Search results

This final chapter of this book highlights and critically discusses some specific issues concerning talent management in the context of higher education raised in the chapters of this book. It recapitulates the transition higher education is going through. This transition started decades ago but was boosted by the movements of Open Science and Recognition and Rewards. It leads to a reorientation on the conceptualization of academic performance and subsequently also on the meaning of talent and talent management in academia. It points to a shift from an exclusive and performance orientation on talent, to an inclusive, developmental approach to talent management or a hybrid form. Yet, Thunnissen and Boselie state that there is a talent crisis in academia, and this crisis urges the need for more innovative ways of developing and implementing talent management practices. This chapter ends with some recommendations for further talent management research and practice.

Talent management in higher education institutes is an underexplored topic. Only a small portion of talent management publications is focussed on describing talent management in higher education institutes. In this chapter, we give an overview of the most important topics in the talent management literature in general and link it to what is known about these issues in higher education. It discusses the definition of talent and talent management, the talent management process and the multilevel outcomes of talent management, the fairness and justice issues related to talent management and the importance of embedding the analysis of talent management in its broader organizational and institutional context. In the final part of this introduction chapter, we will explain how the talent management topics are discussed in the subsequent chapters of this book.

Worldwide academia is going through a major transformation because of Open Science and Recognition and Rewards movements that are linked to big societal challenges such as climate change, digitalization, growing inequality, migration, political instability, democracies under threat and combinations of these challenges. The transformations affect the human resource management (HRM) and talent management of universities. The main focus of this chapter is on collaborative innovation and the way universities participate in coalitions and strategic alliances on national and international levels. These platforms not only discuss the transformations and support the academic changes but also act as talent pools and talent exchange. This chapter provides an overview of the current state of affairs with respect to Open Science and Recognition and Rewards in academia. Next, a theoretical foundation is presented on the concepts of collaborative innovation, coopetition and HRM innovation in general. The leaders or leading organizations in the HRM innovation models often can’t make it happen on their own, in particular in highly institutionalized contexts such as academia. The legitimacy of transformations requires coalitions of the willing and therefore strategic alliances on different levels. The coalitions in academia can also contribute to academic talent management through sectoral transformations (see Recognition and Rewards) and through the way these coalitions operate.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the human resource management (HRM) literature that builds up to our current concern with dualities, paradoxes, ambiguities, and balance issues; and to introduce the six papers in this special issue on managing the dualities in HRM.

The paper presents a literature review taking a historical look at the development of the HR field up to the present awareness of the complexity of the concept and practice of HRM.

Almost 30 years on, is being found now increasing evidence of the dualities, paradoxes, and ambiguities entailed in HRM.

The literature review starts with the personnel management (PM)‐HRM and industrial relations‐HRM debates in the 1980s. Earlier work on traditional PM is not debated in this paper.

After reading this general review practitioners might gain more insights in the potential tensions, ambiguities, and conflicts of interest that are characteristic for the field of HRM in practice.

First, this paper highlights the interest of the pluralist perspective in contrast to the dominating unitarist approaches in contemporary human resource studies. Second, this overview presents methodological challenges for example, with regard to multi‐level and multi‐actor research. Finally, the paper presents alternative theories for future research including new institutionalism, strategic balance theory, and health psychology theories.

Research excellency has long been the dominant paradigm in assessing academic quality and hence a prime determinant of academic careers. Lately, this approach to academic performance has come under higher scrutiny for its narrow focus on the individual, promoted an exclusive, performance-oriented talent management and inhibiting collaboration, transparency and societal involvement.

As a response to the limitations of the excellency policy, this chapter examines the emergence of open science as a transformative force in the academic world. Open science represents a paradigm shift, emphasizing the importance of transparency, and increased societal engagement in the academic process. It opens up the possibility to include the context dimension, multiple stakeholders and a more diverse set of development and performance indicators.

This chapter stresses the urgent need to realign our system of recognition and rewards with the premise of open science and with talent management. By highlighting the disconnect between current recognition mechanisms and the values of universities, this chapter emphasizes the necessity of transformative changes at institutional and systemic levels.

To provide concrete insights into the implementation of these changes, this chapter explores a case study of Utrecht University. This specific example showcases how strategic decisions at an institute level allow navigation of the complexities of recognizing and rewarding open science practices. The Utrecht University case study serves as an inspiration for other institutions seeking to embrace open science and adapt their policies and practices accordingly.

Research in strategic human resource management (HRM) has focused mainly on the effects of HRM practices or systems on organizational effectiveness. However, institutional theory argues that besides being financially successful, organizations also need legitimacy to survive. Owing to the tension between competitive and institutional pressures, organizations balance between the degree of conformity and the degree of differentiation from competitors regarding HRM. The purpose of this paper is to address how institutional pressures help shape HRM.

Using the concepts of leeway, human agency and strategic choice, differences in three types of institutional fit are highlighted: innovative, conformist and deviant. A comparative case study approach is used in order to illustrate the framework, using document analysis and 43 interviews in three organizations in The Netherlands.

This paper shows how balancing competitive and institutional pressures in organizations affects HRM. The cases illustrate the proposed theoretical framework, showing leeway, human agency, strategic choice and the nature of institutional fit. The organizations each illustrate a type of institutional fit. Moreover, not the institutional context itself, but the organization's response seems to make a difference for the nature of institutional fit.

While previous studies focus on the effects of HRM on organizational effectiveness, this paper examines how the balance between competitive and institutional pressures affects HRM and aims to show that institutional fit can contribute to strategic HRM by providing insight in this more balanced goal setting of organizations.

This paper aims to present an empirical study of the effect of high performance work practices on commitment and citizenship behaviour in the health care sector. The theory suggests that individual employees are willing “to go the extra mile” when they are given the opportunity to develop their abilities and to participate, and when they are motivated.

The data were gathered in a Dutch general hospital using employee questionnaires. Medical specialists were not included in the study.

The results of the study suggest that employee development (e.g. skills training, general training, and task enrichment) and employee involvement (e.g. job autonomy, participation in decision making) are important HR practices in creating a high performance work climate in a health care organisation.

The data come from one hospital and the analysis is cross‐sectional. However, the importance of the study lies in its focus on the individual employee perspective rather than the organisational level analyses which currently predominate in the HRM and performance debate.

The training and development of health care employees can increase their affective commitment. Increasing employee involvement can also help stimulate citizenship behaviour.

The paper looks at the non‐profit sector, whereas the majority of previous HR research has focused on multinational companies.

In academia, assessment is often narrow in its focus on research productivity, its application of a limited number of standardised metrics and its summative approach aimed at selection. This approach, corresponding to an exclusive, subject-oriented concept of talent management, can be thought of as at odds with a broader view of the role of academic institutions as accelerating and improving science and scholarship and its societal impact. In recent years, open science practices as well as research integrity issues have increased awareness of the need for a more inclusive approach to assessment and talent management in academia, broadening assessment to reward the full spectrum of academic activities and, within that spectrum, deepening assessment by critically reflecting on the processes and indicators involved (both qualitative and quantitative). In terms of talent management, this would mean a move from research-focused assessment to assessment including all academic activities (including education, professional performance and leadership), a shift from focus on the individual to a focus on collaboration in teams (recognising contributions of both academic and support staff), increased attention for formative assessment and greater agency for those being evaluated, as well as around the data, tools and platforms used in assessment. Together, this represents a more inclusive, subject-oriented approach to talent management. Implementation of such changes requires involvement from university management, human resource management and academic and support staff at all career levels, and universities would benefit from participation in mutual learning initiatives currently taking shape in various regions of the world.