Leadership talent mindset as a catalyst for talent management and talent retention: The case of a Botswana local government institution

Abstract

Orientation: Talented employees play an essential role in the service performance of local government institutions. Unfortunately, talent management remains a neglected practice within the local government, mainly because of the absence of leadership talent mindsets.Research purpose: The main focus of this research study was to determine how leadership talent mindset influences talent management and voluntary turnover intentions of employees in a Botswana local government institution.Motivation for the study: Research on the predictive relationships between leadership talent mindset, talent management and voluntary turnover intentions is yet forthcoming in the Botswana context.Research approach/design and method: The researchers followed a quantitative research approach. Data were collected from a stratified random sample of employees (N = 405) from a Botswana local government institution. A leadership talent mindset scale, talent management measurements and voluntary turnover intentions questionnaire were administered.Main findings: The results showed a weak leadership talent mindset towards talent management. A leadership talent mindset significantly predicted poor talent management practices and voluntary turnover intentions. Talent development moderated the relationship between the leadership talent mindset and voluntary turnover intentions.Practical/managerial implications: Leaders need to adopt the appropriate talent mindsets to implement those talent management practices that will retain key and competent talent in local government institutions.Contribution/value-add: This research study advances empirical knowledge on the importance of leadership in facilitating effective talent management in local government.

Talent management and performance in the public sector: the mediating role of line managerial support

“…The findings also revealed that there a significant positive relationship between TM and LMS which is consistent with previous studies, i.e. Barkhuizen and Masale (2022), that claim the important role of LMS for an effective implementation of TM. To this end, the researchers developed and evaluated a conceptual model that examined the underlying processes (e.g.…”

“…A simple random sampling approach, a probability sampling method, was used to collect data for this study, which is consistent with recent TM studies (e.g. Al Jawali et al, 2021;Barkhuizen and Masale, 2022;Kravariti et al, 2023). Probability samples differ from other types of samples in that each member of the sample has an equal chance of being selected (Lehdonvirta et al, 2020).…”

Effect of transactional and transformational leadership on talent engagement: Mediating role of talent development

“…Additionally, Höglund (2012) stated that there is still a significant lack of empirical research in the field of TM, specifically focusing on the association of leadership style with TM strategies. Prior studies focused on the relationship between leadership style and talent retention (Barkhuizen & Masale, 2022; Nwokocha & Iheriohanma, 2015; Wakabi, 2016), talent engagement (Ghadi et al., 2013; Popli & Rizvi, 2016; Raja, 2012; Thanh & Quang, 2022), talent development (Debebe, 2017) but none of them covered two of the major strategies of TM together. Furthermore, no significant research was conducted to analyze leadership's role in TM strategies (Zhang et al., 2015).…”

“…SET explains the reciprocal behavior between leaders and followers. Leaders can influence organizational strategies, including TM practices (Barkhuizen & Masale, 2022; Schiemann, 2009). For example, leaders may emphasize change, reward systems, and freedom of employees, which may play the role of exchange for employees and lead to the better implication of TM practices like encouraging the development of talents and ensuring high engagement toward their job.…”

“…However, such relationship was hardly investigated in the field of TM, particularly in the context of developing countries. Majority of the studies (Barkhuizen & Masale, 2022;Collings & Mellahi, 2009;Debebe, 2017;Ghadi et al, 2013;Harris et al, 2012;Kleinman, 2004;Matos et al, 2012;Popli & Rizvi, 2016;Wakabi, 2016;Thanh & Quang, 2022;Zhang et al, 2015) were conducted in the context of developed countries but very few of them addressed the context of developing countries in this field like the studies of Nwokocha and Iheriohanma (2015) and Ng'ethe et al (2012). Hence, there is also a contextual gap in this research area for developing countries like Bangladesh.…”