🐈
» Forums » Coffee Break » Re: "This is how talent figures out what you ...
Page options
roberty1y
Community Member

"This is how talent figures out what you need and why you’re great to work with!"

Where does this expression come from? I see it sometimes in job postings. Google isn't of much help.

30 REPLIES 30
sullivanliz
Community Member

It's part of the text clients see when they post a job. People sometimes leave it in by mistake, or maybe copy/paste it because they're just trying out the platform or don't know what they're doing.
martina_plaschka
Community Member

We really need to start a petition to not be called talent. I'm not a 18-year old waitress in LA auditioning for acting jobs. If upwork likes calling us talent so much, I alternatively petition to call it the worlds largest talent platform, where clients meet talent, and people create profiles for talenting. Please rename the forum section from "freelancers" to "talent" too. 

I agree, 'talent' makes me feel a bit queasy.

I can't think of any regular Forum participants who use the term "talents" to refer to freelancers.

 

It strikes me as something only Upwork uses, and does so inconsistently. I assume it is part of marketing.


Preston H wrote:

I can't think of any regular Forum participants who use the term "talents" to refer to freelancers.

 

It strikes me as something only Upwork uses, and does so inconsistently. I assume it is part of marketing.


This is just me personally, but the word "talent"  seems to also negate that most of us have built our careers, knowledge, expertise, and craft over years and years and hundreds of projects figuring out the best ways to do things, the fastest ways to do things, and truly becoming experts. "Talent" indicates to me that we are talking about an innate gift that someone is born with, not the immense amount of work we all have put in to be incredibly good at what we do. "Talent" makes me feel like I haven't worked hard to be this good, and I need someone to "handle" me. 

 

Upwork is not my agent. They do not represent me. I do not like being referred to as "Talent".  

Amanda said:

 

"Talent" makes me feel like I haven't worked hard to be this good, and I need someone to "handle" me. 

 

Well put. It's the sort of word people use for 18-year-old singers who need a manager and publicist. 


Martina P wrote:

We really need to start a petition to not be called talent.


Maybe it's not just a coincidence Upwork's rebranding vs Upwork defending in court, showing evidence that they use the word "freelancer" in their mobile app to describe their users and that the word “freelancer” is well-known and defined as “someone who is not permanently employed by a particular company, but sells their services to more than one company.”


Claudia Z wrote:

Martina P wrote:

We really need to start a petition to not be called talent.


Maybe it's not just a coincidence Upwork's rebranding vs Upwork defending in court, showing evidence that they use the word "freelancer" in their mobile app to describe their users and that the word “freelancer” is well-known and defined as “someone who is not permanently employed by a particular company, but sells their services to more than one company.”


But that still doesn't describe many of us. I have a "Freelancer" account, but I'm permanently employed by my consulting firm, which is what is listed on Upwork for my taxes and my bank account. 

 


Amanda L wrote:


But that still doesn't describe many of us. I have a "Freelancer" account, but I'm permanently employed by my consulting firm, which is what is listed on Upwork for my taxes and my bank account. 


I think someone working in recruitment could explain better this talent thing, there's more to it but something like "Talent acquisition tends to focus on long-term human resources planning and finding appropriate candidates for positions that require a very specific skillset" https://www.jobvite.com/blog/recruiting-process/what-is-the-difference-between-recruitment-and-talen...


Claudia Z wrote:

Amanda L wrote:


But that still doesn't describe many of us. I have a "Freelancer" account, but I'm permanently employed by my consulting firm, which is what is listed on Upwork for my taxes and my bank account. 


I think someone working in recruitment could explain better this talent thing, there's more to it but something like "Talent acquisition tends to focus on long-term human resources planning and finding appropriate candidates for positions that require a very specific skillset" https://www.jobvite.com/blog/recruiting-process/what-is-the-difference-between-recruitment-and-talen...


I don't think those of us that have qualms with the word "talent" need it to be explained to us what it means. Our point is that it doesn't apply to us. We are business owners selling services. We are not "talent". 

