What We Discovered About NHRD and What It
Means for HRD
Eunsang Cho, Gary N McLean. Advances in Developing Human
Resources. San Francisco: Aug 2004. Vol. 6, Iss. 3; pg. 382, 12 pgs
Abstract (Summary)
This issue was initiated to discover how human resource development
(HRD) was being used as national policy in various countries throughout
the world and what the findings would mean to our understanding of HRD.
As suggested in recent exploratory research, the concept of HRD as
national policy is a reality throughout the world. As we continue to explore
HRD in our coursework and research, the articles in this issue will require
us to think more expansively about what HRD is and how we need to
partner with many other change agents to be successful in our national
human resource development (NHRD) efforts. [PUBLICATION
ABSTRACT]
» Jump to indexing (document details)
Full Text
(4326 words)
Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Aug 2004
This issue has explored, although with severe space limitations, how
countries around the world are implementing national human resource
development (NHRD). In this article, five models are summarized that are
seen to be emerging from the practices reported. The barriers and factors
that appear to contribute to success are then discussed, followed by
implications that are seen as critical for the ongoing practice and study of
human resource development (HRD) in a global and domestic context.
India appears to have been the first country to rename its Ministry of
Education to that of HRD in 1985, although, as Rao (2004 [this issue])
suggested, the potential that resided in this move was not fully realized. In
many ways, it was simply a name change without subsequent
implementation of a national HRD policy.
As countries formulated national HRD policies, most countries became
involved with debating and discussing the various issues to diagnose what
was wrong with the country's education system; what was wrong with its
economic, social, cultural, and human resource development systems; and
what could and should be done in response to such an analysis. Expert
committees were appointed, a number of seminars and conferences were
held in various parts of the country, and many issues were raised and
suggestions made, debated, and discussed. Through lengthy and
controversial processes, NHRD systems were designed and developed.
The emerging policies were often influenced by the power dynamics of the
different ministries and by the complexity and multidimensionality of each
country. The emerging models of NHRD will now be explored.
Emerging Models of NHRD
The concepts of HRD at the national level differ from one country to
another. Although the term NHRD might be seen as strange in some of the
countries included in this issue, the concepts presented do allow us to
suggest five emerging models for NHRD: (a) centralized NHRD, (b)
transitional NHRD, (c) government-initiated NHRD, (d)
decentralized/freemarket NHRD, and (e) small-nation NHRD. There is also
no "pure" model; each country, even though it is categorized as fitting into
one or the other of the models, may bring in components from other
countries.
Centralized Model
Under this model, the state is responsible for providing education and
training with a top-down approach from the central government to local
governments and to private enterprises and their agencies, as seen in the
Chinese model (Yang, Zhang, & Zhang, 2004 | this issue]). The central
government plays a critical role in planning, implementing, and assessing
HRD policies and strategies. Entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, and
personal initiative are often discouraged by a top-down management style,
as with the Polish model (Szalkowski & Jankowicz, 2004 [this issue]).
There are no serious or reputable agencies beyond the government that
are responsible for NHRD policy setting. Furthermore, there is a strong
interest in the social dimension of HRD. Rooted in a strong collectivist
context, this NHRD model tends to have strong social and moral
implications. Finally, HRD policies within this model are still usually linked
to 5-year national plans of development, as in the case of Mexico (Rangel,
2004 [this issue!) or Kenya (Lutta-Mukhebi, 2004 [this issue]), both of
which are in the industrialization economic development stage. The
government plays a major role in economic development, whereas the
corporate sector plays a minor role in that its market share is small and
depends on technology from advanced countries.
Transitional Model
This model applies to countries under transition from the centralized model
to a government-initiated or decentralized model. The HRD policy is
featured by the tripartite approach drawing on employers, unions, and the
government. The tripartite relationship ensures that there is agreement
over the strategies and necessary steps for implementing the NHRD
policies. Therefore, a major role emphasized for NHRD is coordination.
second, NHRD policies under this model take a multidepartmental
approach, recognizing that HRD policies developed by different ministries
such as the Ministry of Industry and Resources, Ministry of Culture and
Tourism, Ministry of Information and Communication, Ministry of
Education, and Ministry of Labor are potentially in conflict and sometimes
repetitive. The government may then be called on to plan and initiate
coordinated NHRD policies. In Korea, for example, this coordination occurs
through the office of the vice prime minister of education and HRD.
