Foundations of ­Human
Resource Development
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 1
12/3/21 3:03 PM
A publication in the Berrett-­Koehler
Orga­nizational Per­for­mance Series
Richard A. Swanson and Barbara L. Swanson, Series Editors
Note: Instructors and readers are encouraged to go to http://­textbookresources​.­net
and to access resources for this and other related books.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 2
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Foundations of
­Human Resource
Development
Third Edition
Richard A. Swanson
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 3
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Foundations of Human Resource Development, Third Edition
Copyright © 2001, 2009, 2022 by Richard A. Swanson
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or
by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the
prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews
and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the
publisher, addressed “Attention: Permissions Coordinator,” at the address below.
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
1333 Broadway, Suite 1000
Oakland, CA 94612-1921
Tel: (510) 817-2277, Fax: (510) 817-2278
www.bkconnection.com
Ordering information for print editions
Quantity sales. Special discounts are available on quantity purchases by corporations, associations, and others.
For details, contact the “Special Sales Department” at the Berrett-Koehler address above.
Individual sales. Berrett-Koehler publications are available through most bookstores. They can also be ordered
directly from Berrett-Koehler: Tel: (800) 929-2929; Fax: (802) 864-7626; www.bkconnection.com
Orders for college textbook/course adoption use. Please contact Berrett-Koehler: Tel: (800) 929-2929;
Fax: (802) 864-7626.
Distributed to the U.S. trade and internationally by Penguin Random House Publisher Services.
Berrett-Koehler and the BK logo are registered trademarks of Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Third Edition
Hardcover print edition ISBN 978-1-5230-9209-3
PDF e-book ISBN 978-1-5230-9210-9
IDPF e-book ISBN 978-1-5230-9211-6
Digital audio ISBN 978-1-5230-9212-3
2021-1
Book producer: Westchester Publishing Services
Cover designer: Dan Tesser, Studio Carnelian
Dedicated to the vision of leading the ­human resource
development profession through research.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 5
12/3/21 3:03 PM
This page intentionally left blank
Brief Contents
PART I: Introduction to H
­ uman Resource Development
1­Human Resource Development Bound­aries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Basics of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3 History of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
PART II: Theory and Philosophy in ­Human Resource Development
4 Role of Theory and Philosophy in ­Human
Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
5 Theory of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
6 Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
PART III: Perspectives of ­Human Resource Development
7 Paradigms of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
8 Perspectives on Per­for­mance in ­Human Resource Development . . . . 150
9 Perspectives on Learning in ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . 178
10 Traditional Information and Communication Technology in
­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
PART IV: Developing Expertise through Training and Development
11 Overview of Training and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
12 The Nature of Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
13 Training and Development Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
PART V: Unleashing Expertise through Organ­ization Development
14 Overview of Organ­ization Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
15 The Nature of the Change Pro­cess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
16 Organ­ization Development Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 7
12/3/21 3:03 PM
viii
Brief Contents
PART VI: Advancing ­Human Resource Development
17 Strategy and ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357
18 Assessment in ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 384
19 Policy and Planning for ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . 401
PART VII: ­Human Resource Development into the F
­ uture
20 Challenges of Self-­Managed Learning and
C
­ areer Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
21 Age of Digitalization, Automation, Big Data, and
Artificial Intelligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436
22 Globalization Impacting ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . 451
23­Human Resource Development Moving Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481
Name Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547
Subject Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 8
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Contents
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xix
­ uman Resource Development
PART I: Introduction to H
1­Human Resource Development Bound­aries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Purpose of HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Definition of HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Origins of HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
HRD Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
HRD Core Beliefs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
HRD as a Discipline and a Professional Field
of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2 Basics of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Points of Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
HRD Worldviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
HRD Pro­cess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Threats to Excellent Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ethics and Integrity Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15
16
16
19
24
25
26
27
27
3 History of H
­ uman Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
­ abor and Learning . . . . . . . . . .
The Beginnings: Survival through L
1400–1800: The Re­nais­sance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Apprenticeship in Colonial Amer­i­ca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Industrial Era in Amer­i­ca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Twentieth-­Century Influences in Amer­i­ca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29
30
30
32
33
34
36
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 9
12/3/21 3:03 PM
x
Contents
Evolution of the Organ­ization Development
Component of HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Management and Leadership Development in the
United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Emergence of the HRD Research Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion: HRD History Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
38
42
48
49
54
PART II: Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
4 Role of Theory and Philosophy in ­Human Resource
Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Recognizing the Theory Development Pro­cess as Research . . . . . . .
Requirements of a Sound Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Philosophy and Theory Under­lying HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Philosophical Meta­phors for HRD Theory and Practice . . . . . . . . . .
Contributed by Karen E. Watkins and Ajit Bhattarai,
University of Georgia
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5 Theory of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Perspectives on Theory and Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Theory Framework for All Applied Disciplines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Theory of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
57
57
59
61
61
63
78
79
80
80
81
83
84
97
98
6 Component Theories of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Psy­chol­ogy and the Discipline of HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Contributed by Elwood F. Holton III, Louisiana State University
Economics, H
­ uman Capital Theory, and HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Contributed by Richard J. Torraco, University of Nebraska
Systems Theory as a Foundation for HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Contributed by Wendy E. A. Ruona, University of Georgia
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
PART III: Perspectives of ­Human Resource Development
7 Paradigms of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Overview of the HRD Paradigms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 10
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Contents
xi
Debates about Learning and Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Philosophical Views of Learning and Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Learning Paradigm of HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Per­for­mance Paradigm of HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fusing the Two Paradigms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
132
133
136
139
146
149
149
8 Perspectives on Per­for­mance in ­Human
Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Orga­nizational Effectiveness as a Precursor to Per­for­mance . . . . .
Disciplinary Perspectives on Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Financial Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Multilevel Per­for­mance Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Pro­cess and Team-­Level Per­for­mance Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Individual-­Level Per­for­mance Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Spoils of Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
150
151
151
153
157
161
171
172
175
176
177
9 Perspectives on Learning in ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Theories of Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Learning Models at the Individual Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Learning Models at the Orga­nizational Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
178
179
179
188
198
202
202
10 Traditional Information and Communication Technology
in ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Information and Communication Technology in HRD . . . . . . . . .
Contributed by Theo J. Bastiaens, Open University
of the Netherlands
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
204
204
206
218
219
PART IV: Developing Expertise through Training and Development
11 Overview of Training and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Views of T&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Key T&D Terms and Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The General T&D Pro­cess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 11
223
224
225
229
231
12/3/21 3:03 PM
xii
Contents
Instructional Systems Development (ISD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Training for Per­for­mance System (TPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Individual-­Focused T&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Team/Group-­Focused T&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Training Roles and Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
232
234
243
245
247
247
248
12 The Nature of Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Knowledge versus Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Definitions of Expertise and Competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
249
249
250
254
264
265
13 Training and Development Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Variations in T&D Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Core T&D Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Individual-­Focused T&D Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Group-­Focused T&D Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Work Process–­Focused T&D Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Organization-­Focused T&D Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
266
267
267
268
271
271
275
277
280
280
PART V: Unleashing Expertise through Organ­ization Development
14 Overview of Organ­ization Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Views of OD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Key OD Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The General OD Pro­cess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Action Research: Problem-­Solving Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OD Pro­cess Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OD for Per­for­mance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
285
285
286
293
293
296
299
301
304
305
15 The Nature of the Change Pro­cess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Core Dimensions of Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General Theories of Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Re­sis­tance to Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
306
307
309
312
312
317
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 12
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Contents
xiii
Focused Perspectives on Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Leading and Managing Organ­ization Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
320
332
334
334
16 Organ­ization Development Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Variations in OD Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Core OD Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Organization-­Focused OD Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Work Process–­Focused OD Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Group-­Focused OD Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Individual-­Focused OD Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
335
336
336
338
339
342
346
349
351
353
PART VI: Advancing ­Human Resource Development
17 Strategy and ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Schools of Strategic Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Strategic Roles of ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contributed by Richard J. Torraco, University of Nebraska
Scenario Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contributed by Thomas J. Chermack, Colorado
State University
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
357
358
358
358
18 Assessment in ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Program Assessment Approaches to Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . .
Balanced Scorecard and Intellectual Capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Results Assessment System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Financial Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
384
384
385
389
392
395
400
400
19 Policy and Planning for ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
­Human Resource Development Policy and Planning . . . . . . . . . . .
Contributed by Toby M. Egan, University of Mary­land
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
401
401
403
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 13
371
381
383
414
416
12/3/21 3:03 PM
xiv
Contents
PART VII: ­Human Resource Development into the F
­ uture
20 Challenges of Self-­Managed Learning and ­Career Development . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Self-­Managed Learning: Agent Learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contributed by Patricia A. McLagan, McLagan International
­Career Development and H
­ uman Resource Development . . . . . . .
Contributed by Hyung Joon Yoon, The Pennsylvania
State University
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21 The Age of Digitalization, Automation, Big Data, and
Artificial Intelligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
­Human Resource Development in the Age of Digitalization,
Automation, Big Data, and Artificial Intelligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contributed by Mesut Akdere, Purdue
University-­West Lafayette
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
419
420
420
428
434
436
436
437
448
449
22 Globalization Impacting ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Globalization and ­Human Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contributed by DaeSeok Chai, Colorado State University
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
451
451
452
23­Human Resource Development Moving Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Disruption—­The Faster and Better Challenge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Globalism—­The Systems and Economic Challenge . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Values—­Beliefs on the Ropes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflection Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
466
467
467
472
476
478
478
463
465
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481
Name Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547
Subject Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 14
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Figures
1.1­Human Resource Development: Definitions, Components,
Applications, and Contexts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2­Human Resource Development Definitions over Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 Basic Systems Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
2.2 Five Phase ­Human Resource Development in Context of the
Organ­ization and Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.3 Andragogy in Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.4 Nine Per­for­mance Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.1 The Psychological Life Span . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
4.2 Theory-­Research-­Development-­Practice Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
5.1 Institutional Bound­aries of the HRD Host Institutional
System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
5.2 Theory Framework for Applied Disciplines: Bound­aries,
Contributing, Core, Useful, Novel, and Irrelevant Components . . . . . 83
5.3­Human Resource Development: Definitions, Components,
Applications, and Contexts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.4 Model of ­Human Resource Development within the
Organ­ization and Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
­ uman Resource
5.5 The Theoretical Foundations of H
Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
6.1 Foundational Psychological Theories and Their Contribution
to HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
6.2 A Model of ­Human Capital Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
6.3 A Cross-­Section of the Systems Leg: Contributions of
Systems Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.4 Challenges Posed by Systems Theory as a Foundation
for HRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 15
12/3/21 3:03 PM
xvi
Figures
7.1 Comparison of the Learning and Per­for­mance Paradigms . . . . . . . . 131
7.2 Serving Individuals versus Serving Organ­izations:
Potential Contrasting Systems of Belief for ­Human
Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .147
8.1 Well-­Known Models of Orga­nizational Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
8.2 The Competing Values Framework of Orga­nizational
Effectiveness: An Integration of the Five Well-­Known Models,
with Key Areas of Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
8.3 Perspectives on the Domain of Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
8.4­Human Capital Per­for­mance Matrix and Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
8.5 The Enterprise Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
8.6 White Space Per­for­mance Model Questions—­Rummler
and Brache . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
8.7 Diagnosing Per­for­mance Pro­cess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
8.8 Per­for­mance Diagnosis Matrix Questions—­Swanson . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
8.9 Organ­ization Development Per­for­mance Model—­Cummings
and Worley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
8.10 Job Per­for­mance Components—­Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .173
8.11 Be­hav­ior Engineering Model—­Gilbert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
9.1 Orientations to Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
9.2 The Information-Processing Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
9.3 Holistic Theory of Knowledge and Learning: Indications
of Three Knowledge Facts and Three Knowledge Layers . . . . . . . . . . 187
9.4 Holistic Theory of Knowledge and Learning:
Dynamic Relationships between Individual, Organ­ization,
and Social/Cultural Contexts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
9.5 Pro­cess Design Steps of Andragogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
9.6 Andragogy in Practice Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
9.7 Experiential Learning Model—­Kolb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
9.8 Functions of Schooling and Learning Settings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
9.9 Learning Organ­ization Action Imperatives—­Watkins
and Marsick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
9.10 Learning Organ­ization Per­for­mance Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
10.1 Framework for Information and Communication Technology
Use in H
­ uman Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
10.2 Traditional versus Competence-­Based Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 16
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Figures
xvii
11.1 Taxonomy of Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
11.2 Informal and Incidental Learning Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
11.3 The Model of Interser­vice Procedures for Instructional
Systems Development (ISD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
11.4 Training for Per­for­mance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
11.5 Steps within the Pro­cess Phases of the Training for
Per­for­mance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
11.6 Diagnosing Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
11.7 Documenting Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
11.8 Training Strategy Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
11.9 The Structured On-­the-­Job Training System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
11.10 Work-­Based Learning Pyramid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
12.1 Comprehensive Pro­cess of Documenting
Workplace Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
12.2 The Basic Components of Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
12.3 Competence as a Subset of Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
12.4 Selling Homes Expertise Illustration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
13.1 Analyzing Systems Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
13.2 Scrap and Rework Chart for a Fortune 100 Food-­Processing
Com­pany Before and ­After Implementing the Training for
Per­for­mance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
13.3 Process-­Referenced Expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
13.4 Per­for­mance Roundtable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
14.1 Selected Organ­ization Development Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
14.2 Ten Key Outcome (Dependent) Variables from Definitions
of Organ­ization Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
14.3 Strategic Orga­nizational Planning (SOP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
14.4 Definitions of Selected Organ­ization Development Terms . . . . . . . . 294
14.5 Action Research Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
14.6 Organ­ization Development Pro­cess Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
14.7 Organ­ization Development for Per­for­mance System . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
15.1 Types of Orga­nizational Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
15.2 Model of Change Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
15.3 Pro­cess Theories of Orga­nizational Development and Change . . . . . 316
15.4 Pro­cess Improvement and Management Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . 322
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 17
12/3/21 3:03 PM
xviii
Figures
15.5 Relationship Map for Computec, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
15.6 Model of Orga­nizational Per­for­mance and Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324
15.7 Adopter Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325
15.8 The Three Universal Pro­cesses of Managing for Quality . . . . . . . . . . 327
15.9 Stages of Change Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
16.1 Shewart’s Plan-­Do-­Check-­Act Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343
16.2 Pro­cess Improvement and Pro­cess Innovation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344
16.3 The Five Phases of the Benchmarking Pro­cess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
16.4 Cultural Values and Organ­ization Customs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
16.5 Common Types of Sensitivities and Associated Distortions
in Per­for­mance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352
17.1 Ten Schools of Strategic Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359
17.2 Using Scenario Options to Examine Orga­nizational Ele­ments . . . . . 376
17.3 Theory of Scenario Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
17.4 Strategic Orga­nizational Planning (SOP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378
17.5­Human Resource Development’s Contribution in Supporting
and Shaping SOP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
18.1 Return on Investment Methodology Pro­cess Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388
18.2 Using the Balanced Scorecard to Find Background
Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389
18.3 Lag and Lead Per­for­mance Mea­sures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390
18.4 Skandia Corporation Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391
18.5 Results Assessment Pro­cess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392
18.6 Framework and Key Questions for Assessing HRD
Financial Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
19.1 Comparative Study Framework for ­Human
Resource Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
19.2 Stanford d.School Design Thinking Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412
19.3 Proj­ect Management, HRD, and Business (PMHRDB)
Partnership Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
20.1 The Employee ­Career Development Integration Model . . . . . . . . . . . 431
21.1 Samples from Virtual Reality–­Based Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441
21.2 Samples from AR-­Based Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442
22.1 Summary of Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
22.2 Cross-­Cultural Training Delivery Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 18
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Preface
­ uman resource development (HRD) is deeply concerned with developing
H
and unleashing ­human expertise along with the dynamic issues of individual
and orga­nizational change. HRD is a very large field of practice and a relatively
young academic discipline. Such a profession requires a complete and thoughtful foundational text—­the purpose of this book. This is not a handbook of
disparate stand-­alone chapters by individual authors. Rather, it is an articulated
text with a few selected contributions by noted scholars for the purpose of adding
interest.
This third edition of Foundations of H
­ uman Resource Development is intended to help prac­ti­tion­ers and academics by adding clarity to their professional journeys. While preferences about the purpose and primary means of
­doing HRD work are displayed, the attempt has been to provide a fair review of
the range of major views that exist in the profession.
Most HRD books pre­sent their versions of best practices but do not probe
more deeply into the foundations of practice. This book does the opposite. It is
not a techniques of practice book. The under­lying foundations of HRD are presented with exemplary overviews of practice. Readers h
­ ere seek a deeper understanding of theory and models that support best practice; seek to understand
the history and philosophies of HRD; seek to think more deeply about learning, per­for­mance, and change; and prefer to be reflective about their practice
rather than blindly follow the latest gimmicks. Such readers ­will find this book
a refreshing and thoughtful explication of the field.
­Because the discipline of HRD is young, ­there has been relatively ­little
work articulating the foundations of the field. The approach with this book is
to draw bound­aries without building walls. Thus, this book both advances and
continues the conversation about HRD foundations. In a discipline as young as
HRD, searching for a consensus about its foundations continues to be a work in
pro­gress.
This book is directed ­toward several audiences. First, it is designed for university courses in HRD. We argue that ­every HRD academic program needs a
course that teaches its foundations. Second, HRD researchers ­will find this book
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 19
12/3/21 3:03 PM
xx
Preface
a thought-­provoking and useful guide to identifying impor­tant research issues.
Third, this book is written for reflective prac­ti­tion­ers who actively seek to lead
the field as it grows and matures. Fi­nally, almost e­ very practitioner ­will find parts
of the book that ­will add depth to their practice.
The twenty-­t hree chapters are or­ga­nized into seven parts. The first part,
“Introduction to ­Human Resource Development,” establishes a basic understanding of what HRD is, the general HRD model and the pro­c ess it relies
on to do its work, and the history of HRD. Part 2, “Theory and Philoso­ uman Resource Development,” provides the impor­tant theoretiphy in H
cal and philosophical foundations of HRD. Both of ­these perspectives
have generally been missing among HRD professionals and are believed
to be essential for understanding and advancing the field. Part 3 is titled
“Perspectives of H
­ uman Resource Development.” It explores the learning
and per­for­mance paradigms of HRD and associated models within each.
This section attempts to clarify the learning-­performance perspectives, their
­logical connection, and the under­lying information and communication
technology.
Part 4, “Developing Expertise through Training and Development,” captures
the essence of the training and development component of HRD as well as the
nature of expertise. Illustrations of training and development practice employed
in host organ­izations are presented along with variations in core thinking, pro­
cesses, interventions, and tools. Part 5, “Unleashing Expertise through Organ­
ization Development,” describes the essence of the organ­ization development
component of HRD and the nature of the change pro­cess. This section also pre­
sents examples of organ­ization development and variations in core thinking,
pro­cesses, interventions, and tools.
Part 6, “Advancing ­Human Resource Development,” focuses on HRD’s role
in the high-­level orga­nizational and system-­level issues of strategy, assessment,
and policy and planning. Part 7, “­Human Resource Development into the
­Future,” serves as springboard for the facing h
­ uman challenges, blistering technology, globalization, and the c­ entury ahead.
My sincere thanks go to the HRD scholars throughout the world for their
good work. They have made this book pos­si­ble. Elwood F. Holton III and I ­were
responsible for the first edition, and I am responsible for the second and this
third edition. A very special thanks to several HRD colleagues for providing
contributions in this third edition related to their specializations: Mesut Akdere, Theo J. Bastiaens, Ajit Bhattarai, DaeSeok Chai, Thomas J. Chermack,
Toby M. Egan, Elwood F. Holton III, Patricia A. McLagan, Wendy E. A. Ruona,
Richard J. Torraco, Karen E. Watkins, and Hyung Joon Yoon. Their perspectives and voices add an impor­tant dimension.
Fi­nally, I want to express my deepest gratitude to Lesley Iura, Director of
Professional Publishing, Berrett-­Koehler Publishers, for her competent assis-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 20
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Preface
xxi
tance with this book, and to Steve Piersanti, Founder of Berrett-­Koehler Publishers, for supporting my publishing efforts for so many years.
Richard A. Swanson
Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA
IMPOR­TANT NOTE: Instructional support materials for each book chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 21
12/3/21 3:03 PM
This page intentionally left blank
Foundations of ­Human
Resource Development
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 23
12/3/21 3:03 PM
This page intentionally left blank
PART I
Introduction to ­Human
Resource Development
This first section provides an overview of ­human resource development as a discipline and field of practice, the basics it relies on to do its work, and the history
of the discipline.
CHAPTERS
1­Human Resource Development Bound­aries
2 Basics of ­Human Resource Development
3 History of ­Human Resource Development
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 1
12/3/21 3:03 PM
This page intentionally left blank
1
­Human Resource
Development
Bound­aries
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Purpose of HRD
Definition of HRD
Origins of HRD
HRD Context
• Case Example: Training and Development for New Technology
• Case Example: Organ­ization Development for a Growing Com­pany
HRD Core Beliefs
HRD as a Discipline and a Professional Field of Practice
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
­ uman resource development (HRD) is a relatively young academic discipline
H
but an old and well-­established field of practice. The idea of ­human beings purposefully developing themselves to improve the conditions in which they live is
almost part of h
­ uman nature. HRD theory and practice are deeply rooted in
this developing and advancing perspective.
This first chapter highlights the purpose, definition, origins, context, and core
beliefs of HRD. ­These highlights provide an initial understanding of HRD and
function as an advanced or­ga­nizer for the book. The chapters that follow fully
explore the depth and range of thinking within the theory and practice of HRD.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 3
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Purpose of HRD
HRD is about adult h
­ uman beings functioning in productive systems. The purpose of HRD is to focus on the resources that ­humans bring to the success
equation—­both personal success and orga­nizational system success. The two
core threads of HRD are (1) individual and orga­n izational learning and
(2) individual and orga­nizational per­for­mance (Ruona, 2000; Swanson, 1996a;
Watkins and Marsick, 1995). Although some view learning and per­for­mance
as alternatives or rivals, most see them as partners in a formula for success. Thus,
assessment of HRD successes or results can be categorized into the domains of
learning and per­for­mance. In both cases, the intent is an improvement.
Definition of HRD
HRD has numerous definitions. Throughout the book, we continually reflect on
alternative views of HRD to expose readers to the range of thinking in the profession. The definition put forth in this book is as follows:
­Human resource development is a pro­cess of developing and unleashing expertise to improve individual, team, work pro­cess, and orga­niza­
tional system per­for­mance.
HRD efforts typically take place ­u nder the banners of “training and deve­
lopment” and “organ­ization development,” as well as numerous other titles. Figure 1.1 illustrates the definition and scope of HRD in such realms as per­for­mance
improvement, orga­nizational learning, c­ areer development, and management/
leadership development.
HRD DEFINED:
Human
Resource
Development
• HRD is a process of developing and unleashing
expertise for the purpose of improving performance
. . . performance at the individual, group, process,
and organizational system levels.
PRIMARY COMPONENTS OF HRD:
Training and
Development
Organization
Development
• T&D develops human expertise
. . . for the purpose of improving performance.
• OD unleashes human expertise
. . . for the purpose of improving performance.
• Intellectual & Social Capital • Workforce Development
APPLICATIONS AND
CONTEXTS OF HRD:
• Human Resource Management • Organizational Effectiveness
• Leadership & Strategy • Work System Design • Change Mgt.
• Process Improvement • Career Development • Quality Improvement
• HRD processes direct, complement,
or are imbedded in various
organizational, national, and
international settings.
Figure 1.1: ­Human Resource Development: Definitions,
Components, Applications, and Contexts
Source: Swanson, 2008a.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 4
12/3/21 3:03 PM
1. H
­ uman Resource Development Bound­aries
5
The alternative definitions of HRD that have been presented over the years
mark the bound­aries of the profession. Figure 1.2 provides a historical report
of the range of HRD definitions found in the lit­er­a­ture.
You can think of HRD in more than one way. Our preferred definition describes HRD as a pro­cess. Using the pro­cess perspective, HRD can be thought
of as both a system and a journey. This perspective does not inform us as to who
does HRD or where it resides in the organ­ization. At the definitional level, it
is helpful to think about HRD as a pro­cess open to engaging dif­fer­ent ­people
at dif­fer­ent times and located in other places inside and outside the host
organ­ization.
Another way to talk about HRD is to refer to it as a department, function,
and job. It can be thought of as an HRD department or division in a par­tic­u­lar
organ­ization with p
­ eople working as HRD directors, man­ag­ers, specialists, and
so forth. Furthermore, ­these p
­ eople work in HRD centers, training rooms, retreat centers, corporate universities, government agencies, and online. HRD can
also be identified in terms of the context and content it supports—­for example,
training and organ­ization development in insurance sales. Even ­under ­these departments, function, job, and physical space titles, HRD can also be defined as
a pro­cess.
Two major realms of practice take place within HRD. One is organ­ization
development (OD); the other is training and development (T&D). As their names
imply, OD focuses at the organ­ization level and connects with individuals, while
T&D focuses on individuals and connects with the organ­ization. The HRD
­lit­er­a­ture regularly pre­sents a broad variety of case studies from practice. See
the accompanying examples of T&D and OD practice (page 10).
Origins of HRD
It is easy to logically connect the origins of HRD to the history of humankind
and the training/learning required to survive and advance. While HRD is a rela­
tively new term, training—­t he largest component of HRD—­can be tracked
back through the evolution of the ­human race. Chapter 3, on HRD’s history,
provides a long-­range view of the profession. For now, it is impor­tant to recognize that con­temporary HRD originated in the massive development effort that
took place in the United States during World War II. ­Under the name of the
“Training within Industry” proj­ect (Dooley, 1945a), this massive development
effort gave birth to (1) systematic performance-­based training, (2) improvement
of work pro­cesses, and (3) the improvement of ­human relations in the workplace—­
birth of con­temporary HRD, as it began being called in the 1970s.
HRD Context
HRD almost always functions within the context of a host organ­ization. The
organ­ization can be a corporation, business, industry, government agency, or
nonprofit organ­ization—­large or small. The host organ­ization is a system with
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 5
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Key
Components
Under­lying
Theories
­ uman resource developH
ment is the pro­cess of
increasing the knowledge,
the skills, and the capacities of all the ­people in the
society (2).
High-­level
manpower and its
full utilization
Development
economics
Nadler (1970)
HRD is a series of
or­ga­nized activities
conducted within a
specified time and
designed to produce
behavioral change (3).
Behavioral
change; adult
learning
Psy­chol­ogy
Jones (1981)
HRD is a systematic
expansion of p
­ eople’s
work-­related abilities,
focused on the attainment
of both organ­ization and
personal goals (188).
Per­for­mance,
orga­nizational,
and personal
goals
Philosophical;
systems;
psy­chol­ogy;
economics
Chalofsky and
Lincoln, (1983)
Discipline of HRD is the
study of how individuals
and groups in organ­
izations change through
learning.
Adult learning
Psy­chol­ogy
Swanson
(1987)
HRD is a pro­cess of
improving an organ­
ization’s per­for­mance
through the capabilities
of its personnel. HRD includes activities dealing
with work design, aptitude,
expertise and motivation.
Orga­nizational
per­for­mance
Economics;
psy­chol­ogy;
systems
Smith, R.
(1988)
HRD consists of programs
and activities, direct and
indirect, instructional and/
or individual that positively
affect the development of
the individual and the
productivity and profit of
the organ­ization (1).
Training and
development;
orga­nizational
per­for­mance
Economics;
systems;
psy­chol­ogy
Author
Definition
Harbison and
Myers (1964)
Figure 1.2: ­Human Resource Development Definitions over Time
Source: Adapted from Weinburger, 1998.
6
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 6
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Key
Components
Under­lying
Theories
HRD is the field of study
and practice responsible
for the fostering of a
long-­term, work-­related
learning capacity at the
individual, group, and
orga­nizational level of
organ­izations. As such, it
includes—­but is not
­limited to—­training, c­ areer
development, and
orga­nizational development (427).
Learning capacity;
training and
development;
­career development; orga­
nizational
development
Psy­chol­ogy;
systems;
economics;
per­for­mance
improvement
McLagan
(1989b)
HRD is the integrated use
of training and development, ­career development
and orga­nizational
development to improve
individual and orga­
nizational effectiveness (7).
Training and
development;
­career development; orga­
nizational
development
Psy­chol­ogy;
systems;
economics
Gilley and
­England
(1989)
HRD is or­ga­nized learning
activities arranged within
an organ­ization to
improve per­for­mance and/
or personal growth for the
purpose of improving the
job, the individual, and/or
the organ­ization (5).
Learning activities; per­for­mance
improvement
Psy­chol­ogy;
systems;
economics;
per­for­mance
improvement
Nadler and
Nadler (1989)
HRD is or­ga­nized learning
experiences provided by
employees within a
specified period of time to
bring about the possibility
of per­for­mance improvement and/or personal
growth (6).
Learning and
per­for­mance
improvement
Per­for­mance
improvement;
psy­chol­ogy
Author
Definition
Watkins (1989)
Figure 1.2: ­(Continued)
7
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 7
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Key
Components
Under­lying
Theories
HRD is the pro­cess of
determining the optimum
methods of developing
and improving the ­human
resources of an organ­
ization and the systematic
improvement of the
per­for­mance and productivity of employees
through training, education and development and
leadership for the mutual
attainment of orga­
nizational and personal
goals (16).
Per­for­mance
improvement
Per­for­mance
improvement;
systems;
psy­chol­ogy;
economics
Chalofsky
(1992)
HRD is the study and
practice of increasing the
learning capacity of individuals, groups, collectives and organ­izations
through the development
and application of
learning-­based interventions for the purpose of
optimizing ­human and
orga­nizational growth and
effectiveness (179).
Learning capacity;
per­for­mance
improvement
Systems;
psy­chol­ogy;
­human
per­for­mance
Marsick and
Watkins (1994)
HRD as a combination of
training, ­career development, and orga­nizational
development offers the
theoretical integration
needed to envision a
learning organ­ization, but
it must also be positioned
to act strategically
throughout the organ­
ization (355).
Training and
development;
­career development; orga­
nizational
development;
learning
organ­ization
­Human
per­for­mance;
orga­
nizational
per­for­mance;
systems;
economics;
psy­chol­ogy
Author
Definition
Smith (1990)
Figure 1.2: ­(Continued)
8
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 8
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Author
Definition
Key
Components
Under­lying
Theories
Swanson
(1995)
HRD is a pro­cess of
developing and unleashing ­human expertise
through organ­ization
development and personnel training and development for the purpose of
improving per­for­mance
(208).
Training and
development;
organ­ization
development;
per­for­mance
improvement at
the organ­ization,
work pro­cess, and
individual levels
Systems;
economics;
psy­chol­ogy
McLean and
McLean
(2001)
HRD is any pro­cess or
activity that, ­either initially
or over the long term, has
the potential to develop
adults’ work-­based
knowledge, expertise,
productivity, and satisfaction, ­whether for personal
or group/team gain, or for
the benefit of an organ­
ization, community,
nation, or, ultimately, the
­whole of humanity (313).
Swanson and
Holton (2009)
HRD is a pro­cess of
developing and unleashing expertise for the
purpose of improving
orga­nizational system,
work pro­cess, team, and
individual per­for­mance.
Wang et al.
(2017)
HRD is a “mechanism of
shaping individual and
group values and beliefs
and skilling through
learning-­related activities
to support the desired
per­for­mance of the host
institutional system”
(1175).
Development
economics;
psy­chol­ogy
Developing
expertise; unleashing expertise; per­for­mance
improvement
Systems;
economics;
psy­chol­ogy
Figure 1.2: ­(Continued)
9
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 9
12/3/21 3:03 PM
CASE EXAMPLE: TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT
FOR NEW TECHNOLOGY
Plant modernization and technology implementation are strategies corporations use for productivity and quality improvement. Such efforts typically have parallel T&D efforts in planning and carry­ing out such changes.
Midwest Steel Corporation, for example, utilized systematically developed
structured training instead of an abbreviated vendor-­provided overview
pre­sen­ta­tion. The consequences ­were too significant for Midwest Steel to be
so casual about installing of the new steelmaking technology. The T&D
staff carried out a detailed analy­sis of the expertise required to operate
the new ladle preheaters. This analy­sis served as the basis for the training
program development, delivery, and evaluation of operator expertise.
­Furthermore, following the implementation of the T&D program, a cost-­
benefit analy­sis that compared production gains to training costs demonstrated a short-­term 135 ­percent return on investment. Continued use of
the structured training program resulted in even higher financial returns
for the corporation (Martelli, 1998; Cullen, Sisson, and Swanson, 1976).
CASE EXAMPLE: ORGAN­IZATION DEVELOPMENT
FOR A GROWING COM­PANY
A young and quickly growing com­pany found itself working with systems
and expertise inadequate for its pre­sent volume of business. The prob­lems
of creating and improving work systems w
­ ere tackled head-on by using
an organ­ization development con­sul­tant. The con­sul­tant engaged employee
groups in the following five-­phase pro­cess: (1) building a new foundation,
(2) high-­involvement strategic planning, (3) assessment of p
­ eople systems
and technical systems, (4) implementing the new organ­ization design,
and (5) reflection, assessment, and next steps. The combination of learning, team planning and decision making, and employee involvement in
implementing changes proved successful in advancing the com­pany and
creating a sense of employee owner­ship (Hardt, 1998). A more recent OD
transformation initiative carried out by Accenture, a large multinational
consulting firm, for one of their major clients yielded a 353 ­percent return-­
on-­investment (Vanthourmout, 2008). Focusing on positive results is
Accenture’s major marketing approach.
10
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 10
12/3/21 3:03 PM
1. H
­ uman Resource Development Bound­aries
11
mission-­driven goals and outputs. In an international context, the host organ­
ization for HRD can be a nation (McLean, 2004). Strategic investment in HRD
at this level can range from maintaining high-­level national workforce competitiveness to fundamentally elevating a nation out of poverty and disarray.
The host organ­ization may also be a multinational or global organ­ization
with operations in many continents and many nations. Complex host organ­
izations can both affect the structure of HRD and be the focus of HRD challenges. HRD has traditionally been sensitive to culture within an organ­ization
and between organ­izations. Thus, making the transition to global issues has been
relatively easy for HRD.
HRD can be thought of as a subsystem that functions within the more
­extensive host system to advance, support, harmonize, and at times lead the
host system. Take, for example, a com­pany that produces and sells computers.
­Responsible HRD would be ever-­vigilant to this primary focus of the computer
com­pany and see itself as supporting, shaping, or leading the vari­ous ele­ments
of the complex orga­nizational system in which it functions. The following chapters w
­ ill have much more to say about this contextual real­ity of HRD. For now,
it is impor­tant to think about the significant variations in how HRD fits into
any one organ­ization and the variety of organ­izations that exist in society. This
complexity is compounded by the cultural variations in which HRD functions
from region to region and nation to nation. Some find this milieu baffling; for
­others it is an in­ter­est­ing and exciting aspect of the profession! For ­those who
find HRD puzzling and ­those new to the profession, acquiring a solid orientation to the theory and practice of HRD as presented in this book ­will prove a
sound investment.
HRD Core Beliefs
HRD professionals, functioning as individuals or work groups, rarely reveal
their core beliefs. This is not to say that they do not have core beliefs. The real­
ity is that most HRD professionals are busy, action-­oriented ­people who have
not taken the time to articulate their beliefs. Yet, almost all decisions and actions on the part of HRD professionals are fundamentally influenced by subconscious core beliefs.
The idea of core beliefs is discussed in many places throughout this book.
To describe what motivates and frames the HRD profession, h
­ ere is one set of
HRD core beliefs and a brief interpretation of each.
1. Organ­izations are human-­made entities that rely on ­human expertise to
establish and achieve their goals. This belief acknowledges that organ­
izations are changeable and vulnerable. Organ­izations have been
created by humankind and can soar or crumble, and HRD is intricately connected to the fate of its host organ­ization.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 11
12/3/21 3:03 PM
12
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
2. ­Human expertise is developed and maximized through HRD pro­cesses.
It should be applied for the mutual long-­term and/or short-­term
benefits of the sponsoring organ­ization and the individuals involved.
HRD professionals have power­ful tools available to get o
­ thers to
think, accept, and act. The ethical concern is that t­ hese tools can
be used for negative, harmful, or exploitative purposes (Wang,
Doty, & Yang, 2021). As a profession, HRD seeks positive ends and
fairness.
3. HRD professionals are advocates of individual/group, work pro­cess, and
orga­nizational integrity. HRD professionals typically have a privileged
position of accessing information that transcends the bound­aries and
levels of individuals, groups, work pro­cesses, and the organ­ization.
Access to rich information and the ability to see t­ hings that o
­ thers may
not also carry a responsibility. At times harmony is required, while at
other times the blunt truth is required.
Gilley and Maycunich have set forth a set of princi­ples to guide the profession. ­These princi­ples can also be interpreted as a set of core beliefs. They contend that effective HRD practice does the following:
1. Integrates eclectic theoretical disciplines
2. Is based on satisfying stakeholder needs and expectations
3. Is responsive but responsible
4. Uses evaluation as a continuous improvement pro­cess
5. Is designed to improve organ­ization effectiveness
6. Relies on relationship mapping to enhance operational efficiency
7. Is linked to the organ­ization’s strategic business goals and objectives
8. Is based on partnerships
9. Is results-­oriented
10. Assumes credibility as essential
11. Utilizes strategic planning to help the organ­ization integrate vision,
mission, strategy, and practice
12. Relies on the analy­sis pro­cess to identify priorities
13. Is based on purposeful and meaningful mea­sure­ment
14. Promotes diversity and equity in the workplace (Gilley and
Maycunich, 2000, 79–99)
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 12
12/3/21 3:03 PM
1. H
­ uman Resource Development Bound­aries
13
Most sets of princi­ples are based on core beliefs that may or may not be made
explicit. The pressure for stating princi­ples of practice is greater than for expressing overarching beliefs. Both have a place, however, and deserve serious attention by the profession.
HRD as a Discipline and a Professional
Field of Practice
The HRD profession and its components are large and widely recognized. As
with any applied field that exists in a large number and variety of organ­izations,
HRD can take on a variety of names and roles. This can be confusing to ­those
outside the profession and sometimes be confusing to ­those within the profession. This variation is not bad. This book, and HRD, embrace the thinking that
underlies t­ hese variations:
• Training
• Training and development
• Employee development
• Technical training
• Management development
• Executive and leadership development
•­Human per­for­mance technology
• Per­for­mance improvement
• Organ­ization development
•­Career development
• Scenario planning
• Orga­nizational learning
• Change management
• Coaching
HRD overlaps with the theory and practice under­lying other closely linked
domains, including the following:
• Workforce planning
• Orga­nizational and pro­cess effectiveness
• Quality improvement
• Strategic orga­nizational planning
•­Human resource management (HRM)
•­Human resources (HR)
Prob­ably the most apparent connection is with the orga­nizational use of
the term ­human resources (HR). HR can be conceived as having two major
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 13
12/3/21 3:03 PM
14
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
components—­HRD and HRM. As an umbrella term, HR is often confused with
HRM goals and activities such as hiring, compensation, and compliance issues.
Even when HRD and HRM are managed u
­ nder the HR title, their relative
foci tend to be fairly discrete and keyed to the terms development versus
management.
Conclusion
The practice of HRD is dominated by positive intentions for improving the expertise of individuals, teams, work pro­cesses, and the overall organ­ization.
Most observers suggest that HRD evokes common-­sense thinking and actions.
This perspective has both positive and negative consequences. One positive consequence is the ease with which ­people are willing to contribute and participate
in HRD pro­cesses. One negative consequence is that many p
­ eople working in
the field—­both short-­term and long-­term—­have l­ ittle more than common sense
to rely on for their efforts. Having said this, we are reminded of the adage that
“­there is nothing common about common sense” (Deming, 1993, 58). Common
sense is the superficial assessment called face validity in the mea­sure­ment and
assessment profession. Something can appear valid but be dead wrong, while
something can appear invalid and yet be right. For excellence in HRD, common sense is not enough.
The ultimate goal of this book is to reveal the under­lying thinking and evidence supporting the HRD profession, its pro­cesses, and its tools. Thus, allowing HRD professionals to confidently accept and apply theories and tools that
work while at the same time ridding themselves of frivolous and invalid theories and practices. Foundational HRD theory and practice are the focus of this
book.
Reflection Questions
1. Identify a definition of HRD presented in this chapter (see figure 1.2)
that makes the most sense to you and explain why.
2. Identify a definition of HRD presented in this chapter (see figure 1.2)
that makes the least sense to you and explain why.
3. Of the three HRD core beliefs presented in this chapter, which one is
closest to your views, and why?
4. Based on the ideas presented in this chapter, what is it about HRD that
interests you the most?
Online Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be found
on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 14
12/3/21 3:03 PM
2
Basics of ­Human
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Points of Agreement
• Belief in ­Human Potential
• Goal of Improvement
• Problem-­Solving Orientation
• Systems Thinking
HRD Worldviews
• HRD and Its Environment
• Learner Perspective
• Orga­nizational Perspective
• Global Context
HRD Pro­cess
• Pro­cess Phases of HRD
• Interplay between the Phases of the HRD Pro­cess
Threats to Excellent Practice
• Turning the HRD Intervention into a Fun Event
• The Rate of Change
• Characteristics of the Key Players
Ethics and Integrity Standards
• Standards
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 15
12/3/21 3:03 PM
16
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Introduction
­ ere is no single way to view ­Human Resource Development (HRD) or to go
Th
about HRD work. This chapter pre­sents the under­pinnings of HRD as a further
orientation to its basic framework. The se­lection of HRD under­pinnings is intended to illustrate, but it is not exhaustive. You should be prepared to expand
on the ideas offered in this chapter as you pro­gress through the book. ­These basic under­pinnings serve to orient readers who are new to HRD and also refresh
the thinking of ­those already familiar with the profession.
Points of Agreement
As with any field of theory and practice, ­there are rival views and intense debates.
This is especially true among scholars. Satirically, scholars are characterized as
spending 80 ­percent of their time debating about the 20 ­percent of a subject on
which they disagree. Acknowledging differences is impor­tant, and this ­will take
place throughout the book. Even more impor­tant is the need to point out areas of
agreement. It is h
­ ere that the solid core of HRD theory and practice can be found.
In contrast, areas of disagreement create the tension required for serious reflection and inquiry that ultimately yields renewal and advancement.
HRD is an evolving discipline. This makes for exciting debates within the
profession. It is impor­tant for ­those engaging in and listening to ­these debates
not to lose sight of their points of agreement. Four overriding points of agreement include belief in ­human potential, the goal of improvement, a problem-­
solving orientation, and systems thinking.
BELIEF IN H
­ UMAN POTENTIAL
“Some ­Humans a­ in’t H
­ uman” is a song written and performed by John Prine
(2005). While Prine explores the dark side of humanity through song, HRD professionals try to head off prob­lems in organ­izations and explore the positive
side. Pragmatically, not ideologically, HRD professionals advocate for h
­ uman
potential, ­human development opportunities, and fairness. HRD professionals
are proud of their humanity and talk about h
­ umans and humaneness in ways
that few other business professionals do (Chalofsky, 2000). ­Human resource development professionals are unique in this re­spect, even when compared to
their ­human resource management (HRM) counter­parts.
GOAL OF IMPROVEMENT
The idea of improvement overarches almost all HRD definitions, models, and
practices. To improve means “to raise to a better quality or condition; make
better” (Agnes, 2006, 718). The improvement realms of positive change, attaining expertise, developing excellent quality, and making ­things better is central
to HRD. This core goal of improvement is possibly the single-­most impor­tant
idea in the profession and the core motivator of HRD professionals.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 16
12/3/21 3:03 PM
2. Basics of H
­ uman Resource Development
17
The HRD profession focuses on making t­ hings better and creating an improved f­ uture state. Examples include every­thing from helping individuals learn
new content to helping orga­nizational systems determine their strategic direction. ­There has been a continuing debate among HRD professionals as to the
purpose of HRD being e­ ither learning or per­for­mance. For example, Krempl
and Pace (2001, 55) contend that HRD “goals should clearly link to business outcomes,” while Bierema (1996, 24) states that “valuing development only if it
contributes to productivity is a point of view that has perpetuated the mechanistic model of the past three hundred years.” It is in­ter­est­ing to listen more
closely to each side and to discover that learning is seen as an ave­nue to per­for­
mance and that per­for­mance requires learning (Ruona, 2000). In both cases,
­there is the overarching concern for improvement.
PROBLEM-­SOLVING ORIENTATION
HRD is oriented to solutions—to solving prob­lems. A prob­lem can be thought
of as “a question, m
­ atter, situation, or person that is perplexing or difficult”
(Agnes, 2006, 1144). It is ­these perplexing or difficult situations, m
­ atters, and
­people that most often justify HRD and ignite the HRD pro­cess. Even though
HRD professionals see themselves as constructive and positive agents, some do
not want to talk about their work in the language of prob­lems. Essentially, their
view is that t­ here is a pre­sent state and a f­ uture desirable state and the gap between is the opportunity or prob­lem to be solved (Chermack, 2011, 2021).
At times, HRD professionals know more about the pre­sent state than the
desired f­ uture state. At other times, they know more about the desired ­future
state than the ­actual pre­sent state. HRD critics often say that HRD prac­ti­tion­
ers falsely know more about what should be done than they know about ­either
the pre­sent or desired states. Other critics might say that some HRD ­people are
more interested in their pet programs and activities than in the requirements
of their host organ­ization. Th
­ ese criticisms can be summarized as “having a solution in search of a prob­lem” and “a program with no evidence of results.”
With all the vari­ous models and tools reported in the HRD lit­er­a­ture, each
with its own jargon, it is useful to think generally about HRD as a problem-­
defining and problem-­solving pro­cess. HRD professionals have numerous
strategies for defining prob­lems and even more strategies for ­going about solving them. A core idea within HRD is to think of it being focused on solving
prob­lems for the purpose of improvement.
SYSTEMS THINKING
HRD professionals talk about system views and systems thinking. They think
this way about themselves and the host organ­izations they serve. Systems
thinking is basic to HRD theory and practice. Systems thinking is described as
“a conceptual framework, a body of knowledge and tools that have been developed over the past fifty years, to make full patterns clearer, and to help us see
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 17
12/3/21 3:03 PM
18
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Environment
Input
Process
Output
Feedback
Figure 2.1: Basic Systems Model
how to change them effectively” (Senge, 1990, 7). Systems thinking is an outgrowth of systems theory. General systems theory was first described by Boulding (1956a) and von Bertalanffy (1962) with a clear antimechanistic view of the
world and the full acknowl­edgment that all systems are ultimately open systems—­
not closed systems.
The basic systems theory model includes inputs, pro­cesses, and outputs of
a system as well as a feedback loop. Furthermore, basic systems theory acknowledges that a system is influenced by its larger surrounding system or environment (see figure 2.1) and that systems are not to be thought of as isolated and
linear.
This informed view is referred to as an open system or a system that is capable of being influenced by forces external to the system ­under focus. ­These
ideas provide the basis for many practical HRD tools for viewing improvement
prob­lems (opportunities) and for taking action.
Systems thinking allows HRD to view itself as a system and to view its host,
or sponsoring organ­ization, as a system. When HRD professionals speak about
HRD as a system, they generally think of HRD as being a subsystem within a
larger orga­nizational system. Analy­sis experts sometimes refer to subsystems
as pro­cesses. Thus, HRD is more often discussed as a pro­cess than a system. This
is not meant to be confusing—­most p
­ eople simply acknowledge that a systems
view and a pro­cess view are almost the same. It can be said, however, that when
­people talk about a systems view, they are usually thinking more broadly and
more generally than when they are talking about a pro­cess view. Th
­ ere is a point
when the system and pro­cess views overlap.
Basic systems theory—­the root of systems thinking—­informs us that ­there
are initial and fundamental requirements for engaging in systems thinking and
analy­sis about systems (and pro­cesses). Just being able to answer and gain consensus on the following three questions is enough systems thinking for most
HRD prac­ti­tion­ers.
1. What is the name and purpose of the system? What systems are called,
and what their purposes may be, are often points of misunderstanding
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 18
12/3/21 3:03 PM
2. Basics of H
­ uman Resource Development
19
from one person to another. By naming the system, p
­ eople can first
agree as to what system they are talking about. It is very in­ter­est­ing to
have intelligent and experienced ­people in a room begin to talk about
a situation only to find out that the unnamed system some are talking
about differs from the system ­others are talking about. Furthermore,
differing perspectives on the purpose of the system are almost always
­ ntil made explicit.
­under contention u
2. What are the parts or ele­ments of the system? This question throws
another elementary but essential challenge to a systems thinker. We
find that ­people with a singular or l­ imited worldview only see the
world through that lens. Examples we have seen include production
­people not seeing the customer; sales p
­ eople not seeing production;
new technology p
­ eople only seeing technology itself as the system
rather than the larger system of p
­ eople, pro­cesses, and outputs; and
­legal ­people seeing the system as conflictive by nature rather than
harmonious. With t­ hese ­limited views, individuals w
­ ill be drawn to
varying perceptions of the parts or ele­ments of the system that may
not match real­ity.
3. What are the relationships between the parts? H
­ ere is the real magic of
systems theory—­analyzing the relationships between the parts and the
impacts of ­those relationships. Even HRD experts won­der if they ever
get it complete. Indeed, good analysts are the first to admit their own
shortcomings. Yet, their belief is that in the strug­gle to understand a
system, an analyst ends up with a better and more complete understanding of that system. Studying the relationship between parts forces
analysts to dive deeper into understanding and explaining a system—­
why it works and why it is not working. A ­simple example to illustrate
this point is when enormous pressure is put on an employee only to
find out if he or she can, in fact, perform a task. If the person can then
perform the task, expertise is not the missing piece. Thus, the idea that
­people are not performing tasks well and need training is unacceptable
­until more is known. Workers may know how to perform the task well
but are unable to, or choose not to, for many reasons. You prob­ably
could name several from your own experience. ­There are numerous
reasons in any system why ­things happen and do not happen. Figuring
­these out requires more than superficial analy­sis or meta­phoric analogies. Systems theory is basic.
HRD Worldviews
The good news is that HRD professionals almost always have a worldview. The
bad news is that they rarely articulate it and systematically operationalize it for
themselves, their colleagues, and their clients. Years ago, Zemke and Kerlinger
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 19
12/3/21 3:03 PM
20
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
(1982, 17–25) implored HRD professionals to have general ­mental models for
the purpose of being able to figure out the complexity and context surrounding
HRD work.
HRD AND ITS ENVIRONMENT
Figure 2.2 contains a worldview generally useful to the purpose and context of
HRD. This contextual model positions HRD as a five-­phase pro­cess (system)
paralleling and connecting with the other pro­cesses in the host system or organ­
ization. The orga­nizational system and subpro­cesses each have their inputs,
work pro­cesses, and outputs. The environment where the orga­nizational system functions is also identified and illustrated. The orga­nizational system is seen
to have its unique mission and strategy, organ­ization structure, technology, and
­human resources. Its economic, po­liti­cal, and cultural forces characterize the
larger environment. As expected, this is an open system where influence of any
component can slide up and down the levels of this model. For example, power­
ful global economy influences can push down the need and nature of an executive development program sponsored by the HRD department in a specific
com­pany. ­Those external influences could dictate other changes such as location of manufacturing and marketing methods.
Environment
• Economic Forces • Political Forces • Cultural Forces
Organization
• Mission & Strategy • Organization Structure • Technology • Human Resources
Inputs
Processes
1
Analyze
2
3
4
Propose Create Implement
Outputs
5
Assess
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Figure 2.2: Five Phase ­Human Resource Development in Context
of the Organ­ization and Environment
Source: Swanson, 2001c, 305.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 20
12/3/21 3:03 PM
2. Basics of H
­ uman Resource Development
21
LEARNER PERSPECTIVE
Patricia McLagan (2017), HRD thought leader, pre­sents a case of self-­managed
learning being a necessary and exciting upgrade that w
­ ill keep you in charge
of, rather than becoming a servant to, increasingly intelligent technologies. Other
learner worldviews that gain support in HRD include involving individuals as
leaders, learners, and contributors. Figure 2.3 stems from the original work of
Malcolm Knowles, considered in the United States to be the ­father of adult learning or andragogy. The perspective of andragogy in practice places adult learning princi­ples into the context of adult life through the perspectives of (1) the
goals and purposes for learning, and (2) individual and situational differences.
In figure 2.3 you see the six adult learning princi­ples enveloped by the contextual purpose and situational issues that impact learning and development. The
HRD worldview related to the adult learner is concerned with the learning
Goals and Purposes for Learning
Individual and Situational Differences
ANDRAGOGY:
Core Adult Learning Principles
Subject-Matter Differences
3. Prior Experience of the Learner
• resource
• mental models
4. Readiness to Learn
• life-related
• developmental task
Societal Growth
2. Self-Concept of the Learner
• autonomous
• self-directing
Situational Differences
Institutional Growth
1. Learner’s Need to Know
• why
• what
• how
5. Orientation to Learning
• problem-centered
• contextual
6. Motivation to Learn
• intrinsic value
• personal payoff
Individual Learner Differences
Individual Growth
Figure 2.3: Andragogy in Practice
Source: Knowles, Holton, and Swanson, 2005, 4.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 21
12/3/21 3:03 PM
22
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
pro­cess as it takes place within the context of the learning purpose and situation (Knowles, Holton, and Swanson, 2005).
ORGA­NIZATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
The orga­nizational worldview perspective is presented h
­ ere by the work of Rummler and Brache (2012). They offer a perspective on the orga­nizational variables that explain orga­
nizational per­
for­
mance. In their matrix of nine
per­for­mance variables, the dominance of the organ­ization and its need to perform is acknowledged (see figure 2.4). Included are three per­for­mance levels—­
organ­ization, work pro­cess, and individual contributor—­and three per­for­mance
needs—­goals, design, and management. This worldview argues for the organ­
ization that reaches to the individual, while the e­ arlier learner perspective has
the individual dominating and reaching to the organ­ization. The organ­ization
per­for­mance view takes the general stance that good ­people may be working in
bad systems. For example, the quality improvement expert, W. Edwards Deming, estimated that 90 ­percent of the prob­lems that might be blamed on individuals in the workplace are a result of having them working in bad pro­cesses
or systems. He fundamentally believed in h
­ uman beings and their capacity to
learn and perform. His goal was to focus on the system structure and pro­cesses
that stood in the way of learning and per­for­mance.
GLOBAL CONTEXT
Adam Smith, a Scottish phi­los­o­pher and po­liti­cal economist, was the author of
the 1776 book, An Inquiry into the Nature and ­Causes of the Wealth of Nations.
His treatise spurs continuing interpretations of the socio-­technical-­economic
systems that provoke scholars and decision makers even to the pre­sent day.
His commitment was to capitalistic ­free markets and how rational self-­interest
and competition can lead to common well-­being that is regularly challenged
(Friedman, 2021).
THE THREE PERFORMANCE NEEDS
Organization
Level
THE THREE
LEVELS OF
PERFORMANCE
Process
Level
Job/Performer
Level
Goals
Design
Management
Organization
Goals
Organization
Design
Organization
Management
Process
Goals
Process
Design
Process
Management
Job
Goals
Job
Design
Job
Management
Figure 2.4: Nine Per­for­mance Variables
Source: Rummler and Brache, 1995, 8. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 22
12/3/21 3:03 PM
2. Basics of H
­ uman Resource Development
23
In stark contrast, Capital: A Critique of Po­liti­cal Economy (1887), the work
of Karl Marx, Prus­sian phi­los­o­pher and po­liti­cal economist, also continues to
provoke scholars and decision makers. Marx argued that capitalism leads to class
strug­gles that w
­ ill result in destruction and the ultimate rise of communism.
The historical context in which Smith and Marx advanced their theories
has greatly changed, but most would argue that the motivation of ­human beings
has not changed. Global po­liti­cal, economic, and cultural forces have radically
shifted in the twenty-­first ­century and w
­ ill continue to change. In the past, ­these
­factors that w
­ ere on the outer rim of concerns for most HRD professionals—­
those ­things that happened in faraway nations—­are now a part of standard orga­
nizational considerations. To its credit, HRD has had a long tradition of cultural
sensitivity, as it has worked from region to region nationally and from one work
group to another. Easing into multinational ­people interaction issues has been
relatively painless for the HRD profession, and ­there has been high demand for
HRD expertise in aiding individuals to function in the globalization pro­cess.
McLean and McLean (2001) have hypothesized that HRD is an impor­tant
­factor in the inevitable move to globalization. They note that while globalization is not new, its pre­sent demands are so intense that it fundamentally changes
the way and rate at which change occurs. Globalization “enables the world to
reach into individuals, corporations, and nation-­states farther, faster, deeper, and
cheaper than ever before” (Friedman, 2000, 9). A framework for HRD to use in
dealing with day-­to-­day globalization issues is to adopt the following new mindsets (Rhinesmith, 1995):
• Gather global trends on learning related technology, training, and
organ­ization development to improve the competitive edge.
• Think and work through contradictory needs resulting from paradoxes and confrontations in a complex global world.
• View the organ­ization as a pro­cess rather than a structure.
• Increase ability to work with p
­ eople having vari­ous abilities, experiences, and cultures.
• Manage continuous change and uncertainty.
• Seek lifelong learning and orga­nizational improvement on numerous
fronts.
It is impor­tant to note that ­these mindsets are inadequate in resolving the
larger social-­economic-­political strug­gle between po­liti­cal economies—­Smith,
Marx, and ­those in between—­when thinking about humaneness, system viability, and meaningful participation in rival systems.
The overall message in presenting t­ hese several worldviews is that e­ very
HRD professional should have a worldview that allows her/him to think through
situations time and time again. Conceptual worldview models help HRD professionals gain clarity of the complex situations they face.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 23
12/3/21 3:03 PM
24
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Thus far we have discussed core ideas that influence HRD. Each of t­ hese basic ideas assists in understanding the challenges HRD ­faces and the strategies
it takes in facing t­ hose challenges. The ideas include the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Belief in h
­ uman potential
Improvement as a goal
Problem-­solving orientation
Systems thinking
Worldviews
Global context
HRD Pro­cess
Based on the ideas in the prior sections, it is rational to think of HRD as a purposeful pro­cess or system. The position taken ­here is that the dominant view of
HRD should be that of a pro­cess. The views of HRD as a function, department,
and job are the less impor­tant contextual variations.
When HRD is viewed as a pro­cess and is thought of in terms of input, pro­
cess, output, and feedback within a dynamic environment, potential contributors and partners ­will not be excluded. In that HRD needs to engage ­others in
the orga­nizational system to support and carry out portions of HRD work, it is
best to have the pro­cess view as the dominant view.
Most often HRD is discussed as a pro­cess and not a system. Furthermore,
the pro­cess ele­ments are most commonly called pro­cess phases instead of ele­
ments or steps.
