The likes of Facebook, Apple, Google, Netflix and Salesforce are tied by one thing in common. For them talent management, retention and recruitment are of paramount importance. They may be software companies but deep down it is their expertise in talent promotion which brings them laurels. Fortunately for these giants, money is usually not a constraint. Google even hoards talent just to prevent competitors from getting to them first. CEOs from other businesses meanwhile spend a normal day in office fretting about cost, risk, compliance, supply chain or product management. They do not have the luxury to implement enlightened employment practices. CEOs need to invest time and effort in developing people. Unlike other aspects of the business which end up as zero-sum games, talent provides exponential benefits.

Source: http://www.talenteconomy.io/2016/09/08/every-business-a-talent-business-first/

American office-goers are getting tired more these days in spite of a reduction in the actual physical labour. While an average office worker does not physically exhaust oneself the way a construction worker or farm labourer would, it is the psychological fatigue that is overpowering these days. In the American culture, high intensity feelings are more valued. They may be either positive ones such as excitement or elation or negative ones like anger of anxiety. In East Asian cultures on the other hand low intensity emotions such as calmness or serenity are more valued. Such high intensity emotions may be good for a while but wears out physiologically over time.Management training professionals must get Americans to seek less intense work pleasures.

Source: https://hbr.org/2016/02/your-high-intensity-feelings-may-be-tiring-you-out

Business innovation is no longer an option but a survival kit. Companies not engaged in the same will get wiped out soon. Thus the pressure for that is enormous especially on creative employees. There are certain steps that the company must never take as these will make these creative personnel depart. The first of these is asking innovators to develop ‘cool stuff’. While this sounds interesting, if not backed by adequate strategy, it is instead an albatross on the neck. Decision making must not be arbitrary or hierarchical but based on merit using proper logic. Innovators are often asked to come up with a business case which is a proposal document with projections running up to 25 pages or more. This puts off innovators as financial planning is not their forte. Innovators also struggle when budgetary and time deadlines are imposed on them. As innovation is not a mundane activity, so a culture of “fire if fail” does not bode well. Constant experimentation is a must and marketers need to be bold while launching minimum viable product. Most companies have this policy of the sales head approving product launches but research suggests that this is not a good practice. In a lot of companies, everything to do with technology is manned by the department by that name meaning that no right to use rests with developers. This delays the launch of products sometimes by as much as six months. Sudden budgetary cuts hurt the morale and operations of the innovation process. The one thing that really puts off innovators is when seniors dismiss their work as mere fun and frolic before the actual work of business development is done.

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/tendayiviki/2016/09/12/10-things-companies-do-that-make-their-innovative-employees-leave/#55d36147621e

It has long been understood across industries that in sales, the Pareto Principle applies and only the top quintile brings revenue worth four-fifths of the company’s worth. As standard industry practice, poaching of top sales personnel is a common occurrence. These stars are expected to produce instant results though it has been understood time and again that this does not always hold true. These new recruits often do not do well at the new place as the systems aren’t in place, thus highlighting the importance of the process rather than star personnel. Also, it is more beneficial for the organization to get better value out of the rest four quintiles than try hard to get the few very best. Some core elements need to be put in place for the process to be successful. First of all the people in charge must understand what all goes on in the sales process and tasks within the chain must be clearly defined. The sales process as well as resources invested must be balanced with the purchase process. Any imbalance will lead to a glut or shortfall. Business analytics must be made extensive use of in order to procure exact information for decision making. Metrics that must be tracked include volume data, opportunity costs and conversion data.

Source: https://hbr.org/2016/02/hiring-star-salespeople-isnt-the-best-way-to-grow

Organizations are increasingly reliant on the specific skills that freelancers bring. Their agile talent is being leveraged to provide solutions required for a particular purpose, yet management processes haven’t evolved enough to provide them with proper mentorship. Similarly, there is no role that has emerged to manage such agile talent. Some solutions have been suggested though. One of them is to assign a roving Chief Technology Officer (CTO) who only works with freelancers. Once the task is done or contract over, the CTO moves on to the next such solutions provider. Another such option is to actually create a new position called external talent manager. This person will only manage all such freelancers or contract workers. A third option is to utilize the specific skills of existing project managers as they have ample experience in managing remote employees. Facebook, Intel and LinkedIn have already adopted this approach. Another approach could be to broaden the existing job profiles of C-Suite members. It could involve talent management of contractual workers and freelancers. Since these people are already managing internal teams, it will only be a valuable addition to also incorporate the management of external staff under them.

Source: https://hbr.org/2016/03/whose-job-is-it-to-manage-freelancers

Several examples exist to suggest that labeling people often hits the wrong note and ends up disrupting work. People underperform when they are categorized. This is especially true when someone is labeled as a ‘low performer’. Such categorizations also limit employee engagement. A case where exceptional talent management by a senior professor helped one of his students was when a student who was supposed to be a “big picture” personality and thus not suited to “detail oriented” sessions was motivated when his attention to detail while composing music was highlighted and appreciated. Similarly, a manager who was to assemble a cross-functional team ended up with only “mediocre” or “poor” performers from other departments ended up getting the best out of these same employees once these categories had been taken off their backs.

Source: https://hbr.org/2016/09/why-you-shouldnt-label-people-low-performers

People quitting their jobs is on the rise with an average of ten percent resignations in western Europe and North America. This rate goes up substantially in parts of Asia. With there being more number and types of jobs now available the mobility will further increase. It is up to talent management professionals to figure out ways as to why resignations take place and how to curb attrition rates. Seven ways have been identified by the Harvard Business Review by which employees resign. Four of these are positive ways and three of them negative. Resignations By the Book involve the conventional method of employees approaching their seniors, addressing them about reasons for quitting and then serving the required notice period. The Perfunctory method is similar but with the exception that no reason is attributed. A grateful goodbye is where the resigning employee offers to help out with the transition during the notice period. In the Loop method is where the employee informs the organization that he / she wishes to quit and is looking for new opportunities but isn’t in any hurry. The negative approach starts with avoidant where the person does not directly inform the organization but gets information ‘leaked’ by telling colleagues. Next up is the Bridge Burning method which is the most notorious as here the employee on purpose engages in verbal assault so that the firm is forced to see him leave. The rarest method is Impulsivewhere the employee simply leaves the premises never to return again and avoiding all communication. It is the only method where notice of all forms may be avoided.

Source: https://hbr.org/2016/09/7-ways-people-quit-their-jobs?referral=00563