Poster by Sanne Nijs¹
¹ HRS, Belgium
TIME: Thursday, 16 July, 12:00 – 13:15
Location: Break Room
Session: Poster Session
Abstract
In this study we shine light on hidden assumptions embedded in dominant conceptualizations of talent by elaborating on three ongoing debates: Talent for what? Talent of whom? and Talent to whom? Across these debates, we critically assess how seemingly neutral definitions of organizational talent have been shaped by a managerial discourse that privileges organizational interests and reinforces narrow views of talent. We show that scholars and practitioners alike frequently equate talent with leadership talent (Talent for what?), conceptualize talent as an entity residing within single individuals (Talent of whom?), and adopt top down approaches that position organizations as the primary arbiters of who or what counts as talent (Talent to whom?). These assumptions - rarely questioned in mainstream talent management literature - both reflect and reproduce power dynamics that marginalize alternative conceptualization and sources of talent. The future research directions we outline aim to counterbalance these dominant understandings by recognizing the multiple domains in which talent may manifest, acknowledging the dyadic and collective nature of talent, and valuing perspectives that have historically been overlooked or devalued. To enrich and broaden the study of talent, we point to several relevant literature streams - including feminist scholarship – that can help address underexplored issues and challenge prevailing assumptions. We argue that no single existing theory provides sufficient scope to capture the complexity of the talent phenomenon, and we call for a more pluralistic, critically informed research agenda when it comes to studying talent and talent management.