HR Professionals and Talent Management: Navigating the Dynamic Macro Context

Full text

1
HR Professionals and Talent Management:
Navigating the Dynamic Macro Context
(Accepted for publication in D. Collings et al. (eds), 2022, Talent Management: A Decade of
Developments, London: Emerald Publishing)
This chapter presents a holistic view of dynamic external macro environments and their impact on
internal organizational strategies. It suggests how events, and particularly major crises at the
global or national level, affect organizational responses. Specifically, the authors submit that
organizations adapt their strategy in line with the pressures they face from the external
environment. Consequently, the day-to-day operations inside the organization change, and
managers find themselves faced with new challenges in terms of how they manage their talent. By
exploring critical roles that HR professionals can play in talent management, the authors delineate
several ways in which the HR department can help organizations to react to these external
pressures, supporting managers in ensuring that employee behavior and values are aligned with
the new organizational strategy. The objective of this chapter is not only to reflect on the HR
professionals and their role in helping to manage organizational talent, as their organizations
navigate the dynamic macro context but also to stimulate further research in this field.

2
Elaine Farndale (Ph.D.) is Professor of Human Resource Management and Director of the School
of Labor and Employment Relations, Pennsylvania State University (USA), where she is also
Founder and Director of the Center for International Human Resource Studies. Elaine’s research
and teaching encompass the broad fields of international human resource management (HRM),
strategic HRM, and HRM and performance. She has published widely from her international
collaborations in leading journals such as Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of
World Business, Human Resource Management, and Human Resource Management Journal, as
well as publishing four books. She has also served as Co-Editor-in-Chief for Human Resource
Management Journal, Co-Editor for Routledge’s Global HRM Series, Associate Editor for Human
Resource Management and International Journal of Human Resource Management, as well as
serving on other editorial boards. She completed her Ph.D. at Cranfield School of Management
(UK) and worked previously as an HR specialist for several years.
Vlad Vaiman (Ph.D.) is Professor and Associate Dean at the School of Management of California
Lutheran University and a visiting professor at several premier universities around the globe. He
has published five books on managing talent in organizations and at a country level, as well as a
number of academic and practitioner-oriented articles and book chapters on talent management
and International HRM. His work appeared in Academy of Management Learning and Education,
Human Resource Management, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Human
Resource Management Review, Journal of Business Ethics, and many others. He is also a founding
editor and the Chief Editorial Consultant of the European Journal of International Management,
and an editorial board member of several academic journals, such as European Management
Review, Human Resource Management Review, and Journal of Global Mobility, among others.
He is a founder, organizer, and a leading chair of the EIASM Workshop on Talent Management,
as well as the editor of the Emerald Book Series on Talent Management.

3
HR Professionals and Talent Management:
Navigating the Dynamic Macro Context
Elaine Farndale and Vlad Vaiman
Introduction
Effective talent management (TM) involves the successful implementation of meaningful
strategies aimed at attracting, selecting, developing, and retaining the best employees in the most
strategic roles required to achieve organizational strategic priorities (Vaiman, Collings, &
Scullion, 2012). As such TM represents a critical organizational capability for building firm
success today and for the future. Talent management can, however, only be effective if we
expand its prevalent ‘internal firm-centric focus’ to understand how TM processes work based
on the interaction between external macro environments and an organization’s internal strategic
management activities.
Organizations exist within a very complex and largely unpredictable external
environment, where the degree of complexity and fluidity only increases as an organization
extends its operations beyond its central headquarters. In fact, by expanding regionally or
internationally, firms subject themselves to the influence of one or more different external
environments that represent a unique, contextually based macro talent management (MTM)
system. This is particularly true as organizations expand into emerging economies where the
institutional context is less well understood (Farndale, Beamond, Corbett-Etchevers, & Xu,
2021). Each MTM system is formed by a variety of political, economic, technological, legal,

4
social, and cultural factors, which in turn impact on the organizations operating in those
environments and their internal strategic management activities (King & Vaiman, 2019).
Since TM, and particularly global TM (i.e., GTM, which refers to the systematic
identification of key positions, the development of a talent pool to fill these roles, and the
development of a differentiated human resource architecture to facilitate these processes in
global organizations: Collings & Mellahi, 2009), intrinsically exists and occurs within a broad
macro framework, the MTM system is becoming increasingly relevant to study. MTM is defined
as “the activities that are systematically developed by governmental and nongovernmental
organizations expressly for the purpose of enhancing the quality and quantity of talent within and
across countries and regions to facilitate innovation and competitiveness of their citizens and
corporations” (Khilji, Tarique, & Schuler, 2015: 237). Consequently, MTM is projected to have
a significant impact on GTM effectiveness, even though empirical research on the impact of
macro-level variables on GTM, such as institutions, has been limited thus far.
Referring to what King and Vaiman (2019) describe as the architecture of external MTM
systems, we explore here the macro (global/national) contexts that act as enablers or constraints
in the minds of managers making talent management decisions in line with their firm’s strategy,
facilitating a synergistic integration of internal and external environments. As Figure 1
demonstrates, the global context creates the setting for national contexts, which in turn provide
the backdrop for organizational strategies designed to align with this external context. Internally,
the reality of day-to-day operations of the organization occur in light of the organizational
strategy, and, in turn, influence the day-to-day reality of managers. Each step in this chain also
has a feedback loop to the link above as managers aim to change their reality, which in turn can
change the firm’s operational reality, leading to tweaks in the organizational strategy. The range

5
of organizational strategies adopted within any national context in turn influences national
institutions, which then impact on the global stage. Think, for example, of how the effects of the
global COVID-19 pandemic filtered all the way down to how managers could manage their
talent but then also how these managers made changes in talent management practices (such as
hybrid working, as you will read later) that in turn affected the operation of the firm and its
future strategy. As more organizations then adopted hybrid working, for example, the national
and global talent management scenes changed in line with these organizational changes.
Figure 1: The embedded nature of talent management
Although Figure 1 stops at the managerial reality, we posit that the role of HR
professionals in TM (including GTM) deserves equal attention. As Schuler, Jackson, and Tarique
(2011) argue, HR effectiveness depends on the HR professionals’ involvement with the
organization’s overall business strategy as well as its talent strategy (Schuler et al., 2011). In
other words, to be an effective partner in TM, human resource management (HRM) policies and
procedures should be closely aligned with the strategic intent of the organization. Minbaeva and
Collings (2013) add that even though corporate leadership plays a critically important role in TM

