1

________________________________________________________________

Talent Management in the Army The Principles of Talent Management

________________________________________________________________

White Paper

Human Dimension Capabilities Development Task Force Capabilities Development Integration Directorate Mission Command Center of Excellence (MC CoE)

May 2015

2

Executive Summary After over 14 years of conflict, the Army has determined that its processes for recruiting, developing, employing and retaining talent, which have remained essentially unchanged for decades, are in need of reexamination and redesign.1 To assist in this effort, the director of the Mission Command Center of Excellence (MC CoE) Capabilities Development Integration Directorate (CDID) recently established the Talent Management Tiger Team (TMTT). One of the TMTT’s first objectives was to collaborate with the Army’s Human Dimension (HD) Community of Practice (CoP) and develop a proposed Talent Management Strategy for the Army. This paper contributes to that effort by identifying five categories and nineteen principles of talent management (TM) to serve as guidelines for an effective TM strategy. Through a review of the academic and professional literature, the TMTT initially identified forty-four potential principles. The TMTT then analyzed these principles and evaluated them against the criteria of (1) Feasibility – the degree to which the principle could be put into practice by Army leaders, (2) Suitability – the degree to which there was reason to believe that, if implemented, the principle would indeed make the Army more effective at its assigned and anticipated missions, and (3) Congruency—the degree to which the principle is consistent with the Army’s organizational strategy and culture. The TMTT then collaborated with the HD CoP to gain the insights and feedback on these principles from stakeholders with diverse perspectives and areas of expertise. The TMTT finished with nineteen principles for Army TM, which they then grouped thematically into the following five categories:

1. Talent Management is an Investment.

2. Effective Talent Management Requires a Systems Approach.

3. Effective Talent Management Must Balance the Needs of the Individuals with the Needs of the Organization.

4. Talent Management Must Ensure Accurate Job- Person Fit.

5. The Talent Management System Must Empower Employees.

1 Andrew Tilghman, “Pentagon's quiet push for military personnel reform,”Military Times, 11 May, 2015. http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/05/11/personnel-reform-push/70895094/, Accessed 11 May, 2015.

3

This paper describes each of the 19 principles of TM and concludes with the following three recommendations for the use of these principles in the development, implementation, and assessment of an effective talent management system:

1. That these principles be integrated into the Army’s Talent Management Strategy.

2. That a collaborative planning team, with representation from all relevant stakeholders, use these principles as guidelines in the development of a TM model specifically tailored to meet the needs of the Army.

3. That these principles be operationalized and developed as measures of performance (MOP) for the Army’s TM system.

4

Introduction

After over a dozen years in conflict, the Army finds itself at an inflection point.2 Although the United States Army is currently recognized as among the finest and most effective warfighting forces in the world3, significant reductions in funding levels, rapid changes in technology4, and generational differences in Americans’ career expectations5 have led Army leaders to reemphasize the Human Dimension and reexamine the ways that it recruits, develops, promotes, and retains talent.6 The Army is now seeking to design, develop, and implement a system that will leverage a human capital enterprise to integrate talent management functions and effectively apply talent management principles across the Army Total Force.7 To support this effort, the Director of the Mission Command Center of Excellence (MC CoE) Capabilities Development Integration Directorate (CDID) assembled and designated a Talent Management Tiger Team (TMTT) to collaborate with the greater community of practice (CoP) in order to recommend a talent management strategy for the Army. This paper contributes to this endeavor by reviewing the professional and academic TM8 literature, and identifying the principles of TM that can be utilized as considerations and guidelines for the design, implementation, and assessment of a TM system.

Talent and Talent Management

This paper uses the definitions of talent and talent management published by the Army’s Office of Economic and Manpower Analysis (OEMA). Accordingly, talent is:

“…the unique intersection of skills, knowledge and behaviors in every person. Talent represents far more than the training, education and experiences provided by the Army. The fullness of each person's life

