It is generally known that talent portability is the transfer of skills from one point to another.

This
therefore means that in an organisational situation, talent portability is the transfer of an
employees skills from one organisation to another or from one department to another within the
same organisation. A myth was is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as something that many
people but that doesnt exist or is false and reality is defined as a thing that is actually
experienced or seen, in contrast to what people might imagine. It is therefore the task of the
essay to analyze the fact that do people with talent continue to shine or perform well if they
move from one organisation to another or from one department to another in an organisation; or
its just a fallacy as it progresses.
Pfeffer (1994) has it that talent portability makes a science and practice of Human Resource
Management complex and potential source of sustained competitive advantage, if handled well.
This implies that, a skilled or talented employee is a source of competitive advantage to the
receiving organisation if moved from one organisation to another. An example which helps one
to understand the point is that if a Proton Bakery worker is transferred to Lobels Bakery, he/she
will make Lobels Bakery reach the competitive advantage due to the application of his/her innate
skills which he/she acquired or obtained from Proton Bakery on how bread must be baked and all
the flour products produced by Bakeries. This therefore shows the reality of talent portability if
an employee moves from one organisation to another. However it must also be noted that an
employee moved from Proton Bakery to Lobels Bakery may not continue to shine due to the fact
of adaptability. According to Ones et al (2007), some employees may not be able to cope with
the changes that occur at work and also the changes in environmental factors which may result to
the employee not performing well at the organisation he/she has moved to hence showing talent
portability as a myth. This information therefore makes one to draw a conclusion that talent
portability is both a myth and reality.
Moreover, talented performers largely are responsible for the productivity and profitability of a
firm. It appears as common sense that acquiring these talented individuals can bring those
positive effects into a new organization. The prevailing belief is that star professionals are free
agents, owning their means of production and therefore able to take their talents with them from
one organization to another and continue to shine (Groysberg, 2011) cited in David (2015). An
increasing number of firms rely on recruiting outside star professionals instead of developing

their own people into the best and brightest (Groysberg, 2011) cited in David (2015). This
information shows that the issue of talent portability is of great importance since it helps in
raising the levels of production to the receiving organisation if a talented employee is moved
from one organisation to another. A typical example is when an employees who has a talent in
being an organisational trainer, if the employee is moved to another organisation, he/she will
contact training programmes to the receiving organisation which will then lead to a rise in the
production levels of that organisation. This information therefore makes one to say that talent
portability is a reality rather than a myth. However, recent research shows that hiring star
performers is a risky endeavour, not only negatively affecting the star but upsetting veteran
employees who might be demotivated by the glory and high salaries the incoming stars
command (Groysberg et al., 2004). This therefore implies that an employee may end up not
shining in the receiving organisation due to the tension between him/her and the fellow
employees since the employee will be seen by other employees as someone who is more
important than them due to the praises given to him/her. The talented employee as a result will
end up minimising his capacity and efforts for him/her to be on the same levels with him/her
hence making that employee not to shine thereby showing that talent portability is a myth. This
information then makes one to agree with the assertion that talent portability is both a myth and
reality.
Furthermore, talent portability is both a myth and reality in the sense that if a person is moved
from one department to another it helps the organisation in the sense that the employee will lead
to a rise in the department he/she is placed due to his/her abilities which are different from other
employees in the organisation. Van Rooy and Viswesvaran (2004) has it that moving an
employee from one department to another is of great importance since it will lead to
departmental growths in an organisation since it will give room for every employee to exercise
his/her own potential in every department in the organisation as a way of filling in the loopholes
left by another employee since employees have different talents. For example, if in an
organisation an employee is moved from the Secretariat department to the Finance department,
this will help the organisation in the sense that the employee will improve the departments
standards due to the application of new skills in an organisation. This therefore shows that talent
portability is a reality as supported by this information. However, Felon & Pepermans (1998)
argued that for an employee to work and function well in an organisation, the employee must

