mapping talent in latin america
Post on 18-Nov-2014
114 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
mapping talent in Latin America
Argentina
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
CostaRica
DominicanRepublic
Ecuador
Mexico
Peru
Venezuela
a study to quantify and map the quality of
human capital in 2008 and 2013
Developedinco-operationwiththe
Copyright ©2009 Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc.
All rights reserved. Reproduction without permission is prohibited.
Trademarks and logos are copyrights of their respective owners.
Introduction,1
LatinAmericaTalentIndexmap,2
Findings,3
Methodology,6
TalentIndexweightings,8
Demographics,9
Qualityofcompulsoryeducation,10
Qualityofuniversitiesandbusinessschools,11
Qualityoftheenvironmenttonurturetalent,12
Mobilityandrelativeopennessofthelabormarket,13
StockandflowofForeignDirectInvestment,14
Proclivitytoattractingtalent,15
OurcapabilityinLatinAmerica,16
TheHeidrick&StrugglesTalentIndexseries,17
contents
If we consider talent to be a global commodity, as precious as oil or water, then it should be possible to analyze it as a commodity; to predict its supply and demand. The Global Talent Index, developed in collaboration with the Economist Intelligence Unit, explored the
distribution of talent in the world in 2007 and 2012.
WhenwedevelopedtheGlobalTalentIndex,onlythreeLatinAmericancountries–Argentina,Braziland
Mexico–wereincluded;theirlowperformancewithintheglobalcontextcameasnosurprise.TheLatin
America Talent Indexusesthesamemethodologybutallowscloserexaminationoftheregion’stalentpool
byassessing:Argentina,Brazil,Chile,Colombia,CostaRica,DominicanRepublic,Ecuador,Mexico,Peruand
Venezuela.
Inthepast,thechallengeforLatinAmericancompanieshasbeenaccesstocapitalandtechnologyin
amarketdominatedbyexporting,miningandagribusiness,oligopoliesandgovernmentcontrolled
companies.Businessinterestsweredependentongovernmentactionsandviceversa.Leadershipwas
important,butnotakeysuccessfactorinfosteringcorporategrowthandprofitability.
Unprecedentedadvanceshaveoccurredsincetheearly-1990s,helpedbytheopeningupofmarkets,
deregulation,themodernizationofeconomies,greaterintegrationandinteractionwithglobalmarkets,
thedevelopmentoflocalfinancialandcapitalmarkets,andthecreationoflargeglobalcompanies
headquarteredintheregion(‘multi-latinas’).Asaresult,leadershipandtalenthavestartedtoemergeas
importantcompetitivefactors.
The2008globalfinancialdownturnhascreatednewprioritiesandplacednewdemandsonthecurrent
leaders.Intheshortterm,companiesmaybeconcernedwithquarterlyresultsbutinthelongtermthe
differentiatorwillbetheirabilitytoidentify,developandretainhighlyqualifiedtalent.TheLatinAmerica
TalentIndexrevealssuchtalentwillcontinuetobescarceoverthenextfiveyears,posingachallengeto
companiesandeconomieseagertocontinuetheirgrowthandconsolidation.Permanentlyreversingthis
trendreliesheavilyongovernmentpolicies,businessstrategiesandculturalvalues,andpracticalresultsmay
taketimetoappear.Butassoonasawarenessisraisedamongstbusinesses,governmentsandindividuals,
andaffirmativeactionadopted,thepresentandprojectedtalentshortfallwillstarttobereversed.Thisstudy
representsanimportantfirststepinthisprocess.
Manoel Rebello,Regional Managing Partner, Latin America, June 2009
mapping talent in Latin America
Heidrick&Struggles 1
GuyanaVenezuela
Uruguay
Trinidad & Tobago
Suriname
Peru
Paraguay
Panama
Nicaragua
MexicoJamaica
HondurasHaiti
Guatemala
French Guiana
El Salvador
Ecuador
Dominican RepublicCuba
Costa Rica
Colombia
Chile
Brazil
Bolivia
Belize
Argentina
Latin America Talent Index map
Talent Index rankings in 2013
2008
The map uses color to represent the overall talent ranking in 2013 of each of the ten measured countries, indicating at a glance how they score.
21to
25
26to
30
31to
35
36to
40
41to
45
46to
50
51to
55red hotcooler
2 Mapping Talent in Latin America
findings
rank countryTalent Index
(Ti) ratingrank
change
2013 2008 2013 RC
1 Chile 54.8 57.2 n 0
2 Mexico 52.2 55.9 n 0
3 Brazil 51.8 52.8 n 0
4 CostaRica 49.6 50.1 n 0
5 Argentina 48.5 44.7 n 0
6 Peru 38.0 39.8 s 1
7 Venezuela 41.4 38.6 t 1
8 Colombia 35.9 36.9 n 0
9 DominicanRep. 28.6 29.2 s 1
10 Ecuador 29.9 28.2 t 1
Our regional grouping can be broadly
categorized into three groups of
nations. The top group consists of
five countries with a small range in
overall scores. Two of these countries,
Chile and Costa Rica are relatively
small open economies. Chile is also
the most economically developed in
terms of GDP per capita. Costa Rica is
boosted by its relatively high quality of
compulsory education and openness.