PRO­CESS PHASES OF HRD
HRD has been defined in this text as a five-­phase pro­cess that is essentially a
problem-­defining and problem-­solving method. HRD and its two primary
components—­training and development (T&D) and organ­ization development (OD)—­are each five-­phase pro­cesses. Wording for the general pro­cess
Human Resource
Development
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 24
Training &
Development
Organization
Development
Phase 1
Analyze
Analyze
Analyze/Contract
Phase 2
Propose
Design
Diagnose/Feedback
Phase 3
Create
Develop
Plan/Develop
Phase 4
Implement
Implement
Implement
Phase 5
Assess
Evaluate
Evaluate/Institutionalize
12/3/21 3:03 PM
2. Basics of H
­ uman Resource Development
25
phases of HRD, T&D, and OD have a common thread with slightly varying
terminology.
INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE PHASES OF THE HRD PRO­CESS
The pro­cess phase view suggests that there are major stages in the HRD pro­cess
and that each phase has an impor­tant relationship crucial to achieving the desired outcomes. One of the biggest professional prob­lems facing HRD prac­ti­
tion­ers is in honoring all phases. Studies of HRD practice reveal shortcomings
at the analy­sis and assessment/evaluation phases. ­These are the two most strategic phases of the HRD pro­cess. The shortcomings are compounded ­because
relationships between the m
­ iddle phases rely on the analy­sis for direction and
substance. Furthermore, orga­nizational commitment to HRD is dependent on
positive per­for­mance results reported at the assessment/evaluation phase (Kusy,
1988; Mattson, 2001, Phillips and Phillips, 2016).
Threats to Excellent Practice
Davis and Davis (1998) tell us that, “The HRD movement, on its way to becoming a serious profession, can no longer afford an atheoretical approach” (41).
Even with maturation, ­there are serious threats to theoretically sound and systematic HRD. Three of t­ hose threats are discussed ­here briefly.
TURNING THE HRD INTERVENTION INTO A FUN EVENT
The ­actual time that p
­ eople get together within the HRD pro­cess can become
the focal point, with the real reason for getting together being lost. This is an
ever-­present threat to a systematic approach to HRD. Obsessions with fun-­filled
events and hearing every­one’s full opinion on a m
­ atter can become an end unto
itself rather than a means to an end. An irrational concern for participant satisfaction can also fuel the possibility of undermining the pro­cess.
THE RATE OF CHANGE
The familiar saying, “The faster I go, the behinder I get,” haunts most HRD prac­
ti­tion­ers. The intensity of the rate of change requires more from HRD, which
then can serve to undermine a systematic HRD pro­cess. Not enough time? It is
very tempting to eliminate or cut back on the up-­front analy­sis and go with the
off-­the-­top-­of-­your-­head analy­sis or to bypass the final assessment phase. The
demand for speedy interventions is always a challenge and threat to high quality HRD.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE KEY PLAYERS
­There are strengths and liabilities of three critically impor­tant key players in impacting HRD: (1) the HRD professional/analyst, (2) the client/decision maker,
and (3) the host organ­ization (Sleezer, 1991). Examples include an analyst overly
focused on ­human relationships may ignore hard orga­nizational system-­level
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 25
12/3/21 3:03 PM
26
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
per­for­mance data; a client/decision maker can be guilty of not being able to see
the forest ­because of the trees; and host organ­izations can have such deeply imbedded norms and values that they interfere with opportunities for change.
When the characteristics of the key players are ignored and not managed properly, the integrity of the HRD pro­cess ­will likely erode. Responsibly engaging
multiple stakeholders and multiple sources of data in the HRD pro­cess is essential to good practice and requires careful attention. Th
­ ese characteristics influence the thoroughness and integrity of the overall pro­cess. When they are
ignored, the integrity of the pro­cess can seriously erode.
Ethics and Integrity Standards
­ uman Resource Development (HRD) as a profession and a discipline is focused
H
on training and development and organ­ization development programs, along
with c­ areer development, quality improvement, change efforts, and complimentary ­human resource management practices to advance the per­for­mance of individuals, teams, work pro­cesses, organ­izations, communities, and society.
HRD professionals are engaged in practice, research, consulting, and instruction/facilitation/teaching. Ideally they strive to create a body of research-­based
knowledge and expertise and apply it to HRD in vari­ous orga­nizational, community, and societal settings while functioning as professors, researchers, organ­
ization development con­sul­tants, administrators, trainers, man­ag­ers, and leaders.
In pro­cess, HRD and its host organ­izations are concerned about ethical practices (Krause and Voss, 2007).
The Acad­emy of H
­ uman Resource Development (AHRD) has produced
Standards on Ethics and Integrity, 2nd edition (AHRD, 2018) to provide guidance for HRD professionals engaged in practice, research, consulting, and
­instruction/ facilitation/teaching. Although t­ hese princi­ples are aspiring in nature,
they provide standards of conduct and set forth a common set of values. Adherence to ­these standards furthers HRD as a profession. The primary goal of
the AHRD standards is to manage more clearly the ethics of balancing among
individuals, groups, organ­izations, communities, and socie­ties whenever conflicting needs arise. Case studies connected to the ethics and integrity standards
have also been produced to assist in the interpretation of the standards (Aragon
and Hatcher, 2001).
To ensure this balance, ­these standards identify a common set of values upon
which HRD professionals build their professional and research work. In addition, the standards clarify both the general princi­ples and the decision rules that
cover most situations encountered by HRD professionals. They have as their primary goal the welfare and protection of the individuals, groups, and organ­
izations with whom HRD professionals work.
Adherence to a dynamic set of standards for a professional’s work-­related
conduct requires a personal commitment to the lifelong effort to act ethically;
to encourage ethical be­hav­ior by students, supervisors, employees, and col-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 26
12/3/21 3:03 PM
2. Basics of H
­ uman Resource Development
27
leagues as appropriate; and to consult with ­others, as needed, concerning ethical prob­lems. It is the individual responsibility of each professional to aspire to
the highest pos­si­ble standards of conduct. Such professionals re­spect and protect ­human and civil rights and do not knowingly participate in or condone unfair discriminatory practices.
In providing both the universal princi­ples and l­ imited decision rules to cover
the many situations encountered by HRD professionals, this document is intended to be generic and is not intended to be a comprehensive, problem-­solving,
or procedural document. Each professional’s personal experience as well as his
or her individual and cultural values should be used to interpret, apply, and supplement the princi­ples and rules set forth.
STANDARDS
An abbreviated content outline for the “HRD Ethics and Integrity Standards,”
2nd edition follows. A full standards document is available on the AHRD web­ rg).
site (https://­w ww​.­ahrd​.o
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
General princi­ples
General standards
Research and evaluation
Advertising and other public statements
Publication of work
Privacy, anonymity, and confidentiality
Teaching and facilitating
Resolution of ethical issues and violations
Conclusion
To be effective over time, it is essential to have a worldview model for thinking
about how HRD fits into the milieu of an organ­ization and society. It is also essential to have a pro­cess view of how HRD works and connects with other pro­
cesses. Taking the five-­phase pro­cess view of HRD, the HRD profession has
traditionally been stronger in the ­middle phases (creation and implementation)
and has been working hard to master the analy­sis and assessment phases at each
end of the pro­cess. In pursuit of prob­lems, improvements, and systematic practice,
HRD professionals strug­gle to maintain high standards of excellence, ethics,
and integrity.
Reflection Questions
1. Is t­ here a relationship among the improvement goal, problem-­solving
orientation, and systems thinking agreements within the HRD profession? Explain.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 27
12/3/21 3:03 PM
28
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
2. What about systems thinking in this chapter attracts you? What repels
you?
3. What, if any, is the logical connection between the 2.1 and 2.2 graphic
models in this chapter?
4. How does your general worldview fit with the HRD worldview
(figure 2.2)?
5. Speculate how you think HRD gets into ethical binds?
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 28
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3
History of ­Human
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
The Beginnings: Survival through ­Labor and Learning
• Use of Tools and Mutual Cooperation
• Apprenticeship Method
1400–1800: The Re­nais­sance
• Secular Education for Girls and Boys
• Sensory Learning
• Experience, the Best Teacher
• Manual Training
Apprenticeship in Colonial Amer­i­ca
• Eu­ro­pean Influence
• Early Leader
Industrial Era in Amer­i­ca
• Decline of Apprenticeship
• Training and Corporation Schools
• Role of Government in Training
Twentieth-­Century Influences in Amer­i­ca
• Early 1900s
• World Wars
Evolution of the Organ­ization Development Component of HRD
• Shift to the ­Human Resources School of Thought
• Laboratory Training
• Survey Research and Feedback
• Action Research (Problem-­Solving) Techniques
• Tavistock Sociotechnical Systems and Quality of Work Life
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 29
12/3/21 3:03 PM
30
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
• Strategic Change
• Transformation of Con­temporary Work Organ­izations
Management and Leadership Development in the United States
• Setting the Stage: American Business in the 1800s
• The Strug­gle for Professionalization of Management: 1900–1928
• Depression Era: 1929–1939
• Management Development Boom: 1940–1953
• Management Reform Movement: 1953–1970
• Modern Management Era: 1970–2000
Emergence of the HRD Research Community
• Early University Programs
• Acad­emy of H
­ uman Resource Development
Conclusion: HRD History Timeline
Reflection Questions
Introduction
The history of ­Human Resource Development (HRD) reveals that education,
training, and organ­ization development of all sorts are essentially the products
of social and economic conditions. Scott’s (1914) early characterization of education is still meaningful: “education is the attempt of a civilization to perpetuate what it believes to be most vital in itself” (73).
Training has a unique role in the history of the HRD profession. As you w
­ ill
read in this chapter, training—in the form of parent-­child or master-­apprentice
workplace learning models—­has existed throughout all recorded time. The history of HRD helps the reader understand (1) the origins of the HRD profession,
(2) the significant developments and events, and (3) the reason why the profession is as it now exists.
The Beginnings: Survival through ­Labor
and Learning
­ uman experience and the nature of HRD have passed through many stages
H
since the beginning of the ­human journey. Training in its most ­simple form was
found among our most primitive ancestors. The development of ­humans was
driven exclusively by the need to survive. When learning first involved making
­simple tools from wood, stone, and fibers, primitive ­humans knew nothing about
the productive use of fire and metals. Harnessing ­these ele­ments became critical to further development of the h
­ uman race.
The context of primitive education was ­limited to the ­family or tribe, and
education was an informal and often chaotic activity. It occurred through un-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 30
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
31
conscious imitation of the head of a f­ amily or group. Even as recently as the early
twentieth ­century, parents “become the one[s] who train . . . ​the younger generation in the formal conduct of life—in the proper way of d
­ oing t­ hings” (Monroe, 1907, 8). An essential feature of education was apparent even in this most
primitive form—­“the fitting of the child to his/her physical and social environment through the appropriation of the experience of previous generations” (1).
USE OF TOOLS AND MUTUAL COOPERATION
Eventually ­humans gained the ability to control fire for cooking food, smelting
metals, and the making of ­simple mechanical and agricultural tools. This allowed
­people to engage in crafts and undertake domestic activities previously impossible without basic tools. It also led to a proper division of ­labor where some pursued weaving, ­others became carpenters, still o
­ thers stone masons, and so on.
For the first time, p
­ eople began to rely on tools and each other to meet their
needs. Humankind’s pro­gress through the ages has been inextricably linked to
developing practical tools and securing the bonds of cooperation necessary for
survival. With ­these developments came a new form of education—­one characterized by conscious imitation rather than the unconscious imitation of ­earlier
education (Bennett, 1926). The transfer of skill from one person to another now
became a conscious pro­cess. Learning occurred through deliberate imitation of
examples provided by one who had achieved mastery of a par­tic­u­lar skill. Yet,
education followed no theory or system and had not yet become a rational pro­
cess. ­Those seeking a skill simply copied a model over and over ­until it could be
precisely reproduced.
APPRENTICESHIP METHOD
Apprenticeship has been a basic and per­sis­tent influence on the development of
workplace and is prob­ably the most impor­tant nonschool learning system. With
roots in the very beginning of recorded history, apprenticeship training from
parent to child and master to apprentice has been the most enduring of all methods for transferring knowledge and skill. Bennett (1926) observes that many
­people, even ­those from the more progressive nations, received no formal school­ ntil the nineteenth ­century. What education they acquired was through
ing u
some form of apprenticeship. This also included the professions such as law and
medicine.
Apprenticeship was a system for preparing the young to become expert
workers (Davis, 1978). The three stages of apprenticeship—­apprentice, journeyman, and master—­varied in length and the level of expertise developed. A young
person began training as an apprentice for about seven years ­under direction
of a master to achieve the highest level of expertise at a par­tic­u­lar vocation. The
master was expected to provide apprentices with occupational training and
the same moral, religious, and civic instruction that they would give their
own child.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 31
12/3/21 3:03 PM
32
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
1400–1800: The Re­nais­sance
Jumping ahead in time, the Re­nais­sance heralded a new era of scientific and
philosophical thinking. A continuous stream of social, po­liti­cal, and scientific
advances began to appear as g­ reat minds strug­gled with the practical and philosophical prob­lems of the day.
Several figures profoundly impacted historical developments, including advancements in education and training, during and a­ fter the Re­nais­sance. Four
such influential figures ­were Martin Luther, John Locke, Jean-­Jacques Rousseau,
and Johan Pestalozzi. The influences of ­these men are examined in this chapter
­because each made an essential and uniquely dif­fer­ent contribution to the development of training.
SECULAR EDUCATION FOR GIRLS AND BOYS
In addition to Martin Luther’s (1483–1546) criticism directed at the Roman Catholic Church, catalyzing the Protestant Reformation, he was also critical of the
education provided in monastic and ecclesiastical schools. He proposed that religion and the church should no longer dominate education. He felt that education should embrace both religious and secular domains and that educational
reform should come through the power of the state.
Luther’s vision of education included a remarkable notion for that period—­
that education be given to all ­people, not just the rich, and be available to girls
as well as boys. In his view, education should go beyond religious training to
emphasize the classics, mathe­matics, logic, m
­ usic, history, and science.
SENSORY LEARNING
John Locke (1632–1704) possessed a broad range of intellectual interests and
wrote several impor­tant works on many subjects. His two pieces on the philosophy and methods of education have had a lasting effect on the development of
training.
In his Essay Concerning ­Human Understanding, Locke formulated his theory of knowledge, emphasizing experience and the perception of the senses as
impor­tant bases of knowledge. ­Later known as empiricism, this epistemology
­shaped Locke’s ideas on what should constitute an ideal education. Locke firmly
believed that education should address the development of logical thinking and
preparation for practical life. Consequently, he wrote that education should include learning one or more manual trades and physical, moral, and intellectual
training.
EXPERIENCE, THE BEST TEACHER
The visionary ideas about education of Jean-­Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) appear to have grown out of his own life. In his early years, the restless, self-­
indulgent Rousseau moved from one work experience to another (far more
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 32
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
33
than was acceptable for the time). He was an engraver’s apprentice, a lackey, a
musician, a seminary student, a clerk, a private tutor, a m
­ usic copier, and an
author.
Rousseau firmly believed that experience is the best teacher and that education must be formed around the active experience of the young. His recognition of the value of training in educating youth marked the beginning of a new
era in education and an impor­tant contribution to the development of technical training.
MANUAL TRAINING
The contributions of Johan Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746–1827) furthered the movement from the old education of ­simple acquisition of knowledge to the evolving
notion of education as organic development. Pestalozzi has been called the ­father
of manual training. Pestalozzi came from a ­family of modest means and admitted that he was of no more than average intellectual ability. Yet, his contributions not only set a new course for education and training in Eu­rope but w
­ ere
among the strongest influences on the development of education and training
in the emerging American colonies as well.
Pestalozzi concerned himself with the nature of education as a ­whole, and
his ideas spanned the conceptual spectrum from educational theory and philosophy to institutional settings best suited to education and on to techniques
for teaching skills. Pestalozzi’s methods demanded the analy­sis of subject ­matter
into its component parts and the use of inductive learning methods by proceeding from ­simple to complex ele­ments to achieve mastery of the ­whole. In his
writing, Pestalozzi (1898) states, “­There are two ways of instructing; e­ ither we
go from words to ­things or from ­things to words. Mine is the second method.”
Apprenticeship in Colonial Amer­i­ca
Built on the extensive Eu­ro­pean tradition, the United States developed apprenticeship training that served a critical role in advancing individuals and the
economy.
EU­RO­PEAN INFLUENCE
The Eu­ro­pe­ans who came to s­ ettle North Amer­i­ca ­were ­people of piety and culture who had reaped the fruits of the Re­nais­sance and Reformation and respected the importance of education. Apprenticeship was the dominant educational institution of the time, as it had been for centuries, so the early colonists
in Amer­i­ca brought apprenticeship with them in much the same form as it existed in the m
­ other country of E
­ ngland. As Seybolt (1917) points out, however,
­because t­ here ­were no guild or craft organ­izations in the colonies through which
apprenticeships could be established, the scope of apprenticeships became
broader and ­were administered by municipal authorities. Although apprenticeships eventually became displaced by a system of schooling in the wake of the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 33
12/3/21 3:03 PM
34
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Industrial Revolution, early Americans expanded the role of apprenticeship as
the dominant method of acculturation and training of ­those who would build
the new nation.
In 1647, the beginning of what would become the American public school
system first appeared. Early Americans realized that not all parents and guardians could teach reading and writing, despite the requirement that all c­ hildren
be given this elementary education. As a result, the General Court of Mas­sa­
chu­setts ordered that ­every town of fifty or more homes recruit a teacher from
their district and pay the teacher’s wages. Thus began the system of ­free public
schools in the United States.
EARLY LEADER
Among early American leaders who influenced the development of American
education, Horace Mann (1796–1859) is singularly distinguished: “The first man
who fully understood the needs of the nation, and undertook to meet them in
large, practical ways, was Horace Mann, to whom American culture owes more
than to any other person. He was exactly the influence needed by the nation in
her hour of spiritual awakening” (Davidson, 1900, 246). Mann recognized the
needs of the poor and uneducated in the new nation and saw the vital role of
education.
Mann’s belief that education should develop one’s intellectual and practical
skills furthered practical training in the New World. He believed that “education should be a preparation for life, domestic, economic, social, and not merely
the acquisition of curious learning, elegant scholarship, or showy accomplishments. Its end should be the attainment of moral and social personality”
(Davidson, 1900, 251). Part of his contribution to the American educational
system was to positively influence the integration of practical and vocational
training within general education.
Industrial Era in Amer­i­ca
As Amer­i­ca left ­behind its colonial beginnings and entered the eigh­teenth
­century, it slowly shifted from an agrarian to an industrial economy. Like other
developing Western nations of the time, the United States underwent a traumatic
yet invigorating transition in the workplace from a period of almost total reliance on manual pro­cesses to an era of continuing industrialization. Unlike in
the Eu­ro­pean nations that had ­shaped its development, however, Amer­i­ca’s shift
to an industrial economy was accompanied by a permanent decline in apprenticeship training. Apprenticeship was displaced by several public and private institutions for work-­related training. ­These institutions became the basis for
many of the training arrangements we use ­today. This section examines the development of technical education and training in Amer­i­ca as it strug­gled to
become an industrialized nation.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 34
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
35
DECLINE OF APPRENTICESHIP
Before the onset of the industrial era in the ­later part of the nineteenth ­century,
the system of apprenticeship training that had served the nation so well in e­ arlier
times showed signs of weakness. B
­ ecause early apprenticeships in Amer­i­ca ­were
administered by local authorities and ­were not u
­ nder the strict regulation of craft
and merchant guilds as they ­were in ­England, apprenticeships gradually lost the
developmental purpose for which they had been established and w
­ ere becoming more exploitative of apprentices. The crucial changes in the workplace
brought by the Industrial Revolution required corresponding changes in the
preparation of workers.
TRAINING AND CORPORATION SCHOOLS
During the American colonial era, f­ ree public schools for elementary education
had been established. Secondary schools emerged a­ fter the founding of the nation’s first publicly supported 1821 high school in Boston. Yet, no means had
been devised to provide technical and industrial education to the masses. This
education was not seriously pursued ­until the late nineteenth c­ entury.
Corporation schools w
­ ere formal instruction programs sponsored by businesses and held on com­pany premises for their employees (Beatty, 1918). This
precursor of ­today’s company-­based training function was first developed in the
railroad industry in 1905 to improve the per­for­mance and efficiency of t­ hose
who worked in railroad maintenance shops. R. Hoe and Com­pany, a New York
City manufacturer of printing presses, first offered similar training in the eve­
nings for machinists (Bennett, 1926). Corporation schools—­also called factory
schools—­provided training in the skills and trades needed in a par­tic­u­lar industry and included instruction in mathe­matics, mechanical and freehand
drawing, and other practical skills required of workers. The concept of corporation schools caught on quickly as similar schools w
­ ere established around the
turn of the ­century by Westing­house, Baldwin Locomotive, General Electric,
International Harvester, Ford, Goodyear, and National Cash Register.
­England, France, and Rus­sia w
­ ere also dealing with changes brought on by
industrialization. All three countries had achieved some pro­gress in improving
their educational systems. ­After studying the Rus­sian system for providing technical training, American proponents of offering manual training in the schools
came to the basic and surprising realization that princi­ples involved in manual
skills could simply be put on the same educational plane as other school subjects (Bennett, 1937).
ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN TRAINING
Early support for work-­related training came from state legislatures. The success and growth of early private manual training schools permanently established ­these technical training schools as essential sources of skilled workers.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 35
12/3/21 3:03 PM
36
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
In addition, the demands of manufacturers, ­labor leaders, and the general
public for more of this instruction and more skilled workers increased. Responding to ­these increasingly vocal and better-­organized constituencies, state
legislatures funded technical training curricula within public education in
schools in several states.
Another significant step forward in establishing vocational training as a
component of public education was enacting the Smith–­Hughes Act in 1917. It
provided a permanent, annual appropriation of $7 million for industrial, agricultural, home economics, and teacher training within public education.
Twentieth-­Century Influences in Amer­i­ca
EARLY 1900S
The early 1900s marked a clear shift t­oward the idea that other entities would
need to offer work-­related training. As described ­earlier, corporation schools
­were sponsored as early as 1905 and ensured their employees w
­ ere equipped with
the skills necessary to perform (Swanson and Torraco, 1994).
Vocational associations grappled with a divisive issue from the beginning.
Two distinct camps could be identified within many vocational associations—­
one composed of primarily educators and one composed of men and ­women
from industry. In 1913, Alvin E. Dodd, then assistant secretary of the National
Society for the Promotion of Industrial Education, found that his philosophy
about vocational education was more aligned with t­ hose in industry than the
educators.
At a meeting in 1913, Dodd found that his desire for a dif­fer­ent approach
was shared by Channing R. Dooley of Standard Oil and J. Walter Dietz of Western Electric. The National Association of Corporation Schools was formed to
focus more on business issues and training needs. This organ­ization, increasingly focused on the needs of personnel, merged with the Industrial Relations
Association of Amer­i­ca in 1920. It fi­nally became the American Management
Association in 1923. Present-­day HRD emerged directly from this stream of
training consciousness.
WORLD WARS
The trauma of the First and Second World Wars and the rise of the American
­labor movement during t­ hese periods provided ample opportunity for training
and its leaders to emerge and become central in Amer­i­ca’s development.
Just four years a­ fter the founding of the National Association of Corporation Schools and at the onset of World War I, Channing Dooley was appointed
director of the War Department Committee for Education and Special Training. Dooley’s job was to develop materials for colleges to fill the army’s needs
for over one hundred trades. In 1917, Charles A. Allen was appointed head
of the Emergency Fleet Corporation of the United States Shipping Board, and
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 36
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
37
Michael J. Kane became his assistant. When the war began, t­ here was a desperate need to build ships quickly. The workforce needed to be expanded tenfold
and trained immediately by supervisors at the shipyards. In response, Allen
and Kane pioneered and ordered the now infamous four-­step method of training (discussed l­ater).
The four men mentioned previously—­Dooley, Dietz, Allen, and Kane, along
with Glenn Gardiner and Bill Conover—­used their war­time experiences to fundamentally shape the history of training before and during World War II when
the War Manpower Commission established the Training within Industry
(TWI) Ser­vice, naming Dooley as its leader.
World War II demanded the fast mobilization of resources and exorbitant
war­time production. Although many ­people ­were willing to work ­after the Depression, ­there was a significant need for training. TWI’s objectives ­were to help
contractors produce efficiently with lower costs and higher quality. Dooley
(1945a, 1945b) wrote in a retrospective of the war­time effort that TWI “is known
for the results of its programs—­Job Instruction, Job Methods, Job Relations, and
Program Development—­which have, we believe, permanently become part of
American industrial operations as accepted tools of management” (xi).
TWI was known for its elegant and straightforward way of training incredible numbers of p
­ eople. Each program had a system to support it: l­ imited steps,
keywords, subpoints, documentation/work methods, and supporting training
to obtain certification (Swanson and Torraco, 1994). TWI’s four programs fostered three key con­temporary ele­ments of HRD: per­for­mance, quality, and
­human relations.
TWI and Per­for­mance The philosophy undergirding the TWI Ser­vice was a
clear distinction between education and training. Dooley (1945a, 1945b) stated,
“Education is for rounding-­out of the individual and the good of society; it is
general, provides background, increases understanding. Training is for the good
of plant production—it is a way to solve production prob­lems through ­people;
it is specific and helps p
­ eople to acquire skill through the use of what they
learned” (17). The programs of TWI ­were closely linked to orga­nizational per­
for­mance. TWI “started with per­for­mance at the orga­nizational and pro­cess
­levels and ended with per­for­mance at the same levels” (Swanson and Torraco,
1994). The primary mea­sure of success was ­whether a TWI program helped production, efficiency, and cost-­effectiveness.
The Job Instruction Training Program (JIT) was created for first-­and
second-­line supervisors who would train most employees. The program’s focus
was to teach supervisors how to break down jobs into steps and how to instruct
using a derivative of the four-­step pro­cess introduced during World War I.
­Another program, the Job Safety Program (JST), was implemented to address
the crucial need for employees to be safe in the new, unfamiliar industrial
environment.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 37
12/3/21 3:03 PM
38
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
TWI and Quality TWI also pioneered when it addressed quality issues im-
peding per­for­mance. Two programs are notable. First, the Job Methods Training Program (JMT) provided a specific method for teaching employees how to
address production and quality prob­lems constructively. It encouraged employees to question details of job breakdowns and to develop and apply new techniques that work better.
Second, TWI partnered with General Motors in 1942 to create the Program
Development Method (PDM) (Swanson and Torraco, 1994, 33). This program
introduced a four-­step pro­cess designed to teach employees how to address quality prob­lems and implement improvements. The four steps ­were as follows:
•
•
•
•
Spot a production prob­lem.
Develop a specific plan.
Get the plan into action
Check results.
This 1942 method is strikingly similar to the “plan-­do-­study-­check-­act cycle”
that Edward Deming (1993) brought to the forefront in Japan during the 1950s
and in Amer­i­ca some thirty years ­later. ­These core quality princi­ples introduced
by TWI still provide a basis from which many in HRD implement their analyses and work.
TWI and H
­ uman Relations The TWI Ser­vice was also one of the first to ad-
dress h
­ uman relations issues as impor­tant aspects of production success. The
Job Relations Training Program (JRT) trained supervisors to establish good relations with their employees. JRT laid the necessary groundwork for the burgeoning of organ­ization development in companies during the 1950s. The TWI
effort quickly went beyond training and is seen by many as the origin of con­
temporary HRD and as a springboard for the ­human relations perspective of
the organ­ization development component of HRD. Much of the original TWI
report has recently been republished for the profession ­under the title Origins
of Con­temporary ­Human Resource Development (Swanson, 2001b).
Evolution of the Organ­ization Development
Component of HRD
The philosophy and methods of organ­ization development (OD) w
­ ere honed
­between 1940 and 1960. Many parallel developments occurred, including
(1) a shift to the ­human resources school of thought, (2) the growth of laboratory training, (3) the use of survey research and feedback, (4) an increased use
of action research (problem-­solving) techniques, (5) an acknowl­edgment of
­sociotechnical systems and quality of work life, and (6) a new emphasis on strategic change.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 38
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
39
SHIFT TO THE ­HUMAN RESOURCES SCHOOL OF THOUGHT
From the 1940s to the early 1950s, the primary way to think about and or­ga­
nize work and work environments was based on the h
­ uman relations model.
Developed mostly in response to serious concerns about the viability of traditional and bureaucratic organ­izations, the ­human relations model attempted to
move away from t­ hese classical assumptions and focused more heavi­ly on individuals’ identities, their needs, and how to facilitate stronger interpersonal communication and relationships. Leaders of the ­human relations school of thought
included Chester Bernard, Mary Parker Follett, Frederick Roethlisberger, and
Elton Mayo, who led the now infamous Hawthorne experiments that initially
focused on the quality of workplace lighting and its impact on worker productivity. They fi­nally concluded that productivity gains w
­ ere attributed to being
watched and being specially treated.
By the mid-­to-­late 1950s, it became increasingly clear that the h
­ uman relations model had not effectively impacted work environments. The h
­ uman resources school of thought (Rothwell, ­Sullivan, and McLean, 1995) emerged to
address some of its shortcomings. The h
­ uman resources model was firmly
rooted in humanism, “the key values of which include a firm belief in h
­ uman
rationality, ­human perfectibility through learning, and the importance of self-­
awareness” (17).
Leaders of humanism included Carl Rogers, who pioneered client-­centered
consulting; Abraham Maslow, who developed the needs hierarchy; Cyril Houle
and Malcolm Knowles, who focused on adult learners; and Douglas McGregor,
who developed the theory of X and Y leaders. Each of t­ hese men added to new
assumptions of management thought and continue to be the guideposts of current thinking in organ­ization development and HRD:
• Work is meaningful.
• Workers are motivated by meaningful, mutually set goals and
participation.
• Workers should be increasingly self-­directed, and this self-­control
­will improve efficiency and work satisfaction.
• Mangers are most effective when coaching, developing untapped
potential, and creating an environment where potential can be
fully utilized.
LABORATORY TRAINING
Laboratory training, or the T-­group, provided an early emphasis on group pro­
cesses and interactions. T-­groups ­were unstructured, small-­group sessions in
which participants shared experiences and learned from their interactions. The
first recorded T-­group implementation took place in 1946 u
­ nder direction of
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 39
12/3/21 3:03 PM
40
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Kurt Lewin, Kenneth Benne, Leland Bradford, and Ronald Lippit. Th
­ ese individuals are most well known for their involvement in founding the National
Training Laboratories (NTL) for applied behavioral science.
T-­groups ­were first used in industry in 1953 and 1954 when Douglas McGregor and Richard Beckhard took T-­groups out of the context of individual
development and applied them to the context of an organ­ization. This effort at
Union Carbide focused on the team as the unit of development and, interestingly enough, aimed to address the prob­lem of training transfer—an early in­ ere closely tied.
dication that personnel training and OD w
SURVEY RESEARCH AND FEEDBACK
Attitude surveys and data feedback have become essential tools in OD. In 1947,
­ ere just in their infancy when Rensis Likert pioneered the conhowever, they w
cept of survey-­guided development. This pro­cess entailed mea­sur­ing employees’ attitudes, providing feedback to participants, and stimulating joint planning
for improvement. The first climate survey at Detroit Edison in 1948 was used to
mea­sure management and employee attitudes. The data w
­ ere fed back using a
technique that Likert called an “interlocking chain of conferences”—­starting at
the highest level of management and flowing to successively lower levels.
Likert’s work was grounded in and resulted in a guiding philosophy of orga­
nizational systems. Ultimately, he believed that any system could be categorized based on feedback data into one of four types: exploitative-­authoritarian,
benevolent-­authoritative, consultative, and participative. He advocated creating
a participative organ­ization based on the use of influence, intrinsic rewards, and
two-­way communication (Rothwell et al., 1995).
ACTION RESEARCH (PROBLEM-­SOLVING) TECHNIQUES
Action research (actually a problem-­solving technique rather than a research
method), now acknowledged as the core method of OD, originated out of the
work of social scientists John Collier, Kurt Lewin, and William Whyte in the late
1940s. Their theory asserted that prob­lem solving must be closely linked to action
if orga­nizational members ­were to use it to manage change. Harwood Manufacturing Com­pany was the site of one of the first such studies, led by Lewin and
his students. Other contributors to furthering thinking ­behind action research
included Lester Coch, John French, and Edith Hamilton. Ultimately, the cyclical
nature of the action research problem-­solving method is still v­ iable—­requiring
data collection, analy­sis, planning and implementation, and evaluation.
TAVISTOCK SOCIOTECHNICAL SYSTEMS AND
QUALITY OF WORK LIFE
Also during the late 1940s to early 1950s, the Tavistock Clinic in G
­ reat Britain,
known for its work in ­family therapy, transferred its methods to the orga­
nizational setting. Tavistock researchers conducted a work redesign experiment
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 40
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
41
for coal mining teams experiencing difficulties a­ fter introducing new technologies. The key learning of their initial experiments was a new focus on social subsystems and p
­ eople—­people whose needs must be tended to during
times of change.
In the 1950s, Eric Trist and his colleagues at Tavistock extended the idea
of sociotechnical systems and undertook proj­ects related to productivity and
quality of work life. Their approach increasingly examined both the technical
and ­human sides of organ­izations and how they interrelated (Cummings and
Worley, 1993). The trend to develop interventions that more effectively integrated technology and p
­ eople spread throughout Eu­rope and to the United
States during the 1960s, where the approach tended to be more eclectic and
became increasingly popu­lar.
STRATEGIC CHANGE
Since 1960, much of the evolution of OD has focused on increasing the effectiveness of strategic change. Richard Beckhard’s use of open-­systems planning
was one of the first applications of strategic change methods. He proposed that
an organ­ization’s demand and response systems could be described and analyzed, the gaps reduced, and per­for­mance improved. This work represents a shift
in OD away from a sole focus on the individual—­and the supporting assumption that OD is completely mediated through individuals—to a more holistic
and open-­systems view of organ­izations. This shift continues t­ oday and is evidenced in key revelations stemming from strategic change work, including the
importance of leadership support, multilevel involvement, and the criticality of
alignment among orga­nizational strategy, structure, culture, and systems.
TRANSFORMATION OF CON­TEMPORARY
WORK ORGAN­IZATIONS
Organ­izations—­large and small, public or private, and in a range of business
sectors—­have been the primary twenty-­first-­century mediums through which
work is accomplished. The structure of con­temporary work organ­izations
changed fundamentally in the 1980s and 1990s due to globalization and information technology. Organ­izations became flatter and less hierarchical to reduce
bureaucracy, manage costs, and to be more responsive to markets. Organ­izations
or equivalent subsystems became smaller and leaner as man­ag­ers eliminated work
inefficiencies and duplication of effort.
A consequence of ­these emerging flatter, downsized systems is the need for
major shifts in the distribution of work tasks and roles among workers and the
need for fundamental organ­ization development. In a workplace once modeled
on narrow job definitions and a wide range of functional specialists, ­today’s
workplace is often characterized by increasingly sophisticated work methods
and the presence of relatively fewer workers. Narrow job definitions are giving
way to broader responsibilities and greater interdependence among workers.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 41
12/3/21 3:03 PM
42
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Jobs are being eliminated, combined, and reconfigured as organ­izations
­fundamentally rethink how work should be done. As orga­nizational and job
structures change, training for ­those who operate within such structures must
change.
Thus, the nature of con­temporary work has changed. Organ­ization development efforts underway in organ­izations to reduce costs, integrate technology
and work (not just in terms of labor-­saving technology), and expedite communication with customers and suppliers not only eliminate jobs throughout an
organ­ization but also increase the sophistication of work for ­those who remain.
­Today’s workers increasingly need to understand work operations as a w
­ hole,
rather than what used to be their specific tasks within it. Monitoring and maintaining the work system has become, in t­oday’s workplace, what operating a
single machine had been for mass-­production work. T
­ oday’s workers have to
make sense of what is happening in the workplace based on abstract rather than
physical cues. According to Zuboff (1988), this transformation of work involves
the development of “intellective” rather than “action-­centered” skills. Gone are
the days when prob­lem solving meant making a telephone call to management
or the maintenance department.
Flatter orga­nizational structures require employees to exercise more authority over a wider variety of tasks. ­Today’s work requires an increasingly holistic
perspective of the orga­nizational mission, strategy, structure, and attention to
the demands of both internal and external customers. Once the mainstay of traditional forms of work, procedural thinking has become subordinate to systems thinking for all workers, not just man­ag­ers.
An impor­tant ­factor under­lying the changing nature of con­temporary work
is a perceptible shortening of the half-­life of knowledge. New knowledge drives
the evolution of new work systems and technologies. The half-­life of knowledge
in technology-­intensive fields, such as engineering and health care, is now less
than four years.
Advanced technology, leaner orga­nizational structures, and an environment
of fewer resources and the ever-­changing demands of customers and government are power­ful ­factors that have reshaped organ­izations and fundamentally
changed the nature of work.
Management and Leadership Development
in the United States
In the past, HRD has largely focused on organ­ization development and personnel training and development aimed at workforce and supervisory workers,
while often ignoring management and leadership development (Miller, 1996;
Nadler and Nadler, 1989; Knowles, 1977; Ruona and Swanson, 1998; Swanson
and Torraco, 1994; Steinmetz, 1976).
Many specialty areas of HRD have developed over the years as separate entities, spurred by unique and in­de­pen­dent forces. Management and leadership
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 42
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
43
development (MLD) is one such entity. Man­ag­ers making decisions about MLD
of other man­ag­ers is worthy of separate consideration. Beyond MLD, other HRD
arenas with unique histories are also of interest. Examples include c­ areer roles
(e.g., nursing and general practice within medicine) and bodies of knowledge
(e.g., computer science). Each has its own HRD history.
Only in modern times have mainstream HRD and MLD have converged.
Consequently, t­ here has been ­little systematic attempt to study the history of
MLD. This section identifies the major periods or eras in MLD history.
When studying MLD, it is difficult to divorce the higher education component from the more traditional HRD components, since ­there are impor­tant interactions between them. The ­whole system of MLD providers include higher
education, university-­based MLD, corporate-­based training and development
programs, association activity, private training, and ­others. MLD programs are
designed for all levels of management, including what is often called executive
development, but exclude supervisory development. Supervisory development
is generally considered to be targeted t­oward persons supervising hourly or
nonprofessional-­level employees.
MLD can be thought of as any educational or developmental activity specifically designed to foster the professional growth and capability of persons in
or being prepared for management and executive roles in organ­izations. First,
it includes both formal educational activities and on-­the-­job type programs. As
we ­will see, the concept of MLD has changed significantly through the years
but included primarily more informal activities, though systematically planned
and designed, in the early years. MLD is more than just classroom activity, and
we must include all aspects of it.
SETTING THE STAGE: AMERICAN BUSINESS IN THE 1800S
American business prior to 1870 showed ­little resemblance to business ­after 1900
and certainly not to business ­today. Amer­i­ca was primarily an agrarian society
characterized by very local markets, small owner-­operated companies that w
­ ere
largely labor-­instead of capital-­intensive. Highly trained personnel ­were not
needed b
­ ecause business was not very complicated. Amer­i­ca was largely rural,
with only 11 ­percent of the population living in urban areas in 1840 (Chandler,
1959).
Early commercial schools bore l­ ittle resemblance to management and leadership development, yet, they ­were an impor­tant first step. Prior to this, business was taught through the apprenticeship method. The found­ers of ­these
schools believed that commercial subjects could be taught better and more efficiently by using a systematic classroom method than the old apprenticeship
method. This was a major innovation and laid the foundation for the modern
business school.
By 1900, the U.S. economy had been completely transformed. More firms
­were involved in making goods for industrial purposes than consumer goods.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 43
12/3/21 3:03 PM
44
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Most industries ­were dominated by a few large firms. The nation had changed
from a business to an industrial economy (Chandler, 1959).
A key outcome was that business began to need man­ag­ers—at least in the
modern sense of the word. As businesses grew larger, they also became bureaucratic, with decisions being made in large, hierarchical structures. This ­great new
organ­ization—­the large corporation—­required careful coordination and needed
­people who could accomplish this. Large companies also created many specialized jobs unlike the craft-­oriented small businesses. Specialists required man­
ag­ers to direct their activity. But t­ here w
­ ere no models or theories to guide
companies in learning how to run ­these huge organ­izations. The profession of
management was born, and the need for MLD began.
The first formal business schools ­were formed in this period. The first school
of business was established in 1881 at the University of Pennsylvania with a grant
from Joseph Wharton. The University of California followed in 1898 and New
York University and the University of Wisconsin in 1900. ­These schools recognized two key t­ hings: formal training was needed for business, and technical
training was not enough. While ­there was not much agreement on curricula,
they did realize that a breadth of outlook was needed, more akin to other types
of professional training. One can imagine much opposition in ­these universities since business was largely considered a trade at that time. The private
commercial schools continued to prosper in this period. In 1876, t­here w
­ ere
137 schools enrolling twenty-­five thousand students, and by 1890, they had grown
to enroll almost one hundred thousand students (Haynes and Jackson, 1935).
THE STRUG­GLE FOR PROFESSIONALIZATION
OF MANAGEMENT: 1900–1928
In 1912, Frederick Taylor published The Princi­ples of Scientific Management as
the culmination of years of work and study into a new approach to management
he began around 1900. Taylor is widely regarded as the f­ ather of American management thought and was the first to apply scientific princi­ples to the practice
­ thers had written about management before him,
of management. While many o
it was Taylor who first put forth a scientific theory and approach to management and the need to share it with man­ag­ers and leaders in organ­izations.
In 1913, the National Association of Corporate Schools was formed. As the
role of training broadened, the organ­ization changed its name in 1920 to the
National Association of Corporate Training. In 1922, that organ­ization merged
with the Industrial Relations Association of Amer­i­ca (formerly the National
­Association of Employment Man­ag­ers) to form the National Personnel Association. In 1923, this group changed its name to the American Management
Association (AMA). In 1924, the AMA absorbed the National Association of
Sales Man­ag­ers.
The AMA continued to be a leader in the field of MLD and provided much
of the early push to the field. Its principal mission was “to advance the under-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 44
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
45
standing, princi­ples, policies and practices of modern management and administration” (“Fifty Years of Management Education,” 5). Mary Parker Follett
played a major influence in the early stages of the organ­ization. In 1925, she
voiced the need “to apply scientific methods to ­those prob­lems of management
which involve h
­ uman relations” (“AMA Management Highlights,” 36). In 1926,
the organ­ization formed the Institute of Management “to promote scientific
methods in management and to provide a forum for interchange of information” (Black, 1979, 38).
Higher education in business also experienced tremendous growth during
this period. In 1900, t­ here ­were only four business schools. By 1913, ­there ­were
twenty-­five new business schools on college campuses, thirty-­seven more by
1918, and by 1925 a total of 182 business schools—­thanks largely to the influx
of veterans who needed training for jobs (Bossard and Dewhurst, 1931, 252). In
1916, the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools in Business was formed; by
1930, it had forty-­two member schools. Its mission was to provide accreditation
for schools and to set standards for curricula.
Management theory began to take a turn away from Taylor and scientific
management. In 1927, Elton Mayo became involved in a recently completed series of experiments at Western Electric’s Hawthorne plant begun in 1924.
Sponsored by the National Research Council of the National Acad­emy of Science, the experiments w
­ ere originally designed to determine the relationship
of illumination and individual productivity. While productivity went up dramatically, it was not as a result of the lighting. It was Mayo who suggested the
now-­famous Hawthorne effect of paying attention to workers as a likely explanation. The outcome of t­ hese experiments was a call for the development of a
new set of managerial skills: h
­ uman be­hav­ior and interpersonal skills. Technical skills would not be enough (Wren, 1979, p. 313).
DEPRESSION ERA: 1929–1939
One unfortunate result of much of the enormous growth in business during the
early part of the twentieth c­ entury was the G
­ reat Depression of 1929. Even with
the depressed economy, ­there ­were a few items relevant to HRD worth noting
during this period. The first university-­based executive or management development program was started at MIT’s Sloan School in 1931 with the help and
initiative of A. P. Sloan, chairman of General Motors Corporation. This program
was designed for a group of selected executives with eight to ten years of experience who w
­ ere released from their work for a year to attend. It was the forerunner of what would l­ater become a very impor­tant trend.
MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT BOOM: 1940–1953
This was a critical era for the development of MLD. During this period, business
thinking changed to accept management and leadership development as a necessary part of d
­ oing business. When World War II began in 1939, corporations
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 45
12/3/21 3:03 PM
46
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
needed man­ag­ers quickly, so they turned to MLD activities to fill that need. A
­ fter
the war, the successes with management training made many companies realize that management and leadership development activities should continue.
A significant new venture for university schools of business w
­ ere the nondegree management and executive development programs. ­These programs
­were largely residential and required the man­ag­er or executive to leave the
workplace for an extended period to return to school. In 1943, Harvard and
Stanford ­were asked by the U.S. War Office to form the War Production Retraining Course. This was a fifteen-­week course designed to retrain businessmen to manage the war production effort. By 1950, four such programs existed:
MIT, Harvard, the University of Chicago, and the University of Pittsburgh.
Another postwar phenomenon was the company-­based MLD program. The
Industrial Conference Board reported in 1935 that only 3.1 ­percent of over 2,400
companies surveyed had such programs, rising to only 5.2 ­percent of over 3,400
companies in 1946. By 1952, the American Management Association found that
30 ­percent or the companies surveyed had MLD programs in 1952. While their
sample was smaller and their definition a bit dif­fer­ent, the growth trend is clear
in this period and continued into the mid-1950s.
The Acad­emy of Management began formal operations in 1941 ­a fter five
years of discussions and meetings about the need for such a group (Wren,
1979, 380). In 1942, the American Society of Training Directors was or­ga­nized.
This organ­ization would become the American Society of Training and Development and was a latecomer to the MLD business. ­Later it ­adopted management and leadership development as a key part of its mission.
MANAGEMENT REFORM MOVEMENT: 1953–1970
As MLD became a necessary part of the management profession, p
­ eople in education and business began to take a close look at the quality of management
education and the body of management knowledge that existed. They ­were not
happy with what they found. Despite their growth, business schools in the 1950s
remained very similar to ­those in the 1920s.
One of the Ford Foundation initiatives was a comprehensive study of
business education that included recommendations for the ­f uture growth of
management education. Started in 1955, the study was conducted by Robert A.
Gordon and James E. Howell (1959). The final report is now one of the landmark works in the field of management education and development. The recommendations of this study and the Ford Foundation’s other efforts have
­shaped the field of MLD ever since. The report was critical of the vocationalism
and specialization prevalent in business schools of the time, in essence calling
for the transformation of business schools from vocational to professional
schools.
Along with the reform in business schools came a period of strong growth
for all aspects of MLD. Company-­based MLD programs experienced significant
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 46
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
47
growth. A 1955 AMA study found that 54 ­percent of the 460 companies it surveyed had some systematic plan, program, or method to facilitate the development of ­people in or for management responsibilities (Current Practice in the
Development of Management Personnel, 1955, 3). A 1958 survey showed that of
492 top companies, 90.5 ­percent engaged in managerial development activities,
with 84.8 ­percent of them conducting educational activity that required regular participation by management (Clark and Sloan, 1958, 14).
MODERN MANAGEMENT ERA: 1970–2000
The early part of the modern era was ­really an extension of the reform movement. It was a time of consolidating gains made and continuing the pro­gress
started in the late 1950s and early 1960s. It was a time of change, although not
the revolutionary change of the previous era. Business continued to change dramatically and became even more complicated. The explosion in information
technologies that began in the 1960s continued into the 1970s and reshaped the
way man­ag­ers approached their jobs. It simplified man­ag­ers’ jobs by giving them
new tools with which to manage, but it complicated them ­because it required
adapting to new technologies. The pace of technological change continues to
challenge the very under­pinnings of business and industry and the ability of
man­ag­ers to keep pace. Markets have become more complex and are now global
in scope. The economic, governmental, and social environments of business have
also grown more complex. The rise of the ser­vice economy and internet commerce has reshaped much of our thinking, and the workforce has grown increasingly diverse.
Beyond general expansion, this era saw the development and growth of the
nonuniversity-­, noncompany-­based MLD organ­ization. Porter and McKibbon
(1988) point out that t­ hese firms fall into several categories. First are the firms
whose primary business is offering MLD programs such as Wilson Learning,
The Forum Corp., and the nonprofit Center for Creative Leadership. A second
category includes firms whose primary business is something other than training but who provide programs as a piece of their business, such as Arthur D.
­Little, Inc., and ultimately take over the firms’ business from accounting to consulting. Nonprofit organ­izations offering management programs have also expanded. Fi­nally, a vast array of individual con­sul­tants offer programs as well.
The concept of continuing education and learning for man­ag­ers is now
firmly entrenched in corporate Amer­i­ca, although the methods, quantity, and
sources vary greatly. A study of 1,000 medium and large companies showed
that 90 ­percent used some type of formal MLD program (Johnson et al., 1988,
17). With the growth have come the critics. Two popu­lar books that question the
quality and integrity of both business schools and management con­sul­tants engaged in MLD are Gravy Training: Inside the Shadowy World Business of Business
Schools (Crainer and Dearlove, 1999) and The Witch Doctors: Making Sense of
the Management Gurus (Micklethwait and Wooldridge, 1996). The titles of ­these
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 47
12/3/21 3:03 PM
48
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
books challenge MLD in the twenty-­first c­ entury to be theoretically sound and
to demonstrate positive results.
Emergence of the HRD Research Community
The HRD profession was a very large field of practice with no university academic home ­until the late twentieth ­century. Prac­ti­tion­ers with university degrees came from many disciplines. Most w
­ ere from education, business,
psy­chol­ogy, and communication. For years, universities acknowledged HRD as
a ­career option for gradu­ates without presenting a defined curriculum or disciplinary base.
EARLY UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS
George Washington University
Leonard Nadler, who pop­u­lar­ized the use of the term ­human resource development beginning in 1969, and his academic home base of George Washington University (GWU), deserve special status in the history of the
discipline. GWU has had a large and dynamic HRD gradu­ate program in
which Nadler’s influence continued beyond his retirement. Specific program
features of the HRD consulting role and international HRD have a long tradition at GWU.
Bowling Green State University
In the early 1970s, Bowling Green State University (BGSU) in Ohio supported separate programs in training and development and organ­ization
development. The BGSU gradu­ate program, with a concentration in training and development, was headed by Richard A. Swanson, and the organ­
ization development gradu­ate program was headed by Glenn Varney.
Numerous innovative developments came out of BGSU for a number of
years despite the fact that both w
­ ere only master’s-­level programs.
ACAD­EMY OF ­HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
The history of the Acad­emy of ­Human Resource Development (AHRD) is relatively short and colorful. The acad­emy was founded on May 7, 1993, during a
passionate chartering conference. Numerous in­ter­est­ing events took place before and ­after the historic birth of AHRD. The chartering conference produced
about seventy-­five scholar-­members in 1993. Now t­ here are presently approximately one thousand scholar-­members.
In reporting the AHRD’s history, the first item to acknowledge is that HRD
has been a large field of practice dominated by practical techniques and reactive thinking. HRD is still a very young as an academic field. Thus, the role of
university-­sponsored research and scholarship in the profession has been l­ imited.
During the last twenty years of the twentieth c­ entury, a cadre of HRD scholars
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 48
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
49
seized opportunities to advance the status of research and scholarship in the
profession. They strug­gled to have research lead the profession’s practice. They
edited special issues journals from related disciplines on the topics of HRD,
training, and organ­ization development. They joined the research committees
of American Society for Training and Development (ASTD) and other practitioner socie­ties, contributed to HRD monographs, started HRD research columns in nonresearch journals, and in 1990 introduced the first HRD research
journal, the ­Human Resource Development Quarterly, ­under the leadership of
Richard A. Swanson, founding editor.
The unwieldy Professor’s Network of ASTD (most members w
­ ere vendors,
not professors) and the in­de­pen­dent and elitist University Council for Research
on HRD (fourteen doctoral degree-­granting institutions) provided incubators
for the AHRD. R. Wayne Pace (Brigham Young University) was the driving force
and founding president of AHRD. Karen E. Watkins (University of Texas) represented the Professor’s Network, Richard A. Swanson (University of Minnesota) represented the University Council for Research on HRD, and both Watkins
and Swanson became founding officers of the acad­emy along with Pace as they
moved away from their former organ­izations. The altruistic goal of seeking to
advance the profession through research and scholarship eased the realignment
of t­ hese two e­ arlier groups into a new and in­de­pen­dent acad­emy.
The vision of the acad­emy has been to lead the HRD profession through research. The stated mission is to be the premier global organ­ization focused on
the systematic study of HRD theories, pro­cesses, and practices; the dissemination of the scholarly findings; and the application of t­ hose findings. Furthermore,
the AHRD was designed to be a true community of scholars caring deeply about
advancing the scholarly under­pinnings of the profession and about supporting
one another in that journey.
AHRD, from its inception, was meant to be an international organ­ization.
Large involvement from a ­limited number of gradu­ate faculty and students outside the United States helped (e.g., the University of Twente ­under the leadership
of Professor Wim J. Nijhof). AHRD also established an alliance with the University Forum for HRD based in the United Kingdom that helped advance the HRD
international community of scholars and a cosponsorship of the ­Human Resource Development International ­under founding editor Monica M. Lee. Gary N.
McLean is credited with spearheading impor­tant efforts resulting in regional
international AHRD chapters and annual conferences around the world. The
history of the acad­emy is a litany of positive events and a cobweb of partnerships.
Many are highlighted in the concluding HRD History Timeline (below).
Conclusion: HRD History Timeline
Serving as the conclusion to this chapter, the following timeline is a selected list
of ideas, ­people, and developments of par­tic­u­lar interest to HRD. Clearly, this
timeline is neither exhaustive nor complete:
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 49
12/3/21 3:03 PM
50
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
1911
1912
1913
1914–1918
1914
1926
1933
1937
1937
1941–1945
1943
1944
1945
1946
1946
1947
1947
1949
1954
1956
1958
1958
1959
1959
1960
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 50
Frederick Taylor publishes The Princi­ples of Scientific
Management.
Society for the Promotion of Industrial Education (­later to
become the American Vocational Association) is established.
National Association of Corporate Schools (­later to become
the American Management Association) is founded.
World War I
Charles Allen develops and implements the four-­step job
instruction training (JIT) method as part of the war effort.
American Association for Adult Education or­ga­nized.
Elton Mayo publishes the Hawthorne Studies.
Dale Car­ne­gie publishes How to Win Friends and Influence
­People.
The National Association of Industrial Teacher Educators is
founded.
World War II
Abraham Maslow publishes A Theory of ­Human Motivation.
The American Society of Training Directors (­later to become
the American Society for Training and Development,
and then the Association for Talent Development) is founded.
Channing Dooley publishes Training-­within-­Industry Report:
1940–1945 (this massive World War II effort is the watershed
in the birthing of the con­temporary ­human resource development profession).
Kurt Lewin launches the Research Center for Group
Dynamics at MIT.
Tavistock Institute of ­Human Relations is founded.
National Training Laboratories is founded.
Renis Likert pioneers the concept of survey-­guided
development.
Eric Trist advances the idea of sociotechnical systems.
Peter F. Drucker publishes The Practice of Management.
K. E. Boulding publishes General Systems Theory:
The Skeleton of a Science.
B. F. Skinner builds the first teaching machine.
Norm Crowder invents branching programmed instruction.
Frederick Hertzberg et al. publish The Motivation to Work.
Donald Kirkpatrick publishes articles on the four-­level
evaluation model.
Douglas McGregor publishes The ­Human Side of the
Enterprise.
Training in Industry and Business magazine begins
publication (­later called Training).
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
1961
1962
1962
1964
1964
1964
1965
1968
1969
1970
1970
1972
1972
1972
1974
1978
1978
1983
1983
1987
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 51
51
Cyril O. Houle publishes The Inquiring Mind.
The National Society for Programmed Instruction (­later to
become the National Society for Per­for­mance and Improvement and then the International Society for Per­for­mance
Improvement) is founded.
Robert Mager publishes Preparing Instructional Objectives.
Gary S. Becker publishes ­Human Capital: A Theoretical and
Empirical Analy­sis, with Special Reference to Education.
The term h
­ uman resource development is first used by
Harbison and Myers, economists focused on developing
nations.
Robert Craig (ed.) publishes the first edition of the Training
and Development Handbook.
Robert M. Gagne publishes The Conditions of Learning.
The Organ­ization Development Institute is founded.
Leonard Nadler promotes the term ­human resource
development for the profession.
Malcolm Knowles publishes The Modern Practice of Adult
Education: From Pedagogy to Andragogy.
Leonard and Zeace Nadler publish Developing ­Human
Resources.
International Federation of Training and Development
Organ­izations (IFTDO) is founded in Geneva, Switzerland.
U.S. Military officially adopts the instructional systems
development (ISD) model.
Ontario Society for Training and Development publishes
Core Competencies for Training and Development.
­ uman
Avice M. Saint publishes Learning at Work: H
Resources and Orga­nizational Development.
Patrick Pinto and James Walker publish A Study of Professional Training and Development Roles and Competencies.
Thomas Gilbert publishes ­Human Competence: Engineering
Worthy Per­for­mance.
Patricia McLagan and Richard McCullough publish Models
for Excellence: The Conclusions and Recommendations of the
ASTD Training and Development Competency Study.
The Training and Development Research Center at the
University of Minnesota (­later named the H
­ uman Resource
Development Research Center) is founded.
The University Council for Research on ­Human Resource
Development (­later merged with the members of Professor’s
Network of ASTD to form the Acad­emy of H
­ uman Resource
Development in 1993) is founded.
12/3/21 3:03 PM
52
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
Per­for­mance Improvement Quarterly research journal begins
publication. William Coscarelli is the founding editor. It is
sponsored by the National Society for Per­for­mance and
Instruction (­later called the International Society for
Per­for­mance Improvement).
1990
­Human Resource Development Quarterly research journal
begins publication. Richard A. Swanson is the founding
editor (sponsored by the American Society for Training and
Development and cosponsored since 1997 with the Acad­emy
of H
­ uman Resource Development).
Peter M. Senge publishes The Fifth Discipline: The Art and
1990
Practice of the Learning Organ­ization.
Geary Rummler and Alan Brache publish Improving
1990
Per­for­mance: How to Manage the White Space on the
Orga­nizational Chart.
1992
Chris Argyris publishes On Orga­nizational Learning.
1990
The Acad­emy of H
­ uman Resources Development (India),
an acad­emy of prac­ti­tion­ers and scholars with a mission
of developing HRD professionals and focus on HRD
professionalism, is founded.
1993–­
The Acad­emy of H
­ uman Resource Development (AHRD), an
international acad­emy of HRD scholars, is founded. Wayne
Pace is the founding president.
