Mixed signals: employee reactions to talent status communication amidst strategic ambiguity

Abstract

Given the sensitive nature of communicating talent status in an 'exclusive' talent management system and the complexity involved in simultaneously sending signals of exclusivity and inclusivity, some organisations avoid open communication and instead opt for 'strategic ambiguity' -intentionally maintaining an element of secrecy and information asymmetry. However, we know relatively little about the effects of this communication approach as a feature of the organisational context on the reactions of employees. Drawing on signalling theory, we examine the reactions of both talents and 'B' players on finding out about their talent status in the context of a company that adopts strategic ambiguity in its communication about talent. The data consists of 24 in-depth, qualitative interviews with individuals with experience of TM in a Finnish subsidiary of a large, US-based multinational corporation. The findings reveal that the contextual effects of strategic ambiguity in talent communication affected the reactions of talents and 'B' players in distinctly different ways, but had few long-term positive effects on the attitudes and behaviours of either group. These findings present important theoretical and practical implications for the role of communication and organisational context in employee reactions to talent pool inclusion and for talent management more generally.

Responsible talent management: towards guiding principles

“…Hence, Principle 2, Organizations should produce descriptions of talent that are realistic, aspirational, and non-discriminatory that match the various management levels that they are intended to relate to. Talent criteria are already used of course (Pruis, 2011;Silzer and Church, 2009) but not universally and some organizations do not disclose talent status to talented employees (Ehrnrooth et al, 2018;Sumelius et al, 2020). Non-disclosure of talent status could indicate that talent criteria are either absent or are sufficiently vague to justify any talent identification decision.…”

“…Talent criteria are already used of course (Pruis, 2011; Silzer and Church, 2009) but not universally, and some organizations do not disclose talent status to talented employees (Ehrnrooth et al , 2018; Sumelius et al , 2020). Non-disclosure of talent status could indicate that talent criteria are either absent or are sufficiently vague to justify any talent identification decision.…”

Identification with management and the organisation as key mechanisms in explaining employee reactions to talent status

“…This made talent status a salient phenomenon at the time of data collection and also lent credence to our assumption that talent status was a key variable in explaining differences in OCBs and turnover intention in this sample. Furthermore, a transparent context is rare to find in field research on TM (Sumelius, Smale, & Yamao, 2020). This allowed us to use archival data rather than self-report for the talent status variable, which is a key recommendation for doing research on employee reactions (De Boeck et al, 2018).…”

Investigating employee perceptions: Association between recognized individual talents and social wellbeing

“…Iles et al, 2010 ; Stahl et al, 2012 ). Against the backdrop described above, cultural traditions and values in the Finnish work context can present serious challenges to both the implementation and the effectiveness of exclusive TM practices (Sumelius et al, 2020 ). Inclusive TM, on the other hand, is primarily motivated by the welfare of employees and by extension society at large (Swailes et al, 2014 ), and it is therefore likely to better fit the Finnish work context.…”