In this commentary, we discuss and define the ‘future of work’ as a phenomenon and research area, and outline avenues for further research at the conceptual and empirical level. We first offer a brief review of the different streams of research that study the future of work, both in management and organization studies and in adjacent fields. We then elaborate on what we see as the most promising avenues for research on the future of work, organized around five questions of what, when, who, how, and why. That is, research on the future of work needs to clarify its assumptions about (1) the phenomena it considers within scope; (2) the temporality associated with these phenomena; (3) which future of work actors it is about, and who it is for; (4) the methods and data types used to be able to study the future empirically; and (5) desired impact and envisioned outcomes. We discuss how moving beyond technodeterminism, depoliticization, and a present-day focus could open up new and important avenues for further research on the near and distant future of work. We conclude with some specific examples of research questions and methods.
Dries, Nicky; Luyckx, Joost & Bogaert, Max (2025)
Neo-Luddites, Unite! Worker Resistance in an Era of Real Dystopian Threats
Taking Brian Merchant’s rewriting of the history of the Luddites in his book Blood in the Machine: The origins of the rebellion against big tech (2023) as a point of departure, in this media review we discuss what a renewed, more radical hope for the future of work might look like in an era faced by ‘real dystopian’ threats such as mass automation, algorithmic control and neo-Taylorism (Killoran & Park, 2025).
Career resilience is critical to the world's aging workforce, aiding older workers in adapting to the ever-evolving nature of work. While ageist stereotypes often depict older workers as less resilient when faced with workplace changes, existing research studies offer conflicting evidence on whether older age hinders or improves career resilience. In response to this conflicting evidence, the present study employs multi-level data from 6772 employees in 28 countries to examine the age-career resilience relationships and underlying mechanisms, hence advancing our understanding of career resilience across the life course. By integrating macro-contextual factors such as the unemployment rate and the culture of education with individual-level mechanisms such as positive career meaning and career optimism, we provide a comprehensive model explaining how career resilience varies across age groups. Grounded in life course theory, our findings resolve prior inconsistencies in resilience research, contribute to bridging the micro-macro gap in HRM literature, and challenge existing age-based stereotypes.
In many workplaces, managers provide some employees with unique privileges that support their professional development and stimulate productivity and creativity. Yet with some employees more deserving of a privileged status than others, co-workers feeling left out of the inner circle may begin to exhibit feelings of envy. With workplace envy and intergroup conflicts going hand in hand, the question arises whether co-worker acceptance of employee privileges—where conflict can be constrained through an affirmative re-evaluation of co-workers’ privileged status—may lower the envy experienced by employees. Using virtual reality technology, 112 employees participated in a virtual employee meeting at a virtual organization where they were exposed to a new workforce differentiation practice. We show through our experiment that co-worker acceptance of employee privileges negatively influences workplace envy, which was partially mediated by the anticipated ostracism of employees. Moreover, we show that this effect is only found for employees with privileges, who worry more about being ostracized than their non-privileged co-workers. We anticipate that our findings will enable managers to conscientiously differentiate between their employees, using virtual reality simulations to steer employees’ thoughts and feelings in a direction that benefits both employees and organizations.
Due to recent technological developments, vignette studies that have traditionally been done in text or video formats can now be done in immersive formats using virtual reality—but are such virtual reality video vignettes superior to traditional vignettes? To address this question, we examine participants’ experiences within a fictitious organization by comparing their responses to a relevant and particularly sensitive organizational phenomenon presented either through written text, a video recording, or a virtual reality experience. The results indicate that participants prefer more immersive methods, and that these increase their attention to critical study details. Moreover, this augments the effect sizes of several measured employee reactions—particularly those with high emotional content—suggesting that virtual reality technology offers a promising avenue for developing ecologically valid vignette studies to measure employee affect. To facilitate and expediate the use of virtual reality video vignettes in organizational research, we provide organizational scholars with a step-by-step instructional guide to develop immersive vignette studies.
