In this session, you will hear a combination of the latest research and best and next practices from leading organizations on the role the learning and development staff is increasingly playing in the integrated talent management movement. As a starting point, the group will discuss the top-level findings from ASTD’s recently published report, “Learning’s Critical Role in Integrated Talent Management,” including information on how high-performing and low-performing organizations use talent management differently. You will also gain information on which organizational roles are primarily responsible for the key elements of talent management: leadership development, individual development, performance management, employee learning, recruitment/selection, employee engagement, compensation and benefits, and succession planning. And you’ll hear about learning’s role in each area.

1. Connecting L&D With Integrated Talent
Management
Speaker: Kevin Oakes
CEO
Institute for Corporate Productivity.
Moderator: Daniel Margolis
Managing Editor
Talent Management magazine
#TMwebinar

2. • Q&A
– Click on the Q&A icon
on your floating toolbar
in the bottom right
corner.
– Type in your question in
the space at the bottom.
– Click on “Send.”
#TMwebinar

3. Tools You Can Use
• Polling
– Polling question will
appear in the
“Polling” panel.
– Select your
response and click
on “Submit.”
#TMwebinar

4. Frequently Asked Questions
1. Will I receive a copy of the slides after the webinar?
YES
2. Will I receive a copy of the recording after the webinar?
YES
Please allow up to 2 business days to receive these materials.
#TMwebinar

5. Connecting L&D With Integrated Talent
Management
Daniel Margolis
Managing Editor
Talent Management magazine
#TMwebinar

6. Connecting L&D With Integrated Talent
Management
Kevin Oakes
CEO
Institute for Corporate Productivity.
#TMwebinar

7. Connecting L&D with
Integrated Talent
Management
Kevin Oakes
CEO
7

8. About Kevin Oakes
Background
§ Founder, CEO of i4cp
§ Former Chairman, Jambok
§ Former Chairman, ASTD Board
§ Founder, President, SumTotal
Systems
§ Former CEO, Chair of Click2learn
§ Founder, CEO Oakes Interactive
Kevin
Oakes
CEO
i4cp
8

9. Institute for Corporate Productivity
i4cp
is
the
fastest
growing
and
largest
corporate
network
focused
on
the
prac8ces
of
high-­‐performance
organiza8ons.
9

10. Members (partial list)
3M Eli Lilly & Co Pelco
7-Eleven ExxonMobil PETCO
Adobe Systems FedEx Express Pfizer
Alliance One FedEx Ground Pizza Hut
Allstate Federal Reserve PNC Financial Services
American Mgt. Assoc. Fidelity Investments Prudential Financial
Ameriprise Flextronics Qualcomm
Amway General Electric Raytheon
Apollo Group General Mills Rio Tinto Group
AT&T Home Shopping Network Samsung
Boston Scientific ING Americas SaskTel
Cameco Intel Shell Oil
Catholic Health Jack in the box Starbucks
CitiGroup KFC Takeda Pharmaceuticals
ConAgra Foods Kraft Tampa Electric Company
ConnectiCare LG Electronics T-Mobile
Darden Restaurants Lockheed Martin Toyota Motor Sales
Deloitte & Touche McDonald’s Corp United States Navy
Depository Trust MetLife U.S. OPM
drugstore.com Microsoft U.S. SEC
Duke Energy MITRE United Water
Duke University Northrop Grumman The Y
Edwards Lifesciences Olive Garden YUM! Brands
10

11. Partners
11

12. Defining High Performance
High-­‐performance
organiza<ons
consistently
outperform
most
of
their
compe<tors
for
extended
periods
of
<me.
These
companies
performed
beBer
over
the
past
five
years,
based
on
these
four
indicators:
1. Revenue
growth
2. Market
share
3. Profitability
4. Customer
sa8sfac8on
12

13. The 5 Domains of High Performance
i4cp
research
has
shown
that
high
performance
companies
excel
in
five
core
areas:
1. Strategy
2. Leadership
3. Talent
4. Culture
5. Market
(customer
focus)
13

14. What Does i4cp Do?
We
help
organiza8ons
leverage
the
core
areas
of
high
performance
through
4
delivery
vehicles:
1. Research
2. Peers
3. Tools
4. Technology
14