2 United States Army, “The Army Vision: Strategic Advantage in a Complex World,” Washington DC, 2015. 3 Global Firepower, “Countries Ranked by Military Strength,” accessed 2 April, 2015, http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp. 4 Michael J. Colarusso and David S. Lyle, Senior Officer Talent Management: Fostering Institutional Adaptability, (Carlisle Barracks, PA: United States Army War College Press, 2014), 18. 5 Lindsay Gellman, “How Employers Wrangle Restless Millennials,” The Wall Street Journal, http://www.wsj.com/article_email/how-employers-wrangle-restless-millennials-1430818203-lMyQjAxMTA1ODA5NTkwMzU2Wj, Accessed 5 May, 2015. 6 Andrew Tilghman, “Pentagon's Quiet Push for Military Personnel Reform,” Military Times, May 11, 2015. Accessed 11 May, 2015, http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/05/11/personnel-reform-push/70895094/. 7 United States Army Combined Arms Center, “Principles and Functions for the Army’s Talent Management Strategy,” DRAFT version 4, May 4, 2015, 3. 8 Due to the significant lack of consensus regarding definitions and differences, and the degree of overlap in the literature among the concepts of “talent management,” “strategic human resource management,” and “human capital management,” this paper reviewed and draws from the readily available professional and academic literature in all three areas.

5

experience, to include investments they've made in themselves, personal and familial relationships (networks), ethnographic and demographic background, preferences, hobbies, travel, personality, learning style, education, and a myriad number of other factors better suit them to some development or employment opportunities than others.”9

From that definition of talent, it follows that TM is the:

“…systematic planning for the right number and type of people to meet the Army's needs at all levels and at all times so that the majority of them are employed optimally. It integrates accessions, retention, development and employment strategies. Talent management begins with entry-level employees and aligns their talents against the demand for them during their entire careers, to include positions at the very top of the Army.”10

Talent Management Principles

Methodology

In an attempt to identify appropriate principles, the TMTT initially reviewed academic and professional literature dealing with TM, strategic human resource management, and human capital management. The TMTT additionally collaborated with other relevant entities in the Army’s Human Dimension CoP. Through this process, the TMTT identified 44 potential principles for further consideration. The TMTT then analyzed each of these potential principles to identify any overlap and redundancy, and to ensure that each passed the criteria of:

1. Feasibility: The principle dealt with something that could in fact be put into practice in the Army.

2. Suitability: There is sufficient reason to believe that, if put into practice, the principle would improve the effectiveness of the Army.

3. Congruency: The principle is consistent with the Army’s organizational strategy and culture.

Through this process, the TMTT arrived at 15 principles. The TMTT then collaborated with the CoP and other identified academic and industry experts in the fields of TM and strategic human resources management. As a result of this collaboration, the TMTT finished this process with 19 principles of TM which we then grouped thematically into

9 The U.S. Army Office of Economics and Manpower Analysis, “Talent Management,” 2013, 1. Accessed 9 Apr 2015, http://talent.army.mil/ Talent Management. 10 Ibid.

6

five categories. These are the guiding principles that should be viewed as a systems frame to be applied to the core functions of the Army's human capital management enterprise and the career life cycle of all Army professionals through a holistic, integrated approach. These principles describe the why of TM. 11

Talent Management Principles

1. Talent Management is an Investment. While TM is not free, it should be

considered an investment critical to an organization’s success.12 There is nothing

more important to an organization’s success than the ability to consistently

recruit, motivate, and retain the right people with the knowledge and skills

needed by the organization.13 However, as they should do with all investments,

the organization’s leadership must continuously assess the return on investment

for the various aspects of the TM system and the system as a whole.14,15 This

view is especially important given the Army’s current fiscal limitations. Many

organizations that find themselves facing budget reductions cut investments in

their strategic TM programs and, as a result, enjoy short-term relief but suffer

strategic failure in the mid and long terms.16

2. Effective Talent Management Requires a Systems Approach.

a. Internal Synergy. The TM system must be designed with practices that

complement each other.1718 This is also known as “horizontal fit”.

Organizations with TM practices specifically designed to complement

11 United States Army Combined Arms Center, “Principles and Functions for the Army’s Talent Management Strategy,” DRAFT version 4, 7-8. 12 Mary Crannell, personal communication, 13 April 2015. 13 V. Rani Devi, V., “Employee Engagement is a Two-Way Street,” Human Resource Management International Digest. 17 no.2 (2009): 3-4. 14 John W. Boudreau and Peter M. Ramstad, “Talentship and the New Paradigm for Human Resource Management: From Professional Practices to Strategic Decision Science,” Human Resource Planning 28, no.2 (2005): 17-26. 15 David P. Lepak, Hui Lao, Yunghyung Chung, and Erika E. Harden, “A Conceptual Review of Human Resource Management Systems in Strategic Human Resource Management Research, “Compensation and Incentives: Practice vs. Theory,” Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management 25, (2006): 217-271. 16 Kevin Coyne, Shawn T. Coyne, and Edward J. Coyne, Sr., “When You’ve Got to Cut Costs – Now,” Harvard Business Review May (2010), Accessed 6 May 2015. https://hbr.org/2010/05/when-youve-got-to-cut-costs-now. 17 Lloyd Baird and Ilan Meshoulam, “Managing Two Fits of Strategic Human Resource Management,” Academy of Management Review 13, no.1 (1988): 118. 18 John E. Delery, “Issues of Fit in Strategic Human Resource Management: Implications for Research,” Human Resource Management Review 8, no.3 (1998): 305.

