Content area
Purpose
The process of talent development (TD) is one of the current trends in HRM and human resource development (HRD). Although scientific literature addressing the topic emphasizes that through development of talents, organizations can increase their productivity, performance and competitiveness, little is known so far concerning the development of this research field as a whole and particularly concerning theories prevailing in the area. While research into the field has been ongoing for two decades, the area has not yet been systematized based on key theories used as starting points for the research. The purpose of this paper is to focus on which theories in HRD are used in TD.
Design/methodology/approach
Concerning the topicality of TD, the present article provides a systematic review of literature summarizing current theories in TD based on the currently used typology of theories in HRD, adding the fourth pillar to the existing three, i.e. theories concerning adult learning and education, to increase the stability of the typology.
Findings
The paper argues that the area of TD prevalently uses sociological, psychological and ethical theories, which may be attributed to trends in HRD. The insufficient representation of theories of learning in TD, particularly in view of the fact that adult learning and development is the essence of TD, is an important finding. This finding is particularly important for science concerning adult learning and education.
Originality/value
The benefit of the presented analysis lies in a systematization of the individual theories and a comprehensive overview of the current theoretical framework of TD, as well as suggestions for future research making use of adult learning and education theories.
Introduction
The starting point of our study is theories involving the background of talent development (hereafter TD), which has been frequently used in the past two or three decades by management to increase the appeal of their organizations for potential employees, to retain them and to increase performance, productivity and competitiveness (Hedayati Mehdiabadi and Li, 2016). We share a common view of the process of TD with Garavan et al. (2012, p. 6) as:
“[…] planning, selection, and implementation of a development strategy for the entire talent pool in order to ensure that the organization has and will have a supply of talents in order to fulfil the strategic objectives and harmonize development activities with talent management processes”.
The process of TD is important for organizations, as it involves workers that are of strategic importance to the organization – they have a high level of competence, have high potential and often hold key positions. In a knowledge economy, this process increases in importance, since investment into human capital is understood as a long-term strategy which organizations implement to increase their productivity and competitiveness and keep pace with the current requirement for quick adaptation to technological changes through investment into development and education (Sparrow, 2019; Loon and Nachmias, 2020).
Although certain authors (Lewis and Heckman, 2006; Iles et al., 2010) believe that the relationship between human resource development (hereafter HRD) and TD is unclear and regard TD as merely a currently fashionable phenomenon which, in fact, uses concepts and theories that had already been previously used in HRD, other authors (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2013; Meyers and van Woerkom, 2014) approach TD as an independent research field. The present study considers TD as part of HRD focusing on development of workers in organizations. Without reflections on the development of theories conceptualizing TD (Garavan et al., 2012), it would be impossible to identify key developmental tendencies in TD or the related theories or their prevalence. Understanding how the process of TD is conceptualized helps us understand the phenomenon of TD process itself and define areas for further research into this field using alternative theoretical vantage points.
Over the past two decades, scientific publications have focused on identifying HRD theories and their re-conceptualization from the perspective of adult education (Ju, 2019), and on an analysis of various approaches in defining talent (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2013; Dries, 2013). Certain authors also focused on theoretical frameworks regarding the configuration of the TD process and its efficiency (Rezaei and Beyerlein, 2017; Dalal and Akdere, 2018) or provided a critical reflection on TD in the context of the historical development of HRD (Sparrow, 2019). What has been missing up until now, however, is a study that would address the area of TD in relation to the fundamental theories in HRD. The present study, therefore, aims to describe and systematize the utilization of theories in TD research. To fulfil this objective, we have formulated the following research questions:
As shown by the above provided research questions, we have set ourselves the objective to create a systematic review. We aim to find out whether research into TD reflects current trends in HRD, or is inclined towards the original typology of theories in HRD. We are also interested in determining whether learning theories are prevalent in the area of TD, since we assume that the TD process is primarily oriented on workplace-related learning and development of adults. The benefits of the present analysis and systematization are a comprehensive overview of the current theoretical framework of the TD research field, as well as suggestions for further research. The structure of our work corresponds to our objective: the initial part overviews the main typologies of HRD theories and explains the research method used for the review. The next part presents a systematic overview of theories in TD research in the past decade, followed by a discussion concerning the reasons for utilization of these theories and TD research opportunities.
