalHumanResourceStudies.Sheis

affiliatedwiththeHumanResourceStudiesDepartmentat

TilburgUniversity(Netherlands).Herwidely-published

researchencompassesthebroadfieldofinternationaland

strategichumanresourcemanagement.

MichaelJ.MorleyisProfessorofManagementatthe

KemmyBusinessSchool,UniversityofLimerick,Ireland.His

researchinterestsencompassinternational,comparative

andcross-culturalhumanresourcemanagementwhichhe

investigatesatdifferentlevels.

MireiaValverdeisProfessorofHumanResource

ManagementattheUniversitatRoviraiVirgili,wheresheis

founderandex-principalresearcherofthegroupFHOM

(HumanFactor,OrganisationsandMarkets).Herresearch

interestsareonthestudyofhumanbehaviourregarding

bothemployeesandconsumers.Hermainareasofenquiry

inhumanresourcemanagementareontheimplementation

ofHRpracticesandtheinteractionbetweendifferent