15. The 5 Domains of High-Performance Organizations
And i4cp’s Centers of Knowledge That Support Them
15

16. Two faces of human resources
• Benefits
• Time
&
ABendance
Tac8cal
• Payroll
• Scheduling
• Selec8on
&
Assessment
• Learning
&
Development
Strategic
• Performance
• Succession
Planning
• Compensa8on
Source: i4cp 16
16

17. HR Continues to Evolve
Add Value
&
Strategic
Maximize Talent
Upside HR Planning
Management
Impact/Contribution to the Business
Culture
Organizational & Image
Design
HR as
Survey Action
Business
Planning
Partner
EEO/AA
Staffing
Employee Training & Performance
Relations Development Management
Labor/Union
Relations
Compensation
Benefits HR Information
Systems (HRIS)
Limit Safety & Compliance
Liability Workers’
& Compensation
Protect
Downside
Labor Employee Personnel Human Organizational
Relations Relations Resources Effectiveness
A Century of Evolution in the Function 17

18. Poll
§ How
long
has
the
concept
of
talent
management
been
discussed?
(select
one)
a) Started
about
3
years
ago
b) No,
more
like
5-­‐7
years
ago
c) I’m
old.
It’s
been
discussed
for
over
a
decade
18

19. Talent Management
New concept or an old idea whose time has
arrived?
19

20. Predictions
There is no bigger problem in the global marketplace today
than how to obtain, train and retain knowledge workers.”
- Michael Moe, Chairman & CEO
,
ThinkEquity Partners LLC
– 2 bb000 le
999 is talent u
n decade om b acquisition and
“The killer app for the next 1
d i ot c
retention.”
lare e d
Dec s th bu rst - John Doerr, Partner
ju st a out to Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers
as ab
w
20

21. An Investment Banker’s Graph
rs ago
10 yea
lis hed
Pub
Source: CIBC, February, 2001 21

22. Uniting the silos
22

23. A story…
From:
Ambi8ous
CEO
Sent:
Thursday,
May
03,
2001
8:02
AM
To:
kevin.oakes@click2learn.com
Subject:
SEIZE
Market
Leadership
…(Together, we) will realize the
market leading vision we have
Thanks
for
your
8me
today.
Please
articulated, and hope we can work
together with you to seize this
see
aBached
the
drae
presenta8on
compelling opportunity.
and
proposed
CAP
chart
regarding
our
joint
opportunity…
If you have additional questions
please don't hesitate to contact me
directly. I am also prepared to quickly
travel to your location to fully articulate
the opportunity to you and others.
LET'S SEIZE THIS OPPORTUNITY
NOW, AND DRIVE THE MARKET!!!
23

24. The Executive Guide to ITM
§ Foreword:
Tom
Rath
§ Gurus:
Peter
Cappelli,
John
Sullivan,
Jon
Ingham,
Ed
Lawler,
Marshall
Goldsmith,
Bev
Kaye,
Noel
Tichy,
Dave
Ulrich
§ Prac<<oners:
Chapters
Agilent,
1. Overview
Novelis,
2. Recrui<ng
Hertz,
3. Benefits
4. Performance
Mgt.
Cisco,
5. Succession
Edwards
Lifesciences,
6. Engagement
3M,
7. Leadership
DeloiBe,
Development
General
Mills
8. Conclusion
24

25. L&D’s Role in Talent Management
Recrui8ng
• Iden8fy
competencies
to
hire
for;
Help
develop
assessments
• Use
assessment
data
in
craeing
custom
development
programs
Performance
Management
• Using
performance
data
for
immediate
development
plans
• Training
managers
on
how
to
give
performance
reviews
Engagement
• Training
managers
on
how
to
foster
and
improve
engagement
• Professional
development
opportuni8es
increase
engagement
Succession
Planning
• HiPo
/
Cri8cal
Role
Development
program
• Train
managers
on
developing
successors
25

26. Talent Management Study
§ Conducted
jointly
by
i4cp
§ High-­‐level
business,
HR
and
and
ASTD
learning
professional
contacts
§ 518
Responses
§ Delineated
between
High
and
Low
Performing
Organiza8ons
30.4%
33.8%
35.8%
26

27. Integrated Talent Management Model
SWP
provides
direc8on
and
ensures
alignment
The
EVP
serves
as
an
anchor
27

28. Higher Performing Organizations (HPO) Are More
Effective At Managing Talent
Overall, to what extent is your organization
managing talent effectively?
28

