See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/366682192

The impact of digital transformation on talent management

Article in Technological Forecasting and Social Change · March 2023

DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122291

CITATIONS READS

57 4,262

3 authors, including:

Ignacio Danvila del Valle Mariano Méndez-Suárez

Complutense University of Madrid ESIC
57 PUBLICATIONS 902 CITATIONS 56 PUBLICATIONS 311 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mariano Méndez-Suárez on 24 March 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/techfore

The impact of digital transformation on talent management

José Manuel Montero Guerra a, Ignacio Danvila-del-Valle a, *, Mariano Méndez-Suárez b, c
a
Department of Business Administration, Complutense University of Madrid, Economics and Business Faculty, Campus de Somosaguas, 28223, Pozuelo de Alarcón,
Madrid, Spain
b
ESIC University, Av Valdenigrales s/n, 28223, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain
c
ESIC Business & Marketing School, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Madrid, Spain

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The digital transformation of companies involves a set of substantial changes in all areas of the organization. This
Digital transformation study analyses the influence of digital transformation on talent management processes. In an effort to determine
Talent management whether companies make different investments in each, we analyse talent management by separating the var­
Digital maturity index
iables that attract and retain talent. The sample under study is made up of 314 Spanish companies who are
Talent attraction
Talent retention
currently undergoing the process of digital transformation. Company data were obtained through a questionnaire
answered by managers of these organizations. The statistical technique used to test the model assumptions was a
structural equation model. The results obtained lead us to accept the model hypotheses. The organizational
changes brought about by digital transformation are thus seen to influence talent management and to attract and
retain talent.

1. Introduction dimensions: technology use, changes in value creation, structural

changes, and financial aspects (Matt et al., 2015). Transformation trig­
Companies as well as society at large are currently in the process of gers internal organizational resistance (Robbins, 2008) and in order to
digital transformation, which affects all types of activity, whether cope with this opposition to change, leadership skills are essential (Matt
business or otherwise (Morakanyane et al., 2020). This process condi­ et al., 2015), since greater use of digital technologies may not always
tions companies globally –not only in terms of their internal operations necessarily enjoy the support of employees (Grover and Kohli, 2013).
or processes. Adapting to increasingly digital environments is a complex In this paper, we seek to determine whether digital transformation
challenge for all companies and involves a change in the way work is influences talent management. We also look at whether companies are
done that has significant implications for organizational behaviour, improving their strategies for attracting and retaining talent by
corporate culture, talent recruitment and leadership tactics (Kane et al., leveraging the benefits of digital transformation (Schiemann, 2014;
2017). Hatum, 2010; Gaggnon and Kurata, 2016; Promsri, 2019). In order to
The potential benefits of digitization are manifold and include in­ address the above questions, we examine whether companies are mak­
creases in sales or productivity, innovations in value creation, as well as ing changes to their strategies for attracting and retaining talent in order
new ways of interacting with customers (Berman, 2012). In many cases, to successfully meet the new challenges posed by the digital age (Sethibe
business models need to be reformed or replaced (Downes and Nunes, and Steyn, 2015). Digital transformation is an ongoing phenomenon that
2013), since without profound changes in companies challenges cannot reaches beyond simply investing in technology or digitizing an organi­
be solved sustainably (Bican and Brem, 2020). Digital transformation zation, as it involves profound changes in the very concept of the busi­
generally involves modifying (or adapting) the business model (Kotarbe, ness model, the organizational culture and the company’s value chain
2018). (Kiron and Spindel, 2019). Merely implementing technology in the or­
Most digitization strategies typically define current and future ganization does not imply transformation, although the organization
operational activities, the required application systems and in­ must be changed by relying on the potential of technologies (Vial, 2019).
frastructures, and the appropriate organizational and financial frame­ Digital transformation is not confined to simply reducing costs (Gray
work (Teubner, 2013). These elements can be attributed to four and Rumpe, 2017) –due to a better use of technology or process

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J.M. Montero Guerra), [email protected] (I. Danvila-del-Valle), [email protected] (M. Méndez-Suárez).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122291
Received 13 June 2022; Received in revised form 15 October 2022; Accepted 19 December 2022
Available online 29 December 2022
0040-1625/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

improvement– but also involves a process of creating new business one’s business model (Kotarbe, 2018).
models (Osterwalder, 2009) that adapt to the new digital environment. Transformation causes internal organizational resistance (Robbins,
A company’s digital approach can have a huge impact on the nature of 2008) and, in order to cope with this resistance, transformation lead­
the job, the different types of jobs, or the way people are managed. Thus, ership skills are essential and require the active involvement of the
there is a need to develop new human resource strategies for talent different actors affected by transformations (Matt et al., 2015), since a
management in the digital age (Soule et al., 2016). Digital trans­ greater use of digital technologies may not always be desirable (Grover
formation is a process of organizational change which essentially fo­ and Kohli, 2013). Analysing the level of digital maturity of the sample of
cuses on the weight people have in this transformation (Alunni and companies selected in this project has therefore been considered a key
Llambías, 2018). factor, although the term “digital maturity” has been subject to different
The paper is structured as follows. In the following section, we interpretations, such as that of Chanias and Hess (2016, p. 4) who refer
develop the theoretical framework on which our study is based and to “the state of a company’s digital transformation”.
formulate the hypotheses we aim to test. Subsequently, we present the
methodology used and the results obtained. Finally, we present the 2. Theoretical framework
conclusions of the work, the limitations of the study and the future lines
of research. In the current technological environment, numerous studies have
In this context, it is not clear whether business leaders have the shown a growing interest in the impact of innovation on business results
necessary training to handle this new business model, which leads us to (Abedrapo, 2014; Rauter et al., 2019). More specifically, the human
consider leadership as a key factor in digital transformation. Moreover, factor is considered to be the driving force behind the development of
it is not possible to ensure that traditional talent management systems knowledge networks (Reagans and Zuckerman, 2001). For this reason,
are applicable in a new digital environment (Bock, 2015). various studies have shown how people contribute to the process of
In order to increase the success of the digital transformation process, entrepreneurial innovation, since people’s knowledge allows both new
new organizational capacities are required (George et al., 2016), while and existing skills to be put to use (Camelo et al., 2000; Li et al., 2006),
leaders must first assimilate the complex implications that digitalization with human resources being one of the keys to the development of
entails for their company and their employees (Wang et al., 2016). knowledge and entrepreneurial innovation networks (Becerra and
Digital initiative requires organizations to make strategic changes in Álvarez, 2011).
order to improve not only the individual skills of their employees but Effective management of the business innovation process involves
also the coordination of people, processes, and technologies (Desmet successfully adopting and adapting a sociotechnical systems approach to
et al., 2015; Dörner and Meffert, 2015). The changes that the organi­ all aspects of the organization, including –critically– people and pro­
zation can make as a result of the benefits afforded by new technologies cesses, as well as technology-related problems (Cormican and O’Sulli­
must therefore be complemented by changes in organizational struc­ van, 2004). Furthermore, organizations are under sustained pressure to
tures, management approaches, organizational behaviours, and oper­ improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the HR function (Mackea and
ating cultures (Wade and Marchand, 2014; Kohnke, 2017). Genarib, 2019) by rethinking their approach to how employees are
Organizational strategies derived from digital transformation affect managed (Brewster and Larsen, 1992).
large areas of companies and even go beyond their borders –impacting Strategic management explores which factors correlate with the
products, business processes, sales channels, and supply chains (Berman, success of the organization from an internal perspective. This approach
2012; Barco, 2016). One of the main gaps being analysed in an attempt is called “Resource and Capability Theory” and examines the source of
to explain why not all companies succeed in their digital transformation the company’s sustainable competitive advantages (Wernerfelt, 1984;
concerns their talent management (Frankiewicz and Chamorro- Barney, 1991). It should be noted that, within an organization, HR can
Premuzic, 2020). be a potential source of sustainable competitive advantage (Wright
Academia offers a vast number of studies on talent management. et al., 2001). Resources are generally not valuable in themselves but
(Boxall et al., 2007; Scullion et al., 2010; Huang and Tansley, 2012; because they enable organizations to undertake multiple activities
Tansley et al., 2012; Dries, 2013; Crane and Hartwell, 2019; Whysall (Porter, 1991). Another key factor derived from the approach of the
et al., 2019; Claus, 2020). This paper aims to analyse what impact the theory of resources and capacities is technology, which allows the or­
external and internal context of digital transformation generates on ganization’s performance and competitiveness to be improved, gener­
talent management in organizations (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2019). ating new challenges and opportunities that drive organizational growth
Among the factors that are changing in organizations (digital trans­ (Ynzunza Cortés et al., 2013). This technology is a capacity that helps to
formation indicators) are: organizational culture (Bendak et al., 2020), create technical and market knowledge and that facilitates communi­
business models (Downes and Nunes, 2013; Matt et al., 2015; Bashir and cation between functional areas related to organizational performance
Farooq, 2018), digital leadership (Wakefield et al., 2016; Promsri, (Ynzunza Cortés et al., 2013).
2019), and new human resource strategies for talent management in the This integrated approach can be applied in the context of digital
digital age (Meena and Parimalarani, 2019). transformation since one of the key characteristics will be the dynamism
“More than anything else, digital transformation requires talent. In brought about by technological developments. Strategic resources that
fact, putting together the right team of technology, data, and process favour innovation processes include transformational leadership (Oke
people who can work together, with a strong leader who can drive et al., 2009), human capital (Leonard and Sensiper, 1998; Lawson and
change, may be the most important step a digital transformation com­ Samson, 2001), and culture (Naranjo-Valencia and Calderón-Hernán­
pany can take. Of course, even the best talent does not guarantee suc­ dez, 2015).
cess. But the lack of it almost guarantees failure” (Davenport and
Redman, 2020; p. 1). 2.1. Talent management
The potential benefits of digitization are manifold and include
increased sales or productivity, innovations in value creation, as well as In 1998, a group of McKinsey consultants coined the term “war for
new ways of interacting with customers (Berman, 2012). Business talent” and noted that talent is key to organizational excellence (Mi­
models can thus be reformed or replaced (Downes and Nunes, 2013). chaels et al., 2001). Since then, talent management has been seen as key
Without the transformation of existing companies, the economic and to organizational success (Beechler and Woodward, 2009) and necessary
environmental challenges that the future holds cannot be addressed in a for the sustenance and sustainability of organizations (Gallardo-Gal­
sustainable manner (Bican and Brem, 2020). Broadly speaking, digital lardo et al., 2015).
transformation can be defined as the modification (or adaptation) of Since then, talent management has become an increasingly popular

