Consequences of Exclusive Talent Management and the Mediating and Moderating Roles of Distributer Justice and Procedural Justice

The study examines the effect of exclusive talent management on turnover intention, employ engagement, and perceived distributive justice. Moreover, the impact of distributive justice on turnover intention and employee engagement was examined. Further, we also assess the mediating and moderating roles of distributive justice and procedural justice. The study has collected the data through a survey questionnaire from employees of private banks in Pakistan. The private bank context is suitable for the study because it is the most emerging services sector. There is a high degree of social interaction among management, peers, and customers in providing financial services. Two hundred eighty respondents provided complete responses, and hypothesis testing was analyzed using structural equation modeling with AMOS 24. We used bootstrapping method for mediation/moderation analysis. The study found that exclusive talent management simulates distributive justice, employee engagement, and turnover intention. Our results also show that distributive justice affects employee engagement and turnover intentions. We also found that distributive justice mediates employee engagement but not the turnover intention. However, we did not find any moderating role of procedural justice. This study was limited to the banking sector of Pakistan, and other studies may explore other sectors. A comparative study between service


Introduction
Organizational success in today's global business environment depends on acquisition, development, and talent retention, which is a challenging task (Marinakou & Giousmpasoglou, 2019;Narayanan, et al., 2019).Talent management is a continuous process.It includes enhancing employees' skills and productivity through motivation and incentives and attracting new employees (Younas & Bari, 2020).Since the beginning of the new millennium, talent management has received immense importance from academia and practitioners worldwide (Sheehan & Anderson, 2015;Collings & Mellahi, 2009).Talented employees have high potential, bringing long-term success (Younas & Bari, 2020).Presently, talent management is considered the core issue in management (Thunnissen et al., 2013), which deals with retaining employees, competitive edge, and organizational performance (Dries, 2013).Despite the significance of talent management in organizations, Ready et al. (2010) reported that only the top 3-5% of employees are top performers or talented employees in most organizations.Dries (2013) and Bonneton et al. (2020) highlighted various inconsistencies in the talent management literature.Among these diversions, the most argued and dominant talent management approaches were inclusive talent management and exclusive talent management.Under the inclusive perspective, organizations treat all employees as talented and give equal opportunity to all employees for growth and development (Collings et al., 2015).
On the contrary, under the "exclusive perspective, " organizations identify a few highly talented employees and support them with organizational resources (Dries, 2013).O'Connor and Crowley-Henry (2019) suggest that exclusive talent management schemes allocate organizational resources and support to talented employees.Many recent studies have documented that employees do not appreciate exclusive talent management programs, affecting their attitudes and behaviors.Despite the importance of the exclusive talent management phenomenon, only a few studies have examined its impact on organizational outcomes (Bonneton et al., 2020).The extant literature also suggests that most studies on exclusive talent management are qualitative and conceptual (Bhatia & Baruah, 2020).Employees' perception of organizational justice affects their work-related outcomes.Despite its importance, a limited number of studies have used it to measure its effect on organizational outcomes (Greenberg, 1990).
Similarly, organizational justice is also related to various outcomes, including employee engagement and turnover intention (Khan et al., 2015).While reviewing the extant literature, we only found limited studies that have used both exclusive talent management and organizational justice in their conceptual frameworks (Bhatia & Baruah, 2020;Khan et al., 2015).Thus, many researchers argue that the literature needs more studies on the "association" of exclusive talent management with related organizational outcomes in Asian countries (Gallardo-Gallardo et al., 2019).We believe that our study would be a pioneering study in Asia.It will also inspire Asian researchers to these issues.Given this background, this study will examine: (1) the impact of exclusive talent management on employees' engagement and turnover intention, (2) the mediating and moderating roles of distributive justice and international procedural justice, respectively.

Theoretical Exposition
The study has extended Blau's (1964) social exchange theory and Adam's (1963) equity theory for developing the conceptual framework.When an organization supports employees in their career development and rewards them fairly, they reciprocate by adopting a positive attitude and behavior towards the organization.Also, employees' perception of distributive justice positively affects their behavior and emotions (Cropanzano & Folger, 1991).Researchers based on empirical evidence have concluded that organizational justice reduces employees' turnover intention (Aghaei et al., 2012;Meisler, 2013).The equity theory (Adams, 1963) helps in understanding organizational justice and social exchange behavior.The theory assumes that employees' subjective perception of fairness affects their work-related outcomes (Hofmans, 2012;Glass & Wood, 1996).
The equity theory postulates that when employees believe that the organization treats them fairly without discrimination, they develop a positive attitude, which reduces turnover intentions.On the contrary, when employees see unfair treatment, they develop a negative attitude towards the job and organization, which reduces employee engagement (Meisler, 2013).Thus, we have proposed a new model for assessing turnover intention and employee engagement based on the social exchange theory and equity theory.The model is as shown in Figure 1, followed by theoretical support on the envisaged hypotheses.

