HR Tech at Mining Scale: How Glencore Chose a Partner for Talent Mapping
Introduction
In a global mining company with 30,000+ employees, talent processes don’t fail because of missing frameworks. They fail because the operating reality is unforgiving: leaders are time-poor, sites are distributed, local cultures differ, and regional HR teams are often lean relative to the complexity they must manage.
In NALA Talks, Ana Fabres, Regional Organizational Development Manager at Glencore, shares how she leads regional talent strategy across Chile–Argentina and what mattered most when selecting a technology partner to build Glencore’s first regional Talent Map: enterprise-grade rigor, true flexibility, leader-first simplicity, and implementation support that actually drives outcomes.
1) Start with the job-to-be-done (not the feature list)
The right question isn’t “what does the platform do?” It’s “what decision must this enable this year?”
For Glencore, the objective was clear: establish a regional talent map for the first time to support succession conversations and produce executive-ready visibility.
Useful scoping prompts:
- Are you optimizing for diagnosis, succession decisions, pipeline visibility, or development planning?
- Which population will you start with (top layers, critical roles, etc.)?
- What outputs do you need, site-level decisions, regional governance, global reporting?
2) In a large mining enterprise, flexibility isn’t optional
Ana’s insight is straightforward: a tool can be technically “complete” and still fail if it’s rigid. In large, distributed organizations, you need to adapt the process to:
- local language and leader context,
- cultural values (Glencore emphasizes simplicity),
- and regional differences across countries and sites.
The takeaway: choose rigor + real customization, a robust model that you can shape to match how the business actually operates.
3) Leader experience is the adoption lever (because leaders have no time)
At global scale, leader time is the scarcest resource. That means HR tech must be evaluated through a leader lens:
- one-link access,
- pre-loaded teams,
- clear prompts,
- and a workflow leaders can complete asynchronously without heavy support.
If leaders can’t do it easily, completion rates drop, and the process becomes a constant chase.
4) A partner isn’t a license: implementation is the product
Another key lesson: outcomes come from the combination of platform + delivery. A strong partner helps you:
- design scope and governance,
- configure and iterate the instrument,
- establish cadence and follow-up mechanics,
- and keep the program moving end-to-end.
This matters even more when the regional corporate team is small.
5) Executive-ready outputs matter, because that’s how you scale decisions
In global organizations, the process must end in an executive narrative: where talent sits, where risks concentrate, what succession coverage looks like, and what actions are recommended.
Ana highlights the value of clear, visual, segmentable outputs that support regional and global leadership conversations, without reverting to manual spreadsheets.
Practical recommendations (checklist)
Before choosing a partner, pressure-test these:
- Enterprise scale: can it handle multi-site, multi-country complexity?
- True customization: can we adapt language, prompts, and stages to our culture?
- Leader-first UX: can operational leaders complete it quickly and independently?
- Governance + calibration: is quality protected through structured calibration?
- Implementation support: is there a team that drives adoption and delivery?
- Executive outputs: are insights presentation-ready for regional/global leaders?
At a global scale, talent tech isn’t about automation; it’s about enabling adoption, governance, and decisions. The best partner isn’t the one with the longest feature list; it’s the one that turns a strategic intent into a living, repeatable process leaders will actually run with.
Article 2, Launch, adoption, leadership, and change management
Title: Scaling Talent Reviews in a Global Mining Company: Glencore’s Playbook
Introduction
Talent reviews are hard. Running them inside a global mining organization with 30,000+ employees, distributed sites, and leaders focused on operational continuity is a different level of complexity.
In NALA Talks, Ana Fabres, Regional Organizational Development Manager at Glencore, breaks down how she led the rollout of Glencore’s first regional Talent Mapping cycle across Chile–Argentina, and the change management moves that drove leader adoption, protected quality, and enabled high-impact talent conversations, even with a lean corporate team.
1) The adoption framework: Stakeholders → Governance → Communication
Ana’s core point: every initiative needs change management, especially in operational environments.
Stakeholders:
- Identify sponsors, executors, and potential blockers early.
Governance:
- Start where you should (site/GM leadership) to build legitimacy.
- Use existing forums (executive committees) instead of creating new meeting burdens.
Communication:
- Tailor messages by level. Keep it simple. Re-anchor the purpose repeatedly.
2) Design for operational reality: “leaders have no time”
If you assume leaders have ideal bandwidth, the process fails. What works at scale:
- Asynchronous first: leaders complete inputs when they can.
- Low friction UX: pre-loaded teams, clear prompts, straightforward flow.
- Cadenced follow-up: consistent tracking is what turns “intent” into completion.
The goal isn’t chasing, it’s making progress visible and manageable.
3) Leader access without losing control: autonomy + calibration
Many organizations hesitate to give leaders direct access out of fear of inconsistency. Glencore’s approach balances speed and quality:
Leaders input first → calibration committees align criteria. That combination:
- increases preparedness,
- improves conversation quality,
- and shifts meeting time from “data entry” to decisions.
4) Making talent tables valuable (not a ritual)
Technology prepares the ground; the talent table is the irreplaceable human moment.
What strengthens the table:
- Focus the first cycle: start with top layers / critical populations.
- Widen the lens: best fit for future challenges, not just “my team successor.”
- Surface leadership quality: the process reveals which leaders truly know aspirations, mobility, and motivations.
5) Close the loop: without development, credibility erodes
Ana is clear: if nothing happens after the mapping, trust drops fast. Closing the loop with a lean team requires realism:
- prioritize where to go deep,
- combine group programs for shared gaps with targeted individual actions,
- and maintain momentum so next year’s discussion is about progress, not repetition.
Common pitfalls (and how to avoid them)
- Going too broad in year one → start focused, prove the full cycle.
- Communicating without purpose → adoption stalls.
- Confusing completion with success → success is decisions + development.
- Skipping governance → inconsistency and skepticism increase.
Tactical recommendations for your roadmap
- Publish a leader-facing roadmap with milestones and dates.
- Track operational KPIs: completion, cycle time, calibration coverage.
- Use existing governance moments to reinforce progress.
- Design “day two” from the start: development actions, owners, and cadence.
In a global mining enterprise, the question isn’t whether you can run talent reviews, it’s whether you can make them sustainable. Tech accelerates the workflow. Change management enables adoption. Development closes the loop and makes the effort matter.