The other three countries in the
top group are the regional giants of
Mexico, Brazil and Argentina. However,
scale is not so important here. Without
the demographic category Mexico,
Brazil and Argentina would still remain
in the top five. These three are also
more developed economically with
some of the highest levels of GDP per
capita within the regional group.
Overall rankings showing movement
between 2008 and 2013 for each of the
measured ten countries
Heidrick&Struggles 3
Thenextgroupconsistsofthreecountries:Peru,
VenezuelaandColombia.PeruandColombiahave
similarlevelsofeconomicdevelopmentandGDPper
capita,lowerthanthoseinourtopgroup.Venezuela,
closertothoseinthetopgroupintermsoflevels
ofGDPpercapitaisletdownbyrelativelypoor
environmentstonurtureandattracttalent,thelower
internationalopennessofitslabourmarketand
verylowrelativeratesofForeignDirectInvestment
(FDI).Thesefactorsprecludeitfromreachingthetop
group.
ThefinalgroupconsistsoftheDominicanRepublic
andEcuadorwhicharetwooftheleastdeveloped
countrieseconomically.Thegapbetweenthesetwo
countriesandthesecondgroupispredominantly
causedbymuchweakercategoryscoresforthe
qualityofcompulsoryeducationandtertiary
education.
Overtheforecastperiodthereareafewchanges
inranksuggestingthatthevariationsinrelative
strengthsandweaknesseswillremainentrenched.
Collectivelythoughweareexpectingabsolute
improvementsinmostofourmeasures,especially
ineducation.Incontrast,Venezuelasuffersfroma
noticeabledowngradetoitsexpectedeconomic
prospectsandfallsonerank.Asimilarrelative
weaknessineconomicprospectsforEcuador
explainsitsfall.
Intermsofrelativegrowthpotentialfortalent
Mexicoseemstopromisethemostintheforecast
periodwithmorepotentialtoimproveonits
compulsoryeducationsystem,FDIflowsandstocks,
andgeneraleconomicgrowth.Weexpectallthese
measurestoimproveatamuchfasterratethanits
regionalcompetitorsupto2013,despitethemalign
globaleconomicoutlook;by2013Mexicoisonlyjust
behindChileinouroverallrankings.Althoughitsits
atthetopofourrankingsinbothtimeperiods,Chile
scoressurprisinglyweaklyinoneofourcategories,
thequalityofcompulsoryeducation.Thereismuch
potentialforittomovetowardsthehigherranked
countriesinthiscategory.Insodoing,Chilewould
strengthenitsfirstplaceposition.
Countrybycountryperformance
ThefindingsofthisIndexbroadlyconfirm
conclusionsfrompreviousversionsoftheTalent
Index:absoluteandrelativepoolsoftalentare
mostlikelytobefoundin,andareattractedtothe
economicallydeveloped,wealthiereconomies.
Thereisoneexception:Venezuela.Althoughitsoil
industryhasgeneratedconsiderablewealththishas
nothelpedtodeveloptheconditionsnecessaryfor
aregionallysignificanttalentpool.Overtheforecast
periodVenezuelaisexpectedtofallfromsixthto
seventhplaceintheIndex.
Chileprovidesthemostattractiveenvironment
fortalent.Despitethelowestdemographicrating
andpoorcompulsoryeducationscoresitismost
abletonurturetalent,withthehighestlevelofFDI
andarelativelystrongeconomy;itisabletouse
itsstrongermacroeconomicfoundationstoattract
talentfromoverseas.Mexicoscoresrelativelywell
comparedtoitscompetitorsinmostareasexcept
initsabilitytoattractFDI(whereitisthirdfrom
bottomin2008,thoughrisingby2013).Brazilis
supportedbythestrongestdemographicsand
thebestuniversitiesinthegroup.Brazilispoorat
attractingFDIasaproportionofitsoverallgross
domesticproduct(2ndlowest)andhasarelatively
closedlabormarketinternationally.Ifthe‘Quality
oftheenvironmenttonurturetalent’categorywas
removedBrazilwouldrankfirstoverallin2008.
4 Mapping Talent in Latin America
Aswehavediscoveredinpreviousglobaland
regionalversionsoftheTalentIndex,demographics
playanimportantrole.Chile,forexample,hasper
capitathebestscoresinourIndexforhumancapital,
butitsrelativelysmallsizeandlowpopulation
growthlimittheabsolutesizeofitspotentialtalent
pool.Thisholdsitbackfromwhatwouldotherwise
beamoreregionallydominantposition.Costa Rica
wouldbesecondintheoverallranking(behind
Chile)ifpopulationwerenotbeingusedasasizing
andcorrectivefactor.Brazilwoulddroptwoplaces
tofifthifitspopulationdidnotsodominatethe
region.