Lumineau, Fabrice; Kong, Dejun Tony & Dries, Nicky (2024)
A Roadmap for Navigating Phenomenon-Based Research in Management
Winne, Sophie De; Marescaux, Elise, Raets, Emma & Dries, Nicky (2024)
Co-workers’ reactions to (Mis)Alignment between supervisors’ intentions and Co-workers’ perceptions of I-deal secrecy: An uncertainty management perspective
We examine the assumption that making workforce differentiation practices more inclusive will cause employees to react more positively. We identify a fundamental ‘paradox of inclusion’, where practices designed to be more inclusive may in fact decrease employees' perceived inclusion. Drawing on social comparison theory and the ‘genius effect’ – using talent management practices as an empirical case – we found that both employees identified as ‘talents’ and ‘non-talents’ reacted more favourably to exclusive, secretive practices than to inclusive, transparent practices. Across four studies, we ran experiments testing managers' assumptions about employee reactions to talent practices (Study 1; N = 179); the reactions of ‘non-talents’ (Study 2; N = 576); the reactions of ‘talents’ (Study 3; N = 306); and conducted a field study (Study 4; N = 402). Managers' preferences for more inclusive practices were guided by their assumption that non-talents would react more positively to them. Non-talents, in fact, reacted more negatively to more inclusive practices in terms of envy, organization-based self-esteem, turnover intentions, and perceived inclusion. Keeping talent status a secret from employees buffered negative reactions. Based on these findings, we identify paradoxes inherent to workforce differentiation and extend theorizing on the tension between exclusive and inclusive practices within organizations.
Dries, Nicky & Kaše, Robert (2023)
Do employees find inclusive talent management fairer? It depends. Contrasting self-interest and principle
In this paper, we critically examine the assumption that most employees, and especially those not identified as talents, find exclusive talent management less fair than inclusive talent management. Across two factorial survey studies—one of which manipulates talent status experimentally (N = 300), the other using field data on meta-perceived talent ratings (N = 209)—we examine the extent to which the perceived fairness of talent management is predicted by self-interest (i.e., the extent to which you yourself are seen as talented) versus principle (i.e., a dispositional preference for equality-vs. merit-based allocations). We found a clear effect of talent status, indicating that perceived fairness is at least partly determined by self-interest (i.e., whether one personally stands to gain or lose from exclusive talent management). We also found an effect for preferred allocation norm—implying that fairness perceptions are influenced by matters of principle, independently from self-interest—but only on the boundary condition that organizations provide a transparent justification for their chosen (inclusive or exclusive) talent philosophy. Two major gaps are addressed: the lack of data on how employees perceive and experience talent management practices, and the inability of common study designs to make causal claims.
Dries, Nicky; Luyckx, Joost & Rogiers, Philip (2023)
Across two datasets—a corpus of 485 print media articles and a multi-actor survey of Tech/Innovation experts, Authors/Journalists, Economy/Labor Market experts, Policy Makers/Public Administrators, and Engaged Citizens (N=570)—we build the case that the future of work is a fiction, not a fact; or better yet, a series of competing fictions prescribing what the future will or should look like.Using an abductive and curiosity-driven mixed-method analysis process we demonstrate that different narratives about the future of work stand in direct relation to specific actors in the public debate, both through framing tactics used by narrators in the media, and through political and dispositional processes of narrative subscription. From these findings, we infer that research on the future of work is in need of a paradigm shift: from ‘predictions’ to ‘imaginaries’. This, we argue, will help counter deterministic and depoliticized understandings of the future of work. We propose an integration of theory around framing contests, field frames, narrative subscription, and corresponsive mechanisms to offer a plausible account of our empirical discoveries and develop an agenda for further research. As the practical implications of our research show, the future of work does not need to be something that happens ‘to us’—instead, the future can be what we ‘make it’.