As a former HR I can confirm - yes, some companies (mostly US) have a tendency to use the concepts of "talent management", "Pool of talents", or "talent acquisition". It is applied to even the most senior executives, not to 18 yrs old singers. I am not defending here the term, just explaining how it is used in the recruitment/HR community. 


Piotr O wrote:

As a former HR I can confirm - yes, some companies (mostly US) have a tendency to use the concepts of "talent management", "Pool of talents", or "talent acquisition". It is applied to even the most senior executives, not to 18 yrs old singers. I am not defending here the term, just explaining how it is used in the recruitment/HR community. 


And all of what you described are full time employees/permanent employees. 


Amanda L wrote:

Piotr O wrote:

As a former HR I can confirm - yes, some companies (mostly US) have a tendency to use the concepts of "talent management", "Pool of talents", or "talent acquisition". It is applied to even the most senior executives, not to 18 yrs old singers. I am not defending here the term, just explaining how it is used in the recruitment/HR community. 


And all of what you described are full time employees/permanent employees. 


I would not want to start an argument, but.....so? A "talent" in the HR world is an "A-player", a valuable asset you want to do whatever it takes to keep, cherish, pamper, and never let go - no matter if he/she is a temp, a freelancer, or a full-timer. It never meant "a rising star" or anything implying just a "potential without experience" which, I believe, is your perception of that term. A "talent" in my vocabulary is someone who already has proven his/her value, not someone who is merely "promising". But if you feel offended by being called a "talent" - well, you have every right to feel so, but we are entering a slippery arena of political correctness here.  

To me it's not about being offended, 'talent' just sounds... cringe. I've done my time in management land and tbf a lot of the terms there are cringe.
hglewis
Community Member

Hello Piotr!

 


Piotr O wrote:

Amanda L wrote:

Piotr O wrote:

As a former HR I can confirm - yes, some companies (mostly US) have a tendency to use the concepts of "talent management", "Pool of talents", or "talent acquisition". It is applied to even the most senior executives, not to 18 yrs old singers. I am not defending here the term, just explaining how it is used in the recruitment/HR community. 


And all of what you described are full time employees/permanent employees. 


I would not want to start an argument, but.....so? A "talent" in the HR world is an "A-player", a valuable asset you want to do whatever it takes to keep, cherish, pamper, and never let go - no matter if he/she is a temp, a freelancer, or a full-timer. It never meant "a rising star" or anything implying just a "potential without experience" which, I believe, is your perception of that term. A "talent" in my vocabulary is someone who already has proven his/her value, not someone who is merely "promising". But if you feel offended by being called a "talent" - well, you have every right to feel so, but we are entering a slippery arena of political correctness here.  


HR clients refer to me as their vendor because my company, which I own, bills them for services rendered, and I show up as an expense in their accounts payable records—nothing more, nothing less. 

 

Come to think of it; I wish they would pamper me because I constantly have to clean up after them!


Piotr O wrote:


 It never meant "a rising star" or anything implying just a "potential without experience" which, I believe, is your perception of that term. 

 


Nope.


Amanda L wrote:


I don't think those of us that have qualms with the word "talent" need it to be explained to us what it means. Our point is that it doesn't apply to us. We are business owners selling services. We are not "talent". 


You can call yourself whatever you want. Using the freelancer term in some industries is like saying you are an amateur, something you do as a hobby.


This talent thing in recruitment is not an individual naming, it has something like a catch-all meaning. It doesn't sound right to say ... I'm a talent writer, isn't it? It's like an ocean and this ocean is called Talent, and in this ocean there are fishes, sharks, whales ect..... this biodiversity provides specific ecosystem functions. 

I think Upwork coined "talent" from America's Got Talent, Britain's Got Talent  etc. and now, not to be outdone, Upwork's got talent! 

 

What Upwork doesn't have (unfortunately) is Simon Cowell to weed out the non-starters at the audition stage. 

Ultimately, it's just a word.

