Management Research Review

Unlocking the “black box” in the talent management employee performance

relationship: evidence from Ghana
James Kwame Mensah, Justice Nyigmah Bawole, Nisada Wedchayanon,
Article information:
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

To cite this document:

James Kwame Mensah, Justice Nyigmah Bawole, Nisada Wedchayanon, (2016) "Unlocking
the “black box” in the talent management employee performance relationship: evidence from
Ghana", Management Research Review, Vol. 39 Issue: 12, pp.1546-1566, https://doi.org/10.1108/
MRR-08-2015-0190
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-08-2015-0190
Downloaded on: 05 November 2018, At: 03:41 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 89 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1873 times since 2016*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2015),"A “coalesced framework” of talent management and employee performance: For further
research and practice", International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 64
Iss 4 pp. 544-566 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-07-2014-0100">https://doi.org/10.1108/
IJPPM-07-2014-0100</a>
(2014),"Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance",
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 63 Iss 3 pp. 308-323 <a
href="https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-01-2013-0008">https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-01-2013-0008</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:490284 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-8269.htm

MRR
39,12
Unlocking the “black box” in the
talent management employee
performance relationship
1546 Evidence from Ghana
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

Received 25 August 2015 James Kwame Mensah

Revised 23 February 2016 Graduate School of Public Administration,
Accepted 25 February 2016
National Institute of Development Administration, Bangkok, Thailand
Justice Nyigmah Bawole
Department of Public Administration and Health Services Management,
University of Ghana Business School, Legon, Ghana, and
Nisada Wedchayanon
Graduate School of Public Administration,
National Institute of Development Administration, Bangkok, Thailand

Abstract
Purpose – Combining insights from the social exchange and signalling theories, the purpose of this
paper is twofold: first, to investigate the relationship between talent management (TM) practices and
four dimensions of talented employees’ performance; and, second, to examine the mediating role of job
satisfaction and affective commitment on this relationship in the Ghanaian banking context.
Design/methodology/approach – Structural equation modelling was used to survey data from 232
employees who are part of a talent pool in the Ghanaian banking sector.
Findings – The findings of this paper showed that TM practices increase positive talented employee
performance of task, contextual and adaptive, whereas it reduces counterproductive behaviours.
Second, talented employee work attitudes of job satisfaction and affective commitment partially
mediate the relationship between TM practices and four dimensions of talented employees’
performance.
Research limitations/implications – This study used cross-sectional data; hence, conclusions
regarding causality cannot be made.
Practical implications – Management and organisations implementing and intending to implement
TM practices should implement and invest in TM practices that will trigger employee work attitudes to
achieve full employee performance.
Originality/value – This paper advances the literature by exploring the relationship between TM
practices and four dimensions of talented employees’ performance.
Keywords Job satisfaction, Ghana, Talent management, Affective commitment,
Employee performance
Paper type Research paper

Management Research Review

Vol. 39 No. 12, 2016
pp. 1546-1566
1. Introduction
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
2040-8269
Talent management (TM) has become the focus and centre of attention of both human
DOI 10.1108/MRR-08-2015-0190 resource management (HRM) scholars and practitioners since it entered the managerial
 lexicon in the 1990s. From the work by McKinsey consultants (Michaels et al., 2001), the Black box
field of TM has gained much attention and has consistently grown from infancy to
adolescence (Thunnissen et al., 2013). Thus, research on TM has proliferated from macro
(Bethke-Langenegger et al., 2011) to micro (Gelens et al., 2015; Luna-Arocas and Morley,
2015) levels. Scholars have found a relationship between TM and employee work
attitudes of affective commitment and job satisfaction (Chami-Malaeb and Garavan,
2013; Gelens et al., 2015; Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015). TM has also been found to be 1547
significantly related to employee performance (Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015). Several
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

other studies have found employee work attitudes as mediating variables in TM

research (Chami-Malaeb and Garavan, 2013; Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015).
Generally, it has been observed that organisations can enhance employee
performance through TM practices (Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015; Mensah, 2015).
Employee performance is seen as observable things people do that are relevant for the
goals of the organisation (Campbell et al., 1990). Employee performance has been
considered as a multi-dimensional concept made up of task, contextual, adaptive and
counterproductive behaviours (Motowidlo et al., 1997; Pulakos et al., 2000; Koopmans
et al., 2011). Task performance are actions specified in the job description and form part
of the formal reward system, whereas contextual performance is not directly on the job
but support the context in which organisational work is accomplished. Adaptive
performance is about adaptability to changes in a work system. Counterproductive
behaviours, on the other hand, are non-task behaviours that have negative
consequences for both the organisation and individuals (Koopmans et al., 2011).
Although there is growing popularity of the concepts of TM and the
multi-dimensionality of employee performance (Motowidlo, 2000; Koopmans et al., 2011;
Mensah, 2015), empirical research has not clearly studied how TM relates to the various
dimensions of employee performance. Luna-Arocas and Morley (2015) attempted this
but limited their study to one dimension. There have also been suggestions about how
TM could lead to employee performance, but most of these are conceptual (Collings and
Mellahi, 2009; Mensah, 2015) or practitioner (Gubman, 1998) papers that relied upon
anecdotal evidence and never tested the relationships empirically. In sum, we notice that
there has been a lot of interest in TM by academics, practitioners and business leaders,
but little is known about how TM relates to the various dimensions of employee
performance. Yet, this is appealing, as employee performance should eventually
translate into improved organisational performance (DeNisi and Smith, 2014). It will be
interesting to see how TM relates to the various dimensions of employee performance.
This gap in the literature has implications to the extent that we still have limited
knowledge of how TM influences various dimensions of employee performance
empirically (Mensah, 2015). The objective of our paper is two-fold: first, to investigate
the relationship between TM and four dimensions of employee performance; second, to
examine the mediating role of job satisfaction and affective commitment on this
relationship. These are important in the sense that they provide new insights into how
each dimension of employee performance will be increased or decreased through the
application of TM practices.
The findings of our paper showed that TM increases positive employee performance
of task, contextual and adaptive, whereas it reduces counterproductive behaviours.
Second, we found that employee work attitudes of job satisfaction and affective
commitment partially mediate the relationship between TM and the four dimensions of
 MRR employee performance. Overall, this article makes two main contributions to the TM
39,12 literature. First, the article addresses calls to examine the mediating mechanisms
through which TM leads to employee performance (Collings and Mellahi, 2009; Tarique
and Schuler, 2010; Dries, 2013). Second, the article advances the literature by
demonstrating empirically how TM relates to the various dimensions of employee
performance. The rest of the paper is organised as follows: Section 2 presents the
1548 literature review, and Section 3 focuses on the research model by explaining the
relationship between the various concepts in the study. Section 4 details our
methodology, and Section 5 presents the hypothesis testing and results of our study.
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

Section 6 provided a discussion of the findings. Section 7 provides the conclusions and
implications, Section 8 states the limitations and recommendations.

