Organisational readiness

Talent maturity

The diagram below (figure 1) shows the stages of maturity that organisations tend to go through as they implement their talent strategies. We know that departments, agencies and professions can feature at different stages on the curve. You can place your organisation on the talent maturity curve by asking some key questions.

Figure 1: Talent maturity curve

Talent maturity curve

Image description: Curved arrow with progress through talent maturity from the bottom to the top:

  • ad hoc or no talent; to
  • reluctant process; to
  • recognition of the business value of talent management. Talent defined and mapped but limited action; to
  • talent management embedded as a management activity with talent leaders skilled as talent coaches; to
  • talent embedded as a strategic business activity.

The following questions help organisations plot themselves against the organisational readiness model.

Assessing organisational readiness

Using the self-assessment matrix below and Green - Amber / Green - Amber / Red - Red descriptors, rate each of the key talent components for your organisation.

Green

  • DH and ALBs working collaboratively ensuring a corporate view of talent.
  • Future business challenges identified and strategy to build, borrow or buy required skills in place.
  • Current succession pipeline for Board/Executive Team identified with rich bench strength in place.
  • Actively participates in the HCLS and other talent management schemes relevant to the organisation’s talent strategy, with several, appropriate and quality nominations for the development options relative to the size of organisation.
  • Fully supports the movement of talent across partner organisations and externally where it meets individual development needs and the priority requirements of the health and care system in line with individual contracts and agreed policies and procedures.
  • Talent and succession management systems fully deployed across organisation, resulting in consistent and quality outcomes.
  • Talent management embedded in leadership expectations of the organisation.
  • The need for talent identification is understood and is an integral part of line manager responsibility – line managers routinely engage in developmental discussions and feedback with individuals.
  • All line managers are given advice and support on how to have effective career conversations.


Amber / Green

  • DH and ALBs working collaboratively towards a corporate view of talent.
  • Identified future challenges and formulating strategy to secure talent pipeline.
  • Succession pipeline for Board/Executive Team identified, but bench strength is weak in places although plans are in place to address.
  • Participates in the HCLS and other talent management schemes relevant to the organisation’s talent strategy, with nomination levels appropriate to size of the organisation, but lower quality nominations resulting in limited successful candidates.
  • Some movement of talent across partner organisations and externally, but limited evidence that this is as a result of planned action to meet individual or departmental development needs.
  • Talent and succession management systems deployed across organisation although limited evidence of quality outcomes.
  • The need for talent identification is seen as a discretionary part of line manager responsibility.
  • Some line managers are given advice and support on how to have effective career conversations.


Amber / Red

  • DH and ALBs working together on an ad hoc basis or not at all, leading to duplication and inefficiency.
  • Identified some future challenges but limited evidence of strategy development to secure talent pipeline.
  • Succession pipeline for Board/Executive Team identified but bench strength is weak in places and no plans in place to address.
  • Some participation in the HCLS and other talent management schemes relevant to the organisation’s talent strategy with lower than expected nomination levels appropriate to size of the organisation and lower quality nominations resulting in limited successful candidates.
  • Little movement of talent across partner organisations and externally and limited evidence that this is as a result of planned action to meet individual or departmental development needs.
  • Talent and succession management systems deployed in places across organisation and limited evidence of quality outcomes.
  • The need for talent identification is seen as a discretionary part of line manager responsibility.
  • Line managers are not given advice and support on how to have effective career conversations.


Red

  • DH and ALBs not working collaboratively towards a corporate view of talent, leading to duplication and inefficiency.
  • Future challenges have not been identified and limited evidence of strategy development to secure talent pipeline.
  • Succession pipeline for Board/Executive Team has not been identified.
  • Little or no participation in the HCLS and other talent management schemes relevant to the organisation’s talent strategy with significantly lower than expected nomination levels appropriate to size of the organisation and lower quality nominations resulting in few or no successful candidates.
  • No movement of talent across partner organisations and externally.
  • Talent and succession management systems have not been deployed across organisation.
  • The need for talent identification is not seen as a discretionary part of line managers’ responsibility.
  • Line managers are not given advice and support on how to have effective career conversations.

 

<<< Back    |    Toolkit    |    Next >>>