Contemporary theories of human resource development
Although there is no universal classification of theories that form the background of HRD, it is possible to identify certain approaches that help us with their classification. Many authors (e.g. Seo et al., 2019; Ju, 2019; Jacobs, 2014) build on the frequently used typology of theories by Swanson (2001, 2022). For the needs of our systematic review, Swanson’s theory is adapted and a fourth pillar is added to understand theories used in TD. Swanson distinguishes between economic, psychological and system HRD theories. In his view, economic theories facilitate the understanding of the role of HRD in an organization’s competitiveness; system theories consider HRD as a system serving for maximization of functionality of individual sub-systems within an organization and psychology-oriented theories focus on individuals as actors in HRD processes and their work–life. According to Swanson (2022), these three theoretical frameworks can be perceived as a tripod that provides support to HRD as a practically oriented discipline.
Apart from this theory triad, we can identify one more group, the fourth pillar of HRD, i.e. learning theories. They explain how actors in organizations learn and how they contribute to the organizational learning process. Their value lies in facilitating the understanding of the transfer of learning contents to workers in an organization within HRD processes, as well as in the fact that they approach the analysis of organizations from a different vantage point (Yang, 2004). The macro-social perspective of HRD is represented by economic and system theories. The micro-social perspective is constituted by psychological theories. The micro- and macro-plane are linked through social interaction into an analytical mezzo-plane represented by learning theories (cf. e.g. Argyris, 2017; Illeris, 2018). They offer both the macro-social view (organization learning) and the micro-social view (individual learning), adding the mezzo-level view, i.e. team learning (Boeren, 2017; Boeren et al., 2010). In addition, theories such as self-regulated learning and transformative learning link individual adult learning to social and political systems and contexts (Yang, 2004). For this reason, they stand on the border between psychological and system theories (see Table 1 below). Yang (2004) adds that learning theories provide a focus on informal and random learning into HRD, which is often linked to formalized processes, i.e. also formal education.
As concerns developmental tendencies in HRD theories, Devadas et al. (2011) state that they are gradually becoming more flexible. While in the past, research was based mostly on macro-level-oriented conceptions (economic and system theories), a present trend shows an inclination towards mezzo- and micro-level conceptions of development and education (McLean, 2007); in our table, these are represented by psychological theories and learning theories. Devadas et al. (2011) also point out the more frequent application of the critical approach across all HRD theories (e.g. Fenwick, 2004; Bierema and Callahan, 2014; Sambrook, 2009, 2014), pointing out the possible influences of power, inequality and oppression in organizations.
Globalization, digitizing and demographic changes strengthen the importance of informal learning as part of workplace learning (Loon and Nachmias, 2020). In this context, Swanson (2022) argues that HRD is consequently directed towards re-discovering theories from other scientific disciplines, such as self-regulated learning (Knowles, 1975) or career development theory (Schein, 1971; Holland, 1995). In addition, classical sociological theories have also seen a renaissance in the area of HRD, such as theory of generations (Mannheim, 1928), gender theory (Harding, 1982; 1983), theory of equity (Adams, 1965) and social exchange theory (Blau, 1964). These are used as a basis for a new conceptualization of the expectations of adults learning in their working environment, as well as for reflections on potentially repressive structures leading to exclusion of women or for emphasizing the different educational needs of individual generations. According to Yorks et al. (2022), another trend is adult development theories, which focus on the development of learning adults.
