Kontekstiks: talendijuhtimine kui kompleksne ja keerukas

“Talent management (TM) has achieved significantly increased visibility in public sector organizations in recent years (Boselie, Thunnissen & Monster, 2021; Kravariti & Johnston, 2020; Kravariti, Tasoulis, Scullion, & Khaled Alali, 2022). While scholars highlight the benefits of TM in public sector organizations (e.g. Brunetto & Beattie, 2020; Poocharoen & Lee, 2013), managing the implementation of TM is challenging because of the existence of two or more competing institutional logics that prevail in public sector organizations (Grant, Garavan, & Mackie, 2020; Fossestøl, Breit, Andreassen & Klemsdal, 2015).” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 1) […] “Institutional complexity, emphasizing the coexistence and interaction of multiple logics, is a key characteristic of TM implementation in public sector organizations, and results in tensions in implementing TM.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 2)

Avaliku ja erasektori erisused:

“In private sector organizations, the emphasis is on market legitimacy, financial growth and knowledge, whereas public sector organizations tend to value professionalism, social legitimacy and social capital (Christensen, Lægreid & Røvik, 2020; Thunnissen & Buttiens, 2017).” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 2)

Autorid väidavad:

“We argue that investigation of how different and potentially conflicting values, belief systems and practices are managed in the context of the implementation of TM in public sector organizations can surface issues related to both the creation and resolution of tensions in day-today implementation of these practices.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 2)

Uurimisküsimused:

“Therefore, building on both institutional logics and paradox perspectives, we answer the following research questions: (i) what institutional logics and paradoxical tensions come into play for HR actors when implementing TM day-to-day in public sector organizations and (ii) what mechanisms do HR actors use to resolve tensions arising from these competing institutional logics.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 2)

Kes on talent?

“Kravariti & Johnston (2020: 80) define public sector talent as individuals who possess ‘competencies, knowledge and values that reflect the public sector’s core principles, which enable him/her to use their exceptional abilities to serve the public for the common good’.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 3)

Paradoksiteooria ja paradoks:

“Paradox theory emphasizes that tensions are inherent in organizations and the need for ‘both/and’ solutions to address competing priorities (Smith & Lewis, 2011). Paradoxes are defined as ‘competing, simultaneous, interrelated and persistent demands that cannot be resolved for good and require constant attention’ (Beletskiy & Fey, 2020: 865).” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 5)

Uurimisdisain:

“Our research design draws on the principles of case study design using an inductive approach.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 6)

Valimi selgitus:

“We selected our case organization sample based on similarity between (i) economies and (ii) how the science funding organizations are managed and operate in relation to government departments and ministries.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 6)

Professionaalsusloogika:

“The professional logic emphasizes that talent resides with individuals and there is a strong focus on credentials and professional qualifications as well as experience in different professional roles.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 10)

Pinged:

“Study participants identified three specific tensions that arose within their organizations: (i) inclusive TM versus ambivalence about exclusive TM associated with TM in private and commercial organizations; (ii) objective measurement of talent potential; and (iii) openness in talent identification versus a more closed approach within the public sector.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 13)

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

“Utilizing institutional complexity and paradox theory, we reveal that TM actors encounter different conflicts around the goals, roles and day-to-day TM practice implementation shaped by four logics. TM actors use three distinct mechanisms to resolve tensions: role enactment and performance, distancing and transformation, and language.” (McCarthy et al., 2022, p. 19)

McCarthy, A., Garavan, T., Holland, D., Bohle Carbonell, K., Virtanen, T., O Kane, P., & Van Wart, M. (2022). Talent management in public science funding organizations: Institutional logics, paradoxical tensions and HR actor responses. Public Management Review0(0), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.2133160