HUMAN TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATIONAL KNOWLEDGE IN PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES: DIAGNOSIS, ASSOCIATION, AND EXPERT APPRAISAL OF AN INTEGRATED MODEL- PERU

Objective: To examine the relationship between human talent management and organizational knowledge and to design an integrated model for public health services in the San Martín region of Peru, subject to expert content appraisal. Method: An applied, quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional, descriptive-propositional study was conducted. The population comprised 320 workers, from whom a probabilistic sample of 175 participants was selected. Two 20-item questionnaires were administered, demonstrating high content validity (Aiken’s V = 0.95 and 0.97) and adequate internal consistency. For this article, the original response matrix was reanalyzed using descriptive statistics, Spearman’s rho correlation, and a bootstrap confidence interval. The proposed integrated model was subsequently appraised by five experts using nine content criteria. The model was not implemented and, therefore, its effectiveness was not empirically evaluated. Results: Human talent management was predominantly rated as high by 66.86% of participants (95% CI: 59.6–73.4). Personnel evaluation was the strongest dimension (83.43%), whereas change management showed the lowest level (54.29%). Organizational knowledge was high in 56.00% of participants (95% CI: 48.6–63.1). Knowledge identification was the most consolidated dimension (71.43%), while technological resources represented the weakest area (45.71%). A strong and statistically significant positive association was identified between human talent management and organizational knowledge (rho = 0.802; bootstrap 95% CI: 0.724–0.863; p < 0.001). The experts’ overall appraisal of the integrated model reached 97.29%. Conclusion: Higher levels of human talent management are closely associated with greater organizational knowledge. The high expert appraisal provides initial evidence supporting the model’s content validity; however, it should not be interpreted as evidence of effectiveness. Implementation and longitudinal evaluation are required to determine its practical impact on public health services.