Methods
To fulfil the objective of the article, the systematic review method has been used. It is a suitable tool for identifying, evaluating and interpreting all the existing research concerning a topic, research question or phenomenon (Kitchenham, 2004; Petticrew and Roberts, 2008). This approach provides the data necessary to answer our four research questions. A systematic review is based on synthesizing research conducted in the form of a comprehensive literature review of published studies concerning a particular research question (Tranfield et al., 2003). In this sense, it shares characteristics with integrative literature reviews (Torraco, 2016) and scoping reviews (Wang, 2019). The present study used preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) (Moher et al., 2009). Figure 1 illustrates the entire publication elimination process.
The literature review used the electronic databases Scopus and Web of Science; individual relevant studies were found based on an analysis of their name, abstracts and keywords. Our queries included key terms such as the expression TD in the name of the article, or a combination of the keywords TD and talent management in the article’s abstract. In the former case, the query was TD, in the latter, it was TD with the Boolean operator AND and talent management. The reason why the search involved these keywords was the focus on the formal process of TD, i.e. the studies had to explicitly mention these keywords (TD, possibly in combination with talent management). Otherwise, if the primary focus of the particular study was the development of adult talents, the search could also result in alternative combinations such as development of abilities and competences.
The present review study used a set of criteria to include or exclude a study in accordance with the procedure commonly applied in review studies (Kitchenham, 2004; Moher et al., 2009; Petticrew and Roberts, 2008) to ensure that the selection of studies will lead us to our objective. The criteria for inclusion were as follows:
search interval 2011–2021, since the area of TD and management has been changing quickly, so only studies from the past decade (excluding the year 2022–2023) were included;
the query only included studies in English;
the studies underwent a review process – as a result, books and individual chapters, dissertations and other qualification theses, conference proceedings and essays were not included in the review;
the studies concerned the organizational environment; and
the studies were written in the European geographic context.
Individual articles were analysed with a focus on TD in organizations. In the first stage, we excluded studies whose names did not correspond to the focus of our research questions. The second stage involved analysis of abstracts of the remaining studies, excluding those not addressing the relevant topic. Some studies were excluded, since it was impossible to find their full-text versions. In total, we received 18 studies meeting our criteria from the database WoS and three studies in Scopus; these were, however, excluded, since they were identical to those found in WoS. The total number of studies included in our systematic review is 25 – six of these studies snowballed while analysing all the publications. The used method was intended to minimize possible omissions of relevant studies that would not meet the key word criteria. The list of the 25 articles included in our study is provided in Table 3.
Content analysis was subsequently conducted (Neuendorf, 2016). Based on the typology of the studies, they were organized into the following categories: economic theories, psychological theories, system theories and theories of learning. If there emerged other theories not belonging to the HRD theory typology, a new category of theories was created for them (sociological theories, ethical theories and anthropological theories). To arrive at the answers to our research questions, theories in TD were compared to the typology of theories in HRD. Based on the results of this comparison, options for further research were suggested.
Results
The results of the systematic review are illustrated in Table 2. The table shows the theories used for research into TD in the past decade. The results are ordered in such a manner that they show the individual studies and their classification in a group of theories with regard to the particular theory used as a starting point for the research, the study author, the number of studies using the particular theory and (to provide more context) also the type of journal and utilization of the theory for research design. With seven of the studies, it was possible to identify multiple source theories. For this reason, the total number of studies included in our review does not correspond to the number of studies in Table 3. Individual groups of theories are ordered according to the same principle as Table 1, i.e. from theories constituting the fundamental pillars of HRD through theories of adult learning and education to theories constituting a separate group that could not be classified in the existing categories of HRD theories.