2
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

topic and has been studied by academics. In recent years, numerous (Scullion et al., 2010). In general, talent management aims to meet the
studies have appeared dealing with this term. (Boxall et al., 2007; quantitative and qualitative needs of human capital and to contribute to
Scullion et al., 2010; Dries, 2013; Thunnissen, 2016; Crane and Hart­ the company’s overall performance (Beechler and Woodward, 2009;
well, 2019; Whysall et al., 2019; Claus, 2020). One group of studies Cappelli, 2008). It is assumed that each stakeholder in the organization
advocates incorporating the effects of the organizational context on shares this economic and organizational interest. Different studies on
human resources, and extending the universalist approach of best talent management thus highlight the rational and economic side of
practices, offering contingent alternatives, both in practice and research work and organizations (Thunnissen, 2016). Given the essential role of
(Boxall et al., 2007; Thunnissen, 2016). Another group of authors state HR managers in the development, launch and monitoring of talent
that talent management adds value to strategic human resource man­ management systems, greater organizational commitment to talent
agement (Dries, 2013; Szierbowski-Seibel and Kabst, 2017; Beraha et al., management will increase the importance of HR professionals, making
2018; Kaufman, 2020). their work vital to the company.
There are also many definitions of talent management that refer to From our point of view, context is key to explaining the value of
key concepts such as attracting, retaining, developing, and deploying talent. Individuals may perform better or worse depending on their
talent (Scullion et al., 2010; Thunnissen, 2016). In 2013, Meyers et al. immediate environment, the leadership exercised by those who run the
(2013) presented a compelling overview of the different perspectives on company, and the team they work for. The importance of context in
talent, the different interpretations of these perspectives, and some talent management has already been explored in different studies
implications for an organization’s position when designing talent man­ (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2013; Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2019). For this
agement practices. reason, we believe that digital transformation is an organizational effort
This paper aims to analyse the impact that digital transformation has to adapt to this new context, and which should bring about changes in all
on talent management in organizations (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2019). strategic areas of the organization (Alunni and Llambías, 2018).
The reason for examining the relationship between digital trans­ Collings and Mellahi (2009) note that some studies consider talent
formation and talent management stems from the fact that, in the management to be a contingent practice. This leads us to the “best fit”
different lines of research on talent, a higher level of analysis seems model, which recognizes the impact of organizations’ specific internal
necessary that refers to the influence of the organization’s external and and external contexts on talent management practices and outcomes
internal context (Thunnissen et al., 2013). In the current digital envi­ (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2013).
ronment, great organizational efforts are being made to adapt to the new Talent management policies begin by identifying key positions in the
situation, at a time when there seems to be a shortage of talent to fill organization, then identify people who have the potential talent to fill
certain positions (Chambers et al., 1998; Wójcik, 2017). those key positions (Coulson-Thomas, 2012). If there is not enough
Tarique and Schuler (2010) find exogenous factors that favour talent talent internally, external people need to be recruited to fill potential
shortages (globalization, demographics, and the gap between supply gaps that the organization has or will have in certain positions and to
and demand), as well as other endogenous factors (international stra­ develop HR policies aimed at developing, motivating and engaging
tegic alliances, required skills and local strategies). Organizational talent in order to meet the organization’s talent needs (Highhouse et al.,
managers must achieve long-term stability based on their talent man­ 2003; Edwards, 2010). Digital transformation has different implications
agement strategies in order to remain competitive in the global economy for organizational change (Doppler and Lauterburg, 2005). These
and not engage in short-term approaches that spark an economic crisis changes require organizations to rethink HR strategies (Lund et al.,
with mass layoffs (Temkin, 2008). 2016), especially those aimed at attracting and retaining talent.
Intellectual capital or talent is increasingly essential to the organi­ Based on these studies, and in order to examine the influence of
zation’s strategic success. Digitization, labour shortages, growth digital transformation on talent management, we establish the following
through acquisitions, simultaneous downsizing and expansion, de­ hypothesis:
mographic shifts in the workforce and globalization are just some of the
H1. The digital transformation process of organizations influences
trends that have made talent the top priority for organizations (Kiron
talent management.
and Spindel, 2019).
Thunnissen et al. (2013) propose a more critical approach, drawing
attention to the economic and non-economic (i.e., social and moral) 2.2. Digital transformation
value that can be created by managing talent at three levels: individual,
organizational, and social. Cappelli and Keller (2014) examine the po­ The process of digital transformation entails creating new business
tential implications of today’s uncertain market challenges for talent models and the ability to exploit new market opportunities (Catlin et al.,
management theory and practice. 2015). This digital transformation involves significant investment in
The workforce is now larger, more diversified, mobile and more developing digital skills, which must be aligned with the business
skilled than it was a few years ago (Briscoe et al., 2009). In this global strategy (Lorenzo, 2016). Developing these capacities must take place
environment, not only has the way business is conducted changed, but it comprehensively in all dimensions of the organization: strategy, people
has also created the need for organizations to manage their workforce in and culture, management structure and systems, business process and
a global context (Tarique and Schuler, 2010). technology (Lorenzo, 2016).
Some authors consider talent management to be a “bridge field” First and foremost, digital transformation has to do with how com­
(Sparrow et al., 2014), drawing on the strengths of HR management, panies respond to digital trends in the environment (Downes and Nunes,
supply chain management, marketing or the theory of resources and 2013; Porter and Heppelmann, 2014). Sometimes, the emergence of
skills (Sparrow and MakramWhat, 2015). To understand which elements these trends means adapting to the way your customers, partners, em­
of talent management are most valuable to organizational performance, ployees and competitors use digital technologies (Matt et al., 2015).
we need to know which elements of talent management architecture Second, how an organization implements technology is only a small part
have the greatest impact on organizational effectiveness. This talent of digital transformation. Other issues, such as strategy, talent man­
management architecture is the combination of system processes and agement, organizational structure or leadership, are as important or
practices developed and implemented by an organization to ensure that even more important than technology for digital transformation (Kane,
talent management is carried out effectively (Sparrow and Makram­ 2017; Bharadwaj et al., 2013).
What, 2015). Digital transformation also refers to changes in business models,
In many studies, we find that talent management involves attracting, organizational developments and social changes (Kevles et al., 2017).
identifying, developing, retaining and systematically deploying talent Transformation is disruptive and affects not only customer relationships