2. Literature review
2.1 Talent management
Interest in TM research has surged over the past two decades, and empirical evidence
has begun to rise since 2012 (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2015; Gallardo-Gallardo and
Thunnissen, 2016). This is because all the resources an organisation may have, talented
employees and systems for managing them are the most valuable. The high demand and
employment of talented employees and managing them have become vital subjects for
discussion after the publication of McKinsey specialists who declared “a war for talent”.
However, there is still limited consensus as to the meaning and scope of TM and the
methods to study the construct (Lewis and Heckman, 2006; Gallardo-Gallardo et al.,
2015). Although approaches vary, TM usually focuses on the differential treatment of
high-performing/high-potential employees by organisations that are considered as key
professionals either at present or in the future (Gelens et al., 2013). One of the most cited
definitions of TM, which is also adopted by this paper, is given by Collings and Mellahi
(2009) as:
[…] activities and processes that involve the systematic identification of key positions which
differentially contribute to the organisation’s sustainable competitive advantage, the
development of a talent pool of high potential and high performing incumbents to fill these
roles, and the development of a differentiated human resource architecture to facilitate filling
these positions with competent incumbents and to ensure their continued commitment to the
organisation (p. 311).
Early definitions of TM concentrate on the individuals, but the focus has since shifted to
strategic positions that drive organisational performance (Minbaeva and Collings,
2013). This paradigm shift leads to the identification of “high impact” or “pivotal” roles
to be filled with talented employees. Iles et al. (2010) reiterate that TM is critical to
organisational success, being able to give a competitive edge through the identification,
development and redeployment of talented employees. Randall (2011) maintained that
with globalisation and technology, competitors can replicate every single innovation.
Consequently, talents are needed to keep innovation ongoing and continuous for
sustained competitive advantage. In fact, as the knowledge economy continues to
expand, the value of outstanding talents will continue to be recognised (Hetrick and
Martin, 2006).
Two perspectives of TM have been discussed in the literature. On one hand, the exclusive
perspective takes a narrow view and argues that TM system should cover specific
individuals who are considered as “high flyers”, “talented” and “A players” (Morton, 2005;
 Iles et al., 2010; Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2013). On the other hand, the inclusive perspective Black box
argues that every employee has “talent”, and that, ideally, every employee contributes to the
performance of the organisation (Mensah, 2015). Clearly, every individual’s role is part of the
overall performance of the organisation; however, some individuals have rare skills that
are crucial and contribute heavily to the competitiveness of the organisation. Added to this
is the fact that some positions are very strategic and contribute towards the achievement of
organisational goals than others (Boudreau and Ramstad, 2005). Therefore, adopting an 1549
inclusive perspective results in over investment and waste of resources when a star
performer is in a position with little potential for differentiation (Minbaeva and Collings,
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

2013). In addition, the difficulties involved in recruiting, managing and retaining talents
make TM more exclusive in practice.
Another strand of research wonders whether TM is just a re-branding exercise of HRM.
On one hand, TM is simply viewed as a repackaging of old ideas under a new name, “old
wine in new bottles” (Lewis and Heckman, 2006; Cappelli, 2008; Iles et al., 2010). On the other
hand, TM is seen as fundamentally different from HRM and cannot simply be a
management fad (Chuai et al., 2008; Minbaeva and Collings, 2013). The difficulty of making
a distinction between HRM and TM is partially attributed to the lack of a common
understanding of TM in both academic and practitioner literature. The literature appears to
show a lot of similarities between HRM and TM, but workforce segmentation is generally
seen as the key differentiating principle between TM and HRM (Collings and Mellahi, 2009;
Minbaeva and Collings, 2013). Hence, TM is essentially about employee segmentation, as it
is not practical or desirable to fill all positions with “A” performers. In other words, TM
requires the HR manager to have a talent mind-set in investing in strategic positions that
drive organisational performance (Hatum, 2010). Doing this will lead to a deep conviction
that talents in strategic positions lead to better performance, as opposed to the notion that
people are our most important assets.
TM has been found to lead to higher job satisfaction (Collings and Mellahi, 2009;
Mensah, 2015), affective commitment (Chami-Malaeb and Garavan, 2013; Gelens et al.,
2015), higher retention rates (Bhatnagar, 2007; Hughes and Rog, 2008) and employee
performance (Gelens et al., 2014; Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015). TM can reduce
expenses and labour costs and improve competitiveness (Jackson et al., 2009) and
business performance (Yapp, 2009; Ulrich and Allen, 2014). However, some researchers
have argued that TM is likely to have some negative consequences (Bothner et al., 2011;
Dries, 2013; Swailes, 2013). The segmentation nature of TM may discourage,
de-motivate, frustrate and cause dissatisfaction and jealousy of those employees who
are not in the talent pool, resulting in lower productivity or increased turnover (Bothner
et al., 2011). It promotes inequality, making it a sensitive matter (Gelens et al., 2013), and
exclusion from the TM pool could be interpreted as somehow inferior, which might lead
to lower self-efficacy (Iles, 2013; Swailes, 2013). Hence, Iles (2013, p. 303) put the question
“can TM be ethical?”. Pfeffer (2001) posits that TM leads to overemphasises on “A
players” to the neglect of team contribution, whereas Larsen et al. (1998) stresses that
talent label may lead to arrogance and complacency.

2.2 Employee performance

The concept of employee performance is of high relevance for individuals and
organisations alike. This is because for organisations to meet the needs of their
stakeholders, employee performance is paramount. This reflects the expression that
 MRR organisations are the people in them, and that people make up the place (Schneider,
39,12 1987). In general terms, employee performance is the ability of individuals to realise
their work goals, fulfil work expectations and accomplish job standards set by their
organisation (Campbell et al., 1990; Viswesvaran and Ones, 2000). Koopmans et al. (2011)
maintain that employee performance entails three notions: first, performance should be
defined in terms of behaviour rather than results; second, work performance includes
1550 only those behaviours that are relevant to the organisation’s goals, and third,
performance is multidimensional – task, contextual, adaptive and counterproductive
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

behaviours. Task performance involves patterns of behaviour that provide direct

support for the organisation’s core technical processes (Van Scotter et al., 2000). Task
performance covers a person’s contribution to organisational performance, actions that
are part of the formal reward system, and addresses the requirements as specified in the
job descriptions (Williams and Karau, 1991). However, what constitutes core job tasks
can differ from job to job (Tett et al., 2000).
Contextual performance on the other hand are behaviours that are not directly related
to the job, but support the psychological and social context in which task activities are
performed (Borman and Motowidlo, 1993; Koopmans et al., 2011). Koopmans et al. (2011)
argued that contextual performance comprises behaviours that go beyond the formally
prescribed work goals, such as taking on an extra task, showing initiative or coaching
newcomers on the job. The changing work environment means employees need to
constantly adapt to the work environment, hence the necessity and emergence of
adaptive performance in the world of work (Pulakos et al., 2000; Sinclair and Tucker,
2006). Adaptive performance is the ability of employees to adapt to changes in work
tasks such as being flexible and versatile (Pulakos et al., 2000; Griffin et al., 2007).
Pro-activity, innovativeness and taking initiative (Fay and Sonnentag, 2010) have all
become part of adaptive performance in this rapidly changing work environment.
Counterproductive behaviour is a non-task behaviour that has negative consequences
for both the organisation and the individual (Viswesvaran and Ones, 2000; Rotundo and
Sackett, 2002). There have been controversies about whether contextual performance
and organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB) are the same. Although they have
different origins and definitions, Motowidlo (2000) argued that the labelling issues
are less important especially considering Organ’s (1997) redefinition of OCB to mean the
same as contextual performance. In our study, we use contextual performance, because
we believe this type of performance maintains and enhances the social and
psychological context of work and, more importantly, because we want to contrast its
antecedents with those of task performance.