Following presidents include: Karen E. Watkins, 1994;
Richard A. Swanson, 1996; Elwood F. Holton III, 1998;
Gary N. McLean, 2000; Gene Roth, 2002; Larry Dooley,
2004; Jerry W. Gilley, 2006; Michael (Lane) Morris, 2008;
Darlene Russ-­Eft, 2010; Darren Short, 2012; Ronald L.
Jacobs, 2014; Wendy Ruona, 2016; Julie Gedro, 2018; Laura
Bierema, 2020.
1993–­
Inducted into the HRD Scholar Hall of Fame sponsored by
the Acad­emy of H
­ uman Resource Development:
• 1993 Channing R. Dooley (World War II Training within
Industry Proj­ect)
• 1994 Malcolm S. Knowles (adult learning, andragogy)
• 1995 Lillian Gilbreth (­human aspect of management)
• 1996 Kurt Lewin (change theory)
• 1997 B. F. Skinner (teaching machines)
• 1998 Donald S. Super (­career development theory)
• 1999 Robert M. Gagne (conditions of learning)
• 2000 Gary S. Becker (­human capital theory)
• 2001 Leonard Nadler (foundations of HRD)
1989
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 52
12/3/21 3:03 PM
3. History of H
­ uman Resource Development
1995
1997
1997
1998
1999
1999
2002
2003
2005
2007
2008
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 53
53
• 2002 John C. Flanagan (critical Incident technique)
• 2004 Richard A. Swanson (research leadership in the
HRD profession)
• 2006 Gary N. McLean (international HRD research)
• 2013 Karen E. Watkins (learning vision for HRD)
• 2016 Darlene Russ-­Eft (program evaluation)
• 2017 Victoria J. Marsick (learning organ­ization))
• 2019 Ronald L. Jacobs (structured on-­the-­job training)
• 2020 Victoria J. Marsick (international HRD research)
• 2022 Monica Lee (Eu­ro­pean HRD research publications)
The University Forum for H
­ uman Resource Development
(based in the UK and ­later expanded to Eu­rope) is founded.
International Journal of Training and Development journal
begins publication. Paul Lewis is the founding editor
(published by Blackwell).
­Human Resource Development Research Handbook: Linking
Research and Practice is sponsored by AHRD and ASTD
(published by Berrett-­Koehler).
­Human Resource Development International research journal
begins publication. Monica M. Lee is the founding editor
(cosponsored by the University Forum for HRD and AHRD
and published by Routledge/Taylor and Francis).
Advances in Developing H
­ uman Resources scholarly topical
research to practice quarterly begins publication. Richard
A. Swanson is the founding editor (sponsored by the AHRD
and published by Berrett-­Koehler and then Sage).
AHRD publishes Standards in Ethics and Integrity u
­ nder the
leadership of Darlene Russ-­Eft.
H
­ uman Resource Development Review begins publication as
the theory quarterly of HRD. Elwood F. Holton III is the
founding editor (sponsored by the AHRD and published
by Sage).
Korean Association of H
­ uman Resource Development is
founded.
AHRD sponsors textbook titled Research in Organ­izations:
Foundations and Methods of Inquiry (published by
Berrett-­Koehler).
AHRD adopts HRD Academic Program Standards for
Excellence.
Paul B. Roberts produces the H
­ uman Resource Development
Directory of Academic Programs in the United States–2008
(sponsored by the University of Texas at Tyler).
12/3/21 3:03 PM
54
part i: introduction to ­human resource development
2014
2021
2022
Handbook of ­Human Resource Development, Neal Chalofsky,
Tomette Rocco & Michgael Lane, editors (published by
Pfeiffer).
­Human Resource Development, 6th ed., Jon Werner and
Randy Simone (published by Cengage).
­ uman Resource Development, 3rd ed.,
Foundations of H
Richard A. Swanson (published by Berrett-­Koehler).
Reflection Questions
1. Identify at least three discrete times in history, report on how ­human
beings ­were viewed during that time, and note the HRD implications.
2. Identify three HRD-­related historical times or events of interest to you,
explain why they are of interest, and what ­else you would like to know.
3. Why is the World War II Training within Industry (TWI) proj­ect so
impor­tant to HRD?
4. What unique role does the Acad­emy of H
­ uman Resource Development
play in the HRD profession, and what are some of its
accomplishments?
5. Identify two recurring themes in the history of HRD. Name and
describe them.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 54
12/3/21 3:03 PM
PART II
Theory and Philosophy
in ­Human Resource
Development
This section provides the impor­tant theoretical and philosophical foundations
of HRD. Both of ­these perspectives have generally been missing among HRD
professionals and are essential for understanding and advancing the field.
CHAPTERS
4 Role of Theory and Philosophy in ­Human Resource Development
5 Theory of ­Human Resource Development
6 Component Theories of ­Human Resource Development
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 55
12/3/21 3:03 PM
This page intentionally left blank
4
Role of Theory and
Philosophy in ­Human
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
• Importance of Theory and Theory Building
• Definition of Theory
• Theory Development Pro­cess
Recognizing the Theory Development Pro­cess as Research
Requirements of a Sound Theory
Philosophy and Theory Under­lying HRD
Philosophical Meta­phors for HRD Theory and Practice
Contributed by Karen E. Watkins and Adjit Bhattarai, University of Georgia
• Orga­nizational Prob­lem Solver
• Orga­nizational Change Agent/Interventionist or Helper
• Orga­nizational Designer
• Orga­nizational Empowerer/Meaning Maker
• Developer of ­Human Capital
• Summary
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
The early organ­ization development innovator and scholar, Kurt Lewin, presented an oft-­cited quote: “­There is nothing so practical as good theory (1951).”
It bears repeating. His description of practicality is in contrast to commonly held
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 57
12/3/21 3:03 PM
58
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
thoughts that theory is made of half-­baked ideas disconnected from the real
world. The truth is that a good theory is thorough and has been tested both intellectually and in practice. Lewin prevents us from misusing the word theory.
Sound theory helps direct the professional energies to models and techniques
that are effective and efficient. Sound theory also confronts celebrity professionals and infomercial con­sul­tants that riddle the profession. For example, to the
unsubstantiated promises of techniques for accelerated learning, buyers ­were
warned to beware that it d
­ oesn’t deliver on its promises (Torraco, 1992). For the
unfulfilled promise and premises of Kirkpatrick’s (1998) flawed four-­level evaluation model, Holton (1996b) warned the profession that, ­a fter five de­cades,
it still does not meet any of the criteria required of sound theories or practice.
Science writer Michael Shermer has spent a c­ areer debunking false and flimsy
ideas. He challenges prac­ti­tion­ers and participants to step back and ask themselves if the explanation of the phenomenon u
­ nder question is good enough. If
not, how can the science be assumed (Shermer, 2005)?
IMPORTANCE OF THEORY AND THEORY BUILDING
The HRD profession develops its core theories and understands that theory
building is a scholarly pro­cess, not soapbox oratory (Wang, GG, Doty, DH, and
Yang, S. 2021). Below are a few organ­izing thoughts about theory. Th
­ ese ideas
are impor­tant to highlight ­because some in HRD believe that it is not essential
to the profession to clearly specify its under­lying theory or even have one, for
that ­matter (McLean, 1998). An interpretation of this view of theory is that the
profession simply needs to have an ethical intent and situationally draw upon
as many theories as required to pursue its work. While prac­ti­tion­ers need many
microtheories in their toolkit, scholars of HRD generally seek an all-­encompassing
theory to define and guide the profession (Wang, Doty, and Yang, 2021).
One recent HRD core theory-­building effort expands the stage by noting
that the pre­sent Western theories “are inadequate to explain HRD phenomena
in many non-­western contexts.” They note that HRD in some nations supports
negative ­human outcomes and can embrace both positive and negative into their
theory (Wang, Doty, and Yang, 2021).
Theory is particularly impor­tant to a discipline that is emerging and growing (Chalofsky, 1990; Ruona, 2000; Torraco, 2005). Sound theory is not pontificating or forcefully marketing the latest fad. Instead, theory in an applied field
such as HRD is required to be both scholarly and successful in practice and can
be the basis of significant advances. Rhe­toric that negates theory or promotion
of the idea that theory is disconnected from practice does not come from ­those
who have rigorously applied sound theory to enhance practice.
DEFINITION OF THEORY
The following two definitions from HRD scholars capture the essence of theory and the challenge facing our profession:
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 58
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
59
• “A theory simply explains what a phenomenon is and how it works”
(Torraco, 1997, 115). Torraco’s definition poses the following questions: What is HRD, and how does it work?
• “Theory building is the pro­cess or recurring cycle by which coherent
descriptions, explanations, and repre­sen­ta­tions of observed or experienced phenomena are generated, verified, and refined” (Lynham,
2000b, 160). Lynham’s definition poses the following question: What
commitments must individuals, the HRD profession, and its infrastructure make to establish and sustain theory-­development research
in the HRD profession?
THEORY DEVELOPMENT PRO­CESS
Theory development can be thought of as an eternal journey for any discipline.
Yet, it is reasonable to assume that t­ here are points in the maturation of a field
of study that cause it to press theory development research to the forefront. The
contention is (1) that the demand for HRD theory is increasing, (2) that presently available understandings from practice have taken us about as far as we
can go, and (3) that what we do is too impor­tant to wallow in atheoretical
explanations.
Recognizing the Theory Development
Pro­cess as Research
When a scholar takes a serious look at the theory development research pro­
cess, it is quite intricate and rigorous. A book titled Theory Building in Applied
Disciplines (Swanson and Chermack, 2013) is recommended reading for all ­those
interested in HRD theory development. In addition, ­there are numerous ­earlier
benchmark theory-­practice publications. Workplace Learning: Debating the Five
Critical Questions of Theory and Practice, edited by Rowden (1996), and Systems
Theory Applied to H
­ uman Resource Development, edited by Gradous (1989), have
provided excellent contributions to the advancement of theory in HRD. Gradous’s
classic monograph uses systems theory as a springboard for thinking about
the theory of HRD with arguments for and against a unifying theory for HRD.
The perspectives in her monograph range from a call for focusing on system
outputs—­that is, being results-­driven versus activity-­driven (Dahl, 1989)—to
the consideration of field and intervention theory, the theory of work design,
critical theory, and ­human capital theory (Watkins, 1989). The idea of multiple theories that pay attention to p
­ eople, orga­nizational viability, and a systematic and systemic understanding of the context emerged in this monograph.
­These far-­ranging ideas are pre­sent in most theoretical debates about HRD.
Serious theory-­development methodologies are challenging to carry out
(Reynolds, 1971; Dubin, 1978; Cohen, 1991). Even comparatively ­simple theory-­
building tools and methods put forward require significant effort for the theory
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 59
12/3/21 3:03 PM
60
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
builder (e.g., Patterson, 1983; Storberg-­Walker, 2006; Corbin and Strauss, 2007).
The HRD profession needs to encourage and re­spect a full continuum of
theory-­building engagement. Examples are varied.
Seemingly elementary investigations into definitions and identifying the
range of thought within HRD can be impor­tant theory-­development stepping-­
stones. Specific examples include the following:
• “Commonly Held Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development”
(Weinberger, 1998). Weinberger charts the history and the evolving
definition of ­human resource development. Up to this point, this
basic information has been scattered throughout the lit­er­a­ture.
• “Operational Definitions of Expertise and Competence” (Herling,
2000). HRD methodically analyzes the lit­er­a­ture on knowledge,
competence, and expertise—­core concepts in HRD. The HRD
profession lacked clear scholarly lit­er­a­ture defining ­human
competence and expertise u
­ ntil Herling’s work.
• Organ­ization Development: An Analy­sis of the Definitions and
Dependent Variables (Egan, 2001). Similar to Weinberger, Egan
traces the definition of organ­ization development over time with the
added identification of declared outcomes.
• On the philosophical side, an example of theory research is An
Investigation into Core Beliefs Under­lying the Profession of H
­ uman
Resource Development (Ruona, 1999). This study investigates the
thought and value systems in the discipline of HRD. Within
her extensive findings, Ruona has determined that learning and
per­for­mance are the two dominant philosophical views among
HRD leaders.
• “Philosophical Foundations of HRD Practice” (Ruona and Roth,
2000) exposes core values in the field, while “Theoretical Assumptions Under­lying the Per­for­mance Paradigm of ­Human Resource
Development” (Holton, 2002) pushes to articulate the under­lying
assumptions related to the per­for­mance and learning paradigms and
their shared connection to learning.
It is impor­tant to recognize that each of t­hese early studies advances understanding of the HRD phenomenon.
Examples of straightforward theory-­building efforts on the part of HRD
­ thers
scholars include the following. Each one of t­ hese cited pieces and numerous o
deserve forums with the opportunity for reflection to advance the profession.
• Systems Theory Applied to ­Human Resource Development (Gradous,
1989) pre­sents an exploration of systems theory as foundational
to HRD.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 60
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
61
• “A Theory of Knowledge Management” (Torraco, 2000) helps
us think theoretically about the supportive systems required
of the phenomenon of knowledge management.
• “­Human Resource Development and its Under­lying Theory”
(Swanson, 2001) discusses the under­lying theory of HRD
when per­for­mance improvement is viewed as the desired
outcome.
• “The Mandate for Theory in Scenario Planning” (Chermack, 2002)
emphasizes the dynamic impact scenario planning can have on an
organ­ization’s preparedness for uncertain f­ utures.
• “The Evolution of Social Capital Theory” (Storberg, 2002) emphasizes the importance of social capital theory to HRD and its
impact on orga­nizational effectiveness.
• “Responsible Leadership for Per­for­mance: A Theoretical Model
and Hypotheses” (Lynham and Chermack, 2006) looks at leadership in the context of purpose rather than the ­limited lens of
leaders’ traits and be­hav­iors.
Requirements of a Sound Theory
Critics of HRD have chided many HRD prac­ti­tion­ers and commercial HRD
products as being atheoretical (Swanson, 1998c; Holton, 1996b). Atheoretical
means ­there is no thorough scholarly or scientific basis for the ideas and products
being promoted. Organ­izations seeking quick or magical solutions are vulnerable to the exaggerated promises of suppliers. Patterson (1983) has provided
the following criteria for assessing the theory that undergirds sound practice: (1) importance, (2) preciseness and clarity, (3) parsimony and simplicity,
(4) comprehensiveness, (5) operationality, (6) empirical validity or verifiability,
and (7) fruitfulness.
Reflective prac­ti­tion­ers and scholars want to know about the completeness
and integrity of ideas they adopt. Certainly, t­ here are always new ideas, and t­ hose
ideas generally deserve to be tried and tested. An ethical prob­lem arises when
unjustified claims are made in an attempt to market ­these ideas before they are
fully developed and assessed.
Philosophy and Theory Under­lying HRD
­ ere is tension in the academic world about the distinction between disciplines
Th
and fields of study. Some of the tension is rooted in history and tradition, some
with a singularity of focus in some fields, and some have to do with knowledge
apart from practice. The debates around academic “turf” contain many issues.
First, HRD is an old and established realm of practice but a relatively young academic field of study. While HRD continues to mature, the stage of maturation
varies within nations and between nations.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 61
12/3/21 3:03 PM
62
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
Most academic fields of study are applied (e.g., medicine, engineering, education, business, and communication) and draw upon multiple theories in articulating their disciplinary base. HRD is not alone. It is common for applied
disciplines to create specializations that, over time, come to outgrow their hosts
and break away as in­de­pen­dent disciplines. For example, university departments
of adult education and vocational education have historically supported HRD
in the United States. In the late 1990s, many of t­ hese HRD programs became
larger than their adult education and vocational education academic university
hosts and carried par­tic­u­lar emphases. A ­simple example would be a higher interest in self-­directed learning in programs from ­those nurtured in an adult
education department, performance-­based learning from ­those nurtured in a
vocational education department, and ­human capital development from ­those
nurtured in a ­human resource department.
Another point of confusion is that most disciplines are rooted in theories,
and some of ­those theories are shared by other fields. A major question is: What
core theories help define the HRD discipline? If psychological theory was determined to be one of them, note that HRD programs are hosted in colleges of
the arts, engineering, business, and education—­all draw upon some aspect of
psychological theory. What slice of psychological theory, and for what purpose,
are the questions that help select the specific psychological theories that help
frame the discipline? In that HRD has specific purposes, t­ hose purposes are instrumental in guiding the profession to core theories. Thoughtfully identifying
core component theories of HRD and their fusion is essential for advancing
HRD’s academic status (Swanson, 2007c).
Choosing core contributing theories is not a ­simple exercise. Take two theories often considered as foundational to HRD: systems and anthropological
theories. Systems theory is not as value-­laden as anthropology. Anthropologists
are generally committed to not disturbing or changing the culture they study.
In contrast, systems theory is almost always thinking about understanding the
system and the potential of improving it. Thus, it can be paradoxical to have
HRD ­people espouse anthropological views while intending to change the
­culture. This is a ­simple illustration of the missing logic that can occur when
theory development is bypassed. Given the nature and purpose of HRD,
easy arguments can be made that systems theory is core to HRD and that
­anthropology is secondary. Anthropology can provide impor­tant situational
methods and tools to be called upon as needed while never being core to the
theory and practice of HRD. Recently, HRD scholars have seriously entertained
social capital theory (Akdere and Roberts, 2008; Storberg, 2002; Tuttle, 2002).
By itself, social capital theory is particularly useful for the organ­ization development side of HRD. Yet, it could be argued that social capital theory, like
HRD, is a fusion of economic, psychological, and systems theories for its own
purposes.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 62
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
63
A second example of missing logic within HRD is seen when HRD professionals claim a w
­ hole systems view (of the world, the organ­ization, and the p
­ eople
in it) without having the rigorous systems theory and tools to match ­those claims.
Putting ­people into a guided group pro­cess and relying only on ­those interaction skills is inadequate for w
­ hole systems understanding. Such a l­imited view
would reduce the skill of the HRD professional to group interaction facilitation.
Theory has an enormous challenge and opportunity in the growing HRD
profession. Th
­ ere are concurrent philosophical questions: What is t­here?
­(ontology); How do you know? (epistemology), and Why should I? (ethics). The
following contribution by Dr. Karen Watkins, a noted HRD scholar, provides
philosophical meta­phors for thinking about HRD theory and practice.
Philosophical Metaphors for HRD Theory and Pratice
Contributed by Karen E. Watkins and Ajit Bhattarai, Univerity of Georgia
Theories from dif­fer­ent disciplines attempt to explain the universe, using the
tools and perspectives of that discipline. An interdisciplinary applied field like
HRD can thus be expected to make use of many dif­fer­ent theories. Alternative
philosophies for the role of ­human resource development call for dif­fer­ent theories. Five such philosophic meta­phors ­will be considered and are depicted in
­figure 4.1: The h
­ uman resource developer as orga­nizational prob­lem solver,
orga­nizational change agent/interventionist or helper, orga­nizational designer,
orga­nizational empowerer/meaning maker, and developer of h
­ uman capital.
ORGA­NIZATIONAL PROB­LEM SOLVER
For many years, the dominant image of the trainer was of a person who designs
instructional programs to respond to or­gan­i­za­tion­ally defined prob­lems. Training was primarily behavior-­oriented, in keeping with an emphasis on skills
training. Systems theory is a valuable tool for designing programs to respond
to defined prob­lems. It enables p
­ eople to attend to the w
­ hole and to classify and
define the parts of a system. Depending on how broadly they define the system,
they can think about the prob­lem in increasingly broad terms. From the individual level to the “­whole wide world environment,” systems are made up of the
same parts—­context, inputs, pro­cesses, outputs, and feedback loops. Th
­ ese parts
help clarify the ele­ments of a system, and they have definable characteristics that
can be tinkered with to produce alternative outputs. By increasing the number
of inputs, improving the pro­cesses that produce the outputs, or drawing
Nonpsychological
E
P
E
Nonpsychological
Person + Environment = Life Space
Figure 4.1: The Psychological Life Span
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 63
12/3/21 3:03 PM
64
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
r­ esources more effectively from the environment or context, we alter the cost
and effectiveness of outputs. ­Because systems theory has been so useful for
helping trainers think about the nature of the prob­lems they are trying to solve,
the theory has been widely favored. But t­ here are prob­lems with relying on it.
Systems theory is a useful diagnostic theory, but it does not help us decide
which parts are working and which are not. It is not normative, so t­ here is no
hint about an ideal solution to the pre­sent situation. Moreover, systems theory
focuses more on prob­lem solving than on prob­lem finding, yet the complex, turbulent environments in which organ­izations find themselves ­today demand
much greater emphasis on the problem-­identification phase of the problem-­
solving pro­cess.
Systems theory grew out of the recognition that to solve the world’s prob­
lems, we need models that are more holistic than analytic, as ­were ­those in ­favor
previously. Greenman (1978) suggested that efficient system models help p
­ eople
and organ­izations maintain purposeful, goal-­directed be­hav­ior. He pointed out
­there are inherent dilemmas in using systems models, such as the dilemma of
oversimplifying complex environments or the dilemma of idealism versus
realism.
Systems theory has evolved considerably since the early work of von Bertalanffy (1968), who described systems as a complex of interacting ele­ments that
are open to influence from the environment. They are in continual evolution
and they evolve through emergence. This quality of emergence is also a hallmark of complex adaptive systems that, due to their sensitivity to initial conditions and their location at the edge of chaos, focus more on adaptation and
transformation versus maintenance of system balance. Complex adaptive systems are often unpredictable, emerging as they do out of complexity and chaos.
What makes them unique is that they are self-­organizing, adapting as they go
to the situation they found and creating new entities that fit their complex environment. From the point of view of h
­ uman resource developers, such systems
require very dif­fer­ent responses.
Senge (1987) hypothesizes that managerial learning pro­cesses ­will be more
effective if they result from a systemic and dynamic perspective or worldview.
He concludes that the task of HRD professions is to map, challenge, and
improve existing ­mental models. The systems approach, when conceptualized
broadly, is a useful model for addressing short-­term perspectives, truncated
problem-­solving pro­cesses, or l­imited worldviews. Indeed, system thinking is
the core of the art and practice of creating a learning organ­ization (Senge, 1990,
2006).
B
­ ecause systems theory does not include even an implicit normative model,
it is often coupled with other theories of orga­nizational change or effectiveness
to enable decision makers to move from diagnosing prob­lems in a system to prescribing action. The following philosophical meta­phors are often used in concert with systems theory.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 64
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
65
ORGA­NIZATIONAL CHANGE AGENT/
INTERVENTIONIST OR HELPER
Many would argue the most compelling meta­phor for HRD is that of the orga­
nizational change agent or helper (see Mink & Watkins, 1981; Schein, 2010). In
this conception, h
­ uman resource developers help p
­ eople and organ­izations
change. To do this, they need a theory of how ­human beings and groups are led
to act as they do and what interventions might influence them to act differently.
To start at the beginning, we must introduce Kurt Lewin, the f­ather of orga­
nizational change theory.
Lewin’s field theory is a comprehensive depiction of h
­ uman be­hav­ior. First,
Freud gave us a theory to help us understand the importance of personal history. Then ­there was Lewin, who helped us understand the group, especially as
a means of understanding ­people (Argyris, 1952). Freud and Lewin remain two of
the most influential thinkers in psy­chol­ogy. Lewin developed field theory out of
the field concept in physics—­the study of electromagnetic fields—­which eventually led to Einstein’s theory of relativity. The first psychologists to use field theory ­were the Gestalt psychologists, who believed the way an object is perceived is
determined by the context in which it is embedded. The relationship between
the parts of that perceptual field is more impor­tant than the characteristics
of ­those separate parts (Hall and Lindzey, 1970). Lewin, who was associated
with ­these early Gestalt psychologists while at the University of Berlin, developed
field theory to represent psychological real­ity. He had three major premises:
Be­hav­ior is a function of the field that exists at the time the be­hav­ior
occurs. Lewin (1936) expressed this in an equation B = f (P,E), or be­hav­
ior (B) is a function (f) of the interaction between a person (P) and
their psychological environment (E).
To amplify the first premise, Lewin termed the environment as the person
perceives and organizes it, the psychological field, or the life space. The life space
was made up of the person and their environment. ­These parts ­were dynamically interrelated and held in equilibrium, with changes in any f­ actor affecting
the w
­ hole just as in an electromagnetic field. Field theorists believed a field not
only surrounds the individual, but it also combines or overlaps with ­others to
make up the social field (Argyris, 1952). Thus, by studying the organ­ization in
the individual, we can know the organ­ization.
Lewin sought to understand the psychological field with enough rigor to represent it mathematically. He developed a new mathematic to help him represent psychological real­ity. Using topology, he could mathematically depict the
connectedness of regions in the life space. Such concepts as Karl Weick’s (1976)
loose and tight coupling and the idea of having no permeable bound­aries for
the self, illustrate ways we have conceptualized the degree of connectedness between regions. Although that degree of connectedness is more psychological
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 65
12/3/21 3:03 PM
66
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
than spatial, it is nevertheless clear and observable and may be represented
mathematically.
Lewin developed “hodology,” or a mathematic of path, to express psychological distance and direction. Lewin’s concern was for power­ful, scientific discourse, and the language of mathe­matics was considered the most power­ful. He
chose the mathe­matics of spatial relationships to explain the person in their life
space. He depicted the person as a circle within a larger circle, much like the
boy in a b
­ ubble. Thus, p
­ eople have bound­aries that differentiate them from each
other and their environment. Yet, they are included in a larger area or context,
which also defines who they are. Bordering the entire life space is a foreign hull,
which Lewin described as made up of all the data to which a person is not now
attending but which is nevertheless part of their environment (Hall and Lindzey, 1970).
By varying the thickness of the circle around P, we can indicate a person’s
accessibility or inaccessibility. Lewin divided the life space into regions based
on relevant psychological facts at any given moment. ­Those relevant to the person are needs; ­those relevant to the environment are valences. Needs are a system in a state of tension, or psychological energy, directed t­ oward the system’s
bound­aries (Argyris, 1952). Needs are directed t­ oward goals—­regions in the life
space that are attractive to the person or, in other words, have a positive valence.
­Here the analogy seems clear. Lewin said t­ here might be barriers in the life space
that create re­sis­tance to goal attainment, and ­these barriers may be social, physical, or psychological. The clarity with which a person perceives the field regarding structure, amount of differentiation, and relationships between regions
is the cognitive structure. The regions of the personality are or­ga­nized in definite relationships to each other; this arrangement is called the psychological
structure.
Force in the psychological field is the tendency t­ oward movement in p
­ eople
or groups. It is the cause of change. It is a vector with direction and magnitude
or size. ­Every force in one direction has its opposite, so the direction of movement ­will depend on the strength of a given force. A force field is a constellation of forces. H
­ uman resource developers commonly use force-­field analy­sis
to analyze conflict situations, prob­lem solve, or identify change strategies (Ford
and Lippitt, 1976). It consists of analyzing the forces promoting and inhibiting
change and determining the strength of each of ­those forces, followed by developing strategies to reduce the power of the restraining forces and testing ­those
strategies in action.
Lewin’s theory can also be viewed in terms of adult development. Adults,
he said, have more regions in their personality and are thus more differentiated
than c­ hildren. The bound­aries between regions of the adult are less permeable,
making adults not only more rigid but also less affected in one region by frustrations in another. In contrast, the child who wants an apple and c­ an’t have it
­will find his frustration spreads to his play, his ability to concentrate, and so on.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 66
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
67
Long periods of frustration may produce de-­differentiation in adults. For example, when workers are underutilized, their be­hav­ior may deteriorate in all areas of their lives.
The social field is made up of the group life space and may contain many
subgroups or regions. The group has its own unique properties, both structural
(the degrees of differentiation, stratification, and unity, as well as the type of
organ­ization or social hierarchy) and dynamic (group goals, ideal goals, style
of living, and psychological and social climate) (Argyris, 1952).
Most ­people are part of many groups. Often ­these groups create overlapping
situations for p
­ eople. Chris Argyris used the example of a foreman who is both
part of the worker group and part of the management group. The degree of consonance, or similarity in values, norms, and goals between the groups, ­will increase or decrease overlap, valence or desirability of that overlap, and nature of
the barriers between the groups (Argyris, 1952). A more precise understanding
of the nature of groups, how to manage intergroup conflicts, and the psychological real­ity internalized by individuals as members of groups grew out of
Lewin’s work. Fundamentally, his work is about how ­people and groups change.
­People change when their context, social field, or situation changes, when they
have a goal or valence to work t­ oward, when restraining forces are dampened,
when they have permeable bound­aries that open them to influence, and when a
path opens up to them.
Fi­nally, ­people vary in terms of the relative accessibility of vari­ous regions
in their life spaces. This concept is defined as their space of ­free movement.
A person may view a region negatively or may have a barrier imposed around a
region. In ­either case, the movement ­toward personal goals ­will be impeded. For
example, adults who have difficulty playing have l­ imited their space of ­free movement. Also, in the case of a foreman in a newly ­unionized com­pany, the ­union
­will circumscribe the foreman’s ability to hire, fire, and work directly with the
workers. Psychologically, the foreman’s space of f­ ree movement also w
­ ill be circumscribed. So another way to encourage change is to increase individuals’
space of ­free movement to create greater autonomy.
Perhaps the most significant aspect of field theory is that it does not purport to be or explain objective real­ity but rather explain a person’s psychological real­ity, which is what that person perceives real­ity to be. But Lewin did not
develop his theory only to explain ­human be­hav­ior at an abstract level. Like most
­human resource developers, he was interested in observing t­ hese abstract concepts at work at the practical level. He believed one had to have a broad enough
theory to encompass the multifaceted nature of h
­ uman action, and the way to
test that theory was through a pro­cess called action research.
Action research can be thought of as a series of successive approximations.
Interventions are developed while looking at the w
­ hole (at the individual level,
at the life space, at the orga­nizational level, and at the social field). Interventions
are made and their effects studied. They are followed by new interventions, which
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 67
12/3/21 3:03 PM
68
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
are developed upon reflection of the previous effects on the ­whole. Lewin depicted movement from a pre­sent state to the desired state through action and
reflection as a pro­cess of unfreezing, changing, and refreezing.
Lewin’s concepts ­w ill not lead to ­simple prescriptions or step-­by-­step instructions for h
­ uman resource developers wondering what to do on Monday.
Still, they do bring into sharper focus the architectural structure of ­human and
orga­nizational relationships in a way that permits a rich analy­sis of orga­
nizational life and a win­dow into the psy­chol­ogy of change.
The work of Chris Argyris, who referred to himself as one of Lewin’s last
students (though he only attended one public lecture by Lewin), furthers our
understanding of how to use field theory in orga­nizational change efforts. He
defined intervention as entering “into an ongoing system of relationship, to come
between or among persons, groups, or objects for the purpose of helping them”
(Argyris, 1970, 15). In field-­theory terms, to intervene is to interrupt the forces
in the life space in such a way as to disrupt the quasi-­stationary equilibrium.
Argyris emphasized that the system exists in­de­pen­dently of the intervenor.
Despite the interdependencies that develop between the client system and the
intervenor, the intervenor should focus on how to maintain or increase the autonomy of the client system, how to differentiate even more clearly the bound­
aries between the client system and the intervenor, and how to conceptualize
and define the client system’s health, in­de­pen­dent of the intervenor. The client
must be the system as a w
­ hole regardless of where one initially begins to work.
Interventions must, over time, provide all members with opportunities to enhance their competence and effectiveness (Argyris, 1970). ­Because of the ethical implications of tinkering with a person’s or an organ­ization’s life space, the
intervenor’s primary tasks are to seek valid information, provide ­free and informed choice, and encourage the client’s internal commitment to the choices
made in the interventions.
As HRD prac­ti­tion­ers, our theories of practice usually contain intervention
theories—­theories of action aimed at increasing our effectiveness (Argyris and
Schon, 1982). Argyris developed a normative theory of intervention. Having observed repeated patterns in p
­ eople’s theories of practice, he identified the pattern most commonly found in ­people’s ­actual practice as a control orientation.
In contrast to this pattern is a learning-­oriented intervention theory that encapsulates Argyris’s prescription for effective intervention. ­Because ­these theories are primarily tacit, we need to reflect critically on what we do (rather than
focus mainly on what we intend) to examine and test our assumptions about
what ­causes us to be effective.
Viewed from the perspective of field theory, Argyris can be seen to have defined the intervenor-­client relationship in a way that minimizes the potential
conflict in an overlapping situation (or social field) to decrease attempts to control ­others and to permit learning to occur by increasing space of f­ree movement. His primary tasks for intervenors are designed to minimize perceptual
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 68
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
69
barriers in the forms of defensiveness, negative attributions about the intervenors’ motives, and other self-­protective responses that limit space of ­free movement and subsequent learning. By emphasizing the need for shared meaning
between client and intervenor about goals and the personal causal responsibility of the client for actions and choices, Argyris hoped to increase the consonance between the two overlapping situations.
Action science (Argyris, Putnam, and Smith, 1985) is defined as “an inquiry
into how ­human beings design and implement action in relation to one another.”
It has three key features:
• Empirically disconfirmable propositions that are or­ga­nized into
a theory
• Knowledge that ­human beings can implement in an action context
• Alternatives to the status quo that both illuminate what exists and
inform fundamental change, in light of values freely chosen by
social actors
­ ese three propositions have traveled far from Lewin’s three key tenets.
Th
Like Lewin, Argyris believed ­human action results from the subjective ­human
perception that occurs within a behavioral world or a life space. Both agreed
this knowledge of the perceptual world could inform and reform action. Lewin
believed that for adults, education was most often reeducation, a pro­cess of
­unfreezing that begins with a disconfirmation of one’s current beliefs or perceptions of real­ity, which leads to anxiety or guilt and fi­nally to a search for
psychological safety. The critical theory that ­people change due to an internal
critique in which they perceive that their action conflicts with their values has
been refined in Argyris’s concept of reeducation.
Argyris described reeducation as a pro­cess of disconfirmation based on internal critique, which leads to a sense of personal causal responsibility (as in,
“I produced this mismatch—­this action that conflicts with my values”), which
can then lead to psychological success or congruence between one’s internal
­critique and the external feedback one receives. Argyris noted that p
­ eople and
organ­izations develop elaborate defensive routines to deny that ­these mismatches occur and to save face. Only by interrupting ­those defensive routines
­ eople and organ­izations experience psychological success.
­will p
In both Lewin’s and Argyris’s work, the emphasis is on understanding
­people, especially in their social context. They offer not a technical prescription
of action for change agents but instead a rich conceptual framework for action
in any change situation.
ORGA­NIZATIONAL DESIGNER
The third meta­phor for HRD is that of an orga­nizational designer. Orga­nizational
design is the pro­cess of first diagnosing and then selecting the structure and
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 69
12/3/21 3:03 PM
70
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
formal system of communication, authority, and responsibility to achieve orga­
nizational goals. Orga­nizational designers attend to environmental flux, strategic
choices, and the uncertainty or certainty of tasks or technology (Hellriegel,
Slocum, and Woodman, 1986). ­People who work from this conception see a
clear connection between the structure of work and work organ­izations and
the development of the organ­ization’s h
­ uman resources. A foundational theory
for students of organ­ization design is Herb Simon’s administrative decision-­
making theory.
Simon (1965) theorized individuals have bounded rationality that leads to satisfaction in decision making. Given the quantity of information we deal with, we
need to find bound­aries to make rational decisions. We may use heuristics or
rules of thumb, which, experience suggests, usually lead to acceptable solutions.
Still, heuristics may limit the search for answers, especially in large, complex prob­
lem spaces (note the Lewinian image). In contrast, algorithms are more rigorous,
systematic procedures. One goal of management science is to discover more algorithms by which man­ag­ers may make more consistently effective decisions.
To meet this goal, we need to have a concept of the ele­ments that make up
decision-­making activity. The typical response of man­ag­ers to stimuli is a program, the fundamental ele­ment of Simon’s theory. A program has basic parts:
•
•
•
•
Stimuli—­the information that evokes a program
Inputs—­both facts and values
Content—­a series of execution steps
Outputs
­ ere are programmed and unprogrammed activities. A single apparent
Th
stimulus prompts a programmed activity. An unprogrammed activity is evoked
when ­there is no tried-­and-­true method for h
­ andling the stimulus, e­ ither b
­ ecause
it is a new situation, its nature is elusive and complex, or ­because it is so impor­
tant that it deserves a customized response. Unprogrammed activity has three
stages of individual activity, and each stage is so rich that the stage itself has
theories. The stages are as follows:
• Intelligence activity—­searching the environment for conditions
calling for a decision
• Design activity—­inventing, developing, and analyzing a course of
action
• Choice activity—­selecting a course of action from ­those available
For intelligence activity, theorists have explored the differences in prob­lem
framing between novices and experts. Schon (1983) found that experts frame
prob­lems through a kind of artistry that defies routinization, whereas novices
follow more of a technical, by-­the-­numbers pro­cess. Jaques (1985) suggested that
individuals vary in cognitive complexity, or work capacity. Work capacity is the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 70
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
71
longest time one can plan a proj­ect or work without the need for feedback. This
variable, Jaques said, is a given in individuals, like their height, and it varies
enormously. Most p
­ eople have a work capacity between three months and one
year. A few scientists, politicians, and leaders have work capacities that exceed
their lifetimes; they are designing new worlds. ­People with l­imited work
­capacities cannot fall back far enough to view a prob­lem with a wide-­angle lens
nor can they conceive long-­term solutions or parallel implications. Thus, they
are ­limited in the scope of work they can design.
• Design activity has also been studied extensively. We see design as
having both a conceptual and aesthetic quality, w
­ hether we conceive
of it in any of the following ways:
• In the dictionary sense, as in conceiving an idea or a form, planning and shaping a structure, using tools and materials creatively,
and making something useful
• In the broader context used by Simon, as in converting ­actual to
preferred situations
• Or following C. West Churchman’s (1971) notion that design is
occurring whenever we consciously attempt to change ourselves and
our environment to improve the quality of our lives (vii)
Churchman (1971) said design is “thinking be­hav­ior which conceptually selects among a set of alternatives in order to figure out which alternative leads to
the desired goals or set of goals” (5). Schon (1983, 1987) understood design as a
pro­cess of prob­lem framing or prob­lem setting in which the artistry of expert
prac­ti­tion­ers is a “reflective conversation with a situation,” which may lead to a
reframing of the situation and thence to an architectural plan or a therapeutic
intervention. Pfeiffer and Jones (1973) described the design pro­cess in training
as dependent on four considerations:
•
•
•
•
The par­ameters of the situation (time, place, resources, staff, ­etc.)
The skill needed to design
The components to be designed
Outcome criteria, which are defined in terms of client needs
­Those considerations ­w ill be influenced greatly by the conceptual skill
(thinking be­hav­ior) and the designer’s design expertise (artistry). Design is artistic ­because we must create a new artifact, plan, or training program in ­these
nonroutine, unprogrammed activities.
Most of what ­human resource developers do is unprogrammed activity.
Orga­nizational design has emerged as a distinct field within the study of
organ­izations. Galbraith (1974) noted “the ability of the organ­ization to successfully utilize coordination by goal setting, hierarchy, and rules depends on
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 71
12/3/21 3:03 PM
72
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
the combination of the frequency of exceptions and the capacity of the hierarchy to ­handle them” (29).
Orga­nizational design was thus the creation of responses to uncertainty,
which he said could be done ­either by:
• Reducing the need for information pro­cessing through creating slack
resources or self-­contained tasks
• Increasing the organ­ization’s capacity to pro­cess information
through investment in vertical information systems or the creation
of lateral relationships
Lawrence and Lorsch (1969) focused on the design dimensions of differentiation and integration as primary considerations in designing orga­nizational
structures. They argue that one can develop an organ­ization by creating more
effective structures. This is a theme Jaques echoes in his organ­ization development work on requisite structures (Jaques, 1989).
Brown and Wyatt (2010) offer another theory of design for social innovation, design thinking: “Design thinking relies on our ability to be intuitive, to
recognize patterns, to construct ideas that have emotional meaning as well as
being functional, and to express ourselves in media other than words or symbols” (30). Many in HRD teach design thinking to leaders and organ­ization
members to encourage innovation, but it is also a power­ful approach to designing learning and development. Brown and Wyatt use Lewinian language to describe the pro­cess:
The design thinking pro­cess is best thought of as a system of overlapping spaces rather than a sequence of orderly steps. ­There are three
spaces to keep in mind: inspiration, ideation, and implementation. Think
of inspiration as the prob­lem or opportunity that motivates the search
for solutions; ideation as the pro­cess of generating, developing, and testing ideas; and implementation as the path that leads from the proj­ect
stage into ­people’s lives (30).
Organ­izations increase productivity by increasing the level of routinization.
Thus, a major task for ­human resource developers is to help man­ag­ers design
routine responses for nonroutine, unprogrammed activities. ­There are many
ways to do this—­from designing a learning program for training machine operators to use a new machine to designing strategic systems for monitoring unstable or unpredictable pro­cesses. Design thinking moves from ­human resource
and organ­ization developers helping to develop systems to teaching ­others the
very pro­cess of design itself.
ORGA­NIZATIONAL EMPOWERER/MEANING MAKER
Theorists who embrace this meta­phor argue for a “socially conscious HRD that
problematizes its precepts by challenging the commodification of employees,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 72
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
73
involving multiple stakeholders, contesting the nature of power relations, pursuing wide-­ranging goals (not just profit), while providing alternative, non-­
oppressive, holistic models for cultivating development in work contexts”
(Bierema, 2010, xiv). They often view the ­people working in organ­izations as repressed and disenfranchised by the performative focus of organ­izations and
traditional HRD practices. Dif­fer­ent forms of critical theory influence ­t hese
HRD theorists. Although ­there are dif­fer­ent interpretations of what critical theory is, and critical theorists draw upon a diverse range of philosophical perspectives, critical theories aim to foster insight and produce practices that are
inherently emancipatory in that they help p
­ eople f­ ree themselves from self-­
imposed, orga­nizational, and societal coercion. Over the years, Critical HRD
scholars have theorized about a variety of issues: critical race theory (CRT) (Bernier and Rocco 2003); critical reflection and reflexivity in learning (Cunliffe, 2009;
Lawless, Sambrook, and Stewart, 2012; Vince and Reynolds, 2009); ethics (Hatcher
and Lee, 2003); ethnicity (Byrd, 2008; Sims, 2009, 2010); feminist critiques
(Bierema, 2002, 2009; Bierema and Cseh, 2003); and identity construction, including lesbian, gay, and transgender perspectives (Collins, 2012; Collins and Callahan, 2012; Chapman and Gedro, 2009; Davis, 2009; Gedro, 2007, 2010; Rocco,
Gedro, and Kormanik, 2009; Schmidt, Githens, Rocco, and Kormanik, 2012).
As adherents of the philosophy that meanings are in ­people, critical theorists would agree with Smirich (1983) that “organ­izations are socially constructed
systems of shared meaning” (221). Critical theorists contrast their type of knowledge, which is “reflective,” with that of normal science, which is “objectifying.”
They argue that b
­ ecause knowledge is never objective, the search for objectivity
in normal science tends to objectify ­people and natu­ral phenomena. Critical theory emancipates by offering a critique of “what is” from the perspective of
“what might be.” It seeks to stimulate self-­reflection so p
­ eople may freely choose
to transform their world. Geuss (1981) defined emancipation as a movement or
transformation from an initial state to a final state. The initial state is one of
false consciousness, error, and unfree existence:
• This false consciousness is interconnected with oppression.
• The false consciousness is self-­designed, and oppression is
self-­imposed.
• The power in the above lies in the fact p
­ eople do not realize
their oppression is self-­imposed.
The final stage is one in which ­people are f­ ree of false consciousness (enlightened) and f­ ree of self-­imposed constraints (emancipated).
­People move from one state to another by engaging in a pro­cess of self-­
reflection or critical reflectivity in which they do the following:
• Dissolve the illusion of objectivity.
• Become aware of their origin.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 73
12/3/21 3:03 PM
74
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
• Bring to consciousness the unconscious determinants of their
action (Geuss, 1981).
As a result of this reflection, a perspective transformation may occur
(Mezirow, 1981). The person w
­ ill generate new knowledge that may be generalized into a critical theory. This reflective thinking has also been referred to as
an internal critique of a person’s epistemic beliefs (second-­order beliefs about
which opinions are acceptable), in which the person’s values are seen to contradict their ideal of a good life.
The critical theory so generated ­will consist of three parts:
• A demonstration that change is pos­si­ble.
• A depiction of the practical necessity of the change, as the pre­sent
situation produced frustration and suffering and is only thus ­because
­people hold a par­tic­u­lar world view that, upon critical reflection, is
no longer acceptable.
• An assertion that movement or transformation can only come about
if p
­ eople accept the critical theory as their “self-­consciousness”
(Geuss, 1981, 76).
The best-­k nown critical theories are psychoanalysis for individuals and
Marxism for social systems. Action science comes closest to operationalizing
the idea of a critical theory for organ­izations. The strategies used to transform
perspectives in action science include determining the potential unintended or
unjust consequences of action strategies, ensuring participants feel personal
causal responsibility for their actions, and offering an alternative for action in
the form of learning-­oriented be­hav­ior rather than coercive or control-­oriented
be­hav­ior. Theorists (e.g., Bierema, 2015; Fenwick, 2005; Githens, 2015; Trehan
and Rigg, 2015) argued for critical/emancipatory action learning/research in
HRD that challenges and critiques HRD’s traditional functionalist and interpretive paradigms. Bierema (2015) noted that critical action research “is not unlike participatory action research inspired by Paulo Freire and Miles Horton
that seeks to de­moc­ra­tize the learning pro­cess and challenge dominant institutions’ control over society” (119–120).
DEVELOPER OF ­HUMAN CAPITAL
The fifth and final meta­phor of the h
­ uman resource developer is that of a developer of h
­ uman capital. According to Swanson (2008b), “­human capital, in orga­
nizational terms, is a combination of ­human traits, existing per­for­mance capacity,
ability to learn, and motivation to share knowledge and expertise” (766).
­Although in his 1776 book Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith introduced ­humans
as capital, the term came into prominence in the mid-­twentieth ­century with
theorists from the Chicago School of economists like Milton Friedman,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 74
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
75
Theodore Schultz, and Gary Becker (Baptiste, 2001). Based on neoclassical economics, ­human capital theory refers to “the productive capabilities of ­human
beings that are acquired at some cost and that command a price in the ­labor
market ­because they are useful in producing goods and ser­vices” (Parnes, 1986, 1).
Flamholtz (1985) emphasized that it is the “expected realizable value” of a person, given opportunities for training, expected turnover, age to retirement,
promotability, and so on, that has ultimate value in a h
­ uman resource accounting system. Value is typically perceived as the relationship between costs and
benefits (or the return on investment). Gordon (in LaBelle, 1988) outlines the
economic assumptions that underlie ­human capital theory: “Product and ­labor
markets are competitive, firms attempt to maximize profits, workers seek to
maximize earnings, and the ­labor force has both knowledge and mobility to take
advantage of the best opportunities available” (206).
A worker’s skills and abilities are a form of capital ­because they influence
the worker’s productivity for the organ­ization and the worker’s opportunities
for higher wages, greater economic security, and increased employment prospects. Education, or training, is seen in the ­human capital model as a significant tool to influence workers’ acquisition of the needed knowledge and skills.
Changing demographics and higher l­ abor participation by ­women and minorities, along with recent technological changes, are creating an enormous need
for long-­range thinking.
It becomes increasingly clear that economic security in the post-­
industrial economy depends less on expertise and more on flexpertise—­
the ability to continually adapt individual knowledge and skill. . . . ​
Virtually the entire adult population needs retraining and new learning to be eco­nom­ically productive. . . . ​The emergence of a knowledge-­
based economy requires a new synthesis of the functions of training,
education, and other forms of communication and learning ­under the
single umbrella of the learning enterprise. (Perelman, 1984, xvi–­x vii)
Research on the learning organ­ization (Watkins and Kim, 2018) has demonstrated a strong and consistent relationship between dimensions of a learning culture and knowledge and financial per­for­mance. ­These findings argue that
Perelman was right—­investments in learning and development create economic
value—­perhaps initially by creating new knowledge that translates into new
products and ser­vices. This statement by Perelman so long ago is even more true
as organ­izations strug­gle to make meaning in a postpandemic era.
Carnavale (1984) offered a similar analy­sis of training and development in
developing ­human capital. According to Carnavale, workplace learning and formal education account for more growth in economic output than employee
health, capital, the composition of the workforce, population size, or resource
adaptation. Workplace learning, he said, accounts for 85 ­percent of the variance
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 75
12/3/21 3:03 PM
76
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
in lifetime earnings. The relationship between knowledge and training and economic returns for both ­people and organ­izations enjoys a distinguished, prominent place among the theoretical under­pinnings for HRD.
Although mea­sur­ing and evaluating ­human capital is challenging (Bassi and
McMurrer, 2008; Swanson, 2008b), ­human resource accounting systems have
been developed to mea­sure orga­nizational economic effectiveness. Initially, the
focus was on developing accounting procedures to determine investments in
­human capabilities. H
­ uman resource information systems attempted to inventory ­human resources, determine outlay and replacement costs, and determine
the economic value of the h
­ uman resources employed in the organ­ization. Succession plans and lists of high-­potential employees are outgrowths of orga­
nizational attempts to develop inventories of their h
­ uman resource assets.
­These approaches led to a definition of the economic value of h
­ uman resources
as “the pre­sent discounted value of their [individuals’] ­future contributions less
the costs of acquiring, maintaining, and utilizing t­ hese resources in the organ­
ization” (Pyle, in Dierkes and Coppock, 1975, 313).
The first extension of the application of ­human resource accounting systems
was to health and safety mea­sures ­because if p
­ eople are assets, anything that
diminishes ­t hose assets ­w ill diminish the organ­ization’s expected realizable
value. The costs of investments in employee health, rehabilitation, safety mea­
sures, and safety training can be compared with the costs of days lost b
­ ecause
of accidents and illnesses.
It is a short step from ­there to examining the economic impact of the psychological work environment. The lit­er­a­ture on job satisfaction, employee engagement, climate, leadership, motivation, and so on illustrate the high degree
of interest in this approach. However, research linking ­these tertiary effects to
productivity typically involves assumptions of correlation when, for example, a
change in both climate and productivity occurs without careful concomitant
control of any intervening social, historical, demographic, or po­liti­cal variables.
Such research is difficult to conduct. Rensis Likert and David Bowers (1973) analyzed the results of many studies and found a .67 correlation between orga­
nizational climate and subordinates’ satisfaction and a .42 correlation between
subordinates’ satisfaction and total productive efficiency. Given the large number of studies they used, ­these are strong relationships that suggest that climate
influences satisfaction and leads to at least modest gains in productivity.
In addition to h
­ uman resource accounting systems, some HRD theorists
(e.g. Bassi and McMurrer, 2008) have also engaged in conceptual work in developing models (­human capital capability scorecard) that allow organ­izations
to mea­sure and link ­human capital items to orga­nizational per­for­mance.
­Human capital theory provides a strong, bottom-­line–­oriented justification
for HRD. It breaks down the barriers between orga­nizational development approaches that influence climate and quality of work life, employee assistance,
other employee health and safety areas, and the more conventional learning and
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 76
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
77
development arenas of HRD. Both areas of HRD practice contribute to the
organ­ization’s long-­term effectiveness. The h
­ uman capital, or ­human resource
accounting approach, is perhaps most valuable for its long-­term emphasis and
the way it articulates the benefit of this work to leaders who weigh investments
in HRD in terms of financial returns.
Critics of h
­ uman capital theory point to capitalism’s limits and to economic
explanations of what p
­ eople gain from investments in learning. In the first instance, they discuss the role of training as a means of social control, using the
following as examples:
• Training as a means of despoiling or “cooling out” the aspirations
of many ­people so they ­will accept low-­level jobs
• Orga­nizational training programs to socialize newcomers into
conforming to the organ­ization’s norms and values
Moreover, workers’ inherent class structure and objectification in bureaucratic
organ­izations may produce lower productivity despite training efforts (LaBelle,
1988). Both humanist and poststructural theorists have also critiqued h
­ uman
cap­i­tal­ist theory. The criticisms revolve around the neoclassical economic base
of ­human capital theory, where h
­ uman beings are understood as rational homo
economicus (economic man) narrowly interested in utility with education and
training conduits for such utility maximization (Tan, 2014). Theorists argue
that such narrow understandings dehumanize, but when h
­ umans are understood and treated as homo economicus, ­humans become more governable
and malleable (Foucault, 2008). Further, the reductionist focus does not
­acknowledge the social and cultural impacts on decision making about education and training.
­People gain considerably more from training than an enhanced economic
value. Intrinsic satisfaction, enhanced life skills, and the increased capacity to
function effectively as parents and citizens are alternative benefits derived from
training. ­People often regard training as a fringe benefit—­a view h
­ uman resource
developers deplore, as it often leaves training bud­gets seeming as expendable as
other fringe benefits. Yet, this perspective may also correctly capture a more holistic, value-­added approach to understanding the benefits of training.
SUMMARY
The under­lying root philosophies and theories of HRD are rich and varied.
A brief comparison is presented in this chapter. Increasing understanding
among prac­ti­tion­ers of their potential to enrich and improve practice often
requires translations, such as Peter Senge’s translation of systems theory to
management practice and Argyris’s translation of field theory to HRD practice.
When ­human resource developers embrace many dif­fer­ent theoretical foundations, practice w
­ ill be enlarged and rise to the level demanded by the pre­sent
complex, nonroutine, ambiguous business environment. Not one but many
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 77
12/3/21 3:03 PM
78
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
meta­phors can guide our understanding of the field of our practice. The h
­ uman
resource developer must be a bricoleur—­a broadly trained, master craftperson who can adapt to changing situations and unanticipated training needs
(Engstrom, Forst, and Brown, 2018).
Conclusion
Theory, research, development, and practice together compose a vital cycle that
allows ideas to be progressively refined as they evolve from concepts to practices and from practices to concepts (Swanson, 2007c). The theory-­research-­
development-­practice cycle (figure 4.2) illustrates the systematic application of
inquiry methods working to advance the knowledge used by both HRD researchers and prac­ti­tion­ers.
Some caution us in constructing the relationships among theory, research,
development, and practice. In offering the notion of a scientific paradigm, Kuhn
(1970) compelled phi­los­o­phers and researchers to rethink the assumptions
under­lying the scientific method and paved the way for alternative, postpositivistic approaches to research in the behavioral sciences. Ethnography and naturalistic inquiry allow theory to emerge from practice and experience; theory
does not necessarily precede research, as theory can be generated through it. The
model of theory, research, development, and practice for HRD embraces t­ hese
cautions (see figure 4.2).
The cyclical model brings HRD theory, research, development, and practice together in the same forum. The ­union of ­these domains is itself an impor­
tant purpose of the model. Two other purposes also exist. First, each of the four
domains makes a necessary contribution to HRD. ­There is no presumption about
the importance to the profession of contributions from research, practice, punctuated development efforts, and theory itself. The model demonstrates the need
Research
Theory
Development
Practice
Figure 4.2: Theory-­Research-­Development-­Practice Cycle
Source: Swanson, 2005, 8.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 78
12/3/21 3:03 PM
4. Role of Theory and Philosophy in H
­ uman Resource Development
79
for all domains to inform one another to enrich the profession as a w
­ hole. Second, the exchange among the domains is multidirectional. Any of the domains
can serve as an appropriate starting point for proceeding through the cycle. Improvements in the profession can occur ­whether one begins with theory, research, development, or practice. Thus, each of the cycle’s domains both informs
and is informed by each of the other domains.
In summary, HRD philosophy and theory results in power­ful and practical explanations, princi­ples, and models for professionals to carry out their work
in organ­izations. The prob­lem facing almost e­ very organ­ization is in meeting
the constant demand for high per­for­mance. In that organ­izations are human-­
made entities, they require ­human expertise to perform, grow, and adapt. ­These
demands include every­thing from assuring sustainable financial growth of the
organ­ization to satisfying the next customer standing in the front row. Without
a holistic m
­ ental model of ­human resource development within an orga­nizational
system and improvement context working through ­people, the practitioner is
left with the task of dissecting and interpreting each HRD situation in isolation.
Or worse yet, they simply charge ahead in a trial-­a nd-­error mode.
Reflection Questions
1. Why would someone argue that good theory is practical?
2. What is theory? Give a definition and an explanation.
3. Which of the five philosophical meta­phors for HRD theory makes the
most sense to you? Explain.
4. Which of the five philosophical meta­phors for HRD theory makes the
most sense to a high-­tech business organ­ization? Explain.
5. Do you see the five philosophical meta­phors for HRD as complimentary or rivals? Explain.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 79
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5
Theory of ­Human
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Perspectives on Theory and Practice
Theory Framework for All Applied Disciplines
• Boundary of the Theory of an Applied Discipline
• Contributing Theories for an Applied Discipline
• Core Theory for an Applied Discipline
• Useful Theory for an Applied Discipline
• Novel Theory for an Applied Discipline
• Irrelevant Theory for an Applied Discipline
Theory of ­Human Resource Development
• Assumptions, Context, Definition, and Models of HRD
• Theoretical and Disciplinary Foundations of HRD
• Economic Theory Component of HRD
• Psychological Theory Component of HRD
• Systems Theory Component of HRD
• Ethics in HRD
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
Models of ­human resource development (HRD) have been created and disseminated through books, seminars, and consulting proj­ects. Many models are
based on extensive practical experience (Brache, 2002; Nadler, Gerstein, and
Shaw, 1992; Rummler and Brache, 1995; Schwartz, 1996; Weisbord, 1987). Other
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 80
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
81
models have been embraced to solve prob­lems, then casually called “multidisciplinary” to demand that the user apply multidimensional thinking.
HRD professionals often find that while their models may be power­ful
enough to create change, ­those models and their explanations are almost always
too superficial to explain the complex dynamics of HRD and its connection to
results. In short, a model derived from logic is no substitute for sound theory.
Such models can guide improvement efforts through hypothesized relationships
without having ­those relationships ever tested. This is impor­tant: A model by
itself is not theory. You can have a model and no theory, and you can have a theory with no model. Yet, most theories are accompanied by a model. A model by
itself is not theory.
Perspectives on Theory and Practice
Perspectives on the linkage between theory and practice are wide-­ranging. In
the lay world, theory is a very loose construct, even to the point of ridicule in
noting that something is “just a theory”—an untested speculative idea or antithesis of real­ity. In the academic world, theories require extensive development
and verification before earning the hard-­earned label of a “theory.” In an applied
discipline, verification must take place through both research and practice.
