Exam Questions Flashcards
Explain what Swailes et al. (2014) mean with fully inclusive talent management
Fully inclusive talent management (or FITM) means that all employees have talent, and thus we should evaluate what this talent is and place them in positions that give the best fit and opportunity for employees to use those talents. If their talents are below average, then the organization should assist the employees in deploying talents elsewhere. FITM is based on positive psychology and capabilities approach.
An example of FITM would be utilizing the VIA Strength survey in before allocating positions amongst your employees based on the strengths they exhibited.
Explain what a talent pool is and what it is used for
When assessing talent exclusively, managers can either focus on performance or potential. When focusing on potential, managers create a talent pool of employees (both through internal or external recruitment methods) that can latter fulfill a certain role. Selected employees deserve more resources according to the organization, since they will take key roles in the future. An example of that would be traineeships, where usually low experienced employees are predicted to be able to take key roles in the future, thus supported by the organization as part of their talent pool.
Explain what predictive validity entails and why this is important
Predictive validity is the most important aspect of assessment methods, since it states how efficient they are at predicting future performance, job-related learning, amongst others. When methods have a high predictive validity (e.g., GMA tests) then they are a good tool to assess future performance. This can lead to a competitive advantage for the organization, since instead of fighting for existing talent, they can simple choose and ensttill loyalty on those who will be talent in the future.
Explain the basic ideas behind the war for talent
Explain the basic premises of social exchange theory
Explain the utilitarian perspective on ethics
Explain the difference between an object versus subject approach to talent
Explain the two dimensions on which Meyers and Van Woerkom (2014) base their talent
philosophies on
Gallardo-Gallardo et al. (2013) discuss different approaches to the
conceptualization of the term ‘talent’. Please illustrate what the essence of
the conceptualization of talent as ‘mastery’ is based on an example (2
points)
This approach contrast the natural ability approach and focuses on
deliberate practice and learning from experience. Consider the
teaching profession, as an example. Someone may be a great
teacher due to natural abilities (e.g., intelligence; extraversion) or
due to training his/her teaching skills systematically and intensively
over extended periods of time. The mastery approach implies that
talent—which is seen as a type of expert performance—is nearly
always made, not born. That is, we would assume that people are
not born great teachers, but become one. Talent is also seen as
related to experience, effort, and training: that means that a teacher
with more experience, more training, and more effort invested into
development may be seen as a more talented teacher
Cooke, Saini, and Wang (2014) address talent management in China and India. Now, imagine the following scenario:
Food production Org. is a US-based, highly successful multinational enterprise. They are expanding their businesses to China. This company has developed a very effective exclusive talent management program that has shown to enhance motivation, retention, and performance among talented employees in the US. The company is planning to use the same, successful system in China.
Based on insights presented in Cooke, Saini, and Wang (2014), please indicate whether you would or would not support this plan as an advisor to the company, and justify why you would or would not support it (4 points).
Because… (don’t forget the justification)
Cooke et al., (2014) have investigated how a specific cultural context influences
talent management used by an organization. Although there are aspects of TM in
China that are similar to TM in US (competitive, output-driven and short-term
oriented), they also found that there are elements to talent management in China that
are highly specific to the Chinese context (e.g., we see an influence of Confucianism
and socialist values). This means that we should not use a universalistic approach to
talent management and transfer talent management systems from one context to the
next without adjustments. Instead, a contingency approach is required, where talent
management is adapted to the specific circumstances of a (cultural) context.