Figure 1.
Talent management –
employee
performance linkage
 3. Research model and hypotheses Black box
Figure 1 shows an operational model linking TM to employee performance. The model
is adapted from various frameworks (Collings and Mellahi, 2009; Luna-Arocas and
Morley, 2015; Mensah, 2015). This framework is a blend of insights from the social
exchange theory (SET) and the signalling theory (ST). From the SET perspective, an
organisation that acts in positive ways towards employees creates reciprocity so that
employees generally respond in positive ways that are beneficial to the organisation 1551
(Blau, 1964). SET provides a helpful lens through which to understand the mechanisms
involved in how talented employees interpret and react to TM practices. Thus, TM
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

practices are seen as an investment in the identification, attraction and subsequent

training and development of talented employees. Talented employees perceive TM as
valuable support on the part of the organisation and are likely to pay back the
organisation (e.g. performance). Similarly, from the perspective of the ST, TM practices
communicate messages to talented employees to perform (Spence, 1973; Gelens et al.,
2015). Thus, investments in TM practices send a signal (Spence, 1973) to talented
employees to perform as long as these investments are the preferred choices of talented
employees. Combining insights from the SET and ST helps to explain the relationship
and mechanisms through which TM leads to the four dimensions of employee
performance. The details and specific parts of the proposed framework (Figure 1) are
explained in the next subsections.

3.1 Talent management and employee performance

Exceptional business performance is driven by superior talented employees.
Luna-Arocas and Morley (2015) found a positive relationship between TM and job
performance. Other scholars have found that employees who are identified as talented
demonstrate higher work effort, leading to higher performance than those who were not
identified as such (Gelens et al., 2014; Björkman et al., 2013). Generally, these studies
have concluded that employee performance is a consequence of TM. Although the
extant literature shows that employee performance has four dimensions (Koopmans
et al., 2011), previous studies have been limited, because they fail to address these four
dimensions. These studies treat employee performance as if was a monothematic
concept.
In our study, we expect talented employee to be competent on their job (task
performance), be able to commit extra effort on the task (contextual performance) and be
innovative and generate new ideas (adaptive performance). TM is expected to be
negatively related to counterproductive behaviours, as most talented employees may
not engage in behaviours that harm their organisation (Mensah, 2015). One reason may
account for this negative relationship – TM emphasises on the identification of talented
individuals, and this may lead to the avoidance of behaviours that negatively affect the
organisation. Applying the SET, when an organisation invests in TM practices, talented
employees feel obligated to reciprocate with positive behaviours such as high
performance. Similarly, the ST suggests that TM practices send signals to talented
employees to perform. Based on the preceding discussion, we hypothesise that:
H1. A positive relationship exists between TM and (a) task performance, (b)
contextual performance and (c) adaptive performance, (d) but a negative
relationship with counterproductive behaviours.
 MRR 3.2 Talent management and employee work attitudes
39,12 Studies have found a relationship between TM and employee work attitudes, especially
job satisfaction and affective commitment (Björkman et al., 2013; Chami-Malaeb and
Garavan, 2013; Gelens et al., 2015; Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015). Bethke-Langenegger
et al. (2011) found that TM initiatives increased commitment in their study of 138 Swiss
companies. In the Lebanese context, Chami-Malaeb and Garavan (2013) found that
1552 talent development practices had a positive relationship with affective commitment. A
study of 769 managers and professionals in nine Nordic multinational corporations
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

revealed that employees who perceive that they have been identified as “talent” were
more likely to be associated with commitment than those who either perceive that they
have not been identified or do not know whether they have been identified (Björkman
et al., 2013). Gelens et al. (2015), in their comparative study of designated and
non-designated as high potentials, found that employees designated as high potentials
experienced more affective commitment than the non-designated as high potentials.
Hence, we hypothesized as follows:
H2. A positive relationship exists between TM and affective commitment.
Similarly, research has found a relationship between TM and employee satisfaction. In
a study of 198 public and private sector employees, Luna-Arocas and Morley (2015)
found a positive relationship between TM and employee satisfaction. Gelens et al. (2013)
concluded that TM leads to higher levels of job satisfaction, even though this is
mediated by perceptions of distributive justice. Bethke-Langenegger et al. (2011) found
that TM initiatives that are aimed at retaining and developing talented employees have
positive impact on job satisfaction of talented employees. Finally, two conceptual
frameworks (Collings and Mellahi, 2009; Mensah, 2015) argued that TM is related to
employee satisfaction. Indeed, the SET and the ST also serve as theoretical
underpinnings of the relationship between TM and employee work attitudes. Thus, TM
practices send a good signal to talented employees in the talent pool that their
organisation cares about their well-being, making them committed and satisfied with
their organisation. Accordingly, we hypothesized as follows:
H3. A positive relationship exists between TM and employee satisfaction.

3.3 Employee work attitudes and employee performance

Many studies have found a relationship between work attitudes and employee
performance, asserting that satisfied and committed employees are likely to apply more
efforts leading to employee performance. For instance, Iaffaldano and Muchinsky
(1985), Morrison (1997), and Luna-Arocas and Morley (2015) found positive
relationships between job satisfaction and employee performance. Mcshane and Von
Glinow (2000) maintain that job satisfaction and performance may occur, because
satisfied employees engage in more OCB. However, Bowling (2007) argued that a
cause and effect relationship does not exist between job satisfaction and performance.
We adopt the notion that job satisfaction will be positively related to positive
performance behaviours but will be negatively related to counterproductive behaviours.
We therefore hypothesised as follows:
 H4. A positive relationship exists between job satisfaction and (a) task performance, Black box
(b) contextual performance and (c) adaptive performance (d) but a negative
relationship with counterproductive behaviours.
Among the three components of organisational commitment, affective commitment has
been the most widely studied, because it has been proven to have consistent
relationships with organisational outcomes such as performance, attendance and
retention (Meyer and Allen, 1997). The relationship is such that committed employees 1553
are more likely to put in their maximum effort and, therefore, are considered as
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

performing employees (Meyer and Allen, 1997). Khan et al. (2010) found that employee
commitment has a positive and significant impact on performance. In other words, the
willingness to exert effort is mostly considered as a direct outcome of affective
commitment. Hence, we make the following hypothesis:
H5. A positive relationship exists between affective commitment and (a) task
performance, (b) contextual performance and (c) adaptive performance (d) but a
negative relationship with counterproductive behaviours.

3.4 Relationship between talent management and employee performance: mediating

role of work attitudes
Luna-Arocas and Morley (2015) concluded that TM impacts on job performance, but
through job satisfaction as a mediator. Collings and Mellahi (2009) and Mensah (2015), in
their conceptual frameworks, argued that the relationship between TM and
performance is not straight and that the relationship is mediated by employee
satisfaction. It can also be derived from the SET that TM represents supportive
organisational practices which will lead to job satisfaction, and these satisfied
employees will reciprocate their employers with performance. Similarly, the
relationship between TM and performance is mediated by affective commitment
(Collings and Mellahi, 2009; Mensah, 2015). Oehley and Theron (2010) argued that
affective commitment is an intervening variable between TM and employee
performance. Luna-Arocas and Morley (2015) has proposed that affective commitment
be used as a mediating variable in the TM employee performance relationship. The SET
and the ST also help in explaining the mediating relationship between TM and
employee performance. Thus, when TM practices trigger employee attitudes, these
attitudes then lead to employee performance. Accordingly, we propose the following
hypotheses:
H6. Job satisfaction will mediate the relationship between TM and (a) task
performance, (b) contextual performance, (c) adaptive performance and (d)
counterproductive behaviours.
H7. Affective commitment will mediate the relationship between TM and (a) task
performance, (b) contextual performance, (c) adaptive performance and (d)
counterproductive behaviours.