The first and most abundant group of theories are sociological theories. Out of the sociological theories that are mentioned above as part of development trends in HRD, the most frequently used was theory of social exchange (Homans, 1958; Blau, 1964), followed by generation theory (Mannheim, 1928) and theory of self-fulfiling prophecy (Merton, 1948), gender theory (Harding, 1982; Harding, 1983) and sociological neo-institutionalism theory (Meyer and Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio, 1998). Sociological theories were often combined with psychological theories. The group of psychological theories includes social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979), the Pygmalion and Golem effect (Rosenthal and Jacobson, 1968) and theory of psychological contract (Argyris, 1960; Schein, 1971). This group also includes regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997). The second largest group of theories are ethical theories, which appeared in relation to TD research in seven studies. This group includes the theory of organizational rhetoric (Cheney et al., 2004), the theory of organizational justice (Greenberg, 1990) and the so-called capability approach (Sen, 1992, 1999), as well as paradox theory (Koot et al., 1996). The third group consists of adult learning and education theories; these were identified in four studies. They were focused particularly on organizational learning (Argyris and Schön, 1978, 1996; Argyris, 1999, 2017; Senge, 1990), competence development and career development theories (Super, 1957, 1981, 1990) and social cognitive career theory (Lent et al., 1994, 2000, 2005). The fourth group of theories was economic neo-classical theories, present in four studies. The most commonly used on was workforce differentiation theory (Huselid and Becker, 2011; Collings, 2017). Two studies involved anthropological theories, particularly rites of passage theory (van Gennep, 1960), which was combined in research with social identity theory.
Discussion
To get key insights for theory and TD, we aimed to answer to the question, which particular HRD theories are prevalent in research into TD. We contend that the dominant theories in research on TD are psychological theories and learning theories, which are considered foundational in the field of HRD, as previously mentioned. Regarding the extent, to which is the research of TD influenced by current trends in HRD theories, we can state, that in view of the fact that present developmental trends are directed towards critical HRD theories, including ethical dimension and ethical theories, as well as anthropological and sociological theories, we would argue that the research area of TD follows the trends obvious in HRD to such an extent that particularly sociological and ethical theories were strongly prevalent in the area of TD. The past question aimed to uncover whether learning theories are dominant in research into TD, since TD is primarily oriented on development and education of adults. We found out, that in contrast, we would not state that adult learning and education theories were significantly dominant in research into TD, although the area involves education and development of adult workers that are considered talented. We did not identify any of the theories listed in the above presented table of HRD theories, although there were references to the approach to TD through the concept of competence and to a link between TD and career development. An explanation may be the insufficiently perceived importance of the area of adult education for the study of topics related to HRD, such as TD, despite the fact that it constitutes one of the pillars of HRD.
The results presented above show that although TD is a multi-paradigmatic and pluralistic area, the prevalent approach is psychological and critical to the conception of the TD process, pointing out the utilitarian nature and mechanistic concept of an individual in the economics-based view of TD, rather than an economics-based approach dominant when the area of TD emerged. That also corresponds to current trends in HRD development. This may be documented by the finding that economic theories were used in only four studies. Ethical theories may, therefore, be considered important for designing fair conditions at a workplace, if there is an explicit labelling of workers as talented and the consequent implied labelling of others as untalented. The studies based on ethical theories aimed to emphasize the issue of language and narrative while using the term talent in the organizational environment within formalized processes of talent management and development, as well as the issue of perceived equality, which may affect the motivation of workers and the unintended consequences or paradoxical situations arising from labelling an individual as talented, such as how being labelled as a talented individual may in fact mean merely greater responsibility and more tasks. The theory of sociological neo-institutionalism points out the consequences if economizing patterns of functioning of global organizations are applied in local conditions, where they might be unclear. Anthropological theories bring a sensitizing approach to facilitate comprehension of the transformation of an individual’s identity based on being labelled in the work process of TD, i.e. the process of becoming a talented individual in the culture of the particular organization from the anthropological perspective. A closer look at the psychology-based approach, however, shows only a limited variation in the particular theoretical approaches compared to those listed for the area of HRD. The