The Biggest Challenge Behind Talent Management Failures
Treating people not as beings to be understood, but as objects to be managed may be the root of the problem.
This is not an issue of how well systems are designed or talent management platforms are implemented.
It is a matter of mindset and philosophy in how organizations approach talent management.
Repeated Failures in HR System Adoption in Japanese Companies
Japanese companies have long imported many HR systems, primarily from U.S. firms.
Performance-based pay, management by objectives, one-on-one meetings, and advanced evaluation systems are just a few examples.
Some time ago, competency frameworks and core competencies were also representative cases.
Organizations extracted the behaviors and capabilities of high performers,
based on the belief that “if everyone acquires these, overall organizational performance will improve,”
and many companies adopted such systems.
But what were the results?
In many organizations, these systems became superficial, stalled midway,
and ultimately all that remained was the fact that “a system was introduced.”
The most critical failure was that
introducing the system itself became the objective.
Even when employees tried to imitate the actions of high performers,
“Why does this person take these actions?”
—the why (internal factors)—was never understood during implementation or operation.
In reality, even the role models themselves had not structurally analyzed why they achieved results, nor had they clearly articulated those reasons as talent requirements.
Is the Same Failure Happening in Today’s Talent Management?
Today, the adoption of talent management is accelerating rapidly in Japan.
However, are many organizations becoming overly focused
on building systems and frameworks themselves?
If this continues, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that talent management
will follow the same path as past competency systems.
What Is Most Missing in Talent Management Implementation
So what is the real issue?
In short,
while there may be a business strategy,
the image of the talent needed to realize that strategy is not clearly articulated
.
In other words,
people are being assigned roles, positions, and jobs
without truly understanding or being able to explain them
.
In many organizations, decisions around promotions, performance evaluations, and transfers follow processes like these:
- Looking at employee photos and profiles
- Reviewing experience, achievements, and past evaluations
- Referring, at least superficially, to skill information
However, at the same time,
- Their true strengths are not understood
- The source of their motivation is unclear
- Their thinking patterns are unknown
- Their decision-making tendencies are unclear
- Their emotional volatility is not understood
- The conditions under which their behavior is reproducible are unknown
In most cases, this internal structure of individuals is not grasped at all.
As a result,
- Assignments are decided based on company expectations or wishful thinking
- Development relies heavily on standardized training programs
- Evaluations depend largely on managerial discretion
Can this truly be called talent management?
In many cases, it remains nothing more than
an advanced personnel management system.
Returning to the Origin: What Is Talent Management?
It is time to return to the fundamentals.
What is talent management?
Nearly 25 years have passed since this term became widely known.
Although there is no single official definition in either the U.S. or Japan,
a shared understanding has effectively emerged in practice.
That definition is as follows:
Talent Management is a systematic process of attracting, identifying, developing, engaging, deploying, and retaining individuals whose capabilities are critical to achieving the organization’s strategic objectives.
In Japanese, this can be described as:
Talent management is a consistent system and process for recruiting, identifying, developing, motivating, appropriately placing, and retaining individuals whose capabilities are critical to achieving an organization’s strategic objectives.
This definition is commonly used as a shared understanding by SHRM, CIPD,
Bersin by Deloitte, McKinsey, BCG, Mercer,
and major U.S. MBA programs.
Conclusion
To leverage people’s strengths and characteristics,
it is essential first to correctly understand their inner dimensions,
and to create a state in which strategic management decisions about people can be made.
This is the essential purpose of talent management.
Without it, no matter how advanced a system may be,
it will eventually become superficial.
For details on how to visualize people’s internal structure
and apply it to talent management,
please refer to the
5D Profile Diagnostic overview page.