29. Poll
§ What
is
the
primary
func8on
high
performing
organiza8ons
include
in
integrated
talent
management?
(select
one)
a) Recrui8ng
b) Succession
Planning
c) Learning
&
Development
d) High
Poten8al
Development
e) Performance
Management
f) Leadership
Development
29

30. What Do HPOs Include in Talent Management?
30

31. Performance Management was found to be the Most
Integrated Component of Talent Management
Performance
Management
…and
when
broken
down
by
MPI
scores,
the
integra8on
score
gap
for
Performance
Management
between
high
and
low-­‐performing
organiza8ons
was
one
of
the
largest
found
in
the
study.
419.8
350.1
Market
Performance
Indicator
Score
(MPI)
Higher
Performers
*
Please
see
the
notes
sec8on
for
an
explana8on
of
how
the
Talent
Management
Lower
Performers
Integra8on
Scores
were
calculated.
31

32. What Do Your Employees Think of Your
Organization’s Performance Management Process?
Value provided
varies between
employees,
departments &
managers
70%
32

33. 9 Keys to Performance Management
1. The
performance
management
process
includes
developmental
plans
for
the
next
work
period
2. Manager
training
is
provided
on
conduc8ng
a
performance
appraisal
mee8ng
3. The
quality
of
performance
appraisals
is
measured
4. There
is
a
system
in
place
to
address
and
resolve
poor
performance
5. The
appraisal
includes
informa8on
other
than
that
based
on
the
judgment
of
managers
6. The
performance
management
process
is
consistent
across
the
organiza<on
7. Employees
can
expect
feedback
on
their
performance
more
o[en
than
once
a
year
8. 360˚
or
mul<-­‐rater
feedback
is
used
to
support
the
performance
management
process
9. The
performance
management
process
includes
ongoing
goal
review
and
feedback
from
managers
33

34. No Silver Bullet
34

35. Talent Management
Responsibility & Success in High Performing
Organizations
35

36. Higher performing organizations report greater
alignment, budget & infrastructure in place
36

37. High-Performance Organizations Have More
Backing on Talent Management from Leadership
37

38. Talent Management
The Importance of Integration
38

39. Effectively Integrating Talent Management is positively
correlated with Market Performance
Please
state
the
extent
to
which
you
agree
with
the
following
statements:
Correla<on
Percent
indica<ng
high
or
very
high
extent
with
MPI
Our
leaders
see
integrated
talent
mgt.
73.6% .21**
as
vital
to
organiza<onal
success
36.7%
My
organiza<on
has
processes
in
place
to
69.4% .20**
align
talent
management
to
business
goals
33.3%
My
organiza<on’s
processes
and
policies
65.3% .22**
support
integrated
talent
management
23.3%
My
organiza<on
effec<vely
integrates
the
61.1% .23**
components
of
talent
management
20.0%
Market
Performance
Indicator
Score
(MPI)
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%
Higher
Performers
Lower
Performers
**Correla8ons
with
Market
Performance
Index
are
all
significant
at
p<.01
(2-­‐tailed)
39

40. Strategies to Integrate TM that are associated with
high market performance are not widely utilized
Percentage
of
respondents
answering
Correla<on
with
high
extent
&
very
high
extent
Market
Performance
Integra<ng
technologies
and
sharing
data
for
the
various
13.9
.20
talent
management
func<ons
Appoin8ng
a
single
func8onal
owner
of
talent
management
internally
26.5
.14
Standardizing
talent
review
and
feedback
processes
35.9
.10
Ensuring
consistency
among
the
different
TM
ac8vi8es
23.2
.13
Crea8ng
transparency
across
func8onal
silos
15.1
.15
Establishing
organiza<onal
culture
that
supports
TM
25.4
.19
Increasing
visibility
of
talent
management
ini8a8ves
20.8
.16
Expanding
number
of
talent
management
ini8a8ves
18.8
.14
Training
managers
to
enhance
their
talent
management
capabili8es
17.9
.13
Using
technology
to
improve
talent
management
18.4
.18
Gaining
support
from
top
management
40.1
.16
40

41. Integration Is a Challenge For All Organizations
41

42. Talent Management
Measurement
42

43. Talent Management Measurement
§ Only
12%
of
respondents
said
that
they
have
talent
management
metrics
to
a
high
or
very
high
extent
§ At
the
same
8me,
more
than
seven
out
of
10
organiza8ons
acknowledged
that
they
should
measure
talent
management
to
such
an
extent
43