 

Years ago, I only used the word "contractor." I didn't use the word "freelancer" because the same word is used as the name of a DIFFERENT platform.

 

My philosophy about freelancing can be pretty mercenary.

 

If it is making me money, Upwork could call us "mercenaries" for all I care.

 

"Hire one of our talented database mercenaries."

 

Or "Click here to hire your minion now:"

 

"Search for henchmen:"


Nichola L wrote:

I think Upwork coined "talent" from America's Got Talent, Britain's Got Talent  etc. and now, not to be outdone, Upwork's got talent! 

 

What Upwork doesn't have (unfortunately) is Simon Cowell to weed out the non-starters at the audition stage. 


Nichola, I too think that this talent term is a turn off when you associate it with the talent show. The good part, it's not called the X Factor, which is even worse.


I understand why you may dismiss newbies but some have their role, provide specific functions ... whatever that is.


Think of the ocean, there are sharks, they are predators, dangerous ... you wouldn't think their existence counts ... but they have an important role in the ecosystem, they serve as an indicator for ocean health, as well a benefit to the economy of the country. https://europe.oceana.org/en/importance-sharks-0


I understand that some studied, worked hard and dismiss the idea that someone can perform some jobs without studies and experience, I agree. But in this ecosystem it doesn't exist only sharks ... there are also whales, the ecosystem engineers "Whales play a vital role in the marine ecosystem where they help provide at least half of the oxygen you breathe, combat climate change, and sustain fish stocks." https://us.whales.org/green-whale/


Take also in consideration the evolution theories.................. some newbies may play a vital role, they are not commodities.


Claudia Z wrote:

Nichola L wrote:

I think Upwork coined "talent" from America's Got Talent, Britain's Got Talent  etc. and now, not to be outdone, Upwork's got talent! 

 

What Upwork doesn't have (unfortunately) is Simon Cowell to weed out the non-starters at the audition stage. 


Nichola, I too think that this talent term is a turn off when you associate it with the talent show. The good part, it's not called the X Factor, which is even worse.


I understand why you may dismiss newbies but some have their role, provide specific functions ... whatever that is.


Think of the ocean, there are sharks, they are predators, dangerous ... you wouldn't think their existence counts ... but they have an important role in the ecosystem, they serve as an indicator for ocean health, as well a benefit to the economy of the country. https://europe.oceana.org/en/importance-sharks-0


I understand that some studied, worked hard and dismiss the idea that someone can perform some jobs without studies and experience, I agree. But in this ecosystem it doesn't exist only sharks ... there are also whales, the ecosystem engineers "Whales play a vital role in the marine ecosystem where they help provide at least half of the oxygen you breathe, combat climate change, and sustain fish stocks." https://us.whales.org/green-whale/


Take also in consideration the evolution theories.................. some newbies may play a vital role, they are not commodities.


Not sure why you add sharks to the mix but I stay at the beach.

 

Nichola refers to the people that claim to be professional lifeguards because they have watch some episodes of Baywatch but never learned to swim.


Jennifer R wrote:


Not sure why you add sharks to the mix but I stay at the beach.

 

Nichola refers to the people that claim to be professional lifeguards because they have watch some episodes of Baywatch but never learned to swim.


That's extreme. Crossing fingers, ideally to have a lifeguard nearby when you need one, however, sometimes in extreme cases you may just need someone to throw a snag or a life vest to hang on. 


Claudia Z wrote:

Jennifer R wrote:


Not sure why you add sharks to the mix but I stay at the beach.

 

Nichola refers to the people that claim to be professional lifeguards because they have watch some episodes of Baywatch but never learned to swim.


That's extreme. Crossing fingers, ideally to have a lifeguard nearby when you need one, however, sometimes in extreme cases you may just need someone to throw a snag or a life vest to hang on. 