Talentmanagement neemt in populariteit toe en is een strategie om veelbelovende werknemers te identificeren en ondersteunen. In de huidige tijdgeest neemt echter het enthousiasme voor een exclusief beleid, waar maar een klein deel van de werknemers als ‘talent’ wordt gezien, razendsnel af onder het mom van gelijke behandeling. Al ruim tien jaar zijn zowel managers als academici aan het discussieren over hoe talentmanagement nu het beste aangepakt kan worden om optimale uitkomsten voor werknemers te realiseren. De meeste argumenten om bestaande exclusieve talentenprogramma’s aan te passen blijven echter ongefundeerd en komen niet verder dan een simpele heuristiek zoals: ‘exclusiviteit is moreel onverantwoord’. Relevante psychologische theorieën, zoals de sociale vergelijkingstheorie, zijn daarentegen wel in staat toe te lichten waarom huidige talentmanagementtrends juist tot meer negatieve werknemersreacties zullen leiden. Zolang managers geen gehoor geven aan deze theorieën, kunnen aanpassingen aan talentenprogramma’s meer kwaad dan goed doen voor de organisatie en haar werknemers. Gebaseerd op recent promotieonderzoek wordt er in dit artikel een kritische blik geworpen op exclusief talentmanagementbeleid en worden een zestal empirische onderzoeken toegelicht die werknemersreacties op talentmanagement bestuderen. Aan de hand van de belangrijkste uitkomsten van deze onderzoeken formuleren wij een aantal aanbevelingen voor HR-professionals, waaruit duidelijk wordt hoe managers verantwoord kunnen differentiëren tussen hun werknemers.
Based on social identity theory, exclusive talent programs can be understood to divide employees into two groups—‘talents’ versus ‘non-talents’—creating a setting where ostracism may occur. Using 360°-video vignettes (Study 1; N = 184) and text vignettes (Study 2 and 3; N = 243 and 573) we recreate a fictional HR board meeting and trouble three assumptions commonly held in the talent management literature: First, does exclusive talent management indeed lead to a feeling of exclusion and turnover amongst non-talents? Second, do emotional reactions to talent management spill over between employees? Third, does transparent communication reduce negative employee reactions, as is often assumed? We found that employees identified as talents in fact anticipate more ostracism by non-talents than vice versa, increasing talents’ intention to quit. However, this effect only occurred when non-talents displayed contrastive emotional responses to talent programs (e.g., resentment), not when they displayed assimilative responses (e.g., admiration). In addition, talents’ anticipation of being ostracized by non-talents was also found to be reduced when organizations implemented talent management secrecy. This study addresses researchers’ and practitioners’ concerns about talent retention and provides theoretical and practical implications for the field of workforce differentiation, social identity theory, and organizational intergroup conflicts.
Dries, Nicky & Verbruggen, Marijke (2023)
Career inaction in Belgium: when you want to make a career change, but you just … don't
In this chapter, we identify four different approaches to inclusive TM - a concept that is increasingly advocated for by both academics and practitioners but has so far lacked clarity and actionability. The four approaches are (1) focusing on potential and strengths rather than talent and gifts, (2) increasing the size of the talent pool, (3) defining a broader range of talent domains, and (4) topgrading the entire organization. We propose that exclusive and inclusive TM (co-)exist on a continuum rather than as dichotomies and develop a decision tree for organizations and researchers to determine which custom approach might best fit their talent philosophy.
Dries, Nicky (2022)
What's Your Talent Philosophy? Talent as Construct Versus Talent as Phenomenon
In this chapter, I propose an integrative framework for theorizing and empiricizing about talent management, based on the notion of “talent philosophies.” I believe that current debates about whether talent management should be inclusive or exclusive create the risk that our field will become fragmented, thereby undermining its social-scientific legitimacy. Nonetheless, this debate is absolutely correct in identifying the tensions between inclusive and exclusive approaches to talent management as a phenomenon. This, however, creates issues for talent management as a construct for scientific inquiry, as we need clear definitions and measures to create a cumulative body of research as a community. I propose that the solution lies in an expansion of our vocabulary as talent management researchers and identify four constructs that can help us structure and categorize our collective work: giftedness, talent, potential, and strength. Each of these constructs map logically onto different talent philosophies and talent management practices. In establishing “unity in diversity,” I believe talent management could finally make the transition into a more mature field of academic inquiry – although clearly phenomenon driven – characterized in equal parts by construct clarity, rigor, and relevance.
Dries, Nicky; Marescaux, Elise & Zelderen, Anand van (2021)
This chapter explores the assumptions about Talent Management (TM) held in the TM versus the career management literature, highlighting areas of overlap and contradiction, and their implications for research and practice. The historical evolution of the global economy, from being centered mostly around agriculture to the postmodern information era, has strongly shaped the framework and the boundaries within which individual careers can be enacted today. The dawning of the industrial economy was characterized by the appearance of large, bureaucratically structured organizations providing careers for life. Job security was all but guaranteed to employees, who reciprocated by offering their employers their loyalty and dedication. TM differs from career management in that it is believed to be less egalitarian and more elitist by definition. The careers literature might take lessons from the TM literature by acknowledging careers as an organizational concern that relates to its broader strategic human resource management practices.