6
by underscoring TM’s significance to an organization and providing necessary guidance and
support, an organization’s HR professionals should do more ‘heavy lifting’ when it comes to
operationalizing the TM strategy. The authors argue that even though TM is usually owned by
the firm’s leadership, it is quite often administered by and resides within the HR department.
Extant research has identified four critical professional roles that the HR department can
play to support GTM (Farndale, Scullion, & Sparrow, 2010): champion of processes; guardian of
culture; manager of receptivity; network leadership and intelligence (see Figure 2). In this
chapter, we explore how each of these roles plays out in organizations facing challenging macro
environments that affect their ability to implement desired talent management strategies. In
doing so, we introduce five key TM challenges, examining them from the macro environmental
as well as organizational- and operational-level perspectives and exploring HR’s role in
responding to these challenges. To conclude, we discuss several potential research opportunities
that address HR’s role in talent management from the perspective of dynamic macro contexts.
Key:
Core HR role
Interconnecting role activities
Managing
staffing flows
Encour-
aging
mobility
-Career
management
-Talent flow
- Intelligence
- Resource access
- Socialization
-Leadership
- System monitoring
- System control
Global
expertise
networks
Employer
branding
Champion
of
processes
Guardian of
culture
Network
leadership
&
intelligence
Managers
of internal
receptivity
Supply chain
planning

7
Figure 2: Corporate HR Roles in Global Talent Management
Source: Farndale, Scullion, & Sparrow (2010)
Five talent management challenges & HR responses
There are many challenges brought about by the macro environment that organizations have to
face on an ongoing basis. Along with persistent issues such as an aging population (particularly
in developed economies), tight labor markets, decreasing availability of talent, ever-widening
skill gaps, and changing labor mobility, there are several relatively new developments that will
undoubtedly change the dynamics of GTM too.
Among these new developments are various crises caused by severe environmental
disruptions. The COVID-19 pandemic is not the first, but it is probably one of the most visible
and profound examples of such disruptions. Similar disruptions may be awaiting us in the near
future – perhaps changing weather patterns and extreme temperatures due to climate change,
political upheavals, and/or technology meltdowns – and they will continue to cause profound
changes in the way individuals and organizations live and work. Managing talent in times of
crisis, therefore, is one of those key challenges that organizations face today.
In the following sections, we discuss a series of disruptive challenges that demand
changes to how organizations manage their talent and the associated ways in which HR
professionals can respond.
First, we consider crisis-driven challenging environments, such as the global financial
crisis that changed how organizations prioritized corporate governance and risk management.
Although driven by financial factors, we show how this was essentially a human resources crisis
that the HR department was best positioned to address. Similarly, and more recently, we look at

8
the COVID-19 pandemic as an external crisis again forcing change on organizational talent
management practices.
Second, the pre-COVID-19 pandemic rise in political nationalism meant that many
organizations were already experiencing new, more restrictive immigration regulations, limited
talent flows across national boundaries, and a pause in globalization. GTM challenges associated
with this ‘de-globalization’ trend continue to require attention on the part of HR.
Third, we highlight how deglobalization combined with the COVID-19 pandemic has
heightened organizational awareness of the relevance of remote and hybrid work arrangements.
The pandemic forced organizations to rethink their approach to talent management at a time
when they were already considering greater use of virtual work as global talent pools were
shrinking.
This leads to the fourth area we explore here: the emergence and strengthening of the
fluid workforce. The increase of gig work and the sheer attraction of this type of work to both
employers and individuals are changing the way organizations manage their talent, although the
role of HR professionals in this exciting development is not yet entirely clear.
Finally, we consider the broader issue that talent management must align with the macro
context, whether or not that context is undergoing major change or crisis. In other words, we
emphasize that even when external contexts are less pressing, they remain relevant to talent
management and the role of the HR department.
Although we could draw from examples across many other dynamic contexts too, we will
concentrate our attention here on the five key challenges described. The following examples
highlight the importance of HR’s role in creating a balance between the needs and demands of
individual managers embedded within organizations and the external dynamic macro contexts.

9
Each challenge is introduced first from the macro (global/national) perspective, translating this to
the organizational level. We then explore what this looks like internally in terms of the
operational and managerial reality. Finally, we explore HR’s potential role in responding to the
challenges identified.
1. Talent management in times of crisis
Macro (global/national) environment:
To understand how macro crises affect organizations, we (unfortunately!) have several examples
from which to draw. Crises may originate from varied sources, ranging from natural
environmental disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes to corporate wrongdoing that affects
a whole economy. The global financial crisis of 2008-9 is an example of the latter that created
extreme turbulence in the macro environment. Although this crisis started in the financial sector
– with organizations like BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, Bear Stearns, Citibank, and of course
Lehman Brothers, that truly shook the world – it trickled down throughout economies worldwide
(Bundy, Pfarrer, Short, & Coombs, 2017). Speaking of Lehman Brothers, it was at the heart of
the collapse as the firm had concealed large losses, which ultimately resulted in the demise of a
USD600 billion-asset organization. Such an event would have seemed inconceivable until it
happened. The unanticipated financial crisis that ensued had deep and lasting effects on all types
of organizations worldwide.
Moving forward just over a decade, organizations have again been impacted by an
external crisis through the COVID-19 pandemic. Again, no one anticipated the scale of what was
to unfold, but organizations had no choice but to react in response to the dynamic environment.
And while the Lehman Brothers scandal sparked a financial crisis, the pandemic sparked a