CostaRicaranksrelativelyhighlyinfourthplacewith
asolidsetofcompulsoryeducationindicators.Italso
hasthesecondhighestlevelofFDIandthemost
mobileandopenlabormarket.CostaRica’sposition
isunderminedbyalackofrecognizeduniversities
andbusinessschools,althoughthisisnotsurprising
foracountryofitssize.Thelackofqualityinhigher
educationhasasubstantialimpactonCostaRica’s
ranking,whichwouldotherwisebetwoplaces
higher(aheadofBrazilandMexico).Argentina ranks
inthemiddle.Thisislowerthanonemightexpect
sinceithasthebestcompulsoryeducationand
high-qualityuniversities.However,themobilityand
opennessofitslabormarketandrelativelevelsof
FDIarepoor.
Perumovesfrom7thto6thplaceovertheforecast
period;thisisduemoretoVenezuela’sdecline
ratherthananysignificantimprovementinPeru’s
performance.PeruhasfairlevelsofForeignDirect
Investmentandcouldimproveitsscorebyinvesting
moreinitscompulsoryeducationsystem,in2013it
hasthelowestrateofeducationspendingasa%
ofGDP.
Venezuelahasagoodeducationsystemandgood
potentialforattractingtalentfromoverseas.Other
categoriesaremuchpoorerhowever:FDIisverylow;
theenvironmentisnotconducivefordeveloping
andretainingdomestictalent,and;thelabormarket
isrelativelyrigid.Thebottomthreecountriesin
thegroup–Colombia,theDominican Republic
and Ecuador–haveatbestaveragescoresinmost
categories.ThemainexceptionisFDIforwhichthe
DominicanRepublicscoreswell(althoughthisisnot
enoughtoboostitsfinalposition).
Thegreatestdisturbancetotherankingbetween
2008and2013comesfromthediverseoutlookfor
GDPgrowthandemploymentprospects,which
affecteachcountry’s‘Proclivitytoattracttalent’
measure.Butthisisnotenoughtosignificantlyalter
theoverallrankings.Asaconsequence,weonlysee
twochangesinposition;PeruovertakesVenezuela
(mainlyduetoVenezuela’sexpecteddecelerationin
GDPgrowththroughtheforecastperiod)andthe
DominicanRepublicpushesEcuadorintolastplace
duetoitssignificantlylargerforecastinwardflowof
FDI.Inbothinstancesthescoresremainveryclose.
Interestinglytherangeofscoresiswiderin2013
relativeto2008.Thissuggeststhattheregionis
divergingslightlywiththegapbetweentopand
bottomincreasing.Thebestperformingcountries
areimprovingmorequicklythanthoseatthe
bottomofthegroup.n
Heidrick&Struggles 5
The Latin America Talent Index compares and ranks countries in the region according to the depth of available talent that they have to offer potential employers now and in five years time. In doing so, the Index measures each country’s natural potential for producing talent – a quantity measure largely driven by socio-demographic factors (including immigration and imported skills) – and the degree to which good schooling (and other environmental factors) raises the quality of that raw talent (alongside foreign investment).
We took the following four steps to construct the Index:
methodology
step1Keytalent-promotingcountryattributeswereidentified
Weidentifiedthefollowingsevenkeycategoriesas
themostimportantdriversassociatedwithtalent
pools(intermsofquantityandquality):
• Demographics
• Qualityofcompulsoryeducationsystems
• Qualityofuniversitiesandbusinessschools
• Qualityoftheenvironmenttonurturetalent
• Mobilityoflaborandrelativeopenness
ofthelabormarket
• StockandflowofForeignDirectInvestment
• Proclivitytoattractingtalent
step2Variableswereselectedtomeasureeachofthecountryattributeslistedinstep1
TheEconomistIntelligenceUnit,inconsultationwith
Heidrick&Struggles,drewupalistofvariablesto
measureeachtalentattributecategory.Thepoolof
countriesofinteresttoHeidrick&Strugglesincluded
anumberofdata-pooreconomies,afactorthat
neededtobetakenintoaccountintheselection
process.Estimateswereusedtofillgapsinthe
dataset.Thesewerederivedbylinearregressions,
trend-basedextrapolationsandin-housecountry
expertise.Thefinalsetofvariablescombines
quantitativemeasuresdrawnfromavarietyoflocal
6 Mapping Talent in Latin America
andinternationaldatasources,withqualitative
assessmentsfromtheEconomistIntelligence
Unit’snetworkofcountryanalystsandin-field
contributors.ForecastswerebasedontheEconomist
IntelligenceUnit’smacroeconomicmodelsand
countryanalysts’projections,takingintoaccountthe
currenteconomicuncertainties.
step3Thevariableswerestandardizedandcombinedusingweightstoscoreeachcountryattribute
Thedatawasthennormalizedtoobtainscores
from0–100(wherehigherscoresmeantbetter
performancesonthetalentmeasures).Finally,the
EconomistIntelligenceUnitworkedwithHeidrick&
Strugglestosettheweightsofthedifferentvariables
intheoverallIndexbyassigningthemscoresfrom
1–5basedontheirparticularrelevance(where
1=unimportantand5=ofcriticalimportance).
step4AttributescoreswerecombinedusingweightstoformasingleoverallIndexscoreforeachcountry.