explanation may be a weaker emphasis on comprehension of individuals in the formalized process of TD; instead, the interpretative perspective is applied to identify the reasons why the process of TD is beneficial. In contrast, the critical approach uses these psychological theories to explain the weak spots in the TD process. Sociological theories (together with anthropological ones) provide the opportunity to understand various needs of workers in relation to gender and generation differences, as well as their actions resulting from being labelled as talented. Social exchange theory is, therefore, close the theory of psychological contract, as well as the Pygmalion and Golem effect theories. It is, in fact, the same concept, only embedded in various scientific disciplines (for instance, in adult education, it is the so-called Matthew effect, defined by Merton (1968) and addressed for instance in Dai and Li (2022), which may be used as both a supporting argument or a counter-argument to the economizing approach to the TD process. The label of a talented individual may have positive as well as negative impact on the development of the labelled individuals, as well as the unlabelled ones. A strong emphasis on sociological and ethical theories in TD can be linked particularly to the development trends in HRD. System theories were completely unrepresented among TD theories. The theory of organizational learning (and the learning organization) may be considered, however, a system theory in the area of adult learning and education theories. The missing system approach in TD may be, in our view, explained by the prevalent view of the TD process as part of the TM system that does not need to be studied systemically. The reason is that although TD is perceived as a process, in common practice it may not be approached and designed systemically or may not be seen as equally important to talent management. It can be stated that the theories presented above provide a framework for identification of phenomena studies within TD, since they narrow the selection or research design and methods. The role of theory in TD is to, therefore, specifically provide concepts facilitating a more precise comprehension of TD and its importance within HRD and as a part of TM and HRM. Although TD is a concept that pertains to the education and training of adults, its interpretation through these theories is lacking. Thus, a systems approach can help organizations in practice to apply TD as part of employee development, but also to design a specific TD programme with an awareness of the risk in excluding it from standard development programmes.
Our proposed framework can serve as a basis for future research. From the theoretical point of view, future studies should approach the topic of TD from the viewpoint of currently used adult education theories based on a novel classification by Fejes and Nylander (2019, p. 66 Figure 4.2). These authors present a structural model of theoreticians cited in research into adult education. Inclusion of these theoretical views in the study of the matter may contribute to an elaboration of a comprehensive view of the TD process and the ways in which individuals, explicitly labelled as talented (and those implicitly labelled as untalented), learn and develop. The perspective of HRD theorists (such as Billett, 2020 or Engeström, 2001) can be used to investigate the importance of this process for workplace learning, while the theory of transformative learning may be applied to focus on an individual’s perception of the label “talented”, his/her self-reflections of the label and the impact on the perception of self-efficacy (Lave and Wenger, 1991; Mezirow, 1997; Illeris, 2003). Using the theories of Lave and Wenger or Illeris, researchers could focus on the learning of individuals in talent programmes in relation to both the social and cultural environment and the internal conditions that influence such learning. More into the micro level (and the psychological direction in educational research), future research could focus on examining individuals and their life trajectories labelled as talented. Using a methodology, such as interpretative phenomenological analysis (Smith et al., 2009), it would be possible to conduct a smaller number of in-depth, narrative interviews with employees identified as talented, thus exploring significant nodes in their life trajectories in relation to their learning, education and development, both before acquiring this label and while coping with it. If we were to remain at the micro level, it would also be interesting to focus the research solely on the role of leaders in talent programmes; that is, how they interpret their role and responsibility in talent identification and development and possibly, how they are developed in this role. In contrast, the sociological perspective can facilitate an understanding of structural influences in the TD process, since an individual’s behaviour must be understood in relation to the structures of which the individual is a part (Hodkinson and Hodkinson, 2004; Bourdieu, 1990 or Giddens, 1984). Another option is to expand the existing research to the macro level, thus examining the talent programme from the perspective of programme organizers as well as from the perspective of employees in different countries. Research focusing on programme organizers could reveal, for example, the philosophies, ideologies and contexts that influenced the organizers when conceiving the programme. At the international level, it would also be interesting to compare studies on the impact of labelling across various countries and geographic contexts.