7

each other tend to enjoy higher levels of performance. 19

b. Vertical Consistency. TM practices and processes must be nested into

organizational strategy, values, culture, and operating concepts. 20,21,22

This is known as “vertical fit.”

c. Single Integrator. Effective TM systems require integration to prevent

bureaucratic tendencies that may lead to silos, independent fiefdoms,

and calcified procedures that have ceased to be optimal for the

organization.23

d. Senior Leaders LEAD Change. The Army’s senior leaders need to lead the

process to design, implement, and assess of the overhauled TM system.

More importantly, they will need to be vigorous advocates of the process

in order to foster the cultural change necessary for effective

organizational transformation.

e. Branding. The organization’s branding must appeal to those whose

talents and skills are required for organizational success. It must also be

authentic with its strategy and operating concepts so that the employees

find the organization they join consistent with the organization as

advertised.24

f. Tailored to Fit the Organization. There are no “one-size-fits-all” TM

systems. Each organization requires a TM system specifically tailored to

its unique situation and needs.25

19 R. Richardson and Thompson, M. “The Impact of People Management Practices on Business Performance: A Literature Review.” London: Institute of Personnel and Development, 1999. 10. 20 Sven Kepes, John E. Delery, and Nina Gupta, “Strategic Human Resource Management: A Systems Perspective,” Academy of Management Proceedings, 2008, no. 1, (2008): 5-6. 21 Lee Dyer and Jeff Erickson, “Human Resource Strategies and Firm Performance: What Do We Know and Where Do We Need to Go?” 14. 22 Wright and Snell “Toward a Unifying Framework for Exploring Fit and Flexibility in Strategic Human Resource Management,” 756-762. 23 Baird and Meshoulam, “Managing Two Fits of Strategic Human Resource Management,”120-121. 24 Edward E. Lawler III, and Christopher G. Worley, “Nine Principles for Sustainable Talent Management,” Center for Effective Organizations, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, March, 2011, accessed 11 April, 2015, http://ceo.usc.edu. 25 Casey Ichniowski, Kathryn Shaw, and Giovanna Prennushi, “The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines,” The American Economic Review, 87, no. 3, (1997): 291-313.

8

g. Balance Completeness with Simplicity. The TM system must balance the

requirement for completeness with the need for simplicity. The

organization’s TM system must be intuitive and culturally aligned so that

leaders and managers can effectively implement it and identify when it is

need of change.26

3. Effective Talent Management Must Balance the Needs of the Individuals with

the Needs of the Organization.

a. Individualism and Collectivism. The TM system must balance the need

for talent-based, individualized treatment and career paths of the

employees with the need for an organizational culture characterized by

team orientation, unit cohesion, and selfless service.

b. Identifying and Leveraging Individual Talents. An organization’s TM

system must accurately assess each employee’s unique talents and

interests throughout his or her career, and develop and employ him or

her accordingly.2728

c. Diverse Career Portfolios. In order to be agile and adaptive, an

organization must have a TM system that supports the development of

diverse career portfolios and the retention of a broad talent pool.2930

d. Validity and Transparency. Criteria and processes for selection,

promotion, and placement must be valid and reliable, based upon a

combination of skills, abilities, and potential, of which time may not be a

driving consideration. The system must also be characterized by

transparency,31 and be viewed as such by the members of the

organization.32

26 Ted Ehlert, “Investing in Human Capital for the Future of War: The Price of Adaptation and Victory,” The Medium online https://medium.com/the-bridge/investing-in-human-capital-for-the-future-of-war-2bbceab64e, accessed 11 April 2015. 27 D.G. Collins and K. Mellahi, “Strategic Talent Management: A Review and Research Agenda,” Human Resource Management Review 19 no.4 (2009): 304-313. 28 United States Army, “The Army Vision: Strategic Advantage in a Complex World,” Washington DC, 2015, 12. 29 Lawler and Worley, “Nine Principles for Sustainable Talent Management,” 2-3. 30 Patrick M. Wright and Gary C. McMahan, “Theoretical Perspectives for Strategic Human Resource Management,” Journal of Management 18 no.2 (1992): 295-320. 31 Tom James, “Talent Management,” Army Leader Development Forum 14-2, 26 February, 2014. 32 Frank J. Landy and Laura Shankster, “Personnel Selection and Placement,” Annual Review of Psychology 45, (1994): 261-96