Subjective career success continues to be a critical topic in careers scholarship due to ever changing organizational and societal contexts that make reliance upon external definitions of success untenable or undesirable. While various measures of subjective career success have been developed, there is no measure that is representative of multiple nations. In this study, we develop and validate a new subjective career success scale, which is unique from currently available measures in that it was developed and validated across a broad representation of national cultures. We validated the scale across four phases and several studies cumulatively involving 18,471 individual respondents from 30 countries based upon the GLOBE and Schwartz cultural clusters. This scale allows for addressing career success differences both within and across cultures. It is also easily applicable in everyday practice for companies operating in multi-country contexts. We explore theoretical and practical implications.
We examine how peers form talent appraisals of team members, reframing talent identification as a status-organising social process. Using decision trees, we modelled configurations of characteristics and behaviours that predicted dominant versus parallel routes to achieving the status of most talented team member. Across 44 multidisciplinary teams, talent status was most often granted to peers perceived as having both leadership and analytic talent; a STEM degree served a dominant signalling function. Where previous studies assumed that degree operates as a specific status characteristic, we show that a STEM degree operates as a diffuse status characteristic, which predicts status in general. We thus discovered that status hierarchies in teams are also based on the type of talent—and not just the level of talent—members are perceived to possess. In so doing, we offer a proof of concept of what we call ‘talent hierarchies’ in teams, for future research to build on.
This study examines how identification with management and the organization explains the relationship between talent status, organizational citizenship behavior towards the organization (OCB‐O) and the supervisor (OCB‐S), and turnover intention. Using archival and survey data (N = 597), we tested two competing models: a parallel and a serial mediation. Results supported serial mediation of management identification through organizational identification; management identification was the most predictive mediator overall. We also found different exchange dynamics depending on the focus of the identification (management or organization) and their corresponding outcomes (OCB‐S and OCB‐O); OCB‐S was most strongly related to management identification. We contribute to the literature by integrating concepts and assumptions from social identity and social exchange theory, and advancing the understanding about employee reciprocation of symbolic resources such as talent status. Practical implications, in particular about encouraging ‘pre‐identification’ with management in order to ensure talents' continued extra‐role behavior and retention, are spelled out.
Dries, Nicky (2020)
Individual career outcomes: Conceptual and methodological concerns in the study of career success
The Routledge Companion to Career Studies, , s. 143-161.
Dries, Nicky (2020)
The Routledge Companion to Career Studies
Routledge
Tierens, Hans; Dries, Nicky, Smets, Mike & Sels, Luc (2019)
Multiple-membership survival analysis and its applications in organizational behavior and management research
Multilevel paradigms have permeated organizational research in recent years, greatly advancing our understanding of organizational behavior and management decisions. Despite the advancements made in multilevel modeling, taking into account complex hierarchical structures in data remains challenging. This is particularly the case for models used for predicting the occurrence and timing of events and decisions—often referred to as survival models. In this study, the authors construct a multilevel survival model that takes into account subjects being nested in multiple environments—known as a multiple-membership structure. Through this article, the authors provide a step-by-step guide to building a multiple-membership survival model, illustrating each step with an application on a real-life, large-scale, archival data set. Easy-to-use R code is provided for each model-building step. The article concludes with an illustration of potential applications of the model to answer alternative research questions in the organizational behavior and management fields
Spurk, Daniel; Hirschi, Andreas & Dries, Nicky (2019)
Antecedents and outcomes of objective versus subjective career success: Competing perspectives and future directions
This review examines competing perspectives relating to (a) the range and prevalence of different theoretical approaches to the study of career success and (b) the need for a theoretically differentiated understanding of the antecedents of objective career success (OCS) versus subjective career success (SCS). Furthermore, the review complements the assumption that OCS and SCS are only ultimate outcomes of careers, proposing instead that career success also acts as an antecedent to other career and life outcomes. Against the backdrop of an organizing resource management framework, we present and critically evaluate the results of a systematic analysis of the theoretical approaches used to empirically study the antecedents of OCS and SCS. Furthermore, we develop a taxonomy of outcomes of career success. Our review findings show a theoretical heterogeneity with some dominant theoretical approaches within research of antecedents of career success. Moreover, past research started to adopt different theoretical approaches when predicting OCS (e.g., approaches focusing on personal resources, such as human capital or [competitive] performance) versus SCS (e.g., approaches focusing on personal key resources, such as stable traits). Several types of career success outcomes were identified: withdrawal, career attitudes, health and well-being, reactions from the (work) environment, and self-concept. On the basis of these findings, we provide recommendations for how future research can make sense of the theoretical heterogeneity in career success research, how research on antecedents and outcomes can better account for the OCS/SCS distinction, and how future research can more rigorously integrate research on antecedents and outcomes of career success.