We see the following practical implications of our study. It is precisely the adult education perspective that can broaden this issue to address practical problems concerning the adult individual. Talent management and development can be seen as a tool of social intervention to achieve the organization’s future goals, and it is the domain of adult education to reflect on such intervention through its knowledge base, whether in terms of learning processes or ethics. Our findings thus not only contribute to expanding theoretical knowledge but also, from a practical standpoint, prompt consideration of who the organizers of talent programmes are and whether they approach their planning and implementation with knowledge of adult education specifics. Ideally, such a programme in practice could be implemented with the assistance of adult education consultants.
Our analysis has several limitations. The present analysis covers an adequate sample of studies, providing a sufficient basis for in-depth investigation. First is the definition of TD, which is very broad. For this reason, the selected keywords did not enable including and investigating all the studies. Other studies that snowballed on the selected ones were added to our sample. To ensure the quality of the reviewed studies, our review also only concerned reviewed journals, excluding grey literature such as book chapters and proceedings of conferences, which could nevertheless bring further insight into the matter. The present study only includes studies published in English and excluded all articles written in other languages. Second limitation is that the majority of the studies focused on the area of talent management as a whole, in some cases also in relation to the process of TD, while there were few studies focusing solely on the process of TD. Some of the studies also did not explicitly mention applied theory (Skuza et al., 2013); these studies were ad hoc classified in a suitable theoretical framework based on their content.
In conclusion, the present study provides an up-to-date review of theories in the area of TD based on the still-used typology of theories in HRD and adds a fourth pillar – adult learning and education theories, which can increase the stability of the typology. In this way, the study increases our knowledge, not only concerning the area of TD but also particularly the field of HRD, since TD may be considered a topical and important part of HRD. Comprehension based on systematization and conceptualization of theories in TD, from the perspective of HRD, enables the extension of the range of necessary approaches for further research in TD, both among researchers and HRD professionals. For all kinds of actors, it can be stated that this study should encourage researchers in HRD and TD to investigate the area of TD using theories of adult learning and education, for example, from the perspective of sociotechnical, emancipatory or communicative paradigm, since it is a discipline extending the HRD area that has not yet been sufficiently linked to traditional HRD theories.
The work was funded by FPVC2023/02 Palacký University, number of project 4521S10021/30: Process of TD in organizations: Systematic literature review (Proces rozvoje talentů v organizacích: Systematická přehledová studie).
Figure 1.Visual representation of the elimination process according to a PRISMA graph
Table 1.
Overview of the main HRD theories (cf. Swanson, 2001, 2002, adapted)
| Group of theories in HRD | Sub-section | Theories |
|---|---|---|
| Economic theories | Neo-classical (neo-liberal) | Scarce resource theory (Swanson and Gradous, 1986; Barney, 1991; Huselid and Becker, 2011; Collings, 2017) |
| Sustainable resource theory (Thurow, 1993) | ||
| Human capital theory (Becker, 1962, 1993) | ||
| Neo-institutional | Internal labour market theory (Doeringer and Piore, 1971) | |
| Psychological theories | Gestalt (Graham, 2008) | |
| Behaviourism (Baum, 2017) | ||
| Cognitivism (Knowles et al., 2015) |
||
| Positive psychology (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) | ||
| System theories | General systems theory (Bertalanffy, 1968) |
|
| Adult learning/education theories | Individual | Self-regulated learning theory (Knowles, 1975, 1980) |
| Experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984) | ||
| Operant conditioning theory (Skinner, 1938) | ||
| Social learning theory (Bandura, 2012) | ||
| Cognitive development theory (Piaget, 1952) | ||
| Sociocultural development theory (Vygotsky, 1986) | ||
| Organizational | Theory of organizational learning and learning organization (Argyris and Schön, 1978, 1996; Senge, 1990; Argyris, 1999; 2017) |
Source: Authors
Table 2.