Exclusive Talent Management, Employee Engagement, and Turnover Intention
Exclusive talent management calls for identifying the talented pool of employees and then supporting them with organizational resources for further grooming.Such a program enhances the commitment level of the selected employees and gives a competitive edge to a firm (Collings & Mellahi, 2009).Many past studies have documented that exclusive talent management is a significant driver of employee engagement and turnover intention.It motivates talented employees to develop a sustainable relationship with the organizations.Due to fast track growth and development, such employees tend to have a higher level of engagement (Collings et al., 2015).
Exclusive talent management positively and negatively affects organizational outcomes.For example, employees not recognized as talented under exclusive talent management would receive less organizational support, leading to low morale and high turnover intention (Lambert & Hogan, 2009).Due to the biased attitude of the management, such employees spend time in non-productive activities, which adversely affects their self-esteem and organizational performance.At the same time, with all the support, some employees become complacent, which adversely affects their work engagement and increases turnover intention.Employee engagement is a positive outcome of talent management.Its main purpose is to identify and retain talented employees.It encourages organizational resources to nurture employees without discrimination, resulting in low turnover intention and high organizational performance.Employee engagement motivates employees to fully utilize their emotional, cognitive, and physical energies for achieving organizational goals (Sun & Bunchapattanasakda, 2019).The social exchange theory also helps organizations understand employees' perceptions of leaders and employee engagement (Albasu & Nyameh, 2017).Chang et al. (2013) found that many empirical studies have extended the social exchange theory and found that talent management promotes talented employees and reduces turnover intentions.
H1a: Exclusive talent management positively affects employee engagement.
H1b: Exclusive talent management negatively affects turnover intentions.

Exclusive Talent Management and Distributive Justice
Extant literature suggests that many organizations use exclusive talent management for sustainable growth.In exclusive talent management, organizations spend on a selected pool of talented employees rather than spending their resources on all employees.Other employees negatively perceive distributive justice since "exclusive talent management" focuses on the selected pool of employees (Gohar & Qureshi, 2021;Goestjahjanti et al., 2020).Employees even belonging to the selected pool of talented employees may also believe that organizations are not distributing rewards and resources fairly.Employees often develop a negative perception of distributive justice as their assessment of rewards and resources are based on their subjective assessment (O'Connor & Crowley-Henry, 2019).At the same time, the perception of inequitable resource distribution affects work-related outcomes.Many past studies found that talent management is directly related to organizational justice dimensions (Sharma & Yadav, 2018).Similarly, Chandio et al. (2020) found that talent management practices influence employee performance directly and through the organizational justice system.Many researchers believe that one of the limitations of the exclusive talent management program is that it tends to ignore employees' perception of organizational justice and its effect on employee engagement (Saraih et al., 2019).

Distributive Justice and Employee Engagement
For decades researchers have been assessing the effect of distributive justice on related organizational outcomes (Sharma & Yadav, 2018).Organizational justice has three dimensions: distributive, interactional, and procedural justice, and all of them, directly and indirectly, affect employee engagement.An individual's attitude and behavior significantly depend on fairness in distributing rewards and resources to employees.Employees' positive perception of the distributive justice system promotes employee engagement and motivation leading to low turnover intention (Wan, Zhou, Li, & Shang, 2018).Employee engagement is an important precursor to organizational success and sustainability (Chandio et al., 2020).When employees believe that an organization is fair in distributing organizational resources, it may enhance their job engagement and involvement (Wan, Zhou, Li, & Shang, 2018).Studies also document that employee engagement mediates supervisor support and turnover intention.Therefore, organizations should develop an environment that motivates supervisors to support and counsel employees and adopt distributive justice behavior.Such an environment increases organizational performance and reduces employee turnover intentions (Sharma & Yadav, 2018).Chandio et al. (2020) assert that organizational injustice adversely affects employees association and engagement.

Distributive Justice and Turnover Intention
Organizational justice and its dimensions, directly and indirectly, affect turnover intention.Mengstie (2020) asserts that distributive justice is one of the direct predictors of turnover intention and other organizational-related outcomes.Hiring and training new employees unnecessarily drain organizational resources.Therefore, many organizations align their policies that would reduce turnover intentions (Dong et al. 2020).Studies based on empirical evidence have concluded that organizations reduce turnover intentions by increasing employee perception of distributive justice (Khalid, Rehman, & Muqadas, 2018).When employees see that organizations are fair in distributing rewards and resources, they develop a positive distributive justice perception leading to a sustainable relationship between employees and employers (Huang, Li, & Wan, 2019).Mengstie (2020) argues that employees' justice perception affects job satisfaction, trust, organizational citizenship behavior, and turnover intentions.

