Train through the pain

Government statistics suggest that businesses are twice as likely to
survive if they train their people, than if they don’t. Comment by Ruth
Spellman OBE. CEO of the Chartered Management Institute.

In the current climate, continuing to train and develop is a
proposition that can too easily fall on deaf ears. Of course it’s
understandable that employers are looking to make cuts, but a recession is
about identifying sensible cutbacks not wholesale budget reductions that will
leave organisations floundering in the future.

This is a view echoed in research, published recently by the Chartered Management
Institute (CMI). Most of the
respondents to the CMI’s Business
Outlook survey expressed a desire to maintain their development programmes. The
problem is that they have little choice but to scale back activities because of
the lack of available credit.

Personally, I believe that the desire to ‘get qualified’ should be cherished. By holding
back development, organisations may balance their books in the short-term. My
concern is that, with under-developed skills, productivity will suffer to the
point that these businesses may not be around in the long-term.

So I was initially optimistic when, just before his Budget, the Chancellor spoke
of a desire to “invest in recovery”. And yes, plans were laid out to tackle the
skills shortages and training needs amongst those under 25.

Pullquote: “To work properly, a talent management programme must
focus on the strategic business needs; not just top performers and not just
younger staff members”

However, with 70 per cent of the workforce in 2020 already in employment, surely it
would have been more appropriate to provide a tax break for employers offering
development to staff who need training, irrespective of age? It is, after all,
employers who know what talent they need to grow in order to survive.

In other words, there needs to be greater recognition from Government that how
employers choose to develop their talent will be a critical recovery factor. HR
and Operational Managers also need to get together and work out the priorities
for skills investment without those choices being weighted by Government. Businesses
need to invest in higher level skills if they are to grow in the future and be
competitive.

For one thing, questions should be asked about the focus of talent management
systems. The idea that talent is the ‘cream’ of an organisation is, in my
opinion untrue. The Government’s implication is that talent is ‘those 25 and
under’, but to work properly, a talent management programme must focus on the strategic
business needs; not just top performers and not just younger staff members. What
really matters is identifying the skills that will see an organisation through
change and then building these competencies.

Secondly, wider research conducted by the CMI also suggests that many organisations mistake performance management for talent
management, using achievements to identify future potential. However only 31
per cent believe appraisal systems can accurately identify high-potential
individuals. With such a high level of cynicism, doesn’t this mean HR
professionals should reassess talent indicators?

It is a positive sign to report that more than 8 in 10 individuals want to be
‘recognised as talent’ by their employer. So I find it disconcerting that a
significant proportion also claim not to know if talent management systems
exist in their organisation. If HR is serious about acting as a strategic
business partner, questions need to be tackled about how open systems are to
ensure all employees accept the process as fair. If this doesn’t happen I
believe employers run the risk of disengagement at the very time they cannot
afford to miss out on vast swathes of hidden talent.

Perhaps the reason for these imperfections is that measuring RoI for talent management remains
a source of difficulty. Just 68 per cent of organisations claim to measure the ‘bottom
line contribution’ made by their employees. This cannot be allowed to continue
because, left unchecked, it will undermine some of the arguments about HR’s role.
Effectively this means that the challenge lies in making sure any data
collected is used and fed back into the system so that the talent management
process is developed continuously.

Only then will talent truly be managed. And only then will the right talent be
identified and nurtured to match the immediate recovery, and long-term growth,
plans of an organisation.

Ruth Spellman OBE,
Chief Executive Officer
Chartered
Management Institute

www.managers.org.uk

24 May 2010