Talent management and innovation management: Review of the literature and challenges for future research

D. Baglieri, Maria Cristina Cinici, A. Crupi
{"title":"Talent management and innovation management: Review of the literature and challenges for future research","authors":"D. Baglieri, Maria Cristina Cinici, A. Crupi","doi":"10.4337/9781786437105.00013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Talent management (TM) has turned out to be one of fastest-growing areas of academic work in the fields of international strategy (Morris, Snell & Björkman, 2016), organization (Collings, Scullion & Vaiman, 2015) and entrepreneurship (Liu & Almor, 2016; Wang & Liu, 2016) over recent decades. Since McKinsey consultants coined the term the ‘war for talent’ (Axelrod, Handfield-Jones & Welsh, 2001; Chambers et al., 1998), a growing number of practitioners and scholars have devoted their attention to the concept and stressed the importance of talent in sparking firms’ success (or their failure) (Bethke-Langenegger, Mahler & Staffelbach, 2011). Currently, debate on TM is organized around three distinct strains of thought (Lewis & Heckman, 2006). The first refers to TM as a collection of typically human resource management department practices (Byham, 2009; Chuai, Preece & Iles, 2008). The second considers TM as synonymous with management and valorization of talent pools (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 2002). The third refers generically to the management of talented employees (Michaels, Axelrod & Handfield-Jones, 2001). Despite its growing popularity, the research on TM suffers from several shortcomings that limit its theoretical and practical contribution. Even though several reviews have aimed at clarifying the scope of the concept (Collings & Mellahi, 2009; Collings et al., 2015; Tarique & Schuler, 2010) and a number of special issues have been published in top-tier journals, such as Journal of World Business (2014) and International Journal of Human Resource Management (2017), TM still fails to be linked systematically to researched-based findings as well as failing to have strong practical guidelines (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2015). We hold that in order to overcome these limits and enrich the debate on TM, it would be important to borrow from received findings of innovation literature and reinforce the integration especially with studies","PeriodicalId":153882,"journal":{"name":"Research Handbook of International Talent Management","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Handbook of International Talent Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786437105.00013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Talent management (TM) has turned out to be one of fastest-growing areas of academic work in the fields of international strategy (Morris, Snell & Björkman, 2016), organization (Collings, Scullion & Vaiman, 2015) and entrepreneurship (Liu & Almor, 2016; Wang & Liu, 2016) over recent decades. Since McKinsey consultants coined the term the ‘war for talent’ (Axelrod, Handfield-Jones & Welsh, 2001; Chambers et al., 1998), a growing number of practitioners and scholars have devoted their attention to the concept and stressed the importance of talent in sparking firms’ success (or their failure) (Bethke-Langenegger, Mahler & Staffelbach, 2011). Currently, debate on TM is organized around three distinct strains of thought (Lewis & Heckman, 2006). The first refers to TM as a collection of typically human resource management department practices (Byham, 2009; Chuai, Preece & Iles, 2008). The second considers TM as synonymous with management and valorization of talent pools (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 2002). The third refers generically to the management of talented employees (Michaels, Axelrod & Handfield-Jones, 2001). Despite its growing popularity, the research on TM suffers from several shortcomings that limit its theoretical and practical contribution. Even though several reviews have aimed at clarifying the scope of the concept (Collings & Mellahi, 2009; Collings et al., 2015; Tarique & Schuler, 2010) and a number of special issues have been published in top-tier journals, such as Journal of World Business (2014) and International Journal of Human Resource Management (2017), TM still fails to be linked systematically to researched-based findings as well as failing to have strong practical guidelines (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2015). We hold that in order to overcome these limits and enrich the debate on TM, it would be important to borrow from received findings of innovation literature and reinforce the integration especially with studies
人才管理与创新管理:文献综述及未来研究的挑战
人才管理(TM)已成为国际战略(Morris, Snell & Björkman, 2016)、组织(Collings, Scullion & Vaiman, 2015)和创业(Liu & Almor, 2016;Wang & Liu, 2016)。自从麦肯锡顾问创造了“人才争夺战”这个词以来(Axelrod, Handfield-Jones & Welsh, 2001;钱伯斯等人,1998年),越来越多的从业者和学者将注意力集中在这一概念上,并强调人才在激发公司成功(或失败)方面的重要性(Bethke-Langenegger, Mahler & Staffelbach, 2011)。目前,关于TM的辩论围绕着三种不同的思想流派进行(Lewis & Heckman, 2006)。第一个是指TM是典型的人力资源管理部门实践的集合(Byham, 2009;Chuai, Preece & Iles, 2008)。第二种观点认为TM等同于人才库的管理和增值(Bartlett & Ghoshal, 2002)。第三种是对人才的管理(Michaels, Axelrod & Handfield-Jones, 2001)。尽管TM越来越受欢迎,但其研究仍存在一些不足,限制了其理论和实践贡献。尽管有几篇评论旨在澄清这一概念的范围(Collings & Mellahi, 2009;Collings et al., 2015;Tarique & Schuler, 2010)和一些特刊已经在顶级期刊上发表,如世界商业杂志(2014)和国际人力资源管理杂志(2017),TM仍然未能系统地与基于研究的发现联系起来,也没有强有力的实用指南(Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2015)。我们认为,为了克服这些限制,丰富关于TM的争论,重要的是借鉴已有的创新文献成果,加强与研究的整合
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信