The problem are people claiming to have a knowledge that requires a certain qualification they do not have and thus doing harm to people. I am not talking about people selling stock images for $5 because some clients don't want to pay more and are to lazy to search themselfs. I (and Nichola) are referring to eg people that claim to be qualified translators and then provide legal or medical translation using free online machine translation services. These translation first of all violate any personal data privacy policy and might be responsible for people being wrongly convicted or receiving erroneous medical treatment.
These freelance need to be held responsble for their actions because it is way pass the common understanding of a trivial offence.

 

And yes, I have seen it happening on Upwork, have informed the clients, and reported the freelancers.


Jennifer R wrote: 

The problem are people claiming to have a knowledge that requires a certain qualification they do not have and thus doing harm to people. I am not talking about people selling stock images for $5 because some clients don't want to pay more and are to lazy to search themselfs. I (and Nichola) are referring to eg people that claim to be qualified translators and then provide legal or medical translation using free online machine translation services. These translation first of all violate any personal data privacy policy and might be responsible for people being wrongly convicted or receiving erroneous medical treatment.
These freelance need to be held responsble for their actions because it is way pass the common understanding of a trivial offence.

 

And yes, I have seen it happening on Upwork, have informed the clients, and reported the freelancers.


You are using extreme case scenarios to intensify a hazardous impression.


"personal data privacy policy" ... it's the client responsibility to comply. Why would you held responsible the freelancer? I get it, there are things that common sense say it's something that you shouldn't do it, or that you should ask for additional details to clear you from a liability. It's the client responsibility to hire according to whatever regulations applies. You cannot expect someone from a third party country to know the regulations in the client country. Some clients may use services from third country to bypass some regulations... 


Claudia Z wrote:

Jennifer R wrote:


Not sure why you add sharks to the mix but I stay at the beach.

 

Nichola refers to the people that claim to be professional lifeguards because they have watch some episodes of Baywatch but never learned to swim.


That's extreme. Crossing fingers, ideally to have a lifeguard nearby when you need one, however, sometimes in extreme cases you may just need someone to throw a snag or a life vest to hang on. 


A professional lifeguard is trained and physically capable to perform swimming rescues and provide emergency first aid care. If I were drowning and no lifeguard was available, I would be extremely grateful that person happened to come along to throw me a line. At the same time, it doesn't really make sense to pay them for their "lifeguard" services if all they are capable of doing is tossing a life vest. 


Phyllis G wrote:


A professional lifeguard is trained and physically capable to perform swimming rescues and provide emergency first aid care. If I were drowning and no lifeguard was available, I would be extremely grateful that person happened to come along to throw me a line. At the same time, it doesn't really make sense to pay them for their "lifeguard" services if all they are capable of doing is tossing a life vest. 


I didn't imply that a lifeguard is capable only of tossing a vest. Geez, knock on wood, I hope there will be a lifeguard if I ever need one.


Not all situations related to a possible drowning is strictly reserved to be performed by a specialized lifeguard. On a beach ... a lifeguard may not see that exact moment someone is drowning but is alerted by other people, someone else with no training may pull the person out of water, the lifeguard may play a role if resuscitation is needed ... what if there is no lifeguard on the beach, in that exact area where needed to act in matter of seconds ...  on a beach you never know what other talent there is.


Claudia Z wrote:

Nichola L wrote:

I think Upwork coined "talent" from America's Got Talent, Britain's Got Talent  etc. and now, not to be outdone, Upwork's got talent! 

 

What Upwork doesn't have (unfortunately) is Simon Cowell to weed out the non-starters at the audition stage. 


Nichola, I too think that this talent term is a turn off when you associate it with the talent show. The good part, it's not called the X Factor, which is even worse.


I understand why you may dismiss newbies but some have their role, provide specific functions ... whatever that is.


Think of the ocean, there are sharks, they are predators, dangerous ... you wouldn't think their existence counts ... but they have an important role in the ecosystem, they serve as an indicator for ocean health, as well a benefit to the economy of the country. https://europe.oceana.org/en/importance-sharks-0


I understand that some studied, worked hard and dismiss the idea that someone can perform some jobs without studies and experience, I agree. But in this ecosystem it doesn't exist only sharks ... there are also whales, the ecosystem engineers "Whales play a vital role in the marine ecosystem where they help provide at least half of the oxygen you breathe, combat climate change, and sustain fish stocks." https://us.whales.org/green-whale/


Take also in consideration the evolution theories.................. some newbies may play a vital role, they are not commodities.