10
human crisis, having even greater implications for talent management across organizations
globally as they had to close their operations and move work remote.
Organizational challenge/opportunity:
Such extreme events occurring external to organizations in the global or national macro
environment can have a fundamental effect on how corporate leaders can manage their internal
operations. These events create change that results in action in response to the crisis dynamics,
with senior leaders developing a strategy to recover from the crisis. A substantial part of this
response involves developing an appropriate corporate culture and supporting employee
behaviors to achieve the future desired state of the organization (Boselie, Paauwe, & Farndale,
2013).
For example, one consequence of the Lehman Brothers scandal, which was largely
caused by inappropriate and even illegal employee behavior, was that firms responded with a
renewed focus on corporate governance to limit corporate reputation damage and to ensure
future success (Alpaslan, Green, & Mitroff, 2009). This response required renewed control of
corporate priorities, culture, and employee behaviors as at the heart of any corporate wrongdoing
are the firms’ actors, ranging from senior leadership through shopfloor employees. Talent
management becomes a critical corporate activity given the inherent employee values, attitude,
and behavior issues embedded in corporate governance (Davis, 2005).
Similarly, the COVID-19 pandemic taught us that the meaning and location of talent can
change dramatically overnight. The idea of ‘essential workers’, incorporating people from highly
skilled medical professionals through grocery store clerks, forced organizations to rethink where
value lies in their organization (Collings, Nyberg, Wright, & McMackin, 2021).

11
Operational/managerial reality:
For the day-to-day activities of managers needing to maintain operations and rebuild
organizational success, their focus lay on changing the governance and risk management culture
inside the organization to ensure the organization was in a strong position to ride the waves of
future crises.
One way to address the employee misbehavior that caused the global financial crisis was
to strengthen the rule base of the organization to ensure that all members were clear about their
roles and responsibilities. However, this is with the value of hindsight. When the Lehman
Brothers scandal hit, and likewise the COVID-19 pandemic, these were unforeseen events, so it
is difficult to have already written the handbook on how to react in such extreme circumstances.
Instead, a focus on creating a culture in which all organizational members are constantly
scanning the external environment and are willing and capable to be responsive to changing
circumstances can lead to a greater capacity to cope. An emphasis on relationship-based
governance can lead to more effective employee behavior, particularly in uncertain and dynamic
contexts (Dyer, 1996). This essentially involves building strong interpersonal relationships by
encouraging frequent personal interactions, shared values, and goal congruence (Gençtürk &
Aulakh, 2007), which can result in a strong base from which to weather many a storm.
HR professionals’ role:
The HR function can not only help organizations respond to crises but also prepare them for
future crises. One approach is to be a strong champion of processes to match the increased
focus on compliance and risk management. In other words, HR has a fundamental role to play in

12
rolling out appropriate guidelines for employee behavior and ensuring that valued behaviors are
developed and rewarded. Championing processes involves developing and monitoring practices
and policies, strategies, and tools and ensuring these are implemented across the organization
(Sparrow, Farndale, & Scullion, 2013). It is important for HR also to monitor how these
practices are being implemented and provide appropriate tools and techniques to facilitate both
practice adoption and internalization (Kostova & Roth, 2002).
Secondly, HR can play a strong role as guardians of culture (Brewster, et al., 2005) to
create an appropriate corporate culture that embraces flexibility and responsiveness to the
external environment. The desired shared values can be incorporated across HRM policies and
practices, such as rewarding collaborative and flexible behaviors. This type of social control
creates the opportunity to implement global values and systems that permeate talent management
throughout the organization (Ulrich & Smallwood, 2007). Acting as a guardian of culture,
practices can be developed that encourage a culture of trust and motivation to work together
(Gratton, 2005), ultimately leading to what Farndale et al. (2010) refer to as a ‘joined-up’
approach to talent management across the organization.
2. Talent management during a globalization pause
Macro (global/national) environment:
Globalization ‘on pause’ (Petricevic & Teece, 2019) or deglobalization (Witt, 2019) are terms
that have emerged as the consequence of a series of protectionist policies of governments of
major economies during the last half-decade, perhaps as a result of the changing economic
conditions described in the previous section. Around 2018-19, under the Trump administration,
the USA waged trade wars with both China and the European Union, during which time

13
governments on all sides increased import tariffs to restrict the flow of goods between countries,
among other protectionist acts. This followed growing strong right-wing support witnessed in
general elections for more nationalist government policies (notably in countries such as
Germany, France, and Sweden, among others). This latter trend has largely been explained by
anti-immigrant sentiment as a consequence of the European migrant crisis that started in 2015
largely due to the Syrian civil war. The Brexit referendum vote of 2016 (whereby the United
Kingdom opted to leave the European Union after 47 years of membership) is arguably a
significant artifact of this deglobalization period.
As the infrastructure that supports global trade broke down, efficiencies in the global
market decreased (Verbeke, Coeurderoy, & Matt, 2018). Combined with health-related travel
bans globally in 2020-21 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, these macro environmental contexts
stood in clear opposition to the corporate globalization trend that had grown steadily since World
War II (WTO, 2017). Organizations that had been focusing on expanding their talent pools
globally ever since the recognition of the ‘war for talent’ in the late 1990s, were suddenly faced
with decreasingly global talent pools and hence greater reliance on scarce local talent (Allen &
Raynor, 2004; Bello, 2013).
Key to the changing talent pools for many organizations was increasingly restrictive
immigration regulations controlling the inflow of talent from overseas into developed economies.
Whereas governments (such as in the UK, Australia, and the USA) had previously been
developing immigration policies to favor high-skilled applicants (Carr, Inkson, & Thorn, 2005;
Iredale, 2001), the protectionist tendencies led to these policies being curtailed by strict quotas,
largely to protect local jobs and wage levels (Kirkegard, 2007). Greater controls on temporary
work visas over concerns of misuse (Preston, 2016) combined with countries increasingly