Bacharach’s (1989) definition of theory states, “A theory is a statement of
­relations among concepts within a set of boundary assumptions and constraints” (496). Many definitions of theory use the words phenomenon or phenomena. For example, Torraco (1997) says, “A theory explains what a phenomenon
is and how it works” (115). Gioia and Pitre (1990) described theory as “a coherent description, explanation, and pre­sen­ta­tion of observed or experienced
phenomena” (587). Lynham (2000b) described theory development as “the
purposeful pro­cess or recurring cycle by which coherent description, explanations, and repre­sen­ta­tions of observed or experienced phenomena are generated,
verified, and refined” (161). “A theory describes a specific realm of knowledge
and explains how it works” (Swanson and Chermack, 2013, 14).
Unfortunately, the widespread use of the words phenomenon and phenomena often suggest a narrow realm of concern, event, or occurrence. It is impor­
tant to note that a phenomenon can be long-­lasting, large, and broad—­such as
democracy, global warming, and civil engineering. As an example, h
­ uman resource development scholars can pay attention to training transfer theory. In
contrast, o
­ thers focus on the theory of the broader realm of workplace learning
or even broader to the ­human resource development discipline itself.
Within any discipline or field of study, rival views regarding its purposes
and practices exist at almost ­every level. The rival perspectives can be vast, such
as the focus and the nature of the discipline itself. Or the views can be narrow,
such as explaining a s­ imple elemental aspect of the discipline. In applied fields,
where m
­ atters of both theory and practice are of g­ reat concern, the range of perspectives expands to satisfy the demands of both scholars and prac­ti­tion­ers.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 81
12/3/21 3:03 PM
82
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
Having rival theories in a discipline is not disturbing. However, not having
a well-­developed theory is disturbing. This holds when framing an entire discipline or when considering even the most minor phenomena within a discipline.
The assumption is that theoretical challenges can only help to advance the theory. For applied fields rooted in professional practice (such as ­human resource
development or management), a prob­lem emerges that is less likely to exist in
more staid disciplines that are disconnected from practical ­matters (such as history, religion, or philosophy). The theory development challenge in applied disciplines is exacerbated by the dynamic that comes from practice.
Beyond a few traditional academic disciplines, most disciplines in con­
temporary institutions of higher learning are applied, dynamic, and relatively
young, such as management, information technology, interior design, or dental
hygiene. Applied disciplines almost always have both a strong theory component and a strong practice component. This chapter focuses on HRD, an applied
discipline, and the quest to bring disciplinary coherence to both the theory and
practice of the field.
Most applied disciplines are attempting to make significant advancements in
articulating the theoretical foundation of their fields of study. Management (Weick,
1989), h
­ uman resource development (Swanson, 2001c), and information science
(Benbasat, 1999) are just a few. Most theory discussions and theory research are not
held together in a manner that allows interpretation and integration. For example, theory development related to the totality of HRD can be used to judge the fit
of a theory effort focused on a narrow sub-­phenomenon within HRD (such as
emotional intelligence theory). Without a theory framework, t­ here is a sense of
randomness and incoherence to theory discussions and developments.
The following section describes a theory framework for applied disciplines
and pre­sents a theory of HRD fitting Western culture (the thrust of this book).
It is essential to report again that HRD tools can be used for positive and negative objectives. Wang, Doty, and Yang (2021) note, “The existing HRD models
and perspectives are developed for organ­izations or socie­ties with ­free market,
open host systems, thus their applicability to describing and explaining HRD
practices is specific to ­those in ­limited sociopo­liti­cal and national contexts” (1).
Institutional
Dimensions
Power
Concentration
Closed
Centralized
Open
Applicable
scope of
Inst.
Decentralized
Individual
Decision
Making
Conformity
Loyalty
Autonomy
Accountability
Censorship
Efficiency
Group/team
Figure 5.1: Institutional Boundaries of the HRD Host Institutional System
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 82
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
83
Their expanded theory extends the current understanding of HRD in an open
host system to also include closed system contexts. In a closed host system nation, the state has collective control/own­ership of all natu­ral resources, h
­ uman
resources, and businesses (figure 5.1).
Theory Framework for All Applied Disciplines
“The Theory Framework for Applied Disciplines” (Swanson, 2007c) helps scholars and prac­ti­tion­ers think about, develop, and critique the status of the theory
in their disciplines through a holistic perspective. It is made up of six components that are displayed in a graphic pre­sen­ta­tion (figure 5.2).
Each of the six theory components for applied disciplines is described
below. Th
­ ese descriptions establish the purpose and features of each theory
framework component.
BOUNDARY OF THE THEORY OF AN APPLIED DISCIPLINE
The boundary of the theory of an applied discipline is established by specifying
its name, definition, purpose, and the assumptions or beliefs that conceptually
frame the theory and practice of that discipline.
Novel
Novel
Novel
Contributing
Theory “A”
Useful
Useful
Novel
CORE
Novel
Novel
Contributing
Theory “B”
Useful
Contributing
Theory “C”
Boundary
Irrrelevant
Figure 5.2: Theory Framework for Applied Disciplines: Bound­aries, Contributing,
Core, Useful, Novel, and Irrelevant Components
Source: Swanson, 2007c, 328.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 83
12/3/21 3:03 PM
84
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
CONTRIBUTING THEORIES FOR AN APPLIED DISCIPLINE
The contributing theories are ­those selected theories that fundamentally address
the definition, purpose, and assumptions undergirding the applied discipline.
CORE THEORY FOR AN APPLIED DISCIPLINE
The core theory of the applied discipline is the intersection and integration of
the contributing ideas that operationalize the definition, purpose, and assumptions of an applied field. This constitutes the essential disciplinary theory.
USEFUL THEORY FOR AN APPLIED DISCIPLINE
The theory of a phenomenon outside the core theory of an applied discipline and
within the intersection of two contributing theories has utility in explaining an
impor­tant realm of practice within the discipline.
NOVEL THEORY FOR AN APPLIED DISCIPLINE
The theory of a narrow phenomenon related to an aspect of the applied discipline u
­ nder consideration could logically provide an unusual explanation of how
the phenomenon works. While rarely significant, it could emerge over time.
IRRELEVANT THEORY FOR AN APPLIED DISCIPLINE
This is any theory that falls outside the theory boundary, contributing theories,
core theory, and useful theory of the applied discipline u
­ nder consideration
with no compelling evidence of its usefulness or logic supporting its potential
for a novel contribution.
The remainder of this chapter articulates a theory of HRD, and chapter 6
expands on the three valuable ele­ments of the three primary contributing theories to HRD. ­These updated writings are rooted in papers presented at an Acad­
emy of H
­ uman Resource Development theory symposium by Holton, Ruona,
Swanson, and Torraco. The first section, “Theory of ­Human Resource Development,” frames the discipline of HRD by identifying definitions and explanatory
models along with the theory bound­aries, contributing theories (psychological
theory, economic theory, and systems theory), core theory, and propositions
arising from the theory. Each of the three contributing core theories to HRD is
discussed in depth in chapter 6.
Theory of ­Human Resource Development
The purpose of this section is to pre­sent a theory of ­Human Resource Development (HRD) that is supported by both research and practice.
ASSUMPTIONS, CONTEXT, DEFINITION, AND MODELS OF HRD
The bias of HRD has been the belief that organ­ization, work pro­cess, group, and
individual per­for­mance are mediated through ­human expertise and effort. In
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 84
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
85
contrast to this belief, the per­for­mance scorecards available to orga­nizational
decision makers generally ignore the ­human ele­ment. The most evident example is the short-­term financial view of com­pany per­for­mance as judged by daily
stock market data.
The journey of understanding per­for­mance improvement for ­those having
the ­human resource perspective has not always been easy. The range of per­for­
mance perspectives in organ­izations forces the HRD profession to face the realities of how ­others strategically view HRD and how HRD views itself (Torraco
and Swanson, 1995; Swanson, 1995, 1996b). It appears as though HRD has taken
a detour during the past fifty years. The clear vision and practice during World
War II ­were lost in the 1950s and began returning in the 1980s.
The massive Training within Industry (TWI) proj­ect, which culminated
with the end of World War II, is seen as the origin of con­temporary HRD
(Dooley, 1945b; Ruona and Swanson, 1998; Swanson and Torraco, 1994; Swanson, 2001b). The per­for­mance language was simpler then. “Is it a production
prob­lem?” they would ask. If yes, they would use per­for­mance improvement
tools that ­were masquerading ­under the name of “training.” Besides operating
­under a training title that they quickly outgrew, the TWI proj­ect delivered on
organ­ization, pro­cess, and individual per­for­mance outputs using ­simple and
power­ful tools called job instruction, job relations, and job methods.
In the 1950s, a psychology-­only perspective took over the training and development professions. As far back as 1950, Peter Drucker warned that while
this thinking freed man­ag­ers from viciously bad ideas about working with
­people, it never provided substantive alternatives (1964, 278). He went on to chide
the profession for an inadequate focus on the work itself and inadequate awareness of the economic dimensions of the work (278–279).
The real­ity is that most decision makers in organ­izations pursue per­for­
mance and improvement with or without professional HRD interventions.
This ­simple fact confronts the HRD profession to think about per­for­mance
with and without the ­human resource perspective. The willingness to temporarily let go of the ­human bias in ­favor of per­for­mance improvement at all levels is the key to elevating HRD to its fullest potential. Without this fundamental
­mental shift, HRD ­w ill awkwardly keep trying to claim system per­for­mance
(orga­nizational system) through subsystem thinking (individuals). The best
HRD theory and practice have invariably validated the contribution of h
­ uman
expertise and the unleashing of expertise as integral to per­for­mance at multiple levels.
The basic decision to begin with the host system of HRD (usually the organ­
ization) as the primary ave­nue to per­for­mance alters the models, thinking, and
tools of HRD effort. Without this shift beyond the individual, the ­human resource development lens remains clouded, the HRD model is fragmented, and
the under­lying theory remains unclear.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 85
12/3/21 3:03 PM
86
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
Per­for­mance as the Key Outcome Variable of HRD To perform is “to fulfill
an obligation or requirement; accomplish something as promised or expected”
(American Heritage College Dictionary, 1993, 1015). Per­for­mance is not system
design, capability, motivation, competence, or expertise. ­These, or other similar per­for­mance taxonomies, can best be thought of as per­for­mance variables
(or per­for­mance d
­ rivers) but not per­for­mance. Per­for­mance may be aligned
within missions, goals, and strategies—­but not always. Per­for­mance is the valued, productive output of a system in the form of goods or ser­vices. The ­actual
fulfillment of the goods and/or ser­vices requirement is thought of in terms of
units of per­for­mance. Once ­these goods and/or ser­vice units of per­for­mance are
identified, they are typically mea­sured in production quantity, time, and quality features (Swanson and Holton, 1999; Swanson, 2001a).
Chasing ­after an individual or orga­nizational change without first specifying a valid unit of per­for­mance is foolhardy and a waste of time. Change can
take place while “real” per­for­mance decreases. One example is to pursue employee satisfaction with the assumption that production ­will increase. Numerous studies have demonstrated that employee satisfaction can increase while
­actual production decreases or remains the same. The reengineering fad was another example of the pursuit of change with the majority of instances ending
up in losses in per­for­mance instead of gains (Micklethwait and Wooldridge,
1996). ­There are ­those in the profession speaking directly to the topic of per­for­
mance to clarify the relationships among per­for­mance ­drivers (Holton, 1998)
and/or per­for­mance variables (Swanson, 2007a).
Systems theory informs us that (1) ­there are systems and subsystems and
(2) that all systems are ultimately open systems. It is humbling to realize that
­there are tiers of subsystems and larger host systems, and that systems are open
entities constantly changing. ­These realizations help prevent professionals from
thinking and acting simply and mechanically. HRD prac­ti­tion­ers and scholars
should not lose sight of the continually evolving state of overall systems.
The larger frame in which HRD operates includes orga­nizational systems
and the milieu in which they function. Organ­izations are the host systems for
most HRD activities. Some of t­ hese systems are profit-­making organ­izations that
produce goods and/or ser­vices for consumers. Some are nonprofit or government organ­izations that produce goods and/or ser­vices for consumers. Some
are publicly owned, some are shareholder-­owned and publicly traded, and some
are owned by individuals or a group. All t­hese organ­izations function in an
ever-­present po­liti­cal, cultural, and economic milieu. Each has its own mission/
strategy, structure, technology, and h
­ uman resource mix. And each has core
pro­cesses related to producing the goods and ser­vices it produces.
Definition and Model of ­Human Resource Development The expectation
is that HRD efforts w
­ ill logically culminate with essential per­for­mance improve-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 86
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
87
HRD DEFINED:
Human
Resource
Development
• HRD is a process of developing and unleashing
expertise for the purpose of improving performance
. . . performance at the individual, group, process,
and organizational system levels.
PRIMARY COMPONENTS OF HRD:
Training and
Development
Organization
Development
• T&D develops human expertise
. . . for the purpose of improving performance.
• OD unleashes human expertise
. . . for the purpose of improving performance.
• Intellectual & Social Capital • Workforce Development
APPLICATIONS AND
CONTEXTS OF HRD:
• Human Resource Management • Organizational Effectiveness
• Leadership & Strategy • Work System Design • Change Mgt.
• Process Improvement • Career Development • Quality Improvement
• HRD processes direct, complement,
or are imbedded in various
organizational, national, and
international settings.
Figure 5.3: ­Human Resource Development: Definitions, Components,
Applications, and Contexts
Source: Swanson, 2008b.
ments for its host organ­ization. Thus, the operational definition of HRD is as
follows:
­ uman resource development (HRD) is a pro­cess of developing and unH
leashing expertise to improve per­for­mance.
The realms of per­for­mance improvement include orga­nizational systems, pro­
cesses, groups, and individuals. The two primary components of HRD include
(1) organ­ization development (OD), the unleashing of expertise to improve per­
for­mance, and (2) training and development (T&D), systematically developing
expertise for the purpose of improving per­for­mance. Th
­ ese definitions and their
connection to application areas and contexts are portrayed in figure 5.3.
Additionally, HRD itself can be viewed and pursued as an improvement
pro­cess functioning within the host organ­ization. This is graphically portrayed
in figure 5.3. This model of HRD illustrates HRD as a five-­phase pro­cess
working in concert with other core orga­nizational pro­cesses, all functioning in
the orga­nizational system context and the larger environmental context. The
bound­aries of HRD relate to the system hosting it. In most instances, this is
an organ­ization such as a business, industry, government, or nonprofit agency.
In some instances, the host organ­ization for HRD could be a geopo­liti­cal region
or a nation.
While per­for­mance ­will likely always demand multiple interpretations, per­
for­mance and, more importantly, per­for­mance improvement are not simply
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 87
12/3/21 3:03 PM
88
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
abstract notions about desirable ways to reach a better state. In ­every organ­
ization, the concrete determinants of per­for­mance are reflected in p
­ eople,
ideas, and the material resources through which their ideas reach the marketplace. Per­for­mance cannot be described or improved without specifying its
determinants, accounting for the sophisticated pro­cesses through which per­
for­mance is expressed (e.g., ­human be­hav­ior, work pro­cess innovation, stock
market per­for­mance), and making some judgment about w
­ hether per­for­mance
has improved. Per­for­mance improvement can only be manifested through
outputs, and change in outputs can only be assessed through some form of
mea­sure­ment. Thus, per­for­mance is a concept that can be systematically operationalized in any organ­ization when we set out to demonstrate ­whether or not
it has improved.
THEORETICAL AND DISCIPLINARY FOUNDATIONS OF HRD
HRD as a discipline is broader than any single theory. Reflecting the real­ity that
most successful system and subsystem improvement strategies require multifaceted interventions, HRD draws from multiple theories and uniquely integrates them for HRD. This section develops a core theoretical foundation for
HRD that draws upon contributions from several respected theoretical domains.
For a deeper understanding, refer to the model of ­human resource development
within the organ­ization and environment (figure 5.4).
Environment
• Economic Forces • Political Forces • Cultural Forces
Organization
• Mission & Strategy • Organization Structure • Technology • Human Resources
Inputs
Processes
1
Analyze
2
3
4
Propose Create Implement
Outputs
5
Assess
HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Figure 5.4: Model of ­Human Resource Development within the
Organ­ization and Environment
Source: Swanson, 2001c, p. 305.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 88
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
89
While “a theory simply explains what a phenomenon is and how it works”
(Torraco, 1997, 115), “a discipline is a body of knowledge with its own organ­
izing concepts, codified knowledge, epistemological approach, undergirding
theories, par­tic­u­lar methodologies, and technical jargon” (Passmore, 1997, 201).
The belief that HRD is a discipline that draws upon many theories is widely held.
This overly generous idea has served as fool’s gold to the profession. In the
attempt to be inclusive of so many theories—­staking its claim so broadly—­
HRD has come up with no theory using this approach. However, many believe
that efforts in developing core HRD theory are essential to the profession’s
maturation.
Having well-­defined core HRD theories in no way limits the utility of hundreds of narrower related theories that could inform HRD research or develop
specific practitioner tools and methods.
Contributing and Useful Theory Components of HRD Presently t­here is
no universal view or agreement on the theory (or multiple theories) that support HRD as a discipline. Furthermore, no overarching HRD theory alternatives are being visibly proposed in the lit­er­a­ture and being debated by the
profession beyond this chapter. On the one hand, some have called for systems
theory to serve as a unifying theory for HRD to access all useful theories as
­required (Gradous, 1989; Jacobs, 1989; McLagan, 1989a). On the other hand,
many have proposed sets of princi­ples in the forms of comparative lists of added
value, products, pro­cesses, and expertise (e.g., Gilley and Maycunich, 2000).
The alternative to having a sound theoretical and disciplinary base for the
HRD profession is a state of rudderless random activity aggressively sponsored
by atheoretical professional associations and greedy con­sul­tants (Micklethwait
and Wooldridge, 1996; Swanson, 1997b). This erratic state celebrates short-­term
results without having deep understanding of the ability to replicate the results
or the utility of ­those results. For this reason, a discrete and logical set of theories as the foundation of HRD is proposed as a means of understanding the
model of ­human resource development within the organ­ization and environment. The HRD discipline, definition, and model are believed to be supported
and explained through the three contributing core theory domains of psychological theory, economic theory, and systems theory (Passmore, 1997; Swanson,
1995). Economic theory is recognized as a primary driver and survival metric
of organ­izations; systems theory recognizes purpose, pieces, and relationships
that can maximize or strangle systems and subsystems; and psychological theory acknowledges h
­ uman beings as brokers of productivity, renewal, and the
cultural and behavioral nuances. Each of ­these three theories is unique, complementary, and robust. Together they make up the foundational contributing
theory under­lying the discipline of HRD.
The theories have been visually presented as a three-­legged stool. The three
legs providing excellent stability for HRD as a discipline and field of practice
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 89
12/3/21 3:03 PM
90
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
Organization, Process, Team, & Individual
PERFORMANCE
Human Resource Development
Theory
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
P
s
y
c
h
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
Ethics
Figure 5.5: The Theoretical Foundations of ­Human Resource Development
Source: Swanson, 2001c, 306.
required to function amid unstable and changing conditions (see figure 5.5). The
seat represents their fusion into the unique core theory of HRD. With the demands of the global economy and an unbridled free-­market condition, the stool
has been positioned on an ethical rug—­a filter, if you ­will—­between its three
contributing theories and the worldly context in which HRD functions. Thus,
the three contributing theories are poised to shape the core of the HRD discipline, and ethics play an impor­tant moderating role (Hatcher, 2002). Furthermore, the ethical concerns are believed to be best expressed through recognition
and adherence to the following basic beliefs:
1. Orga­nizational systems are human-­made entities that rely on ­human
expertise to establish and achieve their goals.
2.­Human expertise is developed and maximized through HRD pro­
cesses for the mutual long-­and/or short-­term benefits of the sponsoring organ­ization and the individuals involved.
3. HRD professionals are advocates of individual, group, work pro­cess,
and orga­nizational system integrity.
The w
­ hole or core theory of HRD is proposed to be the fusion of psychological, economic, and systems theories while being filtered by ethical beliefs.
This integrative state is central to securing HRD as a discipline, not in just knowing the ele­ments. The journey to this disciplinary fusion results in the organ­izing
concepts, codified knowledge, underpinning theories, par­tic­u ­lar methodolo-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 90
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
91
gies, and the unique technical jargon of HRD. The core of an integrated HRD
theory ­will be larger than the sum of the parts and unique to HRD. On their
own, psychological theory, economic theory, or systems theory are inadequate
for understanding HRD and producing reliable results. Thus, the overarching
theory proposition for HRD is as follows:
The theory integration proposition: HRD must integrate its contributing
and useful psychological, economic, and systems theories into a core
HRD theory and model for practice.
For example, according to found­ers Hammer and Champy (1994), business
pro­cess reengineering focused on cost reductions through crude system analy­
sis. Had they considered the larger frame system and sustainable economic
per­for­mance and not ignored the psychological domain, business pro­cess reengineering and its total effects would have been very dif­fer­ent. The premise is
that the three theories constitute the contributing useful and core theory for
the discipline of HRD. As such, they must be understood not only individually
but also in their ­wholeness and integration. The implications of economic, systems, and psychological theories guiding the overarching approach to HRD
practice follows.
ECONOMIC THEORY COMPONENT OF HRD
Any depreciation of economic theory in HRD is untenable. The widely used
book on organ­ization development, Organ­ization Development and Change
(Cummings and Worley, 2018), does not have economic, financial, or cost-­benefit
analy­sis in its index. The organ­ization development lit­er­a­ture addresses the psychological theory leg of the theory stool and a portion of the systems theory
leg, but it regularly ignores the economic leg. As a result, what is called organ­
ization development is reduced to individual development or team development
to achieve improvement in orga­nizational per­for­mance. While ­there is still much
to be learned, a substantial amount of information about the economics of short-­
term interventions (Swanson, 2001) and broader-­based investments is available
(Becker, Huselid, and Ulrich, 2001; Fitz-­enz, 2009; Lyau and Pucel, 1995).
How could responsible HRD not include direct analy­sis, action, and mea­
sure­ment of economic outcomes? Over time, organ­izations (profit and nonprofit)
must generate more income than they spend to exist. ­Unless expenditures on
HRD contribute to the viability and profitability of an organ­ization, t­ hose expenditures ­will almost certainly be reduced or eliminated. Three specific economic theory perspectives are believed to be most appropriate and valuable to
the discipline of HRD: (1) scarce resource theory, (2) sustainable resource theory, and (3) ­human capital theory.
Scarce Resource Theory Scarce resource theory informs us that ­there are
limitations to every­thing. The limitations in money, raw materials, time, and
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 91
12/3/21 3:03 PM
92
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
so on require us to choose how capital w
­ ill be utilized to gain the greatest
­return. Decision makers choose among options based on their forecasted return on investment. This is a s­ imple and power­ful notion that forces decision
makers to separate the most valuable and worthy initiatives from the many
­things they would like to do if t­ here ­were no resource limitations (Swanson and
Gradous, 1986).
Sustainable Resource Theory Sustainable resource theory is much like
scarce resource theory except for one central point: the concern for the long-­
term versus short-­term agenda. Thurow (1993) informs us that “in the f­ uture,
sustainable advantage w
­ ill depend on new pro­cess technologies and less on new
product technology. New industries of the f­ uture depend . . . ​on brain power.
Man-­made competitive advantages replace the comparative advantage of ­Mother
Nature (natural-­resources endowment) or history (capital endowments)” (16).
Economist David Warsh (2006) punctuates ­these points throughout his book
titled Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations: A Story of Economic Discovery.
­Human Capital Theory Becker’s classic book, H
­ uman Capital: A Theoretical
and Empirical Analy­sis with Special Reference to Education (1993), illustrates
this domain. Becker implores the reader, “I am ­going to talk about a dif­fer­ent
kind of capital. Schooling, a computer training course, expenditures on medical care, and lectures on the virtues of punctuality and honesty are capital too,
in the true sense that they improve health, raise earnings, or add to a person’s
appreciation of lit­er­a­ture over a lifetime. Consequently, it is fully in keeping with
the capital concept as traditionally defined to say that expenditures on education,
training, and medical care, e­ tc., are investments in capital” (15–16). Th
­ ese are not
simply costs but investments with valuable returns that can be calculated.
The Economic Theory Propositions for HRD The economic princi­ples for
HRD revolve around managing scarce resources and the production of wealth.
Most ­people who talk about per­for­mance can mentally convert units of per­for­
mance into monetary units. HRD itself has costs and benefits that need to be
understood and are not always favorable. As they are better understood in both
theory and practice, the HRD discipline and profession w
­ ill mature. The economic propositions for HRD appear elementary, yet they must be addressed
through sound economic theory and practice:
Scarce resource theory: HRD must justify its use of scarce resources.
Sustainable resource theory: HRD must add value to creating sustainable
long-­term economic per­for­mance.
­Human capital theory: HRD must add short-­term and long-­term value from
investments in developing knowledge and expertise in individuals and
groups of individuals.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 92
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
93
In conclusion, economist Alfred Marshall (1949) argues that the most valuable capital is that invested in h
­ uman beings. Since HRD takes place in economic
entities, HRD must call upon economic theory in shaping its core theory (Wang
and Dobbs, 2009). In addition, most management theories and methods should
be properly viewed as useful extensions of economic theory (see Drucker, 1964).
PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY COMPONENT OF HRD
The psychological theory that HRD can draw on is im­mense. It includes theories of learning, h
­ uman motivation, information pro­cessing, group dynamics,
and psychology-­based theories of how we make decisions and behave in organ­
izations. Yet, it has been poorly interpreted by the profession. Most prac­ti­tion­
ers grab onto a small and relatively irrelevant slice of psychological theory and
act upon it exaggeratedly. Examples include the fascination with whole-­brain
theory, personality types, and emotional intelligence. Passmore (1997) informs
us, “Psy­chol­ogy is the science of be­hav­ior and ­mental pro­cesses of ­humans and
other animals. Beyond that, we have something that resembles a teenager’s
closet” (210).
While psychological theory may have something for every­one, HRD has yet
to capitalize fully on its psy­chol­ogy leverage to improve per­for­mance. Interestingly, the widely used book on training, Training in Organ­izations: Needs
­Assessment, Development and Evaluation (Goldstein, 1993), is almost exclusively focused on the behaviorist school of psy­chol­ogy and does not deal in any
meaningful way with Gestalt psy­chol­ogy or cognitive (purposive-­behaviorism)
psy­chol­ogy. At best, the HRD lit­er­a­ture addresses the psychological theory leg
of the theory stool unpredictably. Add to this that HRD interventions are rarely
systematically connected to the economic agenda via a systematic analy­sis of
the organ­ization and its goals (Brache, 2002; Swanson, 2007a). It is no won­der
that HRD interventions based only on psychological theory are often dismissed
as irrelevant by organ­ization leaders.
Fascination appears be the watchword of the psychological leg, as questions
from psy­chol­ogy are typically narrow and/or disconnected from the core purpose of the organ­ization, the work pro­cess, and often even the individual. For
example, the continued intrigue of such topics as transfer of training from the
psy­chol­ogy perspective mainly focuses on the individual and individual perceptions. The response to this ­limited perspective in HRD is best expanded
through adding systems and economic theory, not by psychological theory alone
(Holton, 1996c).
How could responsible HRD not integrate and use the vast body of knowledge from psychological theory? With such vast and divergent psychological
theory available, it is more appropriate to focus on core understandings of be­
hav­ior and learning rather than fringe psy­chol­ogy theories and techniques.
Three specific psychological theory perspectives are proposed h
­ ere to be most
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 93
12/3/21 3:03 PM
94
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
appropriate to the discipline of HRD: (1) Gestalt psy­chol­ogy, (2) behavioral psy­
chol­ogy, and (3) cognitive (purposive-­behaviorism) psy­chol­ogy.
Gestalt Psy­chol­ogy Gestalt is the German term for configuration or organ­
ization. Gestalt psychologists inform us that we do not see isolated stimuli but
instead see stimuli gathered together in meaningful configurations. We see
­people, chairs, cars, trees, and flowers—­not lines and patches of color. Gestaltists
believe that p
­ eople add something to experience that is not contained in the sensory data and that we experience the world in meaningful ­wholes (Hergenhahn
and Olson, 1993). Thus, learning involves moving from one w
­ hole to another.
Words associated with Gestalt psy­chol­ogy include introspection, meaning, closure,
insight, life space, field theory, humanism, phenomenology, and relational theory.
The holistic view of individuals and their own need for holistic understanding
is in sharp contrast to a mechanistic and elemental view of ­human beings.
Behavioral Psy­chol­ogy Behavioral psy­chol­ogy is concerned with what can
be seen. Therefore, be­hav­ior is what is studied. Behavioral psychologists inform
us that individuals respond the only way they can, given their capacity, experience, and pre­sent forces working on them. ­There was no more introspection,
no more talk of instinctive be­hav­ior, and no more attempts to study the vague
notions of the ­human conscious or unconscious mind. Words associated with
behaviorism include readiness, law effect, exercise, recency, frequency, stimulus,
response, reinforcement, punishment, programmed learning, and drives.
Cognitive Psy­chol­ogy Tolman’s (1932) term purposive-­behaviorism has been
selected as the exemplar of this third impor­tant perspective from psy­chol­ogy.
Purposive-­behaviorism explains goal-­directed be­hav­ior and the idea that ­human
beings or­ga­nize their lives around purposes. Purposive-­behaviorism (and
other cognitive psychologies) integrates theory from Gestalt and behavioral
psy­chol­ogy.
“For Purposive Behaviorism, be­hav­ior, as we have seen, is purposeful, cognitive, and molar, i.e., ‘Gestalted.’ Purposive Behaviorism is molar, not a molecular” (Tolman, 1932, 419). Words associated with cognitive psy­chol­ogy,
including purposive-­behaviorism, include drive discriminations, field-­cognition
modes, cognitive map, learning by analogy, learned helplessness, structuring, information pro­cessing, short-­and long-­term memory, and artificial intelligence.
The Psychological Theory Propositions for HRD The psy­chol­ogy princi­
ples for practice revolve around the ­mental pro­cesses of ­humans and the determinants of h
­ uman be­hav­ior. Among scholars and prac­ti­tion­ers of psy­chol­ogy,
the schisms and gimmicks reported ­under the psy­chol­ogy banner abound with
­little integration. As the three useful psy­chol­ogy theories ­here are interpreted
in terms of the theory and practice relevant to HRD, the discipline and profes-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 94
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
95
sion w
­ ill mature. While the psychological propositions appear to be elementary,
they are regularly ignored in practice:
Gestalt psy­chol­ogy theory: HRD must clarify the goals of individual contributors, work pro­cess ­owners, and/or organ­ization leaders.
Behavioral psy­chol­ogy theory: HRD must develop the knowledge and expertise of individual contributors, work pro­cess ­owners, and organ­iza­
tion leaders.
Cognitive psy­chol­ogy (purposive behaviorism) theory: HRD must harmonize the goals and be­hav­iors among individual contributors, work
groups, work pro­cess o
­ wners, and organ­ization leaders.
In conclusion, since HRD takes place in organ­izations that are psychologically framed by ­those who in­ven­ted them, operate in them, and renew them,
HRD must call on psy­chol­ogy as a contributor for its helpful and core theory
(see Argyris, 1993; Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1993; Dubin, 1976). In addition,
learning theories such as constructivism and situated cognition should be properly viewed as useful derivatives of psychological theory. Per­for­mance cannot
be improved if ­people choose not to perform, put forth ­little effort, or persist in
their efforts (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1993). Moreover, systematically designed
learning experiences and workplace systems provide a durable foundation for
per­for­mance improvement. Thus, specific theories of learning, ­human motivation, information pro­cessing, and other psychologically based phenomenon
complement the core theoretical foundation for the discipline of HRD and have
high utility for specialized (novel) challenges.
SYSTEMS THEORY COMPONENT OF HRD
Systems theory, a small body of knowledge compared to economics and psy­
chol­ogy, contains a harvest of low-­hanging fruit for HRD. From a systems theory perspective, a wide range of systemic disconnects is adversely affecting
per­for­mance. They include (1) not being able to specify the required outcomes
of the host organ­ization and (2) not having a systematically defined HRD pro­
cess (see Brache, 2002; Rummler and Brache, 1995; Swanson, 2007a).
Systems theory is a relatively young discipline made up of “a collection of
general concepts, princi­ples, tools, prob­lems and methods associated with systems of any kind” (Passmore, 1997, 206–207). Gradous’s (1989) classic monograph set the stage for serious consideration of systems theory by the HRD
profession. Jacobs’s (1989) chapter, “Systems Theory Applied to ­Human Resource
Development,” calls for the profession to adopt an individual contributor view
of systems theory as the unifying theory. Seeing this as ­limited, McLagan (1989a)
proposed the larger organ­ization and societal views in her chapter titled “Systems
Model 2000: Matching Systems Theory to F
­ uture HRD Issues.” Her challenge
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 95
12/3/21 3:03 PM
96
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
was for HRD to think about and work within a more expansive and tiered
world of systems.
Three specific systems theory perspectives are proposed h
­ ere to be appropriate to HRD: (1) general systems theory, (2) chaos theory, and (3) ­f utures
theory.
General Systems Theory At the core, general systems theory (GST) forces
us to talk intelligently about inputs, pro­cesses, outputs, and feedback. Furthermore, GST informs us of the real­ity of open systems (vs. closed systems), that
systems engineering focuses on the less dynamic aspects of the organ­ization,
and of the limitations of a single personality theory in predicting h
­ uman be­
hav­ior (von Bertalanffy, 1962).
Boulding’s (1956a) classic article on general systems theory describes the
paradox of a theory so general as to mean nothing and the seeming inability
of a single theory from a single field of study to ever reach a satisfactory level
of theory generality. He goes on to talk about the power of a “spectrum of
theories”—­a “system of systems” that would perform the function of a “gestalt”
in theory building. “General Systems Theory may at times be an embarrassment
in pointing out how far we still have to go” (Boulding, 1956a, 10).
Chaos Theory “Where chaos begins, classical science stops. . . . ​Chaos is a
science of pro­cess rather than a state, of becoming rather than of being” (Gleick,
1987, 3–5). Chaos theory confronts Newtonian logic head-on by offering a revised motto away from determinism to something much softer: “Given an approximate knowledge of a system’s initial conditions and an understanding of
natu­ral law, one can calculate the approximate be­hav­ior of the system” (15).
Chaos theory purposefully acknowledges and studies phenomena that are unsystematic and do not appear to follow the rules.
­Futures Theory ­Futures theory is “not necessarily interested in predicting
the f­ uture, it is about the liberation of p
­ eople’s insights” (Schwartz, 1996, 9). Thus,
in the context of planning for the f­ uture in uncertain conditions, f­ utures theory in no way resembles the reductionist view of most strategic planning efforts
that end up with a single strategy. The language and tools of alternative ­futures
and scenario building are intended to create an accurate picture of the facts, the
potential flux in t­ hose facts, and the decision-­making agility required of the
­future. ­Futures theory is critical for sustainable per­for­mance in that it prepares
one to recognize and cope with an evolving f­ uture state (Chermack, 2005).
Systems Theory Propositions for HRD The systems theory princi­
ples
for practice are organic. The system ele­ments, their arrangements, the
interdependencies—­the complex nature of the phenomenon ­under study—­must
be faced. The systems theory princi­ples for practice require serious thinking,
sound theory-­building research, and using new tools for sound practice. A full
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 96
12/3/21 3:03 PM
5. Theory of H
­ uman Resource Development
97
pursuit of the following ­simple propositions in HRD would reshape the HRD
purpose and the tools utilized in practice:
Theory and Philosophy in ­Human Resource Development
General systems theory: HRD must understand how it and other subsystems connect and disconnect from the host orga­nizational system.
Chaos theory: HRD must help its host orga­nizational system retain its
purpose and effectiveness given the chaos it f­ aces.
­Futures theory: HRD must help its host orga­nizational system shape
a­ lternative ­futures.
In conclusion, HRD takes place in organ­izations that are systems and subsystems functioning within an ever-­changing environmental system. Thus, systems theory is useful and core (see Buckley, 1968; Gradous, 1989). Furthermore,
engineering-­technology theories and methods should be viewed as valuable extensions of systems theory, even though they have a longer scholarly history
(see FitzGerald and FitzGerald, 1973; Davenport, 1993).
ETHICS IN HRD
As noted ­earlier, the rug of ethics is viewed as the supporting theory for HRD.
Still, it is not a core theory. It serves as the filter among the three core theories
of economics, psy­chol­ogy, and systems within the per­for­mance improvement
context.
From the ethical beliefs perspective, some argue about the exploitive nature
of organ­izations and would criticize HRD as an unthinking arm of management (Korten, 2001), challenging the profession to act as the agent of democracy and equity (Dirkx, 1996). O
­ thers argue that exploitation is a much more
expansive concept (e.g., employees can exploit their employers) and that it must
be dealt with as such (Swanson, Horton, and Kelly, 1986). The ethical issue is
not with per­for­mance. It is the distribution of the gains realized from per­for­
mance. Such distribution among contributors and stakeholders is the bogeyman
­behind most of the emotional per­for­mance discussions in HRD. It should be
dealt with directly and apart from the pursuit of per­for­mance (Hatcher, 2002).
Conclusion
The purpose of this theory of HRD discussion was to frame the discipline and
theory of ­human resource development by identifying its definition, model,
component theories, and propositions of the theory.
Research in the realm of theory requires that theories be developed through
rigorous theory-­building research methods (Dubin, 1978, Hearn, 1958; Torraco,
1997; Lynham, 2000b) and that the journey be continuous. If theory just
happened as a result of practice, the development of an HRD theory bucket
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 97
12/3/21 3:03 PM
98
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
would be overflowing. Instead, the massive field of HRD practice is still experiencing a “theory application deficit disorder” (Swanson, 1997b). Fulfilling
HRD’s per­for­mance improvement mission by advancing the HRD discipline
around sound theory, proven in practice, is fundamental to the profession’s
maturation. Chapter 6 provides extended and alternative views of the contributions of psychological, economic, and systems theories to HRD.
Reflection Questions
1. Explain how models and theories differ and discuss if it is pos­si­ble to
have one without the other.
2. What general idea about theory from this chapter did you find most
in­ter­est­ing? Why?
3. What is the argument for multiple contributing subtheories being used
and fused for creating a unique theory of HRD?
4. From the section on the discipline of HRD, what do you see as the
connection between the definition of HRD (figure 5.3) and the model
of HRD (figure 5.4)?
5. What do you think the main contribution of psychological theory is to
HRD? Why?
6. What do you think the main contribution of economic theory is to
HRD? Why?
7. What do you think the main contribution of systems theory is to
HRD? Why?
8. What component of the theory framework (figure 5.2) do you see as
most distracting in advancing HRD theory? Why?
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 98
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6
Component Theories
of ­Human Resource
Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Psy­chol­ogy and the Discipline of HRD
Contributed by Elwood F. Holton III, Louisiana State University
• Psy­chol­ogy and HRD
• Emerging Foundational Theories of Psy­chol­ogy
• Limits of Psy­chol­ogy—­Two Issues
• Summary
Economics, H
­ uman Capital Theory, and HRD
Contributed by Richard J. Torraco, University of Nebraska
• What Is Economics?
• What Is ­Human Capital Theory?
• Economics and ­Human Capital Theory—­Key Concepts
and Applications
•­Future Challenges to ­Human Capital Development
• Surveillance Capitalism
• Economic In­equality and its Consequences
• Summary
• Case Example: ­Human Capital and National Development:
A Tale of Two ­Koreas
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 99
12/3/21 3:03 PM
100
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
Systems Theory as a Foundation for HRD
Contributed by Wendy E. A. Ruona, University of Georgia
• What Is Systems Theory?
• Why Systems Theory?
• The Support Provided to HRD by Systems Theory
• Summary
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
Chapter 5 presented a theory of ­Human Resource Development (HRD) and advocated three primary theory components and a purposeful fusion of them.
The fusion of the three theory components was done in context of HRD’s definition and purpose and is now presented as the core theory of the HRD discipline. The following three sections in this chapter provide extended views from
highly recognized scholars of the contributions of psychological, economic, and
systems component theories to HRD.
Elwood F. Holton’s section, “Psy­chol­ogy and the Discipline of ­Human Resource Development,” addresses psychological theory. He notes that psy­chol­ogy
has long provided a core theoretical base for HRD. Con­temporary HRD extends
beyond psy­chol­ogy to embrace multiple theoretical bases. This section examines psy­chol­ogy’s theoretical contributions to the discipline of HRD. It argues
that psychological theories are both power­ful and ­limited as a foundation for
HRD. Specific psychological theories and their conceptual relationships with
economics and systems theory are discussed.
The second section, “Economics, ­Human Capital Theory, and ­Human Resource Development,” was written by Richard J. Torraco. He argues that developing of a theory base to support the rapidly growing field of HRD is the
most critical issue facing HRD scholars ­today. The pressures on HRD to
meet the needs of a diverse workforce in a rapidly changing work environment demand the inclusion of economics as a foundational theory of HRD.
He further argues for ­human capital theory as the primary economic theory
relevant to HRD.
The final section, “Systems Theory as a Foundation for HRD,” by Wendy E. A.
Ruona, investigates the contribution of systems theory to HRD. Her treatise
offers a framework to or­ga­nize themes emerging from the lit­er­a­ture on how
systems theory supports HRD. Fi­nally, some current challenges and how systems
theory relates to economics and psy­chol­ogy are discussed.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 100
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
101
Psy­chol­ogy and the Discipline of HRD
Contributed by Elwood F. Holton III, Louisiana State University
Psy­chol­ogy has been identified early on as one of the core theories of H
­ uman
Resource Development (HRD) (Passmore, 1997; Swanson, 1994a). ­There can be
­little question that the discipline of psy­chol­ogy has made, and continues to make,
significant contributions to the discipline of HRD. Indeed, references from industrial psy­chol­ogy, educational psy­chol­ogy, cognitive psy­chol­ogy, and developmental psy­chol­ogy are common in HRD research. It is psy­chol­ogy that keeps
HRD’s focus on the individual.
However, some practice HRD as if it w
­ ere l­ ittle more than applied psy­chol­
ogy. This approach results in overemphasis on the individual to the exclusion
of other vital disciplinary components of HRD. The thesis of this section is that
­there can also be l­ ittle question that psy­chol­ogy is inadequate by itself to define
the discipline of HRD. The purpose of this section is to systematically identify
some key issues surrounding psy­chol­ogy’s contribution to defining the field
of HRD.
PSY­CHOL­OGY AND HRD
To understand psy­chol­ogy as a discipline, one must first differentiate between
what is alternately called foundational or framework theories (Wellman and
Gellman, 1992) and systems of psy­chol­ogy (Lundin, 1991) versus specific theories. “Framework theories outline the ontology and the basic causal devices for
their specific theories, thereby defining a coherent form of reasoning about a
par­tic­u­lar set of phenomena” (Wellman and Gellman, 1992, 342). A system has
been defined as “a framework or scaffolding which permits the scientist to arrange his/her data in an orderly meaningful way” (Lundin, 1991, 2). In psy­chol­
ogy, t­ hese systems are also known as movements or schools.
Framework theories inspire specific theories that, in turn, propose clear formal propositions. For example, behaviorism is a framework theory ­because it
defines a par­tic­u­lar set of assumptions about ­human be­hav­ior. Many theorists
(e.g., Watson, Skinner) vary in their specific propositions about behaviorism but
agree as to the under­lying epistemology. The interest ­here is not in par­tic­u­lar
theories but rather the under­lying framework theories from psy­chol­ogy that are
foundational theories for the discipline of HRD.
No universal agreement prevails among psy­chol­ogy scholars as to which theories are specific versus foundational theories, and some theorists are “bridge”
theorists in that they attempt to integrate multiple views. Furthermore, many
noted psychologists can be classified in vari­ous categories (e.g., Is Bandura a behaviorist or a cognitivist?). Thus, it is difficult to find one “best” classification.
For this discussion, Lundin’s (1991) and Brennan’s (1994) classifications of
twentieth-­century psy­chol­ogy systems have been used to generate the following
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 101
12/3/21 3:03 PM
102
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
list of candidates to be included as foundational theories for HRD: functionalism, behaviorism, Gestalt (classic and field theory), psychoanalysis, “third force”
(humanistic and existential), cognitive, and emerging systems (social psy­chol­ogy
and developmental psy­chol­ogy).
Interestingly, some psychologists have called for creating of a “metadiscipline” of psy­chol­ogy to recapture the theoretical roots of psy­chol­ogy (Slife and
Williams, 1997). They use some of the same language that scholars in HRD do
to bemoan movement away from theory “­toward models, techniques, and microtheories in the more modern sense” (118). Due largely to the emergence of
applied or functional psy­chol­ogy in the early 1900s (Watson and Evans, 1991),
psy­chol­ogy has moved away from the creation of broad theories, such as behaviorism and cognitivism, to the scientific testing of narrower theories and models.
Psychological Theories for HRD Within psy­
chol­
ogy, three founda-
tional psycho­logical theories for HRD—­Gestalt, behavioral, and cognitive
­psy­chol­ogy—­have been proposed (Swanson, 1998a). Figure 6.1 summarizes
­these three foundational theories and selected contributions to the discipline
of HRD.
Beyond psy­chol­ogy, two other foundation theories of HRD, economics and
systems theory, have been proposed (Swanson, 1998a). Yet, the relationship between psy­chol­ogy and the other two core domains is fully unresolved. While
­there may be many microlevel linkages, at the macrolevel, pos­si­ble relationships
are as follows:
• Behaviorism provides the link between the psy­chol­ogy of the individual and economic theory. One of behaviorism’s strengths is its
Foundation
Theory
Representative
Theorists
Contributions to HRD
Gestalt
Wertheimer,
Kofka, Kohler,
Lewin
• Focus on the ­whole person
• Holistic view of organ­izations
and individuals
Behaviorism
Watson, Pavlov,
Thorndike
• How external environments affect
­human be­hav­ior
• Reward and motivation systems
• Goal setting
Cognitive
Piaget, Bruner,
Tolman
• How ­humans pro­cess information
• Foundation for instructional design
• How ­humans make meaning of their
experiences
Figure 6.1: Foundational Psychological Theories and
Their Contribution to HRD
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 102
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
103
emphasis on external reinforcers of ­human be­hav­ior. ­Human be­hav­
ior within organ­izations is deeply affected by orga­nizational per­for­
mance goals as represented by individual per­for­mance criteria and
associated rewards. This per­for­mance system is largely economic, as
described by Torraco (1998). Behaviorism provides the theoretical
linkage between the external per­for­mance system and individual
be­hav­ior.
• Gestalt psy­chol­ogy is primarily concerned with the integration
of the parts of the self into the w
­ hole person. Conceptually, this is
the same contribution that systems theory makes to understanding
organ­izations—­the focus on the ­whole and the interaction of the
parts, rather than reducing it to just its parts. In addition to helping
the HRD profession focus on the ­whole person, the emphasis on
holism also logically leads to a holistic view of the person embedded
in the orga­nizational system.
• Cognitivism is primarily focused on the self. Cognitive psy­chol­ogy
explains how individuals make meaning of what they experience. It
emphasizes that individuals are not simply influenced by external
­factors but make decisions about ­those influences and their implications. In the constellation of psychological theories relevant to HRD,
cognitive psy­chol­ogy exclusively focuses on the internal pro­cesses of
individuals. It helps explain how ­people learn and how they make
sense of the orga­nizational system.
EMERGING FOUNDATIONAL THEORIES OF PSY­CHOL­OGY
­There is ­little question that, of the well-­established foundation theories in psy­
chol­ogy, ­these three are the appropriate ones. ­Others, such as functionalism and
psychoanalytic theory, simply d
­ on’t fit. That said, two other emerging psychological theories point out pos­si­ble weaknesses in this scheme and offer pos­si­ble
theoretical solutions.
Individual Growth Perspective None of t­hese three theories fully recog-
nizes the potential h
­ umans have to expand and develop capabilities well beyond
­those immediately apparent. Gestalt psy­chol­ogy comes closest but still focuses
primarily on how p
­ eople perceive, think, and learn in the h
­ ere and now (Hunt,
1993). It still leaves unexplained the h
­ uman pro­cesses that underlie the motivation to grow and develop. It is this potential for growth and expansion of h
­ uman
capabilities that undergird ­human capital theory in economics.
Humanistic psy­chol­ogy is still a somewhat loosely formed movement that
views h
­ umans as self-­actualizing, self-­directing beings. It is one of the roots of
adult learning theory (Knowles, Holton, and Swanson, 2005). Two of its most
recognizable names are Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. While still not as
theoretically “tight” as behaviorism or cognitivism, it nonetheless contributes
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 103
12/3/21 3:03 PM
104
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
to explaining individuals’ motivation and potential. A core presumption of some
HRD models is that employees have intrinsic motivation to grow. While some
growth can be explained from the behavioristic notion that p
­ eople grow to seek
orga­nizational rewards, a strict behaviorist view of this phenomenon is too
­limited. The three psychological theories proposed e­ arlier (Gestalt, behaviorism,
and cognitive) may fall short in supporting HRD’s position that ­humans can reach
a far higher potential, justifying the long-­term investment to build expertise.
Social System of Organ­izations The second area of concern is ­whether
t­ hese three psychological theories, along with systems theory and economic theory, provide adequate theory to account for individuals within the social system of organ­izations. Organ­ization development specialists are particularly
focused on social system ele­ments such as orga­nizational culture, power and
politics, group dynamics, intergroup communication, and how t­ hese social systems change (Cummings and Worley, 1997). The question is w
­ hether the core
theories proposed provide an adequate foundation to understand the individual within the orga­nizational social system.
­These very concerns have led to the emergence of social psy­chol­ogy that
studies interactions between ­people and groups. It, too, is seen by some as an
eclectic discipline lacking any unifying theory (Hunt, 1993), while ­others are
more generous in describing it as still emerging in its theoretical base (Brennan, 1994). In some re­spects, social psy­chol­ogy is much like HRD, building on
other theories while creating a new theory of its own. Wiggins, Wiggins, and
Vander Zanden define social psy­chol­ogy as “the study of be­hav­ior, thoughts, and
feelings of an individual or interacting individuals and their relationships with
larger social units” (1994, 17). According to them, social psy­chol­ogy consists of
four theoretical streams, the first two from psy­chol­ogy and the second two from
sociology:
1. Behavioral perspective—­Social learning and social exchange theory
2. Cognitive perspective—­Field theory, attribution theory, and social
learning of attitudes
3. Structural perspective—­Role theory, expectation states theory, and
postmodernism
4. Interactionist perspective—­Symbolic interaction theory, identity
theory, and ethnomethodology
The offer h
­ ere is for this as a “placeholder” rather than with certainty that it
is a foundational theory. What social psy­chol­ogy emphasizes, and which seems
lacking in this HRD discipline model, is some theory base that defines the social
system of an organ­ization. Th
­ ere are deep roots in some aspects of HRD that
have relationships with social psy­chol­ogy. For example, social psychologist
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 104
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
105
Lewin’s force field theory is a core model for orga­nizational change and development. Social psy­chol­ogy also focuses on h
­ umans in groups, which is a significant issue in HRD. If social psy­chol­ogy is not the correct foundational theory,
then we must identify a component that provides a base for HRD’s work in the
social systems of organ­izations.
In summary, Kuhn (1970) cautions us that the emergence of new theory is
rarely an orderly or quick pro­cess. While both humanistic and social psy­
chol­ogy lack the conceptual clarity of cognitivism, behaviorism, and Gestalt
­ thers did not
psy­chol­ogy, they emerged to explain ­human phenomena that o
adequately describe. The question for HRD to debate is w
­ hether t­ hese same holes
are essential considerations for HRD theory. If so, ­these two emerging areas of
psy­chol­ogy—or some other theory—­should be carefully considered.
LIMITS OF PSY­CHOL­OGY—­TWO ISSUES
Domains of Per­for­mance Two predominant per­for­mance frameworks are
the Rummler and Brache (1995) model and Swanson’s (1994a) expanded framework. ­Because Swanson’s framework uses five per­for­mance variables, it is a
more power­ful lens for this analy­sis. He suggests that ­there are three levels of
per­for­mance and five per­for­mance variables. By definition, psy­chol­ogy’s primary focus is on the individual. Psychologists do consider orga­nizational context but as environmental influences on the individual, not as a core area of
focus.
Historically, HRD was also defined at the individual level (Ruona and Swanson, 1998). It is increasingly considering multiple levels (individual, group,
work pro­cess, and orga­nizational) as core focus areas. The implications of this
for HRD as a discipline are significant. If the discipline of HRD is multilevel,
then we can draw heavi­ly upon psy­chol­ogy as a foundation discipline but must
also realize it is inadequate by itself.
The psychological lens, while power­ful, leads to incorrect or inadequate conceptions of HRD when used alone. For example, Barrie and Pace (1997) state:
The question of ­whether the field of ­human resource development is
in the business of improving per­for­mance or of enhancing learning
in organ­izations has not been sufficiently explored. Succinctly put,
­advocates argue that the field should focus on creating behavioral
changes or on fostering a cognitive perspective in organ­ization members. (335, emphasis added)
The authors equate the per­for­mance perspective with the behavioral perspective in psy­chol­ogy, which is incorrect. Per­for­mance theory is concerned with
the outputs and outcomes of h
­ umans in organ­izations and the extent to which
cognitive strategies improve them. From an applied psy­chol­ogy definition of
HRD, theirs is the logical conclusion. From a broader theoretical base, their argument is incorrect.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 105
12/3/21 3:03 PM
106
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
Building Capacity for Per­for­mance Holton (1999) pre­sents an expanded
framework for conceptualizing per­for­mance domains in HRD that offers
­a nother lens to consider psy­chol­ogy’s contribution to HRD. One impor­tant
addition is the integration of Kaplan and Norton (1996) into two categories of per­for­mance mea­sures: outcomes and d
­ rivers. Unfortunately, they
do not offer concise definitions of ­either. For our purposes, outcomes are
mea­sures of effectiveness or efficiency relative to core outputs of the system,
subsystem, pro­cess, or individual. The most typical are financial indicators
(profit, return on investment [ROI], ­etc.) and productivity mea­sures (units of
goods or ser­v ices produced) and are often generic across companies. According to Kaplan and Norton, ­these mea­sures tend to be lag indicators in that
they reflect what has occurred or has been accomplished concerning core
outcomes.
­ rivers mea­sure ele­ments of per­for­mance that are expected to sustain or inD
crease system, subsystem, pro­cess, or individual ability and capacity to be more
effective or efficient in the ­future. Thus, they are leading indicators of ­future outcomes and tend to be unique for par­tic­u­lar business units. Together with outcome mea­sures, they describe the hypothesized cause-­and-­effect relationships
in the organ­ization’s strategy (Kaplan and Norton, 1996). Thus, ­drivers should
predict ­future outcomes. For example, for a par­tic­u­lar com­pany, ROI might be
the appropriate outcome mea­sure that might be driven by customer loyalty and
on-­time delivery, which in turn might be caused by employee learning so that
internal pro­cesses are optimized. Conceptually, per­for­mance ­d rivers could
be added as a third axis to Swanson’s per­for­mance levels and per­for­mance
variables.
This lens further defines the limits of psy­chol­ogy’s contribution to HRD:
• At the individual level, psy­chol­ogy pays only ­limited attention to
building ­future capacity for individual per­for­mance.
• At other levels, per­for­mance ­drivers are not an area of focus for
psy­chol­ogy.
Some areas of psy­chol­ogy are preoccupied with current per­for­mance and outcomes, while HRD has a more balanced view of building capacity for ­future execution in addition to pre­sent implementation.
SUMMARY
As part of a series of papers on the core theories of HRD, this treatise was primarily designed to initiate an ongoing dialogue to continue defining the discipline of HRD. HRD has, and always ­w ill have, psy­chol­ogy as one of its core
theories. It is psy­chol­ogy that reminds us that our discipline is concerned with
­humans in organ­izations. We must recognize its contributions as well as its limitations as a lens through which to view HRD.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 106
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
107
Economics, ­Human Capital Theory, and HRD
Contributed by Richard J. Torraco, University of Nebraska
Economics offers a distinctive perspective for analyzing complex situations for
making choices about how scarce resources can be allocated among competing
needs. This section explic­itly addresses ­human capital theory and the economic
realities of individuals, organ­izations, and communities. ­Human capital theory
demonstrates the central role of economics as a theoretical foundation of H
­ uman
Resource Development (HRD) and its practice.
WHAT IS ECONOMICS?
Economics addresses the allocation of scarce resources among a variety of
­human wants and needs. Economics represents h
­ uman wants and the scarcity
of resources as essential and perennial ele­ments in the study of any ­human activity. Like other social sciences, economics deals with ­human be­hav­ior that cannot be controlled, such as the physical mechanisms of automated equipment
used by an engineer. Economics uses society as its laboratory and cannot engage in experimentation favored by the physicist or chemist. As with the social
sciences in general, economics is not an exact science, and its predictions about
economic developments are subject to error. Nonetheless, according to Lewis
(1977), economics is the social science “with the most sophisticated body of
theory—­that is, the one with the greatest predictability accuracy of all the social sciences” (43). For comprehensive treatments of economics, see Klugman
and Wells (2017) and Mankiw (2020).
WHAT IS ­HUMAN CAPITAL THEORY?
­Human capital theory is considered the branch of economics most applicable
to h
­ uman resource development. H
­ uman capital theory offers an increasingly
influential perspective on social and economic policy. While Theodore Schultz’s
(1961) address to the American Economic Association was the first pre­sen­ta­
tion of research on the return-­on-­investment in ­human capital, Gary S. Becker
is generally credited with developing ­human capital theory. Becker’s seminal
work advanced the widespread understanding of h
­ uman capital and applied
princi­ples of ­human capital theory to education (Becker, 1993).
Classic economic theory considers ­labor as a commodity that can be bought
and sold. B
­ ecause of the negative connotations associated with the exploitation
of ­labor by capital, it is understandable that h
­ uman capital theory is still suspect in some circles. However, unlike the meaning traditionally associated with
the term ­labor, ­human capital refers to the knowledge and expertise one accumulates through education and training. Emphasizing the social and economic
importance of ­human capital theory, Becker (1993) quoted the economist
­Alfred Marshall’s dictum that “the most valuable of all capital is that invested
in ­human beings” (27).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 107
12/3/21 3:03 PM
108
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
Becker distinguished specific ­human capital from general ­human capital.
General ­human capital development increases the skills and productivity of
­people by the same amount in the organ­izations providing the training as in
other organ­izations. General ­human capital involves developing capabilities that
are generic and broadly applicable, such as problem-­solving skills, communication skills, and leadership skills. However, certain kinds of education and
training increase the productivity of ­people more in the organ­izations providing
the training than in other organ­izations, largely b
­ ecause the training is specific
­ uman capito the work of that organ­ization. Referred to by Becker as specific h
tal, this includes training in production operations, ser­vice delivery, firm-­specific
management information systems, and most forms of on-­the-­job training since
they address skills used in a par­tic­u­lar organ­ization.
Both specific training and general training are means of ­human capital development that are impor­tant both to ­those acquiring the knowledge and skill
and to the organ­izations and communities where trainees ­will use ­these skills.