The Mediating Role of Distributive Justice
Exclusive talent management is of strategic importance to separate talented and nontalented employees; their segregation and treatment significantly affect distributive justice and employee engagement (Khalid, Rehman, & Muqadas, 2018).Extant literature suggests that employees' attitude and behavior significantly affects the distributive justice system in an organization.Organizations based on distributive justice can develop a sustainable relationship with employees and nurture talented employees (Sharma & Yadav, 2018).Wooten and Cobb (1999) stated that talent management helps employees in their career development.However, employee motivation in career development significantly depends on management's fair practices in distributing rewards and resources (Saraih et al., 2019).If the organizational talent management program is perceived as unfair by employees, the quality of social exchange between employers and employees may reduce significantly (Sharma & Yadav, 2018).Organizational justice is an important driver of organizational outcomes, including employee engagement and turnover intention (Dong et al. 2020).Positive outcomes such as job engagement and positive attitude significantly reduce turnover intention (Saraih et al., 2019).Many studies based on perceived organizational justice theory have concluded that unfair and unjust employee treatment adversely affects employees' attitude towards the job and increases turnover intention (Sharma & Yadav, 2018).The relationship between employers and employees depends on their perception of organizational justice (Masterson et al., 2000).A good relationship between an employer and employee promotes sustainable growth in an organization.Based on the above discussion, we argue that organizational justice would mediate exclusive talent management and outcomes.
H5a: Distributive justice mediates exclusive talent management practices and employee engagement.

The Moderating Role of Procedural and Interactional Justice
Procedural justice relates to "fairness in allocating resources to the employees in an organization." (Walters & Bolger, 2019).A procedural justice system must display "fairness and transparency in processes and actions." Its decisions are impartial, allowing the employee to voice against unwarranted decisions and actions (Nagin & Telep, 2020).On the other hand, interactional justice is defined "as the quality of interpersonal treatment people receive when procedures are applied and distributed outcomes" (Ahmed, Eatough & Ford, 2018).Its two important components are "interpersonal justice and information justice." (Lee & Ha, 2021).
Distributive justice directly affects related organizational outcomes, including employee engagement and turnover intention (Kundu et al., 2019).Extant literature also suggests that the effect of these relationships changes with the incorporation of procedural justice (Connor & Crowley-Henry, 2017).Thus, we argue that it would have a moderating effect on employee engagement and turnover intentions.

H6a: Procedural justice moderates distributive justice and employee engagement.
H6b: Procedural justice moderates distributive justice and turnover intention.

Sample and Respondents' Profile
We collected the data through a questionnaire using purposive sampling.We distributed 370 and received 280 questionnaires from employees working in private banks of Pakistan.The demographic information is as follows.Age strata show 74% were male, and 26% were female.In terms of age, we found that 27% were under 30 years, 41% were between 30-40 years age group, 26% were between 41-50 years age group, and the remaining 6% were over 50.The experience data suggests that 79% had fewer than ten years of experience in the banking sector, 23% had 10-20 years of experience, and 7% have more than 25 years of job experience.The education data suggests that 26% had a Bachelor's degree, 48% had a Master's degree, and the remaining 26% had M.S. or MPhil.Gender profile suggests that 55% were females, and 45% were males.Of the total respondents, 65% are married, and 35% are single.

Scales and Measures
The questionnaire for the study has two parts.Part one, associated with demographics, has five items based on a nominal scale.The second part had six latent variables and 29 indicator variables, and all were measured on the "five points Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree".We have illustrated the summary of the questionnaire containing constructs, sources, and number of items in Table 1, and the detailed questionnaire in Annexure-1.

Common Method Bias
The study used procedural and statistical techniques to reduce the common method bias (CMB) (Podsakoff et al., 2012).We adapted the questionnaire with established reliability and validity.We ensured respondents' confidentiality by not asking about their real names and other data that could lead to them.We collected the data from the respondent who voluntarily wanted to participate.The study used Harman's singlefactor statistical procedure.The analysis suggests that the total variance at a single factor was 33%, which was less than the threshold value of 50%, suggesting common method variance is not a significant issue (Chin, Thatcher, & Wright, 2012).