14
encouraging their diaspora to return home given the rising employment opportunities in the
home countries (Lewin & Zhong, 2013; Ragazzi, 2014; Sparrow Vaiman, Schuler, & Collings,
2018) have meant an increasingly local rather than global talent pool (Farndale, Thite, Budhwar,
& Kwon, 2021).
Organizational challenge/opportunity:
Firms have, therefore, been faced with the challenge of adapting their talent management
strategy to recruit, develop, and retain talent. In particular, firms in developed economies seeking
locally scarce high-tech talent often turned to India to source their talent where universities have
been producing large numbers of technology graduates. As the number of immigrant visas
available for firms decreased, however, this tool for fighting the war for talent has become
largely redundant. Instead, firms have explored alternative opportunities to acquire necessary
talent, such as offshoring work to where talent is readily available, focusing on local hires,
particularly through partnerships with schools and colleges, or retraining existing employees
(Farndale, Thite, Budhwar, & Kwon, 2021).
However, these alternative strategies also have their challenges. For example, offshoring
potentially creates a greater disconnect between the organization and its clients, leading to lower
levels of service quality. There is also increasing competition for the top talent among local firms
in emerging economies such as India, where the local economy is growing (Zimmermann &
Ravishankar, 2016). Partnering with local schools and colleges is potentially a good strategy for
developing the local talent pool, as organizations influence curricula, however this is a long-term
solution to an immediate challenge (Brown & Tannock, 2009). Similarly, retraining existing
talent can be both costly and time-consuming when the talent shortages are present today.

15
Operational/managerial reality:
Organizations, or rather managers within organizations, have choices regarding how to react to
the challenges highlighted. For example, the extent to which immigration laws are seen as
impeding, helping, or neutral can depend on the manager’s perspective and the organization’s
goals (Oliver, 1991). Managers in firms seeking overseas talent during the globalization pause
were faced with a shortfall in suitably qualified talent to meet organizational or project goals
(Vaiman, Cascio, Collings, & Swider, 2021). This is a day-to-day reality potentially severely
affecting managers’ ability to hit targets and ultimately simply get work done.
Different managers could approach the problem in different ways, however. For those
closely involved in hiring and working with employees on immigrant visas, the situation could
be particularly challenging. Not only does the supply of potential talent decrease, but also there
is rising sentiment against immigrant workers in the workplace that needs to be managed. High-
skilled immigrant workers prepared to work for lower wages than domestic workers (Hira, 2010)
create competition and ill-feeling. Combined with a sense that immigrant workers are ‘taking our
jobs’ (Thompson, Newsome, & Commander, 2013), the changing mood of nations to being more
protectionist created an increasingly complex set of workplace dynamics. Therefore, it is not
surprising that an increased focus on local talent started to emerge (Farndale, Thite, Budhwar, &
Kwon, 2021).
HR professionals’ role:
What can HR do to help firms through the challenging effects of the globalization pause on
global talent pools? A primary role that HR can play here is network leadership. Network

16
leadership requires HR to be aware of both the organization’s strategic goals as well as the
external labor market trends, being sensitive to what is happening at both the local and global
level, inside and outside the organization (Evans, Pucik, & Barsoux, 2002).
An important network leadership activity is the facilitation of collaboration across the
organization. Increasing the focus on internal talent mobility and developing the skills of existing
employees can reduce the reliance on external hires. To achieve this, there needs to be strong
leadership from HR to network managers and talent pools internally (Farndale, Scullion, &
Sparrow, 2010). This also ties in with the ‘managers of internal receptivity’ role in creating
staffing flows across the organization (see Figure 2) – moving key talent to where it is most
needed.
Building intelligence about appropriate networks that can support the organization
(Farndale, Scullion, & Sparrow, 2010) is a second important network leadership activity.
Network intelligence involves coming up with alternative routes to gain access to talent, such as
through talent providers or engaging with lawyers to help the immigration process, for example.
It also involves initiating different talent strategies, such as offshoring or outsourcing, to
complement direct hires. Without a keen understanding of the globalization pause and what this
means for different areas of the business, HR would not be able to sense the need for alternative
approaches to talent management, nor make strong recommendations for activities and policies
to address these challenges.
3. Talent management for remote and hybrid workers
Macro (global/national) environment:

17
Following the logic of the need for increased flexibility as national or global crises affect
organizational activities, and the constraints around being able to operate on a truly global
platform, the macro environment is forcing organizations to think about how to operate on a
more remote or virtual platform.
Since the start of the information technology revolution, India, for example, has played a
substantial role as a source of scarce talent with the desired technological skills. However, over
time, as it has become more difficult for firms in Western countries to hire Indian professionals
on work visas, it has also become more desirable for Indians to stay in their home country and
seek employment there (Farndale et al., 2021b). Opportunities in Indian-based firms have been
growing and people no longer necessarily have to leave their home country in search of good
employment with high wages. Similarly, the diaspora is returning so that people can be with their
family yet still have a good career (Lewin & Zhong, 2013). Similar trends of returning diaspora
can be seen across a wide range of emerging economies, such as China and Central and Eastern
European countries (Poór, 2005).
The other trend emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic is that many people have
experienced remote work and have been successful after the initial set-up period. Consequently,
firms are thinking about keeping many of their normally office-bound employees working from
their homes or in a hybrid format (sometimes from home and the rest on-site). This is not only
happening in the domestic setting but globally – for example, McKinsey (2021) estimates that up
to 25% of the workforce in the developed economies and about 10% in the developing will
continue working from home even after the pandemic. The increase in online and hybrid work
has facilitated employee connections globally, reducing the need for global mobility in the ‘new
normal’ following the pandemic.