Rao (2004) pointed out that the concept of NHRD in India has been limited
to education and culture, and the NHRD system has not been integrated
due to the complexity and multidimensionality of the country. In this
context, Indian NHRD can be considered a very weak version of this
model. The Singaporean model lies between the transitional model and the
government-initiated model in that Singapore's human capital development
plan is featured by a committed government, a network of agencies, and a
commitment to tripartism (Osman-Gani, 2004 [this issue]). Furthermore,
Singapore has the People Developer system, which is similar to the
Investor in People (IIP) system in the United Kingdom (Lee, 2004 [this
issue]).
Government-Initiated Model Toward Standardization
The U.K. example of NHRD is seen as exerting some influence over its
former territories and beyond (Lee, 2004). It is featured in a variety of HRD
initiatives that have been taken by the government, and the majority have
been consultative and based on a stakeholder view of HRD and the
economy. HRD competences are controlled by the National Occupational
Standards and Modern Apprenticeship Frameworks that are managed by
sector Skills Councils. The Learning and Skill Council, which is composed
of representatives from employers, learning providers, and community
groups working to provide HRD services to satisfy the local needs, plans
and funds all post-16 education other than the university sector. Investor in
People awards have attracted interest from corporate sectors and have
placed the HRD function on the agenda of large corporations, although it
does not easily meet the needs of SMEs. The general move in NHRD in
the United Kingdom is toward standardization, which risks a unitary
approach. South Africa (Lynham & Cunningham, 2004 [this issue]),
Australia, and other former territories have followed the U.K. model to a
large extent, although some components, such as IIP, are not designed
and implemented in the current system.
Decentralized/Free-Market Model
Under this model, the major forces pushing HRD efforts come from the
competitive market. HRD has been normally regarded as activities at the
enterprise level. The private sector is mostly responsible for education and
training, although the state supports the private sector in an indirect way.
second, this model is based on a firm individualistic value in which
individuals are responsible for their own learning and growth. The
Canadian model (Cooper, 2004 [this issue]) fits this category as,
presumably, does the model present in the United States.
Small-Nation Models
Small countries often need to take different approaches toward NHRD,
often in cooperation with other small nations in their region. Therefore, we
find nations in the Pacific Islands cooperating together (Bartlett & Rodgers,
2004 [this issue]), just as St. Lucia cooperates with other small countries in
the Caribbean (Scotland, 2004 [this issue]). Because there are currently
more than 190 countries in the United Nations, it is important to consider
this model because, by far, the majority of nations in the world fit into the
small-nation category. The model is a difficult one for countries to
participate in, for, on one hand, the countries are in competition with each
other, especially in the tourism industry; but, on the other hand, they need
to cooperate to gain the benefit of pooling resources. This is a perfect
example of the concept of coopetition introduced in the first article in this
issue (McLean, 2004 [this issue]).
In the Pacific Islands, a number of regional intergovernmental
organizations have played a key role in promoting NHRD for the region
(Bartlett, & Rodgers, 2004). These include the secretariat of the Pacific
Community (SPC), the Pacific Islands Forum secretariat (PIFS), the South
Pacific Board of Educational Assessment, and the University of the South
Pacific. Another characteristic of the small-nation model is the participative
processes that are possible. Because the nations are small, it is not
difficult to get people together and to hear from every sector of the nation.
Barriers to Establishing NHRD
Although most of the country cases focused on their successes in moving
toward a national HRD policy, each country had some difficulties in moving
toward establishing NHRD. Although not comprehensive, the following list
suggests some reasons why countries might have difficulty in establishing
a national HRD policy:
* The labor market is imperfect and unpredictable. We cannot know what
skills and competencies will be needed in the future. Moreover, by the time
the future arrives, the labor market is unbalanced. Therefore, students who
have prepared for careers that were "hot" 5 years ago find that the supply
of students in that field exceeds the demand, whereas a new labor
demand has emerged for which too few students have prepared
themselves.