4. Method
4.1 Sample
The banking sector is without doubt one of the sectors of the Ghanaian economy that
has visibly experienced the “talent war” mantra. This “talent war” is not only triggered
by the competition for talented employees between the banks (and potential new entrant
 MRR of foreign banks) alone but also competition from multinational corporations. To
39,12 withstand and cope with this challenge, TM practices have been implemented by
Ghanaian banks. To this end, they have created better alignment between their TM
practices and business growth aspirations. Some of the banks have adopted internally
run academies as one route to address the challenge of the talent shortage as the labour
market continues to heat up (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2014). The banks now have
1554 official positions for TM with names for such positions varying slightly (TM and
performance management; learning and talent development; leadership, learning and
talent development; etc.).
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

Our data were collected by means of a survey questionnaire distributed to licensed

banks in the Bank of Ghana database. The list of perceived talented employees was
obtained from the HR departments of these banks. Thus, all respondents had to meet a
pre-set criterion of being labelled talented employee. A simple random sampling
technique was then used to select the respondents (Babbie, 2013; Creswell, 2014). Of the
300 questionnaires distributed to talented employees, 232 usable questionnaires were
returned, representing a response rate of 77.3 per cent. Table I presents the demographic
characteristics of the respondents in terms their gender, age distribution, educational
level and job titles.

4.2 Measures
All the indicators in this study allowed respondents to answer on a five-point Likert
scale (1 ⫽ strongly disagree, 5 ⫽ strongly agree). TM practices were measured with five
items related to the banks’ deliberate practices in strategically managing their talent
pool. Instruments from previous studies (Chadee and Raman, 2012; Marescaux et al.,

Sample size (n ⫽ 232)

Demographic variable Category Frequency (%)

Gender Male 127 54.7

Female 105 45.3
Age (years) 21-30 29 12.5
31-40 100 43.1
41-50 99 42.7
51-60 4 1.7
Highest level of education Bachelor 58 25.0
Masters 170 73.3
PhD 1 0.4
Professional 3 1.3
Job titles Investment Banker 30 12.9
Financial Analyst 25 10.8
IT Specialist 27 11.6
Development Manager 12 5.2
HR Manager 9 3.9
Project Manager 33 14.2
Table I. Operations Manager 22 9.5
Demographic Corporate Banker 31 13.3
characteristics of Marketing Specialist 20 8.7
respondents Credit Risk Analyst 23 9.9
 2013; Raman et al., 2013; Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015) were examined and Black box
inspirations were taken from them in formulating the items to capture TM practices in
these banks. These items were pre-tested with a sample of employees before finally
administering the questionnaire. Sample item is “I am given differential treatment by
my bank”. Job satisfaction was measured with three items developed by Seashore et al.
(1982). This scale is “global” and the preferred measure of job satisfaction (Wanous et al.,
1997), because it focuses on employees’ perceptions of their job, rather than on different 1555
aspects of their work. Employees’ perception of their job is more likely to result in fewer
methodological concerns (Wanous et al., 1997). Sample item is “In general, I like working
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

here”. Affective commitment was measured with five items from the scale developed by
Meyer and Allen (1997). The affective commitment captures employees’ identification
with emotional attachment to and involvement in the organisation, and this has been
found to have a strong association with performance outcomes (Meyer et al., 2002).
In this study, we measured task performance using a five-item scale developed by
Koopmans et al. (2012). Sample item is “my quantity of work is higher than average”.
Studies that involve contextual performance often perceived the concept as
multi-dimensional (Van Scotter and Motowidlo, 1996; Motowidlo et al., 1997). For
instance, Van Scotter and Motowidlo (1996) divided contextual performance into two
separate dimensions: interpersonal facilitation and job dedication. They argued that
interpersonal facilitation consists of interpersonally oriented behaviours that contribute
to organisational goal, whereas job dedication centres on self-disciplined behaviours. In
a simple way, Koopmans et al. (2012) divided contextual performance into interpersonal
and organisational, which is similar to that of Van Scotter and Motowidlo (1996). We
measured contextual performance with eight items developed by Koopmans et al. (2012).
These items cover the two dimensions of contextual performance identified by scholars.
Sample item is “I often start new tasks myself, when my old ones are finished”.
Adaptive performance was measured using six items adopted from Koopmans et al.
(2012). Sample item is “I work at keeping my job knowledge up to date”. Although
counterproductive behaviours are often seen as one-dimensional construct, a number of
authors have divided it into two sub-dimensions based on the target of the behaviour,
namely, towards other individuals and towards the organisation (Mount et al., 2006;
Berry et al., 2007). We measured counterproductive behaviours using four items
developed by Koopmans et al. (2012). These items captured succinctly negative work
behaviours towards both other individuals and the organisation. Sample item is “I
purposely work slowly”.

4.3 Consistency of the research instrument

The consistency of the research instrument was tested with respect to content validity,
internal consistency, construct validity, composite reliability, discriminant validity and
common method bias. With respect to content validity, we conducted a thorough review
of the literature and adopted instruments that are well accepted and valid to represent
the constructs. We also pre-tested the instrument with experts, professionals and
academics and selected respondents for their adequacy and relevance. This helped
established content validity of the items (Straub, 1989). We examine the internal
consistency by evaluating the computed Cronbach alphas, which shows that the
instruments are reliable as all Cronbach alphas are higher than 0.70 (Hair et al., 2010;
Tabachnick and Fidell, 2014). The construct validity was examined by applying
 MRR confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using analysis of moment structures (AMOS), where
39,12 the average variance extracted (AVE) values are higher than 0.40, indicating
acceptability of the instruments (Hair et al., 2010). The calculated composite reliability
scores also indicated that the degree of construct reliability is acceptable (0.70 ⱖ).
We assessed discriminant validity by examining whether the square root of each
factor’s AVE is larger than its correlations with other factors. Table II shows that the
1556 correlation coefficients are significantly different from unity and are smaller than the
square root of each factor’s AVE, providing evidence for separate constructs (Byrne,
2009; Hair et al., 2010; Meyers et al., 2013). Finally, we assessed common method bias by
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

using Harman’s (1967) single factor test. After performing this test, we found that the
simultaneous loading of all items in a factor analysis revealed four factors, with the first
factor covering only 12.787 per cent of the total variance explained, indicating that
common method bias in the data was rather limited (Podsakoff et al., 2003).

4.4 Statistical analysis

Test for normality (skewness and kurtosis) shows that all the variables fall within the
acceptable statistical limit (Hair et al., 2010; Meyers et al., 2013). We tested the proposed
framework with the methodology of structural equation model (SEM) via AMOS 20 and
the maximum likelihood estimation. It has been stated that SEM is effective for testing
models that are path analytic with mediating variables (Byrne, 2009). In assessing the
model, we followed the recommended two-step analysis procedure (Byrne, 2009; Hair
et al., 2010; Meyers et al., 2013). We validated the measurement model including the
seven constructs in the first step and structural model in the second step. We examined
the fit of both the measurement and structural models with the use of multiple indices, as
it is possible for a model to be adequate on one-fit index but inadequate on many others
(Byrne, 2009; Hair et al., 2010; Meyers et al., 2013). Hence, we used the ␹2 test (with
critical insignificant level, p ⱕ 0.05), the normed ␹2 ratio (with critical level not more than
3 or at most 5), the GFI, CFI, TLI and IFI (with critical level not lower than 0.90) and the
RMSEA (with critical level not more than 0.08) (Byrne, 2009; Hair et al., 2010; Meyers
et al., 2013).