3
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

but also internal processes and value propositions (Westerman et al., measure the level of digital transformation using the digital maturity
2012; Morakanyane et al., 2020). Digital technologies and business in­ index (Jacquez-Hernández and López Torres, 2018). Digital maturity is a
novations influence different fields: introducing new cultures, changing key construct for further academic research, as knowledge about the
society, reshaping the competitive landscape, raising customer expec­ paths taken by different organizations allows a deeper understanding of
tations, disrupting established business models, blurring lines between this ongoing socio-technical phenomenon (Tilson et al., 2010). While a
industries, and creating unprecedented challenges and opportunities for digital strategy consolidates and aligns the ICT and business strategy, a
companies around the world. As a result, digital transformation is now digital transformation strategy specifically contains the vision, planning
one of the most important strategic issues for all organizations (Korachi and implementation of the organizational change process (Matt et al.,
and Bounabat, 2020). 2015).
Digitization seeks to transform the whole organization by redefining In order to increase the success of the digital transformation process,
the value propositions for the client, the value-added processes and the new organizational capacities are required (George et al., 2016), while
ways people work. Transformation also requires strong leadership that is leaders must first assimilate the complex implications that digitalization
capable of solving problems and challenges and of understanding that entails for their company and their employees (Wang et al., 2016).
technology can create large-scale improvements (Earley, 2014). Digital Digital initiative requires organizations to make strategic changes in
transformation offers a unique opportunity for HR to influence order to improve not only their employees’ individual skills but also the
employee culture, well-being and engagement. Company digitization coordination of people, processes, and technologies (Desmet et al., 2015;
enhances the ability to generate competitive advantages through cost Dörner and Meffert, 2015). The changes the organization can make
reduction, efficiency improvement or new forms of production (Fitz­ thanks to the advantages offered by new technologies must therefore be
gerald et al., 2013). complemented by changes in organizational structures, management
Digital transformation strategies focus on transforming products, approaches, organizational behaviours and operating cultures (Wade
processes and organizational aspects due to new technologies. Digital and Marchand, 2014; Kohnke, 2017).
transformation strategies go beyond the process paradigm and include As digitization is a challenge for organizations, “to successfully
changes and implications for products, services and business models in implement it, organizations must invest in staff training, empower em­
general (Matt et al., 2015). The power of a digital transformation ployees, change organizational culture to embrace the key role of ana­
strategy lies in its scope and objectives. Less digitally mature organiza­ lytics for the company, and hire leaders who actively support
tions tend to focus on individual technologies, and their strategies have digitization” (Ancarani and Di Mauro, 2018, p. 7). In light of the pre­
an operational focus. Digital strategies in mature organizations are vious studies, we expect that the digital transformation which organi­
developed with the intention of transforming the business (Kane et al., zations undergo will impact talent:
2017).
H2.1. The digital transformation of organizations influences the
Companies in all industries (Westerman et al., 2014) need to eval­
attraction of talent.
uate their current business model against emerging opportunities and to
potentially adapt it to the new digital age (Gannon, 2013). To account H2.2. The digital transformation of organizations influences the
for this phenomenon, recent literature has established the concept of retention of talent.
digital maturity. Although several equivalent terms have been presented
in the literature –such as digital readiness or digital transformation 3. Methodology
index– we consider digital maturity to be the predominant term. Chanias
and Hess (2016, p. 4) define digital maturity as “the state of a company’s 3.1. Population and sample
digital transformation.” Digital maturity is a key construct for greater
academic research, as it reflects the different levels of transformation The target population is made up of Spanish companies with an in­
that each organization adopts, allowing us to delve deeper into this termediate or advanced level of digital transformation and who belong
socio-technical phenomenon (Tilson et al., 2010). to one of the following four sectors: industry, construction, commerce,
Transformation refers to a fundamental change within the organi­ and other services (Table 1). Due to the large size of the population, the
zation and has a major impact on organizational strategy (Matt et al., sample is selected randomly, thereby guaranteeing its representative­
2015; Kotter, 1995) and the distribution of power (Wischnevsky and ness and the possibility of extrapolating the data obtained.
Damanpour, 2006). The scales employed to measure the “digital matu­ In the study on digital transformation in Spain prepared by the
rity index” have been used to evaluate and measure the transformation Spanish Chamber of Commerce, 35 % of companies were at an advanced
process. Maturity models are a tool that primarily allows for an assess­ stage of implementation with a specific digital transformation strategy,
ment of the status quo (Becker et al., 2009) and indicates potential, while 50 % were at an intermediate level.
anticipated or dynamic growth towards the desired target state (Paulk Companies in the sample were selected using the Digital Readiness
et al., 1993). The scales used to evaluate the digital maturity index in our Assessment Maturity Model (DREAMY) Digital Maturity Index (De
study were chosen from among the different models proposed. We Carolis et al., 2017). The maturity scale ranges from 1 (lowest level of
believe them to be a key element for seeing how the level of each maturity) to 5 (highest level of maturity). We ruled out companies that
company surveyed within the process of digital transformation has did not reach level 3, as we feel they do not attain the average level of
evolved. In the study by Kane et al. (2017, p. 7), “companies with an digital transformation. Sample distribution by sector is shown in
advanced level of digital maturity are characterised by implementing Table 2.
systemic changes in the way they organise and develop the workforce,
stimulate innovation in the workplace, and cultivate digitally minded
cultures and experiences.” Table 1
The Digital Maturity Index measures an organization’s ability to take Business sectors of the study.
advantage of and benefit from technology. It shows us how companies Business sector % Companies
struggle to keep up with accelerated standards whilst also looking to the
Total sectors 3,152,332
future. It seems clear that most are not prepared for what is coming, as Industry 7%
technologies continue to merge and advance (Curran et al., 2017). Construction 13.5 %
In our research model, we establish digital transformation as an in­ Trade 20 %
dependent variable. We follow the review of models to analyse whether Rest of services 59.5 %

the transformation process fits into a strategic plan. In our review, we Source National Statistical Institute of Spain (2020).