* Everyone tries to do the same thing; for example, the IT and customer
service labor markets, which are moving offshore from the United States
and Europe in large numbers, are likely to lead ultimately to a glut in the
labor market. When technology changes or when wages in one country
become too high for the desired level of productivity, what will countries
like India, the Philippines, and Malaysia, as well as other Asian or African
countries, do? Will they be prepared for the next major wave of offshoring?
* Mobility of labor can upset the best of plans. Often, this is put in the
context of "brain drain" and is often experienced by countries that have a
low standard of living but have been successful in producing personnel
who are well-qualified in areas of high global labor market demand.
* Freedom of choice may impede governmental action; two examples are
limitations on the number of higher education institutions or allowing
people to earn degrees for which there is no demand. No clear examples
of this were included in this issue, but Kyrgyzstan is a perfect example of
where this problem exists (Albaeva & McLean, in press). Current higher
education reforms in Kyrgyzstan have reduced higher education
institutions from 114 to 8 that will receive financial support from the
government. The result is a monopolistic environment in which each major
is offered in only one institution that is government subsidized.
Furthermore, in a country with extremely high unemployment (approaching
40%), one of the most popular majors is American Studies, for which there
is no demand in the workplace.
* To some people, NHRD sounds too much like communism, socialism,
and centralized planning. As seen in the five models, the centralized model
does exist-but there are four other models that do not rely on a centralized
planning perspective.
* Is NHRD simply camouflaging the old 5-year plans? Again, it is clear that
for some of the countries included in this issue (e.g., Kenya or the People's
Republic of China), such is the case. Several other countries have not
done this, however, and even those countries that do use the 5-year plans
may have a head start in coming to grips with the concept of NHRD.
* There are serious social problems that impede the development of NHRD
in some countries. For example, the HIV/AIDS situation in India, Kenya,
and South Africa has a huge impact on the countries' economies, such as
in health costs, loss of a productive workforce (including teachers),
orphans, and absenteeism. Such countries must come to grips with this
issue if they are to have a viable NHRD policy.
Attributes of Excellent NHRD
In spite of these barriers, many of the case countries are moving toward
the successful use of HRD as national policy. Some of the attributes that
might be mined from the cases include the following:
* There is no one "right" way to do NHRD. As concluded in McLean and
McLean (2001), the case studies here verify that NHRD will vary from
country to country based on country characteristics.
* NHRD provides a shifting and differential balance among central,
regional, and local planning.
* NHRD must be flexible, allowing for quick responses to changes in the
worldwide, regional, national, and local economies and labor markets.
Those models that presume to predict the future or to establish standards
after lengthy and extensive study are likely to be too rigid to respond
quickly enough to the needs of the marketplace.
* When individuals lose jobs through no fault of their own, NHRD must
provide training and retraining, education and reeducation, relocation, and
compensation. A social and economic fallback system must be in place for
all members of the society.
* Excellent NHRD will be nondiscriminatory and designed for everyone
from birth to death!
* NHRD will dynamically encourage rather than mandate, for example, the
elimination of overlap in higher education institutions, attracting students to
needed fields of study and away from those with excess, providing
incentives to pay higher salaries in areas where labor is needed, and so
on.
* There will be a clear statement of mission for government agencies to
eliminate any duplication of government services in HRD. This is the key to
excellent NHRD, and it is probably one of the most difficult to implement.
How to move past jealousies, power struggles, turf battles, and other
destructive activities remains a key but extremely difficult necessity for
excellent NHRD.
* Excellent NHRD will emphasize coopetition with other countries in the
region and perhaps even with any country willing to partner. In today's
market-based economies, it may be difficult for most countries to deal with
the ambiguity of coopetition, especially in countries where dichotomous,
we-they thinking predominates.
* The role of the political system will be well defined. Within the centralized
model, of course, the political system will take the lead; in the transition
model, the government will be a part of the tripartite system providing the
leadership. In decentralized systems, on the other hand, any influence
from the political system will be viewed as interference.
* Leadership in excellent NHRD will be interdisciplinary.
