Talent v. Talent

Sometimes you can look at the same object and see different things.

We recently had a discussion about what we do at Pythia Cyber when we assess talent. The issue is that the recruiting and HR worlds have appropriated the term "talent" to mean "applicants with qualifications we like." As in, "We're looking for top talent!" 

At that level, "talent" is an honorific much like "ma'am" or "sir" or "your majesty."

Let's get a few disclaimers out now. Referring to potential new hires, who are after all people like you and me, as "talent" or "talented" is a huge improvement over referring to them as "human resources." And if an accompanying emphasis on -- let's say it together -- RECRUITING as opposed to putting out a help wanted sign comes with it, bravo.

Where did this come from?

As usual the people at McKinsey started it. We first learned of the "War for Talent" in a 1997 book and associated materials. This Wikipedia entry makes for good though squirmy reading:

"The war for talent refers to an increasingly competitive landscape for recruiting and retaining talented employees. In the book, Michaels, et al., describe not a set of superior Human Resources processes, but a mindset that emphasizes the importance of talent to the success of organizations."

But wait there's more -- quoting directly:

While talent is vague or ill-defined, the underlying assumption is that for knowledge-intensive industries, the knowledge worker (a term coined by Peter Drucker) is the key competitive resource (see the Resource-based view of the firm). Knowledge-based theories of organizations consistently place knowledge workers as a primary, competitive resource.

And, what do we mean by "talent"?:

Talent is never explicitly defined in the book, though the Preface notes, "A certain part of talent eludes description: You simply know it when you see it." (p. xii) After several further caveats, the authors go on: "We can say, however, that managerial talent is some combination of a sharp strategic mind, leadership ability, emotional maturity, communications skills, the ability to attract and inspire other talented people, entrepreneurial instincts, functional skills, and the ability to deliver results." (p. xiii) The authors offer no outside support for this assertion.

A 2006 article in The Economist, which mentions the book, notes that, "companies do not even know how to define “talent”, let alone how to manage it. Some use it to mean people like Aldous Huxley's alphas in “Brave New World”—those at the top of the bell curve. Others employ it as a synonym for the entire workforce, a definition so broad as to be meaningless."

"You simply know it when you see it." Wow. "Yes your honor, we selected this person instead of that person because we knew it when we saw it."

As they say somewhere 'you can't fight city hall,' & as they say elsewhere 'don't fight the Fed.' Thus, let's go with the term 'talent.'

What is it?

We previously offered the definition of talent provided by Conchie & Dalton:

 "A measurable, innate characteristic that a person demonstrates consistently in order to achieve high performance. Talents are strictly defined. A person who has a strong measure in a specific talent will perform predictably better in tasks related to that talent."

Why does the definition matter?

It matters because if you look for 'talent' you'll find it nearly anywhere, especially when you need to make a hire. As the country & western tune master Mikey Gilley once put it, "Don't the girls all get prettier at closing time." (p.s. I've been told that the boys all get prettier at closing time also.)

In contrast a talent-based assessment process such as the ones we use at Pythia Cyber are designed and validated to identify the extent to which people have the talents needed to be successful. 

Setting new hires up for success, and preparing the organization to leverage the capacities of their new hires, require us as human capital professionals to treat all our prospects and applicants as potential superstars. And by the same token we are treating our applicants with respect and dignity by assessing them fairly relative to the demands they will face. Taking both approaches set us up to talk about 'talent and talent,' not 'talent v. talent.'

Ask us how we can help you find and assess the talent you need.