However, the incentives for an organ­ization to invest in training are dif­fer­ent
for the two types of training. ­Because general training develops expertise that
can increase productivity by the same amount in the organ­ization providing
the training as in other organ­izations, competitors could benefit by hiring
trained employees away from the organ­izations that provide general training.
For this reason, organ­izations may be less likely to offer general training. This
distinction notwithstanding, Becker states that “education and training are the
most impor­tant investments in h
­ uman capital” (1993, 17).
Becker’s application of h
­ uman capital theory to education and training provides a basis for sound decision making about allocating resources to education in general and HRD in par­tic­u­lar. Investing in the education and training
of ­those who are more educated to begin with is justified by the concept of financial rates of return. With the knowledge economy demanding more ­human
capital, ­there are increasingly strong market-­based incentives to produce skills
more efficiently. The need to create more h
­ uman capital cheaper, faster, and better inevitably leads to an investment bias that f­avors the most highly skilled
and educated. An additional dollar invested in a more highly qualified person
brings higher economic returns than an additional dollar invested in a less experienced youth or adult. As a result, financial incentives alone are unlikely to
lead to greater investments in the least skilled (Carnevale and Fry, 2001). However, this is not meant to justify investing training resources in ­those who are
­ thers. Such a strategy would cut short the availhighly skilled at the expense of o
ability of education and training for several impor­tant segments of the population when more skilled workers are critically needed. ­These include working-­age
adults at the midcareer stage who, e­ ither by choice or more likely by necessity,
must find new jobs or ­careers—­a predicament made more difficult without obtaining the requisite skills (Ci, Galdo, Voia, and Worswick, 2015). Improving
language skills for immigrants to a nation is another example.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 108
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
109
1
Inputs
Resources
Education
and Training
Resources/
Inputs
2
Outcomes
Production
Processes
Earnings/Output
Citizenship
Processes
Efficacy/Output
3
Figure 6.2: A Model of ­Human Capital Theory
In short, the notion of wide-­scale h
­ uman capital development reaches beyond the short-­term financial incentives for ­doing so. It embraces the ongoing
training and development of ­those at all levels, including members of low-­income
working families, ­those with disabilities, and academically underprepared workers who have deficiencies in both their academic and job skills.
The rates of return on education analyzed by Becker are impressive and have
contributed substantially to advancing h
­ uman capital theory into the forefront
of social and economic policy. The findings of Becker’s (1993) empirical analy­
sis of the rates of return on education include the average rate of return on a
college education to white males is between 11 and 13 ­percent, with higher rates
on a high school education and even higher rates on an elementary school education. Recent projections of the employment and wage premiums for ­those with
postsecondary education versus a high school diploma show a higher likelihood
of full-­time, full-­year employment, higher wages, and better benefits (Carnevale,
Jayasundera, and Gulish, 2015).
A Model of H
­ uman Capital Theory (see figure 6.2) pre­sents the key relationships in ­human capital theory and the assumptions under­lying ­these relationships. Key relationships and assumptions of ­human capital theory are represented
in figure 6.2 by the numbered brackets 1, 2, and 3. Based in systems theory, the
relationships in figure 6.2 are pro­cess models, each composed of inputs, pro­
cesses, and outputs.
• Relationship 1 represents the concept of production functions as
applied to education and training. This relationship shows the
potential of education as a means to foster learning and ­human
capital development. Relationship 1 is a pro­cess model showing that
inputs/resources to education and training (e.g., investments in
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 109
12/3/21 3:03 PM
110
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
schools, instructors, learning materials, and so on) should produce
learning outcomes. Presumably, as p
­ eople participate in education
and training, they learn and acquire knowledge and skill. The
fundamental assumption under­lying this relationship is that investments in education and training do result in increased understanding. Relationship 1 includes the ­human capital variables assessed
using cost-­effectiveness analy­sis.
• Relationship 2 represents the h
­ uman capital relationship between
learning and increased productivity. This relationship shows the
potential contribution of education and learning to increased productivity. The pro­cess model in relationship 2 shows that increased
learning should produce increased productivity. Presumably, as
­people acquire more knowledge and skill, they apply this expertise in
their work and thereby enhance productivity. The fundamental
assumption under­lying this relationship is that increased learning
does result in increased productivity.
• Relationship 3 represents the h
­ uman capital relationships among
increased productivity and increased wages and business earnings,
and between increased citizenship pro­cesses and increased social
efficacy. Presumably, as productivity increases, business revenues are
generated that result in higher wages for employees and higher
earnings for businesses. Similarly, as citizenship pro­cesses affected
by education are enhanced (e.g., community involvement, voting,
socially responsible action), social efficacy would be expected to
increase (e.g., social equity and opportunity, enhancements to the
environment). The fundamental assumption under­lying this relationship is that increased productivity results in increased wages
for individuals and earnings for businesses. An equally impor­tant
assumption of ­human capital theory represented by relationship 3
is that improved citizenship pro­cesses affected by education
enhance social efficacy.
• The entire h
­ uman capital continuum represented in figure 6.2
(i.e., all the bracketed relationships as a single continuum) is
assessed using return-­on-­investment analy­sis or cost-­benefit
analy­sis.
ECONOMICS AND ­HUMAN CAPITAL THEORY—­
KEY CONCEPTS AND APPLICATIONS
The study of HRD is partially grounded in economics and h
­ uman capital theory. In this section, concepts of economics and ­human capital theory are discussed and applied to the field of HRD, thus, demonstrating their centrality to
HRD theory, research, and practice.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 110
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
111
Productivity. Productivity is an efficiency concept used in production systems to express the ratio of output relative to input. Productivity is a mea­sure
of the relationship of output (the goods and ser­vices produced) to inputs (the
­labor, capital, and other resources used to produce them). The concept of productivity relates to per­for­mance efficiency, not to outcome per­for­mance or
effectiveness.
Total-­factor productivity. Total-­Factor productivity refers to the efficiency
of transforming all inputs in combination into outputs—­t he efficiency of the
­entire pro­cess. Inputs to production include l­abor, raw materials, physical
capital (equipment, tools, hardware and software), production time, and other
­specialized inputs that may apply. Total-­factor productivity is the production
of outputs relative to all inputs.
Partial-­factor productivity. Partial-­factor productivity refers to the output
attributable to a single input ­factor (e.g., ­labor). For example, a standard mea­
sure of productivity is “output per l­ abor hour”—­a partial-­factor productivity
mea­sure.
Supply and demand. The supply of and demand for education and training
affect the competitive position of organ­izations such that h
­ uman resource development’s role becomes central to the organ­ization’s long-­term viability. Classical economics posits that, on average, scarce resources are more valuable than
plentiful resources. Grounded in economic theory, Wright, McMahan, and McWilliams’s (1994) resource-­based view of the firm is based on the concept of
supply and demand. They suggest that ­human resources and expert workers in
par­tic­u­lar substantially increase the competitive position of the firm b
­ ecause
they enhance the value of the firm’s ­human resources in ways that are (a) rare,
(b) inimitable, (c) valuable, and (d) nonsubstitutable. It is challenging to stay
competitive with organ­izations whose greatest assets are embedded in ­people—
­ uman capital.
their h
Elasticity of demand. This concept is an elaboration of the concept of supply and demand. Elasticity of demand indicates the degree of responsiveness of
the quantity of a product or ser­vice demanded by consumers to changes in the
market price of the product or ser­vice. Elastic demand exists when a price reduction leads to a substantial increase in demand for the product or ser­vice (and
an increase in total revenue despite the price cut). Inelastic demand exists when
a price reduction leads to a decrease in total revenue despite the price cut. Elastic demand exists for some leisure and recreation-­related goods (e.g., airfares,
vacation cruises, and hotel-­resort rates). Inelastic demand exists for gasoline
prices, railroad ser­vice, and certain necessities (e.g., foods, medicine) for which
acceptable substitutes are unavailable.
The elasticity of demand for HRD can be viewed in several contexts. For
example, how elastic is the need for education/training when its cost increases
relative to the cost of alternative activities in the workplace (e.g., attend training versus remain on-­the-­job)? ­Will attendance or support for HRD increase,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 111
12/3/21 3:03 PM
112
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
despite its increased cost, if the intervention is perceived as crucial to orga­
nizational growth or survival (e.g., an organ­ization development or per­for­
mance improvement intervention)? To what degree does the availability of
substitutes for training (e.g., outsourcing, hiring versus training skilled personnel) influence the elasticity of demand for training?
Opportunity costs. Opportunity costs are the value of opportunities foregone
due to participation in a given proj­ect or activity. By electing a par­tic­u­lar course
of action among alternatives, one necessarily foregoes the opportunities offered
by the other options. ­Human capital theory involves opportunity costs at several levels of HRD practice. At the orga­nizational level, opportunity costs in
HRD occur with programs that have been established to prepare groups of employees for par­tic­u­lar positions or c­ areer opportunities. By adopting ­these programs in an environment of scarce resources, the organ­ization necessarily
foregoes the opportunities to provide programs for other positions or employee
populations.
At the individual level, participation in employer-­sponsored training, especially during regular working hours, incurs the opportunity costs associated
with lost productivity on the job. This opportunity cost has traditionally been
a significant source of management reluctance to support certain types of training. Similar opportunity costs are incurred at the department level when work
activities are foregone to participate in training. At the organ­ization level, the
value of opportunity costs is necessarily higher as is the value of h
­ uman capital
­because it is applied across the organ­ization. Opportunity costs are the flip side
(and sometimes the unnoticed side) of the benefits of education and HRD.
Production functions. Production functions are the technical or physical relationships between the inputs and outputs in a value-­added pro­cess. Concerning educational investments in h
­ uman capital, we wish to know the precise
inputs (i.e., resources) that enter the production pro­cess (i.e., education), the precise relationship between f­actors within the production pro­cess, and the outputs (i.e., benefits, outcomes) that result from the educational production pro­cess
(Lewis, 1977). Educational economists are not disinterested in the learning pro­
cess and the best ways for ­people to acquire skills. On the contrary, studies
of the ways p
­ eople learn and use their skills in the workplace should reflect
economic considerations and ­human capital theory. Production functions in
HRD are represented by choices such as internal training (i.e., provided by the
employer) versus external training (i.e., provided by a training vendor), classroom versus online training, the direct involvement of supervisors or subject
­matter experts in developing programs, and other means of producing education and training.
Macroeconomic theory. Macroeconomic theory addresses the aggregate per­
for­mance of an entire economy or economic system (e.g., the Eu­ro­pean economy or world economy). Macroeconomics is concerned with fiscal and monetary
policy and the interaction of major determinants of economic developments,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 112
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
113
such as wages, prices, employment levels, interest rates, capital investments, the
distribution of income, and other ­factors. Macroeconomics is contrasted with
microeconomics, which focuses on the individual consumer, ­family, or firm
and the determinants of each of t­ hese f­actors (i.e., wages, interest rates) in
par­tic­u­lar.
­Human capital theory has both macroeconomic and microeconomic implications for HRD. HRD on a regional or national level is what economists might
call “­human capital deepening” on a macroeconomic scale. The increased value
of ­human capital derived from HRD is likely to influence productivity, wages,
prices, and other ­factors at an aggregate level of the economy. Conversely, the
decisions made by HRD professionals in organ­izations are microeconomic in
scope—­that is, they influence the economic per­for­mance of a par­tic­u­lar community, organ­ization, group, or its members.
Screening theory of education. The screening theory of education suggests
that, as opposed to affecting the productivity increases espoused by h
­ uman
capital theory, education serves a screening function in which individuals are
ranked by ability, achievement levels, and grading. Any productivity gains apparent from education are, therefore, a function of the traits of t­ hose being educated, not a product of the education pro­cess. That is, increased productivity
derives from the abilities of individuals and not from their education. Education serves to screen out t­ hose who do not have the ability; individuals with ability complete their educations, o
­ thers do not. Some evidence exists in support of
the screening theory of education (Stiglitz, 1975). The implications of this theory extend to HRD in that training might be seen as a screening activity and,
thus, perceived as not improving productivity. Education also may be viewed
as a screening pro­cess for promotion, transfer, or other personnel action.
­ UTURE CHALLENGES TO ­HUMAN CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT
F
The period since World War II has been characterized by growth and prosperity in the United States due in large part to advancements in technological and
­human capital development. But continued growth and prosperity seem uncertain in light of recent social and economic developments. Two such developments are (a) the rise of surveillance capitalism and (b) the consequences of
increasing economic in­equality. This section addresses the challenge to h
­ uman
capital development posed by each of t­ hese threats.
SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM
Surveillance capitalism is “a new economic order that claims h
­ uman experience
as ­free raw material for hidden commercial practices of extraction, prediction,
and sales” (Zuboff, 2019, iv). Shoshana Zuboff coined the term surveillance capitalism about recently developed AI-­enabled capabilities that unilaterally capture private h
­ uman experience as ­free raw material to use for commercial
purposes. Information that can be covertly collected is analyzed and packaged
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 113
12/3/21 3:03 PM
114
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
as a product that predicts ­human be­hav­ior, such as the purchasing patterns of
individuals that are made available to commercial customers seeking advanced
insight into what consumers want and how they access what they want.
Surveillance capitalism emerged as Google in­ven­ted a formula and algorithms that track and interpret unwitting users’ search choices and purchasing
be­hav­iors. Highly appealing to business and commerce, surveillance capitalism
has expanded despite growing anxiety about incursions into privacy. Reflecting the concerns of Americans about data collected about them by companies,
81 ­percent of Americans believe that the potential risks of companies collecting data about them outweigh the benefits (Auxier et al., 2019). Recognizing the
risk and wanting to avoid public scrutiny, organ­izations that use consumer prediction models based on surveillance use obfuscation and deception instead of
accepted marketing strategies that yield consumers’ a­ ctual needs. An example
presented by ProPublica shows how insurance companies are using data sent
from the CPAP breathing machines used by ­people with sleep apnea as information to justify reduced insurance payments (Allen, 2018).
Surveillance capitalism poses a growing threat to ­human capital development. It is infringing on the potential of ­human capital and attenuating the
strength and autonomy of individual and collective contributions to our social
and economic well-­being. Innovation and ­human capital development are
thwarted in a surveillance environment that engenders fear that one’s privacy
can be indiscriminately ­violated. Advocates for individuals’ rights, privacy, and
widespread opportunity are aligned with h
­ uman capital proponents in extolling the merits of democracy and the evils of deception.
ECONOMIC IN­EQUALITY AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
Economic in­equality—­t he income gap between the wealthy and the poor—is
increasing, and the ­middle class—­once a substantial proportion of the U.S. population—is shrinking (Pew Research Center, 2015). Economic in­equality f­ osters
educational inequity and is a direct affront to h
­ uman capital development
­(Stiglitz, 2015). The deleterious effects of increasing economic in­equality are apparent in the disparity in educational achievement among students of wealthy
and poor families (Dickert-­Conlin and Rubenstein, 2009). High test scores and
high ­family income are associated with a greater likelihood of graduating from
college (Belley and Lochner, 2007; Turner, 2004). But increasing economic in­
equality has widened the gap in ­family incomes and contributed to disparities
in educational outcomes among students at dif­fer­ent income levels. Bailey and
Dynarski (2011) demonstrated that low-­income students with high test scores
are less likely to gradu­ate from college than high-­income students with low test
scores. Compounding this unfortunate trend is that postsecondary education
is becoming more expensive and, as costs rise, more exclusive (U.S. Department
of Education, 2019). ­These educational disparities also reduce ­career opportunities for t­hose with inadequate education (Carnevale, Jayasundera, and
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 114
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
115
­ ulish, 2016). H
G
­ uman capital theorists and l­abor economists have long maintained that as the breadth and depth of one’s education expands, so do the range
and quality of the c­ areer opportunities available (Becker, 1993; Mincer, 1989).
With 20.2 ­percent of ­children ages zero to seventeen in the United States
living in poverty, the nation is well above the average across Organ­ization for
Economic Co-­operation and Development (OECD) countries of 13.1 ­percent
childhood poverty. Among developed nations, the United States has among the
highest poverty rates for the general population (OECD, 2019). The threat to
­human capital development posed by increasing economic in­equality warrants
substantially more attention from policy makers and researchers (Torraco, 2018).
SUMMARY
The development of ­human capital is critical not only to organ­izations but also
to workforce development and utilization. The economic realities facing HRD
include the following:
• The mea­sure­ments used most frequently in organ­izations of any
kind are financial mea­sures.
• HRD professionals are reluctant to express their work in financial
terms, even though organ­izations and communities are eco­nom­
ically driven.
• All organ­izations (public, private, nonprofit) need to be responsive to
the financial and economic imperatives that support their existence.
HRD is expected to be responsive to the needs of the individuals
and organ­izations it serves. Economics and ­human capital theory
underlie the viability of both organ­izations and HRD.
• The dynamics of ­human capital development occur along the continuum of ­human activity—­from the individual or group to the
entire population. The participation of students, citizens, or workers
represents individual h
­ uman capital development; the participation
of populations and nation-­states represents aggregate h
­ uman capital
development.
• The merits of ­human capital development go beyond its contributions to workforce and economic development. The social benefits
of ­human capital development are manifested in greater community
involvement, civic participation, voting, and public ser­vice.
Princi­ples of economics and ­human capital theory are part of the fabric of
the organ­izations in which HRD professionals carry out their work. Ideology
aside, the real­ity in our culture is that economic choices are among the most
impor­tant decisions made in the workplace. ­These considerations support economics and ­human capital theory having a central place in the theoretical foundation of HRD. The following case study further illustrates ­these relationships.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 115
12/3/21 3:03 PM
116
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
CASE EXAMPLE: ­HUMAN CAPITAL AND NATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT: A TALE OF TWO ­KOREAS
The countries of North ­Korea and South ­Korea exist together on the Korean peninsula separated by a narrow demilitarized zone. The two countries share similar climate, geography, and prior to the end of World
War II, similar national and ethnic heritages. Since 1945, North ­Korea has
been a single-­party state governed by a dictatorship, while South ­Korea
has been a presidential republic with a demo­cratic government and constitution. Recent estimates (2018) of populations are 25.4 million (North
­Korea) and 51.4 million (South K
­ orea), and of life expectancy are 71 years
(North ­Korea) and 82.5 years (South K
­ orea).
North K
­ orea contends with chronic social and economic prob­lems
including severe famine and widespread starvation in the mid-2000s,
prolonged malnutrition and poor living conditions that persist to the pre­
sent, and preoccupation with military and nuclear arms development at
the expense of a standard of living that is among the lowest of developed
nations. On the other hand, South ­Korea is a major participant in the
global economy despite its relatively small size and population. Since 2017
wages in South ­Korea have increased, government spending has risen, and
export growth has increased to raise real GDP growth by 2–3 percent.
The role of ­human capital development in the success of South K
­ orea and
the stagnation of North ­Korea is undeniable. Although literacy rates are similarly high in both countries, the duration of primary to tertiary education is
11 years in North ­Korea whereas it is 50 percent longer in South K
­ orea at
17 years. North K
­ orea’s estimated l­abor productivity in 2017 was only 3.8 percent compared to 5.2 percent for South ­Korea. Disparities in ­human capital
investment also are apparent in poverty rates: an estimated 50 percent of the
population in North K
­ orea and 14.6 percent in South K
­ orea. ­Today GDP in
North ­Korea is lower than in 1990 despite a larger population; gross national
income per capita is likely only a small percentage of that in South ­Korea.
Source: CIA Factbook (Central Intelligence Agency, 2020).
Systems Theory as a Foundation for HRD
Contributed by Wendy E. A. Ruona, University of Georgia
It is widely acknowledged that HRD is a discipline rooted in multiple theories.
While it is true that HRD utilizes many theories, most of t­ hese theories are not
foundational or core to HRD. A foundation is a basis on which a t­ hing stands
and comprises ­those ele­ments that are essential to its survival. For a profession
such as HRD, a foundation must be theoretically sound, and its professionals
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 116
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
117
must be well-­versed in what comprises that core. Indeed, Warfield (1995) regards
the specification of foundations as central to the pro­gress of a discipline when
he stated, “Science is a body of knowledge consisting of three variously integrated
components: foundations, theory, and methodology. Foundations inform theory and the theory informs the methodology” (81).
Systems theory has been proposed h
­ ere as one of three core theories integrated to constitute HRD theory. While many are committed to systems
theory implicitly if not explic­itly, its incorporation into HRD’s foundational
base has yet to fully take hold. The goal of this section is to investigate the contribution of systems theory to HRD.
WHAT IS SYSTEMS THEORY?
Systems theory is fundamentally a theory concerned with systems and their interdependent relationships. Beyond this elementary description, ­there is not
one correct way to define it. The ­father of general systems theory was von
­Bertalanffy, who in 1968 first forwarded his revolutionary ideas on complex
systems. As forwarded by von Bertalanffy, general systems theory birthed a
newly or­ga­nized body of science and a new scientific paradigm. Systems theory
­today includes numerous variations. All of them share a fundamental interest
in understanding systems—­with a par­tic­u­lar emphasis on the interdependencies and dynamics of the parts, how they are or­ga­nized, and how they work together to produce results.
Scope Multiple fields are direct descendants of systems theory and operate as
part of the larger conceptual framework of systems inquiry. Although all ­these
related fields are distinctive, they align in their concern with the system. Four
of t­ hese dominate the discussion in systems theory.
General systems theory. As described above, general systems theory is known
for focusing multiple disciplines on ­wholes, parts, the organ­ization and connectedness of the vari­ous parts, and, especially, the relationships of systems to their
environment. von Bertalanffy (1968) challenged traditional conceptions of
organ­ization by forwarding the notion of open systems. In so d
­ oing, he laid the
foundation for the other major fields of study described below.
Cybernetics. Cybernetics is the science of information, communication, feedback, and control both within a system and between a system and its environment. Its focus is more on how systems function—­how they react to and pro­cess
information. The result of much of its core work has been in defining heterogeneous interacting components, such as mutuality, complementarily, evolvability, constructively, and reflexivity (Joslyn, 1992). Cybernetics is the foundation
for the emphasis on feedback loops that are commonly associated with modern-­
day systems thinking.
Chaos. Chaos theory is the “qualitative study of unstable aperiodic be­hav­
ior in deterministic non-­linear dynamic systems” (Kellert, 1993, 2). A parallel
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 117
12/3/21 3:03 PM
118
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
and highly related field of study growing predominantly out of physics, this theory revolutionized science through its discovery that complex and unpredictable results ­were actually not random but, rather, could be expected in systems
that are sensitive to their initial conditions. Be­hav­ior assumed to be random in
systems of e­ very type was found to be bounded and operating within recognizable patterns. Now it is widely recognized that forces in a system endlessly rearrange themselves in dif­fer­ent yet similar patterns. The resulting hidden pattern
is coined chaos, fractal, or strange. Chaos theory seeks to understand this ordered randomness and enables scientists to discover and study chaotic be­hav­ior.
Complex adaptive systems. This field inquires into a special kind of system
and strives for an even more holistic view. ­These systems are complex ­because
they are diverse and nonlinear. They are adaptive in that they can change and
learn from experience. Founded by the Santa Fe Institute, the field of complex
adaptive systems (CAS) proposes that systems function in a unique area of
complexity and conduct self-­organizing and learning pro­cesses that include
structural change through self-­renewal (replication, copy, and reproduction),
nonlinear flows of information and resources, and “far-­from-­equilibrium conditions that create a dynamic stability where paradox abounds” (Dooley, 1996,
p. 20). The field of CAS, then, is vitally impor­tant to our understanding of how
systems emerge, change, and learn from experience in a way that makes the
­future of a system unpredictable and, ultimately, determined by a dynamic network of agents acting and reacting in parallel (Holland, 1995).
WHY SYSTEMS THEORY?
Even a­ fter this brief review of systems theory, the question must be raised about
­whether HRD has any choice but to fully embrace systems theory. If HRD agrees
that it serves organ­izations and the ­people in them, it must logically adopt the
science of systems as a core foundation. Organ­izations are systems. A system is
defined ­here as a collection of ele­ments where the per­for­mance of the w
­ hole is
affected by ­every one of the parts and the way that any part affects the ­whole
depends on what at least one other part is ­doing. Although ­there remains some
critique of using the “organ­ization as organism” meta­phor (Morgan, 1996),
organ­izations can be viewed as living systems of discernible ­wholes that have
lives of their own that they manifest through their pro­cesses, structures, and
subsystems (Jaros and Dostal, 1995; Wheatley, 1999). One of the largest differences between organ­izations and other living systems is that they are multiminded, a fact that HRD has long accepted.
Systems theory provides a common conception of organ­izations—an or­ga­
nizer or conceptual frame through which HRD can ensure a holistic understanding of its subject. It also provides analy­sis methodologies capable of including
multiple variables. For ­these two impor­tant reasons, systems theory/inquiry is
an essentially meaningful way to comprehend an organ­ization.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 118
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
S
Y
S
T
E
M
S
Information
Direction
Capabilities
119
Information
• Structure
• Behavior
• Change
• Future
Direction
• HRD as a System
• Theory Building
• Theory vs. Fad
Capabilities
• Understanding
• Analysis & Modeling
• Problem Solving
Figure 6.3: A Cross-­Section of the Systems Leg: Contributions
of Systems Theory
THE SUPPORT PROVIDED TO HRD BY SYSTEMS THEORY
It is not pos­si­ble to provide a comprehensive review of the multiple ways in which
systems theory contributes valuable knowledge to HRD. However, some general themes can be drawn from the lit­er­a­ture and grouped into conceptual categories. A cross-­section of the systems leg of the three-­legged stool proposed by
Swanson (1998b) visually depicts ­these three categories—­three ways that systems theory supports HRD (figure 6.3). Systems inquiry provides (a) information: knowledge or data about systems, (b) capabilities: the potential to act, and
(c) direction: guidance for a field’s activities and development.
Information Provided by Systems Theory A primary goal of systems the-
ory is to uncover information about systems. During the last forty to fifty years,
a vast amount of knowledge has been compiled to help HRD professionals understand the basic structure and essences of systems’ parts and w
­ holes. Four distinct areas of information have emerged from the lit­er­a­ture review conducted
by this author. A description of each area and a cursory discussion of the implications resulting from that knowledge are provided below.
Structure of systems. Systems theory has sought to understand the basic
structure of systems—­how their parts are arranged, the interrelation of parts
to other parts and of ­wholes to the environment, and the purposes of the system design. Although some systems scientists propose that the structure of a
system is hardly separable from its functioning or be­hav­ior, ­others study structure specifically and agree that certain ele­ments provide necessary infrastructure (such as bound­a ries, feedback structures, and mechanisms that serve
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 119
12/3/21 3:03 PM
120
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
specific purposes). For example, Prigogine and Stengers (1984) discovered that
systems in disequilibrium produce new structures spontaneously from the disorder. Field theory, commonly discussed related to orga­nizational development,
emerged in the 1970s to explain the space in systems that affect the structure.
Fi­nally, the issue of levels in complex systems has begun to attract scholarly
attention.
Be­hav­ior of systems. The be­hav­ior of a system must be understood before it
can be influenced. Systems theorists conduct considerable research into the
pro­cesses and be­hav­iors of a system. While it is not pos­si­ble to offer a comprehensive inventory of the plethora of information in this area, a brief account
demonstrates how extensive it is and how much information is available for HRD
to tap into to better understand how systems behave.
Katz and Kahn (1966) identified nine common characteristics of open systems that help inform HRD of the basic character of systems. To date, seventeen laws of complexity have been discovered and can be classified in a matrix
particularly relevant to be­hav­ior outcomes (Warfield, 1995). McLagan (1989c)
discusses pro­cesses unique to self-­creating systems. Dooley (1996) offers theoretical propositions of complex adaptive systems. The entire field of cybernetics
exists for the primary goal of understanding information pro­cessing and how
nonlinear feedback guides systems be­hav­ior. Fi­nally, chaos and emerging fields
of complexity inform us that the random be­hav­ior of a system reveals an under­
lying pattern and order and that complex systems are deterministic (that is,
they have something that is determining their be­hav­ior).
Change pro­cesses. Systems theory acknowledges that change is part of the
very fabric of systems. A systems subfield, population ecol­ogy, focuses almost
entirely on the potential evolution of the system and posits that ­actual equilibrium in a system is equal to death, underscoring how systems must evolve, grow,
and change to survive. It has taught us to view change as the activation of a system’s inherent potential for transformation. The field of ontogeny supports this
evolutionary perspective in developing ways to study the history of structural
change in a unity without loss of organ­ization in that unity (Dooley, 1995).
Systems theory is also increasingly probing for a deeper understanding of
the nature and pro­cesses of change in systems. Findings in systems theory inform us that systems sensitive to initial conditions are fairly unpredictable in
that minor changes can cause huge fluctuations through amplification or, conversely, that some changes in systems can have no apparent effect at all. We also
know from the theory that (a) systems be­hav­ior gets worse before it grows better,
(b) systems tend t­oward equilibrium (thus, to expect re­sis­tance to incremental
change), and (c) changes in the essential nature of a system take place when a
control pa­ram­e­ter passes a critical threshold or bifurcation point (Dooley,
1996). From the field of chaos and complexity, we are beginning to understand
that a system is creative not when all of its components pull in same direction
but when they generate tension by pulling in contradictory directions (Stacey,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 120
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
121
1992). Systems theory renders the complex dynamics of change more comprehensible through the uncovering of general princi­ples about the nature of change.
The ­future in systems. ­There have been many distinguished systems scientists who have also been very active in studying the f­ uture. Systems theory contributed a rather revolutionary ele­ment to f­ utures theory. It surfaced the real­ity
that the f­ uture is emergent—it is created by, and emerges from, self-­organization
and the interaction of its members (Banathy, 1997; Hammond, 2005; Stacey,
1992).
What does this mean? It means that emergent systems are adaptable, evolvable, boundless, and resilient and are not optimal, controllable, or predictable.
The lit­er­a­ture emerging out of chaos, in par­tic­u­lar, informs us that the ­future is
unpredictable due to a system’s sensitivity to initial conditions as well as specific characteristics being discovered about emergent systems. Attempting to
perform traditional strategic planning given this information has extreme limitations. In a systems approach, rather, the focus of the inquiry is on the general
character of a system’s long-­term be­hav­ior. ­There is ongoing pressure to develop
improved ways of understanding the qualitative patterns that emerge, how to
increase the ability of a system to cope with its emerging f­ uture, and how to use
evolution as a tool. The emphasis in modern organ­izations on core competencies, strategic thinking, and scenario planning reflects the application of t­ hese
princi­ples.
Capabilities Offered by Systems Theory Systems theory offers a specific
contribution that affects how ­things are seen or done beyond just the information described above. It is in this way that systems theory provides HRD with
capabilities—­the potential to act.
Understanding of w
­ holes and complexity. Some might find it strange that this
theme has been categorized as a capability. However, it is placed h
­ ere to sufficiently recognize the perspective contributed by the ontology and epistemology
discussed ­earlier in this paper. Information provided by systems theory is simply raw data without professionals using it to act in ways that are unique in what
can often be a mechanistic, reductionist environment. If we accept and utilize
systems as a foundational theory, it enables us to set critical standards for our
profession that demand a deep analy­sis of the ­whole to seek understanding. The
conceptual importance of the ­whole cannot be minimized in HRD, and it has
­great implications. While many frameworks are emerging from organ­ization
theory that seek to model the parts of an organ­ization, systems theories remind
us that we must use ­these only as a starting point. Systems theories acknowledge that systems have a life of their own separate from their parts, focus on
the interactions between the parts rather than the variables themselves, concede
that cause and effect are distant in time and space, and remind us that the properties of the parts and the ­whole system are constantly interacting, emerging,
and evolving. Systems theories should help to remind the HRD practitioner that
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 121
12/3/21 3:03 PM
122
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
the nature of a system is a continuing perception and deception—­a continual
reviewing of the world.
Systems theory also offers a unique capability rooted in its perspective on
the complexity that organ­izations face. This includes understanding the environment and its impact on systems and the complexities within systems. ­These
understandings better position systems professionals to deal with the unpredictability inherent in systems and recognize the need for nonlinear feedback and
structural instability as sources of innovation and growth. Furthermore, current
lit­er­a­ture reveals that chaos methods are being discussed as tools to simplify
decisions made in conditions of complexity. Guastello (1995) asserts that the
toolkit of nonlinear dynamical systems theory consists of attractor and repellor forces, stabilities and instabilities, bifurcation and self-­organization, fractal
geometry, the distinction between evolutionary and revolutionary change, and
catastrophes and discontinuous change. All of this redirects the potential of
HRD to act and forces the development of new capabilities.
Methodologies for analy­sis and modeling. Systems theory offers much in the
way of describing, analyzing, and creating models of systems. ­These methods
facilitate the analy­sis and modeling of complex interpersonal, intergroup, and
human/nature interactions without reducing the subject ­matter to the level of
individual agents. The key is to utilize methods that allow the abstraction of certain details of structure and component while concentrating on the dynamics
that define the characteristic functions, properties, and relationships. This simplification is coined “reduction to dynamics” (Laszlo and Laszlo, 1997). ­There
are multiple analy­sis and modeling approaches grounded in the systems approach to be reviewed in the lit­er­a­ture. Generally, they entail identifying multiple ele­ments around and in a system and a refocusing on the ­whole, integrating
what was learned to understand the overall phenomena.
Problem-­solving approaches. Systems theory offers two ­things in terms of approaching prob­lem solving in applied sciences such as HRD. First, systems
theorists start from the prob­lem, not some preconceived notion of a model or a
solution. Once the manifestation of the prob­lem has been identified and described, they proceed inward to the subsystems and outward to the environment (Laszlo and Laszlo, 1997). Second, systems theory is the antithesis of the
“one-­tool-­fits all” mentality. Rather, the theory accepts complexity, freeing
prob­lem solvers from causality and linearity and fostering the identification of
patterns and tools that apply to dif­fer­ent entities. Furthermore, systems theory encourages drawing on multiple disciplines without being unduly restricted from points of view within t­ hose disciplines (McLagan, 1989a).
Direction Provided by Systems Theory Fi­nally, it is suggested that systems
theory can serve as a guiding force that offers direction for a discipline’s activities and ­f uture. Interpretations grounded in systems theory can help to build
the case for the structure and be­hav­ior of HRD.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 122
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
123
HRD as a system. Th
­ ere continues to be much discussion about the purpose,
function, and definition of HRD. Further work on how HRD ­will conceive itself is imperative to ensure a robust ­future for the field. While ­there have been
multiple proposals to conceive of HRD as a system, ­there continues to be no firm
agreement or discussion of the implications of such a conception. Systems theory guides identification of the field’s contexts and bound­aries, ­actual versus desired goals, inputs, pro­cesses, outputs, modes of operation, constraints, vari­ous
systems states, and roles.
Theory building in HRD. Systems theory can enhance the development of
theory in HRD in a few ways. First, it serves as a unifier with other disciplines
and sciences in the spirit of its founder. von Bertalanffy (1968) called for the
unity of science through an interdisciplinary theory that sought to integrate
findings into “an isomorphy of laws in dif­fer­ent fields” (48). This isomorphy
needs to be built at two levels. On a microlevel, it can assist in the organ­ization
of HRD’s “vari­ous practical experiences into some formal, theoretical structure
that ­w ill be useful in advancing our practice and that in turn w
­ ill provide a
­basis for further theory building” (Jacobs, 1989, 27). On a macrolevel, systems
theory provides a foundation for acknowledging how interdisciplinary it is and
contributing to the isomorphy integrating ­those disciplines.
Second, systems theory provides relief from mechanistic approaches and a
rationale for rejecting princi­ples based on the closed-­system mentality (Kast
and Rosenzwig, 1972). The theory requires a new heuristic other than reducing
­things to their components—­focusing on w
­ holes, dynamics, and general theory constructs.
Fi­nally, systems theory provides g­ reat insight into the pro­cess of theory-­
building. It offers guidance about the limits of theoretical generalization.
­Although a motivation undergirding the theory is the unity of science and discovery of general systems princi­ples and laws, it should be noted that systems
scientists take ­great pains to avoid the trap of creating theory that explains
every­thing but explains nothing. The goal of systems theory is to build theory
that explains a lot and has tentacles linking it to other general theories whose
purposes are to describe a par­tic­u­lar class of phenomena (Guastello, 1995).
Theory versus “ fad.” Systems theory provides knowledge of the nature and
be­hav­ior of systems. In this, knowledge is once again found a capability—­the
capability to fight against the propagation of fads. Most of t­ hese solutions are
only partial, focusing on parts that gurus can easily see or market rather than
the holistic view needed. They typically lack an overall understanding of the
complexity and how a system copes with the implications. Systems theory is not
a panacea or an easy “six-­step” kind of t­ hing. It is hard. However, it provides a
foundation that facilitates a thorough understanding of complex situations and
systems. This is the strongest way to increase the likelihood of appropriate action. Professionals embracing systems theory as a foundation of HRD are best
positioned to influence other prac­ti­tion­ers to change their perception of the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 123
12/3/21 3:03 PM
124
part ii: theory and philosophy in h
­ uman resource development
Theoretical Challenges
Practical Challenges
• Provides more information about
dynamics between the parts than it
does about the parts themselves
• Theories are complex
• Biological model may ignore social-­
psychological nature of social
systems (Katz and Kahn, 1966)
• Responsibilities of systems prac­ti­tion­
ers have yet to be clearly articulated
and developed
• Can be misinterpreted as not offering
a definite body of knowledge since
­there is not one mainstream
approach
• Necessitates interventions that
may lie outside of the mandate
of the “client” (Dash, 1995)
• Lacking in reliable methods of “total”
conception of the ­whole
• Can be viewed as constraint to
prac­ti­tion­ers ­because time-­consuming
and costly
• Requires subjectivity, which is still a
“stretch” for strict positivists
• Coercive structures in organ­izations
have to be confronted as they
undermine the pluralist spirit of
systems approach (Dash, 1995)
• Normative implications of systems
theory not clarified (Dash, 1995)
• Raises the risk of becoming obsessed
with system and forgetting individual
(Bierema, 1997)
• Requires more empirical data on
systems applications and concepts
relative to theoretical formulations
• Places ­great demands on the field
in terms of theory building
• Risk of losing scientific depth in ­favor
of breadth
• Requires knowledge and skills that
are not readily available in academia
Figure 6.4: Challenges Posed by Systems Theory as a Foundation for HRD
development and the unleashing of expertise in systems. This is the very nature
of scientific revolution (Kuhn, 1970).
SUMMARY
Even in the ­limited space of ­these pages, it would be incomplete not to acknowledge that systems theory poses challenges to the field. Some of ­these challenges
are noted in figure 6.4 in terms of how they impact theory and practice. ­These
issues provide ample challenges to HRD professionals; however, most of them
can be overcome through research, development, and increased dialogue between theoreticians and prac­ti­tion­ers.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 124
12/3/21 3:03 PM
6. Component Theories of H
­ uman Resource Development
125
Attending to t­ hese challenges ­w ill certainly make the discipline of HRD
more capable of being a strategic partner and more able to effectively work to
achieve the aims to which we espouse. Systems theories offer much wisdom for
HRD professionals and should certainly be requisite for foundational knowledge and effective practice. Hammond (2005) sums it up well: “Systems thinking nurtures a way of thinking that engenders a dif­fer­ent kind of practice and
cultivates an ethic of integration and collaboration that has the potential to
transform the nature of social organ­ization. . . . ​The challenge is to integrate what
we have learned, to communicate t­ hese insights to a larger audience, and to nurture institutional practices that honor the ethical princi­ples inherent in the systems view” (20).
Conclusion
Three component theories have been proposed as constituting the theoretical
foundation of HRD. Explicit in this proposal is that the integration of ­these three
theories is what ­will equip HRD to contend with the challenges it is called upon
to address. In this sense, the w
­ hole of the theory of HRD stemming from t­ hese
foundations ­will be larger than the sum of the parts and ­will be unique to HRD
(Ruona and Swanson, 1998). The three component theories complement one another in explaining the phenomenon of HRD.
Reflection Questions
1. What aspect of psychological theory interests you the most? Why?
2. What aspect of economic theory interests you the most? Why?
3. What aspect of systems theory interests you the most? Why?
4. How do you see the three component theories working together for
HRD? Explain with an example.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 125
12/3/21 3:03 PM
This page intentionally left blank
PART III
Perspectives of ­Human
Resource Development
This section explains the per­for­mance and learning paradigms of HRD and associated models within each. It clarifies the learning—­performance perspectives and their logical connection.
CHAPTERS
7 Paradigms of ­Human Resource Development
8 Perspectives on Per­for­mance in ­Human Resource Development
9 Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
10 Traditional Information and Communication Technology in
­Human Resource Development
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 127
12/3/21 3:03 PM
This page intentionally left blank
7
Paradigms of ­Human
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Overview of the HRD Paradigms
Debates about Learning and Per­for­mance
Philosophical Views of Learning and Per­for­mance
• Three Views of Per­for­mance
• Three Views of Learning
• Comparing Philosophical Foundations
Learning Paradigm of HRD
• Definition of the Learning Paradigm
• Core Theoretical Assumptions of the Learning Paradigm
Per­for­mance Paradigm of HRD
• Definition of the Per­for­mance Paradigm
• Core Theoretical Assumptions of the Per­for­mance Paradigm
Fusing the Two Paradigms
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
Like most professional disciplines, ­Human Resource Development (HRD) includes multiple paradigms for practice and research. A paradigm is defined as
a “coherent tradition of scientific research” (Kuhn, 1996, 10). Thus, multiple paradigms represent fundamentally dif­fer­ent views of HRD, including its goals
and aims, values, and guidelines for practice. It is impor­tant to understand each
paradigm, as they often lead to dif­fer­ent approaches to solving HRD prob­lems
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 129
12/3/21 3:03 PM
130
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
and other research questions and methodologies. It is also impor­tant that each
person develops a personal belief system about which paradigm or blend of paradigms ­will guide their practice. This chapter reviews the major paradigms,
discusses the learning versus per­for­mance debate, examines each paradigm’s
core philosophical and theoretical assumptions, and examines their merger.
Overview of the HRD Paradigms
For our purposes, we divide HRD into two paradigms—­the learning paradigm
and the per­for­mance paradigm (figure 7.1). Th
­ ese two paradigms are the most
clearly defined and dominate most HRD thinking and practice. A third paradigm, the meaning of work and work-­life integration, is an emerging perspective (Morris and Madsen, 2007). It seems to have arisen from a backlash against
the workplace due to downsizings, layoffs, and other corporate actions that have
left workers unemployed or other­wise feeling disenfranchised. From this perspective, one crucial HRD role is helping p
­ eople create a sense of meaning in
their work and balance in their lives.
The first paradigm, the learning paradigm, has been the predominant paradigm in HRD practice in the United States. As shown in figure 7.1, this perspective has three dif­fer­ent streams. Individual learning (column 1a) focuses
primarily on individual learning as an outcome and the individual learner as
the target of interventions. Two characteristic approaches within this stream are
adult learning (Knowles et al., 2020; McLagan, 2017; Yang, 2003) and instructional design (Allen, 2006; Gagne, 1965; Gagne, Briggs, and Wagner, 1992; Gagne
and Medsker, 1996).
Most HRD practice has advanced to performance-­based learning (column 1b)
or ­whole systems learning (column 1c). When moving from individual learning
to ­these two streams, the key change is that the outcome focuses on per­for­
mance. However, it is still individual per­for­mance improvement as a result of
learning. The primary intervention continues to be learning, but interventions
are also focused on building orga­nizational systems to maximize the likelihood
that learning ­will improve broader per­for­mance. Performance-­based learning
(column 1b) is focused on individual per­for­mance resulting from learning.
Performance-­based instruction (Brethower and Smalley, 1998) and systematic
training (Allen, 2006) are two examples of this paradigm. Whole systems learning (column 1c) focuses on enhancing team and orga­nizational per­for­mance
through learning in addition to individual per­for­mance. It does so by building
systems that enhance learning at the individual, team, and orga­nizational
­levels. Most representative of this perspective is learning organ­ization theory
­(Dibella and Nevis, 1998; Marquardt, 1995, 2002; Watkins and Marsick, 1993).
The second paradigm, the per­for­mance paradigm, is familiar to ­those who
have embraced per­for­mance improvement or ­human per­for­mance technology
(Brethower, 1995). From t­ hese perspectives, the outcome focus is on total per­
for­mance, but the intervention focus is on nonlearning and learning interven-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 130
12/3/21 3:03 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 131
1
2
Learning Paradigm
Per­for­mance Paradigm
(A)
(B)
(C)
(A)
(B)
Individual
Learning
Performance-­
Based Learning
Whole-­Systems
Learning
Individual
Performance
Improvement
Wholesystems
Performance
Improvement
Outcome
focus
Enhancing
individual learning
Enhancing individual
per­for­mance through
learning
Enhancing multiple
levels of per­for­mance
through learning
Enhancing individual
per­for­mance
Enhancing multiple
levels of per­for­mance
Intervention
focus
• Individual
learning
• Individual learning
• Organ­ization
systems to support
individual learning
• Individual, team,
and orga­nizational
learning
• Orga­nizational
systems to support
multiple levels of
learning
• Nonlearning individual
per­for­mance system
• Learning if appropriate
• Nonlearning
multiple-­level
per­for­mance
system
• Multiple-­level
learning if
appropriate
Representative research
streams
• Adult learning
• Instructional
design
• Performance-­based
• Transfer of learning
• Learning
organ­ization
• ­Human per­for­mance
technology
• Per­for­mance
improvement
Figure 7.1: Comparison of the Learning and Per­for­mance Paradigms
12/3/21 3:03 PM
132
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
tions. It is the incorporation of nonlearning components of per­for­mance and
associated interventions that distinguishes this group from the learning systems
perspective.
Within the per­for­mance systems perspective are also two streams. The
­individual per­for­mance improvement approach (column 2a) focuses mainly
on individual-­level per­for­mance systems. ­Human per­for­mance technology
(Gilbert, 1978; Stolovich and Keeps, 1992) represents this approach. Whole systems per­for­mance improvement is the broadest perspective, encompassing
learning and nonlearning interventions occurring at multiple levels in the
organ­ization. What is generically called per­for­mance improvement (Holton,
1999; Rummler and Brache, 1995, 2012) or per­for­mance consulting (Robinson
and Robinson, 2015) represents this approach.
Debates about Learning and Per­for­mance
Since 1995, an intense debate in the U.S. HRD research lit­er­a­ture has revolved
around the learning versus per­for­mance paradigms (Watkins and Marsick, 1995;
Swanson, 1995). The debate has occurred even though HRD practice in the
United States is increasingly focused on per­for­mance outcomes and developing systems to support high per­for­mance (Bassi and Van Buren, 1999).
In this debate, the per­for­mance paradigm of HRD has come u
­ nder criticism. For example, Barrie and Pace (1998) argue for a more educational approach
to HRD manifested through an orga­nizational learning approach. They are also
particularly critical of the per­for­mance paradigm concerning the individual:
Improvements in per­for­mance are usually achieved through behavioral
control and conditioning. Indeed, per­for­mance may be changed or improved through methods that allow for very ­little if any willingness and
voluntariness on the part of the performers. In fact, behavioral per­for­
mance may be enhanced decidedly by pro­cesses that allow for minimal
or no rational improvement on the part of performers in the change pro­
cess. Their willingness of consciousness as rational agents is neither
encouraged nor required. Such persons function in a change pro­cess
purely as “means” and not “ends.” (Holding, 1981, 50)
Their criticisms became even harsher: “It is the per­for­mance perspective that
denies a person’s fundamental and inherent agency and self-­determination, not
the learning perspective. All of the negative effects of training come from a per­
for­mance perspective” (Barrie and Pace, 1999, 295).
Bierema (1997) calls for a return to a focus on individual development and
equates the per­for­mance perspective to the mechanistic model of work. She says,
“The machine mentality in the workplace, coupled with obsessive focus on per­
for­mance, has created a crisis in individual development” (23). She goes on to
say that “valuing development only if it contributes to productivity is a viewpoint that has perpetuated the mechanistic model of the past three hundred
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 132
12/3/21 3:03 PM
7. Paradigms of H
­ uman Resource Development
133
years” (24). Peterson and Provo (1999) also equate the per­for­mance paradigm
with behaviorism.
Dirkx offers a somewhat similar view when he says that “HRD continues to
be influenced by an ideology of scientific management and reflects a view of education where the power and control over what is learned, how, and why is located in the leadership, corporate structure, and HRD staff” (1997, 42). He goes
on to say that the traditional view in which learning is intended to contribute
to bottom-­line per­for­mance leads “prac­ti­tion­ers to focus on designing and implementing programs that transmit to passive workers the knowledge and skills
needed to improve the com­pany’s overall per­for­mance and, ultimately, society’s
economic competitiveness. In this market-­driven view of education, learning
itself is defined in par­tic­u­lar ways, largely by the perceived needs of the sponsoring corporation and the work individuals are required to perform” (43).
What is striking about t­ hese comments and ­others offered by critics of the
per­for­mance paradigm of HRD is that they all contain misunderstandings.
­There is less of a gap between the per­for­mance and learning paradigms than is
represented by learning paradigm advocates. While t­ here can be no denying that
some tension w
­ ill always exist between the learning systems and work systems
in an organ­ization (Van der Krogt, 1998), ­there is more common ground than
has been portrayed by the critics of per­for­mance.
The purpose of this chapter is not to argue for a unifying definition or perspective of HRD. Instead, it is to pre­sent a framework for understanding paradigms of HRD to highlight both the common ground and the differences
between the perspectives. As Kuchinke (1998) has articulated, it is prob­ably not
pos­si­ble or even desirable to resolve paradigmatic debates. Yet, the sharp dualism that has characterized this debate in HRD helps the search for common
ground.
Philosophical Views of Learning and Per­for­mance
Under­lying this debate is tension about ­whether per­for­mance is inherently “bad”
and learning “good.” From a philosophical perspective, this is a discussion about
the ontology of learning and per­for­mance b
­ ecause it focuses on making the fundamental assumptions about the nature of t­hese phenomena explicit and
clearly articulated (Gioia and Pitre, 1990; Ruona, 1999, 2000). Multiple perspectives of per­for­mance and learning identified within the learning versus per­for­
mance debate, with neither per­for­mance nor learning considered inherently
“good” or “bad,” can be embraced as humanistic (Holton, 2000).
THREE VIEWS OF PER­FOR­MANCE
Per­for­mance has primarily been a practice-­based phenomenon with l­ ittle philosophical consideration. Three basic views pervade the thinking about the per­
for­mance paradigm: per­for­mance as (1) a natu­ral outcome of ­human activity,
(2) necessary for economic activity, and (3) an instrument of oppression.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 133
12/3/21 3:03 PM
134
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
Per­for­mance as a Natu­ral Outcome of H
­ uman Activity In this view, per­
for­mance is accepted as a natu­ral part of h
­ uman existence. H
­ uman beings are
seen as engaging in vari­ous purposeful activities with per­for­mance as a natu­
ral and valued outcome. Furthermore, the accomplishment of par­tic­u­lar outcomes in t­ hese purposeful activities is regarded as a basic ­human need. In other
words, few p
­ eople are content not to perform.
Many of ­these activities occur in work settings where we traditionally think
of per­for­mance. However, they may also take place in leisure settings. For example, a person may play softball for leisure but be quite interested in winning
games. Or, a person might be heavi­ly involved with church activities such as
membership drives or outreach programs and exert ­great effort to make them
successful. In both of t­ hese examples, per­for­mance is the desired aspect of their
freely chosen be­hav­ior.
In this view, for HRD to embrace per­for­mance is also to embrace enhancing
­human existence. It is this perspective that many, although not all, performance-­
based HRD professionals advocate. This view of performance-­based HRD
views advancing per­for­mance and enhancing h
­ uman potential as perfectly
complementary (Holton, 2000).
Per­for­mance as Necessary for Economic Activity This perspective con-
siders per­for­mance an instrumental activity that enhances individuals and society ­because it supports economic gains. This view sees per­for­mance as neither
inherently good nor bad but rather as a means to other ends. It is essentially a
work-­based view of per­for­mance. Per­for­mance is seen as necessary for individuals to earn livelihoods, be productive members of society, and build a good
society. In this recursive pro­cess, per­for­mance at the individual level leads to enhanced work and c­ areers. Per­for­mance at the orga­n izational level leads to
stronger economic entities capable of providing good jobs to individuals.
Some models and concepts of per­for­mance improvement can be associated
with this perspective as they attempt to enhance the utility of learning by linking learning to individual and orga­nizational per­for­mance outcomes. While
this objective is worthy by itself, it is criticized for lacking intrinsic “goodness.”
As the per­for­mance paradigm has matured, it has broadened to embrace
worthiness.
Per­for­mance as an Instrument of Orga­nizational Oppression From this
perspective, per­for­mance is seen as a means of control and dehumanization.
Through focusing on per­for­mance, organ­izations are seen as coercing and demanding be­hav­iors from individuals in return for compensation. Workplace
surveillance in United Parcel Ser­vice is one example (Bruder, 2015). Per­for­mance
is viewed as threatening to h
­ umans and potentially abusive. As such, it is largely
a necessary evil that denies ­human potential.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 134
12/3/21 3:03 PM
7. Paradigms of H
­ uman Resource Development
135
It is this perspective that seems to be represented in critics of performance-­
based HRD. For example, Barrie and Pace (1998) say that “it is the per­for­mance
perspective that denies a person’s fundamental and inherent agency and self-­
determination” (295). ­Others (Bierema, 1997; Peterson and Provo, 1999) refer
to the mechanistic or machine model of work when referring to the per­for­mance
perspective.
The under­lying presumption of this perspective is that per­for­mance is antithetical to ­human potential. It seems to be most closely aligned with critical
theorists wanting HRD to challenge orga­nizational power structures that seek
to control per­for­mance outcomes.
THREE VIEWS OF LEARNING
A g­ reat deal of philosophical work focused on learning (Gutek, 1998; Elias and
Merriam, 1995; Lindeman,1926; Bryson, 1936; Hewitt and Mather, 1937). For
purposes of this discussion, the views of learning are grouped into ­these three
categories: (1) a humanistic endeavor, (2) value-­neutral transfer of information,
and (3) a tool for societal oppression.
Learning as a Humanistic Endeavor The primary purpose of learning in
this perspective is to enhance h
­ uman potential. Most closely aligned with humanistic psy­chol­ogy and existentialist philosophy, h
­ umans are seen as growing, developing beings. Learning is a key ele­ment in helping individuals become
more self-­actualized and inherently good (McLagan, 2017). Most HRD scholars view learning from this perspective. They sincerely believe in the power of
learning to enhance ­human potential. It is impor­tant to note that most within
performance-­based HRD also see learning in this way.
Learning as a Value-­Neutral Transmission of Information Learning in
this view has instrumental value in that it transfers information that individuals need and desire. Closely aligned with Dewey’s (1938) pragmatic philosophy,
learning is seen to solve prob­lems of everyday living. Instructional designers and
many orga­nizational trainers approach learning from this perspective, as their
primary task is to transfer information effectively. A large part of training practice in the United States is grounded in this perspective that sees learning as
largely value-­neutral and instrumental.
Learning as a Tool for Societal Oppression The fact that learning can also
be a tool for oppression, particularly outside orga­nizational settings, is largely
overlooked by most HRD scholars in the United States. For example, communists use learning to control ­people, cults use learning to brainwash ­people, religion has used learning to restrict worldviews of ­people, and education has used
learning to restrict or misrepresent Native American, African American, and
female history. Freire (1970) and Mezirow (1991) are examples of scholars who
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 135
12/3/21 3:03 PM
136
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
have warned about the potentially oppressive nature of learning. The recent fake
news man­tra by Donald Trump, when serving as U.S. president, presented fundamental risks to internal stability and national security (Haber, 2017). To the
extreme, learning can be a tool for oppression and control (Wang, Doty, and
Yang, 2021).
COMPARING PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS
The first conclusion is that neither learning nor per­for­mance is inherently good
or bad. Both can be instruments of oppression or means to elevate h
­ uman potential. HRD can elevate ­human potential and enhance the ­human experience
by focusing on both per­for­mance and learning.
HRD professionals are encouraged to adopt the perspective that both learning and per­for­mance are inherently good for the individual b
­ ecause both are
­ uman existence. It is hard to imagine a life without learning
natu­ral parts of h
or without per­for­mance. The challenge for the HRD profession is to ensure that
neither one becomes a tool for oppression but instead one to elevate ­human
potential.
Learning Paradigm of HRD
The learning paradigm is familiar territory to most HRD professionals. In
this section, the learning paradigm is defined, and its core assumptions are
presented.
DEFINITION OF THE LEARNING PARADIGM
Watkins and Marsick (1995) offer a helpful definition of the learning paradigm
of HRD: “HRD is the field of study and practice responsible for the fostering of
a long-­term work-­related learning capacity at the individual, group, and orga­
nizational level of organ­izations” (2). Furthermore, she notes that HRD “works
to enhance individuals’ capacity to learn, to help groups overcome barriers to
learning, and to help organ­izations create a culture which promotes conscious
learning” (2).
CORE THEORETICAL ASSUMPTIONS OF
THE LEARNING PARADIGM
No one has clearly articulated the core assumptions of the learning paradigm.
Ruona (1998, 2000) provides excellent insights in her study of the core beliefs of
HRD scholarly leaders. ­Others have offered strong arguments in f­ avor of what
we call the learning paradigm (Barrie and Pace,1998; Watkins and Marsick,
1995; Bierema, 1997; Dirkx, 1997; McLagan, 2017). Drawing on ­these and other
sources, the following nine core assumptions from the learning paradigm have
emerged.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 136
12/3/21 3:03 PM
7. Paradigms of H
­ uman Resource Development
137
Learning Paradigm Assumption 1: Individual education, growth, learning, and
development are inherently good. At the heart of the learning paradigm is the
notion that learning, development, and growth are inherently good for each individual. This assumption is drawn from humanistic psy­chol­ogy that stresses
self-­actualization of the individual. This assumption is also central to all HRD
practice and is unchallenged by any paradigm of HRD.
Learning Paradigm Assumption 2: P
­ eople should be valued for their intrinsic
worth as ­people, not just resources to achieve an outcome. Learning advocates
object to characterizing ­people as “resources” to achieve a goal, particularly in
an organ­ization. For HRD to value ­people only with regard to their contribution to per­for­mance outcomes is offensive ­because it invalidates them as h
­ uman
beings. Furthermore, it leads to workplaces that devalue p
­ eople and can quickly
become abusive to employees. From this perspective, HRD should value p
­ eople
for their inherent worth and not seek to use them to accomplish a goal. Thus,
learning and development should be a means to enhance ­people and their
humanness—­not merely to achieve per­for­mance goals.