Construct
Construct Alpha AVE reliability 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Commitment 0.81 0.813 0.927 [0.90]

Satisfaction 0.87 0.782 0.914 0.40 [0.88]
CPWB 0.89 0.680 0.894 ⫺0.32 ⫺0.10 [0.83]
Adaptive 0.88 0.662 0.887 0.52 0.36 ⫺0.34 [0.81]
Contextual 0.84 0.571 0.841 0.38 0.28 ⫺0.28 0.63 [0.76]
Task 0.86 0.617 0.865 0.38 0.26 ⫺0.17 0.68 0.74 [0.79]
TM 0.86 0.568 0.867 0.27 0.30 ⫺0.12 0.31 0.25 0.33 [0.75]
Table II. Mean 3.73 3.82 3.51 3.67 3.41 3.53 3.44
Consistency and SD 1.22 1.61 1.55 1.73 1.81 1.32 1.01
reliability measures
and inter-correlation Notes: NB: diagonal figures in brackets represent square root of AVE; sub-diagonal entries are the
for all the variables latent construct inter-correlations; SD ⫽ standard deviation
 5. Results and hypothesis testing Black box
5.1 Measurement and structural model evaluation
We studied employee performance from four dimensions; hence, we conducted two
CFAs to confirm this dimensionality. In the first CFA, we loaded the items into their
various dimensions, and in the second CFA, we loaded all the items together as overall
employee performance. The data provided a good fit to the CFA with the four
dimensions: (␹2 ⫽ 592.2, df ⫽ 224, p ⫽ 0.001, ␹2/df ⫽ 2.644, GFI ⫽ 0.925, CFI ⫽ 0.934, 1557
IFI ⫽ 0.935, TLI ⫽ 0.920 and RMSEA ⫽ 0.070). The data also provided a good fit to the
CFA for TM, job satisfaction and affective commitment, as all the indices were within
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

the acceptable range. The result of the measurement model is given as: ␹2 ⫽ 1019.768,
df ⫽ 506, p ⫽ 0.001, ␹2/df ⫽ 2.015, GFI ⫽ 0.901, CFI ⫽ 0.960, IFI ⫽ 0.971, TLI ⫽ 0.958
and RMSEA ⫽ 0.051. All the loadings are high (0.531-0.992), whereas all the path
estimates are significant (p ⬍ 0.001) (Byrne, 2009; Hair et al., 2010; Meyers et al., 2013).
Also, the indices of the structural model are as follows: ␹2 ⫽ 1045.827, df ⫽ 507, p ⫽
0.001, ␹2/df ⫽ 2.063, GFI ⫽ 0.893, CFI ⫽ 0.948, IFI ⫽ 0.948, TLI ⫽ 0.940 and RMSEA ⫽
0.053. Therefore, the data provided good fit indices, as obtained by both the
measurement and structural models, and are shown in Table III. In our model, TM, job
satisfaction and affective commitment account for 24.8 per cent of the variance of task
performance (R2 ⫽ 0.248); 31.0 per cent of the variance of contextual performance (R2 ⫽
0.310); 29.1 per cent of the variance of adaptive performance (R2 ⫽ 0.291); and 47.7 per
cent of the variance of counterproductive behaviours (R2 ⫽ 0.477). Again, TM accounts
for 9.6 per cent of the variance in job satisfaction (R2 ⫽ 0.096) and 7.8 per cent of the
variance in affective commitment (R2 ⫽ 0.078).

5.2 Hypotheses testing

Table IV presents the results of the hypotheses. H1a, H1b and H1c predicted that there
would be a positive relationship between TM and task, contextual and adaptive
performance, whereas H1d predicted a negative relationship between TM and
counterproductive behaviours. The results showed that TM had a positive and
significant relationship with task performance (␤ ⫽ 0.237, p ⬍ 0.003), contextual
performance (␤ ⫽ 0.217, p ⬍ 0.009) and adaptive performance (␤ ⫽ 0.159, p ⬍ 0.027),
whereas the relationship with counterproductive behaviours is negative and significant
(␤ ⫽ ⫺0.292, p ⬍ 0.001). Therefore, H1a, H1b, H1c and H1d were supported. H2 and H3
predicted that there would be a positive and significant relationship between TM and

Constructs ␹2/df GFI CFI IFI TLI RMSEA

TM 2.256 0.981 0.987 0.988 0.975 0.074

Affective commitment 5.876 0.932 0.946 0.946 0.910 0.065
Satisfaction 1.859 0.992 0.995 0.995 0.986 0.061
Task performance 2.153 0.924 0.952 0.952 0.904 0.053
Contextual performance 2.145 0.913 0.932 0.941 0.903 0.071
Adaptive performance 2.221 0.931 0.948 0.948 0.913 0.052 Table III.
Counterproductive 1.763 0.963 0.992 0.992 0.975 0.057 CFA for individual,
Performance (four dimensions) 2.644 0.925 0.934 0.935 0.920 0.070 overall measurement
Overall measurement model 2.015 0.901 0.960 0.971 0.958 0.051 and structural
Structural model 2.063 0.893 0.948 0.948 0.940 0.053 models
 MRR Hypothesised relationship ␤ t-values p
39,12
H1a: TM ¡ task 0.237 2.930 0.003
H1b: TM ¡ contextual 0.217 2.606 0.009
H1c: TM ¡ adaptive 0.159 2.271 0.027
H1d: TM ¡ CPWB ⫺0.292 ⫺3.769 0.001
1558 H2: TM ¡ satisfaction 0.309 4.344 0.001
H3: TM ¡ commitment 0.281 4.004 0.001
H4a: Satisfaction ¡ task 0.177 2.469 0.014
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

H4b: Satisfaction ¡ contextual 0.243 3.204 0.001

H4c: Satisfaction ¡ adaptive 0.150 2.300 0.021
H4d: Satisfaction ¡ CPWB ⫺0.245 ⫺3.553 0.001
H5a: Commitment ¡ task 0.355 4.706 0.001
Table IV. H4b: Commitment ¡ contextual 0.293 3.897 0.001
Hypotheses test H5c: Commitment ¡ adaptive 0.424 6.314 0.001
results H5d: Commitment ¡ CPWB ⫺0.445 ⫺6.260 0.001

employee satisfaction; and TM and affective commitment, respectively. The results

showed that TM had a direct positive relationship with job satisfaction (␤ ⫽ 0.309, p ⬍
0.001) and affective commitment (␤ ⫽ 0.281, p ⬍ 0.001), providing support for H2 and
H3.
We hypothesised that job satisfaction will be positively related to task, contextual
and adaptive performance but a negative relationship with counterproductive
behaviours (H4a, H4b, H4c and H4d). The results showed that job satisfaction had a
direct positive relationship with task performance (␤ ⫽ 0.177, p ⬍ 0.014), contextual
performance (␤ ⫽ 0.243, p ⬍ 0.001) and adaptive performance (␤ ⫽ 0.150, p ⬍ 0.021) and
a negative relationship with counterproductive behaviours (␤ ⫽ ⫺0.245, p ⬍ 0.001).
Hence, the results support H4a, H4b, H4c and H4d. We hypothesised that affective
commitment will have a positive and significant relationship with task, contextual and
adaptive performance but a negative relationship with counterproductive behaviours
(H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d). The results showed that affective commitment had a positive
and significant relationship with task performance (␤ ⫽ 0.355, p ⬍ 0.001), contextual
performance (␤ ⫽ 0.293, p ⬍ 0.001) and adaptive performance (␤ ⫽ 0.424, p ⬍ 0.001),
whereas the relationship between affective commitment and counterproductive
behaviours was found to be negative and significant (␤ ⫽ ⫺0.445, p ⬍ 0.001), providing
support for H5a, H5b, H5c and H5d.
The model we presented in this study shows that job satisfaction and affective
commitment mediate the relationship between TM and the four dimensions of employee
performance. Even though Baron and Kenny’s (1986) procedure for testing mediation is
well known, more recent literature suggest that there are a lot of flaws in Baron and
Kenny’s logic (Zhao et al., 2010). Several authors (Mackinnon et al., 2002; Preacher et al.,
2004) recommended that to establish mediation, the Baron-Kenny’s three steps be
replaced with one test: the bootstrap test of the indirect effect. Hence, we used the
Sobel test with bootstrap standard errors to examine the mediation effect of
employee satisfaction and affective commitment. The purpose of Sobel test is to
examine whether a mediator carries the influence of the independent variable (IV) to
 the dependent variable (DV). We used a bootstrapped based on 1,000 re-sampling, Black box
because Sobel test requires large sample size (Hayes and Preacher, 2010).
Using the Sobel online calculator based on the formula, z-value ⫽ a ⫻ b/SQRT (b2 ⫻
sa ⫹ a2 ⫻ sb2), where a ⫽ raw (un-standardized) regression coefficient for the
2

