Migration and Global Talent Management: The Dynamics Creating Insiders and Outsiders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global Talent Management (GTM) is a central challenge facing organizations at the interface. Within business and management research, GTM is generally understood to mean an organization's strategy and procedures regarding the attraction, selection, development, and retention of the most high-potential talent in the most significant international roles. International mobility, especially skilled migration, is, however, an aspect of GTM that is seldom given the attention it deserves. GTM governs how people are deployed and managed in the international positions to which they are assigned. It should be acknowledged that the efficient management of employees who are already internationally mobile also falls to GTM, for the sake of both employees and organizations. This topic, along with the recognition of international migrants as a global talent pool with the potential to improve an organization's competitive value, represents a gap in the GTM literature to date, notably studies that focus on country-level comparisons. The changing formation of organizational, institutional, and national dynamics, activities, and identity can influence the socially-constructed boundaries and exchange of the global talent pool. The changing dynamics are especially of concern due to recent contextual issues, such as Brexit and the U.S. political environments, which can impact socially-constructed boundaries and create new psychic, institutional, cultural, and geographic barriers, resulting in how the future global talent pool is managed. The cross-disciplinary group of symposium presenters has a strong track record of publishing on issues relating to GTM and migration across a wide range of areas,including Europe, Canada, Australia, the Middle East and the U.S. The symposium encourages a cross-disciplinary dialogue and enables an investigation of organizational, institutional, and national forces that create challenges for the transfer of human capital across boundaries. The symposium can also create an opportunity to highlight the implications for human capital planning, managing skill shortages, and developing HR practices to facilitate organizational competitiveness. The symposium will also facilitate understanding of synergies in the global human capital exchange mechanisms which will allow career optimization of migrants across diverse organizational and societal interfaces.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".