Eachcountryreceivedascorebasedontheirrelative
performanceineachoftheindicatorsandcategories
intheIndexagainstalltheothercountries.Countries
thatrankhighlytendtogetfairlygoodscoresacross
awiderangeofindicators;ortheydoextremelywell
inasub-setofhighlyweightedindicators.
Backgroundnote
TheLatin America Talent Indexisaregionaldeep-diveandextensiontotheoriginalGlobal
Talent Index(GTI)althoughcoveringtheperiod2008to2013,astepforwardofoneyearonthe
originalGTIwork.Importantly,therankscorescalculatedarerelativewithinthegrouponly(how
eachcountryfaresagainstitsregionalcompetitorsbyeachindicator)andcannotbecompared
tootherrecentregionalindicesortheoriginalHeidrickandStrugglesGlobalTalentIndex.
Indeed,absolutevaluesinscoresbetween2008and2013mustnotbedirectlycompared;the
significancelieswithintherelativespreadandtherankings.
Heidrick&Struggles 7
Talent Index weightings
indicator weight:1to5
Demographics
Populationaged20-59 4 nnnn
CAGRPopulationaged20-59(%) 1 n
Quality of compulsory education sectors
Durationofcompulsoryeducation 4 nnnn
Startingageofcompulsoryeducation 1 n
Currenteducationspending(%ofGDP) 2 nn
Currenteducationspendingperpupilasa%ofGDPpercapita
4 nnnn
Primaryschoolenrollmentratio(%) 2 nn
Secondaryschoolenrollmentratio(%) 4 nnnn
Meanyearsofschooling 4 nnnn
Adultliteracyrate(%ofpopover15) 5 nnnnn
Pupil/Teacherratio,primary 2 nn
Pupil/Teacherratio,lowersecondary 2 nn
Pupil/Teacherratio,uppersecondary 2 nn
Quality of universities and business schools
GrossenrollmentratioISCED5&6Total 4 nnnn
Numberofbusinessschoolsrankedinworld’stop100
2 nn
Numberofuniversitiesrankedinworld’stop500
3 nnn
Expenditureperstudentforhighereducation(as%ofGDPpercapita)
3 nnn
Quality of the environment to nurture talent
Shareofthepopulationaged25-64withtertiaryleveleducation
3 nnn
PercentageofhighereducationgraduatesintheSocialSciences,BusinessandLaw
2 nn
PercentageoftertiarygraduatesintheSciences
4 nnnn
ResearchersinR&D(permpop) 4 nnnn
TechniciansinR&D(permpop) 3 nnn
indicator weight:1to5
R&Das%ofGDP 5 nnnnn
Costofliving 3 nnn
Degreeofrestrictivenessoflaborlaws 4 nnnn
Wageregulation 1 n
Qualityofworkforce 4 nnnn
Localmanagers 4 nnnn
Protectionofintellectualpropertyrights 4 nnnn
Protectionofprivateproperty 3 nnn
Meritocraticremuneration 4 nnnn
Mobility and relative openness of the labor market
Numberofstudentsstudyingoverseas 3 nnn
Numberofoverseasstudentsstudyingincountryasa%oftertiaryenrollment
4 nnnn
Languageskillsofthelaborforce 5 nnnnn
Hiringofforeignnationals 4 nnnn
Opennessoftrade(exports+imports%ofGDP)
3 nnn
Stock and flow of Foreign Direct Investment
AverageflowofFDIinpreviousfiveyears(%ofGDP)
3 nnn
AveragestockofFDIinpreviousfiveyears(%ofGDP)
2 nn
Proclivity to attracting talent
Technicalskillsoftheworkforce 4 nnnn
Personaldisposableincomepercapita(US$bn)
4 nnnn
Employmentgrowth 3 nnn
GDPpercapita 0
GDPpercapita(PPP) 4 nnnn
NominalUSDGDP 3 nnn
PPPGDP 0
RealGDPgrowth(%) 3 nnn
8 Mapping Talent in Latin America
rank country scorerank
change
2013 2008 2013 RC
1 Brazil 85.0 85.0 n 0
2 Mexico 50.0 50.4 n 0
3 Peru 26.9 27.2 n 0
4 Venezuela 26.7 27.0 n 0
5 Colombia 24.7 24.8 n 0
6 Ecuador 23.4 23.5 n 0
7 CostaRica 17.1 17.1 n 0
8 Argentina 13.5 13.3 n 0
9 DominicanRep. 11.5 11.5 n 0
10 Chile 5.0 4.9 n 0
demographics
Between2008and2013thedemographicrankings
remainunchanged.BrazilandMexicomaintaintheirtop
placedespiteslightlylowerratesofprojectedgrowth
intheirworkingagepopulations.Countrieswithhigher
populationgrowthrates–PeruandVenezuela,are
nothighenoughtoreceiveanoticeableboosttotheir
scores.ThedemographicsscoresforArgentinaand
Chilearestronglyimpactedbylowrelativeworkingage
populationgrowthrates.Theybothrankfourpositions
lowerthantheywouldifonlyabsolutepopulationsize
weretakenintoaccount.