18
Organizational challenge/opportunity:
On the other side of the pandemic, many employers are focused on welcoming their employees
back to in-person presence (De Smet, Dowling, Mysore, & Reich, 2021). However, although
around 83 percent of CEOs prefer that their employees return to work in person, only 10 percent
of employees are ready to comply (Bersin, 2021). This reality demonstrates that there is most
likely no going back to ‘business as usual’, and that the ‘new normal’ will be hybrid.
The question for organizations is how to manage and prosper from these developments.
As work becomes increasingly remote and hybrid, talent management strategies need to adjust in
line with this approach, creating dispersed rather than concentrated talent pools, shifting the best
talent into the most critical roles, moving away from a traditional performance management
system and creating the best employee experience possible (Komm, Pollner, Schaninger, &
Sikka, 2021).
Operational/managerial reality:
There are advantages of remote and hybrid work in terms of tapping into valuable talent pools
that were previously unavailable. However, there are also disadvantages in terms of the
challenges involved in managing the performance of employees working remotely (for at least
part of their workweek) and keeping them engaged (Collings et al., 2021).
Speaking of the advantages of remote and hybrid work, many employers note increased
productivity as the key benefit of such work arrangements. Among the main disadvantages, most
executives cite real or perceived damage to their organizational culture and employees’ sense of
belonging to the company (De Smet et al., 2021). As mentioned earlier, even though these

19
executives may well realize that it is going to be difficult to achieve, they still want their
employees to come back to the office. They do feel that the new work arrangement will be more
flexible, but there is not much appetite for something radically distinct from the pre-pandemic
normal. The employees, on the other hand, actually prefer at least half of their workweek to be
remote, despite feeling exhausted, anxious, sometimes disconnected, and experiencing a loss of
social ties with their colleagues (McKinsey & Company, 2021). This obvious discrepancy
between employers’ plans and employees’ desires signals several talent management challenges
that organizations have to tackle.
Importantly, Alexander et al. (2021a) report that many remote and hybrid employees are
experiencing burnout, which they also attribute to a lack of open and unambiguous
communication on the part of their management. Both anxiety and burnout usually lead to
voluntary turnover, which may immediately affect both the organization’s availability of talent
and the TM strategy. To deal with these serious issues, organizational leadership is developing
policies that deal with communication technology, working hours, expectations for collaboration,
and available support, among many other factors. It is then important that these guidelines,
approaches, and expectations are communicated clearly and frequently, with HR helping
managers to facilitate and reinforce these messages. At the time of writing, there is still much
work to do on this front, as apparently, most organizations are only starting to develop the
specifics of hybrid working arrangements (Alexander, Cracknell, De Smet, Langstaff, Mysore, &
Ravid, 2021b).
HR professionals’ role:

20
To assist management in addressing these challenges, the HR function can operate as process
champions, supporting virtual and dispersed teams through appropriate talent management
practices plus training for managers. However, to support the organization’s leadership and
ensure all employees are on the same page in terms of understanding and commitment, HR
professionals also need to operate as guardians of culture by facilitating, among other things,
open and transparent communication within the organization.
Communication has long been reported as one of the most crucial factors behind employee
job satisfaction and productivity, but it becomes even more important to those working in a fully
remote or hybrid manner. Remote and hybrid employees who feel involved in more
comprehensive organizational communication are nearly five times more productive (Alexander
et al, 2021a). Alternatively, a lack of clear communication leads to heightened anxiety, which
tends to reduce job satisfaction, and as a result, lowers productivity. HR professionals can lend
their helping hand in formulating these specifics and ensuring that the employee voice is heard
before resulting policies are approved and implemented.
There are other equally important dimensions of hybrid work that can be supported by HR in
their roles as process champions and guardians of culture. For instance, Bersin (2021) identifies
reimagining organizational culture (by encouraging collaboration and simplified decision
making), building a collaborative technology platform (by partnering with IT to create a toolset
for onboarding, scheduling, and communication), integrating wellbeing programs (by
incorporating mental health, fitness, and coaching benefits), and a few others, as among the most
essential tasks HR professionals can take on to help their organization to succeed in this new
environment.

21
4. The emergence and strengthening of the fluid workforce
Macro (global/national) environment:
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a near-unprecedented level of human suffering, death, and
devastation. If there is a silver lining to this tragedy, it is that the current COVID-19 crisis has
hastened the arrival of the ‘future of work’. According to the World Economic Forum (Zahidi,
2020), the pandemic has seen not only a proliferation of remote working on an unprecedented
scale as we noted in the previous section, but it has also rapidly intensified automation, a global
appreciation of the care economy that includes first responders and other essential employees,
and the reliance on freelance (or gig) workers.
One of the most intriguing outcomes of all these and other developments is a visible
increase in so-called fluid work. We noted earlier that deglobalization was shrinking traditional
talent pools, perhaps with the fluid workforce being another alternative solution. Many experts
argue that work within an organization becomes more fluid when jobs are deconstructed and
reinvented, permanent employees are offered inside gigs, and work is highly automated
(Boudreau, 2021; Boudreau et al., 2015).
Furthermore, organizational work boundaries become more fluid as new types of
employees are introduced. These include: freelancers/independent contractors (those who
supplement the organization’s own workforce and set their own hourly rates); gig workers
(freelancers whose work is facilitated through a smart-phone app or an Internet-based platform,
and who are usually paid by the task); paid-crowdsourced workers (employed to perform a
partial assignment and are paid per micro-task); and moonlighters (professionals with a primary
permanent job with a fluid job on the side), as well as workers who are borrowed from partners
on a temporary basis. All of these can be referred to as the fluid workforce (Paolini et al., 2020).

22
Unlike the regular workforce, fluid workers are not on the organization’s permanent payroll.
They are temporary in terms of the nature of their contracts, enjoying either no or limited
benefits. Their work is not, as of yet, well regulated, as the laws and policies are currently
evolving and vary from country to country.
Organizational challenge/opportunity:
Organizations use a fluid workforce to address a specific need (Lau, 2020) when it comes to
specialized skills (when it is easier to find skilled talent for a certain project/task than to develop
talent internally; this is the fastest way to bridge skill gaps in an organization), cost reduction
(there are usually no benefits, pensions, or office space required), quality (fluid workers are
specialized in a specific area of work and become true experts in that area), speed (with deep
expertise comes agility), and globalization (can help provide expertise in certain new markets,
without exposing the organization to the risks associated with international expansion).
It is noteworthy that with the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, more and more
organizations utilized the talent of the fluid workforce, in addition to their permanent employees.
Even pre-COVID, nearly 80% of organizations surveyed by Cap Gemini worldwide in 2019 had
used a fluid workforce in the past year (Paolini et al., 2020). The global pandemic has
accelerated the usage of fluid workers across organizations.
Although it is possible that this upward trend of fluid employment will level off or even
revert to pre-pandemic levels in the years to come, many experts agree that this is highly
unlikely. On the one hand, the global health crisis has only accelerated the shift from traditional,
hierarchical organizations to a more fluid ecosystem driven by agility, adaptability, and
flexibility, and – importantly – a limited need for a physical location. In addition, 87% of