* Leadership will consist of the very best minds available (not limited to
cronies, political friends or politicians, civil servants, and not necessarily
even just citizens of the country unless they are truly the best minds
available).
* NHRD will be short term while remaining visionary. This probably means
that there will be no 5-year plans! They are too far out and inhibit flexibility.
At the same time, consideration must be given to possible scenarios for at
least 20 years ahead-with the hope that the best minds will be able to
surface scenarios that might be close to what will actually happen.
* It will not be constrained by the culture of the country but will still consider
country culture. This is another tricky situation that must be handled wisely.
* It will be heavily biased toward research and theory while remaining
thoroughly practical.
* Evaluations will include both qualitative and quantitative measures. It is
interesting that all of the country cases were silent on the issue of
evaluation. We do not know what criteria are to be used in each country to
determine success, nor are we informed about how those evaluations will
take place. So although most countries put considerable emphasis on the
up-front analysis of needs, none, according to these cases, is concerned
about evaluation. When such plans are put in place, they need to be both
statistics driven as well as anecdotal.
* Desired outcome measures will focus on both quality and quantity. Here
is an area in which countries need to focus on how they will determine
whether their NHRD plans have been successful.
* Objectives will be established based on the capabilities of the system, not
on wishes, desires, and needs.
* Budgets to support NHRD will increase dramatically annually, gradually
replacing social welfare and defense budgets. In spite of the positive
NHRD plan laid out in the last two plans in Kenya, its current budget is
insufficient to cover the most basic HRD needs of the nation, such as
teacher salaries, minimal educational facilities, and so on.
* Tax incentives may encourage the use of quality HRD, although the
entire issue of funding NHRD is a difficult one and is, again, not well
described in the country cases included in this issue.
* Work-life balance will be encouraged with family-friendly policies. There
must be a recognition that with a holistic perspective of HRD, economic
development alone is not enough. This is one of the major problems in a
country such as South Korea, where long working hours mean absence
from the home and discriminate against women moving into the workplace.
* Social factors must be addressed. When workers and potential workers
are confronted with poverty, illness (such as HIV/AIDS), family abuse,
discrimination of various sorts, political oppression, and so on, it will be
impossible for the population to thrive and for NHRD policies to succeed.
Outcomes of Excellent NHRD
The following list of desirable outcomes, although perhaps perceived by
some as idealistic, each occurred in the case of one or more of the
countries included in this issue:
* Functional illiteracy will be eliminated-among youth and adults.
* Employment in socially undesirable occupations (prostitution, drug
dealing, and illegal activities) will steadily decline because of the
availability of attractive, alternative employment and a personally and
socially supportive environment.
* There will no longer be a need for child labor; all children will receive
adequate education while having their physical needs met, along with
those of their families (see Budhwani, Wee, & McLean, 2004).
* The "right" mix of people will emerge from excellent NHRD. Creative
approaches will be needed to attract people to occupations and
preparation programs that are not deemed to be socially acceptable, for
example, plumbers, construction workers, hotel workers, and the like.
* The quality of primary and secondary education will improve and be more
comprehensive in its curriculum; teachers will be adequately paid, and
appropriate facilities and supplies will be provided.
* The quality of higher education institutions will improve as their quantity
decreases; again, faculty will be adequately paid, and appropriate facilities
and supplies will be provided. In addition, academic freedom will be
affirmed and carried out with the blessing of the political system.
* Less money will be spent in traditional forms of HRD, such as remediated
basic education, proprietary schools, and long-term degree programs for
which there is little demand, whereas increasing funds will be available in
nontraditional forms of HRD, such as online learning, structured on-the-job
training, apprenticeship programs, and so on.
* There will be increased legal and encouraged flow of labor across
national boundaries to seek labor market equilibrium. This will likely
continue to be fought by developed countries that have a disproportionate
share of the world's economic wealth.
* There will be zero or negative population growth, except for immigration.
Although some nations will resist this outcome on the basis of religious or
cultural values, most countries, as they develop economically, will move
toward this outcome.
* There will be progress toward full employment without underemployment.