Iftheinfluenceofourcorrectivedemographicscategory
wereremovedfromtheIndex,CostaRicawouldbein
secondplaceoverall,afterChile.Brazilwoulddroptwo
placestofifth.Chile,whichissignificantlyweakenedby
itsrelativelysmallabsoluteworkingagepopulationand
growthrates,wouldbetopoftheIndexbyagreater
margin.
2008 2013
COOLER HOTTER
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Heidrick&Struggles 9
quality of compulsory education
Thequalityofcompulsoryeducationvarieswidely
acrossthetenmeasuredcountries.Argentinatopsthe
ranking,aheadofCostaRicabyasignificantmargin.
Interestinglytheoverallrankingsforthiscategory
resemblethoseforeducationspendingperpupilas
apercentageofGDPpercapita(althoughArgentina
outperformsonthiscomparedtotherestofthegroup).
Althoughitshouldbenotedthatthisisonlyone
ofthemetricsbeingmeasuredinthecategory,this
correlationhasnotalwaysappearedinotherregional
talentindices.Mexico,Venezuela,Brazil,Colombiaand
Peruscoresimilarlywithinatighteight-pointband.
FollowingthemisChilecloselytrailedbyEcuador.The
DominicanRepublicsitsatthebottomoftablewithan
exceptionallyweakrelativescore(duetolowscoresfor
allthevariableindicatorsinthiscategory).
Therangeofscoresacrossthegroupcontractsslightly
by2013.Thissuggeststhequalityofcompulsory
educationwillconverge,albeitonlymarginally.
ArgentinaandCostaRicaatthetop,andthebottom
threemaintaintheirrespectiveranksinthisperiod.A
highandimprovingprimaryschoolenrollmentratio
putsMexicoaheadofbothVenezuelaandBrazil.But
allthreecountriesimproveovertheforecastperiod
tonarrowthegapwithArgentina.Theothernotable
changeisthatColombiaisforecasttopassPeru;
theresultofadivergenceintheirexpectedprimary
enrollmentratios.
rank country scorerank
change
2013 2008 2013 RC
1 Argentina 72.3 72.1 n 0
2 CostaRica 61.0 64.7 n 0
3 Mexico 54.2 62.0 s 2
4 Venezuela 56.1 61.7 t 1
5 Brazil 55.2 56.8 t 1
6 Colombia 47.9 53.9 s 1
7 Peru 50.1 52.9 t 1
8 Chile 42.5 48.4 n 0
9 Ecuador 40.0 40.9 n 0
10 DominicanRep. 13.8 17.3 n 0
2008 2013
COOLER HOTTER
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
10 Mapping Talent in Latin America
quality of universities and business schools
Thequalityofuniversitiesandbusinessschoolsvaries
widely.Thetopfivecountrieshaveagoodbalance
betweenexpenditure,enrollmentandaccreditation;
thisislesssoforthenextthree–CostaRica,Peruand
Colombia.
Brazilhousesfiveoftheworld’stop500universities
andhasfouraccreditedbusinessschools,while
Mexicohasthreetopuniversitiesandfiveaccredited
businessschools.Asonemightexpect,thesetwo
countriesspendthemostontertiaryleveleducation
(asapercentageofGDPpercapita),althoughtheir
enrollmentratiosarenotparticularlyhighinaglobal
context.Argentina,hasthehighestenrollmentratio
overall.Chile’slowrankinthiscategoryisaresultofits
lowexpenditureontertiaryeducation(asapercentage
ofGDPpercapita),eventhoughithastwouniversities
intheworld’stop500andfouraccreditedbusiness
schools.Country-wideinvestmentandhighlevelsof
enrollmentaremoreheavilyrewardedinthisstudy.
CostaRicadespitehavingnoaccreditedinstitutions
isthethirdhighestinvestorintertiaryeducation(asa
percentageofGDPpercapita).
Between2008and2013therankingsremainlargely
unchangedexceptthatCostaRicaovertakesPerudueto
anincreaseinitsexpectedenrollmentratio.Therange
ofscoresdivergesslightlyinthisperiodsuggestingthe
topfivenationswillimprovetheirhighereducation
systemsatafasterratethanthebottomfive.
rank country scorerank
change
2013 2008 2013 RC
1 Brazil 61.2 67.2 n 0
2 Mexico 56.7 58.2 n 0
3 Argentina 52.1 52.4 n 0
4 Venezuela 47.5 51.9 n 0
5 Chile 44.2 50.9 n 0
6 CostaRica 21.3 24.8 s 1
7 Peru 22.5 22.8 t 1
8 Colombia 21.0 21.5 n 0
9 DominicanRep. 7.5 7.3 n 0
10 Ecuador 2.2 0.8 n 0
2008 2013
COOLER HOTTER
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Heidrick&Struggles 11
quality of the environment to nurture talent
Thereiswidevariationineachcountry’sabilityto
nurturetalent,especiallyamongstthetopeightinthe
rankings.Fourteenseparateindicatorsaremeasured
inthiscategory,andnosinglevariableisallowedto
dominate.Chileistopoverall,withthemostresearchers
andtechnicianspermillionpeopleandthejoint-highest
workforcequality.Italsohasthebestcombination
ofprivateandintellectualpropertyprotectionand
meritocraticremuneration.MexicoandArgentina,
insecondandthirdplacerespectively,perform
consistentlywellacrossalltheindicators.CostaRicahas
asimilarlywell-roundedenvironmentbutsuffersfroma
lackofresearchersandtechnicians.Infact,ifweignore
thisindicator,CostaRicawouldtopthiscategoryoverall.