association between IV and mediator, sa ⫽ standard error of a, b ⫽ raw coefficient for the
association between the mediator and the DV (when the IV is also a predictor of the DV)
and sb ⫽ standard error of b. The results showed that job satisfaction mediates the 1559
relationship between TM and employee performance – task (Sobel test ⫽ 2.194, p ⬍
0.028), contextual (Sobel test ⫽ 2.586, p ⬍ 0.009), adaptive (Sobel test ⫽ 2.047, p ⬍ 0.040)
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

and counterproductive behaviours (Sobel test ⫽ ⫺2.739, p ⬍ 0.006). This mediation is

partial, because the relationship between TM and employee performance was found to
be significant. Finally, the results showed that affective commitment mediates the
relationship between TM and employee performance – task (Sobel test ⫽ 3.048, p ⬍
0.002), contextual (Sobel test ⫽ 2.806, p ⬍ 0.005), adaptive (Sobel test ⫽ 3.387, p ⬍ 0.001)
and counterproductive behaviours (Sobel test ⫽ ⫺3.389, p ⬍ 0.001). Again, this
mediation is partial, because the relationship between TM and employee performance
was found to be significant. Further, we controlled for gender, education and experience
and found no significant differences.

6. Discussion of findings
The main objective of our paper was to examine the relationship between TM and four
dimensions of employee performance: task, contextual, adaptive and counterproductive
through job satisfaction and affective commitment. First, the findings showed that TM,
job satisfaction and affective commitment have relationships with all the dimensions of
employee performance. Second, we found that job satisfaction and affective
commitment partially mediate the relationship between TM and all the dimensions of
employee performance. Previous studies have found a positive relationship between TM
and employee performance (Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015). However, these studies did
not examine employee performance from these four dimensions.
The modest contribution of our findings is that TM does not only lead to positive
performance but also reduces counterproductive behaviours. Thus, the implementation
of TM will lead to employee performance in terms of core job functions, contextual
behaviours, as well as creativity and innovativeness, while, at the same time, reducing
negative behaviours at work. These findings support the SET to the extent that when
organisations invest in TM practices, talented employees will compensate the
organisation with performance. From the ST perspective, investment in TM practices
sends a signal to employees in the talent pool to perform. Consistent with previous
studies, we found that TM is positively related to job satisfaction and affective
commitment (Chami-Malaeb and Garavan, 2013; Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015; Gelens
et al., 2015). Thus, this finding showed that the implementation of TM is likely to induce
positive work attitudes of job satisfaction and affective commitment. This finding
provides support for the SET, which suggests that when organisations invest in their
employees in terms of TM practices and professional development, they are likely to
reciprocate their organisational investments in positive ways.
Our findings suggest that employee work attitudes of job satisfaction and affective
commitment are related to all the four dimensions of employee performance. This
finding also supports previous studies that have found a relationship between employee
 MRR work attitudes and performance (Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015; Mensah, 2015). Thus,
39,12 satisfied and committed talented employees are more likely to put in more discretionary
effort to the performance of their duties. At the same time, such employees will not
engage in counterproductive behaviours that will negatively affect the well-being of
their organisations and colleagues. Finally, we found that job satisfaction and affective
commitment partially mediate the relationship between TM and all the dimensions of
1560 employee performance. The finding generally supports the tenets of the SET in that TM
practices generate reciprocation in terms of performance through positive employee
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

work attitudes.

7. Conclusions and implications

In this employee-level study, we developed and tested a conceptual model that
demonstrates the mediating relationship between TM practices and four dimensions of
employee performance. The findings showed that although TM practices increase
positive aspects of employee performance (task, contextual and adaptive), it reduces
counterproductive behaviours. We found that TM practices are positively related to
employee work attitudes of job satisfaction and affective commitment. Again, the result
showed that job satisfaction and affective commitment have positive relationships with
task, contextual and adaptive performance but a negative relationship with
counterproductive behaviours. Finally, job satisfaction and affective commitment
partially mediate the relationship between TM and the four dimensions of employee
performance. From these findings, we conclude that TM does not only increase positive
employee performance behaviours but also reduces counterproductive behaviours
through the partial mediating role of employee work attitudes.
We contribute to the literature by taking the concepts of TM and employee
performance a step further by demonstrating how TM practices influence and relate to
four dimensions of employee performance. In spite of the abundant literature that
employee performance is multi-dimensional, previous studies on the relationship
between TM practices and employee performance (Luna-Arocas and Morley, 2015) did
not show how TM relates to the various dimensions of employee performance. In
addition, our study has contributed to the TM literature by examining the mechanisms
through which TM practices lead to employee performance. Therefore, the blind spot
(“black box”) that exists in the literature concerning the mediating mechanisms through
which TM practices may influence the various dimensions of employee performance
may have been unlocked.
The result of our study has three important implications for managers and
organisations implementing and intending to implement TM practices. First, managers
and organisations can implement TM practices to increase positive employee
performance behaviours and reduce counterproductive behaviours. Second, managers
and organisation can benefit from positive work attitudes of job satisfaction and
affective commitment through the implementation of TM practices. Finally, managers
and organisations should note that job satisfaction and affective commitment mediate
the relationship between TM practices and employee performance. Therefore, they
should implement and invest in TM practices that will heighten their employees’ job
satisfaction and increase their affective commitment to gain maximum positive
performance from employees.
 8. Limitations and recommendations Black box
The findings of our study should be interpreted with caution. First, our study used a
cross-sectional data; hence, conclusions regarding causality cannot be made. That is, the
results must be interpreted as associations rather than causality. Second, the data for
this study were collected from talented employees in commercial banks in Ghana with
the use of simple random sampling. Therefore, the findings of this study cannot be
generalized to all Ghanaian organisations. Third, there is no agreement upon the set of 1561
TM practices that should be used for empirical research. Accordingly, the five practices
selected for this study may not be representative of all the TM practices used by the
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

studied banks. However, the practices included in this study are among the most widely
used practices in research and practice. The fourth limitation of our study is the
exclusive use of single source, self-report and subjective measures of all variables.
Subjective and self-report have been criticised to have many systematic biases related to
order, bias in inflating results and concerns about the common method bias. However,
Howard (1994) intimates that this may be less of a concern than is occasionally
expressed in the literature.
Based on the findings and limitations of this study, we make suggestions for further
research. First, even though longitudinal research is both expensive and time
consuming, future research would benefit from testing this study’s model through a
longitudinal research design so as to determine the causal links more explicitly. Second,
although this study has clearly demonstrated the importance of job satisfaction and
affective commitment as partially mediating the relationship between TM practices
and employee performance, other variables such as engagement, motivation and
perceived organisational support can be added. Again, our study only used sample of
talented employees. Therefore, the literature would benefit by comparing results from
employees designated as talents and non-talents to determine whether TM is solely
responsible for the relationships found in this study. Finally, further research is required
that would use subjective data either from superiors or co-workers. Archival data and
multiple raters can be used to collect data on employee performance.