Learning Paradigm Assumption 3: The primary purpose of HRD is the development of the individual. From this paradigm, the needs of the individual should
be more impor­tant than the needs of the organ­ization, or they should be equally
impor­tant at a minimum. Th
­ ose learning advocates who are concerned about
power structures in society would argue that the learning and development
needs of the individual should take pre­ce­dence over the needs of the organ­
ization (Bierema, 2000; Dirkx, 1997). O
­ thers might take a more moderate view
that the needs of the individual need to be balanced against the organ­ization’s
needs. Regardless, the primary goal of HRD from this perspective is to help individuals develop to their fullest potential.
Learning Paradigm Assumption 4: The primary outcome of HRD is learning and
development. In this paradigm, learning is considered to be the primary outcome of HRD. While per­for­mance is acknowledged, the core outcome variable
is learning. As stated in the overview, t­ here are variations within this paradigm,
such that some focus mostly on individual learning while o
­ thers take a w
­ hole
systems approach (individual, team, and orga­nizational). Regardless, the result
is some form of learning and development.
Learning Paradigm Assumption 5: Organ­izations are best advanced by having
fully developed individuals. Per­for­mance outcomes that benefit the individual
and the organ­ization are presumed to occur if the individual is developed to full
potential. That is, the specific per­for­mance be­hav­iors desired by the organ­ization
are best achieved by focusing on the individual’s development. Per­for­mance,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 137
12/3/21 3:03 PM
138
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
then, flows naturally from development instead of having per­for­mance drive
development. As Bierema (1996) states, “A holistic approach to the development of individuals in the context of a learning organ­ization produces well-­
informed, knowledgeable, critical-­thinking adults who have a sense of fulfillment
and inherently make decisions that cause an organ­ization to prosper” (22).
­Indeed, learning and development are presumed to nourish the individual to
higher levels of per­for­mance than can be achieved by a focus on well-­defined
per­for­mance outcomes.
Learning Paradigm Assumption 6: Individuals should control their learning pro­
cess. This assumption is deeply rooted in the demo­cratic and humanistic
princi­ples of adult learning. Individuals are presumed to have the inherent capacity and motivation to direct their education in a way that is most beneficial
to them. ­Because of this, HRD is thought not to need to specify per­for­mance
outcomes ­because learners can determine their courses to high per­for­mance and
actively seek to do so. Deeply rooted in the inherent belief of the goodness of
­people and the concept of self-­organizing systems, this assumption ­frees HRD
from focusing on per­for­mance outcomes by striving to create nourishing learning situations.
Learning Paradigm Assumption 7: Development of the individual should be holistic. For ­people in organ­izations to achieve their fullest potential, they must
be developed holistically, not just with specific skills or competencies for par­
tic­u­lar tasks (Barrie and Pace, 1998; McLagan, 2017; Yang, 2003). HRD, from
this paradigm, should focus on all aspects of individual development.
Holistic development integrates personal and professional life in c­ areer
planning, development, and assessment. Holistic development is not
necessarily linked to the pre­sent or f­uture job tasks, but the overall
growth of the individual with the recognition that this growth w
­ ill have
an effect on the orga­nizational system. (Bierema, 1996, 25)
Learning Paradigm Assumption 8: The organ­ization must provide ­people a means
to achieve their fullest h
­ uman potential through meaningful work. This assumption extends assumption 3 to say that organ­izations have a duty and responsibility to help individuals develop to their full potential. Furthermore, one of the
primary vehicles for this is h
­ uman resource development.
Learning Paradigm Assumption 9: An emphasis on per­for­mance or orga­nizational
benefits creates a mechanistic view of ­people that prevents them from reaching
their full potential. This assumption is fundamental b
­ ecause it creates the largest gap within the per­for­mance paradigm. Learning advocates tend to think
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 138
12/3/21 3:03 PM
7. Paradigms of H
­ uman Resource Development
139
that emphasizing per­for­mance outcomes in HRD and targeting HRD interventions to improve per­for­mance results in an overly mechanistic approach to HRD
and orga­nizational life. As a result, p
­ eople in organ­izations are l­imited, and
many fail to reach their full potential. Such an approach fails to tap into the
capabilities ­people have to accomplish g­ reat t­ hings, leaving them more alienated
from the organ­ization and ultimately hurting the organ­ization.
Per­for­mance Paradigm of HRD
The per­for­mance paradigm of HRD saw a renewed interest in the 1990s. As
shown in chapter 3, per­for­mance has profound roots in training practices
throughout history. It has come to the forefront of HRD debates b
­ ecause changes
in the global economy have put renewed pressure on HRD for accountability.
DEFINITION OF THE PER­FOR­MANCE PARADIGM
The per­for­mance paradigm of HRD is defined as follows:
The per­for­mance paradigm of HRD holds that the purpose of HRD is
to advance the mission of the per­for­mance system that sponsors the
HRD efforts by improving the capabilities of individuals working in the
system and improving the systems in which they perform their work
(Holton, 1999, 27).
CORE THEORETICAL ASSUMPTIONS OF
THE PER­FOR­MANCE PARADIGM
In this section, eleven core assumptions are presented (Holton, 2002). It is impor­
tant to remember that the per­for­mance paradigm has greatly matured and
evolved over the past several de­cades (Swanson, 1999, 2001b, 2007c; Holton,
1999; Phillips and Phillips, 2016, Vanthornout et al., 2008). The following core
assumptions represent a snapshot of the per­for­mance paradigm. Indeed, in their
zeal to get per­for­mance added to the HRD framework, some per­for­mance advocates mainly focused on per­for­mance variables at the expense of learning and
­ uman potential.
long-­term h
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 1: Per­for­mance systems must perform to survive and prosper, and individuals who work within them must act if they wish to
advance their ­careers and maintain employment or membership. The per­for­
mance paradigm views per­for­mance as a fact of life in per­for­mance systems
(e.g., organ­izations) that is not optional. For example, if organ­izations do not
perform, they decline and eventually dis­appear. Per­for­mance is not defined
only as profit but instead by what­ever means the organ­ization uses to determine its core outcomes (e.g., citizen ser­vices for a government organ­ization).
­Every per­for­mance system has core outcomes and constituents or customers
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 139
12/3/21 3:03 PM
140
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
who expect them to be achieved. Even nonprofit and government organ­izations
face restructuring or extinction if they do not achieve their core outcomes.
By extension, if individual employees do not perform in a manner that supports the system’s long-­term interests, they are unlikely to be seen as productive members of the system. Thus, in an organ­ization, persons may not advance
and may ultimately lose their jobs. This is not to suggest that employees must
blindly follow the organ­ization’s mandates. In the short term they are expected
to challenge the organ­ization when necessary, but over the long term e­ very employee must make contributions to core outcomes. Thus, the greatest ser­vice
HRD can provide to the individual and the per­for­mance system is to help improve per­for­mance by enhancing individual expertise and building effective per­
for­mance systems.
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 2: The ultimate purpose of HRD is to improve
the per­for­mance of the system in which it is embedded and which provides the
resources to support it. The purpose of HRD is to improve per­for­mance of the
system in which it is embedded (or within which it is working in the case of
con­sul­tants) and that provides the resources to support it (Swanson and Arnold,
1997). All interventions and activities undertaken by HRD must ultimately
enhance that system’s mission-­related per­for­mance by improving per­for­mance
at the mission, social subsystem, pro­cess, and individual levels (Holton, 1999).
Aside from general ethical responsibilities (Dean, 1993; Acad­emy of ­Human
­Resource Development, 1999), HRD’s primary accountability is to the system
within which it resides.
The system’s mission and the goals derived from it specify the expected
outcomes of that system. E
­ very purposefully or­ga­nized system operates with a
mission, e­ ither explic­itly or implicitly, and the role of the mission is to reflect
the system’s relationship with its external environment. If the system has a purpose, then it also has desired outputs, so per­for­mance theory is applicable. Per­
for­mance occurs in every­thing from churches (e.g., number of members, money
raised, individuals helped), to government (e.g., health care in a community,
driver’s licenses issued, crime rates), to nonprofits (e.g., research funded, members), and, of course, to profit-­making organ­izations. ­Under this broad definition, per­for­mance is not seen as inherently harmful or nonhumanistic but rather
an impor­tant fact of life in systems or­ga­nized for purposeful activity.
The par­tic­u­lar system’s definition of its per­for­mance relationship with the
external environment is fully captured by the organ­ization’s mission and goals.
In that sense, this model differs from Kaufman and his associates (see Kaufman,
Watkins, Triner, and Smith, 1998; Kaufman, 1997), who have argued that societal benefits should be included as a level of per­for­mance. This difference should
not be interpreted to mean that societal benefits are unimportant. Instead, the
relationship between the per­for­mance system and society is most appropriately
captured by the mission of that system.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 140
12/3/21 3:03 PM
7. Paradigms of H
­ uman Resource Development
141
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 3: The primary outcome of HRD is not just
learning but also per­for­mance. The argument over learning versus per­for­mance
has positioned the two as equal and competing outcomes. In real­ity, this is an
inappropriate theoretical argument. Per­for­mance and learning represent two
dif­fer­ent levels of results that are complementary and not competing. Multilevel theory building has become increasingly popu­lar to integrate competing
perspectives (Klein, Tosi, and Cannella, 1999). In management, this divide has
been characterized as the micro domain where the focus is on the individual,
and the macro domain where the focus is on the organ­ization. Multilevel theory integrates the two by acknowledging the influence of the organ­ization on
the individual and vice versa:
Multilevel theories illuminate the context surrounding individual-­level
pro­cesses, clarifying precisely when and where such pro­cesses are likely
to occur within organ­ization. Similarly, multilevel theories identify the
individual-­level characteristics, be­hav­iors, attitudes and perceptions that
underlie and shape organization-­level characteristics and outcomes.
(Klein et al., 1999, 243)
From the multilevel perspective, then, neither level is more or less impor­
tant. Furthermore, individual learning would be seen as an integral part of
achieving orga­nizational and individual goals.
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 4: ­Human potential in organ­izations must
be nurtured, respected, and developed. Per­for­mance advocates believe in the
power of learning and the power of ­people in organ­izations to accomplish g­ reat
­things. It is essential to distinguish between the per­for­mance paradigm of HRD
and ­simple per­for­mance management. Per­for­mance management does not necessarily honor ­human potential in organ­izations as performance-­oriented
HRD does. Performance-­oriented HRD advocates remain HRD and h
­ uman
advocates at the core. Per­for­mance advocates do not believe that emphasizing
per­for­mance outcomes invalidates their belief in and re­spect for ­human
potential.
The per­for­mance paradigm of HRD recognizes that it is the unleashing of
­human potential that creates excellent organ­izations. While per­for­mance advocates emphasize outcomes, they do not demand that results be achieved through
control of h
­ uman potential. Per­for­mance advocates fully embrace notions of empowerment and ­human development ­because they ­will also lead to better per­for­
mance when properly executed (Huselid, 1995; Lam and White, 1998; Rummler
and Brache, 2012). Furthermore, they see no instances where denying the power
of h
­ uman potential in organ­izations would lead to better per­for­mance. Thus,
they see it as completely consistent to emphasize both ­human potential and
per­for­mance.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 141
12/3/21 3:03 PM
142
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 5: HRD must enhance current per­for­mance
and build capacity for ­future per­for­mance effectiveness to create sustainable high
per­for­mance. Kaplan and Norton (1996) suggest two categories of per­for­mance
mea­sures: outcomes and ­drivers. Unfortunately, they do not offer concise definitions of ­either. For our purposes, outcomes are mea­sures of effectiveness or
efficiency relative to core outputs of the system, subsystem, pro­cess, or individual. The most typical are financial indicators (profit, ROI, ­etc.) and productivity mea­sures (units of goods or ser­vices produced) and are often generic across
similar per­for­mance systems. According to Kaplan and Norton, ­these mea­sures
tend to be lag indicators in that they reflect what has occurred or has been accomplished concerning core outcomes.
­Drivers mea­sure ele­ments of per­for­mance that are expected to sustain or increase system, subsystem, pro­cess, or individual ability and capacity to be more
effective or efficient in the f­uture. Thus, they are leading indicators of f­uture
outcomes and tend to be unique for par­tic­u­lar per­for­mance systems. Together
with outcome mea­sures, they describe the hypothesized cause-­and-­effect relationships in the organ­ization’s strategy (Kaplan and Norton, 1996).
From this perspective, the views of per­for­mance improvement experts who
focus solely on ­actual outcomes, such as profit or units of work produced, are
flawed. They are likely to create short-­term improvement but neglect aspects of
the organ­ization that ­will drive ­future per­for­mance outcomes. The views of experts who focus solely on per­for­mance ­drivers such as learning or growth are
equally flawed in that they fail to consider the ­actual outcomes. Only when outcomes and d
­ rivers are jointly considered w
­ ill long-­term, sustained per­for­
mance improvements occur. Neither is more or less critical, but both work in
an integrated fashion to enhance the mission, pro­cess, subsystem, and individual per­for­mance. Performance-­based HRD advocates do not support such
“performance-­at-­all-­costs” strategies. Long-­term sustainable high per­for­mance,
which is the goal performance-­oriented HRD advocates, requires a careful balance between outcomes and ­drivers. High short-­term per­for­mance that cannot
be sustained is not high per­for­mance.
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 6: HRD professionals have an ethical and
moral obligation to ensure that attaining orga­nizational per­for­mance goals is
not abusive to individual employees. Per­for­mance advocates agree that the
drive for orga­nizational per­for­mance can become abusive and unethical. In
no way should performance-­oriented HRD support orga­nizational practices
that exceed the bound­aries of ethical and moral treatment of employees. ­There is
ample room for disagreement about the specifics of what is ethical and moral,
but the basic philosophical position is that per­for­mance improvement efforts
must be ethical. This is not viewed as hard to accomplish ­because of the assumption described below that effective per­for­mance is suitable for individuals and
organ­izations.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 142
12/3/21 3:03 PM
7. Paradigms of H
­ uman Resource Development
143
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 7: Training/learning activities cannot be separated from other parts of the per­for­mance system and are best bundled with
other per­for­mance improvement interventions. The broadest approach, and the
one advocated by performance-­based HRD, is the ­whole systems per­for­mance
improvement approach. This approach focuses on improving per­for­mance outcomes at multiple levels with nonlearning and learning interventions. In most
organ­izations, ­there is no profession or discipline charged with responsibility
for assessing, improving, and monitoring per­for­mance as a ­whole system. This
void is directly responsible for the proliferation of “quick fixes” and faddish improvement programs, most of which focus on only a single ele­ment or a subset
of per­for­mance variables. ­Because HRD is grounded in systems theory and the
whole-­systems perspective of organ­izations, it is the logical discipline to take
responsibility for w
­ hole system per­for­mance improvements in organ­izations.
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 8: Effective per­for­mance and per­for­mance
systems are rewarding to the individual and the organ­ization. Per­for­mance benefits the organ­ization. However, lost in the lit­er­a­ture is the recognition that effective per­for­mance benefits individuals equally. In many instances, per­for­mance
is presented as almost antithetical to individual benefits, implying one must
choose between them. A variety of research tells us that ­people like to perform
effectively:
• The goal-­setting lit­er­a­ture indicates that individuals build self-­esteem
by accomplishing challenging goals (Katzell and Thompson, 1990).
• Hackman and Oldham’s (1980) job characteristics model and the
research supporting it have shown that experienced meaningfulness
of work and responsibility for work outcomes are two critical
psychological states that individuals seek.
• Self-­efficacy is built when individuals experience success at task per­for­
mance, referred to as enactive mastery (Wood and Bandura, 1989).
• The relationship between job satisfaction and per­for­mance is a
reciprocal relationship, with per­for­mance enhancing job satisfaction and vice versa (Katzell, Thompson, and Guzzo, 1992; Spector,
1997).
• Success at work is seen as necessary to an individual’s basic adult
identity b
­ ecause it helps them see themselves as productive, competent ­human beings (Whitbourne, 1986). Conversely, failure or
frustration threatens an individual’s self-­concept of competence.
• Work allows the individual to implement their self-­concept and
fulfill their unique goals and interests. Work and life satisfaction
depend on the extent to which individuals find outlets for their
needs and abilities (Super, Savickas, and Super, 1996).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 143
12/3/21 3:03 PM
144
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
• Success at work fulfills an individual’s innate drive for what has been
called self-­actualization (Maslow, 1970) or the need for achievement
(McClelland, 1965).
• Self-­determination theory and research suggest that ­humans have
three innate needs essential to optimal functioning and well being:
the needs for competence, relatedness, and autonomy (Ryan and
Deci, 2000). Thus, effective per­for­mance ­will contribute to an
individual’s sense of well-­being by enhancing feelings of competence.
• Certain individuals have high levels of a dispositional trait called
conscientiousness that is a valid predictor of job per­for­mance
(Barrick and Mount, 1991). For ­these individuals, failure to
perform would be very frustrating.
• Per­for­mance also helps individuals achieve instrumental goals.
It may lead to more ­career advancement, ­career opportunities in
organ­izations, and valued intrinsic and extrinsic rewards as a
result of per­for­mance.
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 9: Whole systems per­for­mance improvement
seeks to enhance the value of learning in an organ­ization. Performance-­based
HRD seeks to increase the value of the individual employee and individual learning in the system, not diminish it. It fully agrees that enhancing the expertise
of individual employees is fundamentally necessary. However, performance-­
based HRD suggests that individually oriented HRD violates the fundamental
princi­ples of systems theory (von Bertalanffy, 1968), which tells us that no one
ele­ment of the system can be viewed separately from other ele­ments. Intervening in only one aspect of the system without creating congruence in other parts
of the system w
­ ill not lead to systemic change. Furthermore, intervening in the
­whole system to improve outcomes or ­drivers alone is also flawed. For example,
a com­pany that downsizes drastically may increase profits (outcomes) in the
short run, but it ­will leave itself without any intellectual capital (driver) for ­future
growth. ­Human per­for­mance technologists (Stolovich and Keeps, 1992) and
needs assessors (Moore and Dutton, 1978; Swanson, 2007a; Phillips and Phillips, 2016) have understood the need to view the individual domain within the
larger orga­nizational system to make individual domain per­for­mance improvement efforts more effective. Whole systems per­for­mance improvement goes a
step further to analyze and improve the entire system’s per­for­mance through a
balanced emphasis on outcomes and ­drivers in the four per­for­mance domains.
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 10: HRD must partner with functional departments to achieve per­for­mance goals. One common lament from HRD
prac­ti­tion­ers is that the per­for­mance approach forces them to deal with orga­
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 144
12/3/21 3:03 PM
7. Paradigms of H
­ uman Resource Development
145
nizational variables over which they have no control (e.g., rewards, job design,
­etc.). Performance-­oriented HRD acknowledges this and stresses that HRD must
become a partner with functional units in the organ­ization to achieve per­for­
mance improvement, even through learning (Swanson, 2007a). Opponents often suggest that HRD should focus on learning b
­ ecause they can by themselves
influence learning. Yet, classroom learning is the only variable in the per­for­
mance system over which HRD professionals have the primary influence. Learning organ­ization advocates stress that much of the ­really valuable learning in
organ­izations occurs in the workplace, not the classroom (Watkins and Marsick, 1993). Performance-­oriented HRD advocates suggest that if HRD is unwilling to be a per­for­mance partner, it is doomed to play only minor roles in
organ­izations with minimal impact and significant risk for downsizing and
outsourcing.
Per­for­mance Paradigm Assumption 11: The transfer of learning into job per­for­mance
is of primary importance. ­Because the dependent variable in performance-­
oriented HRD is not just learning but also individual and orga­nizational per­
for­mance, considerable emphasis is placed on transferring learning to job
per­for­mance. As Holton, Batre, and Ruona (2000) point out, researchers are still
working to operationalize the orga­nizational dimensions impor­tant to enhancing transfer. Nonetheless, ­there is widespread recognition that the transfer
pro­cess is not something that occurs by chance or is assured by achieving
learning outcomes. Instead, it results from a complex system of influences (Baldwin and Ford, 1988; Broad, 2000; Ford and Weissbein, 1997; Holton and Baldwin,
2000). Learning is a necessary but not sufficient condition for improving job
per­for­mance through increased expertise (Bates, Holton, and Seyler, 2000;
Rouillier and Goldstein, 1993; Tracey, Tannenbaum, and Kavanaugh, 1995). Expertise has emerged as a construct integrating the per­for­mance component of
HRD with learning (Swanson and Holton, 1999). Expertise, defined as “­human
be­hav­iors, having effective results and optimal efficiency, acquired through study
and experience within a specialized domain” (26), focuses HRD on core outcomes from learning. Per­for­mance advocates are known for emphasizing mea­
sure­ment of HRD outcomes to see ­whether results are achieved. Mea­sur­ing
per­for­mance is a common activity in organ­izations, so, logically, performance-­
oriented HRD would also stress mea­sure­ment. This emphasis stems from two
key observations. First, it seems that impor­tant per­for­mance outcomes in organ­
izations are almost always mea­sured in some manner. Thus, if HRD is to improve per­for­mance, then it must mea­sure its outcomes. Second, components of
orga­nizational systems that are viewed as contributing to the organ­ization’s
strategic mission can demonstrate their contribution through some mea­sure­
ment. Thus, if HRD is a strategic partner, it must mea­sure results (Phillips and
Phillips, 2016).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 145
12/3/21 3:03 PM
146
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
Fusing the Two Paradigms
In recent years, more energy has gone into reconciling the two paradigms and
finding common ground. It is fair to say that ­there is now much greater understanding and harmony between groups representing both views.
Runoa (2000) studied the core beliefs of a select group of HRD scholar-­
leaders. Her findings, profiled in figure 7.2, summarize the issues around serving both individuals and organ­izations. Straddling belief systems that honor
both the individual and the organ­ization creates a natu­ral tension that the HRD
profession believes is both impor­tant and difficult.
In the end, substantial overlap exists between the HRD paradigms. In
par­tic­u­lar:
• A strong belief in learning and development as ave­nues to individual
growth
• A belief that ­human expertise can improve organ­izations
• A desire to see ­people and organ­izations as healthy and growing
­ uman potential
• A commitment to ­people and h
• A passion for learning and productivity
It is this common ground that keeps ­people within the two paradigms in the
field of HRD. They represent a strong uniting bond that clearly defines the field
and separates it from other disciplines.
At the same time, unresolved issues persist between the two paradigms. The
differences seem to be deeply held values and philosophical assumptions (Ruona, 1999). B
­ ecause of that, they are challenging to resolve, as t­ here are few
“right” answers when the differences are defined at the value level. Let’s review
some key differences.
Orga­nizational control over the learning pro­cess and outcomes is complex
for ­those who believe that only the individual should control their learning pro­
cess (Bierema, 2000). It may be the one issue where ­there can be no agreement
­because it is a philosophical issue about which ­people have passionate feelings.
The per­for­mance paradigm accepts the premise that the organ­ization and the
individual should share control of the individual’s learning if the organ­ization
is the sponsor of the intervention. However, per­for­mance advocates would argue that ignoring per­for­mance in ­favor of individual control might ultimately
be bad for the individual if the organ­ization cannot survive or prosper. The individual employee presumably needs the benefits of employment (e.g., economic,
psychological, instrumental) that w
­ ill only exist if the organ­ization thrives.
Thus, sharing control to advance organ­ization per­for­mance is viewed as appropriate and beneficial to both parties. Learning advocates would argue that
learning is inherently an individual and personal experience that should never
be controlled. That is, to control a person’s learning is to control the person,
which is objectionable.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 146
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Serving Individuals
Serving Organ­izations
Core focus for
HRD
Defined by its work with
­people
Defined by its work with
organ­izations
Responsibility for
HRD
To and for individuals
To and for organ­izations and
orga­nizational mission and goals
Setting for HRD
Any setting—­not ­limited
to the orga­nizational
setting
Conducted in some kind of
goal-­oriented system
Importance of
organ­ization
To improve the ­human
condition, help individuals
achieve life purpose, and
improve society
To achieve orga­nizational
mission and goals, and contribute
to capitalistic system, thus
benefiting individuals and society
­People in
organ­izations
Should care for and
support ­people, fostering
meaning, and help ­people
connect to something
Have some, but not primary,
responsibility for individuals’
short-­ and long-­term
development
Profit
Needs of individuals
should be more highly
valued than the aims of
profit
HRD should enhance per­for­
mance on multiple dimensions
and for short-­and long-­term
value
­People
­ eople are inherently
P
valuable
­ eople are valuable to organ­
P
izations for the resources they
provide
­Humans and
learning
­ umans are learning
H
beings
­ umans are learning beings;
H
however, when learning is
or­gan­i­za­tion­ally sponsored,
individuals learn on behalf of the
organ­ization (explic­itly in full
agreement)
Results of
development
Growth of the individual
­ eople reach
and helping p
their full potential
Changes in job/role and per­for­
mance, fulfilling orga­nizational
needs
Driver to develop
systems
To help ­people achieve
their potential within the
system
To foster alignment and help
organ­izations achieve their
mission and goals
Prioritization
between the
individual and
organ­ization
Put ­people first, and
orga­nizational benefits
­will follow
Put organ­izations first, and
­people benefits ­will follow
Figure 7.2: Serving Individuals versus Serving Organ­izations: Potential
Contrasting Systems of Belief for H
­ uman Resource Development
Source: Ruona, 2000, 23–24.
147
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 147
12/3/21 3:03 PM
148
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
The other argument for shared control is an economic one. Simply, if the
per­for­mance system or organ­ization is paying for the HRD efforts, it has a right
to derive benefits from it and share control over it. This is one area of criticism
that per­for­mance advocates genuinely strug­gle to understand. It is difficult to
understand how organ­izations can be expected to pay for HRD efforts yet have
­those efforts focus primarily on what is good for the individual. To per­for­mance
advocates, this sounds perfectly appropriate for schools and universities in a
demo­cratic society but not for organization-­sponsored HRD. Most would wholeheartedly support the individually oriented philosophy for learning activities
outside of organ­izations. Yet, most per­for­mance advocates also understand
­t here are deeply held fears about institutional control over individual learning. Nonetheless, they view the situation differently once HRD crosses the
orga­nizational boundary and employers fund HRD efforts.
Many of the learning paradigm tenets are best understood by remembering that their roots are in adult education. Adult education is a broader and dif­
fer­ent field of practice than h
­ uman resource development. Adult education is
grounded in the idea that education should be used to maintain a demo­cratic
society, which is best accomplished by building individuals’ power through education and knowledge. When viewing adult learning in a broader societal
context, this makes perfect sense. The differences arise when learning is moved
inside the bound­aries and sponsorship of a purposeful system like an organ­
ization. Then per­for­mance advocates believe a dif­fer­ent set of assumptions is
warranted. Learning advocates, on the other hand, believe that a very similar
set of assumptions still applies.
Our bias leans t­ oward the per­for­mance paradigm. Perhaps the best way of
thinking about the importance of the per­for­mance paradigm is to ask this question: Could HRD sponsored by a per­for­mance system survive if it did not result in improved per­for­mance for the system? Most would agree that the answer
is no. Second, w
­ ill it thrive if it does not contribute in a substantial way to the
mission of the organ­ization? Again, most would answer no. Like all components
of any system or organ­ization, HRD is expected to enhance the organ­ization’s
effectiveness. The challenge is to consider how per­for­mance is incorporated in
HRD theory and practice, not w
­ hether it ­will be.
The per­for­mance paradigm is the most likely approach to lead to a strategic
role for HRD in organ­izations. HRD ­will be perceived as having strategic value
to the organ­ization if it can connect the unique value of employee expertise with
the organ­ization’s strategic goals (Torraco and Swanson, 1995; Walton, 1999;
Yorks, 2005). Per­for­mance advocates see ­little chance that HRD ­will gain power
and influence in organ­izations by ignoring the per­for­mance outcomes that
organ­izations wish to achieve. By being both ­human and per­for­mance advocates,
HRD stands to gain the most impact in the orga­nizational system. If HRD focuses only on learning or individuals, it is likely to end up marginalized as a
staff support group.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 148
12/3/21 3:03 PM
7. Paradigms of H
­ uman Resource Development
149
Conclusion
While it would be naive to think that the per­for­mance and learning paradigms
would ever converge, it is impor­tant to realize that t­ here may be much more
common ground than has been stated by learning advocates. Further scholarly
research and debate are needed to articulate the similarities and the differences
more clearly. This chapter is a step in that direction, as we have attempted to
define core assumptions of each paradigm to discuss differences and common
ground more accurately. In the end, HRD is prob­ably best served by the integration of the two paradigms.
Reflection Questions
1. Which paradigm do you feel most comfortable with and would adopt
as your belief system?
2. Do you see the learning and per­for­mance paradigms as competing
paradigms, or do you see them as mutually reinforcing?
3. How can HRD operate from a per­for­mance paradigm and ensure that
­human development is honored and supported?
4. How can HRD operate from a learning paradigm and play a core
strategic role in organ­izations?
5. How would an employee, an employee’s man­ag­er, and a corporate
CEO each view the preceding issue?
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 149
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8
Perspectives on
Per­for­mance in H
­ uman
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Orga­nizational Effectiveness as a Precursor to Per­for­mance
Disciplinary Perspectives on Per­for­mance
Financial Per­for­mance
• Units of Per­for­mance
• Financial Benefit Analy­sis
• ROI of ­Human Capital
Multilevel Per­for­mance Models
• Enterprise Model—­Brache
• White Space Per­for­mance Model—­Rummler and Brache
• Per­for­mance Diagnosis Pro­cess and Matrix—­Swanson
• Organ­ization Development Per­for­mance Model—­Cummings and Worley
Pro­cess and Team-­Level Per­for­mance Models
Individual-­Level Per­for­mance Models
• Model of Individual Performance—­Campbell
•­Human Per­for­mance Engineering Model—­Gilbert
The Spoils of Per­for­mance
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 150
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
151
Introduction
This chapter examines core theories and per­for­mance models that inform the
per­for­mance perspective of h
­ uman resource development (HRD). Unlike learning theory that is essentially focused solely on the individual, per­for­mance
theory is much more diverse. Per­for­mance theories address individuals, teams,
pro­cesses, and orga­nizational systems. Some theories are multilevel.
One of the hallmarks of per­for­mance theories is that they all attempt to capture the complexity of orga­nizational systems while still presenting a set of
constructs discrete enough to be usable. Given the complexity of orga­nizational
systems, it is easy to develop a model so complex that it becomes unwieldy. Thus,
most per­for­mance theories take a par­tic­u­lar perspective to define a more ­limited
range of useful per­for­mance ideas while maintaining their integrity with systems theory. Imagine picking up a crystal and turning it in the light—­each
perspective yields a slightly dif­fer­ent view. Such is the case with per­for­mance
theory, where each theory attempts to capture adequate complexity but still be
helpful to the HRD profession.
Orga­nizational Effectiveness as a
Precursor to Per­for­mance
Cameron (2005) has provided a meaningful analy­sis and discussion of the
concept of orga­nizational effectiveness that helps in thinking clearly about per­
for­mance. He notes that orga­nizational effectiveness was once the dominant
outcome or dependent variable in orga­nizational studies, and other variables
have taken its place. Examples include customer loyalty, productivity, error rates,
financial ratios, and share price (Cameron and Whetten, 1996).
Figure 8.1 summarizes five models of orga­nizational effectiveness and an
encapsulated definition and assessment of appropriateness. For the most part,
­these models are self-­explanatory. It is easy to recognize their presence within
any organ­ization or the tension among stakeholders having dif­fer­ent positions
about their organ­ization. Then the five models of orga­nizational effectiveness
are placed into a competing values framework (figure 8.2).
The competing values around orga­nizational effectiveness and per­for­mance
are positioned into four cells created by the axes of flexibility-­stability and internal maintenance-­external positioning. The effectiveness models placed into the
four cells represent competitors. Some ­people in HRD and orga­nizational leadership positions might see HRD as totally in the h
­ uman relations model and
therefore in the upper-­left corner of the framework. The extended discussion in
this chapter suggests other­wise. In developing and unleashing expertise, HRD
has the potential to contribute to per­for­mance and orga­nizational effectiveness
in all four cells. It is up to HRD professionals to understand, advocate for, and
facilitate per­for­mance based on professional judgment.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 151
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Model
Definition
Appropriateness
Organ­ization effective if:
Model preferred when:
Goal
It accomplishes stated goals
Goals are clear, overt,
consensual, time-­bound,
and mea­sur­able
System resource
It acquires needed resources
Resources and outputs are
clearly connected
Internal pro­cesses
It has smooth functioning and
an absence of strain
Pro­cesses and outcomes
are clearly connected
Strategic
constituencies
All constituencies are at least
minimally satisfied
Constituencies have power
over or in the organ­ization
­Human relations
Members are satisfied and
collaboration occurs
Coordinated effort and
harmony are directly
attached to results
Figure 8.1: Well-­Known Models of Orga­nizational Effectiveness
Source: Adapted from Cameron, and Whetten, 1996.
Flexibility
The Human Relations Model
The System Resource Model
Innovation
New resources
Adaptation
The Internal Processes Model
The Goal Model
Control
Efficiency
Consistency
External
Maintenance
Internal
Maintenance
Collaboration
Engagement
Harmonious relations
Productivity
Aggressiveness
Achievement
The Multiple Constituencies Model
Customer focus
Boundary-spanning
Competitiveness
Stability
Figure 8.2: The Competing Values Framework of Orga­nizational Effectiveness:
An Integration of the Five Well-­Known Models, with Key Areas of Interest
Source: Cameron, 2005, 309.
152
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 152
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
153
Disciplinary Perspectives on Per­for­mance
HRD is not the only discipline interested in per­for­mance and per­for­mance improvement. Thus, it is crucial to recognize that HRD is challenged, judged, and
advanced by ­these vari­ous per­for­mance perspectives in business and societal
organ­izations.
To clarify perspectives on per­for­mance, it is impor­tant to be aware of the
per­for­mance theories and models within HRD and ­those closely associated with
HRD. The results are discussed ­here and shown in figure 8.3. ­These models
­illustrate the diversity of per­for­mance perspectives and point to key considerations in understanding per­for­mance:
• Per­for­mance is a multidisciplinary phenomenon. Many dif­fer­ent
disciplines study per­for­mance. Per­for­mance models exist in vari­ous
fields, including psy­chol­ogy, h
­ uman resource management, ethics,
quality, sociology, economics, strategic management, and industrial
engineering. This range of disciplines is consistent with per­for­mance
improvement competency models that indicate that a per­for­mance
improvement professional must be proficient in skills drawn from
multiple disciplines (Stolovich, Keeps, and Rodriguez, 1995).
• Per­for­mance models have a disciplinary bias. Each discipline defines
per­for­mance to fit its unique needs. For example, psy­chol­ogy focuses
on individuals and defined per­for­mance through the individual lens
(Campbell, 1990). The quality movement, which focuses on improving orga­nizational pro­cesses, sees per­for­mance through a pro­cess
lens (Juran, 1992). Strategic management, which focuses on positioning the organ­ization competitively, sees per­for­mance through the
organ­ization and industry lens (Porter, 1980). While nothing is
inherently wrong with a disciplinary bias, it does indicate a need for
caution when viewing per­for­mance models from other disciplines.
• ­There is no such ­thing as a single view of per­for­mance. Each discipline
or perspective has defined per­for­mance in a way that fits its purpose.
The search for a single per­for­mance model would likely be a futile
search or at least likely to result in a model so complex as to be
unusable. Each discipline has to limit its per­for­mance models to
focus on aspects of per­for­mance appropriate for that discipline. The
lesson is that HRD must define per­for­mance in a manner that fits its
unique role in per­for­mance improvement and acknowledges the
other disciple’s’ legitimate roles. HRD’s model d
­ oesn’t have to represent e­ very pos­si­ble view of per­for­mance. As professionals responsible
for improving per­for­mance in predominantly work-­related social
systems (Dean, 1997), HRD needs to define per­for­mance domains
that fit that purpose.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 153
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Domains of Per­for­mance/
Analysis
Perspective
Author
Per­for­mance
improvement
Brache (2002);
Rummler and
Brache (1995, 1992)
• Environment
• Organ­ization
• Pro­cess
• Individual
Per­for­mance
improvement—­
strategic
Hronec (1993)
Quantum Per­for­mance Matrix
Levels
• Organ­ization
• Pro­cess
• People
Mea­sures
• Cost
• Quality
• Time
HRD and
per­for­mance
improvement
Swanson (2007a,
2001a, 1994a)
Levels
• Organ­ization
• Pro­cess
• Team
• Individual
Mea­sures of Outputs
• Quantity
• Time
• Quality features
­Human per­for­
mance technology
Kaufman, Rojas,
and Mayer (1993)
Orga­nizational Ele­ments Model
Results
• Mega-­outcomes
• Macro-­outputs
• Micro-­intermediate products
Means
• Pro­cesses
• Resources
HRD and
microeconomics
Swanson (2001a)
• Units of per­for­mance
• Per­for­mance value calculation
• Cost calculation
• Benefit calculation
HRM and macro/
microeconomics
Fitz-­Enz (2009)
• Orga­nizational
• Functional
• ­Human capital management
­Human per­for­
mance technology
Silber (1992)
• All organ­izations in society
• All organ­izations in system
• Whole organ­ization
• One unit of organ­ization
Figure 8.3: Perspectives on the Domain of Per­for­mance
154
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 154
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Domains of Per­for­mance/
Analysis
Perspective
Author
HRD—­training
McGehee and
Thayer (1961);
Moore and Dutton
(1978); Sleezer
(1991); Ostroff and
Ford (1989)
• Orga­nizational
• Work/task
• Individual
Levels
• Orga­nizational
• Subunit
• Individual
Content
• Orga­nizational
• Task
• Person
• Psy­chol­ogy
Campbell (1990)
• Individual level
HRD—­organ­ization
development
Cummings and
Worley (2001)
• Orga­nizational
• Group
• Individual
HRD—­organ­ization
development
Rashford and
Coghlan (1994)
• Orga­nizational
• Interdepartmental group
• Face-­to-­face team
• Individual
Management—­
strategy
Kaplan and Norton
(1996)
• Financial
• Customer
• Internal business pro­cess
• Learning and growth
(employee based)
Management—­
strategy
Porter (1980)
• Society
• Industry
• Com­pany
Management—­
strategy
Hitt, Ireland, and
Hoskisson (1997)
• Corporate level
• Competitive dynamics
• Business level
Systems—­quality
Juran (1992)
• Customer needs
• Product features
• Pro­cesses
Systems—­
reengineering
Hammer and
Champy (1994)
• Pro­cess efficiency
Social
responsibility
D. L. Swanson
(1995)
• Societal impacts
• Orga­nizational ethical
per­for­mance
• Individual ethical per­for­mance
Figure 8.3: ­(Continued)
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 155
155
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Domains of Per­for­mance/
Analysis
Perspective
Author
HR—­performance
management
Schneir (1995)
• Com­pany
• Work pro­cess
• Unit
• Team
• Individual
HRM—­general
Lewin and Mitchell
(1995)
• Firm
• Plant
• Individual
Economics—­
human capital
Becker* (1993)
• Society/economy
• Firm
• Individual
Economics—­
macroeconomics
Case and Fair
(1996)
• Society/economy
• Markets
• Firm
• Individual
Intellectual capital
Edvinsson and
Malone (1997)
• Financial
• Customer
• Pro­cess
• Renewal and development
• Human focus
Sociology—­general
Kammeyer, Ritzer,
and Yetman (1997)
• Society
• Cultures
• Organ­izations
• Groups
• Individuals
Sociology—­
industrial
Hodson and ­Sullivan
(1995)
• Workplaces (firm)
• Occupation
• Industry
• ­Labor force
• Worker
Sociology—­
industrial
Baldwin and Ford
(1988)
• Macro (society, social systems,
culture)
• Mezzo (organ­izations and
associations)
• Micro (social groups, roles,
and norms/rules)
Figure 8.3: ­(Continued)
*Derived from analy­sis of levels discussed in the book.
156
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 156
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
157
• Types (levels) of per­for­mance and indicators of per­for­mance are
confused in some models. One per­sis­tent source of confusion in the
lit­er­a­ture is between per­for­mance levels and indicators or metrics of
per­for­mance. For example, several models include “customer” as a
level of per­for­mance (Edvinsson and Malone, 1997; Juran, 1992;
Kaplan and Norton, 1996; Vanthourout, 2008). Customer satisfaction is essential, but it is an indicator of pro­cess and orga­nizational
per­for­mance, not a level of per­for­mance. Similarly, several models
define some aspects of employee be­hav­ior such as learning (Edvinsson
and Malone, 1997; Kaplan and Norton, 1996), demonstrating effort
(Campbell, 1990), or individual ethics (D. L. Swanson, 1995) as a
level of per­for­mance. All are indicators of individual per­for­mance
but are defined as levels due to disciplinary biases.
Sleezer, Hough, and Gradous (1998) point out that per­for­mance
is usually not mea­sured directly. What is mea­sured are attributes of
per­for­mance and their indicators. Per­for­mance indicators and
metrics are vitally impor­tant but must not be confused with per­for­
mance itself. And, as they point out, multiple levels of mea­sure­ment
may be involved. For example, customer satisfaction may be an
indicator of pro­cess per­for­mance, but it is also mea­sured in vari­ous
ways. We do not mea­sure all pos­si­ble dimensions of satisfaction
directly but could use a metric such as repeat visits to a store as an
indicator of satisfaction.
• Subsystems in the models vary widely. Part of the disciplinary bias is
reflected in the subsystems included in the models. Organ­ization
development (Cummings and Worley, 1993) defines groups as its
primary subsystem b
­ ecause orga­nizational development (OD) focuses
on the interpersonal dimensions of an organ­ization. Needs assessment
(McGehee and Thayer, 1961; Sleezer, 1991) defines work or task as its
­ ecause it focuses on analyzing work-­related
primary subsystem b
learning needs. O
­ thers (Rummler and Brache, 1995; Swanson, 1994a,
2007b) include pro­cess as a subsystem, reflecting an emphasis on
pro­cess improvement. In h
­ uman capital or strategic management,
the organ­ization becomes the subsystem, with society as the larger
system. ­There seems to be ­little uniformity in terminology.
Financial Per­for­mance
For most HRD professionals, assessing the financial benefits of HRD programs
is an underdeveloped area of their expertise. Much of the activity of HRD is
spent on per­for­mance d
­ rivers versus a­ ctual per­for­mance outcomes. Thus, HRD
uses interventions like executive coaching, system redesign, training worker expertise, action research, and valuing diversity as a means to a per­for­mance goal,
not as a goal in itself.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 157
12/3/21 3:03 PM
158
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
Many value-­laden myths have influenced the HRD profession, and a few
have been related to financial analy­sis of HRD: (1) HRD costs too much, (2) you
­can’t quantify the benefits of HRD, and (3) it is good to give organ­izations the
HRD they want. Th
­ ese myths should be confronted and tossed aside.
Myth: HRD Costs Too Much. Good HRD generally costs a fair amount of
money. Most of the worthwhile proj­ects that go on in an organ­ization cost a fair
amount of money. Usually management decides to spend available dollars on
the equipment, ser­vices, and proj­ects that give the best return on its investment.
Whenever something must be purchased that apparently w
­ ill have l­ittle effect
on the business, management ­will request the one with the lowest price.
The following example w
­ ill have a familiar ring: If low-­quality mailing envelopes w
­ ill do the job, management tends to say, “Get them as cheaply as you
can.” If t­ hese inexpensive envelopes ­later stick together or ­will not feed through
the postage machine, or if they make the organ­ization look tacky in the eyes of
customers, management then ­will tend to say, “Stop buying such junk.” Conversely, suppose the more expensive envelopes are the kind that seal automatically and thus increase output, catch the attention of potential customers, and
bring increased sales. In that case, management ­will tend to say, “Get a good
price if you can, but we want the best.”
Cost figures by themselves are irrelevant. Reviewing HRD costs without also
examining the associated benefits is not smart. Analyzing what you get for your
money is smart. What most HRD man­ag­ers fail to realize is that orga­nizational
decision makers usually focus only on HRD costs. When they lack information
about the economic benefits of HRD, many decision makers decide consciously
or unconsciously that a proposed HRD program is just another HRD program—­
just as an envelope is only an envelope. “So get the cheapest one.”
Myth: You Cannot Quantify the Benefits of HRD. Listening to ­people find excuses as to why they cannot do something is always in­ter­est­ing. Rationalizing
that the benefits of HRD cannot be quantified has kept the HRD profession in
the dark ages of orga­nizational per­for­mance. Do you suppose that management
knows how many products it ­will sell next year? Of course not. If it knew the
correct figures ahead of time, it would make exactly that many products. But
­because management does not know precisely how many products it ­will sell, it
gathers the best estimates it can find and makes its decision without the satisfaction of knowing it is correct. This pro­cess takes knowledge of past results,
intelligence, and guts—­not perfection. Likewise, a rec­ord of assessed benefits, a
­little more intelligence, and a lot more guts on the part of HRD professionals
­will explode this myth.
­There is a strong possibility that ­these myths have arisen from inside the
HRD profession. If decision makers have also learned ­these HRD myths, they
prob­ably learned them from HRD p
­ eople. As leaders of change and opportu-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 158
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
159
nity, executives have the right to expect HRD departments to join them in their
strug­gle to achieve per­for­mance and profitability. Orga­nizational decision makers are not enemies of HRD. They want to be orga­nizational partners and reap
the added value that HRD can provide.
Myth: It Is Good to Give Organ­izations the HRD They Want. The ­actual pressure for HRD activity ­will come as the result of identifying critical per­for­mance
requirements. Good per­for­mance analyses are the basis for making financial
benefit assessments. A major practical issue in most organ­izations is how to distinguish between wants and requirements. What man­ag­ers want is not always
what they need or require. Per­for­mance variables are critical conditions that
organ­izations must meet to achieve their per­for­mance goals and mission. The
relationship between financial benefits assessment and per­for­mance requirements is impor­tant. Wants are not so impor­tant. The most critical HRD skill is
to work with decision makers to discover genuine orga­nizational per­for­mance
requirements and convince them that they want what they need. This goal is
best accomplished by working in partnership with man­ag­ers rather than making high-­pressure attempts to sell faddish HRD programs.
The outcome of a par­tic­u­lar HRD program is valuable only if connected to
an orga­nizational per­for­mance goal and the core pro­cesses designed to achieve
­those per­for­mances. A high-­cost HRD program does not always result in a per­
for­mance gain, while a low-­cost HRD program may result in a large per­for­
mance gain. Determining the critical per­for­mance to be attained and its value
to the organ­ization should precede the financial assessment of an HRD
program.
UNITS OF PER­FOR­MANCE
All human-­made organ­izations are economic entities. Organ­izations produce
goods and ser­v ices for customers and over time they must have income that
equals or exceeds the costs of operating that system. This is equally true for
multinational corporations, family-­owned businesses, nonprofit arts groups,
churches, regional governments, and families.
The goods and ser­vices that an organ­ization produces are expressed in terms
of units of per­for­mance or a clear proxy that makes the most sense. A retail furniture corporation can express its unit of per­for­mance simply as total dollar
sales in a par­tic­u­lar period. This could then be compared to the total cost of operation during the same period to determine if ­there is a profit or loss. In a sales
organ­ization, units of sales per­for­mance can be tracked not only to the entire
organ­ization but also to each division, department, line of products, sales team,
and salesperson.
Thus, HRD programs aimed at improving sales per­for­mance can be financially assessed. Each unit of per­for­mance can be monetized. The number of additional units produced following the intervention times the monetary value of
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 159
12/3/21 3:03 PM
160
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
each unit gets you to the accurate financials of an organ­ization and the bottom-­
line impact of HRD interventions.
FINANCIAL BENEFIT ANALY­SIS
Many scholars have addressed the topic of assessing the financial benefits of
­investing in ­human resources (Bassi and McMurrer, 2007; Cascio and Boudreau, 2008; Fitz-­Enz, 1995, 2009; Phillips and Phillips, 2016; Swanson, 2001a).
Financial benefit analy­sis is a research-­based and field-­tested methodology for
financially assessing HRD programs. Using the microeconomic methodology,
assessing financial benefits of HRD interventions is quite easy. The pro­cess
follows a basic financial assessment model (Swanson, 2001a, 28):
Per­for­mance Value (per­for­mance value resulting from the HRD intervention)
− Cost (cost of the HRD intervention) =
Benefit (benefit is the per­for­mance value minus the cost)
Worksheets are provided for each of the three components of the model. In
addition, a framework for assessing financial benefits is presented that identifies
three perspectives on evaluating the financial benefits of HRD interventions:
• What is the forecasted financial benefit resulting from an HRD
intervention?
(Before-­the-­fact assessment based on estimated financial data.)
• What is the ­actual financial benefit resulting from an HRD
intervention?
(During-­the-­process assessment based on ­actual financial data.)
• What is the approximate financial benefit resulting from an HRD
intervention?
(After-­t he-­fact assessment based on approximated financial data.)
­ ese three perspectives offer three financial benefit assessment strategies that
Th
fit with the financial decision points in an organ­ization.
ROI OF H
­ UMAN CAPITAL
Jac Fitz-­Enz (2009) also pre­sents a research-­based and field-­tested methodology
for determining the return-­on-­investment (ROI) of h
­ uman capital through employee per­for­mance. His methodology spans macro and microeconomics.
While Swanson (2001a) focuses on the ROI of individual HRD interventions,
Fitz-­Enz provides a methodology for assessing ­human capital per­for­mance contributions at the organization-­wide level and organization-­wide change initiative level. In creating a corporate scorecard, he combines quantitative and
perceptual data for an organization-­level financial assessment. In addition, he
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 160
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
Cost
Acquiring
Maintaining
Developing
Retaining
Cost per hire
Cost per paycheck
Cost per
trainee
Cost of
turnover
161
Cost per EAP case*
Time
Time to fill jobs
Time to respond
Time to fulfill
request
Cost per
trainee
Turnover by
length of
ser­vice
Quantity
Number mixed
Number of claims
pro­cessed
Number
trained
Voluntary
turnover rate
Error
New hire
rating
Pro­cess error rate
Skills
attained
Readiness
level
Reaction
Man­ag­er
satisfaction
Employee
satisfaction
Trainee
responses
Turnover
reasons
Figure 8.4: ­Human Capital Per­for­mance Matrix and Examples
*EAP = Employee asssistance program
Source: Fitz-­Enz, 2009, 109.
provides a methodology that is aimed at assessing pro­cesses u
­ nder h
­ uman
control.
According to Fitz-­Enz, ­human capital per­for­mance evaluation uses a matrix to acquire and categorize data. The matrix contains four core ­human resource activities: acquisition, maintenance, development, and retention on one
axis. The second axis specifies component per­for­mance mea­sures: cost, time,
quantity, error, and reaction. Figure 8.4 illustrates the h
­ uman capital per­for­
mance matrix with examples in the cells.
Multilevel Per­for­mance Models
Scholars of orga­nizational per­for­mance have long been frustrated with piecemeal
approaches to per­for­mance improvement. Systems theory tells us that interventions that focus on only a subset of orga­nizational per­for­mance variables w
­ ill
likely fail ­unless they are embedded in the context of whole-­system per­for­mance
improvement. Thus, efforts to improve per­for­mance using an individual-­level
model are missing critical ele­ments of the orga­nizational context. Fundamentally,
this is the reason that the performance-­based HRD perspective has developed
and become popu­lar. Development is often futile ­unless it is embedded in a systems approach to orga­nizational per­for­mance improvement.
When viewed from a systems perspective, organ­izations are highly complex.
They become so complicated that the average person has trou­ble comprehend-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 161
12/3/21 3:03 PM
162
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
ing them, let alone improving them. Thus, vari­ous scholars have attempted to
reduce the complexity of orga­nizational systems to a more manageable form by
creating taxonomic models of key per­for­mance variables. Th
­ ese models usually
embrace multiple levels of per­for­mance and multiple dimensions of per­for­mance
within t­ hose levels. This chapter looks at four multilevel models: Brache’s (2002)
enterprise model, Rummler and Brache’s (2012) white space per­for­mance model,
Swanson’s (2007a) per­for­mance diagnosis pro­cess and matrix, and the organ­
ization development per­for­mance model from Cummings and Worley (2001,
2018).
ENTERPRISE MODEL—­BRACHE
Brache (2002) pre­sents what he calls a holistic approach to enterprise health. His
approach supports the idea that per­for­mance improvement professionals need
to understand orga­nizational structures and how organ­izations work. The methodology guides the analy­sis of the internal and external variables of an organ­
ization’s environment to diagnose the overall health of a firm.
The enterprise model (see figure 8.5) is a holistic view of the structures of
an organ­ization that are categorized into internal and external components. In
addressing the organ­ization’s integration as a ­whole, the importance of each
variable of the enterprise model is described and the impact they have on each
other. Brache’s work is particularly good at providing a clear and not overly technical conceptualization of how organ­izations work and the key questions required to assess an organ­ization’s health.
WHITE SPACE PER­FOR­MANCE MODEL—­
RUMMLER AND BRACHE
Rummler and Brache (2012) provide an integrated framework for achieving
competitive advantage by learning how to manage organ­izations, pro­cesses, and
individuals effectively. The subtitle of their book is Managing the White Space
in Organ­izations. From a sociotechnical perspective, the white space represents
the essential connection between components and where per­for­mance breakdowns most often occur. Beginning with a holistic view of the organ­ization, they
set forth a rational, straightforward, yet ­simple view of the orga­nizational
skeleton, pro­cess levels, and interdependencies. Their model hypothesizes that
orga­nizational failure is due not to a lack of desire or effort but to a lack of understanding of the variables that influence the orga­nizational pro­cess and individual per­for­mance. Rummler and Brache call ­these variables “per­for­mance
levers” (2). With a complete understanding and holistic management of ­these
variables, high per­for­mance should result.
To guide the management of organ­izations as systems, Rummler and Brache
pre­sent the nine-­cell matrix described h
­ ere and in figure 8.6 along with questions each cell raises. They define three levels of per­for­mance:
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 162
12/3/21 3:03 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 163
Government
The
economy
Society/
community
Regulations/policies
Economic priorities
Concerns
Technology
Resource
providers
Parent
corporation
Priorities
The business
Leadership
Equity/dividends
People
Money
Capital
Shareholders
Strategy
Business processes
Suppliers’
suppliers
(upstream
industry
value chain)
Raw
materials/
component
suppliers
Goals/
measurement
Human
capabilities
Information
knowledge
management
Organization
structure
roles
Culture
Issue resolution
Competitors
Figure 8.5: The Enterprise Model
Source: Brache, 2002, 5.
Needs
Market
Products/
services
Customers
Customers’
customers
(downstream
industry
value chain)
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Organ­ization
Management
Organ­ization Goals
Organ­ization Design
• Has the organ­ization’s
strategy/direction been
articulated and
communicated?
• Does the strategy
make sense in terms of
the external threats and
opportunities and the
internal strengths and
weaknesses?
• Are all the relevant
functions in place?
• Are all functions
necessary?
• Is the current flow of
inputs and outputs
between functions
appropriate?
• Does the formal
organ­ization structure
support the strategy
and enhance the
efficiency of the
system?
• Have appropriate
function goals been
set?
• Is relevant per­for­mance
mea­sured?
• Are resources appropriately allocated?
• Are the interfaces
between functions
steps being managed?
Pro­cess Goals
Pro­cess Design
Pro­cess Management
• Are goals for key
pro­cesses linked to
customer and organ­
ization requirements?
• Is this the most efficient/effective pro­cess
for accomplishing
pro­cess goals?
• Have appropriate
pro­cess subgoals been
set?
• Is pro­cess per­for­mance
managed?
• Are sufficient resources
allocated to each
pro­cess?
• Are the interfaces
between pro­cess steps
being managed?
• Given this strategy,
have the required
outputs of the organ­
ization and the level of
per­for­mance expected
from each output been
determined and
communicated?
Figure 8.6: White Space Per­for­mance Model Questions—­Rummler and Brache
164
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 164
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
Job/Performer Goals
Job Design
• Are job outputs and
standards linked to
pro­cess requirements
(which are in turn linked
to customer and
organ­ization
requirements)?
• Are pro­cess requirements reflected in the
appropriate jobs?
• Are job steps in a
logical sequence?
• Have supportive
policies and procedures been developed?
• Is the job environment
ergonomically sound?
165
Job/Performer
Management
• Do the performers
understand the job
goals (outputs they are
expected to produce
and the standards they
are expected to meet)?
• Do the performers have
sufficient resources,
clear signals and
priorities, and a logical
job design?
• Are the performers
rewarded for achieving
the job goals?
• Do the performers
know if they are
meeting the job goals?
• Do the performers have
the necessary skills
and knowledge to
achieve the job goals?
• If the performers w
­ ere
in an environment in
which the five questions listed above w
­ ere
answered yes, would
they have the physical,
­mental, and emotional
capacity to achieve the
job goals?
Figure 8.6: ­(Continued)
• Orga­nizational level—­the organ­ization’s relationship with its market
and the basic skeleton of the primary functions that comprise the
organ­ization
• Process—­the workflow, how the work gets done
• Job/performer—­the individuals ­doing vari­ous jobs
Within each of t­ hese three levels are three per­for­mance variables:
• Goals—­specific standards that reflect customers’ expectations for
product and ser­vice quality, quantity, timeliness, and cost
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 165
12/3/21 3:03 PM
166
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
• Design—­the necessary structural components configured in a way
that enables the goals to be efficiently met
• Management—­management practices that ensure goals are current
and being achieved
Organ­ization Level According to Rummler and Brache (1995, 2012), “If ex-
ecutives [leaders] do not manage at the organ­ization level, the best they can
expect is modest per­for­mance improvement. At worst, efforts at other levels
­w ill be counterproductive” (33). This “level emphasizes the organ­ization’s relationship with its market and the basic ‘skeleton’ of the major functions that
comprise the organ­ization” (15). They further suggest that organization-­level
per­for­mance addresses the set of core questions, as shown in figure 8.6.
Pro­cess Level An organ­i zation is only as good as its pro­cesses (Rummler
and Brache, 1995, 2012). Orga­nizational pro­cesses describe the a­ ctual work
of an organ­ization and are responsible for producing goods and ser­v ices
(i.e., outputs) for customers. For the pro­cess level, the analyst must go “beyond the cross-­f unctional bound­a ries that make up the organ­ization chart,
we see the work flow—­how the work gets done. . . . ​At the pro­cess level,
one must ensure that pro­cesses are installed to meet customer needs, that
­those pro­cesses work effectively and efficiently, and that the pro­cess goals
and mea­sures are driven by the customers’ and the organ­izations’ requirement” (17).
Rummler and Brache (1995, 2012) make t­ hese arguments for the importance
of focusing on pro­cesses in per­for­mance systems:
• Pro­cess is the least understood and least managed domain of
per­for­mance.
• A pro­cess can be seen as a value chain, with each step adding value
to the preceding steps.
• An organ­ization is only as effective as its pro­cesses.
