development interventions are to perceptions of distributive, procedural and “prone interactional and Cobb, 1999, p.177) by employees. As one form of justice fairness” (Wooten influences the others cumulative effects serve to enhance the impact of fairness “the of the actions (Wooten and Cobb, 1999, p.177). perceptions” organisation’s The review also established a link between perceived organisational justice and employee reactions to exclusive TM practices (, , ), and it found that in some cases, such as with those not labelled as talented, that exclusive TM was damaging to some perceptions of employees’ organizational justice, such as the findings that employees experienced ‘untalented’ marginality, isolation, distress and feelings of being undervalued. As stated, the links between the concepts is mostly examined under SET (, , , , ). However, under SET, for employees to be engaged respect and trust must flow in both directions, with transparent processes throughout (Doherty, 2010). If employees do not perceive they are being treated fairly the employment relationship can suffer (Purang, 2011). The review has shown that exclusive TM is damaging to some employees and their perceptions of justice (, , ), thus we posit that exclusive TM, through its effects on perceived organisational justice, can have an effect on employee engagement. Study Limitations This is a conceptual paper, with the conceptual model developed from a detailed review of the literature. It requires empirical testing, preferably a longitudinal study, which would track the categories of employees considered or not in different organisation case studies, ‘talent’ in terms of their employee engagement different scales have been scores. “At least seven developed to measure (), most based on paper. However the engagement” Kahn’s (1990) most popular scale (, , ), the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) by , is based on engagement being the antithesis of burnout. This research could be supplemented with
development interventions are “prone to perceptions of distributive, procedural and interactional fairness” (Wooten and Cobb, 1999, p.177) by employees. As one form of justice influences the others “the cumulative effects serve to enhance the impact of fairness perceptions” of the organisation’s actions (Wooten and Cobb, 1999, p.177). The review also established a link between perceived organisational justice and employee reactions to exclusive TM practices (, , ), and it found that in some cases, such as with those not labelled as talented, that exclusive TM was damaging to some employees’ perceptions of organizational justice, such as the findings that ‘untalented’ employees experienced marginality, isolation, distress and feelings of being undervalued. As stated, the links between the concepts is mostly examined under SET (, , , , ). However, under SET, for employees to be engaged respect and trust must flow in both directions, with transparent processes throughout (Doherty, 2010). If employees do not perceive they are being treated fairly the employment relationship can suffer (Purang, 2011). The review has shown that exclusive TM is damaging to some employees and their perceptions of justice (, , ), thus we posit that exclusive TM, through its effects on perceived organisational justice, can have an effect on employee engagement. Study Limitations This is a conceptual paper, with the conceptual model developed from a detailed review of the literature. It requires empirical testing, preferably a longitudinal study, which would track the categories of employees considered ‘talent’ or not in different organisation case studies, in terms of their employee engagement scores. “At least seven different scales have been developed to measure engagement” (), most based on Kahn’s (1990) paper. However the most popular scale (, , ), the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) by , is based on engagement being the antithesis of burnout. This research could be supplemented with
Exclusive-Talent-Management-Perceived-Organisational-Justice-Employee-Engagement-.docx