References
Babbie, E. (2013), The Practice of Social Research, 13th ed., Cengage Learning, Wadsworth.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986), “The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 6, pp. 1173-1182.
Berry, C.M., Ones, D.S. and Sackett, P.R. (2007), “Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance,
and their common correlates: a review and meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 92 No. 2, pp. 410-424.
Bethke-Langenegger, P., Mahler, P. and Staffelbach, B. (2011), “Effectiveness of talent
management strategies”, European Journal of International Management, Vol. 5 No. 5,
pp. 524-539.
Bhatnagar, J. (2007), “Talent management strategy of employee engagement in Indian ITES
employees: key to retention”, Employee Relations, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 640-663.
Björkman, I., Ehrnrooth, M., Mäkelä, K., Smale, A. and Sumelius, J. (2013), “Talent or not?
Employee reactions to talent identification”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 52 No. 2,
pp. 195-214.
Blau, P.M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Wiley, New York, NY.
 MRR Borman, W.C. and Motowidlo, S.J. (1993), “Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of
contextual performance”, in Schmitt, N. and Borman, W.C. (Eds), Personnel Selection in
39,12 Organizations, Jossey-Bass, New York, NY, pp. 71-98.
Bothner, M., Podolny, J.M. and Smith, E. (2011), “Organizing contests for status: the Matthew
effect versus the mark effect”, Management Science, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 439-457.
Boudreau, J. and Ramstad, P. (2005), “Talentship, talent segmentation, and sustainability: a new
1562 HR decision science paradigm for a new strategy definition”, Human Resource
Management, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 129-136.
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

Bowling, N.A. (2007), “Is the job satisfaction–job performance relationship spurious? A
meta-analytic examination”, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 71 No. 2, pp. 167-185.
Byrne, B.M. (2009), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications and
Programming, 2nd ed., Routledge, London.
Campbell, C.H., Ford, P., Rumsey, M.G. and Pulakos, E.D. (1990), “Development of multiple job
performance measures in a representative sample of jobs”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 43
No. 2, pp. 277-300.
Cappelli, P. (2008), “Talent management for the twenty-first century”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 86 No. 3, pp. 74-81.
Chadee, D. and Raman, R. (2012), “External knowledge and performance of offshore it service
providers in India: the mediating role of talent management”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Human Resources, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 459-482.
Chami-Malaeb, R. and Garavan, T. (2013), “Talent and leadership development practices as
drivers of intention to stay in lebanese organisations: the mediating role of affective
commitment”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 21,
pp. 4046-4062.
Chuai, X., Preece, D. and Iles, P. (2008), “Is talent management just ‘old wine in new bottles’?”
Management Research Review, Vol. 31 No. 12, pp. 901-911.
Collings, D. and Mellahi, K. (2009), “Strategic talent management: a review and research agenda”,
Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 304-313.
Creswell, J.W. (2014), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches,
4th ed., Sage Publication, London.
DeNisi, A. and Smith, C.E. (2014), “Performance appraisal, performance management, and
firm-level performance: a review, a proposed model, and new directions for future
research”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 127-179.
Dries, N. (2013), “The psychology of talent management: a review and research agenda”, Human
Resource Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 272-285.
Fay, D. and Sonnentag, S. (2010), “A look back to move ahead: new directions for research on
proactive performance and other discretionary work behaviours”, Applied Psychology,
Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 1-20.
Gallardo-Gallardo, E. and Thunnissen, M. (2016), “Standing on the shoulders of giants? A critical
review of empirical talent management research”, Employee Relations, Vol. 38 No. 1,
pp. 31-56.
Gallardo-Gallardo, E., Dries, N. and González-Cruz, T.F. (2013), “What is the meaning of ‘talent’ in
the world of work?”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 290-300.
Gallardo-Gallardo, E., Nijs, S., Dries, N. and Gallo, P. (2015), “Towards an understanding of talent
management as a phenomenon-driven field using bibliometric and content analysis”,
Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 264-279.
 Gelens, J., Dries, N., Hofmans, J. and Pepermans, R. (2013), “The role of perceived organizational Black box
justice in shaping the outcomes of talent management: a research agenda”, Human
Resource Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 341-353.
Gelens, J., Hofmans, J., Dries, N. and Pepermans, R. (2014), “Talent management and
organisational justice: employee reactions to high potential identification”, Human
Resource Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 159-175.
Gelens, J., Dries, N., Hofmans, J. and Pepermans, R. (2015), “Affective commitment of employees 1563
designated as talent: signalling perceived organisational support”, European Journal of
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

International Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 9-27.

Griffin, M.A., Neal, A. and Parker, S.K. (2007), “A new model of work role performance: positive
behaviour in uncertain and interdependent contexts”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 327-347.
Gubman, E.L. (1998), The Talent Solution Aligning Strategy and People to Achieve Extraordinary
Results, McGraw-Hill Companies, New York, NY.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global
Perspective, 7th ed., San Francisco, New York, NY.
Harman, H.H. (1967), Modern Factor Analysis, 2nd ed., Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL.
Hatum, A. (2010), Next Generation Talent Management: Talent Management to Survive Turmoil,
Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Hayes, A.F. and Preacher, K.J. (2010), “Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation
models when the constituent paths are nonlinear”, Multivariate Behavioural Research,
Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 627-660.
Hetrick, S. and Martin, G. (2006), Corporate Reputations, Branding and People Management,
Routledge, London.
Howard, G.S. (1994), “Why do people say nasty things about self-reports?”, Journal of
Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 399-404.
Hughes, J.C. and Rog, E. (2008), “Talent management: a strategy for improving employee
recruitment, retention and engagement within hospitality organizations”, International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 743-757.
Iaffaldano, M.T. and Muchinsky, P.M. (1985), “Job satisfaction and job performance: a
meta-analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 97 No. 2, pp. 251-273.
Iles, P. (2013), Commentary on “The meaning of ‘talent’ in the world of work”, Human Resource
Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 301-304.
Iles, P., Preece, D. and Chuai, X. (2010), “Talent management as a management fashion in HRD:
towards a research agenda”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 125-145.
Jackson, S.E., Schuler, R.S. and Werner, S. (2009), Managing Human Resources, 10th ed.,
South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, OH.
Khan, M.R., Ziauddin, M., Jam, F.A. and Ramay, M.I. (2010), “The impacts of organizational
commitment on employee job performance”, European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 15
No. 3, pp. 292-298.
Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C.M., Hildebrandt, H.V., Schaufeli, W.B., De Vet, H.C.W. and
Van der Beek, A.J. (2011), “Conceptual frameworks of individual work performance: a
systematic review”, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 53 No. 8,
pp. 856-866.
 MRR Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C., Hildebrandt, V., Buuren, S.V., Van der Beek, A.J. and De Vet, H.C.W.
(2012), “Development of an individual work performance questionnaire”, International
39,12 Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 6-28.
Larsen, H.H., London, M., Weinstein, M. and Raghuram, S. (1998), “High-flyer
management-development programs: organisational rhetoric or self-fulfilling prophecy?”,
International Studies of Management and Organisation, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 64-90.
1564 Lewis, R.E. and Heckman, R.J. (2006), “Talent management: a critical review”, Human Resource
Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 139-154.
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