Boeck, Giverny De; Dries, Nicky & Tierens, Hans (2019)
The experience of untapped potential: Towards a subjective temporal understanding of work meaningfulness.
In this paper, we propose that untapped potential acts as a subjective temporal meaning-making mechanism. Using a two-wave survey design, we examine the relationship between job characteristics, untapped potential, and work meaningfulness in a heterogeneous sample of 542 employees. We found that employees’ perceived amount of untapped potential mediates the effects of skill variety, autonomy, and job feedback on work meaningfulness. This mediated relationship was moderated by the valence employees attributed to their untapped potential. Moreover, decreases in the perceived amount of untapped potential over time were related to increases in perceived work meaningfulness. Our research shows that work that allows employees to move beyond the here-and-now by providing opportunities to realize future work selves is experienced as particularly meaningful. We conclude that, if we wish to understand what makes work meaningful for employees in the present, we need to know how it aligns with their self-perceptions in the future.
Meyers, Maria Christina; Woerkom, Marianne van, Paauwe, Jaap & Dries, Nicky (2019)
HR managers’ talent philosophies: Prevalence and relationships with perceived talent management practices
HR managers have different beliefs about the nature, value, and instrumentality of talent—referred to as ‘talent philosophies’. In line with cognitive psychology, we reason that talent philosophies are similar to mental models that influence how HR managers interpret and use talent management (TM) practices within their organizations. In this article, we explore the prevalence of four different talent philosophies (exclusive/stable; exclusive/developable; inclusive/stable; inclusive/developable) in a sample of 321 HR managers. We then explore how talent philosophies relate to organizational context (i.e. size, ownership form, multinational orientation) as well as to HR managers’ perceptions of their organization’s TM practices. Cluster analysis corroborated the presence of the four talent philosophies in our dataset. All four talent philosophies were represented almost equally often in the overall dataset. Organizational size was found to be related to talent philosophies, such that HR managers who worked in smaller organizations were more likely to hold an inclusive talent philosophy. We also found support for the relationship between talent philosophies and perceptions of the exclusiveness or inclusiveness of the organization’s definition of talent, and its degree of workforce differentiation. Contrary to expectations, results did not support a link between talent philosophies and perceived talent identification criteria.
Dries, Nicky (2024)
The Digital Dilemma (TV documentary)
[TV]
Dries, Nicky (2024)
Resolve To Act On What Affects Your Life, Says A Visionary Scholar
[Journal]
Dries, Nicky; Hubbard, Timothy, Jolink, Albert, McGuire, Jack & Zelderen, Anand van (2024)
The role of emerging technologies in shaping a human-centric future of work
Group & Organization Management [Kronikk]
Dries, Nicky; Luyckx, Joost & Rogiers, Philip (2024)
Predictions about the Future of Work Depend on Who’s Making Them
Dries, Nicky; Luyckx, Joost & Rogiers, Philip (2024)
What 570 Experts Predict the Future of Work Will Look Like
[Popular Science Article]. Harvard Business Review,
No one knows exactly what the future of work will look like, but many people have opinions. Research involving Belgian newspaper articles and experts shows that public commentators on the topic tend to fall into three buckets: optimists (largely tech entrepreneurs), skeptics (largely economists) , and pessimists (authors and journalists). So, who’s right — should the future involve accelerated progress, degrowth, or something in between? Because each group uses different research and has different points of view, it’s impossible to tell. But it is possible to better understand all three arguments, and to think critically about what you, personally, want the future of work to look like. A robust public debate involving every citizen, policy maker, manager, and CEO is the best way to ensure all voices are heard; after all, the future is what we make it.