…add some examples of how the US and China may differ and what that means for
TM
The HR manager of a medium-sized company (producer of aluminum window frames) has received
seven internal applications for a spot in the company’s high-potential development program. She
realizes that her cousin is among the applicants and decides to give the spot to him, without looking
at the other applicants in detail.
a. Name 1 ethical principle this decision violates. Please explain your answer. (2 points)
b. Name 1 ethical principle this decision adheres to. Please explain your answer. (2 points)
Violates: (1) distributive justice (e.g., part of Rawl’s principle about equal
opportunities) or (2) virtue ethics (fairness, honesty, integrity)
Adheres to: Care ethics (you are allowed to favor the people with whom you
have special relationships)
Climact Corp. is an organization that offers consultancy on how to lower organizations’ carbon
footprint. They employ mainly engineers and climate studies researchers. They expect their
employees to take initiative and constantly update their knowledge on this topic. The HR manager of
Climact Corp. claims that it is useful to assess the proactive personality of candidates. Please
explain what a proactive personality is and discuss if it is valuable to look at the proactive personality
of job candidates for Climact Corp.? (3 points)
Proactive personality: Proactive personality characterizes “a stable disposition to take
personal initiative in a broad range of activities and situations” (Seibert et al., 2001, p.
847).
➔ Yes, useful to assess as it predicts overall performance (see slide)
➔ also Climact corp expects their employees to show initiative so fits this context
Please indicate if you agree or disagree with the following statement: “In order to assess potential
mainly career specific indicators should be assessed”. Please justify your answer based on the work
of Silzer and Church 2009 who discuss the pearls and perils of potential identification (3 points).
Disagree: Silzer and Church (2009) emphasis the importance of assessing
potential based on 3 dimensions. While the last dimension is career specific, the
other two are common dimensions and are thus not career specific/talent pool
specific. The statement is consequently not true.
More specifically they describe the following dimensions
1. Foundational dimension = common, not career specific
consistent and stable, unlikely to develop or change
2. Growth dimension = common, not career specific
facilitate or hinder growth and development in other area
3. Career dimension = career specific/talent pool specific
early indicators of later career skills
When comparing exclusive and (fully) inclusive talent management Swailes et al., (2014) state that
FITM is “inherently far more virtuous”. Please explain the authors’ reasoning behind this quote (2
points)
Fully inclusive talent management is inherently far more virtuous because it is
done to advance the well-being and fortunes of others, even though the
organization may benefit from their enhanced performance (Swailes et al, 2014).
This fits with the principles of virtue ethics, because it reflects virtues (e.g.,
advancing well being of other) rather the vices (e.g., selfishness). According to
Swailes, a well developed FITM approach should also be focused on realizing the
potential of all, also in terms of the virtues of employees, again this is in alignment
with virtue ethics.
a) From which ethical principle(s) are Swailes et al. (2014) evaluating ETM in the excerpt below?
“When talent management occurs for reasons of improved organisational performance, then it
cannot be considered virtuous because the humanistic developmental actions that go with it are not
done for their own sake but for reasons of self-interest.”(2 points)
b) Similarly, in his article on the ethics of talent management Swailes (2013) discussed that when
self-interests are widely present in organizational motives, this can have implications for how ethical
an action is considered. In lecture 5 we discussed different theories that help us understand how
talent management drives organizational outcomes. Please name one of these theories in which the
self-interest of the organization is leading, and in which employees are seen as instrumental to org.
outcomes. Please explain why. (2 points)
a) Virtue ethics (selfishness), Kantian ethics (instrumental, self-interest) (lecture 6)
b) Human Capital Theory: Human capital as key driver of organizational
performance / competitive advantage.
➔ Human are considered to be capital that one should “use” in order to influence
organizational outcomes. So, humans are predominantly considered as instruments
with which organizational outcomes and competitive advantage can be achieved.
RBV: sustained competitive advantage can be gained through firm-specific resources
(human resources) that are valuable, rare, and difficult to imitate
➔ Human are considered resources of which the value depends on the contribution
they can deliver to the goals of the organization (self-interest). The underlying
assumption is that not all human resources are equally valuable, rare, and difficult to
imitate. What the means for the interests (e.g., well-being) of employees, for example
the non-valuable ones, is of less importance. So, the interests of the organization are
leading.