44. Research Focus on TM Metrics
§ Quality
of
Hire
§ Is
your
organiza8on
acquiring
“beBer”
talent?
§ Quality
of
Separa8on
§ Is
your
organiza8on
losing
valuable
talent?
§ Quality
of
Movement
§ When
talent
moves
in
your
organiza8on
–
what
happens?
§ Time
to
Full
Produc8vity
§ How
long
does
it
take
to
become
“fully
produc8ve”?
44

45. Talent Management Measurement
Study
This
study
sought
to
iden8fy
the
talent
§ Conducted
April
2010
management
measurement
prac8ces
of
high-­‐
§ 426
responses
performing
organiza8ons
and
to
quan8fy
their
impact
on
organiza8onal
strategy.
Company Size Company
Type
1
-­‐
999
employees
33.8%
Global
27.7%
1,000
-­‐
9,999
employees
31.9%
Multinational
47.4%
10,000+
employees
34.3%
24.9%
National
30.5%
31.5%
32.5%
33.5%
34.5%
45

46. Talent Management Accelerator Group
46

47. The Who, How and When of reporting is not as
important as the actual act of reporting…
§ Who
is
responsible
for
calcula8ng
the
workforce
results?
§ HR
Analy8cs
Team
(22.0%)
No
Significant
§ Head
of
HR
(21.2%)
Sta8s8cal
Difference
§ Within
the
Business
(11.4%)
§ What
systems/technology
are
used
to
calculate
the
workforce
results?
No
§ HRIS
system
(41.1%)
Significant
Sta8s8cal
§ “Talent
Management”
System
(15.3%)
Difference
Note:
Spreadsheets
&
Databases
(34.7%)
are
not
correlated
to
TM
Success
§ How
oeen
workforce
results
are
produced?
§ Monthly
(28.5%)
No
Significant
§ Quarterly
(30.2%)
Sta8s8cal
Difference
47

48. …but Who receives the workforce reports is
important
§ Execu8ve
Team
/
CEO
are
the
only
groups
correlated
to
High
Market
Performance
Q: Who receives the workforce metrics reports? (Select all that apply)
48

49. Poll
§ Which
of
these
metrics
does
your
organiza8on
track?
(select
all
that
apply)
a) Voluntary
termina8on
rate
b) Involuntary
termina8on
rate
c) Total
aBri8on
49

50. Talent Metrics Survey Results
Finding:
Organiza8ons
are
more
likely
to
measure
why
employees
separate
or
how
many
employees
leave
the
organiza8on,
but
are
less
likely
to
analyze
who
is
separa8ng
from
the
organiza8on.
50

51. Talent Metrics Survey Results
igh
en H
twe es?
nce s Be pani
e Di ormffere ing Com
re T her erf
A
dL ow P
an
Finding:
Organiza8ons
are
more
likely
to
measure
why
employees
separate
or
how
many
employees
leave
the
organiza8on,
but
are
less
likely
to
analyze
who
is
separa8ng
from
the
organiza8on.
51

52. Attrition Metrics – Tactical
Finding:
When
comparing
large
organiza8ons
(10,000+
employees),
there
is
no
significant
difference
between
Higher
and
Lower
Performers’
likelihood
of
measuring
tac8cal
reten8on
metrics
52

53. Attrition Metrics – Strategic
Finding:
When
comparing
large
organiza8ons
(10,000+
employees)
Higher
Performers
are
more
likely
to
measure
who
is
leaving
the
organiza<on
than
Lower
Performers.
53

54. § Quality of Attrition
54

55. What is Quality of Attrition?
QoA
describes
who
is
leaving
the
organiza8on
and
answers
the
ques8on
“is
the
firm
losing
its
most
valuable
employees?”
First
Year
72.9%
47.9%
High
Poten<al
51.4%
32.5%
Demographics
52.8%
31.4%
Pivotal
Roles
47.2%
25.9%
Quality
of
Afri<on
36.5%
20.4%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
Overall
High
Performers
Low
Performers
55

56. Quality of Attrition Scorecard
56

57. Quality of Attrition Scorecard
57

58. The Should/Do gap on separation metrics
§ Again,
not
a
surprise
that
there
are
large
gaps
between
“Should”
and
“Do”.
§ The
smallest
gap
is
§ Uncontrollable
separa8on
rate
( 25.2)
§ The
3
largest
gaps
are
§ High-­‐performer
separa8on
rate
( 53.5)
§ Controllable
separa8on
rate
( 47.6)
§ RegreBable
termina8on
rate
( 44.3)
Q: To what extent does your organization use
the following metrics for the purpose of
managing talent better and to what extent do
you think it should use these metrics?
58