• Enhancing orga­nizational and individual effectiveness ­will improve
per­for­mance only as much as the pro­cesses allow.
• Strong p
­ eople cannot compensate for a weak pro­cess (45).
Individual Level Fi­nally, Rummler and Brache (1995) identify three per­for­
mance variables at the job/performer level: job/performer goals, design, and
management. They developed the core questions shown in figure 8.6. “At the
individual level it is recognized that pro­cesses . . . ​are performed and managed
by individuals d
­ oing vari­ous jobs” (17). Th
­ ese per­for­mance levels determine effectiveness at the individual job/performer level and contribute to the efficiency
of the pro­cess and orga­nizational levels.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 166
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
167
PER­FOR­MANCE DIAGNOSIS PRO­CESS
AND MATRIX—­SWANSON
Analy­sis for Improving Per­for­mance, 2nd edition advances a pro­cess and method
of per­for­mance diagnosis (Swanson, 2007a). The general five-­phase pro­cess,
shown in figure 8.7, begins with an initial purpose and culminates in a per­for­
mance improvement proposal.
Within the per­for­mance diagnosis pro­cess, assessing the per­for­mance
variables is a critical phase—­a matrix of questions (similar to Rummler and
Brache’s matrix) but with changes in categories. Initially advanced as part of
his per­for­mance analy­sis system, the core per­for­mance diagnosis model also
stands alone as one definition of an orga­nizational per­for­mance system.
Per­for­mance Levels Four levels are identified and consistently referred to
throughout the per­for­mance diagnosis phases:
•
•
•
•
Organ­ization
Pro­cess
Team
Individual
Orga­nizational system levels have been carefully presented by FitzGerald
and FitzGerald (1973). Systems theory helps us understand the levels. For example, the cause of a com­pany sending a customer a contract bid containing an
inaccurate bud­get and an incomplete list of ser­vices may lie in any or all of the
four levels. Even so, the decision maker may be falsely convinced early on that
the cause is lodged at a single level:
• “­There is so much bureaucracy around ­here that it is a miracle
anything even gets done!”
Assess
performance
variables.
Articulate
initial
purpose.
Specify
performance
measures.
Constuct
improvement
proposal.
Determine
performance
needs.
Figure 8.7: Diagnosing Per­for­mance Pro­cess
Source: Swanson, 2007b, 58.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 167
12/3/21 3:03 PM
168
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
• “The financial computer program has a glitch in it!”
• “Our financial analysts are incompetent!”
Per­for­mance Variable The second component of the per­for­mance diagnosis
is five per­for­mance variables that occur at each of the four per­for­mance levels:
•
•
•
•
•
Mission/goals
System design
Capacity
Motivation
Expertise
­These per­for­mance variables, matrixed with the levels of performance—­
organ­ization, pro­cess, and/or individual—­provide a power­ful perspective in
diagnosing per­for­mance. For example, a work pro­cess may have an inherent goal
built into it that is in conflict with the organ­ization’s mission and/or goal or a
person working in the pro­cess. The questions presented in the per­for­mance variable matrix help the diagnostician sort out the per­for­mance overlaps and disconnects (see figure 8.8).
Multilevel models uniformly acknowledge that inadequate or­gan­i­za­tion­al/
work systems almost always overwhelm good p
­ eople. This idea was most evident in the World War II per­for­mance improvement efforts (Dooley, 1945b).
How ­else to explain the failure of workers with high aptitudes? When the work
system ties the hands of competent persons ­behind their backs and then punishes them for d
­ oing their best, they e­ ither quit and leave—or quit and stay! Likewise, when a well-­designed work pro­cess is coupled with orga­nizational policies
and procedures that hire employees lacking the capacity to perform the work,
no reasonable amount of training w
­ ill get the employees up to required per­for­
mance standards.
ORGAN­IZATION DEVELOPMENT PER­FOR­MANCE MODEL—­
CUMMINGS AND WORLEY
Another representative multilevel per­for­mance model comes from organ­
ization development. Figure 8.9 shows the Cummings and Worley (2001) orga­
nizational diagnosis model. This model is typical of per­for­mance models found
in OD.
­There are several apparent differences between the OD and the white space
models. The obvious difference is in the levels defined. Instead of including a pro­
cess per­for­mance level, most OD models have a group or team per­for­mance level.
Swanson’s per­for­mance diagnosis model consists of both. The other two levels—­
organ­ization and individual—­are usually the same in most models. The group/
team level reflects a clear difference in values and perspective by OD professionals, who emphasize group and interpersonal dynamics in organ­izations.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 168
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Per­for­mance
Variables
Per­for­mance Levels
Individual
Level
Organ­ization
Level
Pro­cess
Level
Team Level
Mission/Goal
Does the
organ­ization
mission/goal fit
the real­ity of the
economic,
po­liti­cal, and
cultural forces?
Do the pro­cess
goals enable the
organ­ization to
meet organ­
ization and
individual
missions/goals?
Do the team
goals provide
congruence
with the
pro­cess and
individual
goals?
Are the
professional
and personal
mission/goals
of individuals
congruent with
the
organ­ization’s?
System Design
Does the
organ­ization
system provide
structure and
policies supporting the desired
per­for­mance?
Are pro­cesses
designed to
work as a
system?
Do the team
dynamics
function to
facilitate
collaboration
and
per­for­mance?
Does the
individual clear
obstacles that
impede his or
her job
per­for­mance?
Capacity
Does the
organ­ization have
the leadership,
capital, and
infrastructure to
achieve its
mission/goals?
Does the
pro­cess have
the capacity to
perform
(quantity,
quality, and
timeliness)?
Does the team
have the
combined
capacity to
effectively and
efficiently meet
the per­for­
Does the
individual have
the ­mental,
physical, and
emotional
capacity to
perform?
mance goals?
Motivation
Do the policies,
culture, and
reward systems
support the
desired
per­for­mance?
Does the
pro­cess provide
the information
and ­human
­factors required
to maintain it?
Does the team
function in a
respectful and
supportive
manner?
Does the
individual want
to perform no
­matter what?
Expertise
Does the
organ­ization
establish and
maintain se­lection
and training
policies and
resources?
Does the
pro­cess of
developing
expertise meet
the changing
demands of
changing
pro­cesses?
Does the team
have the team
pro­cess
expertise to
perform?
Does the
individual have
the knowledge
and expertise
to perform?
Figure 8.8: Per­for­mance Diagnosis Matrix Questions—­Swanson
Source: Swanson, 2007b, 65.
169
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 169
12/3/21 3:03 PM
170
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
Comprehensive Model for Diagnosing Organizational Systems
ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL
Inputs
Design Components
Outputs
Technology
General
Environment
Industry
Structure
Strategy
Organization
Effectiveness
Structure
Culture
Measurement
Systems
Human
Resources
Systems
(e.g.,
performance,
productivity;
stakeholder
satisfaction)
GROUP LEVEL
Inputs
Design Components
Outputs
Goal Clarity
Organization
Design
Task
Structure
Team
Functioning
Group
Composition
Group
Norms
Team
Effectiveness
(e.g., quality
of work life,
performance)
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL
Inputs
Organization
Design
Group
Design
Personal
Characteristics
Design Components
Outputs
Skill Variety
Task
Identity
Autonomy
Task
Significance
Feedback
About Results
Individual
Effectiveness
(e.g., job
satisfaction,
performance,
absenteeism,
personal
development)
Figure 8.9: Organ­ization Development Per­for­mance Model—­Cummings
and Worley
Source: Cummings and Worley, 2001.
The other clear difference is in the per­for­mance variables included in the
model, which are called design components in this model. Sixteen variables are
included across the three levels, roughly equivalent to the other models. The
variables at the organ­ization level are similar, encompassing strategy (goals), design, systems, and management. Notice, however, that one key variable explic­itly
included is organ­ization culture, another variable of interest to OD but not as
explicit in other models. At the group and individual levels, the variables included
represent traditional areas of concern for OD professionals. They emphasize ele­
ments that affect the social dynamics in organ­izations that are likely to enhance
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 170
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
171
quality of work life. This model explic­itly includes quality of work life, job satisfaction, and personal development as outcome variables and per­for­mance.
Kaplan and Norton (1996) go on to say the following about per­for­mance
d
­ rivers and per­for­mance outcomes:
Outcome mea­sures without per­for­mance d
­ rivers do not communicate
how the outcomes are to be achieved. . . . ​Conversely, per­for­mance
­drivers without outcome mea­sures may enable the business unit to
achieve short-­term operational improvements, but ­w ill fail to reveal
­whether the operational improvements have been translated into expanded business with existing and new customers, and, eventually, to
enhanced financial per­for­mance. A good balanced scorecard should
have an appropriate mix of outcomes (lagging indicators) and per­for­
mance ­drivers (leading indicators) of the business unit’s strategy.
(31–32)
From this perspective, the per­for­mance assessment that focuses solely on
per­for­mance outcomes (such as profit or units of work produced) without links
to per­for­mance ­drivers is inadequate. Models that focus solely on per­for­mance
­drivers (such as learning or personal growth) are equally flawed in that they fail
to consider the ­actual outcomes. Only when outcomes and ­drivers are jointly
considered ­will long-­term sustained per­for­mance improvement occur.
The correct perspective is that per­for­mance ­drivers and per­for­mance out­
comes should be linked within each per­for­mance domain. Both work in an integ­
rated manner to enhance mission, pro­cess, team, and individual per­for­mance
(Holton, 1999).
Pro­cess and Team-­Level Per­for­mance Models
Per­for­mance perspectives at the pro­cess and team levels functionally fall between the orga­nizational and individual levels. Much of the organ­ization and
individual-­level thinking and many of the tools are equally useful in ­these ­middle
levels. Yet, t­ here are some unique differences.
­There are two significant views of pro­cess per­for­mance improvement. One
is incremental and the other is radical. Reengineering is a radical approach to
per­for­mance improvement. Impatient with standard pro­cess improvement, reengineering is willing to scrap an entire pro­cess for one that is projected to be
more efficient and more effective. The criticisms of reengineering are that it takes
a narrow system view without seriously considering h
­ uman beings as part of
the equation.
Incremental pro­cess improvement is focused on mea­sur­ing pro­cesses at each
step and assessing the pro­cess steps and the pro­cess as a w
­ hole as being u
­ nder
control (within quality range limits). Once ­under control, additional pro­cess improvement actions are taken, and per­for­mance mea­sures track the results. The
man­tra for pro­cess improvement is the relentless pursuit of quality.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 171
12/3/21 3:03 PM
172
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
W. Edwards Deming (1986) and Joseph Juran (1992) are considered the gurus of quality and total quality management. Six Sigma methodology is simply
upping the bar for the per­for­mance expectations. Six Sigma is a quality pro­cess
improvement method developed by Motorola Corporation. Quality methods
embrace the following:
1. Continuous efforts to reduce variation in pro­cess outputs is key to
business success.
2. Manufacturing and business pro­cesses can be mea­sured, analyzed,
improved, and controlled.
3. Succeeding at achieving sustained quality improvement requires
commitment from the entire organ­ization, particularly from
top-­level management.
Some pro­cess per­for­mance efforts rely heavi­ly on a statistical analy­sis of pro­
cess data (item 2 above) while ­others rely more heavi­ly on team building and
managerial support (item 3 above).
Team per­for­mance is often pursued as a part of pro­cess per­for­mance. The
core idea that teams oversee pro­cesses and that teams can cooperatively make
sound judgments is central to pro­cess improvement efforts.
To a larger extent, the pursuit of team development takes place outside the
pro­cess per­for­mance banner by organ­izations wanting to simply improve work-­
team per­for­mance. As teamwork increases and individual work wanes, the per­
for­mance mea­sures attributable to individuals are now attributable to teams.
Individual-­Level Per­for­mance Models
­ ecause HRD has its roots in individual learning, it was logical that individual-­
B
level per­for­mance models would be the first to develop. Th
­ ese models have been
collectively known as ­human per­for­mance technology (Stolovich and Keeps, 1999)
models. The common characteristic of t­ hese models is that they attempt to define individual per­for­mance and critical ­factors that impact individual per­for­
mance. Two representative models are John Campbell’s taxonomy of individual
per­for­mance and Thomas Gilbert’s h
­ uman per­for­mance engineering model.
MODEL OF INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE—­CAMPBELL
Campbell’s (1990) model of individual per­for­mance is considered the early per­
for­mance model from industrial psy­chol­ogy. Campbell developed it ­because he
noted that psychologists had paid l­ ittle attention to the dependent variable (per­
for­mance) focusing most of their energy on the in­de­pen­dent variables. In reflecting on the discipline of industrial psy­chol­ogy, he noted, “The lit­er­a­ture
pertaining to the structure and content of per­for­mance is a virtual desert. We
essentially have no theories of per­for­mance” (704).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 172
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
Declarative Knowledge
Procedural Knowledge
and Skill
• Facts
• Principles
• Goals
• Self-knowledge
• Cognitive skill
• Psychomotor skill
• Physical skill
• Self-management skill
• Interpersonal skill
173
Motivation
• Choice to perform
• Level of effort
• Persistence of effort
Figure 8.10: Job Per­for­mance Components—­Campbell
Source: Campbell, 1990.
The model of individual per­for­mance camp has three key parts: per­for­mance
components, per­for­mance determinants, and predictors of per­for­mance determinants. First, the predictors of per­for­mance fall into three groups (see
­figure 8.10). Predictors of declarative and procedural knowledge include ability, personality, interests, education, training, experience, and the interaction
of ­these components. Predictors of motivation vary depending on which theory of motivation one uses.
Campbell (1990) then proposed eight components hypothesized to be collectively sufficient to describe job per­for­mance in all listings in the Dictionary
of Occupational Titles. They are as follows:
1. Job-­specific task proficiency—­the degree to which an individual
can perform the core substantive or technical tasks central to his
or her job
2. Nonjob-­specific task proficiency—­the degree to which an individual can
perform the tasks or execute be­hav­iors that are not specific to his or
her par­tic­u­lar job
3. Written and oral communication—­the proficiency with which an
individual can write or speak, in­de­pen­dent of the correctness of the
subject ­matter
4. Demonstrating effort—­the consistency of an individual’s effort day by
day, the degree to which he or she ­will expend extra effort when
required, and the willingness to work ­under adverse conditions
5. Maintaining personal discipline—­the degree to which negative
be­hav­iors are avoided (e.g., abusing alcohol, breaking laws and
rules, ­etc.)
6. Facilitating peer and team performance—­the degree to which the
individual supports his or her peers, helps them with job prob­lems,
and helps train them
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 173
12/3/21 3:03 PM
174
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
7. Supervision—­proficiency in the supervisory component includes all
the be­hav­iors directed at influencing the per­for­mance of supervisees
through face-­to-­face interpersonal interaction and influence
8. Management/administration—­includes the major ele­ments in management that are in­de­pen­dent of direct supervision
­HUMAN PER­FOR­MANCE ENGINEERING MODEL—­GILBERT
­ uman Competence: Engineering Worthy Per­for­mance
Tom Gilbert’s 1978 book H
is regarded as one of the classics in ­human per­for­mance technology. While
the more recent multilevel per­for­mance models discussed in the next section
are more comprehensive, Gilbert’s work remains an essential benchmark in
individual-­level per­for­mance improvement.
The work is presented in a series of theorems called leisurely theorems. The
first theorem states:
­ uman competence is a function of worthy per­for­mance (W), which is a
H
function of the ratio of valuable accomplishments (A) to costly be­hav­ior (B).
Mathematically, this is stated as:
W=
A
B
This theorem tells us that having large amounts of work, knowledge, and
outcomes without accomplishment is not worthy per­for­mance. Per­for­mance,
Gilbert points out, is not the same as activity but instead is a function of the
worth of the accomplishment for a given unit of effort (similar to return on
investment). Thus, systems that reward p
­ eople for effort and noteworthy accomplishments are seen to encourage incompetence. Similarly, rewarding
achievement without examining the relative worth of ­those accomplishments
squanders ­people’s energies.
Mea­sur­ing per­for­mance alone does not give us a mea­sure of competence,
according to Gilbert. To mea­sure competence, the second theorem is offered:
Typical per­for­mance is inversely proportional to the potential for improving per­for­mance (the PIP), which is the ratio of exemplary per­for­
mance to typical per­for­mance. The ratio, to be meaningful, must be
stated for an identifiable accomplishment, ­because ­there is no “general
quality of competence.” (Gilbert, 1978, 30)
Mathematically, this is stated as:
PIP =
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 174
Wex
wt
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
175
The PIP tells us how much competence we have and how much potential we
have for improving it. For example, simply knowing that a person can produce
ten widgets a day tells us ­little about competence. If the best per­for­mance pos­
si­ble is ten widgets, then this person is an exemplary performer. On the other
hand, if the best per­for­mance is twenty widgets, then this person is only at
50 ­percent of ideal per­for­mance and has a high potential for improving
per­for­mance.
The third theorem deals directly with engineering ­human be­hav­iors to create accomplishments. It states:
For any given accomplishment, a deficiency in per­for­mance always has
at its immediate cause a deficiency in a be­hav­ior repertory (P), or in the
environment that supports the repertory (E), or in both. But its ultimate
cause ­will be found in a deficiency of the management system (M).
Gilbert (1978, 88) then provides what may be the most well-­k nown part of this
model, the be­hav­ior engineering model (see figure 8.11).
Gilbert’s notion of ­human per­for­mance was grounded in behavioral psy­
chol­ogy. The strength of his framework is that he focused on both the individual and the individual’s environment, unlike Campbell’s model that focuses
solely on the individual. Con­temporary conceptualizations of per­for­mance encompass more than just behaviorist notions of ­human be­hav­ior. Emphasis on
the worth of be­hav­ior as a mea­sure of wise investments in expertise remains
fundamental to performance-­based HRD. Behaviorism is viewed by some as a
weakness, suggesting that such work is mechanistic and dehumanizing. The
irony is that most behaviorists believe in h
­ uman beings and their capacity to
perform, in h
­ uman potential, and in providing ­people what they needed to perform successfully.
The Spoils of Per­for­mance
Getting to per­for­mance is no small accomplishment. It is impor­tant to note that
attaining ethical per­for­mance goals is worthy and impor­tant to individual contributors, top executives, and society. In the big picture, it is impor­tant and
discouraging to note that HRD tools and techniques can be and are at times
being used for evil purposes. ­These negative applications are generally quite obvious and should be shunned and reported.
At the ethics level, questions of exploitation, inequity, and unfairness in distributing of the spoils of per­for­mance are deeply disturbing. ­These questions
go beyond the per­for­mance paradigms and into the realms of ethics, ­human
decency, morality, abuse of power, and the law. While HRD should and must
be a partner in pursuing per­for­mance, HRD professionals should avoid being
duped into facilitating conditions of exploitation, inequity, and unfairness in the
distribution of the spoils of per­for­mance. This warning is vital in applying the
group pro­cess tools within organ­ization development interventions when used
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 175
12/3/21 3:03 PM
176
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
SD
R
ST
Instrumentation
Instrumentation
Motivation
E Environmental
supports
Data
1. Relevant and
frequent feedback
about the adequacy
of per­for­mance
2. Descriptions of
what is expected of
per­for­mance
3. Clear and relevant
guides to adequate
per­for­mance
Instruments
1. Tools and
materials of work
designed
scientifically to
match ­human
­factors
Incentives
1. Adequate
financial incentives made
contingent upon
per­for­mance
2. Nonmonetary
incentives made
available
3. Career development
opportunities
P Person’s
repertory of
be­hav­ior
Knowledge
1. Scientifically
designed training
that matches the
requirements of
exemplary
per­for­mance
2. Placement
Capacity
1. Flexible scheduling of per­for­
mance to match
peak capacity
2. Prosthesis
3. Physical shaping
4. Adaptation
5. Se­lection
Motives
1. Assessment of
­people’s motives
to work
2. Recruitment of
­people to match
the realities of
the situation
Figure 8.11: Be­hav­ior Engineering Model—­Gilbert
Source: Gilbert, 1978.
to placate workers or provide the illusion of meaningful participation instead
of their true purposes.
Conclusion
Integrating per­for­mance models into HRD has introduced an entirely new perspective to HRD thinking, research, and practice. Their primary contribution
is that they all remind us that the individual is embedded in a per­for­mance system that significantly affects the individual’s per­for­mance. Even if one believes
that the primary purpose of HRD is to enhance individual development, the
individual is embedded in an orga­nizational system, so HRD professionals need
to understand the system and its effects on the individual. A broader view suggests that enhancing h
­ uman per­for­mance means working on the system as well
as developing individuals. The broadest application of ­these models indicates
that HRD professionals should improve all aspects of the per­for­mance system.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 176
12/3/21 3:03 PM
8. Perspectives on Per­for­mance in H
­ uman Resource Development
177
Reflection Questions
1. Which per­for­mance model do you think best represents per­for­mance
constructs of concern to HRD? Why?
2. What are the implications of multilevel, multiattribute per­for­mance
models for HRD practice?
3. Do per­for­mance models enhance or diminish the value of learning in
organ­izations?
4. Per­for­mance models are often seen as useful to management but not as
tools to benefit employees. What is your position on this?
5. How can HRD lead change in each of the per­for­mance variables?
6. What do you believe is the f­ uture of performance-­oriented HRD?
Why?
7. Decsribe a hy­po­thet­i­cal ethical situation of the negative application of
HRD per­for­mance tools.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 177
12/3/21 3:03 PM
9
Perspectives on
Learning in ­Human
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Theories of Learning
• Behaviorism
• Cognitivism (Gestalt)
• Humanism
• Social Learning
• Holistic Learning
Learning Models at the Individual Level
• Andragogy: The Adult Learning Perspective
• Andragogy-­in-­Practice Model
• Experiential Learning Model
• Informal and Incidental Workplace Learning
• Transformational Learning
Learning Models at the Orga­nizational Level
• Learning Organ­ization Strategy
• Learning Organ­ization and Per­for­mance Outcomes
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 178
12/3/21 3:03 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
179
Introduction
Learning is at the heart of ­Human Resource Development (HRD) and continues to be a core part of all paradigms of HRD. What­ever the debates about
paradigms, nobody has ever suggested that HRD not embrace learning as foundational for the discipline. This chapter takes a closer look at representative theories and research on learning in HRD. First, core theories of learning are discussed.
Then, representative learning models at the individual and orga­nizational levels
are reviewed. The purpose of this chapter is to provide key foundational perspectives on learning.
Theories of Learning
A summary of fundamental theories of learning including behaviorism, cognitivism, humanism, social learning, and holistic learning, are presented in figure 9.1. Th
­ ese are theoretical perspectives that can apply to learning in all settings,
for all age groups, and for all types of learning events. In this section, each theory is described along with its primary contribution to HRD. Each has been
the subject of extensive experience, thinking, writing, and research.
Figure 9.1 helps to show that each approach represents a fundamentally dif­
fer­ent view of learning. Each would define learning differently, prescribe dif­fer­
ent roles for the instructor, and seek dif­fer­ent outcomes from learning. Each has
made a substantial contribution to learning and w
­ ill continue to inform HRD
practice. This section provides only a summary of each. Readers interested in a
more thorough pre­sen­ta­tion are encouraged to consult Ormond (1999); Hergenhahn and Olson (1993); or Merriam, Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2006).
Very few HRD professionals or HRD interventions use only one of ­t hese
metatheories. Most are pretty eclectic, using a combination of approaches that
fit the par­tic­u ­lar situation. Thus, t­ hese five approaches should not be read as
either/or choices but instead as five dif­fer­ent methods to be drawn upon as appropriate to one’s par­tic­u­lar needs. They are presented h
­ ere in their pure form
to enhance the understanding of each. However, in practice, they are usually
adapted and blended to accomplish specific objectives. The challenge for the
HRD professional is to understand them and make sound judgments about
which approach to use in a given situation. It is crucial not to reject any single
theory, for each has its strengths and weaknesses.
BEHAVIORISM
Behaviorists are primarily concerned with changes in be­hav­ior as a result of
learning. Behaviorism has a long and rich history, initially developed by John B.
Watson, who introduced the term in 1913 and developed it in the early twentieth ­century (Ormond, 1999). Six prominent learning theorists are most commonly included in this school: Ivan Pavlov, Edward L. Thorndike, John B.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 179
12/3/21 3:03 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 180
Social
Learning
Holistic
Maslow, Rogers,
Knowles
Bandura, Rotter
Yang, Jarvis & Parker
Internal ­mental pro­cess
(including insight,
information pro­cessing,
memory, perception)
A personal act to
fulfill potential
Interaction with
and observation
of o
­ thers in a
social context
Involves facets of explicit,
implicit, and emancipatory
knowledge
Stimuli in the
environment
Internal cognitive
structuring
Affective and
cognitive needs
Interaction of
person, be­hav­ior,
and environment
Occurs as a result of
interactions with and
between knowledge facets
Purpose of
education
Produce behavioral
change in desired
direction
Develop capacity and
skills to learn better
Become self-­
actualized,
autonomous
Model new roles
and be­hav­ior
Systematization, participation, and transformation
Teacher’s role
Arranges environment
to elicit desired
response
Structures content of
learning activity
Facilitates
development of
­whole person
Models and
guides new roles
and be­hav­ior
Facilitator
Manifestation in
adult learning
• Behavioral
objectives
• Competency-­based
education
• Skill development
• Skill development
and training
• Cognitive
development
• Intelligence, learning,
and memory as
function of age
• Learning how to learn
• Andragogy
• Self-­directed
learning
• Socialization
• Social roles
• Mentoring
• Locus of control
• Holistic and dialectical
perspective
• Dynamic
Aspect
Behaviorist
Cognitivist (Gestalt)
Humanist
Learning
theorists
Thorndike, Pavlov,
Watson, Guthrie, Hull,
Tolman, Skinner
Koffka, Kohler, Lewin,
Piaget, Ausubel,
Bruner, Tolman, Gagne
View of the
learning pro­cess
Change in be­hav­ior
Locus of
learning
Figure 9.1: Orientations to Learning
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Source: Adapted from Merriam and Caffarella, 2006, 264.
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
181
Watson, Edwin R. Guthrie, Clark L. Hull, and B. F. Skinner. Pavlov and Skinner are the best-­k nown contributors, with Pavlov having developed the classical conditioning model and Skinner the operant conditioning model. While
each of ­these six scholars had dif­fer­ent views of behaviorism, Ormond (1999)
identified seven core assumptions that they share:
1. Princi­ples of learning apply equally to dif­fer­ent be­hav­iors and dif­fer­ent
species of animals.
2. Learning pro­cesses can be studied most objectively when the focus of
the study is on stimulus and response.
3. Internal cognitive pro­cesses are largely excluded from scientific study.
4. Learning involves a be­hav­ior change.
5. Organisms are born as blank slates.
6. Learning is primarily the result of environmental events.
7. The most useful theories tend to be parsimonious ones.
Behaviorists put primary emphasis on how the external environment influences a person’s be­hav­ior and learning. Rewards and incentives play a crucial
role in building motivation to learn. In classic behaviorism, the role of the learning facilitator is to structure the environment to elicit the desired response
from the learner.
Behaviorism has played a central role in HRD. Its key contributions include
the following:
• Focus on be­hav­ior. The focus on be­hav­ior is impor­tant ­because
per­for­mance change does not occur without changing be­hav­ior.
Although be­hav­ior change alone without internal cognitive changes
is usually not desirable, neither is cognitive change alone. Thus,
behaviorism has led to popu­lar practices, such as behavioral objectives and competency-­based education.
• Focus on the environment. Behaviorism reminds us of the central
role that the external environment plays in shaping h
­ uman learning
and per­for­mance. Individuals in an organ­ization are subjected to
several ­factors (e.g., rewards and incentives, supports, e­ tc.) that ­will
influence their per­for­mance. As discussed in chapter 6, behaviorism
provides the link between psy­chol­ogy and economics in HRD.
• Foundation for transfer of learning. Behaviorism also provides part of
the foundation for transfer of learning research. Transfer of learning is
concerned with how the environment impacts the use of learning on
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 181
12/3/21 3:03 PM
182
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
the job. Transfer research (e.g., Rouillier and Goldstein, 1993) shows
that the environment is at least as necessary, if not more so, than
learning in predicting the use of learning on the job.
• Foundation for expertise development training. As indicated in
figure 9.1, behaviorism has provided much of the foundation for skill
or competency-­oriented training and development. Behavioral
objectives are another contribution from behaviorists.
Behaviorism has also been heavi­ly criticized, primarily by adult educators
who prefer a more humanistic and constructivist perspective. The chief criticism is that behaviorism views the learner as passive and dependent. In addition, behaviorism does not account for the role of personal insight and meaning
­ ese are legitimate criticisms and explain why behaviorism is rarely
in learning. Th
the only learning theory employed. On the other hand, t­ here are training interventions that are appropriately taught in a behavioral approach. For example, training police officers on how to respond when attacked is an appropriate
use of behavioral methods b
­ ecause officers have to react instinctively.
Behavioristic interventions are also objectionable to some HRD professionals ­because they find them offensive at a values level. This is particularly true of
­those who f­ avor an adult learning perspective that resists external control over
a person’s learning pro­cess (McLagan, 2017). Most HRD professionals believe
that ­there are legitimate uses of behaviorism when the situation warrants this
type of learning. We question the objections about training, such as in the police example or in cases where certification of skills externally mandated is
essential for safety. For example, airplane pi­lots, chemical plant operators, surgeons, and nuclear plant operators must pass rigorous certification programs
that are behavioristic that few of us would want to be changed.
COGNITIVISM (GESTALT)
Gestalt psy­chol­ogy (cognitivism) arose as a direct response to the limits of behaviorism, particularly the absence of meaningfulness in ­human learning. The
early roots can be traced back to the 1920s and 1930s through Edward Tolman,
the Gestalt psychologists of Germany, Jean Piaget, and Lev Vygotsky (Ormond
1999). However, more con­temporary cognitivism began to appear in the 1950s
and 1960s. Ormond (1999) identifies seven core assumptions of con­temporary
cognitivism:
1. Some learning pro­cesses may be unique to ­human beings.
2. Cognitive pro­cesses are the focus of study.
3. Objective, systematic observations of p
­ eople’s be­hav­ior should focus
on scientific inquiry; however, inferences about unobservable m
­ ental
pro­cesses can often be drawn from such be­hav­ior.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 182
12/3/21 3:03 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
183
4. Individuals are actively involved in the learning pro­cess.
5. Learning involves the formation of ­mental associations that are not
necessarily reflected in overt be­hav­ior changes.
6. Knowledge is or­ga­nized.
7. Learning is a pro­cess of relating new information to previously
learned information.
Cognitivists are primarily concerned with insight and understanding. They
see ­people not as passive and s­ haped by their environment but instead as capable of actively shaping the environment themselves. Furthermore, cognitivists focus on the internal pro­cess of acquiring, understanding, and retaining
learning. B
­ ecause of this, they suggest that the focus of the learning facilitator
should be on structuring the content and the learning activity so learners can
acquire information optimally.
Gestalt theory is the first form of cognitivist theory. Some well-­known names
within HRD fit ­under this umbrella, including Kurt Lewin (organ­ization development), Jean Piaget (cognitive development), and Jerome Bruner (discovery
learning). Cognitivism has made significant contributions to HRD and adult
learning. Some key ones include the following:
• Information pro­cessing. Central to cognitivism is the concept of the
­human mind as an information pro­cessor. Figure 9.2 shows a basic
schematic view of the ­human information-­processing system. Notice
that ­there are three key components: sensory memory, short-­term
memory, and long-­term memory. Cognitivists are particularly
concerned with the pro­cesses shown by arrows in this schematic.
­These arrows represent the ­mental pro­cesses of moving information
from sensory memory to short-­term memory, and from short-­term
Sensory
Memory
Short-Term
Memory
Retrieval/
Reconstruction
Encoding/
Elaboration
Long-Term
Memory
• Declarative
Knowledge
• Procedural
Knowledge
Rehearsal
Figure 9.2: The Information-­Processing Model
Source: Bruning, Schraw, and Ronning, 1999, 16. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 183
12/3/21 3:03 PM
184
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
memory to long-­term memory, and retrieving information from
long-­term memory.
• Metacognition. Along with ­these basic information-­processing
components, cognitivism also focuses on how individuals control
their cognitive pro­cesses, called metacognition. This concept is more
commonly known in HRD and adult learning as “learning how to
learn.”
• Cognitive development. Another significant contribution has been
the focus on how cognition develops over the life span. It is now
generally accepted that cognitive development continues throughout
adulthood.
Cognitivism has not received the same degree of criticism that behaviorism has. While less dominant than behaviorism, cognitivism has made very
impor­tant contributions in HRD and is widely utilized. It is seen in some circles as incomplete ­because it views the ­human mind as too abstract. Cognitivism has been the stimulant for more recent trends of brain research. Byrnes
(2001) argues that several “trends have created an atmosphere of increased
(though certainly not universal) ac­cep­tance of the idea that neuroscientific research could provide answers to impor­tant questions about learning and cognition. Most scholars believe that the available neuroscientific evidence is
provocative and in­ter­est­ing, but far from conclusive” (2).
HUMANISM
Humanism did not emerge as a learning theory but rather a general approach
to psy­chol­ogy. The work of Abraham Maslow (1968, 1970) and Carl Rogers (1961)
provides the core of humanistic psy­chol­ogy. Buhler (1971), a leading humanistic psychologist (Lundin, 1991), identifies the core assumptions of humanism
as follows:
• The person as a ­whole is the main subject of humanistic psy­chol­ogy.
• Humanistic psy­chol­ogy is concerned with the knowledge of a
person’s entire life history.
•­Human existence and intention are also of ­great importance.
• Life goals are of equal importance.
•­Human creativity has a primary place.
• Humanistic psy­chol­ogy is frequently applied to psychotherapy.
Rogers (1980) puts forth his humanistic princi­ples of learning by saying that
such learning should have the following characteristics:
• Personal involvement: the affective and cognitive aspects must come
from within.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 184
12/3/21 3:03 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
185
• Self-­initiated: a sense of discovery must come from within.
• Pervasive: learning makes a difference in the be­hav­ior, the attitudes,
and perhaps even the personality of the learner.
• Evaluated by the learner: the learner can best determine ­whether
the learning experience is meeting a need.
• Essence is meaning: when experiential learning occurs, its meaning
to the learner becomes incorporated into the total experience.
Humanism adds yet another dimension to learning and has dominated
much of adult learning. It is most concerned with development by the ­whole
person, and it places a g­ reat deal of emphasis on the affective component of
the learning pro­cess largely overlooked by other learning theories. The learning facilitator takes into account the ­whole person and their life situation in
planning the learning experience. Humanists view individuals as seeking self-­
actualization through learning and of being capable of controlling their own
learning pro­cess. Adult learning theories, particularly andragogy, best fit HRD.
In addition, self-­directed learning and much of ­career development are grounded
in humanism.
In many re­spects, humanism is central to HRD. If ­humans are not viewed
as motivated to develop and improve, then at least part of the core premise of
HRD dis­appears. At the same time, humanism is also a source of debate within
HRD ­because some view the per­for­mance paradigm as violating humanistic
tenets. If a person believes completely in the humanistic view of learning, then
allowing for behavioral components in the learning pro­cess is disconcerting. The
strong preference ­here is to see them coexist.
SOCIAL LEARNING
Social learning focuses on how ­people learn by interacting with and observing
other p
­ eople. This type of learning focuses on the social context in which learning occurs. Some p
­ eople view social learning as a special type of behaviorism
­because it reflects how individuals learn from p
­ eople in their environment.
­Others view it as a separate metatheory b
­ ecause the learner is also actively making meaning of the interactions.
A foundational contribution of social learning is that ­people can learn vicariously by imitating ­others. Thus, central to social learning pro­cesses is that
­people learn from role models. This contradicts behaviorists who contend that
learners need to perform themselves and be reinforced for learning to occur.
The social learning facilitator models new be­hav­iors and guides individuals in
learning from ­others. Albert Bandura is prob­ably the best-­k nown name is this
area. It was his works in the 1960s and extending through the 1980s that fully
developed social learning theory.
Ormond (1999) lists four core assumptions of social learning theory: ­people
can learn by observing the be­hav­iors of ­others and the outcomes of ­t hose
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 185
12/3/21 3:03 PM
186
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
be­hav­iors; learning can occur without a change in be­hav­ior; the consequences
of be­hav­ior play a role in learning; cognition plays a role in learning.
Social learning also occupies an impor­tant place in HRD. One contribution
is in classroom learning, where social learning focuses on the role of the facilitator as a model for be­hav­iors to be learned. Facilitators often underestimate
their influence as role models and forget to utilize role modeling as part of their
instructional plan.
Social learning may make its biggest contribution through nonclassroom
learning. One area is in new employee development, where socialization pro­
cesses account for the largest portion of new employee development (Holton,
1996c; Holton and Russell, 1999; Korte, 2007). Socialization is how organ­izations
pass on their culture to new employees and teach them how to be effective in the
organ­ization. It is an informal pro­cess that occurs through social interactions
between new employees and orga­nizational members. Another critical area is
mentoring, a primary means of on-­the-­job development in many organ­izations.
It is often used to develop new man­ag­ers. This is a social learning pro­cess, as
mentors teach and coach protégés. Yet another key area is on-­the-­job training,
whereby newcomers learn their jobs from job incumbents, in part by direct instruction but also by observing the incumbent and using them as a role model.
­There are few HRD critics of social learning, as it contributes to learning
theory without inciting strong arguments. Social learning is widely accepted as
an effective and vital learning pro­cess. Motivational training and change readiness are two impor­tant applications. When properly applied, it enhances education and contributes to learning that often cannot occur in the classroom.
HOLISTIC LEARNING
The Holistic Theory of Knowledge and Adult Learning has been advanced by
Baiyin Yang (2003; 2004a; 2004b). His theory plays a unique role in integrating
so many rival learning theories that distinguish themselves by their differences
rather than their commonalities. Yang’s holistic theory conceptualizes knowledge into three indivisible facets—­implicit, explicit, and emancipatory. Furthermore, each of ­these has three layers—­foundation, manifestation, and orientation.
The interactions between the facets and layers are shown in figure 9.3.
It is essential to note that most perspectives on learning are focused on the
individual level. Holistic theory embraces the individual, group, and orga­nizational
learning challenges facing HRD. Figure 9.4 visually arranges the knowledge
facets and knowledge layers in an individual and social group/or­ga­ni­z a­t ion
relationship.
Another feature of the holistic theory is its attempt to harness the best of
three major views on the nature of knowledge and learning put forth by Mezirow
(1996). They include: (1) the empirical/analytic paradigm (objective interpretation), (2) the interpretist paradigm (subjective interpretation), and (3) the critical paradigm (power interpretation).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 186
12/3/21 3:03 PM
Knowledge
Layers
Knowledge Facets
Explicit
Implicit
Emancipatory
Foundations
Axioms, assumptions,
beliefs, hypotheses
Habits, social
norms, traditions,
routines
Values, aspirations,
vision
Manifestations
Theories, princi­ples,
models, conceptual
frameworks, formulas
Tacit understandings, know-­how,
intuition, ­mental
models
Attitudes, motivations, learning
needs, equity,
ethics, moral
standards
Orientations
Rational
Practical
Freedom
Figure 9.3: Holistic Theory of Knowledge and Learning: Indications
of Three Knowledge Facts and Three Knowledge Layers
Source: Yang, 2003.
Critical
Knowledge
Emancipatory
Knowledge
Individual
Explicit
Knowledge
Implicit
Knowledge
Technical
Knowledge
Practical
Knowledge
Social Groups/
Organizations
Figure 9.4: Holistic Theory of Knowledge and Learning: Dynamic Relationships
between Individual, Organ­ization, and Social/Cultural Contexts
Source: Yang, 2003.
187
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 187
12/3/21 3:04 PM
188
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
The value of the holistic theory is in making connections between seemingly
disparate streams of philosophy and research related to knowledge and learning (Jarvis and Parker, 2005; Nafukho, 2006). Critics would argue that such connections are tenuous.
Most learning theories can be embedded in one or a blend of the five general theories of learning that have been presented. Each general theory makes
unique contributions and adds power to practice in HRD. Understanding each
so that they can be employed in appropriate situations is impor­tant. Again, no
single theory is best. In any given situation, one or a combination of approaches
is likely to be most effective.
Learning Models at the Individual Level
In this section, models of learning are reviewed. First, andragogy is discussed
as a core adult learning model that has played a central role in HRD. Also, the
andragogy in practice model is presented as a more comprehensive elaboration
of andragogy (Knowles et al., 2020; Holton, Swanson, and Naquin, 2001). Next,
Kolb’s experiential learning model is considered, followed by informal and incidental learning. Transformational learning is discussed last.
ANDRAGOGY: THE ADULT LEARNING PERSPECTIVE
When Knowles introduced andragogy in the United States in the late 1960s, the
idea broke new ground and sparked much subsequent research and controversy. Spurred in part by the need for a defining theory within the field of adult
education, andragogy has been extensively analyzed and critiqued (Henschke,
1998). Andragogy has been alternately described as a set of guidelines (Merriam,
1993), a philosophy (Pratt, 1993), and a set of assumptions (Brookfield, 1986).
Davenport and Davenport (1985) note that andragogy has been called a theory
of adult learning, a method or technique of adult education, and a set of assumptions about adult learners. Regardless of how it is viewed, “it is an honest attempt to focus on the learner. In this sense, it does provide an alternative to
the methodology-­centered instructional design perspective” (Feur and Gerber,
1988, 144).
Brookfield (1986) asserts that andragogy is the “single most popu­lar idea in
the education and training of adults” (91). HRD and adult education professionals, particularly beginning ones, find them invaluable in shaping the learning
pro­cess to be more effective with adults.
The Core Andragogical Model Pop­u­lar­ized by Knowles (1970), the original
andragogical model pre­sents core princi­ples of adult learning and impor­tant
assumptions about adult learners. Th
­ ese core princi­ples of adult learning enable ­those designing and conducting adult learning to create more effective
learning pro­cesses for adults. The model is a transactional one (Brookfield, 1986)
in that it speaks to the characteristics of the learning transaction. It applies to
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 188
12/3/21 3:04 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
189
any adult learning transaction—­from community education to ­human resource
development in organ­izations.
The number of andragogical princi­ples has grown from four to six over the
years as Knowles refined his thinking (1989). The current six core assumptions or princi­ples of andragogy are as follows (Knowles, Holton, Swanson, and
Robinson, 2020):
1. Adults need to know why they need to learn something before
learning it.
2. The self-­concept of adults is heavi­ly dependent on a move t­ oward
self-­direction.
3. Prior experiences of the learner provide a rich resource for learning.
4. Adults typically become ready to learn when they experience a need to
cope with a life situation or perform a task.
5. Adults’ orientation to learning is life-­centered, and they see education
as a pro­cess of developing increased competency levels to achieve their
full potential.
6. The motivation for adult learners is internal rather than external.
­ ese core princi­ples provide a sound foundation for planning adult learning
Th
experiences. They offer a practical approach to adult learning.
The second part of the andragogical model is called the andragogical pro­
cess design steps for creating adult learning experiences (Knowles, 1984, 1995).
The eight steps include: (1) preparing learners for the program, (2) establishing
a climate conducive to learning, (3) involving learners in mutual planning,
(4) involving participants in diagnosing their learning needs, (5) involving learners in forming their learning objectives, (6) involving learners in designing learning plans, (7) helping learners carry out their learning plans, and (8) involving
learners in evaluating their learning outcomes. Figure 9.5 shows the andragogical pro­cess ele­ments and andragogical approaches presented and updated by
Knowles (1995).
Knowles (1984) noted that he had spent two de­cades experimenting with
andragogy and had reached certain conclusions, including t­ hese:
• The andragogical model is a system of ele­ments that can be ­adopted
or adapted in ­whole or in part. It is not an ideology that must be
applied totally and without modification. An essential feature of
andragogy is flexibility.
• The appropriate starting point and strategies for applying the andragogical model depend on the situation. (418)
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 189
12/3/21 3:04 PM
190
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
Ele­ment
Andragogical Approach
Preparing learners
Provide information
Prepare for participation
Help develop realistic expectations
Begin thinking about content
Climate
Relaxed, trusting
Mutually respectful
Informal, warm
Collaborative, supportive
Planning
Mutually by learners and facilitator
Diagnosis of needs
By mutual assessment
Setting of objectives
By mutual negotiation
Designing learning plans
Learning contracts
Learning proj­ects
Sequenced by readiness
Learning activities
Inquiry proj­ects
In­de­pen­dent study
Experiential techniques
Evaluation
Learner-­collected evidence validated by peers,
facilitators, and experts
Criterion referenced
Figure 9.5: Pro­cess Design Steps of Andragogy
Source: Developed from Knowles, 1995.
Knowles confirmed through use that andragogy could be utilized in many dif­
fer­ent ways and would have to be adapted to fit individual situations. In reaction,
the andragogical assumptions about adults have been criticized for appearing to
claim to fit all situations or persons (Davenport, 1987; Davenport and Davenport,
1985; Day and Baskett, 1982; Elias, 1979; Hartree, 1984; Tennant, 1986).
ANDRAGOGY-­IN-­PRACTICE MODEL
Andragogy in practice, the framework depicted in figure 9.6, is an enhanced
conceptual framework to apply andragogy more systematically across multiple
domains of adult learning practice (Knowles, Holton, Swanson, and Robinson,
2020). The three dimensions of andragogy in practice, shown as rings in the figure,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 190
12/3/21 3:04 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
191
Goals and Purposes for Learning
Individual and Situational Differences
ANDRAGOGY:
Core Adult Learning Principles
Subject-Matter Differences
3. Prior Experience of the Learner
• resource
• mental models
4. Readiness to Learn
• life-related
• developmental task
Societal Growth
2. Self-Concept of the Learner
• autonomous
• self-directing
Situational Differences
Institutional Growth
1. Learner’s Need to Know
• why
• what
• how
5. Orientation to Learning
• problem centered
• contextual
6. Motivation to Learn
• intrinsic value
• personal payoff
Individual Learner Differences
Individual Growth
Figure 9.6: Andragogy in Practice Model
Source: Knowles, Holton, Swanson, and Robinson, 2020, 4.
are (1) goals and purposes for learning, (2) individual and situational differences, and (3) andragogy (core adult learning princi­ples).
In contrast to the original model of andragogy, this approach conceptually
integrates the additional influences with the core adult learning princi­ples. The
three rings of the model interact, allowing the model to offer a three-­dimensional
pro­cess for adult learning situations. The result is a model that recognizes the
lack of homogeneity among learners and learning situations and illustrates that
the learning transaction is a multifaceted activity. This approach is entirely consistent with most of the program development lit­er­a­ture in adult education
that in some manner incorporates contextual analy­sis in developing programs
(e.g., Houle, 1972; Knox, 1986a; Boone, 1985).
Goals and purposes for learning, the outer ring of the model, are portrayed
as developmental outcomes. The goals and purposes of adult learning serve to
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 191
12/3/21 3:04 PM
192
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
shape and mold the learning experience. In this model, goals for adult learning
events may fit into three general categories: individual, institutional, or societal
(Knowles, 1970, 1980). Beder (1989) also used a similar approach to describe the
purposes of adult education as facilitating change in society and supporting and
maintaining good social order (societal), promoting productivity (institutional),
and enhancing personal growth (individual).
Individual Growth The traditional view among most scholars and prac­ti­tion­
ers of adult learning is to think exclusively of individual growth. Representative researchers in this group might include some mentioned ­earlier, such as
Mezirow (1991) and Brookfield (1984, 1987). ­Others advocate an individual development approach to workplace adult learning programs (Bierema, 1997;
Dirkx, 1997). At first glance, andragogy would appear to fit best with individual development goals ­because of its focus on the individual learner.
Institutional Growth Adult learning is equally power­ful in developing better
institutions and individuals. For example, HRD embraces orga­nizational
per­for­mance as one of its core goals (Brethower and Smalley, 1998; Swanson and
Arnold, 1997), which andragogy does not explic­itly embrace ­either. From this
view of HRD, the ultimate goal of learning activities is to improve the institution sponsoring the learning activity. Thus, control of the goals and purposes is
shared between the organ­ization and the individual. The adult learning transaction in an HRD setting still fits nicely within the andragogical framework.
However, the dif­fer­ent goals require adjustments to be made in how the andragogical assumptions are applied.
Societal Growth Societal goals and purposes associated with the learning
experience are illustrated through Paulo Freire’s work (1970). This Brazilian educator sees the goals and objectives of adult education as societal transformation, contending that education is a consciousness-­raising pro­cess. He says
education aims to help participants put knowledge into practice and that the
outcome of education is societal transformation. Freire is concerned with creating a better world and the development and liberation of p
­ eople. As such, the
goals and purposes within this learning context are oriented to societal and individual improvement.
Individual and situational differences, the ­middle ring of the andragogy in
practice model, are portrayed as variables. We continue to learn more about the
differences that impact adult learning and act as filters that shape the practice
of andragogy. ­These variables are grouped into the categories of individual
learner differences, subject-­matter differences, and situational differences.
Subject-­matter differences may require dif­fer­ent learning strategies. For example, individuals may be less likely to learn complex technical subject m
­ atter
in a self-­directed manner. Introducing unfamiliar content to a learner w
­ ill re-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 192
12/3/21 3:04 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
193
quire a dif­fer­ent teaching/learning strategy. Simply, not all subject ­matter can
be taught or learned in the same way.
Situational differences capture any unique ­factors that could arise in a par­
tic­u­lar learning situation and incorporate several sets of influences. Dif­fer­ent
local conditions may dictate dif­fer­ent teaching/learning strategies. For example, learners in remote locations may be forced to be more self-­directed or perhaps less so. At a broader level, this group of f­ actors connects andragogy with
the sociocultural influences now accepted as a core part of each learning situation. Jarvis (1987) sees all adult learning as occurring within a social context
through life experiences.
Individual differences may be the area where our understanding of adult
learning has advanced the most since Knowles first introduced andragogy. Many
researchers have expounded on a host of individual differences affecting the
learning pro­cess (e.g., Dirkx and Prenger, 1997; Kidd, 1978; Merriam and
Caffarella, 2006). The increased emphasis on linking adult learning and psychological research is indicative of an increasing focus on how individual differences
affect adult learning. From this perspective, ­there is no reason to expect all adults
to behave the same. Instead, our understanding of individual differences should
help shape and tailor the andragogical approach to fit the uniqueness of the
learners.
The andragogy in practice model is an expanded conceptualization of andragogy. It incorporates domains of f­ actors that influence the application of core
andragogical princi­ples.
EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING MODEL
Kolb (1984) has been a leader in advancing the practice of experiential learning
for adults that we most associate with John Dewey (1910; 1938). Kolb defines
learning as “the pro­cess whereby knowledge is created through transformation
of experience” (1984, 38). For him, learning is not so much the acquisition or
transmission of content as the interaction between content and experience,
whereby each transforms the other. The educator’s job, he says, is not only to
transmit or implant new ideas but also to modify old ones that may get in the
way of new ones.
Kolb bases his model of experiential learning on Lewin’s problem-­solving
model of action research, which is widely used in organ­ization development
(Cummings and Worley, 2001). He argues that it is very similar to Dewey and
Piaget’s as well and specifies four steps in the experiential learning cycle (see
figure 9.7): (1) concrete experience—­being fully involved in here-­and-­now experiences; (2) observations and reflection—­reflecting on and observing their experiences from many perspectives; (3) formation of abstract concepts and
generalizations—­creating concepts that integrate their observations into logically sound theories; and (4) testing implications of new concepts in new
situations—­using ­these theories to make decisions and solve prob­lems.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 193
12/3/21 3:04 PM
194
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
Concrete
experience
Testing implications
of concepts in
new situations
Observations
and reflections
Formation of
abstract concepts
and generalizations
Figure 9.7: Experiential Learning Model—­Kolb
Kolb goes on to suggest that ­these four modes combine to create four distinct learning styles.
Kolb’s model has contributed to the experiential learning lit­er­a­ture by providing (1) a theoretical basis for experiential learning research and (2) a practical model for experiential learning practice. The four steps in his model are an
invaluable framework for designing learning experiences for adults. At a macro
level, programs and classes can be structured to include all four components,
as well as at a micro level, units or lessons. Below are examples of learning strategies that may be useful in each step:
Kolb’s Stage
Concrete experience
Observe and reflect
Abstract conceptualization
Active experimentation
Example Learning/Teaching Strategy
Simulation, case study, field trip, real
experience, demonstrations
Discussion, small groups, buzz groups,
designated observers
Sharing content
Laboratory experiences, on-­the-­job
experience, internships, practice sessions
Research on Kolb’s model has focused chiefly on the learning styles he proposes. Unfortunately, research has done ­little to validate his theory, due largely
to methodological concerns about his instrument (Cornwell and Manfredo,
1994; Freedman and Stumpf, 1980; Kolb, 1981; Stumpf and Freedman, 1981).
While always valuing experience, HRD prac­ti­tion­ers are increasingly emphasizing experiential learning as a means to improve per­for­mance. Action
reflection learning is one technique developed to focus on the learner’s experiences and integrate experiences into the learning pro­cess. Transfer of learning
researchers are also focusing on experiential learning as a means to enhance
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 194
12/3/21 3:04 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
195
transfer of learning into per­for­mance (Holton, Bates, Seyler, and Carvalho, 1997;
Bates, Holton, and Seyler, 2000) and to increase motivation to learn (Seyler,
Holton, and Bates, 1997). Structured on-­t he-­job training (Jacobs, 2003) has
emerged as a core method to capitalize more systematically on the value of experiential learning in organ­izations and as a tool to more effectively develop new
employees through the use of experienced coworkers (Holton, 1996c). Experiential learning approaches have the dual benefit of appealing to the adult learner’s experience base and increasing the likelihood of per­for­mance change a­ fter
training.
INFORMAL AND INCIDENTAL WORKPLACE LEARNING
While many p
­ eople think first of formal training in HRD, much of the learning that occurs in organ­izations happens outside formal training or learning
events. Informal and incidental learning has deep roots in the work of Lindeman (1926) and Dewey’s (1938) notion of learning from experience, although it
was Knowles (1950) who introduced the term informal learning.
Watkins, Marsick, and their associates have advanced inquiry on informal
and incidental learning (1990, 1992, 1997, 2015). They define the ele­ments in this
way:
Formal learning is typically institutionally-­sponsored, classroom-­based,
and highly structured. Informal learning, a category which includes incidental learning, may occur in institutions, but is not typically
classroom-­based or highly structured, and control of learning rests primarily in the hands of the learner. Incidental learning is defined as a
byproduct of some other activity, such as task accomplishment, interpersonal interaction, sensing the orga­nizational culture, trial-­and-­error
experimentation, or even formal learning. Informal learning can be deliberately encouraged by an organ­ization or it can take place despite an
environment not highly conducive to learning. Incidental learning, on
the other hand, almost always takes place although ­people are not always conscious of it. (Marsick and Watkins, 1990, 12, emphasis added)
Thus, informal learning can be ­either intentional or incidental. Examples
of informal learning include self-­directed learning, mentoring, coaching, networking, learning from ­mistakes, trial and error, and so on. Incidental learning can also lead to embedded assumptions, beliefs, and attributions that can
­later become barriers to other learning. Argyris (1982) and Schon (1987) refer
to double loop learning (or reflection in action) as the learning pro­cess required
to challenge the implicit or tacit knowledge that arises from incidental learning. Tacit knowledge is increasingly recognized as an impor­tant source of knowledge for experts and innovation (Glynn, 1996).
Marsick and Watkins (1990, 1997) and Cseh, Watkins, and Marsick (1999)
have developed a model of informal and incidental learning where learning is
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 195
12/3/21 3:04 PM
196
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
embedded within the individual’s daily work and is highly contextual. Furthermore, they contend that learning occurs due to some trigger (internal or external) and an experience. This is in sharp contrast to the planned learning approach
of formal learning events.
The question of ­whether informal or incidental learning can and should be
facilitated is unsettled. On the one hand, it seems that ­there are efforts HRD
organ­izations should use to facilitate the pro­cess. For example, Raelin (2000)
suggests using action learning, communities of practice, action science, and
learning teams in management development to encourage informal work-­based
learning. Piskurich (1993) takes a similar approach to self-­directed learning,
while Jacobs (2003) and Rothwell and Kasanas (1994) advocate a structured approach to on-­the-­job training. Realistically, attempting to overfacilitate informal and incidental learning gets to the point that they become formal learning.
Nijhof and Nieuwenhuis (2008) published an up-­to-­date analy­sis of workplace learning related to HRD in their book titled The Learning Potential of the
Workplace. They note, “Learning is becoming a constituent part of work. Anthropologists would smile, ­because it is their main belief that lifelong learning in
context is the essence of mankind, and therefore an integral part of what p
­ eople
do, including work” (4). Yet, one conclusion is that ­there are misconceptions
about learning in the workplace and that the workplace is not always an effective learning environment (Nijhof, 2006). Figure 9.8 profiles learning functions
as being most appropriate in a classroom or workplace setting.
Functions
Formal Learning
(generic)
Workplace
(job-­specific)
Socialization
X
Innovation
X
Maintenance
X
Cognitive acquisition
X
Skills acquisition
X
Personal development
X
­Career development
X
Lifelong learning
X
Vocational studies
X
Job per­for­mance
X
X
X
Figure 9.8: Functions of Schooling and Learning Settings
Source: Nijhof and Nieuwenhuis, 2008, 5. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 196
12/3/21 3:04 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
197
Throughout this discussion of informal workplace learning, it is critical to
highlight unstructured and structured on-­the-­job learning ideas. Unstructured
is equivalent to informal workplace learning, and structured on-­the-­job training uses the a­ ctual workplace as a learning setting.
“The learning potential of the workplace should be proved by evidence that
students and employees learn something that changes their be­hav­ior with durable results—­cognitive, affective, technical, and social. While the workplace is
a place to work and perform, learning is an intermediate condition, and the
learning potential of the workplace therefore lies in its condition to support or
stimulate learning” (Nijhof and Nieuwenhuis, 2008, 5).
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEARNING
Transformational learning has gained increasing attention in HRD. The fundamental premise is that ­people, just like organ­izations, may engage in incremental learning or deeper learning that requires them to challenge fundamental
assumptions and meaning schema they have about the world. This concept has
appeared in a variety of forms in the lit­er­a­ture.
Argyris (1982) labels learning as e­ ither single-­or double-­loop learning.
Single-­loop learning is learning that fits prior experiences and existing values,
enabling the learner to respond automatically. Double-­loop learning does not fit
the learner’s prior experiences or schema and generally requires learners to fundamentally change their ­mental schema. Similarly, Schon (1987) discusses
“knowing in action” and “reflection in action.” Knowing in action refers to the
somewhat automatic responses based on our existing m
­ ental schema that enable us to perform efficiently in daily actions. Reflection in action is reflecting
while performing to discover when existing schema are no longer appropriate
and changing t­ hose schemas when appropriate.