Overview of main TD theories
| Group of theories in TD | Theory | Author | Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sociological theories | Theory of social exchange (Homans, 1958; Blau, 1964) | Björkman et al. (2013) |
3 |
| Theory of self-fulfiling prophecy (Merton, 1948) | Meyers and van Woerkom (2014) | 1 | |
| Gender theories (Harding, 1982; Harding, 1983) | Festing (2015) | 1 | |
| Generation theories (Mannheim, 1928) | McCracken et al. (2016) |
2 | |
| Sociological neo-institutionalism theory (Meyer and Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio, 1998) | Ewerlin and Süß (2016) |
3 | |
| n = 10 | |||
| Economical neo-classical theories | Workforce differentiation theory (Huselid and Becker, 2011; Collings, 2017) | Guerci and Solari (2012) |
3 |
| Configurational approach (Doty et al., 1993; Meyer et al., 1993; Delery and Doty, 1996) | De la Calle-Duran et al. (2021) | 1 | |
| n =4 | |||
| Psychological theories | Pygmalion and Golem effect (Rosenthal and Jacobson, 1968) | Swailes and Blackburn (2016) |
2 |
| Theory of psychological contract (Schein, 1971) | Höglund (2012) |
2 | |
| Regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997) | Kichuk et al. (2019) | 1 | |
| n = 5 | |||
| Ethical theories | Theory of organizational rhetoric (Cheney et al., 2004) | Huang and Tansley (2012) | 1 |
| Theory of organizational justice (Greenberg, 1990) | Gelens et al. (2014) |
3 | |
| Paradox theory (Koot et al., 1996) | Daubner-Siva et al. (2018) |
2 | |
| Capability approach (Sen, 1992, 1999) | Downs and Swailes (2013) | 1 | |
| n = 7 | |||
| Adult education/learning theories | Organizational learning (Argyris, 1999; Senge, 1990) | Oltra and Vivas-López (2013) |
2 |
| Competence development | Nilsson and Ellström (2012) | 1 | |
| Career development theories |
Kichuk et al. (2019) | 1 | |
| n = 4 | |||
| Anthropological theories | Rites of passage theory (van Gennep, 1960) | Tansley and Tietze (2013) |
2 |
| n = 2 |
Source: Authors
Table 3.
List of studies selected for the final analysis
| No. | Publication | Country | Respondents | Methods | Analysis | Theory | Keywords |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Björkman et al. (2013) | Finland | HR managers from different-sized companies | Questionnaire survey (787 out of 1,230 submitted) | Multivariate analysis of covariance |
Social exchange theory | Employee reactions |
| 2 | Daubner-Siva et al. (2018) | The Netherlands, Scotland | One person | Observation, interview, self-reflection | Autoethnography | Paradox theory | Criticism of TM from an individual’s perspective |
| 3 | De la Calle-Duran et al. (2021) | Spain | Four organizations, HR managers or TM managers | Case study, interview, document analysis | VosViewer SW – content analysis and mapping | Configurational approach to talent pools | Various talent pools |
| 4 | Downs and Swailes (2013) | UK | X | Theoretical study | X | Capability approach | Ability development, critical approach, neo-liberalism, grand narratives |
| 5 | Dries and De Gieter (2014) | Belgium | Organizations from different industries (nine), HR directors (11) and high-potential individuals (20) | Semi-structured interview | Coding, ATLAS.ti | Theory of psychological contract | Information asymmetry, different expectations |
| 6 | Ewerlin and Süß (2016) | Germany | HR managers/talent managers from different-sized companies | Questionnaire survey (313 completed forms) | Factorial, regression and cluster analysis | Sociological new institutionalism | Institutionalism |
| 7 | Festing (2015) | Germany | Two organizations (37 interviews about TD programme) | Comparative case study, semi-structured interview | Content analysis in MAXQDA (codes and categories) | Gender | Gender and inclusion |
| 8 | Gelens et al. (2014) | Belgium | 58 senior high-potential workers, 70 high-potential junior workers, 75 non-high-potential workers | Questionnaire survey | Moderated mediation models in a linear |
Social exchange and organizational justice theory | Employee reactions, identification, justice |