9

4. Talent Management Must Ensure Accurate Job- Person Fit.

a. Optimizing All Talent. To achieve human performance optimization, TM

must apply to all of the organization’s human capital and all cohorts; not

just the organization’s top performers.33

b. KSB Driven. The knowledge, skills, and behaviors required by the

organization must drive the TM system.34,35

c. Right Person—Right Job—Right Team. Effective TM must ensure the

organization has the right number of the right people in the right places

at the right times doing the right things on the right team. This Job –

Person alignment is measured at a single point in time. 36

d. Enabling Organizational Agility. The TM system must be able to

continuously assess and detect the need for change and rapidly transition

to a more optimal configuration as the strategic environment changes.

This organizational agility is measured over spans of time.37

5. The Talent Management System Must Empower Employees.

a. Employee Empowerment. TM strategies must emphasize and enable

employee involvement in their career planning and career decisions. 38

These decisions should be made to the mutual benefit of the individual,

the team, and the organization.

b. Enhanced Employee Self-Awareness. Increased and more accurate

employee self-awareness promotes enhanced individual career

33 Michael J. Colarusso, and David S. Lyle. “Senior Officer Talent Management: Fostering Institutional Adaptability.” Carlisle Barracks, PA: United States Army War College Press, 2014. 34 Ibid, 2. 35 Gert Stulp, Abraham P. Buunk, Simon Verhulst, and Thomas V. Pollet, “Tall Claims? Sense and Nonsense about the importance of Height of US Presidents,” The Leadership Quarterly (2012) http://dx.doi.org/ /10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.09.002, accessed 20 April, 2015. 36 Patrick M. Wright and Scott A. Snell “Toward a Unifying Framework for Exploring Fit and Flexibility in Strategic Human Resource Management,” The Academy of Management Review 23 no.4 (1998): 756-762. 37 Lee Dyer and Jeff Erickson, “Human Resource Strategies and Firm Performance: What Do We Know and Where Do We Need to Go?” CAHRS Working Paper #94-29. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies. 1994. Accessed 7 Apr, 2015. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cahrswp/254, 14. 38 Dyer and Erickson, ““Human Resource Strategies and Firm Performance: What Do We Know and Where Do We Need to Go?”

10

preferences, goal-setting, and self-improvement efforts.39 The TM

system must include instruments and processes, and hold managers at all

levels accountable for ensuring employees receive accurate and timely

feedback regarding their talents, behaviors, and performances.

c. Reward Desired Behavior. The TM system must effectively incentivize

the behaviors and performances needed for organizational success.40,41

Recommendations for the Way Forward

1. That these principles be integrated into the Army’s Talent Management Strategy.

2. That a collaborative planning team, with representation from all relevant

stakeholders, use these principles as guidelines in the development of a TM model specifically tailored to meet the needs of the Army.

3. That these principles be operationalized and developed as measures of performance (MOP) for the Army’s TM system.

39 Paul J. Silvia and Ann G. Phillips, “Self-Awareness, Self-Evaluation, and Creativity,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 30, no.8 (2004): 1009-1017. 40 Nandi Rajagopalan, “Strategic Orientations, Incentive Plan Adoptions, and Firm Performance: Evidence from Electric Utility Firms,” Strategic Management Journal 18, no.10 (1997): 761-785. 41 Steven Kerr, “On the Folly of Rewarding A, while Hoping for B,” The Academy of Management Journal 18, no. 4 (1975): 769-783.

11

References

Alter, Allen E. “The Corporate Make-Over: Companies with the need to overhaul outdated

business processes are turning to business re-engineering, a methodical technique for identifying and enhancing the essential while paring away the obsolete.” CIO December (1990): 32-42.

Andrews, Dee H., and Ludwika A. Goodson. “A Comparative Analysis of Models of Instructional

Design.” Journal of Instructional Development 3, no. 4 (1980): 2-16.