Between2008and2013therangeofscoresremains
almostconsistent.Thusallcountriesintheregionwill
movetogetherintheirabilitytonurturetalent.The
orderremainslargelyunchangedexceptthatMexico
movesaboveArgentinaandVenezuelamovesabove
Ecuador.TheproportionofMexico’soverallpopulation
withatertiaryeducationisexpectedtoincreasethe
mostalthoughtheabsolutenumberofgraduates
willstillbehalfofthatinArgentina.Otherfactors
thatwillincreasinglyhelpMexicotonurturetalent
areitsrelativelyhighexpenditureonresearchand
development,thelowcostoflivingandarelativelyhigh
protectionandrecognitionforprivatepropertyrights.
Brazilisfifth,sufferinginthisrankingfromitsrelatively
lowpopulationsharewithtertiary-leveleducation.
Therearenobigsurprisesinthebottomfivecountries.
Eachofthesecountriesexhibitconsistentlylowscores
acrossalltheindicators.
rank country scorerank
change
2013 2008 2013 RC
1 Chile 70.1 70.6 n 0
2 Mexico 63.6 65.3 s 1
3 Argentina 67.0 62.5 t 1
4 CostaRica 60.2 58.1 n 0
5 Brazil 56.3 56.2 n 0
6 Colombia 49.7 50.5 n 0
7 Peru 48.5 47.8 n 0
8 Venezuela 38.6 44.4 s 1
9 Ecuador 40.4 38.4 t 1
10 DominicanRep. 37.9 37.8 n 0
2008 2013
COOLER HOTTER
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
12 Mapping Talent in Latin America
mobility and relative openness of the labor market
Thismeasurecaptureshowpotentiallyeffectivenations
areatimportingtalent.InthisrespectCostaRicaleads
thegroupin2008byasignificantmargin.Itdoeswell
despitehavingthelowestnumberofstudentsstudying
overseas(inabsoluteterms).Asthesmallestcountryin
ourregionalgroup,CostaRicahoststhelargestoverseas
studentpopulationasashareoftotalenrollmentin
tertiaryeducation.Ecuador(infourthplace)ranks
higherthanonemightexpect,mainlybecauseithasthe
secondhighestopennesstotrade(afterCostaRica).
ThetalentpoolinArgentinaandBrazilisnotlargely
supportedbyoverseasinfluences.Relativelyfew
Argentinestudentsstudyabroadandtradeformsa
relativelysmallpartofeconomicactivity.Brazilscores
poorlyonmostmeasures;mostnotablyscoring40for
foreignlanguageskillscomparedto80forCostaRica.
Itisalsothehardestplaceintheregionalgrouptohire
foreignnationalsandistheleastdependentonexternal
trade.
Between2008and2013therangeofscoreswillnarrow,
indicatinggreateralignmentinlabormobilityand
openness.Brazilwillvacatethebottompositionto
overtaketheDominicanRepublic.Ourcontinued
forecastforrelativelyhighexportandimportgrowth
forVenezuela(mostlyoilsales)preventsitfallingtothe
bottomofthissub-indexduringtheforecastperiod.
rank country scorerank
change
2013 2008 2013 RC
1 CostaRica 74.7 70.2 n 0
2 Mexico 56.7 60.7 n 0
3 Chile 55.5 58.1 n 0
4 Ecuador 48.9 46.6 n 0
5 Peru 44.8 46.4 n 0
6 Columbia 43.3 41.8 n 0
7 Venezuela 42.9 40.6 n 0
8 Argentina 41.7 39.1 n 0
9 Brazil 34.8 37.4 s 1
10 DominicanRep. 39.2 36.3 t 1
2008 2013
COOLER HOTTER
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Heidrick&Struggles 13
stock and flow of Foreign Direct Investment
OurcategoryforForeignDirectInvestment(FDI)
isonlymeasuredbytwoindicatorsbutithasa
reasonableinfluenceontheoverallIndexscores.
OurthinkingbehindthisisthatFDIservesasan
importanttransmissionmechanismforinformation,
knowledgeableworkersandinternationalexpertise.
RelativelyhighlevelsofFDIareassociatedwithgood
businessenvironments,ofwhichthequalityofthe
indigenouslaborsupplyisanimportantcomponent.
AdditionallyFDIinflowsareoftenaccompaniedby
internationalbestpractice,promotedbyhigh-quality
foreignmanagers.
