For those of you who know me, have been taught by me and/or are familiar with my writing, know that I like to devise and use guiding principles (called Dr Sharnaism’s) when talking about talent (and living my life). Guiding principles provide a way for me to illustrate and illuminate aspects of talent, technology, strategy, and decision-making.
One of my guiding principles is this: focus on investing, rather than expensing.
And in light of my recent reflections on the need to ‘invest’ in developing AI tools, rather than expecting them to perform without iteration, I wanted to extend this idea to talent management specifically.
When we treat talent decisions as investments, we strengthen our ability to deliver strategic outcomes.
Despite the rhetoric that people are an organisation’s greatest asset, talent is still largely treated as a cost – aka an expense – in practice. This framing has implications for how we make talent decisions, because when talent is viewed as an expense, the focus shifts to control. How many times have you or your decision-makers talked about the need to control workforce/employee costs?
Talking about controlling costs influences talent development as development programs are questioned and advancing capability development is delayed or deprioritised. These decisions are reasonable in isolation, especially when faced with responding to and managing external pressures, but collectively they send a message – one where ‘investing’ in talent is not core to the organisation.
Talking about talent as an expense can also shape talent decisions, leading you to systematically underinvest in individuals, skills and capabilities, and pivotal roles and positions that disproportionately contribute to strategy execution.
Rethinking talent as an investment helps spark different conversations, with the focus shifting from “what would/does that cost?” to “what capability does this build for today and tomorrow?” and “how does this capability contribute to our ability to execute our strategy?”
These questions help shift the emphasis from short-term efficiency and cost containment to longer-term value creation. Importantly, it is not about spending more. It is about making deliberate, intentional and informed decisions about where and how investments occur.
This is where you and your organisation may, however, experience challenges. While the language of investment is adopted, the underlying systems, metrics, and technology stack often remain anchored in an expense logic. Talent systems are frequently configured to prioritise efficiency, standardisation, compliance and control. These are necessary for operating, but they can distract from building strategic capability if conversations about investing are not occurring alongside them.
Focusing on investing in talent rather than expensing it helps advance strategic priorities and encourages investments in the tools, programs, and activities that support your desired outcomes.
Another benefit is that trade-offs become explicit. It requires clarity on what matters and the strategic reasons for choosing to invest in some and not others.
It is important not to treat this as a mere language change. It is a mindset and decision infrastructure change as it requires alignment across your strategy, decision-making, and system design. It means being clear about which individuals, skills and capabilities, pivotal roles and positions are critical and those which generate value, ensuring talent decisions consistently support those areas, and evaluating impact in terms of contribution, not just costs.
So, given my suggestion to frame talent as an investment rather than an expense, you could reflect on the extent to which your systems and processes adopt this logic, by asking the question:
Do our talent decisions build the capabilities our strategy requires, or do we focus on controlling costs because talent is treated as an expense, not an investment that drives strategic outcomes?
Sharna Wiblen 