Arnold, Michael J. “The Future Security Environment: Why the US Army Must Differentiate and Grow Millennial Officer Talent.” 2015, Carlisle Barracks, PA: US Army War College.

Baird, Lloyd and Ilan Meshoulam. “Managing Two Fits of Strategic Human Resource Management.” Academy of Management Review 13, no.1 (1988):116-128.

Boot, Max. “War Made New: Technology, Warfare and the Course of History.” NY: Gotham

Books, 2006.

Boudreau, John W. and Peter M. Ramstad. “Talentship and the New Paradigm for Human Resource Management: From Professional Practices to Strategic Decision Science.” Human Resource Planning 28, no.2 (2005): 17-26.

Browne, Michael W., and Robert Cudeck. “Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit.” In Testing

Structural Equation Models, edited by Kenneth A. Bollen and J. Scott Long, 136-162. NY:Sage Publishing, 1993.

Burke, Warner W. “What Human Resource Practitioners need to know for the Twenty-First Century.” In Tomorrow’s HR Management, edited by Dave Ulrich, Michael R. Loset, and Gerry Lake. 96-110. NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1997.

Christensen, Ralph N. “Where is Human Resources?” In Tomorrow’s HR Management, edited by

Dave Ulrich, Michael R. Loset, and Gerry Lake. NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1997. Collins, D.G. and K. Mellahi. “Strategic Talent Management: A review and research agenda.”

Human Resource Management Review 19, no.4 (2009): 304-313. Colarusso, Michael J., and David S. Lyle. “Senior Officer Talent Management: Fostering

Institutional Adaptability.” Carlisle Barracks, PA: United States Army War College Press, 2014.

Coyne, Kevin, Shawn T. Coyne, and Edward J. Coyne, Sr. “When You’ve Got to Cut Costs – Now.” Harvard Business Review. May (2010), Accessed 6 May 2015. https://hbr.org/2010/05/when-youve-got-to-cut-costs-now.

12

Delery, John E. “Issues of Fit in Strategic Human Resource Management: Implications for Research.” Human Resource Management Review 8, no.3 (1998): 289-309.

Devi, V. Rami. “Employee Engagement is a Two-Way Street.” Human Resource Management International Digest. 17, no.2 (2009): 3-4.

Dorner, Dietrich. “The Logic of Failure: Why Things Go Wrong and What Can We Do to Make

Them Right.” Translated by Rita and Robert Kimber. NY: Metropolitan Books, 1989. Dyer, Lee, and Jeff Erickson. “Dynamic Organizations: Achieving Marketplace Agility through

Workforce Scalability.” CAHRS Working Paper #06-12. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies. 2006. Accessed 6 Apr, 2015. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cahrswp/454.

Dyer, Lee, and Todd Reeves. “Human Resource Strategies and Firm Performance: What Do We

Know and Where Do We Need to Go?” CAHRS Working Paper #94-29. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies. 1994. Accessed 7 Apr, 2015. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cahrswp/254.

Ehlert, Ted. “Investing in Human Capital for the Future of War: The Price of Adaptation and Victory.” The Medium Online. Accessed 11 April 2015. https://medium.com/the-bridge/investing-in-human-capital-for-the-future-of-war-2bbceab64e.

Gellman, Lindsay. “How Employers Wrangle Restless Millennials.” The Wall Street Journal. Accessed 5 May, 2015. http://www.wsj.com/article_email/how-employers-wrangle-restless-millennials-1430818203-lMyQjAxMTA1ODA5NTkwMzU2Wj.

George, Alexander, L. “Case Studies and Theory Development: The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison.” In Diplomacy: New Approaches in History, Theory, and Policy, edited by Paul G. Lauren, 43-68. NY: Free Press, 1979.

Ginzberg, Eli, and John L. Herma. “Talent and Performance.” NY: Columbia University Press, NY.

1964.

Global Firepower, “Countries Ranked by Military Strength,” accessed 2 April, 2015, http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp.

Heskett, Jim. “Why Can’t We Figure Out How to Select Leaders?” Harvard Business School,

Working Knowledge. 05 FEB 2009. Accessed 27 Mar, 2015. http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6103.html.

Holling, C.S. “Understanding the Complexity of Economic, Ecological, and Social Systems.”

Ecosystems 4 (2001): 390 - 405.

Ichniowski, Casey, Kathryn Shaw, and Giovanna Prennushi, “The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity: A Study of Steel Finishing Lines,” The American

13

Economic Review 87, no. 3 (1997): 291-313.