Chileranksfirstinboththestockandflowofinward
FDI,aheadofCostaRica,byaverysignificantmargin.
Between2008and2013therangeofscoresincreases,a
reflectionofthefactthatChile’sFDIinflowwillcontinue
torisewhileVenezuela,atthebottom,willreceivevery
littleadditionalforeigninvestmentinourview.Thetop
threenationsretaintheirpositionsin2013.Mid-table
PeruisexpectedtoovertakeColombiaasweexpectit
toexperienceaslowerdeclineinFDIinflows.Mexico
andBrazilmoveaheadofEcuadorandArgentinaforthe
samereason.
rank country scorerank
change
2013 2008 2013 RC
1 Chile 100.0 100.0 n 0
2 CostaRica 51.0 38.0 n 0
3 DominicanRep. 39.4 34.2 n 0
4 Peru 24.0 32.5 s 1
5 Colombia 35.0 28.6 t 1
6 Mexico 19.1 23.4 s 2
7 Brazil 11.2 16.3 s 2
8 Ecuador 20.0 13.3 t 2
9 Argentina 19.6 12.3 t 2
10 Venezuela 6.8 0.0 n 0
2008 2013
COOLER HOTTER
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
14 Mapping Talent in Latin America
proclivity to attracting talent
Thiscategoryfocusesonthetechnicalaptitudeof
theworkforce,itsemploymentgrowthprospectsplus
theabsolute,relativeandpotentialrateofchanges
inincome.Venezuelatopsthetablein2008,largely
becauseGDPgrowthwasboostedbythehighpriceit
receivedforoil.Argentina’s2008rankingisbuoyedby
relativelyhighratesofrealGDPgrowth(thesecond
highestinpercapitatermsatUS$purchasingpower
parities–PPP)alongwithstrongemploymentgrowth
overthepreviousfiveyearsto2008.Chilehasastrong
setofindicatorscoresinthiscategory(especially
GDPpercapitaatPPP);whileBrazilhasthehighest
levelofnominalGDPin2008andthehighestratesof
employmentgrowth.
Indicatorscoresinthiscategoryvaryconsiderably
between2008and2013.Venezuelafallsfromfirst
toeighthplace;asignificantdeclinepredicatedby
ourexpectationofmuchlowergrowthratesforGDP
andincomesintheforecastperiod.IncontrastCosta
Ricawillexperiencearelativeincreaseinpersonal
disposableincomespercapitaandrelativelyhighrates
ofemploymentgrowth.
rank country scorerank
change
2013 2008 2013 RC
1 CostaRica 48.7 65.9 s 5
2 Chile 63.8 64.7 s 1
3 Mexico 57.2 63.9 s 2
4 DominicanRep. 47.3 57.8 s 3
5 Brazil 62.9 53.8 t 1
6 Argentina 64.5 51.4 t 4
7 Peru 42.8 43.2 s 1
8 Venezuela 66.3 35.2 t 7
9 Columbia 22.1 30.2 s 1
10 Ecuador 25.0 24.1 t 1
2008 2013
COOLER HOTTER
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Heidrick&Struggles 15
our capability in Latin AmericaHeidrick & Struggles offers firsthand, inside knowledge on Latin American talent management challenges; providing clients with consulting services that powerfully blend specific regional expertise and global insight.
Throughournetworkofofficesweprovidefulllocalcoverageineverymajorindustry,helpingourclientsbuildthemostpowerfulleadershipteams.WeserveLatinAmericancompaniesbothpublicandprivate–fromfamilyownedbusinessestoglobalclientsinterestedinconsolidatingtheiractivitiesintheregion,aswellasnewbusiness.
Ourapproachissimple:weproactivelymanageourcandidaterelationshipstocreateanoutstandingtalentbase,whichwedeploytoservethespecificneedsofourclients.Weblendagilityandqualitywithconsultingservicesbeyondtheacquisitionofexternaltalent,includinginternaltalentmanagement,onboarding,leadershipinventory,assessmentanddevelopment,growthandretentionplanning,optimizationofhumancapitalinmergersandacquisitionsandsuccessionplanning.
Thiscompleteofferinggivesourplacementstheverybestchanceofsuccess.Weunderstandtheimpactofeffectiveleadership,asweworkwithhundredsofleaderseachyear–asclients,ascandidates,andasexecutivesinourassessmentandleadershipdevelopmentprograms.
ByunderstandingthedynamicsoftheLatinAmericanmarket,wehavebeenchosenasthepreferredpartnerforanumberofcustomerslookingtoleveragetheirbusinessintheregion.