4
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

Table 2 2) – Formalization: use of processes, procedures and tools, valuing

Distribution of the sample by sector. documentary aspects, business plans, and management models.
BUSINESS SECTOR Frequency % Cumulative %
The PRH-33 scale covers the following 15 aspects of human re­
Industry 102 32.4 32.4
Construction 70 22.3 54.7 sources: (1) values and culture, (2) job description and analysis, (3)
Trade 35 11.1 65.8 internal communication, (4) training and development, (5) performance
Rest of services 107 34.2 100.0 and performance appraisal, (6) staff selection, (7) salary compensation,
Total 314 100 (8) reception and separation processes within the company, (9) work­
Source: own elaboration. force planning (10) climate and motivation, (11) teamwork, (12) change
management, (13) leadership style, (14) labour relations, and (15)
In our sample, companies with 100 to 500 employees account for career plans.
38.2 % of the total, companies with 500 to 1000 employees account for In this research, 28 of the 33 items that make up the scale were used
37.9 %, and companies with >1000 employees account for 23.9 %. The in order to reduce the excess number of questions and use only those
information needed to test the hypotheses was obtained through a most appropriate for this research. In addition, eight items were intro­
questionnaire. The design and initial construction of the questionnaire duced to strengthen the assessment of human resource practices vis-à-vis
was carried out in two phases: the first related to creating the items, and attracting and retaining talent.
the second to content validation. Questionnaires were completed by a
senior manager of each company (director of human resources, ICT di­ - Attracting talent: this variable seeks to understand the recruitment
rector or director general). efforts that organizations must make in order to develop their busi­
ness properly: that is, recruiting people in a timely manner, in suf­
ficient numbers and with the right skills to join the company when
3.2. Variables needed. This variable is measured by the following four items: type
of talent needed by the company, talent attraction strategy, talent
3.2.1. Independent variables development, and talent retention.
In our research model, we established digital transformation as an
independent variable. We measure the level of digital transformation - Retention of talent: employee loyalty to the organization is key to
using the digital maturity index and three indicators: business models, organizational success and long-term profitability. Companies must
organizational culture, and leadership (Jacquez-Hernández and López be sufficiently attractive such that their employees would prefer to
Torres, 2018). These three indicators are the most widely used when stay rather than move to another firm. Some studies claim that
studying the digital transformation process. In turn, to validate the employer branding reduces turnover and increases employee loyalty
model, we see whether these indicators are structurally related to digital (Kucherov and Zavyalova, 2012). This variable is measured using the
transformation through maturity scales. The scales used to evaluate the items applied by Hillebrandt and Bjorn (2013) in their study. These
digital maturity index are a key element in understanding the evolution items were selected from among those that make up the PRH-33
of each company in the process of digital transformation. scale. In addition, we added an item on the use of e-recruitment
The Digital Maturity Index measures an organization’s ability to take from the study by Eckhardt et al. (2014).
advantage of and benefit from technology. It also indicates how com­
panies struggle to stay up to date, as technologies continue to merge and 3.3. Statistical analysis of data
advance (Curran et al., 2017).
For this study, among the different digital maturity models being After collecting the data from the questionnaires, the statistical
used, we selected the following three: processing of the questionnaires was initiated. We used version 25 of the
statistical software SPSS in our study. We first calculated the variables
1. McKinsey’s Digital Ratio (Catlin et al., 2015). (recoding of variables). New variables are generated by numerical
2. Skills maturity model (Paulk et al., 1993). transformations performed on the values of the pre-existing variables.
3. Our own adaptation of the Digital Readiness Assessment Maturity This allows us to work on numerical scales, starting from nominal items,
Model (DREAMY, Digital Readiness Assessment Maturity model) (De which facilitates statistical calculation. In turn, to test the hypotheses,
Carolis et al., 2017). we resorted to structural equations modeling, using the SmartPLS 3.2.3
program (Ringle et al., 2015).
3.2.2. Dependent variables
The dependent variable is the variable explained by the independent 4. Research findings
variable. In our study, we wish to know whether digital transformation
(independent variable) influences talent management (dependent vari­ In order to test the hypotheses presented, we use a structural equa­
able). Traditionally, talent management consists of HR practices aimed tions model. This model is a multivariate statistical technique that al­
at attracting and retaining talent. In our research, we therefore choose lows the effect and relationships between multiple variables to be
three dependent variables: talent management –measured by a scale of estimated. These models enable us to test the relationship (non-causal­
HR practices– attraction, and retention. ity) between observed and latent variables.
The process starts with the PLS-PM algorithm, which is an iterative
- Talent management: a variable that integrates all activities related to process that uses standardized manifest variables. This algorithm allows
the management of the life cycle of talent, from attraction to us to calculate external weights, latent variable scores and loads. It is a
development and retention (Schiemann, 2014). partial procedure, as it analyses blocks one by one using simple and
multiple linear regressions alternately.
This variable is measured using the PRH-33 scale (Boada-Grau and The algorithm process consists of the following steps:
Gil-Ripoll, 2011). This scale consists of two sub-factors:
1- First step: we obtain the weights in order to find the scores of the
1) – Development: professional growth of people within the organiza­ latent variables.
tion, valuing aspects such as: teamwork, leadership, conciliation,
change, and innovation.

5
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

2- Second stage: the estimation of the route coefficient is performed by we must perform the PLS-SEM analysis without the moderating effect. A
making regressions between the estimated scores of the latent vari­ PLS path model without the moderating effect includes only the main
ables according to the system of specified structural relationships. effects among the latent variables in the structural model. The main
3- Third stage: obtaining the loads through correlations between latent effects model becomes a moderator model after including a product term
and manifest variables. and its interaction (or moderation) effect. In a moderator model, the
main effects change to simple (or single) effects (Henseler and Fassott,
The first step of our study is to evaluate the reliability and validity of 2010).
the model used. The internal consistency indicates the reliability of the Whereas a main effect quantifies the change in the level of the
construct. We use the composite reliability index to know the reliability dependent variable when the considered independent variable is
of the model. This index is more appropriate than Cronbach’s alpha, increased by one unit and all other independent variables remain con­
since it does not assume that all indicators are given the same weighting stant (ceteris paribus), a simple effect quantifies the change in the level
(Chin and Marcoulides, 1998). Indicators are considered valid as of 0.7 of the dependent variable when the independent variable is increased by
(Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). The results obtained (Table 3) show the one unit, the interacting variable has a value of zero and all other in­
reliability of the model. dependent variables remain constant. The first step is to analyse the
Convergent validity indicates that a set of indicators, items or re­ relationship between the independent variable and the three dependent
agents represent a single underlying construct (Henseler et al., 2009). variables. We perform a simple regression analysis with which to obtain
The measure used to determine the validity of the model is the average the path coefficients.
variance extracted (AVE), which measures the amount of variance of the These coefficients have standardized values between +1 and − 1; the
construct that can be explained through the chosen indicators (Fornell higher the value, the greater the ratio (prediction) between the values;
and Larcker, 1981). If the AVE is greater than or equal to 0.50, we have while the closer to zero, the lower the ratio. If the result of a path value is
convergent validity. The results obtained (Table 3) show the validity of contrary to the sign postulated in the hypothesis, it indicates the hy­
the model. pothesis will be rejected. The results obtained (Table 5) show significant
Having completed the analysis of construct reliability and validity, and moderate relationships between the independent variable and the
the next step is to determine whether the indicators used in the model three dependent variables.
are independent of each other. In order to do this, we perform We then analyse the validity of the analysis model (goodness of fit of
discriminant validity analysis, which we measure through the Spearman the model) using the coefficient of determination R2, which calculates a
correlation. linear regression between the variables of the model. Falk and Miller
Carmines and Zeller (1979) consider there to be discriminant validity (1992) consider that an R2 should have a minimum value of 0.10; Chin
with factor loads >0.707. It is suggested that indicators with loads below and Marcoulides (1998) consider 0.67, 0.33, and 0.10 (substantial,
this range should be eliminated (Urbach and Ahlemann, 2010; Hair moderate, and weak), while Hair et al. (2017) recommend 0.75, 0.50,
et al., 2011). Table 4 shows the Spearman correlation values. All values 0.25 (substantial, moderate, and weak).
are >0.8, except for digital transformation, which is above 0.75. We The results obtained (Table 6) are moderate, although all factors are
consider that this latter data shows a positive relationship close to the above 0.20. In this analysis, we found the R2 for attracting talent and
limit. We therefore consider it proven that there is discriminant validity managing talent to be substantial, retention of talent to be moderate,
in the model. and digital transformation to be weak. All are above 0.20, thereby
Through the reliability of the latent construct or variable, we can validating the equation when the variance is explained by at least 20 %.
observe the consistency of its indicators; that is, the simple correlations Using the f2 distribution, we then analyse the effect of digital
of the measures or indicators with their respective constructs, valued by maturity on the three dependent variables. This measure is a continuous
examining factor loads or weights. Carmines and Zeller (1979) consider probability distribution that measures changes in R2. A value of 0.03
factor loads >0.707 to be appropriate. It is therefore suggested that represents a low f effect, a value of 0.15 represents a medium effect, and
indicators with loads below this range should be removed (Hair et al., 0.35 a high effect. A low f effect means little probability of a relationship
2011). When an indicator has a lower than the denoted load, it can be between the digital transformation variable and the three dependent
removed and the model can be run again to estimate the results (Urbach variables.
and Ahlemann, 2010). In the PLS algorithm, composite reliability is All the effects of the variable “digital transformation” are average
>0.8 in all cases. Authors recommend using a compound validity >0.7 and range from 0.15 to 0.35 (Table 7). They can therefore be considered
as a reference (Hair et al., 2011; Malhotra, 2004). As for the value of the valid.
extracted variance, all values are above 0.5, indicating that the factors Since the PLS distribution is unknown, conventional significance
are valid at the convergent level. cannot be tested. In other words, because there is no normality of the
The classic criterion used is that of Fornell and Larcker (1981), who sample, conventional parametric tests are not applied. The bootstrapping
recommend that the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) technique analyses the robustness of the indicator loads and whether the
should be greater than the correlations that present a construct with the relationships between the variables are significant. By calculating the
rest of the constructs. When the square root is higher in all cases, it is distribution of the subsamples, we obtain their standard error, which
assumed that the model is valid in a discriminating way. will be used to calculate Student’s t, according to the formula t = b/Sb,
Once the analyses carried out have validated the consistency and where b is the path coefficient and Sb is the type error. The result is
validity of our model, we then proceed to test the hypotheses. To do this, Student’s t, which is significant for values of 1.96 (0.05) and 2.58 (0.01)
(Hair et al., 2017).
All factors have a T > 1.96 and P < 0.005 (Table 8). Using boot­
Table 3 strapping analysis, we thus demonstrate that the three hypotheses of our
Reliability and construct validity analysis. research are statistically significant, through Student’s t-values.
Reliability and construct Composite Reliability Average Variance The three hypotheses of our study are therefore tested and accepted.
validity Index Extracted (AVE)