have adequate knowledge and skills in the department he/she will be working in. This implies
that the employee must have proper attitude with the skills necessary to be efficient in work. An
employee may therefore cease to shine if he/ she is transferred to a department he/she doesnt
have full knowledge about hence showing that talent portability is a myth. This information,
combined together brings home the fact that talent portability is both a myth and reality as
highlighted in the paragraph.
Additionally, an employee may continue to shine or not if he/she is moved from one organisation
to another due to the fact of ethics. Burkus and Osula (2011) cited in David (2015) denote that
work ethics is very important for the performance of an employee since good ethics and morals
help a person to improve his/her performance. A clarifying example is in an organisational setup,
when an employee performed well in the sending organisation where there were good ethics and
morals, if exposed to good ethics and morals in the receiving organisation, he/she will continue
shining because she will be used to a good ethical and moral environment. This then makes one
to see the reality side of talent portability since the worker will continue shining. However, this
factor by Burkus and Osula (2011) cited in David (2015) reveals the mythical side of talent
portability. If an employee was used to a good ethical and moral environment, and is then moved
to an organisation where there are bad ethics and morals, he/she will not perform well due to the
environment he/she will be exposed to and may also be demotivated by other employees who
were already on that organisation hence leading to poor performance by the employee thereby
showing that talent portability is also a myth. By this information, one is therefore made to agree
with the assertion that talent portability is both a myth and reality.
More still, experience is another factor which can be used to support the fact that talent
portability is a reality. Social psychologists have it that there is a strong correlation between
performance and experience. This implies that as one increase in the number of years working in
an organisation, he/she will begin to perform very well since he/she will have been exposed to
the type of job she/he is doing. Therefore if an employee is moved from one organisation to
another to perform the same task he/she was performing in the previous organisation he/she was
working in. this then makes one to agree with the notion that talent portability is a reality as
highlighted in the paragraph. However, an employee may be hindered from performing well due
to the fact of the lack of support from the superiors. According to Maslow cited in Armstrong

(2011) in his hierarchy of needs showed that for an employee to perform well there must be
motivation of that employee. Therefore in an organisation, superiors have to understand the
needs of the employees the employee to maximise his/her own performance. Sometimes frequent
fault finding of the employees work may also lead to deficiency in work since the employee
may be insecure on whether she is doing the right thing or not at an organisation. Though an
employee may have innate skills in him/her, his/her effectiveness is also lost if there is no proper
guidance or planning in an organisation by the superiors. This then makes one to agree with the
fact that talent portability is also a myth. By this entire information one is therefore made to say
that talent portability is both a myth and reality.
Also, talent portability is a myth when one focuses on the issue of technology. An employee may
not continue to shine if that employee moves from one organisation to another due to a change in
technology to the company he/she has moved to. A typical example to note on this fact is the
scenario where an employee from Net One is moved to Econet Wireless. The employee may not
perform well due to his/her introduction to new machines which will be digital hence making the
employee not to perform well since he was previously exposed to manual machines hence
showing that talent portability is a myth rather than a reality.
Conclusively the essay has highlighted the fact that talent portability is a myth more than a
reality to a greater extent. Points of strength include the fact of experience as well as ethics
among others discussed in the essay. However, there are also factors which hinders an employee
to perform well in an organisation he/she has moved to which include adaptability as well as
support of the employees from the superiors among others highlighted in the essay.

REFERENCES
Armstrong; M (2011) A Handbook of Human Resources Management Practice 11th Edition.
London; Kogan Page Limited.
David, B. (2015). IUP Journal of Soft Skills: Leadership and the Portability Myth: Research and
Implications on Talent Portability.
Felon, I. A., & Pepermans, R. G. (1998). Exploring the relationship between orientation
programs and current job satisfaction. Psychological Reports, 83, 367371.
Ones, D. S. et al (2007). In support of personality assessments in organizational settings.
Personnel Psychology, 60, 9951027.
Pfeffer, J. (1994). Competitive advantage through people. Boston, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2004). Emotional intelligence: A meta-analytic
investigation of predictive validity and nomological net. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 71
95

Motto: A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one life!!!!!