23
companies surveyed worldwide estimate that they are either already experiencing talent gaps or
expect them within the next five years (McKinsey & Company, 2020). To address this growing
talent gap, organizations use a mix of approaches such as hiring more fluid workers and
redeploying existing employees into new roles. Also, the growth of the freelance economy was
already substantial before the pandemic, and it is likely to continue into the future. Similarly, an
increasing proportion of the workforce, especially influenced by the influx of both Millennials
and Gen-Z’ers, prefer job roles that offer flexibility, variety, and fewer constraints, which are the
key features of fluid work (Varagur, 2021).
The fluid workforce is not new, and research on freelancers and gig workers has been
conducted in the past, but what is new is that the fluid workforce is now becoming mainstream,
with about 80% of organizations worldwide having adopted this approach since 2019. 73% of
organizations surveyed in 2020 believed that they will be using more fluid workers in the next
twelve months, and around 70% agreed that the current crisis would lead them to hire more fluid
workers in the future, well beyond the pandemic (Paolini et al., 2020). There are similarly calls
among scholars for more empirical evidence on managing talent in non-traditional work
arrangements (Vaiman et al., 2021).
Operational/Managerial reality:
The emergence and rapid expansion of the fluid workforce (and the fact that it is most likely here
to stay for the foreseeable future) will pose new challenges to organizations: from information
security to intellectual property rights to talent management. Fluid workers specifically have the
potential to offer considerable value to their temporary organizations and should therefore be
part of their TM programs.

24
First, the number of fluid workers is likely only to increase in the future. Besides the
statistics quoted earlier, according to Microsoft’s 2021 Work Trend Index report, 41% of the
global workforce is likely to consider leaving their current employer within the next year. This
increases to 54% when it comes to younger employees. This number is substantially higher than
the 30% that indicated the same willingness in both 2019 and 2020. At the same time, 46% in
2021 are planning to make a major pivot or career transition (Microsoft, 2021). Some of these
employees will find their place in the fluid workforce.
Second, most organizations are not set up to cater to the needs of fluid workers, as most
organizational efforts to recruit, onboard, develop, manage the performance, and retain are aimed
at full-time employees. Third, there is little effort to ensure that fluid workers are socialized into
the company’s culture, values, and traditions. Finally, most managers are not trained on how to
deal with fluid workers and manage them effectively. Less than half of the organizations
surveyed by Cap Gemini in 2021 have a highly developed approach to managing the talent of
their fluid workers (Paolini et al., 2020).
HR professionals’ role:
To help organizations deal effectively with the talent of fluid workers, HR professionals can take
on the role of a champion of processes (Farndale et al., 2010). HR experts can first learn as
much as possible about the fluid workforce, its composition and importance to the organization,
and then provide the necessary coaching and training for managers directly supervising fluid
workers. Furthermore, HR professionals can initiate the re-formulation of organizational policies
of recruiting, onboarding, engaging, developing, and retaining fluid workers, as in most
organizations these policies are almost exclusively calibrated for more permanent employees.

25
Finally, in this role, HR can assist managers in setting performance expectations, measuring
performance, and monitoring talent management efforts aimed specifically at fluid workers.
In addition to being a champion of processes, HR can also play the role of network
leadership and intelligence by creating awareness and sharing information about the fluid
workforce, the latest trends behind this phenomenon, and its influence both inside and outside
the industry and across national borders. Moreover, HR can play a major role in building social
capital within the organization by facilitating the collaboration of permanent and fluid workers
across the company, thereby improving its market success.
5. Translating talent management strategies globally
Macro (global/national) environment:
The macro challenges described here have focused on specific events or trends at the industry,
national, or global level that have stimulated change in the operating environment of
organizations. The final challenge that we discuss here is more stable and enduring – the way
that talent is managed differs across countries. This is a consequence of different operating
contexts that include employment and labor legislation, employee values, and traditions in talent
management. Every country has a unique combination of regulations, traditions, and values
related to the workplace and as such, we can expect talent management to play out in different
ways (Björkman, Fey, & Park, 2007).
Organizational challenge/opportunity:
What we are referring to here is path dependency (Sydow, Schreyögg, & Koch, 2009). In other
words, national culture values and institutions combine to create a system that prevents quick or

26
radical change (Farndale, Mayrhofer, & Brewster, 2019). This means that organizations
embedded in this system are required to follow certain legislative regulations, are likely to follow
the traditions and guidelines of influential bodies such as professional associations, and often
mimic the successful practices of other organizations around them. By aligning with the system,
the organization gains legitimacy (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983) that facilitates access to necessary
resources, including talent.
The challenge, therefore, when developing a TM strategy, particularly for multinational
firms that operate across a diverse range of countries, is to balance the need for global
standardization with the need to adapt practices to local conditions.
Operational/Managerial reality:
The operational reality that pertains is that although there may be a corporate TM strategy, it is
the manager at ground level who must act as a translator of that strategy to the local workforce.
Strategy developed by corporate headquarters in the home-country needs to be translated into a
firm’s subsidiaries in other host countries, but the process of translation involves navigating the
complex system of cultural values and institutional norms and regulations (Beamond, Farndale,
& Härtel, 2020). In other words, each manager interprets the corporate strategy in light of the
institutional and relational contexts both inside and outside the organization (Kostova, & Roth,
2002), including aspects such as language, culture, politics, society, and economy.
HR professionals’ role:
HR professionals can assist in this process of translation, acting as managers of internal
receptivity. This involves gaining an understanding of the potential sticking points of practice

