Search results

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to a grounded understanding of how mobility impacts talent designation and with what consequences.

An exploratory qualitative case study was conducted of a global medical technology corporation, based on interviews with HR managers, line managers and non-managerial employees.

The findings illustrate that mobility plays a significant role in how employees are assigned talent status, and that mobility manifests and impacts talent designation through two types – geographical and lateral mobility. Mobility is not determined based on abilities and competencies, but rather on an employee’s overall personal situation, including age, family status and relationship status. Two main practices emerged through which these determinants were decided: direct questioning and guesswork. The consequences that follow are that individuals are left with little room to influence their own talent situation, and that there is a risk of discriminatory and exclusionary consequences arising.

The study makes two main contributions. First, it provides a more nuanced understanding of how talent designation unfolds in practice, showing that performance and potential alone cannot explain the process and emphasizing the consequential role of mobility. Second, it contributes with knowledge about the consequences of basing talent designation heavily on mobility. Individual employees are left with significantly less room for enacting agency and playing active roles in relation to TM than has been suggested. Added to this are the potential discriminatory and exclusionary consequences.