___________________________

I do not dismiss newbies Claudia, you entirely missed the point. 

 

But then I have certainly missed the point on the rest of your diatribe. But thanks for the link. Do you refer to newbie whales or newbie sharks? It's all very confusing ... 😉

 

ETA:  And Phyllis is right. Does it really matter?


Nichola L wrote:

I think Upwork coined "talent" from America's Got Talent, Britain's Got Talent  etc. and now, not to be outdone, Upwork's got talent! 

 

What Upwork doesn't have (unfortunately) is Simon Cowell to weed out the non-starters at the audition stage. 


I don't think so. Sub-disciplines have emerged within HR called Talent Acquisition, Talent Management, Talent Development. The finer points of how these differ from traditional recruiting, HR management, and training, I couldn't tell you but distinctions are there because of how businesses have evolved in terms of handling people as a key asset. All of this is to say that 'talent this' and 'talent that' are terms of art in HR and it makes perfect sense for UW to borrow from that lexicon. After all, we staunch independent contractors represent only part of its business base. It also focuses on large staffing contracts.

I joined in the chorus complaining about being called Talent, some months ago. But on reflection, I've discovered I don't care. Call me whatever you want, just don't call me late for supper. I don't care what nomenclauture UW uses as long as good clients can find and recognize me. I don't think this matters in that regard.

The one downside I see is the same with any terminology that elides distinctions between contractors and employees because it can make it more challenging for new FLs to find and maintain the mindset they need to have about running their own business independently, making their own rules, getting all the glory and all the blame for everything. That is the footing from which you engage successfully and equitably with clients and I think newbies can be subtly undermined when they internalize careless language.

 

You're right Phyllis, it doesn't really matter at all. I've turned my mind to a much more important issue - whether I'm a shark or a sea cucumber.


Phyllis G wrote:

Nichola L wrote:

I think Upwork coined "talent" from America's Got Talent, Britain's Got Talent  etc. and now, not to be outdone, Upwork's got talent! 

 

What Upwork doesn't have (unfortunately) is Simon Cowell to weed out the non-starters at the audition stage. 


I don't think so. Sub-disciplines have emerged within HR called Talent Acquisition, Talent Management, Talent Development. The finer points of how these differ from traditional recruiting, HR management, and training, I couldn't tell you but distinctions are there because of how businesses have evolved in terms of handling people as a key asset. All of this is to say that 'talent this' and 'talent that' are terms of art in HR and it makes perfect sense for UW to borrow from that lexicon. After all, we staunch independent contractors represent only part of its business base. It also focuses on large staffing contracts.

I joined in the chorus complaining about being called Talent, some months ago. But on reflection, I've discovered I don't care. Call me whatever you want, just don't call me late for supper. I don't care what nomenclauture UW uses as long as good clients can find and recognize me. I don't think this matters in that regard.

The one downside I see is the same with any terminology that elides distinctions between contractors and employees because it can make it more challenging for new FLs to find and maintain the mindset they need to have about running their own business independently, making their own rules, getting all the glory and all the blame for everything. That is the footing from which you engage successfully and equitably with clients and I think newbies can be subtly undermined when they internalize careless language.

 


I hate being referred to as Talent or as a Freelancer, because neither describes myself or my business. I use Upwork as ONE means of client acquisition. It does not constitute my business model nor does any decision Upwork makes about how it brands itself really have much impact on me. To an extent, no, I don't care. And the most my caring reaches is expressing that I don't like the terms here. I don't need to debate anyone about it. My business model is my business model, it's not up for debate with random people on the internet. 

 

That said, if I'm going to suggest Upwork focus on anything to fix, it's not what they refer to us in the client job posting interface.

Latest Articles
Learning Paths