27
transfer and building awareness of practices that can be ‘lost in translation’. HR is well-
positioned to gather information regarding how practices may differ between countries and, by
working collaboratively between both corporate and local HR partners, can explore where TM
practices can be standardized and where they need to be localized to align with operating
conditions. HR professionals can explain to managers the advantages and disadvantages of both
standardization and localization to improve managerial buy-in, which consequently can lead to
greater practice internalization (Kostova & Roth, 2002).
Conclusions and opportunities for future research
In this chapter, we have presented a holistic way of viewing how dynamic (and stable) external
macro environments impact on internal organizational strategies. In other words, what happens
outside organizations affects the realities inside organizations. We have suggested how events,
and particularly major crises at the global or national level, affect organizational responses.
Specifically, we have suggested that organizations adapt their strategy in line with the pressures
they face from the external environment. Consequently, the day-to-day operations inside the
organization change, and managers find themselves faced with new challenges in terms of how
they manage their talent. Finally, by exploring critical roles that HR professionals can play in
TM, we have suggested ways in which the HR department can help organizations respond to
external challenges, supporting managers in ensuring that employee behavior and values are
aligned with the new organizational strategy.
We believe that this reflection on HR professionals and talent management not only can
help organizations navigate the dynamic macro context but also stimulates further research in
this field. In particular, it might be beneficial to explore in depth (both conceptually and

28
empirically) the content and the process of HR function’s involvement in managing
organizational talent in times of crisis, such as during a globalization pause or when it comes to
remote, hybrid, and fluid workforces, as well as in translating TM strategies globally. Important
research questions may include what other roles, besides those identified here does HR play?
Also, how are these (and potentially other relevant) roles being played out? What are the
mechanisms and outcomes of HR’s involvement?
Another potential research opportunity may be related to a larger and somewhat more
fundamental question of the role that HR (and management, in general) can play in facilitating
MTM. How can (HR) managers influence their firm’s macro context, or is their role strictly to
respond to the external context? In other words, are there meaningful ways for (HR) managers
to be more proactive in preparing their organization’s talent, anticipating (or even influencing)
changes in the MTM environment? We look forward to seeing how increased consideration of
the dynamic macro environment can be incorporated in our research to improve our
understanding of HR’s role in talent management.

29
References
Allen, D., & Raynor, M. E. (2004). Preparing for a new global business environment: divided
and disorderly or integrated and harmonious? Journal of Business Strategy, 25(5), 16-25.
Alexander, A., De Smet, A., Langstaff, M., & Ravid, D. (2021a). What employees are saying
about the future of remote work, McKinsey & Company, April 2021.
Alexander, A., Cracknell, R., De Smet, A., Langstaff, M., Mysore, M., & Ravid, D. (2021b).
What executives are saying about the future of hybrid work, McKinsey & Company, May
2021.
Alpaslan, C. M., Green, S. E., & Mitroff, I. I. (2009). Corporate governance in the context of
crises: Towards a stakeholder theory of crisis management. Journal of Contingencies and
Crisis Management, 17, 1, 38-49.
Beamond, M., Farndale, E., & Hartel, C. (2016). MNE translation of corporate talent
management strategies to subsidiaries in emerging economies. Journal of World Business,
51(4), 499–510.
Bello, W. (2013). Capitalism's last stand? Deglobalization in the age of austerity. London, UK:
Zed Books.
Bersin, J., 2021. The Joys Of Hybrid Work. Ten Things We Have Learned. Retrieved from
joshbersin.com on December 5, 2021.
Björkman, I., Fey, C. F., & Park, H. J. 2007. Institutional theory and MNC subsidiary HRM
practices: Evidence from a three-country study. Journal of International Business Studies,
38(3): 430–446.
Bodem-Schroetgens, J., Reich, A., Schaninger, B., & Sharma, K. (2021). Three keys to building
a more skilled post-pandemic workforce, McKinsey Quarterly, July 2021.

30
Boselie, P., Paauwe, J., & Farndale, E. (2013). The contribution of HRM to fairness, social
legitimacy and public value: Human resource governance and risk management in seven
leading multinational companies. In P. Leisink, P. Boselie, M. van Bottenburg, & D. M.
Hosking (Eds.), Managing Social Issues: A Public Values Perspective. London, UK: Edward
Elgar, 238-257.
Boudreau, J. W. (2021) Economic Recovery After COVID-19: The Future of Work, VCEDA
Virtual Conference, January 15.
Boudreau, J. W., Jesuthasan, R., & Creelman, D. (2015). Lead the Work: Navigating a world
beyond employment. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Brewster, C., Sparrow, P. R., & Harris, H. (2005). Towards a new model of globalizing human
resource management. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16: 953-974.
Brown, P., & Tannock, S. (2009). Education, meritocracy and the global war for talent. Journal
of Education Policy, 24(4), 377–392.
Bundy, J., Pfarrer, M. D., Short, C. E., & Coombs, W. T. (2017). Crises and crisis management:
Integration, interpretation, and research development. Journal of Management, 43, 6, 1661-
1692.
Carr, S. C., Inkson, K., & Thorn, K. (2005). From global careers to talent flow: Reinterpreting
‘brain drain’. Journal of World Business, 40(4), 386-398.
Collings, D. G., Nyberg, A. J., Wright, P. M., & McMackin, J. (2021). Leading through paradox
in a COVID‐19 world: Human resources comes of age. Human Resource Management
Journal. doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12343.
Collings, D. G., Mellahi, K., & Cascio, W. F. (2019). Global talent management

31
and performance in multinational enterprises: A multilevel perspective. Journal of
Management, 45(2), 540–566.
Davis, G. F. (2005). New directions in corporate governance. Annual Review of Sociology, 31,
143-162.
DiMaggio, P. J. & Powell, W. W. 1983. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and
Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48: 147-160.
De Smet, A., Dowling, B., Mysore, M., & Reich, A. (2021). It’s time for leaders to get real about
hybrid, McKinsey Quarterly, July 2021.
Evans, P., Pucik, V., & Barsoux, J. (2002). The global challenge. Frameworks for international
human resource management. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Farndale, E., Mayrhofer, W., & Brewster, C. (2019). Comparative HRM. In Wilkinson, A.,
Bacon, N., Snell, S., & Lepak, D. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource
Management, 2e (pp. 99-109). Sage.
Farndale, E., Scullion, H., & Sparrow, P. (2010). The role of the corporate HR function in Global
Talent Management. Journal of World Business, 45(2), 161-168.
Farndale, E., Beamond, M., Corbett-Etchevers, I., & Xu, S. (2021a). Accessing host country
national talent in emerging economies: A resource perspective review and future research
agenda. Journal of World Business.
Farndale, E., Thite, M., Budhwar, P., & Kwon, B. (2021b). Deglobalization and talent sourcing:
Cross-national evidence from high-tech firms. Human Resource Management, 60(2), 259–
272.
Gratton, L. (2005). Managing integration through cooperation. Human Resource Management,
44(2): 151–158.