Digital maturity 0.797 0.576 5. Conclusion and practical implications

Talent attraction 0.962 0.926
Talent management 0.965 0.932 The results contribute to a better understanding of the impact of
Talent retention 0.748 0.525
digital transformation on talent management, attraction, and retention.
Source: own elaboration. Numerous studies on talent management carried out in recent years

6
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

Table 4
Discriminant validity analysis.
Discriminant validity Digital Transformation Talent Attraction Talent Management Talent Retention

Digital Transformation 0.759

Talent Attraction 0.758 0.905
Talent Management 0.573 0.862 0.965
Talent Retention 0.600 0.811 0.765 0.809

Source: own elaboration.

Table 5 Attracting and retaining talent is therefore key for organizations. In the
Path coefficient analysis. literature review, we found evidence on how, in the current digital
Coefficient Path Talent Talent Talent context, technological advances are being taken advantage of to
Attraction Management Retention improve talent management. In the midst of the race to digital maturity,
Digital 0.556 0.613 0.624 this poses a high risk of not achieving transformation success due to
Transformation scarce resources and skills. In short, digital work platforms –arising from
Big Data– enhance the performance of HR departments in terms of talent
Source: own elaboration.
management (Larkin and Hystad, 2017). Using this type of platform
improves performance by 9 % and reduces costs by 7 %, thereby
Table 6
providing a better balance between supply and demand in the digital age
Coefficient of determination analysis.
(Lund et al., 2016). This improves the performance of employers when
Coefficient of determination R2 R2 adjusted managing talent and facilitates more engaged, satisfied, and efficient
Attraction of talent 0.642 0.635 employees as they progress in their careers (Larkin and Hystad, 2017).
Talent management 0.642 0.635 These advances are taking place within a framework of continuous
Retention of talent 0.547 0.538
innovation that leads companies to update their organizational culture
Source: own elaboration. towards a more pioneering model. New working methods are facilitating
the achievement of competitive advantages that are sustainable over
Table 7 time. The hypotheses tested in our empirical study show a positive
Distribution analysis f2. correlation between the dependent variables (management, attraction,
Coefficient f2 Attraction of talent Talent Retention of talent
and engagement of talent) and the independent variable (digital trans­
management formation); in other words, the positive impact of digital transformation
on the management, attraction, and retention of talent. We therefore
Digital maturity 0.184 0.267 0.377
accept the three hypotheses put forward in our research.
Source: own elaboration. The theoretical framework within which our research is carried out
indicates that talent determines the strategy to be followed by the or­
Table 8 ganization, whether it is for person to position suitability, maintaining a
T statistics T (Bootstrapping). succession policy in key positions, or for other company needs (Gal­
T statistics Original Sample Standard T P lardo-Gallardo et al., 2013). Organizational change is now based on
(Bootstrapping) Sample mean deviation statistics Values technological development aimed at adapting to a new environment
Digital- Maturity> 0.234 0.241 0.086 1.998 0.047 that requires a restructuring of key business processes.
Attraction of All of these changes -focused on technological development and the
talent need to possess highly technical skills such as data analysis, engineering,
Digital- Maturity> 0.200 0.199 0.112 2.664 0.008
etc., mean that companies will fail to meet 100 % of their needs in terms
Talent
management
of talent (Tito and Serrano, 2016). Competition will therefore be
Digital- Maturity> 0.530 0.506 0.134 3.960 0.000 disproportionate and strategies for attracting and retaining talent
Retention of (Paauwe and Boselie, 2007) will have to be increasingly proactive and
talent better than those of competing firms. Efforts will need to be made in HR
Source: own elaboration. policies (Sparrow et al., 2013), such as promoting careers, compensation
and benefits, labour flexibility, temporary hiring in accordance with the
show the enormous interest in the scientific community with regard to labour regulations of each country, international hiring on the same
what role people play in organizations, particularly in the digital envi­ terms as the above, etc. (Vaiman and Collings, 2013).
ronment in which companies operate today. If anything characterizes
HR in the digital age, it is the ability to transform data into valuable 5.1. Contribution to corporate management
knowledge (Bondarouk and Brewster, 2016). There are many direct
costs involved in the rotation of talent, such as recruitment and training In the theoretical framework, we pointed out that merely investing in
of new entrants. Yet this also carries hidden costs such as lost produc­ technology is not digital transformation. Our main contribution to the
tivity, the learning curve or the negative impact on the employer’s business world is that digital transformation is a management change
reputation. process based on technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence or
The pandemic caused by the coronavirus has dramatically increased HR analytics, which make it easier for business models to transform
the use of digital tools in jobs, such that we believe that exploring the (Downes and Nunes, 2013). Digital transformation is not just about
influence of digital transformation on talent management is very cutting costs, but also about making it easier to create business models
attractive because of its topicality. Digital development is changing the that generate greater differentiation, based on digitalization. Human
way organizations select and retain new employees, and this study resources departments need to adapt talent management processes to
shows the positive relationship between digital transformation and the new environment, as in many cases they were designed for a non-
talent management. Talent management has become a strategic asset digital world (Kane et al., 2017). The digital transformation of busi­
that generates innovation, consumer value and financial profitability. nesses brings with it new ways of retaining, attracting and motivating

