War for Talent or Hiring Freeze?
In 1997, some consultants at McKinsey & Co. coined the phrase war for talent and it’s been a buzzword ever since. Their follow-up piece, The War for Talent, published in 2000, asserts that the war for talent will last for at least the next 20 years.
But instead, we hear of hiring freezes. A screeching halt in the search for new employees has been reported at various levels, from 68% of organizations in the manufacturing/mining industry to just 17% of organizations in the health care industry. And, of course, there are the layoffs.
Up until the recession, talent was considered the new strategic advantage that will transform today’s workplace, like technology did in the 20th Century. And thus, talent management and the adequate preparation of the succession pipeline became a priority. Some reasons given include:
But as we experience unprecedented economic conditions, is talent still a strategic advantage? Is the managing of said talent a priority? Should it be?
Take a look at the list above again. Has any of that changed? The downturn didn’t take us back to the Industrial Age. Managerial and executive skills are still just as important and, arguably, even more crucial during this time of stress. The generational numbers gap isn’t changing so the need and competition for talent will still exist. Job hopping may require more creativity from the job hopper’s perspective, but unplanned attrition will still affect organizations negatively– again, possibly even more so now, when key team members have increased influence. So what is up with the hiring freeze? Why the cut in L&D funding?
Like I mentioned in an earlier article, I get the need for survival mode. But my belief is that operating in survival mode is an admission of defeat. In no way is that a strategic move, and in no way does that set you up for long-term success. This is true at both the organization and individual level. But with a little thought, and a focus on the primary drivers of success, there can be both a cost savings and a long-term advantage.
Key point… focus on the important, not the immediate.
My passion is to apply insights from psychology to make work and life better. On this site I gather and reflect on bits and pieces of wisdom related to business, careers, self-improvement, finances, & health. 
In my view, one of those factors has changed dramatically: babyboomers have changed their plans about retiring. They plan to keep working, and many will be able to work part-time. That will change the competitive landscape for jobs.
I also suspect that people will do less job-hopping; they’ll hang on to their jobs if they can.
The imperative – as this Business Anthropologist
sees it – is to focus on the timeless basics of commerce:
–Who do I want to serve?
–Where and how might they be vulnerable?
http://bestwork.biz/blog/?p=44
–How can I add value?
Those will never change – no matter what happens in the marketplace.
Thanks for your comment Marsha! I’ll expand on some of my thoughts.
So let’s say a significant amount of baby boomers postpone retirement – this still doesn’t change the fact that Gen X is smaller in size. The gap may not exist RIGHT NOW, but it most certainly will soon enough. Unless you only care about the next few quarters (see my post on Circuit City), that long-term plan is still needed. And is a part-time executive a good idea, really?
Regarding job hopping, let’s assume it has significantly decreased across the working population due to the recession. But that’s an average and average rules don’t apply to exceptions very neatly. And those exceptions are the “talent” everyone (supposedly) seeks. So I think that there’s a certain part of the working population that can job hop whenever they want, recession or not — in theory… alas, this post.
Your timeless questions are a good place to focus for a lone entrepreneur or an organizational strategy statement. But at the org level, there is no one person who is able to address everything. And so, good people are needed to ensure follow-through. Who will add value when they’re gone?
For what it’s worth, one thing many corporations and large companies overlook when they lay off skilled workers is that those workers may move to a competitive business or set up their own competitive business.
Small, nimble micro-businesses can then often significantly undercut and undermine the business models of the larger firms they once worked for.
In other words, laying off skilled knowledge workers is a way of creating your next competitors.
Good point Bill! Didn’t even consider that. Ironically, those new competitors could have been a partnership.
Trackback citation –
“The posts from Eva Rykr and Brian Sommers both point out that now is not the time to radically go off course with talent management programs, but rather take the opportunity to build for the future….”
http://www.halogensoftware.com/blog/?p=1026