59. § Quality of Hire
59

60. Lower Performers are often more likely to measure
tactical recruiting metrics vs. Higher Performers.
60

61. Higher Performers are more likely to measure quality
of recruiting efforts than Lower Performers
61

62. Measuring QoH is an opportunity to gain a
competitive advantage.
Correlated
with
High
Market
Performance
.14%
Correlated
with
Talent
Management
Effec8veness
.44%
62

63. New Hire Information
Date
Number
of
New
Number
of
Number
of
Example: Consolidated
Hires
Management
Professionals
2010
(YTD)
170
28
(16%)
95
(56%)
Quality of Hire Report
2009
549
66
(12%)
346
(63%)
2008
659
119
(18%)
402
(61%)
2007
790
119
(15%)
514
(65%)
To
provide
context
about
hiring
pa3erns
2006
705
99
(14%)
423
(60%)
New Hire Fit
Survey
Questions
2010
2009
2008
(sampling)
%
of
Managers
that
would
hire
again
85%
88%
79%
Manager
Satisfied
w/
Candidate
Pool
83%
78%
64%
“Real”
Time
Indicators
%
of
Employees
that
would
accept
89%
75%
81%
the
position
again
Number
of
“bad
hires”
4
(2%)
27
(5%)
16
(10%)
Number
of
“at
risk”
hires
36
(21%)
137
(25%)
48
(29%)
Retention over Time
Population
Overall
Management
Professionals
Term
first
90
days
2010
11%
14%
12%
Term
less
than
one
year
2009
22%
7%
8%
Reten;on
by
Hiring
Class
Term
1-­‐2
Years
2008
14%
3%
7%
Still
with
Organization
2008
65%
72%
68%
In future years, compare the Still with Organization by year – looking for improvements
Performance over Time
Outstanding/
Needs
Population
Meets
Exceeds
Improvement
With
one
year
of
tenure
2009
2008
5%
85%
2%
83%
10%
15%
Performance
by
Hiring
Class
With
two
years
of
2008
6%
86%
8%
tenure
In future years, compare the tenure bands - looking for improvements
63

64. Movement Metrics
64

65. Promotion Rate
Promo8on
Rate
is
defined
as
a
change
in
job
code
and
an
increase
in
salary
in
the
HRIS
system
of
record
including
progression
promo8ons,
internal
hires,
development
assignments
65

66. Internal Placement Rate
Internal
Hire
is
defined
as
a
current
employee
is
selected
for
a
role
that
was
posted
on
an
external
job
board
66

67. Quality of Movement Scorecard
67

68. Summary
§ Effec8vely
managing
talent
is
a
trait
of
high
performing
organiza8ons
§ Integra8on
of
func8ons
is
difficult,
but
necessary
§ Technology
only
helps
organiza8ons
who
have
already
organized
themselves
to
be
integrated
§ Effec8ve
measurement
can
raise
the
bar
on
talent
management’s
visibility
and
effec8veness
§ Learning
and
Development
can
be
the
glue
in
uni8ng
the
tradi8onal
HR
silos
68

69. For More Information:
kevin.oakes@i4cp.com
Corporate
411
First
Avenue
South
•
Suite
403
•
SeaBle,
WA,
U.S.A.
98104
Telephone
866-­‐375-­‐i4cp
(4427)
•
Fax
206-­‐624-­‐6951
Research
8950
Ninth
Street
North•
Suite
115
•
St.
Petersburg,
FL,
U.S.A.
33702
Telephone
727-­‐345-­‐2226
•
Fax
727-­‐345-­‐1254
www.i4cp.com
© 2011 Institute for Corporate Productivity, Inc. Member companies may reproduce and distribute this file on an unlimited basis
to their employees for internal management purposes only. Nonemployees (including outside consultants) may not be given
copies of or access to i4cp’s reports, online services or conference materials.
69

70. Join Our Next TM Webinar
Work-Life Balance is NOT a Perk
Tuesday, Sept. 27, 2011
•
TM Webinars start at 2 p.m. Eastern / 11 a.m. Pacific
Register for upcoming TM Webinars at
www.talentmgt.com/events
Join the Talent Management magazine Network
http://network.talentmgt.com/
#TMwebinar