7
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

people. These changes affect both the organizational culture and the Data availability
way new business models are created. Thanks to new technologies,
people become strategic assets of their organizations. No data was used for the research described in the article.
Starting from the premise that digital transformation offers new
opportunities to gain new and better competitive advantages, in addi­ References
tion to considering people to be at the centre of this digital revolution,
HR departments must take a step forward to lead this internal trans­ Abbatiello, A., Agarwal, D., Bersin, J., Lahiri, G., Schwartz, J., Volini, E., 2018. Nuevas
tendencias globales en capital humano 2018: El auge de la empresa social. Deloitte
formative process (Lal, 2015). We agree with the “New Global Trends in University Press, Madrid.
Human Capital 2018 (Deloitte University Press)” report (Abbatiello Abedrapo, C., 2014. Gestión del cambio en contexto de innovación tecnológica. Rev.
et al., 2018), in that the most innovative companies are generating new GestiónPers.Tecnol. 7 (21), 81–90.
Alunni, L., Llambías, N., 2018. Explorando la transformación digital desde adentro.
talent practices, which include improving and simplifying the work Palermo Bus.Rev. 17, 11–30.
experience or designing thinking and behavioural economics, which Ancarani, A., Di Mauro, C., 2018. How does digitization affect the behaviour of
they call the “Digital HR” approach. purchasers and team members in related functions?. In: Digitalisierung im Einkauf.
Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden.
Barco, J.A., 2016. La transformación digital. La palanca para una cadena de suministro
adaptable, ágil y flexible. Bol.Estud.Econ. 71 (219), 483–505.
5.2. Limitations of the empirical study Barney, J.B., 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 17
(1), 99–120.
Bashir, M., Farooq, R., 2018. The synergetic effect of knowledge management and
The first limitation of the study stems from the instrument used for business model innovation on firm competence: a systematic review. Int.J.Innov.Sci.
data collection; a hand-delivered survey. This method is directly 11 (3), 362–387.
dependent on the company’s willingness to complete the questionnaire. Becerra, F., Álvarez, M., 2011. El talento humano y la innovación empresarial en el
contexto de las redes empresariales. Estud.Gerenciales 27 (119), 209–232.
A second limitation concerns two of the main terms used: digital Becker, B.E., Huselid, M.A., Beatty, R.W., 2009. The Differentiated Workforce:
transformation and talent. In both cases, they are concepts used with Transforming Talent Into Strategic Impact. Harvard Business Press, Boston.
different meanings by the scientific community. Thirdly, this study was Beechler, S., Woodward, I.C., 2009. The global “War for Talent”. J. Int. Manag. 15 (3),
273–285.
carried out with a sample of companies from different sectors, in order to Bendak, S., Sikhli, A., Abdel-Razek, R., 2020. How changing organizational culture can
reduce bias, although the volume of cases analysed always leads us to enhance innovation: development of the innovative culture enhancement
consider the results with some degree of caution. In an effort to reduce framework. Cogent Bus.Manag. 7 (1), 1–17.
Beraha, A., Bingol, D., Ozkan-Canbolat, E., Szczygiel, N., 2018. The effect of strategic
this limitation, we unified the criteria for selecting companies from the
flexibility configurations on product innovation. Eur. J. Manag. Bus. Econ. 27 (2),
final sample, based on their degree of digital maturity, eliminating 129–140.
companies with a low level of digitalization. Fourthly, the variance of Berman, J., 2012. Digital transformation: opportunities to create new business models.
Strateg. Leadersh. 40 (2), 16–24.
the common method has been applied so as to minimize the use of the
Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O., Pavlou, P., Venkatraman, N., 2013. Digital business strategy:
Structural Equation Method (PLS SEM) which, as already mentioned, is toward the next generation of insights. MIS Q. 37 (2), 471–482.
more powerful than correlational models and relaxes the rigidity of Bican, P., Brem, A., 2020. Digital business model, digital transformation, digital
regression models. Despite these limitations, the assumptions of the entrepreneurship: is there a sustainable “Digital”? Sustainability 12, 5239–5254.
Boada-Grau, J., Gil-Ripoll, C., 2011. Medida de las prácticas de recursos humanos:
model were tested and accepted, such that the results of the project can propiedades psicométricas y estructura factorial del cuestionario PRH-33. An.Psicol.
be considered valid. 27, 527–535.
Bock, L., 2015. La nueva fórmula del trabajo. Conecta, Barcelona.
Bondarouk, T., Brewster, C., 2016. Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology
research. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 27 (21), 2652–2671.
5.3. Future lines of research Boxall, P., Purcell, J., Wright, P., 2007. Human resource management: scope, analysis,
and significance. In: The Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management. Oxford
University Press, Oxford.
The findings of this study lead us to suggest different lines of research
Brewster, C., Larsen, H.H., 1992. Human resource management in Europe: evidence from
for both the scientific community and companies. These proposed lines ten countries. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 3 (3), 409–434.
relate to different aspects of our work. First, the concept of talent needs Briscoe, D., Schuler, R., Claus, E., 2009. International Human Resource Management.
Routledge, London.
to be further developed, as it seems to be key to reducing ambiguities.
Camelo, C., Martin, F., Romero, P., Valle, R., 2000. Relación entre el tipo y el grado de
Secondly, it would be advisable to separate the attraction and retention innovación y el rendimiento de la empresa. Econ.Ind. 333, 149–160.
of talent into different lines of research. In this way, it may be easier to Cappelli, P., 2008. Talent management for the twenty-first century. Harv. Bus. Rev. 86
find strategies that are more specific to each of them. Thirdly, it would (3), 74–81.
Cappelli, P., Keller, J.R., 2014. Talent management: conceptual approaches and practical
be advisable to conduct research to show whether proper talent man­ challenges. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 1 (1), 305–331.
agement favours the digital transformation process and, in contrast, Carmines, E.G., Zeller, R.A., 1979. Reliability And Validity Assessment. Sage
whether poor management might slow it down. Publications, Beverly Hills.
Catlin, T., Scanlan, J., Willmott, P., 2015. Raising your digital quotient. In: McKinsey
Finally, a study could be carried out on companies which are Quarterly, 1, pp. 1–7.
addressing their digital transformation process, analysing whether there Chambers, E., Foulon, M., Handfield-Jones, H., Hankin, S., Michaels, E., 1998. The war of
is a digitally-focused management change (operating processes, tech­ talent. In: McKinsey Quarterly, 3, pp. 45–57.
Chanias, S., Hess, T., 2016. How digital are we? Maturity models for the assessment of a
nology, sales channels, etc.) or whether they also include people as a key company’s status in the digital transformation. LMU Munich. Munich School of
factor in this change. Management. Institute for Information Systems and New Media, Munich.
Chin, W., Marcoulides, G., 1998. The partial least squares approach to structural
equation modeling. In: Advances in Hospitality and Leisure, 8(2), pp. 295–336.
CRediT authorship contribution statement Claus, L., 2020. HR disruption—time already to reinvent talent management. Bus. Res.
Q. 22, 207–215.
Collings, D.G., Mellahi, K., 2009. Strategic talent management: a review and research
Ignacio Danvila-del-Valle: Conceptualization, Formal analysis,
agenda. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 19 (4), 304–313.
Investigation, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Cormican, K., O’Sullivan, D., 2004. Auditing best practice for effective product
review & editing. Mariano Méndez-Suárez: Formal analysis, Investi­ innovation management. Technovation 24 (10), 819–829.
gation, Resources, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. Coulson-Thomas, C., 2012. Talent management and building high performance
organisations. Ind. Commer. Train. 44 (7), 429–436.
Crane, B., Hartwell, C., 2019. Global talent management: a life cycle view of the
interaction between human and social capital. J. World Bus. 54 (2), 82–92.
Declaration of Competing Interest Curran, C., Garrett, D., Puthiyamadam, T., 2017. A Decade of Digital Keeping Pace With
Transformation. PWC, New York.

None.