Descriptive Statistics
The study has carried out statistical analysis to ascertain the shapes of Skewness and Kurtosis and the univariate normality of the constructs used in the study.We have depicted the summary of results in Table 2.The results indicate that Kurtosis values range from -0.13 to 0.96.It is highest for interactive justice (Mean=3.92,SD = 0.72), and the lowest for exclusive talent management (Mean=3.42,SD = 0.71).Also, the Skewness values range from 0.14 to 1.05.The highest is for turnover intention (Mean=2.25,SD = 1.33), and the lowest is for distributive justice (Mean=3.92,SD = 0.72).Thus, we have inferred that the constructs do not deviate from the requirements of univariate normality (Henderson, 2006).

Convergent and Discriminant Validity
The study has assessed convergent validity based on composite reliability and average variance extracted.And have used Fornell and Larcker (1981) criteria for assessing the uniqueness and distinctiveness of the constructs on the data set collected from Pakistan's banks.Table 3 shows the summary of results The results show that the highest composite reliability is for employee engagement (CR=0.93),and the lowest is for distributive justice (CR=0.86).At the same time, the highest average variance extracted value is for the work environment (AVE= 0.83), and the lowest is for exclusive talent management (AVE=0.55),suggesting that the constructs used in the study do not deviate from the requirements of convergent validity.We also found that the average variance extracted square roots are greater than the Pearson correlation values.Thus, we have assessed that the constructs used in the study are unique and distinct.

Evaluating Measurement Model Fitness
Researchers have different opinions on reporting measurement model fit indices.However, they suggest that the study should report at least four or five indices.Thus, we have reported seven fit indices.Table 4 shows fit indices, their values, and fitness criteria The results show that all the model fitness indices are within the acceptable range, suggesting that the model fits adequately (García-Santillán, 2017).

SEM Results
The study has tested nine hypotheses, including five direct and four indirect.We have summarized the results in Table 5.The results support all the five direct hypotheses.However, we did not find support for one mediating and both moderating hypotheses.

Discussion and Conclusion
The present study aimed to understand the fairness in implementing exclusive talent management practices and their outcomes.The study found that employees' perceptions towards exclusive talent management practices are not the same.It varies depending on their subjective assessments.The bulk of the employees believe that an exclusive talent management scheme promotes employee engagement and reduces turnover intentions.This finding validates the results of earlier studies (Swailes, 2013;Mensah, 2019).The exclusive talent management system believes that employees are valuable assets.Therefore, it makes efforts to meet employees' needs and helps them in career development.The support employees receive from the organizations helps them build self-esteem, confidence and stimulate work engagement.Such employees often have a positive perception of distributive justice, discouraging negative behavior, including turnover intentions (Byrne, 2005;Poon, 2012).The study also found that employee perception of distributive justice leads to engagement and reduces turnover intentions.Employees' perception of the fair distribution of rewards and resources motivates them to reciprocate with a positive attitude and behavior (Chandio et al. 2020;Abbasi & Alvi, 2012).We also found distributive justice mediates (1) exclusive talent management and employee engagement and (2) exclusive talent management and turnover intentions.
Past studies have documented that distributive justice directly affects and mediates organizational outcomes, including work engagement and turnover intentions (Connor & Crowley-Henry, 2017).
Studies based on equity theory found that employees tend to restore balance in their relationships with their employers.If they believe that employers are fair with them, they will reciprocate with a positive attitude and behavior.Employees' positive attitude and behavior promotes work engagement and reduce turnover intention.However, all these relationships may change employee perception of distributive justice (Narayanan et al., 2019).We also found that procedural justice does not moderate distributive justice and organizational outcomes (employee engagement and turnover intentions).Mcfarlin and Sweeney's (1992) two-factor model postulates that employees' favorable organizational outcomes significantly depend on procedural justice.

Theoretical Implications
The present study has contributed to the body of knowledge by extending the social exchange theory and equity theory in understanding the effect of exclusive talent management on organizational outcomes (employee engagement and turnover intention) and the indirect effects of distributive justice and procedural justice.Extant literature suggests that a limited number of studies have examined the consequences of exclusive talent management with moderating and mediating variables (O'Connor & Crowley-Henry, 2019;Narayanan et al., 2019;Bhatia & Baruah, 2020).The study has also contributed to the body of knowledge by examining the mediating effect of distributive justice and moderating effect of procedural justice, which a few studies have used in their conceptual frameworks.

Limitations and Future Research
The study has focused on the banking sector of Pakistan.We invite others to explore the consequences of exclusive talent management in other sectors.Researchers can also compare respondents' perceptions of exclusive, non-exclusive talent management.
Our study has restricted the consequence of exclusive talent management to two organizational outcomes.Future studies may consider other organizational consequences such as citizenship behavior, burnout, and affective commitment.

Figure
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

Figure
Figure 2: SEM Results