3-minute read
‘Total Talent Management’ has become a buzzword in the post-lockdown economy. What exactly is it? And how does it equip your organization to create a flexible workforce?
Going ‘Total’ on Talent
Total Talent Management (TTM) is a human capital management strategy to satisfy enterprise workforce demands by embracing both full-time employees and contingent/gig working in its various forms.
Why TTM is different from how things work today in most organizations is the result of years and years of HR and Procurement departments owning different parts of the resourcing equation. While HR took care of full-time contract hires, it’s been the role of procurement to find the additional ‘indirect’ sourced talent a business needs. This ‘two-stream’ model creates a duplication of effort and a high degree of complexity. While indirect workers must be dealt with differently to full-time hires to avoid dual-employment law infractions, no enterprise today can ignore the importance of treating all workers fairly.
With contingent workers and contractors representing over 25% of the workforce in most US businesses these days (and a growing proportion of European and Asian companies too, albeit not on the same scale) there’s never been a more important time to get talent sourcing right.
Why is Total Talent Management (TTM) taking off?
Practitioners suggest there are three main reasons why TTM is becoming a must-do strategy for organizations in 2021. They are:
1. Savings gained through consolidation of the hire to off board workforce life-cycle
Savings come in various forms. For one thing, in existing talent management models, often tasks like background checks and workforce off boarding reviews (etc.) will be performed by different agencies. Companies may be employing Recruitment Process Outsourcers (RPOs) to manage the lion’s share of their permanent staff sourcing, while employing a Managed Service Provider (MSP) for their indirect sourcing, with each of these agencies charging for many of the same tasks ‘in parallel.’
Another area of saving comes from sourcing talent directly (even contingent workers and gig workers) instead of going through agencies.
Research by Staffing industry Analysts suggests that 26% of US employers use direct sourcing today and 41% plan to seriously consider it within the next two years, according to the SIA’s “Workforce Solutions Buyer Survey 2019” report.
2. Access to more talent channels and sources
Adopting a Total Talent Management approach means every resourcing need can be resourced in a multitude of ways (i.e. full-time contract, contingent worker hire, gig project or task, etc.) with all of these options on the table and considered in every case when hiring managers put forward a requirement.
3. A reduction in risk
Working through a well-regimented and structured talent management framework reduces risks. A simpler talent ecosystem (with fewer areas of role duplication) avoid worker misclassifications and help to make sure things such as background checks and insurances are in place for every hire.
How TTM brings more talent within reach of your business
Case studies show that moving to Total Talent Management (TTM) results in faster placements and reduces the number of open vacancies because it offers more talent choices, and brings wider access to talent.
Opening up more channels
TTM strategies allow companies to reach out to best fit talent sourced through multiple outlets including:
- Full-time Employment (FTE) Contracts
- Contractor Procurement – Normally procured through indirect procurements via staffing agencies
- Project Outsourcing Purchase Orders – i.e.m, ‘Outsourcing’
- Statement-of-Work (SOW) Gig Contracts – The provisioning of work against agreed milestones stipulated in a contract
- Micro-Task (or Micro Job) Gig Contracts – The fulfilment of tasks by gig workers, normally via an online task portal
Unfettered accessing ‘best fit’ talent
Every resourcing need can be triaged with the full gamut of available sourcing options highlighted above open to decision makers without any potential bias introduced by departmental rivalries.
