The older worker as talent: ‘Tell ‘em they’re dreamin’..’
In February it was heartening to see business celebrities and economic commentators promoting the benefits of engaging older workers in workforces. Chef, Rick Stein and economic commentator Lieth van Onselen both felt there were upsides for business and employees in including older workers in the labour-force. As previously observed, we are seeing increasing examples of older workers being embraced in front line roles across hospitality, retail and service industries.
However, this positive trend is not translating into the managerial and professional space. Anti-ageism advocates and diversity professionals argue to overcome this issue, corporate talent programmes should be extended to include older workers within the mix. We love the sentiment but believe there is “more to it” and think that we need to get to grips with the meaning of the word “talent.”
EncourAGEEQUALITY believes the way we use the word “talent” in Australia excludes older worker consideration. We also suggest the ‘talent’ term has become the acceptable business language for creating a ‘smokescreen’ obscuring organisation sanctioned ageism - certainly within recruitment decision-making. In preparing for the impending longevity revolution, we think it timely to present why the notion of talent should be taken out of our corporate lexicon.
Historically, the talent concept burst into the business world in 1998 when McKinsey published its seminal article on the War for Talent. Talent was the magic ingredient for the achievement of organisational excellence. Coincidentally or otherwise, this concept emerged as neoliberal economic thinking was actively taking hold of mainstream corporate thinking and behaviour. Two critical factors underpinning neo-liberal thinking that have influenced talent meaning are:
1. Individual self-interest and initiative as the prime engine for economic growth.
2. Free market sustainability premised on continual economic growth fuelled by an ever-increasing population thus keeping average population age on the younger side and providing larger younger oriented consumer groups, a ready supply of skilled younger labour and an increased capability for human inventiveness.
We believe this management paradigm has created the bias for younger rather than older individuals as the driver of business performance. The ongoing consequences for talent meaning have been:
1. Organisations coming to associate talent with individual people possessing unique and outstanding skills and capabilities, positioning talent as a scarce resource offering competitive advantage to the firms embracing the talent idea.
2. An emphasis on corporate exclusion behaviours in determining who qualifies as talent through a focus on differentiating the special characteristics of one individual relative to other workforce employees.
3. Older people understood as a significant risk to national economic well-being and competitiveness because of their believed loss of vitality, productive capacity and ability to renew themselves.
4. Talent recruitment and hiring reflecting a certain sameness- at odds with the available and qualified diverse working population.
At encourAGEEQUALITY we see embedded HR practices precluding older age considerations within talent meaning in:
1. Recruitment processes which prioritise social factors over technical skills:
a. A recent study of over 200 interviews with Polish HR professionals and senior managers found potential, personal commitment and fit were the three talent non-negotiables. Potential was the most critical element of talent meaning representing the perceived ability to be promoted to a higher-level management or leadership position.
b. Australian research confirms similar findings with technical expertise and experience found to be the least important talent criteria. The social criteria of organisational fit and individual potential were rated by HR professionals as the most critical talent signifiers.
2. Diversity initiatives which openly embrace a number of diversity factors (gender, sexual orientation etc) but not age diversity. Our research identified that Australian HR leaders were open to accommodating many elements of diversity within their talent meaning - but not age. Unfortunately, any person over the age of 40 was unlikely to be classified as talent or included in talent pools.
Research studies reveal the importance of “organisational fit” and the ability to ‘plug into’ a company’s social and organisation systems are a much more important recruitment factor than say technical skills or ability to positively impact business performance. Skills, experience and wisdom are often the advantages attached to older workers. These supposed benefits are at odds with how HR currently understand talent. Research indicates a key factor in talent meaning is its primary association with ensuring organisation continuity and sustainability.
From a talent standpoint and its impact on older worker employability this suggests:
1. Our talent processes support organisation behaviours of stability, continuity and risk-aversion.
a. Protecting the organisation status quo and reinforcing existing cultural norms is critical to organisation talent meaning.
b. Talent identification requires the screening out of people who do not fit the internal talent norm required to preserve the existing order and resist change.
2. The alignment of business continuity with the importance of the notion of ‘potential’ to talent meaning indicates talent is more about securing the future than dealing with the present.
3. A consideration of the future in talent meaning introduces a time element into its meaning.
4. Age considerations influence talent meaning when ‘time’ becomes a factor in its determination.
5. Recruitment decision-makers believe younger workers relative to older workers therefore represent talent as they are perceived to have greater individual growth potential.
Talent management as an exclusive and elitist organisation practice is representative of a management paradigm that is fading. As global populations age and fertility rates diminish, the emerging longevity revolution will require us to embrace new leadership thinking and letting go of old management mindsets and language. The word “talent” is no longer ‘fit for purpose’ and is a clear barrier to older worker employment. We see a conscious decision to erase the word ‘talent’ from management speak as more than a semantic exercise but a symbolic action installing inclusion and egalitarianism as driving values underpinning HR policies and practices.
We recommend restoring the language of employing people (not talent) with a variety of experiences, capabilities and skills necessary to create age-inclusive workforces, ensuring companies can take advantage of new business opportunities and expand their purpose to meet the needs of all stakeholders.
If the above insights have made you reflect on your workplace dynamics, please contact us and let us help you take practical steps to transform your existing workplace into an inclusive age-neutral one that develops your competitive and performance capability.
References
Alvesson, M. (2013). The triumph of emptiness: Consumption, higher education and work organization. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Coole, D. (2012) Reconstructing the elderly: A critical analysis of pensions and population policies in an era of demographic ageing; Contemporary Political Theory 11, 41–67. doi:10.1057/cpt.2011.12
Downs, Y., & Swailes, S. (2013). A capability approach to organizational talent management. Human Resource Development International, 16(3), 267-281.
Gallardo-Gallardo, E., & Thunnissen, M. (2016). Standing on the shoulders of giants? A critical review of empirical talent management research. Employee Relations, 38(1), 31-56.
Hessell, T (2021). ‘Talent and Age: How Do Human Resource Manager Meanings of Talent Influence Their Perceptions of Older Workers?’ PhD Thesis. University of Newcastle.
Martin, G., Gollan, P. J., & Grigg, K. (2011). Is there a bigger and better future for employer branding? Facing up to innovation, corporate reputations and wicked problems in SHRM. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(17), 3618-3637.
McDonnell, A; Skuza, A; Jooss, S; & Scullion, H. (2021): Tensions in talent identification: a multi-stakeholder perspective, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2021.1976245
Silzer, R., & Church, A. H. (2009). The pearls and perils of identifying potential. Industrial and Organizational Psychology(2), 377 - 412.
Swailes, S. (2016). The cultural evolution of talent management: A memetic analysis. Human Resource Development Review, 15(3), 340-358.
Yang, Y., & Konrad, A. M. (2011). Understanding diversity management practices: Implications of institutional theory and resource-based theory. Group & Organization Management, 36(1), 6-38.
