FS2. Integrated Talent Management = High Performance. Kevin Oakes Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp)

Transcription

1 FS2 Integrated Talent Management = High Performance Kevin Oakes Institute for Corporate Productivity (i4cp)

2 Integrated Talent Management Equals High Performance Kevin Oakes, CEO Institute for Corporate Productivity 1 Page 1

3 About Kevin Oakes Background: Founder, CEO of i4cp Founder, President of SumTotal Systems Former Chairman, ASTD Board Previous CEO, Chairman of Click2learn Kevin Oakes, CEO Institute for Corporate Productivity 2 Page 2

4 Institute for Corporate Productivity i4cp is the world s largest vendor free network of corporations focused on building and sustaining a highly productive, high performance organization 3 Page 3

5 Defining High Performance High performance organizations consistently outperform most of their competitors for extended periods of time. These companies performed better over the past five years, based on these four indicators: 1.Revenue growth 2.Market share 3.Profitability 4.Customer satisfaction 4 Page 4

6 The 5 Domains of High Performance i4cp research has shown that high performance companies excel in 5 core areas: 1. Strategy 2. Leadership 3. Talent 4. Culture 5. Market (focus) These 5 areas need to work as a system 5 Page 5

7 The 5 Domains of High-Performance Organizations 6 Page 6

8 Predictions There is no bigger problem in the global marketplace today than how to obtain, train and retain knowledge workers. - Michael Moe, Chairman & CEO ThinkEquity Partners LLC The killer app for the next decade is talent acquisition and retention. - John Doerr, Partner Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers Declared in , just as the dot com bubble was about to burst 7 Page 7

9 An Investment Banker s Graph Published 9 years ago Source: CIBC, February, Page 8

10 HR Continues to Evolve Impact/Contribution to the Business Add Value & Maximize Upside Limit Liability & Protect Downside Labor/Union Relations Safety & Workers Compensation Employee Relations Benefits Compliance Survey Action Planning Staffing Training & Development Compensation Strategic HR Planning Organizational Design EEO/AA Performance Management Culture & Image HR as Business Partner HR Information Systems (HRIS) Labor Employee Personnel Human Organizational Relations Relations Resources Effectiveness A Century of Evolution in the Function Talent Management 9 Page 9

11 Talent s Link to Market Performance Rank Please answer the following talent questions as they relate to your organization. Responses based on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Corr. with MPI 1.35 Our employees are highly engaged 2.35 We are able to retain our most talented employees 3.31 We identify and track high potential employees well 4.31 We hold managers accountable for effective talent management 5.30 Our executive team takes responsibility for managing talent i4cp High-Performance Organizations Survey Dec Page 10

12 Talent Management Study Conducted jointly by i4cp and ASTD 518 Responses High level business, HR and learning professional contacts Delineated between High and Low Performing Organizations 30.4% 33.8% 35.8% 11 Page 11

13 Does your organization have an agreed-on definition of talent management? 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% No Yes 12 Page 12

14 Defining Talent Management Talent management is a holistic approach to optimizing human capital, which enables an organization to drive short- and long-term results by building culture, engagement, capability and capacity through integrated talent acquisition, development, and deployment processes that are aligned to business goals. 13 Page 13

15 How will the emphasis on talent management change over the next three years? 14 Page 14

16 The Talent Continuum Learning Compensation Retention Recruiting Performance Management Succession Planning 15 Page 15

17 The Talent Continuum Learning Recruiting Performance Management Retention Compensation Succession Planning 16 Page 16

18 The Talent Continuum Recruiting Talent Management Retention Learning Succession Planning Performance Management Compensation 17 Page 17

19 What s Included? Score (5 = Very high extent, 1 = Not at all) % High, Very high extent % Difference Performance management Learning/training Leadership development High-potential employee development Compensation and rewards Individual professional development Succession planning Competency management Engagement Recruitment % 57.4% 51.5% 70.2% 64.8% 52.5% 58.7% 46.5% 54.1% 37.0% 51.6% 38.0% 48.4% 37.6% 25.3% 47.5% 47.1% 32.7% 46.7% 38.4% -18.3% -26.7% -19.0% -20.8% -31.6% -26.4% -22.2% -46.9% -30.7% -17.8% 18 Page 18

20 Higher Performers = Greater Effectiveness Overall, to what extent is your organization managing talent effectively? 19 Page 19