James, Tom. “Talent Management.” Army Leader Development Forum 14-2, 26 February, 2014.

Kepes, Sven, John E. Delery, and Nina Gupta. "Strategic Human Resource Management: A Systems Perspective." Academy of Management Proceedings, 2008, no. 1 (2008): 1-6.

Kerr, Steven. “On the Folly of Rewarding A, while Hoping for B.” The Academy of Management Journal 18, no. 4 (1975): 769-783.

Landy, Frank J. and Laura Shankster. “Personnel Selection and Placement.” Annual Review of Psychology 45, (1994): 261-296.

Langley, Ann. “Between ‘Paralysis by Analysis’ and ‘Extinction by Instinct.’” Sloan Management

Review 36, no.3 (1995): 63-76.

Lawler III, Edward E. and Christopher G. Worley. “Nine Principles for Sustainable Talent Management.” Center for Effective Organizations, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California. March, 2011. Accessed 11 April, 2015, http://ceo.usc.edu.

Lepak, David P., Hui Lao, Yunghyung Chung, and Erika E. Harden, “A Conceptual Review of Human Resource Management Systems in Strategic Human Resource Management Research, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management 25 (2006): 217-271.

Lubold, Gordon, Kellie Lunney, and Molly O’Toole. “Special Report: Military Retirement.” Defense One. March 2015. Accessed 28 March, 2015 http://www.defenseone.com/reports/special-report-military-retirement/108415/.

Martin, Jean and Conrad Schmidt. “How to Keep Your Top Talent.” Harvard Business Review May (2010): 14-28.

Rajagopalan, Nandi. “Strategic Orientations, Incentive Plan Adoptions, and Firm Performance: Evidence from Electric Utility Firms.” Strategic Management Journal 18, no.10 (1997): 761-785.

Richardson, R. and Thompson, M. “The Impact of People Management Practices on Business Performance: A Literature Review.” London: Institute of Personnel and Development, 1999.

Silvia, Paul J. and Ann G. Phillips. “Self-Awareness, Self-Evaluation, and Creativity.” Personality

and Social Psychology Bulletin 30, no.8 (2004): 1009-1017.

Snell, Scott A., James W. Dean. “Integrated Manufacturing and Human Resource Management: A Human Capital Perspective. The Academy of Management Journal 35, no.3 (1992): 467-504.

14

Stulp, Gert, Abraham P. Buunk, Simon Verhulst, and Thomas V. Pollet. “Tall Claims? Sense and Nonsense about the importance of Height of US Presidents.” The Leadership Quarterly (2012) Accessed 20 April, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/ /10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.09.002.

Sun, Yong, Li Ma, and Joseph Matthew. “Improving Asset Management Process Modelling and

Integration.” In Asset Condition, Information Systems, and Decision Models, edited by Joe E. Amadi-Echendu, Roger Willet, Kerry Brown, and Joseph Matthew. 71-87, London: Springer, 2012.

Thie, Harry J. “Planning the Future Military Workforce.” In New Challenges, New Tools for Defense Decisionmaking, edited by Stuart E. Johnson, Martin C. Libicki, and Gregory F. Treverton. RAND Corporation, 2003.

Tilghman, Andrew. “Pentagon's quiet push for military personnel reform.” Military Times, 11 May, 2015. Accessed 11 May, 2015. http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/05/11/personnel-reform-push/70895094/.

United States Army. “The Army Vision: Strategic Advantage in a Complex World.” Washington DC, 2015.

United States Army Combined Arms Center. “Principles and Functions for the Army’s Talent Management Strategy.” DRAFT version 4. May 4, 2015, 3.

United States Army Office of Economics and Manpower Analysis. “Talent Management.” 2013. Accessed 9 Apr 2015, http://talent.army.mil/ Talent Management.

Weiss, David S. “High Performance HR: Transforming Human Resources for Competitive

Advantage.” SF: Jossey-Bass, 1999. Wicklund, Robert A. “The influence of Self-Awareness on Human Behavior.” American Scientist

67, no. 2 (1979): 187-193.

Wright, Patrick M., and Gary C. McMahan. “Theoretical Perspectives for Strategic Human Resource Management.” Journal of Management 18, no.2 (1992): 295-320.

Wright, Patrick M., and Scott A. Snell. “Toward a Unifying Framework for Exploring Fit and

Flexibility in Strategic Human Resource Management.” The Academy of Management Review 23, no.4 (1998): 756-762.