Author
Share:
Please join us for a time machine ride.
It's 1997, and McKinsey consultants publish an article in their Quarterly called The War for Talent. It causes a stir, to say the least. After surveying large companies, they concluded that the most important factor defining competitive advantage in the 21st century would be how organizations manage talent. How to find it, develop it, and retain it.
The most important factor defining competitive advantage in the 21st century would be how organizations manage talent. How to find it, develop it, and retain it.
Was this an HR problem? A TA problem? A C-suite problem? None of the above — or all of the above. According to the authors, it was a strategy problem.
They suggested five imperatives:
Instill a "talent mindset" — make it a CEO/leadership priority, not an HR function
Create a winning Employee Value Proposition — this is where EVP enters the lexicon
Rebuild your recruiting strategy — recruit continuously, not just when positions open
Develop talent aggressively — coaching, mentoring, stretch assignments
Differentiate and affirm — reward top performers for the value they create, and recognize that poor performers bring everyone down around them
One of their case studies of talent management excellence was a little-known company called Enron. Buyer beware.
For the last 28 years, we've been under the spell of EVP as the answer to our talent challenges. Only we got it backwards.
Here's how McKinsey actually described it:
Their EVP was framed as the answer to one question: "Why would a talented person want to work here?" That's it. It wasn't a framework, a house model, or a messaging platform. It was a strategic challenge to leadership.
They used marketing as an analogy — which is telling, because it's still hurting us:
Brand = company culture and values (how outsiders perceive you)
Products = the actual jobs (autonomy, challenge, growth, great colleagues)
Price = compensation, especially long-term wealth accumulation
And then they said something the industry has been ignoring ever since: don't try to be all things to everyone. They argued companies should aim for a "dominant talent segment" — the specific type of person who thrives in your environment. Successful companies had a clear talent profile. Weaker companies tried to appeal to everybody.
In short, the original EVP playbook says DO NOT do EVP the way it's been done for decades.
With all due respect, the consulting-industrial complex took a strategic segmentation argument and flattened it into a one-size-fits-all messaging exercise — which is exactly what McKinsey warned against.
EVP is not broken. It was never applied the way it was intended.
There's nothing to fix.
There is, however, an urgent need for a model that does what McKinsey originally intended — targets the right people, creates real value, and treats talent as a business strategy, not a messaging exercise with an arts and crafts deliverable. The standards need raising, now more than ever.