Luna-Arocas, R. and Morley, M.J. (2015), “Talent management, talent mindset competency and job
performance: the mediating role of job satisfaction”, European Journal of International
Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 28-51.
McShane, S.L. and Von Glinow, M. (2000), Organizational Behaviour, McGraw-Hill, New York,
NY.
MacKinnon, D.P., Lockwood, C.M., Hoffman, J.M., West, S.G. and Sheets, V. (2002), “A comparison
of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects”, Psychological Methods,
Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 83-104.
Marescaux, E., De Winne, S. and Sels, L. (2013), “HR practices and affective organisational
commitment: (when) does HR differentiation pay off?”, Human Resource Management
Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 329-345.
Mensah, J.K. (2015), “A ‘Coalesced Framework’ of talent management and employee performance:
for further research and practice”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 64 No. 4, pp. 544-566.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1997), Commitment in Workplace: Theory, Research, and Application,
Sage Publications, CA.
Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002), “Affective, continuance, and
normative commitment to the organization: a meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates and
consequences”, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 20-52.
Meyers, L.S., Gamst, G. and Guarino, A.J. (2013), Applied Multivariate Research: Design and
Interpretation, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Michaels, E., Handfield-Jones, H. and Axelrod, B. (2001), The War for Talent, Harvard Business
School Press, Boston, MA.
Minbaeva, D. and Collings, D.G. (2013), “Seven myths of global talent management”, The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 9, pp. 1762-1776.
Morrison, K.A. (1997), “How franchise job satisfaction and personality affects their performance,
organizational commitment, franchisor relations, and intention to remain”, Journal of Small
Business Management, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 39-67.
Morton, L. (2005), Talent Management Value Imperatives: Strategies for Execution, The
Conference Board, New York, NY.
Motowidlo, S.J. (2000), “Some basic issues related to contextual performance and organizational
citizenship behaviour in human resource management”, Human Resource Management
Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 115-126.
Motowidlo, S.J., Barman, W.C. and Schmit, M.J. (1997), “A theory of individual differences in task
and contextual performance”, Human Performance, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 71-83.
Mount, M., Illies, R. and Johnson, E. (2006), “Relationship of personality traits and
counterproductive work behaviours: the mediating effects of job satisfaction”, Personnel
Psychology, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 591-623.
 Oehley, A.M., Theron, C.C. (2010), “The development and evaluation of a partial talent Black box
management structural model”, Management Dynamics, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 2-28.
Organ, D.W. (1997), “Organizational citizenship behaviour: it’s construct clean-up time”, Human
Performance, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 85-97.
Pfeffer, J. (2001), Fighting the War for Talent is Hazardous for Your Organization, Pearson
Education, Stanford.
Podsakoff, P., Mackenzie, S., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N. (2003), “Common method bias in 1565
behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”,
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.

Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2004), “SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in
simple mediation models”, Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers,
Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 717-731.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (2014), Ghana Banking Survey: The Future of Banking in Ghana and
What’s Next?, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Accra.
Pulakos, E.D., Arad, S., Donovan, M.A. and Plamondon, K.E. (2000), “Adaptability in the
workplace: development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 4, pp. 612-624.
Raman, R., Chadee, D., Roxas, B. and Michailova, S. (2013), “Effects of partnership quality, talent
management, and global mindset on performance of offshore IT service providers in India”,
Journal of International Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 333-346.
Randall, M.J. (2011), “Perform! Don’t run!”, in Wright, P.M., McKinnon, P., Antoine, R.L.,
Sartain, E.L., Boudreau, J.W. and Pace, D.A. (Eds), The Chief HR Officer: Defining the New
Role of Human Resource Leaders, Jossy-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Rotundo, M. and Sackett, P.R. (2002), “The relative importance of task, citizenship, and
counterproductive performance to global ratings of performance: a policy capturing
approach”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 66-80.
Schneider, B. (1987), “The people make the place”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 3,
pp. 437-453.
Seashore, S.E., Lawler, E.E., Mirvis, P. and Camman, C. (1982), Observing and Measuring
Organizational Change: A Guide to Field Practice, John Wiley, New York, NY.
Sinclair, R.R. and Tucker, J.S. (2006), “Stress-CARE: an integrated model of individual differences
in soldier performance under stress”, in Britt, T.W., Castro, C.A., Adler, A.B. (Eds), Military
Life: The Psychology of Serving in Peace and Combat: Military Performance, Vol. 1, Praeger
Security International, Westport, CT, pp. 202-231.
Spence, M. (1973), “Job market signaling”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 87 No. 3,
pp. 355-374.
Straub, D. (1989), “Validating instruments in MIS research”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 147-169.
Swailes, S. (2013), “The ethics of talent management”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 22
No. 1, pp. 32-46.
Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2014), Using Multivariate Statistics, Pearson Education, Boston,
MA.
Tarique, I. and Schuler, R.S. (2010), “Global talent management: literature review, integrative
framework, and suggestions for further research”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 45 No. 2,
pp. 122-133.
 MRR Tett, R.P., Guterman, H.A., Bleier, A. and Murphy, P.J. (2000), “Development and content
validation of a ‘hyperdimensional’ taxonomy of managerial competence”, Human
39,12 Performance, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 205-251.
Thunnissen, M., Boselie, P. and Fruytier, B. (2013), “A review of talent management: infancy or
adolescence?”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 9,
pp. 1744-1761.
1566 Ulrich, D. and Allen, J. (2014), “Talent accelerator: understanding how talent delivers performance
for Asian firms”, South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, Vol. 1 No. 1,
pp. 1-23.
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

Van Scotter, J.R. and Motowidlo, S.J. (1996), “Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as
separate facets of contextual performance”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 81 No. 5,
pp. 525-531.
Van Scotter, J.R., Motowidlo, S.J. and Cross, C.T. (2000), “Effects of task and contextual
performance on reward systems”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 4, pp. 526-535.
Viswesvaran, C. and Ones, D.S. (2000), “Perspectives on models of job performance”, International
Journal of Selection and Assessment, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 216-226.
Wanous, J.P., Reichers, A.E. and Hudy, M.J. (1997), “Overall job satisfaction: how good are
single-item measures?”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 247-252.
Williams, K.D. and Karau, S.J. (1991), “Social loafing and social compensation: the effects of
expectations of co-worker performance”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Vol. 61 No. 4, pp. 570-581.
Yapp, M. (2009), “Measuring the ROI of talent management”, Strategic Human Resource Review,
Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 5-10.
Zhao, X., Lynch, J.G. and Chen, Q. (2010), “Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: myths and truths
about mediation analysis”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 197-206.

Corresponding author
James Kwame Mensah can be contacted at: mensjam@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 This article has been cited by:

1. James Kwame Mensah. 2018. Talent Management and Employee Outcomes: A Psychological
Contract Fulfilment Perspective. Public Organization Review 52. . [Crossref]
2. MensahJames Kwame, James Kwame Mensah, BawoleJustice Nyigmah, Justice Nyigmah Bawole.
2018. Testing the mediation effect of person-organisation fit on the relationship between talent
management and talented employees’ attitudes. International Journal of Manpower 39:2, 319-333.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. James Kwame Mensah. The Psychology of Talent Management 1-5. [Crossref]
Downloaded by HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION LIBRARY At 03:41 05 November 2018 (PT)

4. . References 127-163. [Citation] [Enhanced Abstract] [PDF] [PDF]

5. James Kwame Mensah, Justice Nyigmah Bawole. 2017. Person–job fit matters in parastatal
institutions: Testing the mediating effect of person–job fit in the relationship between
talent management and employee outcomes. International Review of Administrative Sciences 10,
002085231770450. [Crossref]