Talents are the foundation and guarantee for the development of scientific, technical and medical (STM) journals. The talent flow essentially constitutes a process of intellectual capital reallocation driven by the potential energy difference of knowledge. The efficiency and dynamic optimization of talent allocation hold substantial importance for the overall development of the STM journals. Recent trends indicate an increase in the talent flow among STM journal editors, characterized by a shortage and frequent turnover of high-level and versatile talents, alongside a common phenomenon of hybrid roles within the editorial teams of journals. This study addresses the challenges of talent mobility among STM journal editors by constructing an analytical framework encompassing "personnel management system, professional title evaluation mechanism, and performance evaluation mechanism". The findings reveal that in terms of institutional dilemmas, the staffing restrictions within the personnel management system weaken the professional loyalty of non-staff and heighten the risk of talent attrition. The lack of autonomy in employers’ employment leads to inefficient talent allocation. The professional title evaluation mechanism is excessively tied to specific employers and regions, complicating the mobility of professional and technical talents across the boundaries due to the need for "secondary certification" in professional title evaluation and the inconsistent evaluation standards. This increases both psychological and social costs associated with talent flow. Moreover, the performance evaluation mechanism is criticized for its reliance on a single indicator, misalignment between career promotion channels and the professional contributions of academic editors, and an imperfect incentive mechanism, which directly affects the career orientation of talents, especially high-level talents. These institutional dilemmas lead to inefficient in human resource allocation, and also contribute to diminished professional capabilities and a crisis of professional identity. These issues have evolved beyond simple human resource management issues to become systemic problems impeding high-quality development of STM journals. To address these institutional challenges, it is essential to eliminate employment mobility barriers in the personnel management system, narrow the gap between internal and external positions regarding benefits and career development, and transform supervisory departments from administrative controllers to system suppliers, fostering a service-oriented supervisory department. Regarding the professional title evaluation mechanism, it is essential to enhance the universality of professional title evaluation, and establish a mechanism for professional title mutual recognition across regions and systems. Standardization of evaluation criteria can alleviate the professional title anxiety in the process of talent mobility. In terms of performance evaluation mechanism, a diversified evaluation index system should be constructed, taking into account organizational characteristics and industry universality. A systematic and multi-level incentive mechanism should be established, comprehensively considering composite indicators such as knowledge, management, and skills. These measures help to reduce the institutional costs of talent flow, promote the transformation of STM journals from traditional management to modern governance, and achieve talent-supported high-quality development of STM journals. It is worth noting that while promoting institutional innovation, vigilance is required regarding potential "excessive mobility" risks that might lead to the dissolution of journal characteristics and the rupture of academic inheritance, ensuring that talent flow maximizes its beneficial impacts.