The “competition for talent”, some even say "war for talent" and the underlying talent and skills gaps challenges are a key CEO prority and also a hot topic in business publications. The new Global Arena talent supply chain dashboard aims to provide senior executives insight about the talent supply and demand and skills gaps situation for their organisation. The public version of our talent supply dashboard provides a good overview of the global picture. Each organisation specific secure and private online dashboard identifies company and market specific gaps, issues and solutions.
According the 16th Annual CEO Survey published by PwC about 77% of the interviewed CEO's are planning to change their corporate talent programs and most of them are increasingly worried about and impacted by the skills gaps in their global workforce.
In a recent publication PwC warns that companies around the world face a skills mismatch in overseas markets because many staff do not want to go to emerging economies.
The Oxford Economics Global Talent 2021 study looks at how market transformation is redefining talent supply and demand in key global markets. It recommends that CEO's and HR senior executives rethink HR strategies for the new global talent marketplace and use more sophisticated analytical tools for making global decisions. Our new global talent supply dashboard is designed to do just that.
Ultimately, each individual market and company situation is all about the quantity and quality of talent in the workforce and the ability of a company to implement effective and efficient global talent mobility. The public domain version of our big-data analysis based on the talent-supply-chain concept is currenlty implemented on a set of 95 countries.
What is the concept of the talent-supply-chain?
Figure 1: The talent-supply-chain (Global-Arena.com)
If you want to raise talent you need the people and you have to invest some resources in the formation of the people (knowledge investments). So consequently labor force, population growth and investments on knowledge (R&D and education) can be regarded as inputs for talent supply. These fundamentals are put into an educational system where the human factors earn their skills and abilities in order to create innovation or let the society benefit from their creativity. Besides theses inputs and the educational system, other factors as the ease of migration and the location attractiveness can enhance the creation of talent located in a specific country.
We have grouped talent supply into domestic talents and the attracted international talent. The second group is calculated using migration and location talent attractiveness factors.
Figure 2: Dashboard factors
What does this concept implicate for the ranking?
For this blog item, we applied the analysis on a specific set of countries. The next step is that we launch the Global Talent Supply dashboard to provide a tool that offers big-data analysis on the global data. The scope of the first analysis are the G7-nations (Italy excluded) and the BRIC-member-states.
Overall ranking scores (applying equal weights):
The results show the first BRIC-state ranked on the 21th place (Brazil), followed by China (25th), India (33th) and the Russian Federation (40th), while the United States of America and other mature markets as Australia, UK and Germany are on the top of the tier nations in the ranking. The first ranking results are largely influenced by the weight of educational factors (skills, education, academic capabilities) in the ranking. The data shows the expected positive bidirectional correlation between the education level and the economic development of a country.
The expected finding is that mature markets (G7) still provide the best educated talents all over the world, especially in the US.
But how do the G7 & BRIC-members perform in each specific talent-supply category? A comprehensive survey on the G7 & BRIC-members’ performance is shown within the upcoming sequence of nine spider maps, each of them covers a single index according the overall ranking setting.
The talent supply chain factor scores per country for the G7 + BRIC countries:
Figure 3: Spider maps different talent supply factors (Global-Arena.com)
The data reveals a strong performance of the BRICs in the categories labor force size and the more dynamic population growth. Only China and Russia’s population growth seems to be weaker compared to other emerging markets. On other hand, in all education-linked indices the mature markets are clearly outperforming the BRICs, this fact corresponds with the overall ranking finding that treats industrial well-developed countries preferentially than others.
But mature markets do not only benefit from high scores in educational topics, additionally they are able to position themselves more appropriate in classes as locational talent attractiveness and ease of migration. These two indices are particularly relevant due to the suggestion that talent supply is not uniquely provided by domestic labor forces, more it is as well supported by people’s will to emigrate into a non-native country in order to gain working experience. Therefore it is about the country’s attractiveness in terms of quality of life, taxation and etc. and the convenience to enter a country without overpassing a mass of judicial obstacles.
In the end by applying the complete ranking setup equally weighted on the dataset, it pronounces the gap between emerging nations and others who had spent decades on the nation’s consolidation. Finally, it is intuitively sound, stating that issues as the education quality, the society’s openness to other people are highly positively correlated with the country’s development.
This relation is proven by the following figure where the Human Development Index is plotted against the overall ranking score (equal weights).
Figure 4: HDI-Ranking correlation (Global-Arena.com)
Figure 4 shows us a positive relation between the ranking outcome and the corresponding Human Development Index-value calculated by the United Nations. It seems to be a fact that there is a general relation between the nation’s welfare and the ranking score applying an equal weight setting.
We conclude that the outcomes of any talent supply market analysis depends on the factor composition and the corresponding weights, especially in the G7 example, where educational factors and the size of labor force dominate the ranking results.
When we launch the talent supply dashboard in September, it is up to the user to select his set of markets and prioritize talent supply factors.