21 Where is TM focused? Score (5 = Very high extent, 1 = Not at all) % High, Very high extent % Difference Senior executives % 53.5% -20.7% High-potential talent % 52.6% -19.1% Employees in pivotal roles % 41.2% -26.1% Professionals % 37.0% -15.3% All managers % 27.6% -35.7% Skilled employees % 25.8% -37.9% All employees % 10.2% -60.8% 20 Page 20

22 Drivers for TM 21 Page 21

23 Higher performing organizations have more backing on TM from leadership Score (5 = Very high extent, 1 = Not at all) % High, Very high extent % Difference Our leaders see talent management as vital to organizational success % 38.8% -41.8% Our organization s values reference talent management % 39.0% -25.2% Our organization s culture supports talent management % 32.0% -35.4% Our leaders frequently communicate the importance of talent management % 20.2% -57.8% We agree on a definition of talent management % 25.3% -46.3% Our leaders use the phrase talent management in our organization % 22.4% -49.4% 22 Page 22

24 Higher performing organizations report greater alignment, budget & infrastructure in place Score (5 = Very high extent, 1 = Not at all) % High, Very high extent % Difference We can retain the talent needed to achieve business goals % 48.7% -47.1% Our organization attracts talent effectively % 30.6% -36.0% Our organization has processes in place to align talent management to business goals % 45.3% -54.5% Our organizational processes/policies support talent management % 22.7% -42.8% Our organization has a succession plan in place % 27.6% -21.4% Our workplace layout/physical plant supports effective talent management % 19.8% -40.6% We have a large enough budget to support talent management % 14.4% -54.8% We have technological capabilities needed to facilitate talent management % 15.5% -46.8% 23 Page 23

25 The Importance of Integration 24 Page 24

26 TM Measurement Just over 12% of respondents said that they have talent management metrics to a high or very high extent At the same time, more than seven out of 10 organizations acknowledged that they should measure talent management to such an extent 25 Page 25

27 How do you measure TM effectiveness? (Hint: think business metrics) Score (5 = Very high extent, 1 = Not at all) % High, Very high extent % Difference Customer satisfaction rates % 50.5% -41.6% Market share % 43.0% -66.1% Revenue % 40.6% -49.2% Performance appraisal ratings % 33.3% -17.8% Training and development effectiveness % 27.4% -28.6% Turnover rates % 29.2% -22.7% Profits % 35.5% -38.4% Employee productivity % 33.0% -55.4% Employee satisfaction surveys on talent management % 27.4% -3.3% Recruitment metrics % 17.7% -27.8% 26 Page 26

28 What s the Bottom Line? Clarifying what TM means can pay dividends. Organizations that report being the best market performers and talentmanagement performers are more likely than average to say they have an agreed on definition of talent management. Managing talent is linked with better market performance. Those who reported success in the areas of revenue growth, market share, profitability and customer satisfaction, tended to say they are better at talent management. Only about a third of all respondents gave their companies high grades for managing talent, nearly half (48%) of the best market performers rated their ability to manage talent as good or excellent. 27 Page 27

29 Effect TM Maturity has on the bottom-line Study gathered both quantitative and qualitative data showing the enterprise financial, operational and process performance payoff from talent management. Companies with the most mature talent management capabilities (called talent management maturity leaders, or TMMLs) achieved the best results in each of these performance categories by developing and deploying diverse talent management capabilities. Source: Hackett Group, Page 28

30 A Note on ITM Technology Vendors There are no more Learning Mgt. System, Recruiting or Performance Mgt. Vendors Everyone claims to be an Integrated Talent Management Vendor No one really is M&A will continue to heat up SuccessFactors buys Inform Authoria & PeopleClick merge Skillsoft goes private 29 Page 29

31 Summary Organizations that take an integrated, holistic view of talent tend to perform better Senior level support is critical Alignment with business, broad focus are key There are no systems today that are fully integrated (but many claims) M&A will be focused on the integrated suite Talent Management will maintain it s hold on the most overused term award for the foreseeable future 30 Page 30

32 Corporate 411 First Avenue South Suite 403 Seattle, WA, U.S.A Telephone i4cp (4427) Fax Research 5959 Central Avenue Suite 201 St. Petersburg, FL, U.S.A Telephone Fax Institute for Corporate Productivity, Inc. Member companies may reproduce and distribute this file on an unlimited basis to their employees for internal management purposes only. Nonemployees (including outside consultants) may not be given copies of or access to i4cp s reports, online services 31 or conference materials. Page 31