* Education and training will bring about improvements in the health
situations of countries with NHRD, especially relative to HIV/ AIDS-in spite
of religious and cultural restrictions.
* As stated by Briggs (1987):
If human resources are truly "the wealth of nations," their development
carries with it the parallel responsibility to recognize that their contribution
to the economy must enhance the quality of life on this planet and not lead
to its enslavement, impoverishment, or extinction, (p. 1236)
Implications and Future Directions
This issue of ADHR will have a significant impact on the field of human
resource development. No longer can academics hold to narrow definitions
of HRD; it is clear that around the world, with some significant exceptions,
the concept of HRD is much broader with much greater impact than has
been acknowledged in many academic programs and much of the
literature of the field.
One of the notable omissions from this issue is an article on the United
States. In spite of calling for proposals for an article on the United States,
the issue editors were able to identify only one proposal that was capable
of providing the information needed for this issue for the United States, and
that article, although extremely well-written, did not fit the theme for this
issue. What does this mean? It probably, although not definitively, means
that the United States is behind most of the rest of the world in
acknowledging the value of NHRD. As a result, the United States does not
have a clear vision of its national human resource development, and
multiple agencies (perhaps as many as 125) overlap in offering
uncoordinated aspects of NHRD.
One of the gaps identified in this issue is the lack of discussion about
evaluation. When authors were asked to provide information related to the
barriers and the factors that contributed to successes, they were often not
able to do so. Countries with NHRD had not focused on the criteria to be
used in determining success and the process to be used in determining
success.
Because of the emerging nature of NHRD, there are many opportunities
for longitudinal research. What will happen with the process of moving
toward NHRD? How will countries with longstanding NHRD adapt to
changing world circumstances? Is it possible for countries or politicians to
set aside self-interests to enhance the lives of their people, the people of
their region, or humanity? NHRD challenges the field of HRD to refocus its
research and pay more attention to larger issues that affect whole
countries!
Conclusion
There are cynics who believe that conversation about national human
resource development is idealistic-but at our core, is that not what we are
as HRD professionals? We dream of developing individuals to have
improved lives. We dream of developing organizations that are productive,
safe, supportive, nurturing, successful, competitive, financially secure,
ethical, and profitable. Are these goals too idealistic?
Why should we dream for less for our nations, our regions, and our
common humanity than what we dream for individuals and organizations?
NHRD will not be perfect; but it can and should move us along on our
pathway to improved humanity. This will not be an easy journey, but it is a
journey that we must take-as a profession and as professionals within that
profession.
[Reference] » View reference page with links
References
Albaeva, G., & McLean, G. N. (in press). Higher education reform in Kyrgysstan. Journal of College
Bartlett, K. R., & Rodgers, J. (2004). HRD as national policy in the Pacific Islands. Advances in Dev
Briggs, V. M., Jr. (1987). Human resource development and the formulation of national economic p
Budhwani, N., Wee, B., & McLean, G. N. (2004). Should child labor be eliminated? An HRD perspe
Cooper, S. (2004). National governance and promising practices in workplace learning: A postindus
Resources, 6(3).
Lee, M. (2004). National human resource development in the United Kingdom. Advances in Develo
Lutta-Mukhebi, M. C. (2004). National human resource development in Kenya. Advances in Develo
Lynham, S. A., & Cunningham, P. W. (2004). Human resource development: The South African cas
McLean, G. N., & McLean, L. D. (2001). If we can't define HRD in one country, how can we define i
4(3), 313-326.
Osman-Gani, A. M. (2004). Human capital development in Singapore: An analysis of national policy
Rangel, E. (2004). Policies for employment and higher education in Mexico: An approach to human
6(3).
Rao, T. V. (2004). Human resource development as national policy in India. Advances in Developin
Scotland, M. (2004). National human resource development in St. Lucia. Advances in Developing H
Szalkowski, A., & Jankowicz, D. (2004). The development of human resources during the process o
Human Resources, 6(3).
Yang, B., Zhang, D., & Zhang, M. (2004). National human resource development in the People's R
Cho, E., & McLean, G. N. (2004). What we discovered about NHRD and what it means for HRD. Ad