Anand van Zelderen, Currently working on research at the University of Calgary/
Channel NewsAsia

Dealing with employees who aren’t placed on a company’s talent management programme needs to be handled very delicately, say two observers from the University of Calgary.

Have you ever compared your work performance to a colleague’s? It’s a daily habit for most of us, and can often have a positive impact.
It could be a source of motivation: “Did Tom just receive a promotion? Perhaps if I work a bit harder, I’ll be next!”
It could also provide you with a sense of reassurance: “Most of my team members just received a ton of criticism, but my bosses had nothing negative to say about me. I must be doing really well!”
Comparing your performance to that of your colleagues, however, can become a detriment when your performance pales in comparison to that of your peers: “I have been working at this company far longer than Sara, but for some reason she received her second raise and I haven’t even had one.”
Would it be better for your boss to tell you why Sara got another raise and you are still waiting for your first? Or would it be better for your supervisor to keep the situation a secret?
TALENT MANAGEMENT A COMPANY’S STRATEGY
Talent management is a common practice within organisations. It involves the identification of key positions that contribute to the organisation’s sustainable competitive advantage. The aim of talent management is to fill these key positions with the most high-performing and high-potential employees.
Considering the competitive climate of organisations, under which organisations frequently succumb and go bankrupt, it should not be surprising that roughly 65 per cent of companies worldwide have a talent management programme in place.
Typically, these programmes include one to 10 per cent of the company’s employees, who receive extra training and responsibilities, thereby ensuring that the organisation stays innovative, profitable, and in the end, survives.
SECRECY OR TRANSPARENCY?
But this separation between “talent” and “non-talent” staff raises a lot of controversy. Managers are increasingly concerned about providing equal opportunities to all employees, and fear the negative reactions from those that may be left out of these “elitist” talent programmes.
To manage this conflict, some supervisors opt for larger talent pools. They increase the number of employees identified as “talent” to minimise potentially negative reactions from employees who are in fact part of the “non-talent” group.
Some talent managers take a different approach and opt to keep their talent practices a complete secret.
While secrecy would allow companies to make “unpopular” decisions and avoid potentially negative reactions from employees, transparency is always portrayed as the more desirable communication strategy.
After all, many researchers have found that a lack of transparency is associated with feelings of nepotism, unjustified business practices and a general lack of trust in management and the organisation.
FEELINGS OF ENVY MAY EMERGE
Our research revealed that employees are more likely to develop feelings like envy and reduced self-esteem when they were not selected to be part of the 30 per cent top performers, as compared to when they were excluded from the top 1 per cent top performers in their organisation.A likely explanation is that individuals subconsciously utilise various self-defence mechanisms when confronted with peers that outperform them.
Sad woman
Research says that employees are more likely to have reduced self-esteem when they were not selected to be part of the 30 per cent top performers. (Photo: Pixabay/loilamtan)
More specifically, for very exclusive talent management programmes — those programmes where the likelihood to be identified as talent is below the 5 per cent level — employees can more easily convince themselves that one must be an exceptional “genius” in order to be eligible for such a programme.
It’s no surprise nearly everyone can accept not being a “genius” as long as they believe that their performance is above average.
We also found that feelings of envy were at their absolute lowest and feelings of self-esteem were at their highest when employees were aware of the existence of a talent management programme as well as the percentage of employees included in such a programme, but they didn’t know whether they were identified as being part of the talent pool themselves.