32
Hira, R. (2010). The H-1B and L-1 Visa Programs: Out of Control. Economic Policy Institute
Briefing Paper, No. 280: https://www.epi.org/publication/bp280/ (accessed 28 November
2019).
Iredale, R. (2001). The migration of professionals: Theories and typologies. International
Migration, 39(5), 7-24.
Khilji, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (2017). Talent management in the global context. The Oxford
Handbook of Talent Management, 399-420. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Khilji, S. E., Tarique, I., & Schuler, R. S. (2015). Incorporating the macro view in global talent
management. Human Resource Management Review, 25(3), 236-248.
King, K. A., & Vaiman, V. (2019). Enabling effective talent management through a macro-
contingent approach: A framework for research and practice, Business Research Quarterly,
22(3), 194-206.
Kirkegard, J. (2007). The accelerating decline in America’s high-skilled workforce: Implications
for immigration policy. Policy Analyses in International Economics. Washington, DC:
Peterson Institution for International Economics.
Komm, A., Pollner, F., Schaninger, B., & Sikka, S. (2021). The new possible: How HR can help
build the organization of the future, McKinsey & Company, March 2021.
Kostova, T., & Roth, K. (2002). Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of
multinational corporations: Institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management
Journal, 45(1), 215-233.
Lau, Y., (2020). How (And Why) Companies Should Engage the Liquid Workforce, Forbes,
January 6.

33
Lewin, A. Y., & Zhong, X. (2013). The evolving diaspora of talent: A perspective on trends and
implications for sourcing science and engineering work. Journal of International
Management, 19(1), 6-13.
Lund, S., Madgavkar, A., et al. 2021. The Future of Work After COVID-19, McKinsey Global
Institute.
Microsoft, (2021). 2021 Work Trend Index: Annual Report, Microsoft Corporation.
Minbaeva, D., & Collings, D.G. (2013). Seven myths of global talent management, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24:9, 1762-1776
McKinsey & Company. (2021). Grabbing hold of the new future of work, Organizational
Practice, May 2021.
McKinsey & Company. (2020). Beyond hiring: How companies are reskilling to address talent
gaps, Organization Practice and McKinsey Accelerate, January 2020.
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management
Review, 16(1), 145-179.
Paolini, S., et al. (2020). The Fluid Workforce Revolution, Capgemini Research Institute.
Petricevic, O., & Teece, D. (2019) The structural reshaping of globalization: Implications for
strategic sectors, profiting from innovation, and the multinational enterprise. Journal of
International Business Studies, 50(9), 1487-1512.
Poór, J. (2005). Past, present and future of human resources management in foreign-owned
subsidiaries in Hungary (1998-2004). Current issues of change management: challenges and
organizational responses. Paper presented at University Pécs-Ohio State University
Conference, Pécs, Hungary, 5 May.

34
Preston, J. (2016). Lawsuits claim Disney colluded to replace U.S. workers with immigrants. The
New York Times, January 25.
Ragazzi, F. (2014). A comparative analysis of diaspora policies. Political Geography, 41, 74–89.
Schuler, R.S., Jackson, S.E., and Tarique, I. (2010), Global Talent Management and Global
Talent Challenges: Strategic Opportunities for IHRM, Journal of World Business, 46, 4, 506–
516.
Sparrow, P., Farndale, E., & Scullion, H. (2013). An empirical study of the role of the corporate
HR function in global talent management in professional and financial service firms in the
global financial crisis. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(9), 1777-
1798.
Sparrow, P., Vaiman, V., Schuler R. & Collings, D. G. (2018). Introduction. Macro talent
management in developed markets: Foundations for a developing field. In Vaiman, V.,
Sparrow, P., Schuler R. & Collings, D. G. (Eds), Macro Talent Management in Emerging
and Emergent Markets: A global perspective: 1-16. London, UK: Routledge.
Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G., & Koch, J. 2009. Organizational path dependence: opening the black
box. Academy of Management Review, 34(4): 689-709.
Thompson, P., Newsome, K., & Commander, J. (2013). ‘Good when they want to be’: migrant
workers in the supermarket supply chain. Human Resource Management Journal, 23(2), 129-
143.
Ulrich, D., & Smallwood, N. (2007). Leadership Brand: Developing Customer-focused Leaders
to Drive Performance and Build Lasting Value. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Vaiman, V., Cascio, W., Collings, D., & Swider, B. (2021). The shifting boundaries of talent
management, Human Resource Management, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 253–257.

35
Vaiman, V., Collings, D., & Scullion, H. (2012). Talent Management Decision Making.
Management Decision, Vol. 50, No.5, pp. 925-941.
Varagur, K. (2021). To Gen Zers working from home, the office is a remote concept, The Wall
Street Journal, August 21.
Verbeke, A., Coeurderoy, R., & Matt, T. (2018). The future of international business research on
corporate globalization that never was…. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(9),
1101-1112.
Witt, M. (2019). De-globalization: Theories, predictions, and opportunities for international
business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(7), 1053-1077.
WTO (2017). World Trade Statistical Review 2017. Geneva, CH: World Trade Organization.
Zahidi, S. (2020) The Future of Work is Here: 5 Ways to Reset Labor Markets After Coronavirus
Recovery, World Economic Forum, May 1.
Zimmermann, A., & Ravishankar, M. N. (2016). A systems perspective on offshoring strategy
and motivational drivers amongst onshore and offshore employees. Journal of World
Business, 51, 548–567.