6 Comments

  1. Michael,
    You bring some great points in your article. While I refer to employees as assets after reading this, I will have to rethink that terminology. Thanks for the thought provoking article.

  2. Semantics and classifications do not define, make or break a strategy. Where Talent Management strategy is concerned, it really does not matter what you call, or how you classify, those paid to work for the organization. For that matter, people can, at the same time and in the same relationship, be both assets and investments. In short, this is a specious and rather silly argument, and pretty much a waste of the reader’s time.

    • So then, what does matter where talent management is concerned? If it’s not how we classify, or refer to workers, then what is it? You only gave half an argument. If this one is silly and specious then make a valid one. I think I agree with you, so I’d like to hear, beyond semantics, how you think we can improve talent management.

    • ur a fagit

  3. Semantics and classifications do not define, make or break a strategy. Where Talent Management strategy is concerned, it really does not matter what you call, or how you classify, those paid to work for the organization. For that matter, people can, at the same time and in the same relationship, be both assets and investments. In short, this is a specious and rather silly argument, and pretty much a waste of the reader’s time.

    • So then, what does matter where talent management is concerned? If it’s not how we classify, or refer to workers, then what is it? You only gave half an argument. If this one is silly and specious then make a valid one. I think I agree with you, so I’d like to hear, beyond semantics, how you think we can improve talent management.


Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment *
Name *
Email *
Website