Argentina
AlejandraCaneda–acaneda@heidrick.com
GustavoWurzel–gwurzel@heidrick.com
Brazil
AnaClaudiaReis–areis@heidrick.com
AnaPaulaChagas–achagas@heidrick.com
CynthiaRejowski–crejowski@heidrick.com
DarcioCrespi–dcrespi@heidrick.com
DominiqueEinhorn–deinhorn@heidrick.com
LauraMenezes–lmenezes@heidrick.com
ManoelRebello–mrebello@heidrick.com
PauloWeinberger–pweinberger@heidrick.com
RosanaSouza–rsouza@heidrick.com
ThaisMariz–tmariz@heidrick.com
Chile
LorenaMedel–lmedel@heidrick.com
LuisBonzi–lbonzi@heidrick.com
MarioMora–mmora@heidrick.com
Colombia
CatalinaPardo–cpardo@heidrick.com
NataliaBorda– nborda@heidrick.com
SantiagoSolis–ssolis@heidrick.com
Mexico
CarlaOrmsbee–cormsbee@heidrick.com
FedericoGonzalez– fgonzalez@heidrick.com
GladysMitchell–gmitchell@heidrick.com
IgnacioPerez–iperez@heidrick.com
IngeCasteleyn–icasteleyn@heidrick.com
MargaretCauley–mcauley@heidrick.com
NicholasGribbon–ngribbon@heidrick.com
Miami
CarlaPalazio–cpalazio@heidrick.com
GuyCote– gcote@heidrick.com
MeganBlack–mblack@heidrick.com
Monterrey
JoseRuiz–jruiz@heidrick.com
16 Mapping Talent in Latin America
TheTalentIndexisauniqueresearchstudy
devisedbyHeidrick&StrugglesandtheEconomist
IntelligenceUnit,toidentifywheretalentislocated
intheworldtodayandwhereitwillbelocatedfive
yearsfromnow.
ThefirstglobalstudywasproducedinSeptember
2007,measuringtalentinthirtycountriesaround
theglobe.Regionalindiceshavealsobeen
developedforCentralandEasternEurope,Asia-
PacificandtheMiddleEast.
ToordercopiesofanyHeidrick&StrugglesTalent
Indexbooklets(ormapswhereavailable),please
contact:emeamarketing@heidrick.com
learn more…TodiscusswhattheresultsoftheLatinAmerica
TalentIndexmeanforyourbusiness,pleaseemail
latamtalent@heidrick.com
FormoreinformationontheTalentIndexseries
pleaseemailtalentmap@heidrick.com
Visit our online resource to find out more about the
Latin America Talent Index, the Global Talent Index
and other Heidrick & Struggles regional indices:
• plottalenttrendsovertheforecastperiod
• exploreindividualcountrydata
• comparecountryperformances
• downloadandprint
www.weknowglobaltalent.com
the Talent Index series
we know global talent
Copyright ©2009 Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc.
All rights reserved. Reproduction without permission is
prohibited. Trademarks and logos are copyrights of their
respective owners.
200901CDTSBA20
ConnectingleadersaroundtheglobeiswhatHeidrick&Strugglesdoesbest.Foroverfiftyyearswehavebeen
buildingdeeprelationshipswiththeworld’smosttalentedindividualsonbehalfoftheworld’smostsuccessful
companies.Throughthestrategicacquisition,developmentandretentionoftalentwehelpourclients–fromthe
mostestablishedmarketgiantstothenewestmarketdisrupters–buildwinningleadershipteams.
Amsterdam+31(0)204627777
Atlanta+14045772410
Auckland+64(0)93066630
Bangkok+6626641011
Barcelona+34932257300
Beijing+86(0)1065988288
Beirut+9611964671
Bogotá+5715877878
Boston+16177376300
Brussels+32(0)25420750
Bucharest+40213188850
Budapest+3613274598
Buenos Aires+54(0)1143209950
Chicago+13124961000
Chongqing+86(0)2363001588
Cleveland+12162417410
Copenhagen+4533377600
Dallas+12147067700
Denver+17209323839
Dubai+97145096675
Düsseldorf+49(0)21182820
El Segundo+13103213220
Encino+18189056010
Frankfurt+49(0)696970020
Geneva+41(0)223222939
Guangzhou+86(0)2038135588
Hamburg+49(0)403405770
Helsinki+35892511250
Hong Kong+85221039300
Houston+17132379000
Istanbul+90(0)2123510904
Johannesburg+27(0)116856910
Lisbon+351213514530
Ljubljana+38659199768
London+44(0)2070754000
Los Angeles+12136258811
Madrid+34913915256
Melbourne+61(0)390123000
Menlo Park+16502341500
Mexico City+525591380370
Miami+13052622606
Milan+3902762521
Minneapolis+16122156913
Monterrey+525591380370
Moscow+74952259368
Mumbai+91(0)2266663021
Munich+49(0)89998110
New Delhi+91(0)1244655300
New York City+12128679876
Paris+33(0)144341700
Philadelphia+12159881000
Prague+420222191478
Rome +390685375801
San Francisco+14159812854
Santiago+56(2)7535300
Sao Paulo+551155044000
Seoul+82(0)234306000
Shanghai+86(0)2161361988
Singapore+6563325001
Stamford+12032522900
Stockholm+46(0)84067100
Sydney+61(0)282052000
Taipei+886(0)227576123
Tokyo+81(0)345207800
Toronto+14163614700
Tysons Corner+17038482500
Vienna+43(0)153310070
Warsaw+48(0)225849898
Washington DC+12023314900
Zurich +41(0)444881313
top related