8
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

Davenport, T., Redman, T., 2020. Digital transformation comes down to talent in 4 key Korachi, Z., Bounabat, B., 2020. General approach for formulating a digital
areas. Harv. Bus. Rev. 88 (10), 53–58. transformation strategy. J. Comput. Sci. 16 (4), 493–507.
De Carolis, A., Macchi, M., Negri, E., Terzi, S., 2017. A maturity model for assessing the Kotarbe, M., 2018. Digital transformation of business models. Found.Manag. 10 (1),
digital readiness of manufacturing companies. In: Lödding, H., Riedel, R., Thoben, K. 123–142.
D., Von Cieminski, G., Kiritsis, D. (Eds.), Advances in Production Management Kotter, J.P., 1995. Leading change: why transformation efforts fail. Harv. Bus. Rev. 73
Systems. The Path to Intelligent, Collaborative And Sustainable Manufacturing, 513, (2), 59–65.
pp. 13–20. Kucherov, D., Zavyalova, E., 2012. HRD practices and talent management n the
Desmet, D., Duncan, E., Scanlan, J., Singer, M., 2015. Six Building Blocks for Creating a companies with the employer brand. Eur.J.Train.Dev. 36 (1), 86–104.
High-performing Digital Enterprise. McKinsey & Company, New York. Lal, P., 2015. Transforming HR in the digital era: workforce analytics can move people
Doppler, K., Lauterburg, C., 2005. Change Management: Den Unternehmenswandel specialists to the center of decision-making. Hum. Resour. Manag. Int. Dig. 23 (3),
gestalten. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt. 1–4.
Dörner, K., Meffert, J., 2015. Nine Questions to Help You Get Your Digital Larkin, A., Hystad, P., 2017. Towards personal exposures: how technology is changing
Transformation Right. McKinsey & Company, New York. air pollution and health research. Curr.Environ.Health Rep. 4 (4), 463–471.
Downes, L., Nunes, P.F., 2013. Big-bang disruption. Harv. Bus. Rev. 91, 45–56. Lawson, B., Samson, D., 2001. Developing innovation capability in organisations: a
Dries, N., 2013. The psychology of talent management: a review and research agenda. dynamic capabilities approach. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 5 (3), 377–400.
Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 23, 272–285. Leonard, D., Sensiper, S., 1998. The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. Calif.
Earley, S., 2014. The digital transformation: staying competitive. In: IT Pro, 18. IEEE, Manag. Rev. 40 (3), 112–125.
pp. 118–141. Li, Y., Zhao, Y., Liu, Y., 2006. The relationship between HRM, technology innovation and
Eckhardt, A., Laumer, S., Maier, C., Weitzel, T., 2014. The transformation of people, performance in China. Int. J. Manpow. 27 (7), 679–697.
processes, and IT in e-recruiting: insights from an eight-year case study of a German Lorenzo, O., 2016. Modelos de madurez digital: ¿En qué consisten y qué podemos
media corporation. Empl. Relat. 36 (4), 63–80. aprender de ellos? Bol.Estud.Econ. 219, 573–590.
Edwards, M., 2010. An integrative review of employer branding and OB theory. Pers. Lund, S., Manyika, J., Robinson, K., 2016. Managing Talent in Digital Age. McKinsey
Rev. 39 (1), 5–23. Global Institute, New York.
Falk, F., Miller, N., 1992. A Primer for Soft Modeling. University of Akron Press, Ohio. Mackea, J., Genarib, D., 2019. Systematic literature review on sustainable human
Fitzgerald, M., Kruschwitz, N., Bonnet, D., Welch, M., 2013. Embracing digital resource management. J. Clean. Prod. 208 (1), 806–815.
technology: new strategic imperative. Global executive study and research project. Malhotra, N., 2004. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation. Pearson Education,
MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 55 (2), 1–12. New Jersey, Upper Saddle River.
Fornell, D., Larcker, S., 1981. In: Structural Equation Models With Unobservable Matt, C., Hess, T., Benlian, A., 2015. In: Digital Transformation Strategies. Business and
Variables And Measurement Error: Algebra And Statistics, 18. American Marketing Information Systems. Engineering Catchword First Online: DOI (Digital Object
Association, pp. 382–388. Identifier), 57 (5), pp. 339–343.
Frankiewicz, B., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., 2020. Digital transformation is about talent,not Meena, R., Parimalarani, G., 2019. Human capital analytics: a game changer for HR
technology. Harv. Bus. Rev. 13 (2), 2–6. professionals. Int.J.Recent Technol.Eng. 8, 3963–3965.
Gaggnon, R., Kurata, K., 2016. How digital transformation elevates human capital Meyers, M.C., van Woerkon, M., Dries, N., 2013. Talent — innate or acquired?
management. In: Forbes Insight. Washington Blvd, Jersey City, NJ. Theoretical considerations and their implications for talent management. Hum.
Gallardo-Gallardo, E., Dries, N., González-Cruz, T.F., 2013. What is the meaning of Resour. Manag. Rev. 23 (4), 305–321.
‘talent ‘in the world of work? Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 23, 290–300. Michaels, E., Handfield-Jones, H., Axelrod, B., 2001. The War for Talent. Harvard
Gallardo-Gallardo, E., Nijs, S., Dries, N., Gallo, P., 2015. Towards an understanding of Business School Press, Boston, MA.
talent management as a phenomenon-driven field using bibliometric and content Morakanyane, R., O’Reilly, P., McAvoy, J., 2020. Determining digital transformation
analysis. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 25, 264–279. success factors. In: Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on
Gallardo-Gallardo, E., Thunnissen, M., Scullion, H., 2019. Talent management: context System Sciences 2020, Hawaii.
matters. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 31 (5), 1–17. Naranjo-Valencia, J., Calderón-Hernández, G., 2015. Construyendo una cultura de
Gannon, B., 2013. Outsiders: an exploratory history of IS in corporations. J. Inf. Technol. innovación. Una propuesta de transformación cultural. Estud.Gerenciales 31 (135),
28 (1), 50–62. 223–236.
George, G., Osinga, E., Lavie, D., Scott, B., 2016. Big data and data science methods for Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H., 1994. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York.
management research. Acad. Manag. J. 59 (5), 1493–1507. Oke, A., Munshi, N., Walumbwa, F., 2009. The influence of leadership on innovation
Gray, J., Rumpe, B., 2017. Models for the digital transformation. Softw. Syst. Model. 16 processes and activities. Organ. Dyn. 38 (1), 64–72.
(2), 307–308. Osterwalder, A., 2009. Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game
Grover, V., Kohli, R., 2013. Revealing your hand: caveats in implementing digital Changers, And Challengers. Wiley, New Jersey.
business strategy. MIS Q. 10 (10), 1–20. Paauwe, J., Boselie, P., 2007. HRM and social embeddedness. In: Boxall, P., Purcell, J.,
Hair, J., Ringle, C., Sarstedt, M., 2011. PLS-SEM: indeed, a silver bullet. J.Mark. Wright, P. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of HRM. Oxford University Press, Oxford,
TheoryPract. 19 (2), 139–151. pp. 166–184.
Hair, J., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C., Gudergan, S., 2017. Advanced Issues in Partial Teast Paulk, M., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M., Weber, C., 1993. Capability Maturity Model for
Squares Structural Equation Modeling. SAGE Publishing, London. Software, Version 1.1. Carnegie Mellon University, Pennsylvania.
Hatum, A., 2010. Next Generation Talent Management: Talent Management to Survive Porter, M., 1991. Towards a dynamic theory or strategy. Strateg. Manag. J. 12 (52),
Turmoil. McMillan, Hampshire. 95–117.
Henseler, J., Fassott, G., 2010. Testing moderating effects in PLS path models: an Porter, M., Heppelmann, J., 2014. How smart, connected products are transforming
illustration of available procedures. In: Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W., Henseler, J., competition. Harv. Bus. Rev. 92 (11), 11–64.
Wang, H. (Eds.), Handbook of Partial Least Squares. Springer Handbooks of Promsri, C., 2019. The developing model of digital leadership for a successful digital
Computational Statistics, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 713–735. transformation. Int.J.Bus.Manag. 2 (8), 1–8.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C., Sinkovics, R., 2009. The use of partial least squares path Rauter, R., Globocnik, D., Perl-Vorbach, E., Baumgartner, R., 2019. Open innovation and
modeling in international marketing. Adv. Int. Mark. 20, 277–319. its effects on economic and sustainability innovation performance. J. Innov. Knowl.
Highhouse, S., Lievens, F., Sinar, E.F., 2003. Measuring attraction to organizations. Educ. 4 (4), 226–233.
Psychol. Meas. 63 (6), 986–1001. Reagans, R., Zuckerman, E., 2001. Networks, diversity, and productivity: the social
Hillebrandt, I., Bjorn, S., 2013. In: Measuring Employer Brands: An Examination of the capital of corporate R&D teams. Organ. Sci. 12 (4), 502–517.
Factor Structure, Scale Reliability And Validity. University of Bamberg, Germany, Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Becker, J.M., 2015. SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS, Bönningstedt. http
pp. 65–86. ://www.smartpls.com.
Huang, J., Tansley, C., 2012. Sneaking through the minefield of talent management: the Robbins, S., 2008. Comportamiento Organizacional. Pearson Educación, Barcelona.
notion of rhetorical obfuscation. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 23 (17), 1–19. Schiemann, W., 2014. From talent management to talent optimization. J. World Bus. 49
Jacquez-Hernández, M., López Torres, V., 2018. Modelos de evaluación de la madurez y (2), 281–288.
preparación hacia la Industria 4.0: una revisión de literatura. Ingeniería Industrial. Scullion, H., Collings, D.G., Caligiuri, P., 2010. Global talent management. J. World Bus.
Actualidad y Nuevas Tendencias 6 (20), 61–78. 45 (2), 105–108.
Kane, G.C., 2017. Digital maturity, nor digital transformation. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. Sethibe, T., Steyn, R., 2015. The relationship between leadership styles, innovation and
14, 26–31. organizational performance: a systematic review. S.Afr. J. Econ. Manag. Sci. 18 (3),
Kane, G.C., Palmer, D., Nguyen, A., Kiron, D., Buckley, N., 2017. Achieving digital 325–337.
maturity adapting your company to a changing world. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 14, Soule, D., Puram, A., Westerman, G., Bonnet, D., 2016. Becoming a Digital Organization:
1–25. The Journey to Digital Dexterity. MIT Center for Digital Business, Cambridge.
Kaufman, B., 2020. The real problem: the deadly combination of psychologisation, Sparrow, P., MakramWhat, H., 2015. What is the value of talent management? Building
scientism, and normative promotionalism takes strategic human resource value-driven processes within a talent management architecture. Hum. Resour.
management down a 30-year dead end. Hum.Resour.Manag.J. 30, 49–72. Manag. Rev. 25, 249–263.
Kevles, J., Dopp, D., Rost-Hein, M., 2017. Out-thinking Organizational Communications Sparrow, P., Farndale, E., Scullion, H., 2013. An empirical study of the role of the
the Impact of Digital Transformation. Springer, Germany. corporate HR function in global talent management in professional and financial
Kiron, D., Spindel, B., 2019. Rebooting work for a digital era: how IBM reimagined talent service firms in the global financial crisis. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 24,
and performance management. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 3, 1–12. 1777–1798.
Kohnke, O., 2017. It’s not just about technology: the people side of digitization. In: Sparrow, P.R., Scullion, H., Tarique, I., 2014. Multiple lenses on talent management:
Oswald, G., Kleinemeier, M. (Eds.), Shaping the Digital Enterprise. Springer, Cham, definitions and contours of the field. In: Sparrow, P.R., Scullion, H., Tarique, I.
pp. 69–91.

