I was inspired by a recent conversation with a colleague
to examine this question more closely.
We were comparing and contrasting the work of different teams within an
organization. He likened another team’s
work to checkers, while suggesting that we were playing chess – and pointed out
that there was really no comparison. He
was right!
If you think about it, checkers is largely a game of
tactical skills, about blocking your opponent’s next move or preserving
yourself. Checkers is fairly
reactionary, a jagged continuum of random movements. On the other hand, chess is quite
strategic. Rather than simply having red
and black pieces (or as the Glossary of Checkers Terminology calls them, “men”),
there is an array of pieces that can be used in a myriad of ways. Chess is far more strategic and analytical;
it requires thought , forethought and afterthought. There is no checklist in chess; you must use
your brain.
When it comes to talent management, many companies are
still playing checkers. I prefer
chess. I began to ask myself “what is
it that differentiates those organizations playing chess from those still
playing checkers?” I’ve concluded that
there are four significant characteristics that differentiate those
organizations: a clear strategy, a
holistic approach, the absence of boxes, and an inclusive “what if” mindset.
Strategy is the foundation upon which the function is
built, right? You’d be surprised at how
many organizations simply do not have a talent management strategy. It seems so basic, yet I believe it is the
primary reason so many organizations fail miserably at talent management. A talent management strategy keeps the
organization and its leaders “honest”.
It roots out nepotism and favoritism and brings in objectivity. It levels the playing field, creating equal
opportunities for all qualified candidates.
It must be stated that talent management is not a
stand-alone activity. One cannot see “talent
review” in isolation; it must be connected to employee engagement,
compensation, performance management, and leadership development. There must be actions, insights and
deliverables that come from talent review discussion, and those discussions
should involve both supporters of a candidate and those with whom there have
been disagreements. Talent management
professionals need to push for a 360 degree view of the subject. Without intention, the act of managing talent
becomes a “check the box” activity.
Sadly, this mindset exists in too many companies. Stakeholders are sometimes led to believe
that there is a strong bench of “ready now” talent and that the talent pipeline
is deep when, in fact, there are merely names on a list; names of people who
could succeed a leader in the event of a departure.
Then, for organizations who actually do have a formal
process for reviewing talent, many ruin it all by insisting on putting names in
boxes --- the dreaded, antiquated 9 BOX grid.
Checkers players love the 9 box because checkers requires one to simply
put pieces (men) in boxes, move them across the board and viola’, you’re either
a winner or a loser. Chess requires meaningful
thought, even internal conversation, about your next move. Chess requires that you ignite thought from a
different part of your brain. Unlike
checkers, chess requires that you consider a wide range of possibilities.
Pursuing the thought that chess requires consideration of
a wider range of possibilities, so should talent management. Talent leaders should constantly be asking
themselves “what if?” In Peter Block’s “The
Answer To How Is Yes”, he asserts that when we ask “how”, that we’ve already
revealed our bias and that we’re looking for reasons not to act. By shifting away from “how” to “what if”, we
again call on a different part of our brain to explore opportunities. Who knows, we might just find a possibility
that we’d never find playing checkers.
