Since the 70s of the last century, even before, it has been evolving in business literature at the international level, writings and research, where regardless of its origin or trend, they place special emphasis on the human component within Organizations, giving it a role of first order to achieve success.
This responds to the fact that during those years, machinery and capital ceased to be the main productive resources, giving way to innovation and adaptation to change as the central axes on which the development clock is mounted.
It is for this reason that at that time specialists began to ask themselves the following questions: who generates innovation? Who has the capacity to adapt to changes? What component within the Organization is capable of bringing together both elements of importance?
The answers did not take long to appear and all agreed that man is the only one capable of achieving this goal, therefore the almost general trend among all the specialists and business gurus of the time began, which is the component human the decisive factor and the key to organizational success.
From this moment on, the different terminologies used to refer to man within the Organization began, some began to call it Human Resources, others more advanced in time and permeated by the financial perspective began to call it Human capital and now more recent over the years. 90 the term Human Talent began to emerge.
Currently, the term human resources is practically discarded in the specialized literature at an international level, since people are not a resource to move and change places when someone deems it convenient, because otherwise we would be comparing ourselves to a table, a chair and that would be unforgivable, because the human being is much more. Therefore, it is necessary to focus on the analysis of the other two nomenclatures used, although it should be noted that the term human capital also has its detractors (an element that is not the object of this article to develop it).
Now, in the face of this reality described above, we should ask ourselves a question: Is Human Capital management and Human Talent Management the same? o Are they different types of management? To answer these questions, we have to analyze the main currents of thought that exist in the world regarding this topic.
In a first analysis of the subject, we find that there are many authors and researchers who are of the opinion that Human Capital Management (GCH) and Human Talent Management (GTH), are usually the same since both place man as the center of development, sharing the same goal which is: Provide organizations with competent people who can generate value for them. From this perspective everything seems to indicate that it is the same but with a different name, but we cannot stop reflecting that when it comes to walking the path of how to achieve that goal that both have, they choose different paths and that is where they can locate the difference between GCH and GTH.
Regardless of this difference that has just been stated, I think that the essence lies in the point of view with which Talent Management is analyzed, because if you think that GT is for the elite or for people with a high value, with certain knowledge, abilities, capacities, motivations and commitments above the existing average, seen in this way the GTH and the GCH are very different, since the latter does include all the members of the Organization and in all its social dimension, However, there is another group of authors of the criterion that Talent Management includes everyone, starting from the principle that all human beings have talent, some more others less, but all in one way or another possess Talent, so when talk about GTH,All members of the Organization and its potential are included, taking into account the social dimension of the GTH.
If we took this last thesis as a position, then we would be facing the same processes, that is, GCH and GTH are the same. As you can see, this is a theme that goes through the focus in which each specialist appropriates and makes their own, but the truth is that both have the same goal. In my opinion, I am of the opinion that GCH and GTH are the same, since both use different terminology to refer to people within an Organization.
Notwithstanding what is stated in this article, its fundamental objective is to promote debate among specialists, for the sake of a transparent and enriching exchange that allows us to join efforts around a common destiny: Contribute to Organizational development. May this article serve as an opening to dialogues, forum debates and from now on, we are ready to participate in the interest of continuous improvement.