9
J.M. Montero Guerra et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 188 (2023) 122291

(Eds.), Strategic Talent Management: Contemporary Issues in International Context. Westerman, G., Bonnet, G., McAfee, A., 2014. Leading Digital: Turning Technology Into
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 36–70. Business Transformation. Harvard Business Review Press, Cambridge.
Szierbowski-Seibel, K., Kabst, R., 2017. The impact of HR outsourcing and strategic HR Whysall, Z., Owtram, M., Brittain, S., 2019. The new talent management challenges of
integration on the HR-to-employee ratio. Int. J. Manpow. 39 (2), 283–300. Industry 4.0. J.Manag.Dev. 38 (2), 118–129.
Tansley, C., Kirk, S., Tietze, S., 2012. The currency of talent management—a reply to Wischnevsky, J.D., Damanpour, F., 2006. Organizational transformation and
“talent management and the relevance of context: towards a pluralistic approach”. performance: an examination of three perspectives. J.Manag. 18 (1), 104–128.
Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 23, 337–340. Wójcik, P., 2017. Shortage of talents – a challenge for modern organizations. Pobrane z
Tarique, I., Schuler, R., 2010. Global talent management: literature review, integrative czasopisma. Int.J.SynergyRes. 6, 123–135.
framework, and suggestions for further research. J. World Bus. 45, 122–133. Wright, P., Dunford, B., Snell, S., 2001. Human resources and the resource based view for
Temkin, S., 2008. Managers feel strain of economic crisis. In: Business Day, 5(3), the firm. J. Manag. 27 (6), 701–721.
pp. 20–36. Ynzunza Cortés, C., Izar, J.M., Ávila, R., 2013. Recursos y Capacidades de Tecnología y
Teubner, A., 2013. Information systems strategy - theory, practice, and challenges for Desempeño Organizacional. Concienc.Tecnol. 46, 36–42.
future research. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 5 (4), 243–257.
Thunnissen, M., 2016. Talent management. For what, how and how well? An empirical
José Manuel Montero Guerra is a Human Resources Consultant at Montero HR Con­
exploration of talent management in practice. Empl. Relat. 38 (1), 57–72.
sulants and a part time Professor of Human Resources Management and Business
Thunnissen, M., Boselie, P., Fruytier, B., 2013. Talent management and the relevance of
Administration and Organizational Theory at the Complutense University of Madri and
context: towards a pluralistic approach. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 23 (4), 326–336.
part time professor of management at the Carlos III University in Madrid. His areas of
Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., Sørensen, C., 2010. Research commentary-digital infrastructures:
expertise are Talent Management and Head Hunter. He has a PHD in Business Management
the missing IS research agenda. Inf. Syst. Res. 21 (4), 748–759.
and Administration, an Executive MBA, Master in HR Management and Bachelor of In­
Tito, M., Serrano, B., 2016. Desarrollo de soft skills una alternativa a la escasez de talento
dustrial Psychology. Among other professional experience he has been director of human
humano. Innov.Res.J. 1 (12), 59–76.
resources in the health sector.
Urbach, N., Ahlemann, F., 2010. Structural equation modeling in information systems
research using Partial Least Squares. J.Inf.Technol.TheoryApplic. 11 (2), 5–40.
Vaiman, V., Collings, D., 2013. Talent management: advancing the field. Int. J. Hum. Ignacio Danvila Del Valle is Associate Professor of Human Resources Management and
Resour. Manag. 24, 1737–1743. Business Administration and Organizational Theory at the Complutense University of
Vial, G., 2019. Understanding digital transformation: a review and a research agenda. Madrid (Spain). Previously, he has been Assistant Professor at the Complutense University
J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 28 (2), 118–144. of Madrid, Professor in the Royal University College El Escorial, Villanueva University and
Wade, M., Marchand, D., 2014. Are You Prepared for Your Digital Transformation? European Business School. He holds a Ph. D. in Business Administration, a B.A. in Eco­
Understanding the Power of Technology Amps in Organizational Change. IMD, Real nomics. He was Chief of Studies of Segur Ibérica´s Training Department. He has published
Learning, Lausanne. different articles in specialized magazines of Human Resources. In addition, he has taken
Wakefield, M., Abbatiello, A., Agarwall, D., 2016. Global Trends in Human Capital 2016. part in numerous international Congresses.
Deloite University Press, Washington.
Wang, G., Gunasekaran, A., Ngai, E.W., Papadopoulos, T., 2016. Big data analytics in
Mariano Mendéz-Suárez holds a Ph. D. in Finance by the UAM, is Director of Research at
logistics and supply chain management: certain investigations for research and
ESIC University. He has research interests in areas such as the Marketing-Finance inter­
applications. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 176, 98–110.
face, digitalization and robotization, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. He has
Wernerfelt, B., 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg. Manag. J. 5 (2),
consulting experience in project valuation under uncertainty and financial risk
171–180.
management.
Westerman, G., Bonnet, D., MCafee, A., 2012. The advantages of digital maturity. MIT
Sloan Manag. Rev. 138, 443–449.

10

View publication stats