HBR in Brief

Harvard Business Online

Make Your Company a Talent Factory

Tags: Talent, Procter & Gamble Co., HSBC, Workforce Management, Human Resources, Hiring, Talent Development, Harvard Business Review, In Brief, Douglas A. Ready, Jay A. Conger

  • download
  • Print
  • Recommend
  • 22

The Idea in Brief

An astonishing number of companies are struggling to fill key positions. This talent shortage is putting an enormous strain on their potential to expand into new markets. One London-based real estate development firm recently had to pass on a 500 million Euro major reconstruction job in Berlin after realizing it hadn't groomed anyone capable of leading the project.

Talent shortages have two causes: Companies' talent development strategies are out of sync with their strategic goals. And senior executives lack a deep-seated commitment to talent management.

To create a free-flowing pipeline of current and future leaders, Ready and Conger recommend marrying "functionality" (rigorous talent processes that support your company's strategic objectives) with "vitality" (a passion for talent cultivation among executives). At Procter & Gamble, for example, the CEO and senior team personally teach all the leadership development courses for the company's top 300 executives.

The Idea in Practice

Building Functionality

Ready and Conger recommend these processes to help you put the right people with the right skills in the right place at the right time:

Help people understand your strategic objectives. For example, financial services giant HSBC holds conferences to educate employees about the firm's strategy for increasing cross-unit collaboration and to highlight collaborative initiatives. At one conference, some general managers explained how they transferred a client from the commercial banking unit to the private banking unit. Previously, the first unit to "own" that client wouldn't have shared him with other units, because the original unit wanted to still be associated with that client's revenues. After each conference, participants are asked to commit to doing one or two things differently to strengthen the firm's collaborative capabilities.

Groom people for complex, challenging jobs. Consumer products company P&G's growth strategy hinges on winning in emerging markets. To help high-potential employees advance, the company moves them through a portfolio of senior-level jobs categorized according to strategic challenges, size of the business, and complexity of the market. First-time general managers might initially take a relatively small country-manager position and then be placed in charge of larger countries and, later, of regions.

Fostering Vitality

To foster vitality:

Build commitment to talent development. P&G hires 90% of its entry-level managers straight from universities and grows their careers over time. It also sponsors a college intern program that offers participants chances to assume real responsibility by working on important projects. The company takes on former interns as full-time employees at a percentage well above that of most competitors, modeling commitment to talent development.

Encourage engagement. HSBC requires each unit to have a talent implementation strategy. These plans explicitly link a unit's growth objectives to its people development activities. The corporate head of talent works closely with each unit to develop its proposed strategy and presents the aggregated plans to the group head office, highlighting any talent gaps that could threaten the firm's growth objectives. This process keeps talent management high on the agendas of line and corporate leaders, and prevents them from getting distracted by seemingly more pressing problems.

Ensure accountability. Hold all managers and executives accountable for doing their part to make talent processes work. P&G's CEO A.G. Lafley claims ownership of career planning for all the general managers, vice presidents, and talent pools involved in the company's top 16 markets, customers, and brands.

Copyright 2007 Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation. All rights reserved.

About the Authors

Douglas A. Ready (dready@icedr.org) is a visiting professor of organizational behavior at London Business School and the founder and president of ICEDR, a global talent management research center in Lexington, Massachusetts. He is the author or coauthor of several HBR articles, including "How to Grow Great Leaders" (December 2004).

Jay A. Conger (jay.conger@cmc.edu) is the Henry R. Kravis Research Chair in Leadership Studies at Claremont McKenna College, in California, and a visiting professor of organizational behavior at London Business School. He conducts human resources research with the Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California's Marshall School of Business, in Los Angeles. His most recent article for HBR is "Developing Your Leadership Pipeline," with Robert M. Fulmer (December 2003).

 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    Satya Prakash

    10/24/07 | Report as spam

    Right approach

    Talents and ideas come up when there is interaction between every levels of management to discuss the goals and the deadlines.

    It happens sometimes that after even knowing the right approach and the right problem domain there is deviation in the last phase.
    So, in order to let the system work in an effective manner the higher management should always be in touch with their subordinates.

    The skills the organization wants to be inculcated in the employees are generally rendered through the third parties, so why not the CEO or CKO themselves try to meet their employees and explaining thei goals and demand the full productivity and efficiency of the employee and it will give better result

  •  
    2

    laurencechia@...

    10/27/07 | Report as spam

    RE: Make Your Company a Talent Factory

    CEO must be seen as having direct feedback (not for show) from talented employees who are normally overshadowed from the middle mgt. As long as the respective level of mgt staff do not 'buy in' to the organisational goal, u hv a problem.
    Job satifaction and inability to contribute kill the passion of talented employeess and accelerate their urge to leave.
    Challenge is, most employees do interested in their own bottomline regardless of what u sell to them on organisational goals.

  •  
    3

    jlvelez

    11/09/07 | Report as spam

    RE: Make Your Company a Talent Factory

    My question is how does a prospective hire (like me) explain to a prospective employer that their talent development strategy either lacks or does not exist?

    It is not enough to ask them questions like, "what is a realistic career path for me within the firm given my skill set, competencies and work ethic?" or "what can I expect in terms of guidance towards taking on additional responsibilities and challenges"?

    I have yet to encounter a firm that has this firmwide mentality - that talent is something that must be cultivated. As Akio Morita mentions in his book, "Made In Japan", employees should have a 'shared sense of fate'.

    There are profound social changes taking place with respect to the retiring Baby Boomers over the next few decades. The commoditization of labor is well on its way as evidenced by shorter job tenures and candidates with exposure to several industries.

    A major competitive advantage for firms will be their ability to 'grow' talent that is committed to the firm's fate. This will require a rethinking of human resource management as well as instituting a corporate culture of talent development.

    Jose L. Velez
    powercord@gmail.com

  •  
    4

    darinp

    03/11/08 | Report as spam

    Assignmentology

    A lot of companies head down the path of growing their own future leaders, but then fail to realize the expected results. In my experience it has been because they took a very traditional approach to developing those future leaders: invest 70% of the developmental effort and resources in training, 30% in mentor programs, and 10% in special assignments. However, research into development clearly shows that those numbers must be inverted. In reality, 70% of the lessons learned that helped leaders succeed came directly from challenging assignments, 20% came from guidance and observing others, while only 10% came from training and reading.

    These companies fell into the temptation of putting only their go-to people on the most critical projects. They missed the opportunity to allow someone to face a significant challenge and then learn from their successes and failures. The risk-adverse nature of the organization was their undoing... - Darin Phillips

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
advertisement