The Competition for Talent

In recent years, the word “talent” has become the mantra of many organizations and companies. Everyone is looking to attract the best, in a kind of global competition that often translates into improvements in people management practices and public policies aimed at workplace well-being. However, it is worth asking: do we all understand the same thing when we talk about talent?

The answer is probably “no.” Or, at least, not to the same extent. In fact, the perception and availability of talent vary significantly depending on the country, culture, and economic context. In regions with near-full employment rates, organizations struggle to find professionals with the specific skills they need and end up recruiting employees from each other in an endless back-and-forth. But it is also true that even in places with high unemployment rates, companies find a notable lack of prepared people in certain professions. In both scenarios, it is evident that we are living in an era of fierce competition for available talent.

This competition has driven an evolution in people management practices, reflected in increasingly attractive working conditions and processes that prioritize both the candidate’s and the employee’s experience. Organizations invest in improving their value proposition to attract and retain the talent they so desperately need, understanding that human capital is a differentiating asset in the modern world.
 

Transformations in Talent Management

 
From attraction to retention, companies have adopted more people-centered approaches, promoting a culture of internal development and mutual commitment:

• In talent attraction, companies take care of the candidate experience and use innovative tools, with an increasing use of artificial intelligence, to attract and prepare future employees.
• In onboarding processes, organizations have devised multiple ways to support (with technological tools or coworkers) new employees so that their initial entry and future integration are successful.
• In professional development, clear growth paths are designed, personalized counseling tools are available, and there are multiple resources to help each person identify their greatest strengths and opportunities.
• Regarding retention, companies analyze data on employees’ skills, interests, and engagement to anticipate possible turnover decisions and act accordingly before they happen.

These changes and many others in talent management have generated substantial benefits for both organizations and employees, who now have greater development opportunities, can assess whether their organizations align with their expectations and aspirations, and have the possibility to compare their company with others in the environment.
 

Talent and Future Strategies: “Right People” and “Exceptional People”

 
Leaders know that sustainable success depends not only on a solid strategy and organizational structure but also, and fundamentally, on people. As Jim Collins points out in his book Good to Great, “People are not your company’s most important asset. The right people are.” This nuance, simple in appearance, has profound implications because, if well understood, it forces organizations to focus on identifying the people who best fit them and who contribute most significantly to achieving their mission. This is important in the initial selection process (where there is some risk of success because not all candidates turn out to be as they seem), and it is critical when making decisions related to the development and growth of people once they are part of an organization.

Organizations should prioritize identifying and developing a few people who, in the long term, can exponentially multiply the results and value of the entire company.

Choosing to have the “right people” is as much as deciding to implement the strategy to achieve it. And it has enormous implications if the commitment is truly embraced decisively. Although many organizations talk about this, fewer put it into practice continuously over time and fully assume what this means. In manual work, having or not having the “right people” has an impact: the difference between a job well done and an exceptionally well-done job can be 1 to 2, or 1 to 3, or 10 times better. Or perhaps more. However, in creative or intellectual work, the difference can be much greater: the contributions of the “right people” and a few “exceptional people” can exponentially multiply the results. This leads to the need for people management policies for intellectual or creative work to be based on identifying those individuals who contribute very highly or exceptionally highly compared to others and acting accordingly.

In other words, to attract and retain exceptionally capable people, companies must avoid “one-size-fits-all” strategies and have planned greater rewards and faster career paths than normally considered for a certain number of people, in line with their contributions to the business. 

How many companies really do this?

No one doubts anymore that a company’s success depends not on talent in general but on having the “right people” for each company and each position. Within this context, my opinion is that organizations should prioritize identifying and developing a few people who, in the long term, can exponentially multiply the results and value of the entire company. And that requires a brave and coherent strategy that recognizes, incentivizes, and rewards those “right people” and “exceptional people” who are so difficult to find and keep and who, in the end, make the difference.