| 9 | Gold et al. (2016) | UK | One organization, three workshops, number of participants not specified | Case study, story-telling approach (narrative) | Mapping | Talenting – collective matter | Collective influence |
| 10 | Guerci and Solari (2012) | Italy | Four companies meeting the criteria, four individuals for interviews | Exploratory multiple case study, interview | Not stated | Organizational justice theory | Critical approach, purpose of TM in relation to HRD activities |
| 11 | Höglund (2012) | Finland | HR managers from Finnish companies | Questionnaire survey (126) | Mplus statistical analysis | Theory of psychological contract | Relationship between the talent label and motivation for development |
| 12 | Huang and Tansley (2012) | UK | Managers selecting the talented individuals (62) | Single case study, semi-structured interview, focus groups | Concepts, categories and NVIVO8 SW | Organizational rhetoric theory | Mobility, acceptance of multiple roles, greater load |
| 13 | Khoreva et al. (2017) | Germany, USA, Finland | High-potential employees in Finnish companies (439) | Questionnaire survey | Factor analysis | Social exchange theory | Employee reactions, development of leadership competences |
| 14 | Kichuk et al. (2019) | UK | Employees excluded from talent programme + managers (15) | Narrative research | Topic analysis | Super’s career choice and development theory, social cognitive career theory, Higgins’ regulatory focus theory | An individual’s perspective – excluded employees – impact on motivation |
| 15 | McCracken et al. (2016) | UK | Line and department leaders, HR managers and graduates (16) | Multiple case study, interview | Coding | Generations | Graduates – difference between requirements of companies and requirements of university graduates |
| 16 | Meyers and van Woerkom (2014) | The Netherlands | x | Theoretical study | x | Pygmalion effect | Various approaches to talent |
| 17 | Nilsson and Ellström (2012) | Sweden | x | Theoretical study | x | Competence-based approach | Competence, critical approach |
| 18 | Oltra and Vivas-López (2013) | Spain | Employees of big companies (over 250 employees) | Questionnaire survey (167 completed forms) | Factorial, regression and cluster analysis | Knowledge management and organizational learning | Knowledge management, organizational learning, teamwork |
| 19 | Skuza et al. (2013) | Poland | Managers (58) | Combined research (phone survey and focus groups) | Content analysis and SPSS | Sociological new institutionalism | TM in Central and Eastern Europe, cultural context |
| 20 | Swailes and Blackburn (2016) | UK | A large chemical industry organization, 17 managers | Single site case study, document analysis, interview-based questionnaire (Likert scale) | Statistical analysis | Workforce differentiation, perspective of individual, self-fulfiling prophecy theory (Pygmalion effect) and social exchange theory | Focus on individual |
| 21 | Tansley and Tietze (2013) | UK | Managers in charge of TM (6) | Case study, document analysis, semi-structured interview | Grounded theory | Rites of passage | Identity |
| 22 | Tansley et al. (2016) | UK, USA, Australia | A book | Narrative analysis | x | Rites of passage | Gamification, experiential learning |
| 23 | Valverde et al. (2013) | Spain, Ireland | Six organizations, directors, managers and employees (six interviews) | Multiple case study, semi-structured interview | NVivo analysis | Paradox theory | Small and medium companies in Spain, awareness of TM, TM in practice, formalization of the process |
| 24 | Vilčiauskaitė et al. (2020) | Lithuania | HR managers (ten) | Semi-structured interview | Coding | Mentoring, volunteering, career mobility, generations | Older talents, mentoring |
| 25 | Whysall et al. (2019) | UK | HR directors and senior leaders from engineering organizations (12) | In-depth |
Coding | The context of industry 4.0 | Ideology, Industry 4.0, setting up the process |
Source: Authors
© Emerald Publishing Limited.