Mezirow (1991) and Brookfield (1986, 1987) have been leading advocates for
transformational learning in the adult learning lit­er­a­ture. Mezirow (1991) calls
this perspective transformation, which he defines as “the pro­cess of becoming
critically aware of how and why our assumptions have come to constrain the
way we perceive, understand, and feel about our world; changing t­ hese structures of habitual expectation to make pos­si­ble a more inclusive, discriminating,
and integrative perspective; and fi­nally, making choices or other­w ise acting
upon ­these new understandings” (167).
The concept of deep transformational change is found throughout the HRD
lit­er­a­ture. Many believe that transformational change at the orga­nizational level
is not likely to happen u
­ nless transformational change occurs at the individual
level through some pro­cess of critically challenging and changing internal cognitive structures. Furthermore, without engaging in deep learning through a
double-­loop or perspective transformation pro­cess, individuals ­w ill remain
trapped in their existing ­mental models or schemata. It is only through critical
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 197
12/3/21 3:04 PM
198
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
reflection that emancipatory learning occurs and enables p
­ eople to change their
lives at a deep level.
Learning Models at the Orga­nizational Level
While individual learning has long dominated HRD practice, in the 1980s and
particularly the 1990s, increased attention turned to learning at the orga­
nizational level. The lit­er­a­ture refers to two related but dif­fer­ent concepts:
orga­nizational learning and learning organ­izations. A learning organ­ization is
a prescribed set of strategies that can be enacted to enable orga­nizational learning. It is impor­tant to recognize that orga­nizational learning is dif­fer­ent and that
the terms are not interchangeable.
Orga­nizational learning occurs at the system level rather than at the individual level (Dixon, 1992). It does not exclude the learning that occurs at the individual level. But, it is greater than the sum of the learning at the individual level
(Fiol and Lyles, 1985; Kim, 1993; Lundberg, 1989). Orga­nizational learning is
more specifically defined as “the intentional use of learning pro­cesses at the individual, group and system level to continuously transform the organ­ization in a
direction that is increasingly satisfying to its stakeholders” (Dixon, 1994, 42). It is
learning keenly perceived at the system level, and it arises from pro­cesses surrounding the sharing of insights, knowledge, and ­mental models (Strata, 1989).
A key ele­ment differentiating individual and orga­nizational learning revolves around ­mental models (Kim, 1993). When individuals make their ­mental
models explicit and orga­nizational members develop and take on shared ­mental
models, orga­nizational learning is enabled. Learning becomes orga­nizational
learning when t­ hese cognitive outcomes, the new and shared ­mental models, are
embedded in members’ minds, and in . . . ​artifacts . . . ​in the orga­nizational environment (Argyris and Schon, 1996). Orga­nizational learning is embedded in the
culture, orga­nizational systems, work procedures, and pro­cesses.
LEARNING ORGAN­IZATION STRATEGY
The learning organ­ization became a focus of attention in the orga­nizational lit­
er­a­ture in the 1990s and has continued. Interest in this organ­ization development (OD) intervention has been spurred by the constantly changing work and
business environments, prompted by technological advances, increased levels
of competition, and the globalization of industries. Senge and other researchers
have described the characteristics of the learning organ­ization and made suggestions for orga­nizational implementation (Kline and Saunders, 1993; Marquardt,
2002; Pedler, Bourgoyne, and Boydell, 1991; Senge, 1990; Watkins and Marsick,
1993).
The dimensions commonly described in the lit­er­a­ture as associated with a
learning organ­ization are not new concepts, but their coordination into a system focused on orga­nizational learning is. Senge (1990, 13) defines a learning
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 198
12/3/21 3:04 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
199
organ­ization as “a place where ­people are continually discovering how they create their real­ity.” Watkins and Marsick (1993, 8) define it as “one that learns
continuously and transforms itself.” A comprehensive definition of a learning
organ­ization is offered by Marquardt (1996, 19): “an organ­ization which learns
powerfully and collectively and is continually transforming itself to better collect, manage, and use knowledge for corporate success. It empowers p
­ eople
within and outside the com­pany to learn as they work. Technology is utilized
to optimize both learning and productivity.”
­There appears to be some common recognition and agreement about the
core characteristics of a learning organ­ization. Researchers suggest that individuals and teams work t­ oward the attainment of linked and shared goals, communication is open, information is available and shared, systems thinking is
the norm, leaders are champions of learning, management practices support
learning, learning is encouraged and rewarded, and new ideas are welcome
(Marquardt, 2002; Senge, 1990; Watkins and Marsick, 1993). The learning outcomes found in a learning organ­ization are expected to include experiential
learning, team learning, second-­loop learning, and shared meaning (Argyris,
1977; Argyris and Schon, 1978; Dodgson, 1993; Senge, 1990). As a result of this
learning, organ­izations are believed to be capable of new ways of thinking.
Learning Organ­ization Model Peter Senge (1990) is credited with popular-
izing the learning organ­ization. In laying out the foundation for his model of
the learning organ­ization, Senge (1992, 1993) speaks about the three levels of
work required of organ­izations. The first level focused on the development, production, and marketing of products and ser­vices. This orga­nizational task is
dependent on the second level of work: the designing and development of the
systems and pro­cesses for production. The third task undertaken by organ­
izations centers around thinking and interacting. The first two levels of orga­
nizational work are affected by the quality of this third level (Senge, 1993). The
quality of the orga­nizational thinking and interacting affects the orga­nizational
systems and pro­cesses and the production and delivery of products and ser­vices.
This belief places orga­nizational thinking in a pivotal position affecting the ability of an organ­ization to accomplish goals and perform effectively.
It is the third level of orga­nizational work that Senge addresses with his concept of learning organ­izations. In defining a learning organ­ization, he notes,
“We can build learning organ­izations, where ­people continually expand their
capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set ­free, and where
­people are continually learning how to learn together” (1990, 3).
Senge (1990) states that organ­izations need to develop five core disciplines or capabilities to accomplish the following defined goals of a learning
organ­ization:
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 199
12/3/21 3:04 PM
200
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
• Personal mastery
•­Mental models
• Shared vision
• Team learning
• Systems thinking
Systems thinking, the fifth discipline, acts to integrate the other four disciplines. It is described as the ability to take a systems perspective of orga­nizational
real­ity. Senge (1990) discusses strategies that organ­izations can implement. The
recommended methods involve the following orga­nizational variables: climate,
leadership, management, h
­ uman resource practices, organ­ization mission, job
attitudes, orga­nizational culture, and orga­nizational structure.
Watkins and Marsick (1993) posit that learning is a constant pro­cess and
results in changes in knowledge, beliefs, and be­hav­iors. They also note that, in
a learning organ­ization, the learning pro­cess is a social one and takes place at
the individual, group, and orga­nizational levels. They propose six imperatives
that form the basis for the orga­nizational strategies recommended to promote
learning:
1. Create continuous learning opportunities.
2. Promote inquiry and dialogue.
3. Encourage collaboration and team learning.
4. Establish systems to capture and share learning.
5. Empower ­people ­toward a collective vision.
6. Connect the organ­ization to its environment.
Figure 9.9 illustrates the interrelationship of ­these six imperatives across the individual, team, and orga­nizational levels.
­These six imperatives are similar to the disciplines suggested by Senge (1990,
1994). Marquardt (1996) similarly focuses on a learning system composed of five
linked and interrelated subsystems related to learning: the organ­ization, p
­ eople,
knowledge, technology, and learning. Most learning organ­ization models appear to focus on the values of continuous learning, knowledge creation and sharing, systemic thinking, a culture of learning, flexibility, experimentation, and
fi­nally, a people-­centered view (Gephart et al., 1996).
LEARNING ORGAN­IZATION AND PER­FOR­MANCE OUTCOMES
Much of the learning organ­ization lit­er­a­ture is conceptual and descriptive. While
­there are numerous descriptive accounts and suggestions about why the pro­
cess works, ­there are ­limited concrete descriptions about how it works to im-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 200
12/3/21 3:04 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
Society
201
Connect the organization to its environment
Empower people toward a collective vision
Organization
Teams
Individuals
Establish systems to capture and share learning
Encourage
collaboration
and team
learning
Toward
Continuous
learning
and
change
Promote inquiry and dialogue
Create continuous learning opportunities
Figure 9.9: Learning Organ­ization Action Imperatives—­Watkins and Marsick
Source: Watkins and Marsick, 1993, 10. Used with permission.
prove per­for­mance. Learning organ­izations perceive learning as the means to
long-­term per­for­mance improvement (Guns, 1996). However, t­ here is l­ ittle empirical data supporting the claim that per­for­mance improvement is directly
related to the adoption of the learning organ­ization’s strategies. Exceptions include a study showing improved firm per­for­mance associated with learning
organ­ization strategies (Ellinger et al., 2000) and another showing that learning organ­ization strategies are related to perceived innovation (Holton and
Kaiser, 2000).
Innovation is perceived to be the critical link between learning organ­ization
strategies and per­for­mance (Kaiser and Holton, 1998). The learning organ­ization
and the innovating organ­ization are both dependent on the acquisition of information, interpretation of information, creation of meaning, and creation of
orga­nizational knowledge. The stated end goal of both the learning system and
the innovating system is improved orga­nizational per­for­mance. The similarities between the two lit­er­a­tures are striking: the linking pin for both is knowledge; the goal in both is per­for­mance improvement.
A comparison of both lit­er­a­tures concludes that the orga­nizational strategies engaged to support the learning and innovating endeavors are similar and
suggest parallel strategies (Kaiser and Holton, 1998). Innovation appears to be
affected by culture, climate, leadership, management practices, dynamics of information pro­cessing, orga­nizational structure, orga­nizational systems, and the
environment.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 201
12/3/21 3:04 PM
202
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
The Learning Organization as a Performance Improvement Strategy
Under conditions of high market uncertainty and competition
Learning
Organization
Strategy
Organization
Characteristics
Learning
Outcomes:
Innovation
• Organizational
• Team
• Individual
Performance
Driver
Performance
Outcomes:
• Competitive
advantage
• Financial
Performance
Driver
Performance
Outcomes
Figure 9.10: Learning Organ­ization Per­for­mance Model
Source: Kaiser and Holton, 1998.
The conceptual model in figure 9.10 is based on the review of the learning
organ­ization and innovation lit­er­a­tures and the parallel sets of variables and theorized relationships to per­for­mance improvement (Kaiser and Holton, 1998).
This model hypothesizes that learning organ­ization strategies increase learning and innovation (per­for­mance d
­ rivers), improving per­for­mance outcomes.
This hypothesized model of the learning organ­ization as a per­for­mance improvement strategy supports the following conclusions:
• Learning—­particularly improved learning at the team and orga­
nizational levels—­leads to increased organ­ization innovation.
• Adopting learning organ­ization strategies is appropriate for organ­
izations in markets where innovation is a key per­for­mance driver.
• Innovation is expected to result in improved per­for­mance outcomes,
leading to a competitive advantage for the organ­ization.
Conclusion
The good news for HRD is that learning has never been as highly regarded in
organ­izations as it is ­today. HRD is called upon for developing knowledge and
expertise in organ­izations that enable them to be competitive in a challenging
global economy. HRD must continue to research and define effective learning
pro­cesses. While much is known about learning, much remains to be discovered about learning in the workplace.
Reflection Questions
1. Think about the five learning theories discussed in this chapter. Which
is most attractive to you, and why?
2. Think about the four learning models at the individual level presented
in this chapter. Which is most attractive to you, and why?
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 202
12/3/21 3:04 PM
9. Perspectives on Learning in H
­ uman Resource Development
203
3. How can the andragogy in practice model be applied to enhance the
learning that takes place through HRD?
4. Do you believe that organ­izations can learn? Or, are organ­izations
merely the sum of individual learning? Take a position and explain.
5. If learning is a defining construct for the HRD, how can learning be
made more power­ful in organ­izations?
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 203
12/3/21 3:04 PM
10
Traditional Information
and Communication
Technology in H
­ uman
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
• Instructional Technology within HRD
• Information Technology and HRD
Information and Communication Technology in HRD
Contributed by Theo Bastiaens, Open University of the Netherlands
• Virtual Organ­ization
• Organ­izational Development
• Per­for­mance Improvement
• E-­Learning in HRD
• Authenticity
• Summary
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
Intense discussions about advancing technology have been around for three
hundred years. Certainly, the industrial revolutions of the 1700s and 1800s w
­ ere
watershed periods. Talking about technological advances is not new. Over the
last ­century, advancing technology has been largely about the core production,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 204
12/3/21 3:04 PM
10. Traditional Information and Communication Technology
205
delivery of goods and ser­vices, and impact that technology has had on the nature of work and society.
The detailed lens-­grinding case example in the WWII Training Within Industry Report (Dooley, 1945b; Jacobs, 2003) is a vivid example of the interplay
between HRD and technology. In that case, the quality of airplane gunnery
lenses was a life-­and-­death ­matter. Trainers analyzed the work required (production technology) and trained workers to perform at a very high level (information technology).
The continuing interface of HRD with technology remains a significant
challenge to the profession as it develops and unleashes ­human expertise to improve per­for­mance. Most organ­izations are engaged in a constant b
­ attle to
keep their workforce technology expertise up to standard. Helping to meet this
challenge is one of the primary roles of HRD.
INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY WITHIN HRD
In the past fifty years, HRD professionals have seen the technology for delivering HRD interventions impact the way they go about their work. The how of
HRD, not the what or content. ­There may still be some practicing HRD professionals around before xerography was available to make copies of instructional
materials. The many visual and audio mediums and their continued development have been a big technology focus for HRD professionals during the past
­century. Some of ­these former developments in how to deliver HRD have
included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Filmstrips/slides
Audio recordings
Automated filmstrip/slide shows
Transparency projector
Reel-­to-­reel videotapes
Cassette videos
It is impor­tant to note that the locus of control, for the most part, remained
with the HRD professional during t­ hese periods. HRD professionals brokered
the distribution of the new knowledge and expertise about technology using
technology.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND HRD
In recent years, the technology formula advanced to a new paradigm through
the rapid advancement in information technology. For the sake of simplification, information technology made major changes in how work gets done and
how ­people learn about their work.
Surrounding the core work methods of producing and delivering goods and
ser­vices is an envelope of information that is fed back, forward, and beyond the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 205
12/3/21 3:04 PM
206
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
individual contributor, supervisor, HRD professional, related pro­cesses, and
strategic decision makers. While still needing to produce goods and ser­vices,
given advancing information technology, every­thing changes.
For HRD, information technology has created the locus of control of many
interventions to move on to ­others—­including the individual workers and workgroups. Information technology, at its best, can provide a worker what they
need in terms of development when required and where needed. This changes
every­thing. The following section looks more closely at information technology
and HRD.
Information and Communication Technology in HRD
Contributed by Theo J. Bastiaens, Open University of the Netherlands
HRD can be viewed as a strategic approach to investing in ­human capital. This
approach can be supported by information and communication technology
(ICT). While many best practices and experiences in the field are reported, ­there
are fewer research studies on ICT in HRD. Most of them are case studies and
concentrate on electronic learning activities. Training and development (T&D)
is prob­ably the largest segment of HRD, so it is reasonable to find e-­learning
well established compared to organ­ization development (OD) and per­for­mance
improvement (PI) applications of technology.
To or­ga­nize ICT in HRD, Benson, Johnson, and Kuchinke (2002, 396) created a framework. Their categorization into orga­nizational development and
change, per­for­mance enhancement, and learning mediated by technology still
makes sense, although t­ hese terms have changed over the years. This chapter
strengthens the terminology and introduces the concepts of (1) the virtual organ­
ization (instead of the digital workplace), (2) orga­nizational development (including “change”), (3) e-­learning (instead of learning mediated by technology),
and (4) per­for­mance improvement (instead of enhancement). Figure 10.1 pre­
sents a visual overview of the new framework.
VIRTUAL ORGAN­IZATION
In ­today’s society, almost all organ­izations have virtual activities embedded in
their work. This condition is fueled by the global marketplace, changing dynamics of the workforce, customer expectations, and the general growing use
of technology. Companies increasingly have become virtual organ­izations.
­There is a range of thought b
­ ehind the concept of a virtual organ­ization. The
simplest idea of a virtual organ­ization is a physical com­pany that allows employees to work at home while staying connected via the internet. A wider variety is the network of professionals whose members are geo­graph­i­cally apart,
communicating with ICT while often appearing to the outer world as an organ­
ization with an ­actual physical location. The development and expansion of
virtual organ­izations change every­thing by removing the bound­a ries of
time, space, and geography. Colky, Colky, and Young (2002, 16) provide some
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 206
12/3/21 3:04 PM
207
le a
tic
en
ng
uth
rni
/a
ea
ed
e-l
as
e-b
nt
me
ve
pro
ort
im
pp
ce
su
an
ce
rm
an
rfo
rm
rfo
pe
Virtual
Organization
co
mp
ete
nc
pe
rni
ng
10. Traditional Information and Communication Technology
customer-oriented
organizational development
Figure 10.1: Framework for Information and Communication Technology
Use in H
­ uman Resource Development
critical issues for HRD professionals to consider when it comes to virtual
organ­izations:
• Forming a virtual organ­ization involves a rearrangement of ­human
and physical capital. Their presence, for example, must be defined in
terms of customers.
• Virtual organ­izations that are a part of larger traditional organ­
izations require extra preparation to ensure smooth interface between the virtual team and non-­virtual personnel and operations.
• Efficient communication systems are essential to the success of
virtual teams.
• A launch period that includes physical meetings is vital and should
focus on the proj­ect definition and responsibilities as well as on trust
and teambuilding exercises.
• Recruitment of virtual teams has to be based on competencies
needed for the job.
• Unfamiliarity with managing ­people without seeing them may lead
to the man­ag­er questioning the virtual workers’ time and commitment to the proj­ect. Man­ag­ers of virtual teams need a unique set of
skills (they need to be coaches, communicators and coordinators).
The concept of the virtual organ­ization provides an overview of the environment in which an HRD staff functions. The ­earlier mention of the customer-­
centered approach is an example and is increasingly the driving force ­behind
virtual organ­izations. Another expectation impor­tant for HRD is that some jobs
requiring minimal specialized competencies ­will dis­appear with the introduction
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 207
12/3/21 3:04 PM
208
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
of more user-­friendly software providing instruction and guidance (Rothwell
and Kazanas, 2003b).
In our changing world, many organ­izations and employees have found new
identities. The virtual worker and virtual man­ag­er have some of the same needs
for education and training as their counter­parts in the traditional work setting.
Apart from that, virtual employees may have unique HRD needs.
Setting up a virtual workforce without providing adequate support is a formula for failure. McLean (2006) accentuates that virtual environments pre­sent
significant challenges to effective communication. Employees in virtual organ­
izations need to learn to interact with ­others using ICT. Interacting without being face to face requires special skills, including utilization of multiple
modalities (e.g., visual, auditory, tactile) based on the media richness theory. Advantages of ICT include the immediacy of feedback, the availability and use of
multiple channels, the ability to personalize messages, and language variety.
The possibilities of ICT usage in virtual organ­izations are enormous. An obvious example is virtual team building. Bringing together a group of p
­ eople
from vari­ous backgrounds on a synchronous or asynchronous chat can be the
first step in team building. This online chat can be less threatening to ­people
than requiring them to speak in the presence of someone physically (McLean,
2006). Other possibilities include video conferences with headsets and webcams.
To support virtual team building, the HRD staff often has a moderator task or
takes a role as mediator.
It is common t­ hese days that HRD and HRM functions simulate/develop a
relational database for specific pro­cesses for their HR tasks (Stone, Lukaszewski,
Stone-­Romero, 2008). Working with or managing an IT system involves planning the system and agreeing with user requirements. It is often a delivery to
internal customers. The HRD staff is often involved in the next five steps (based
on Armstrong and Stephens, 2005, 76), with new requirements placed on the
HRD staff:
• Establish the needed level of support and provide tools, documentation, and suitably trained staff.
• Respond to and satisfy internal customers’ needs.
• Identify changes to business procedures that ­will improve efficiency.
• Keep ­people informed.
• Take actions needed to achieve target ser­vice levels.
ORGA­NIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
ICT improves orga­nizational per­for­mance by increasing the speed of transactions; enhancing electronic access for stakeholders; increasing interdepartmental communications; reducing the cost of data storage, access, and utilization;
and facilitating linkage among databases within and between agencies (Berman
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 208
12/3/21 3:04 PM
10. Traditional Information and Communication Technology
209
et al., 2006, 313). In this section, we take the example of a virtual organ­ization
that takes a customer-­driven approach. Reasons for that approach can be changing business requirements with more competitors, making it hard to survive
without paying huge attention to the customer, or technology that makes it pos­
si­ble to use an individual customer approach. This possibility to connect technically personal preferences to individualized mass-­customization raises even
higher expectations with customers and sets an increasingly higher standard
of ser­vice expectation.
Since OD is centered on improving existing work pro­cesses and work group
conditions in a changing environment, specific OD tools can be used to strive
for an orga­nizational goal of a customer-­centered approach. ­These tools can
be applied on a more individual level and focus on a person having difficulties
fitting in and contributing to the organ­ization. Pos­si­ble tools are 360-­degree
feedback, c­ areer development, or assessment centers. On the other end of the
spectrum, OD tools can be used more broadly to shape the organ­ization’s ­future
state through ­whole system analy­sis, alignment, and improvement or guided
­future search or scenario building (Swanson and Holton, 2001). All of ­these OD
tools are also available electronically. However, although HRD professionals can
use many ICT tools to support OD, technology for technology’s sake is not a
rational option (Benson, Johnson, and Kuchinke, 2002). First of all, decisions
have to be made about the effectiveness of pos­si­ble ICT tools. A lot of money
has been spent on technology, such as enterprise resource planning systems,
e-­business solutions, advanced planning systems, and so on, for organ­ization
development. The prob­lem for businesses is that the return on investment (ROI)
of t­ hese systems is often unpredictable. The prob­lem for the HRD professionals
is that their role in ­these technology implementation proj­ects is e­ ither non­ex­is­
tent or l­ imited to only organ­izing the software training for employees (Bolstorff,
2002). Although t­ here is no ­simple solution, HRD professionals should position themselves strategically to apply HRD interventions other than software
training.
Another discussion related to embracing technology is the question of high
tech or high touch. The dilemma of full use of technology (high tech) or the
­human need for personal connection (high touch) needs to be discussed in ­every
situation (Swanson and Holton, 2001).
Successful examples of ICT tools in organ­ization development are diagnostic tools for improving orga­nizational communication, such as software supporting open-­space technology meetings. This type of meeting aims to or­ga­nize
a get-­together to create time and space for p
­ eople to engage deeply and innovatively around orga­nizational issues. Although originally not intended for use
with ICT, ICT makes such meetings easier, and the software makes it pos­si­ble
to discuss orga­nizational ­matters online (prob­ably over an intranet). Other successful examples involve e-­tools and resources for planning and managing
­careers and leadership succession planning. Software to run a 360-­degree
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 209
12/3/21 3:04 PM
210
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
feedback proj­ect over the internet makes data collection and data interpretation
easier by using online surveys.
Computer technology makes such per­for­mance mea­sure­ments more feasible and faster: (1) extensive amounts of data can be pro­cessed very quickly (timeliness of outcomes is very impor­tant in data usability); (2) software programs
are now able to tabulate a larger variety of indicators more easily and (3) software programs also produce physically attractive reports (Hatry, 2008). An exotic example reported in the lit­er­a­ture is a computer-­based stress-­management
intervention program to reduce corporate health costs (Pollak Eisen, Allen,
Bollash, and Pescatello, 2008).
In general, it is expected that organ­izations ­will become more networked.
Technology is allowing more outsourcing and telecommuting (McLean, 2006).
It is also noticed that technology is becoming more of an intervening variable.
When OD con­sul­tants (using their systems approach) make an analy­sis of an
organ­ization, they have to ask themselves how technology is being used, how
technology solutions enable (or get in the way of) results, and how technology
is maintained, improved, and explained (Haneberg, 2005).
PER­FOR­MANCE IMPROVEMENT
­There are many per­for­mance improvement perspectives in HRD and a wide
range of per­for­mance levels and indicators available for consideration (Swanson
and Holton, 2001). However, ICT is increasingly used in per­for­mance improvement proj­ects to enhance individual-­level per­for­mance and the per­for­mance
of organ­izations as a ­whole. One of the main computer-­based enhancements in
HRD is electronic per­for­mance support systems (EPSS), an approach originating from Gery (1989). An EPSS is an integrated computerized environment
that supports and occasionally monitors employees while d
­ oing their jobs. In
general, an EPSS contains the following four components: (1) tools (to perform
a job), (2) information (needed to do the job correctly), (3) advice (for the problematic parts of the job), and (4) training (to extend the employees’ knowledge
and skills) (see also Bastiaens, 1997, 1999). EPSS is principally intended for employees who depend on a computer for carry­ing out their job. The potential advantages of learning with EPSS are considered to be a more active learning pro­cess,
more concrete forms of learning, an increase in the transfer of what has been
learned to the workplace, a reduction in learning time, and a reduction of cost of
training. The potential advantages of working with EPSS are higher quality and
higher productivity. The EPSS community uses the term performance-­centered
systems to stress that the systems support functionality of employees’ per­for­
mance more and the training part less.
Although technology is still being used to support learning through electronic versions of traditional instructional programs, in Gery’s opinion, the most
direct effect on work per­for­mance is interactive tools that structure work pro­
cesses and provide links to supporting resources (Gery, 2002, 464). Examples
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 210
12/3/21 3:04 PM
10. Traditional Information and Communication Technology
211
of per­for­mance support software for man­ag­ers are electronic working models
and information and resources on promoting and managing workplace change.
Examples for proj­ect leaders are an integrated suite of software tools, e-­guides,
and resources on starting, scheduling, monitoring, and evaluating proj­ects.
E-­LEARNING IN HRD
Information technology often reduces the need for some tasks while increasing
overall staff requirements. When new applications are introduced, the cost of
training can be 15 to 20 ­percent of the total purchase price of IT applications
(Berman et al., 2006). Additionally, a lifelong learning attitude is vital for employees. T&D is very impor­tant, and the expectation is that e-­learning w
­ ill become increasingly popu­lar. Keeping in mind that the delivery method should
not be selected without the goals in mind (Rothwell and Kazanas 2003b), a similar strategy is also required for e-­learning initiatives. Most often, that is not
the case. However, e-­learning often is a one-­shot or stand-­alone event.
In education and training, many learners are educating themselves for the
sake of their work—­either to improve their c­ areers or to make sure that they
keep their jobs. ICT places increased responsibility on learners for taking charge
of their educations and establishing their competencies that are key to their
­careers (Rothwell and Kazanas, 2003b).
What follows is a description of an e-­learning strategy from a starting point of
­career development focusing on competencies—­this type of e-­learning suits HRD
well. An integrated and more long-­term possibility for organ­izations to train employees is presented, introducing au­then­tic learning tasks and competency-­based
e-­learning opportunities.
­Career development is traditionally seen as a formalized c­ areer planning activity to develop employees who are ready for movement to dif­fer­ent jobs, to
reduce absenteeism and turnover, to cultivate the realization of individual potential, to motivate employees to establish their ­career objectives and act on
them, to increase the management awareness of available talent within the
organ­ization, and/or for the orga­nizational preparation for long-­term trends that
might pose opportunities or threats (Rothwell and Kazanas, 2003a). ­Career development is rarely sufficient by itself to ensure promotion. In the end, it all adds
up to the adequate per­for­mance of an employee. When good per­for­mance is of
paramount importance, educators should focus on the “transfer of training,”
and therefore also on the transfer of e-­learning—­not only for the sake of businesses but also for the benefit of the employees involved. Employees spend time
and effort on c­ areer programs and training. For that, HRD staff are obliged to
come up with effective and efficient solutions. One possibility is the use of
competence-­based training. Competence-­based training is understood as training that focuses on the acquisition of par­tic­u­lar competencies in a person so
that they can act professionally regarding a par­tic­u­lar prob­lem and/or vocational
situation. A competence is a cluster of skills, attitudes, and under­lying ele­ments
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 211
12/3/21 3:04 PM
212
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
of knowledge that enable a person to carry out t­ hose tasks that constitute an
essential part of a function or role (Parry, 1996). ICT can be employed as a primary platform, ensuring a definite (virtual) context, and/or it can be used as a
supporting aid to resolve a prob­lem or vocational situation. It can be especially
power­ful in combination with ICT applications. A description of many crucial
aspects follows.
Competence-­Based Training The purpose of training functions is to create
competent employees who can be immediately productive in order to face rapidly changing demands.
Competence-­based training is seen as the appropriate way to respond to the
wishes of organ­izations to prepare learners for the roles they ­will play in their
working lives and society. Support for competence-­based training is growing.
Figure 10.2 compares traditional training and competence-­based training
(Jochems and Schlusmans, 1999) and provides a basis for further discussion.
E-­Learning and Competencies There is a symbiotic relationship between
instructor-­led and technology-­based training, often called blended learning
(Holton, Coco Lowe, Dutsch, 2006). As expressed in figure 10.2, their characteristic features can all be supported by ICT (Bastiaens, Martens, and Stijnen,
2002a; 2002b).
Traditional Training
Competence-­Based Training
The training program is based on
knowledge content and discipline-­
oriented skills.
The training program is based on
competencies displayed in accomplishing
tasks and dealing with practical or prob­lem
situations.
Learners study predetermined
content.
Learners carry out learning tasks, e
­ ither
with or without other learners.
All learners go through more or less
the same curriculum.
A made-­to-­measure training approach is
put together, depending on the entry level.
Knowledge and skills are tested.
Mainly testing of competencies.
Trainer or teacher-­controlled testing.
Also self-­assessment and
peer-­assessment.
Separate skills modules.
General skills are integrated into learning
tasks.
Training units are derived from
separate disciplines.
Training units to a significant degree are
interdisciplinary.
Figure 10.2: Traditional versus Competence-­Based Training
Source: Based on Jochems and Schlusmans, 1999, 50.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 212
12/3/21 3:04 PM
10. Traditional Information and Communication Technology
213
The training program is based on competencies displayed in accomplishing
tasks and dealing with practical or prob­lem situations. In competence-­based
training, the emphasis is on the functions that a person must carry out and on
the prob­lem and practical situations in which a person must act competently.
The construction of the learning program, se­lection of the training materials,
and testing of learners is based on t­ hese two princi­ples. The emphasis is not on
developing knowledge alone but on learning a complex combination of knowledge, skills, and prob­lem solving (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Martens, 2002, 2005).
A distinction can be made ­here in ICT support. First, ICT can be employed as
a primary medium where ICT creates the (virtual) context or prob­lem situation to demonstrate the competence. Software is developed and simulates more
or less a real­ity (Stijnen, 2003a). In addition, ICT can be employed as an aid to
competence-­based training. All kinds of content environments, auxiliary systems, information, and search tools can be consulted to carry out or acquire the
competence.
Learners carry out learning tasks, ­either with or without other learners. The
learning task is at the core of competence-­based training. Learners are confronted with prob­lems and assignments in a learning task. The aim is for learners to acquire knowledge, skills, and attitudes, enabling them to solve the
prob­lems and save themselves from the situation. They then discover for themselves what knowledge and skills they do not yet possess and are helped and
guided to acquire this knowledge and ­these skills in­de­pen­dently. This active approach to learning is unfamiliar to many learners, and learning tasks have
therefore been oriented so that they gradually learn how to manage their learning pro­cesses and learn in­de­pen­dently. Learners w
­ ill also have to carry out many
learning tasks with other learners to learn how to collaborate.
ICT is commonly used on learning tasks together with other learners (Van
Merriënboer, Bastiaens, and Hoogveld, 2004). Computer-­aided collaboration in
the form of chat-­room and email facilities is very popu­lar. ICT serves h
­ ere as a
secondary medium (as an add-on to a learning environment). Good examples
of this are the proj­ects of Stassen, Baudoin, and De Jong (2002), in which learners are educated by collaborating and commenting on each other’s writing in a
digital writing environment. Another example is the proj­ect of Van Eijl, Pi­lot,
Thoolen, and de Voogd (2002), in which learners are offered classes, assignments,
and electronic quizzes. One of the most significant advantages of collaboration
with o
­ thers in the same organ­ization is that changes or innovations can be realized ­because all members have participated in the training.
A made-­to-­measure training approach is put together, depending on the entry level. The under­lying princi­ple in competence-­based training is that learners only have to learn what they cannot yet do or cannot yet do adequately. It
can be determined by taking a pre-­exam on what competencies or components
of ­these competencies learners have already mastered. Only ­those learning tasks
that relate to the components still missing are then offered. In this way, the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 213
12/3/21 3:04 PM
214
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
learner is provided learning tasks that are tailored to him or her. The flexibility
of ICT is put to use. Electronic learning environments (ELEs), in par­tic­u­lar, are
highly regarded for the flexible (often individual) learning routes they make pos­
si­ble. An ELE is often a web-­based study center accessible through the internet.
Each learner has their own virtual study location to access previously selected
content and communicate with fellow learners or the trainer. Van de Laak, Veldhuis, and Veerman’s (2002) proj­ect is an example of a proj­ect that looks at providing an adaptive, personal learning path in an electronic learning environment
from the educational point of view.
Mainly testing of competencies, also self-­assessment and peer-­assessment.
What­ever a trainer, a training medium, or a training organ­ization does, it is the learner
who ultimately determines ­whether they learn a lot or a l­ ittle. In competence-­
based training, the learner w
­ ill be emphatically addressed on this point. The
learner is confronted with detailed assessments of their attitude and skills concerning the requirements of the occupational field for which they wish to be
trained. The learner is familiarized with forms of self-­testing and group evaluations and learns to reflect on their learning and work experiences. At the same
time, vocational practice necessitates being in­de­pen­dently able to quickly acquire
new knowledge and skills at the right time and reflect on one’s actions.
Competence-­based training necessitates dif­fer­ent forms of testing (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Kirschner, 2004)—­not just testing of facts but testing of competencies attained. When we ask learners to work together more and develop a
higher order of skills, the testing cannot remain unadapted. For example, if we
only test at a level of a­ ctual knowledge, learners w
­ ill quickly adapt their be­hav­
ior and may neglect aspects of collaboration that “­don’t ­really count.” One of
the commonly used forms is self-­assessment, where the learner assesses themselves, or peer-­assessment, where learners assess one another. This form of assessment at pre­sent is frequently linked to portfolios. In portfolios, which
originate from the teaching of art, learners put together evidence demonstrating that they have mastered a par­tic­u­lar competence. Gunnewiek, van den Berk,
and de Graaff (2002) give an example of a workshop portfolio in training in German that illustrates the learner’s development (of language skills) and their reflections on it.
Although forms of assessment like portfolios and self-­assessment are
promising, a lot of work has to be done concerning their validity and reliability
(Baartman et al., 2006).
General skills are integrated into learning tasks, and training units are to a
significant degree interdisciplinary. E
­ very curriculum at pre­sent has subjects such
as “communication” and “working in proj­ects.” The learners have to be capable
of adapting their skills adequately in very dif­fer­ent situations. They should therefore also be trained and tested for this in widely dif­fer­ent contexts. It should be
pos­si­ble for such skills and associated tasks to be found through the subjects in
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 214
12/3/21 3:04 PM
10. Traditional Information and Communication Technology
215
a competence-­based curriculum. Learning tasks in which learners are confronted with realistic situations are used in a competence-­based curriculum.
The form of the learning task can vary—­a realistic game, a simulation of a practical situation, a proj­ect assignment, a practical orientation, or a practical
placement. True-­to-­life prob­lem situations almost by themselves break through
the rigid subject structure that often prevails in training courses. Competence-­
based training is thus, by definition, interdisciplinary and far less bound by domains. An example proj­ect for this is Mulder and Swaak (2002), which studies
multidisciplinary proj­ects in which multidisciplinary teams try to develop a
common conceptual framework.
The interdisciplinary nature of competence-­based training is greatly enhanced by using ICT information sources such as the internet. Searching for
information using WebQuests is very much in vogue. A WebQuest activity is
concerned with the collection (in a group setting) of information via the inter­ tml). Sources are connet (see, for example, http://­webquest​.­sdsu​.­edu​/­webquest​.h
sulted to solve the prob­lem as well as pos­si­ble. The issues presented to learners
must have a loose structure and permit open study. The learning must touch on
a range of topics and subjects. In training, two forms of WebQuests can be distinguished: short-­term WebQuests and long-­term WebQuests. A short-­term
WebQuest is principally focused on information acquisition and integration. In
the end, learners have grappled with large quantities of information and are
aware of this information. A long-­term WebQuest is focused on the broadening and refining of knowledge. When finished, learners have analyzed a field of
expertise, transformed it, and demonstrated their knowledge by producing
something related to the knowledge to which o
­ thers can respond. An essential
aspect of the didactics of a WebQuest is built-in guidance components (Martens,
1998). Competence-­based training, as can often be seen in WebQuests, is moving more in the direction of in­de­pen­dent learning or even distance training.
This move necessitates an entirely dif­fer­ent approach by the training provider.
A distinction is made between basic material and aids that make pos­si­ble the
in­de­pen­dent study of the basic material. Examples are diagrams, self-­testing questions, summaries, and study instructions.
It is impor­tant to note that ICT tools have been available that support the
phases of the ADDIE model (analyze, design, develop, implement, and evaluate) (Gustafson and Branch, 1997).
AUTHENTICITY
In competence-­based training, learners are no longer primarily trained to pass
their examinations but to learn in­de­pen­dently and manage their learning pro­
cess. Training based on au­t hen­tic tasks is an essential feature of this. When
learners are confronted with real and meaningful learning tasks, the learning
becomes more meaningful and in­ter­est­ing for them. The most significant feature
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 215
12/3/21 3:04 PM
216
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
of an au­then­tic learning task is that it must deliver a learning experience closely
related to real­ity. Herrington and Oliver (2000, 45) have formulated several
conditions to be met by au­then­tic learning tasks:
• They must provide an au­then­tic context that reflects the skills
necessary in real­ity.
• The learning tasks must encourage au­then­tic activities characterized
by relevance to real­ity.
• Au­then­tic learning tasks must make pos­si­ble access to expert
per­for­mance.
• Au­then­tic tasks must make it pos­si­ble to look at the situation from
several perspectives and where appropriate, fulfill several roles.
• Au­then­tic learning tasks must encourage common buildup of
knowledge.
• The au­then­tic learning tasks must stimulate reflection.
• Au­then­tic learning tasks must encourage the articulation of implicit
knowledge so that the learners are prompted to make all their
knowledge explicit.
• Coaching and guidance must be offered at critical moments.
• Au­then­tic testing must be built into the learning task.
Technological applications can also support working on au­then­tic learning
tasks. Using ICT, “real” environments can be created where learners can work
on attaining their competence and carry out functions as “real employees,” explore new fields, meet vari­ous p
­ eople, and use varied methods and instruments
to gather information and solve prob­lems (Gulikers, Bastiaens, and Martens,
2002).
As a result of the much-­promised added value of au­then­tic learning combined with ICT, the Open University of the Netherlands has for many years been
developing so-­called confrontations with practice, electronic cases in which the
­whole context in which a competence must be learned is simulated.
The significance of flexible, life-­long learning is increasing sharply in the new
knowledge-­based economy. This increase necessitates training that is tied in with
learners’ own learning needs as closely as pos­si­ble. In addition, the new generations of learners, who grow up with the internet and mobile communication,
also expect intensive use of ICT in training. This flexible, adapted training with
a large amount of ICT makes specific demands on developing learning environments. Developments in the area of ICT have a significant impact on the organ­
ization of learning and learning environments. The internet and extensive
databases with ever more advanced search engines make it pos­si­ble to open up
large amounts of information to learners. At the same time, this can lead to
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 216
12/3/21 3:04 PM
10. Traditional Information and Communication Technology
217
learners being overwhelmed by constantly changing and ever more quickly obsolescent information.
New means of communication such as email, discussion groups, audio conferences and video conferences, chat rooms, and mobile phones offer opportunities for communicating with learners in­de­pen­dently of place and time.
In addition, more and more development environments are being designed
that make it pos­si­ble to personalize electronic training materials and tailor them
to learners. Th
­ ese new technologies create ways of responding to changing learning needs and the latest views of what constitutes good training. Therefore,
initiatives in this area can be seen in many educational and training institutions
(Lubberman and Klein, 2002). They nevertheless often do not lead to the desired result (see also Stijnen, 2003a, 2003b; Smits, Stijnen, de Bie and Bastiaens,
2006). Software packages are purchased without much thought, and lecturers
put course information, Power­Point pre­sen­ta­tions, and supplementary texts on
the internet and/or top off classical training with email facilities, for example.
In many cases, this leads to a large amount of text that is pos­si­ble only to
browse. ­There are few opportunities for interaction and/or no feedback on what
learners think they have learned, let alone how to apply the new knowledge.
Many new digital training materials are often not developed in line with con­
temporary educational/didactic findings and are commonly ­limited to just virtual transfer of knowledge with no regard for competence or expertise.
SUMMARY
Some HRD experts provide warnings about technology. Some see e-­learning as
impersonal. “It does not fulfill individual’s need for social interaction and does
not capitalize on the value of group instruction where new ideas can be more
easily formulated” (Rothwell and Kazanas, 2003b, 364). Some strive for a balance between technology and traditional approaches (Farrel, 2000). This balance is often referred to as blended learning. ­Others are more positive ­toward
technology and see huge possibilities to improve the effectiveness of on-­the-­job
training, for example. As the effectiveness of any given training approach depends on the amount of time that elapses between training events, the match
between the training and work setting and the situated learning context (Jacobs,
2003) technology, as explained in this chapter, has indeed a lot to offer. In general, ­there are no statements about the possibilities of ICT in fields other than
“learning” in the HRD lit­er­a­ture. However, HRD software is increasingly used
that supports ­human resource functions. For applicant tracking, benefits, payroll, and so on, employees use software that is also used by vari­ous commercial
vendors (often called talent management software).
­There is a growing availability of technology throughout the internet. Daily,
new “niche” applications are developed. Many of them are open-­source software,
free-­, or shareware. The most significant technology movement changing the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 217
12/3/21 3:04 PM
218
part iii: perspectives of ­human resource development
HRD f­ uture is Web 2.0. The idea ­behind Web 2.0 stresses the importance of social aspects instead of technological ones when it comes to the internet. In
HRD, ­these Web 2.0 issues are also embedded as tools to improve collaboration, learning, and per­for­mance to ultimately benefit organ­izations.
Web 3.0 is referred to by experts as the semantic web; semantic meaning
“data driven.” The data comes from the user, and the web essentially adjusts to
meet the user’s needs. For example, if you do a lot of searching for “hrd assessment blogs,” you’ll receive more advertisements related to HRD assessment.
More a strategy than technology is the usage of wikis in companies. A wiki is
a medium that can be edited by anyone with access to it. It is mainly done via
collaborative development. The most well-­known wiki is the website Wikipedia​
.­org. Many companies use wikis to solve orga­nizational issues online. They put
all available information regarding an issue online and ask the internet community for a solution. The idea is that a community of ­people interested in a common topic (on the internet) knows more than just a few expert employees hired
by the com­pany. This strategy and way of ­doing business are referred to as Wikinomics (www​.­wikinomics​.­org). Collaboration is the main idea when it comes to
wikis. The caution ­here has to do with the level of expertise of ­those participating
and the validity of their contributions. Another form of idea sharing is blogs (an
online log); thoughts are shared and communicated over the internet. Learners
and trainers can write down their opinion. ­Others can comment on that. ­These
innovative ways of collaboration go beyond training and development.
In HRD, a new “web 2.0 way” of presenting content to learners is grounded
in the popularity of using podcasts and videocasts. Small audio and/or video
files are put online by ­people who want to share their opinion or expertise. Learners can listen and/or look over the internet or download the content on portable media players. This feature is also increasingly used in formal training
programs. For example, trainers provide their learners small video files as preparation on a training program, or companies select small video files that provide information about specific topics in an online portal that is available
twenty-­four hours a day for employees.
As previously stated, HRD electronic training and development, called
e-­learning, is well established, although new technologies make it continually
necessary to stay current. Academics need to see technology as an ongoing impor­
tant issue in HRD requiring research.
Conclusion
The introduction to this chapter highlighted three phases of HRD’s engagement
with information technology:
• Phase 1. HRD focusing on developing and unleashing expertise and
dealing with the technologies required to produce and deliver goods
and ser­vices.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 218
12/3/21 3:04 PM
10. Traditional Information and Communication Technology
219
• Phase 2. HRD utilizing informational, instructional, and media
technologies to help in d
­ oing the work of HRD with the locus of
control remaining with the HRD professional.
• Phase 3. HRD utilizing ICT to do the work of HRD with the locus of
control being in the hands of the individual worker-­learner.
Phases 1 and 2 do not go away as a result of phase 3 and its virtual capacity.
Given the rate of change in technology, it is pos­si­ble that specific ICTs reported
in this chapter ­w ill be out of date by the time this is read. That is part of the
lesson of this chapter. Three concluding challenges arise related to technology
and HRD and are offered in conclusion: (1) how to keep up with technology
while being sure one is adding substance and not just pizzazz; (2) how to ensure
expertise through the use of virtual technology, not just knowledge; and (3) how
to remain ­human, not just efficient.
Reflection Questions
1. Identify one concept of the virtual organ­ization in this chapter that
makes the most sense to you, and explain why.
2. Explain something about virtual organ­izations that is new to you.
3. Explain how your view of c­ areer development fits with e-­learning
initiatives in HRD.
4. How is a competency-­based e-­learning approach dif­fer­ent from other
e-­learning approaches?
5. Identify and explain an issue in this chapter that makes the least sense
to you or is impossible to achieve in your work situation.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 219
12/3/21 3:04 PM
This page intentionally left blank
PART IV
Developing Expertise
through Training and
Development
This section captures the essence of the training and development component
of HRD and the nature of expertise. Illustrations of training and development
practice that exist in host organ­izations are presented along with variations in
core thinking, pro­cesses, interventions, and tools.
CHAPTERS
11 Overview of Training and Development
12 The Nature of Expertise
13 Training and Development Practices
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 221
12/3/21 3:04 PM
This page intentionally left blank
11
Overview of Training
and Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Views of T&D
• Education-­Training Dichotomy
• Taxonomy of Per­for­mance
• Informal and Incidental Learning
Key T&D Terms and Strategies
• Subject ­Matter Focus of T&D
The General T&D Pro­cess
Instructional Systems Development (ISD)
Training for Per­for­mance System (TPS)
• TPS Model
• Phases of the TPS
• Leading the T&D Pro­cess
Individual-­Focused T&D
• Hands-on Training
• Structured on-­the-­Job Training
Team/Group-­Focused T&D
• Action Learning
• Orga­nizational Learning
Training Roles and Responsibilities
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 223
12/3/21 3:04 PM
224
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
Introduction
Training and Development (T&D) makes up the primary realm of HRD activity. T&D is defined as a pro­cess of systematically developing work-­related knowledge and expertise to improve per­for­mance. Training is not education-­light—­it
is more than knowledge. ­People experiencing T&D should end up with new
knowledge and do ­things well ­after they complete a training program (Zemke,
1990). New knowledge by itself generally is not enough.
Within T&D, more effort is focused on training rather than development.
Also, training is more likely focused on new employees and ­those entering new
job roles in contrast to long-­term development. The development portion of training and development is seen as “the planned growth and expansion of knowledge and expertise of ­people beyond the pre­sent job requirements” (Swanson,
2002, 6). In most instances, development opportunities are provided to ­people
who have a strong potential to contribute to the organ­ization. Indeed, development often comes ­under the banner of management development, leadership
development, and c­ areer development. In e­ very case, p
­ eople at all levels in all
organ­izations need to know how to do their work (expertise) and generally need
help with their learning. Davis and Davis (1998) provide an explanation that
helps to frame this chapter:
Training is the pro­cess through which skills are developed, information
is provided, and attributes are nurtured, in order to help individuals who
work in organ­izations to become more effective and efficient in their
work. Training helps the organ­ization to fulfill its purposes and goals,
while contributing to the overall development of workers. Training
is necessary to help workers qualify for a job, do the job, or advance,
but it is also essential for enhancing and transforming the job, so that
the job actually adds value to the enterprise. Training facilitates learning, but learning is not only a formal activity designed and encouraged by specially prepared trainers to generate specific per­for­mance
improvements. Learning is also a more universal activity, designed
to increase capability and capacity and is facilitated formally and
­informally by many types of ­people at dif­fer­ent levels of the organ­
ization. Training should always hold forth the promise of maximizing
learning. (44)
T&D, as defined ­here, often appears ­under other names. Organ­izations w
­ ill
usually title T&D functions to match their communication goals. Beyond T&D,
some carry broader names such as executive development or corporate university. O
­ thers are very specific, such as flight safety school or sales training department. What­ever the title, it is good to look beyond the name to see what is
taking place. The “university” title might be teaching participants how to flip
hamburgers.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 224
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
225
Views of T&D
Fortunately, no single view of T&D exists. Th
­ ere is so much variety in the nature of organ­izations, the ­people who work in them, the conditions surrounding the need for ­human expertise, and the pro­cess of learning that a single lens
would be inadequate. Alternative views are helpful. Three models that help in
understanding T&D include the education-­training dichotomy, the taxonomy
for per­for­mance (Swanson, 2007a), and the informal and incidental learning
model (Marsick and Watkins, 1997).
EDUCATION-­TRAINING DICHOTOMY
The role of general knowledge versus specific job-­related knowledge and expertise is an ongoing issue within orga­nizational systems that sponsor T&D (Buckley and Caple, 2007). General knowledge that an individual has is marketable
throughout the job market. For example, the ability to read, write, and do math
is not specific to any one organ­ization. Thus, employers generally do not want
to pay for programs that do not directly benefit them. Most organ­izations view
high school programs and many college degree programs as providing the required general knowledge. They hire gradu­ates of ­these educational programs
with the understanding that the new employees ­will need to learn the specific
job knowledge and skills required by the employing organ­ization.
Companies resist paying the bill for general knowledge learning programs,
and governments resist paying the bill for organization-­specific learning programs. Having said this, it is even messier in practice. Companies requiring
entry-­level workers in a tight ­labor market can find themselves providing basic
education (reading, writing, ­etc.) and job-­specific training. They ­will often appeal to government agencies for funding for t­ hese efforts or for gaining access
to public-­sector adult education resources to help them. Conversely, public-­sector
economic development agencies often proactively fund job-­specific T&D programs to maintain or attract new business and industry in their geographic area.
The politics and pressures surrounding ­human capital development, within
and between orga­nizational systems, influence T&D decisions and programming. Questions of survival, competitive advantage, and the pursuit of defined
strategies directly influence T&D decisions. For example, employing organ­
izations may decide to support tuition reimbursement for ­those desiring general learning as long as they go about it on their own time. Tepid orga­nizational
support of tuition reimbursement programs may have as much to do with providing competitive employee benefits (holding on to good employees) as it does
from expecting any direct per­for­mance return on their expenditures.
TAXONOMY OF PER­FOR­MANCE
One way of gaining a clearer perspective of the expertise required of organ­izations
is through the taxonomy of per­for­mance (Swanson, 2007a; see figure 11.1). The
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 225
12/3/21 3:04 PM
226
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
To produce a new method, process, device,
or system from study or experimentation
Invent
Changing
the System
Improve
Troubleshoot
Maintaining
the System
Operate
Understand
To advance an existing method, process,
device, or system to a better state or quality
To locate and eliminate sources of trouble in
an existing method, process, device, or system
To run or control the functioning of a method,
process, device, or system
To comprehend the language, sounds, form,
or symbols of an existing method, process,
device, or system
Figure 11.1: Taxonomy of Per­for­mance
Source: Swanson, 2007a, 24.
taxonomy first illustrates the two considerable challenges that e­ very organ­
ization ­faces that T&D is expected to address: maintaining the system and changing the system. Keeping any work system up and ­running is a challenge. Workplace
systems erode in many ways. For example, equipment wears out, customers
demand more than the work pro­cesses can produce, required information is
less readily available, and expert workers leave their employment for vari­ous
reasons.
Even though a work system is mature and reasonably predictable, conditions
can change quickly, and t­ hings can go wrong. A variety of forces cause systems
to erode. Thus, man­ag­ers and workers have the continuing pressure of maintaining their work systems. When t­ here is inadequate expertise, training can
be applied. Furthermore, the three “maintaining the system” subcategories of
understanding, operation, and troubleshooting of work systems allow for clearer
specification of the expertise required and what it takes to achieve it. You could
not expect a person trained only to “understand” a work system to then be able
to go into the ­actual workplace with the expertise required to “operate” and
“troubleshoot” that system. A fundamental error in HRD practice would be to
provide training to employees at a lower level and expect them to demonstrate
expertise at a higher level.
It is generally assumed, ­either through on-­t he-­job experience and formal
training, that ­people who have designed and worked successfully in a system
are subject-­matter experts on that system. Thus, t­ hese subject-­matter experts are
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 226
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
227
vital resources for T&D professionals wanting to analyze what a person needs
to know and do to maintain the system. In addition, supporting documentation about an existing system is usually available that can also be used to put
together sound training.
In contrast to the challenge of maintaining systems, the challenge of changing systems is presented by the taxonomy of per­for­mance. Changing the system can mean e­ ither improving the system or inventing a w
­ hole new approach.
Changing the system strikes another chord. What a person needs to know
and do to change a system is to engage in activity that is primarily outside the
maintaining realm. A person needs expertise in prob­lem identification and
problem-­solving methods. For example, training in human-­factors design,
pro­cess redesign, and statistical pro­cess control are specific strategies for improving the system. Once learned, the person can apply them to an existing
work system needing improvement. Interestingly, a person can be an expert
in improvement work without being an expert in the system they wish to improve. The T&D professional typically partners with ­people having system-­specific
expertise. In other situations, organ­izations train ­people on tools to improve
the system with the expectation that they can apply t­ hose tools to change the
system in which they work. Thus, they are expecting the same p
­ eople to be able
to maintain and improve systems. Leading teams that carry out improvement
efforts can jump over to the realm of organ­ization development, the natu­ral
partner of T&D.
The invention level of changing the system has l­ ittle regard for the existing
system. New ways of thinking and ­doing work are entertained. One mea­sure of
success is that the existing system goes away due to being replaced by the new
system. The challenge then is to maintain the new system. This cycle of renewal
is fed by HRD interventions and ends up requiring still more HRD interventions. Two examples include T&D experiences in scenario planning (see Chermack and Burt, 2008) and antecedents to creativity (Robinson and Stern, 1997).
It is part of the dynamic of the HRD profession that both ­t hese demands of
maintaining the system and changing the system can go on si­mul­ta­neously in
organ­izations.
Experts on changing the system (see Brache, 2002; Deming, 1986; Rummler
and Brache, 1995) provide us fair warning about maintaining the system and
changing the system in organ­izations. An organ­ization in crisis first needs to
focus on the fundamental issue of maintaining the system before changing the
system. While improving the system may be more appealing, it would be analogous to rearranging the chairs on the deck of the Titanic. We have started
with a “changing the system” proj­ect more than once, only to discover a desperate need to develop core workforce expertise to get the system functioning
at an acceptable level. Once stabilized, changes to the system could then be
entertained.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 227
12/3/21 3:04 PM
228
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
The more radical invention level in the taxonomy of per­for­mance rejects
the pre­sent system and sets up a clean slate. Steven Jobs (Isaac­son, 2011) and
Elon Musk (Redding, 2019) are two revolutionary entrepreneurs that group
high-­energy experts into work/learning teams that identify needs and create
solutions—­inventing systems.
The learning and per­for­mance paradigms discussed in chapters 8 and 9 play
impor­tant roles in meeting the challenges posed by the taxonomy of per­for­
mance. With learning viewed as a driver of per­for­mance, it is easy to make a
short-­term connection between learning and per­for­mance when ­there are system maintenance issues. In comparison, it is not as easy to make the long-­term
learning-­to-­performance connection when T&D is involved in system change
issues. The extended time required to change a work system makes it more difficult to claim system per­for­mance gains and suggests that intermediate evidence
of learning and new work be­hav­iors are legitimate short-­term goals u
­ ntil the
change takes full effect.
The traditional lines often drawn between t­ hose ­people working in a system, ­those responsible for maintaining it, and ­those responsible for changing
the system have been blurred. Some traditional thoughts about hourly workers
getting short-­term training versus salaried workers earning longer-­term development experiences have also been confused. Strategies must be thought through
for each setting based on accurate analy­sis of the expertise required to function in specific jobs.
INFORMAL AND INCIDENTAL LEARNING
While it has been known all along, T&D professionals have recently written
about the unstructured dimensions of workplace learning. Most T&D professionals had advocated their structured training view without acknowledging the
unstructured, or trial-­and-­error, role of learning in the organ­ization. The classic rival to structured T&D has been unstructured T&D. Swanson and Sawzin
(1975) define each, noting that the difference was ­whether or not ­there was a
plan for learning coming from the organ­ization: plan denotes structured training, or no plan equals unstructured training. Planning is at the heart of the argument. Jacobs is credited with consciously differentiating on-­the-­job training
as structured or unstructured (see Jacobs and McGriffen, 1987).
The study of unplanned informal and incidental workplace learning has
gained interest in recent years. Th
­ ese studies are based on the real­ity that most
of what ­people learn related to their work per­for­mance is not planned in the
way T&D professionals have traditionally thought about work-­related learning.
Marsick and Watkins (1997) provide an “informal and incidental learning
model” to understand this phenomenon (see figure 11.2). Their model is based
on a core premise that the be­hav­ior of individuals is a function of their interaction with their environment (Lewin, 1951). Work and the workplace context are
at the core of informal and incidental workplace learning (Nijhof and Nieuwen-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 228
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
Frame the
experience.
Experience
challenges.
Interpret
context.
Plan
next steps.
WORK
Examine
alternative
solutions.
Assess intended
and unintended
consequences.
Produce
the solutions.
Reflect in
and on action.
229
Figure 11.2: Informal and Incidental Learning Model
Source: Marsick and Watkins, 1997, 299. Used with permission.
huis, 2008). One could argue that the moment an organ­ization begins planning
and taking actions to encourage informal and incidental learning, the pro­cess is
no longer informal or incidental. Such an argument would shortchange the confidence in the capability and integrity of workers as learners that the informal
and incidental learning perspective offers. They highlight the power of the
context—­the organ­ization and the work—­both to ignite the learning pro­cess and
serve as the primary learning aid. The work requirements provide the challenge
to learn, define prob­lems, and solve prob­lems, but t­ here is usually no time to
reflect. In this vein, Nijhof (2006) cautions the profession about the limitations
of the learning potential of work settings that demand ongoing per­for­mance.
The evolution of the internet as a store­house of information with individuals
who have access to computers and smartphones is a game-­changer. Individual
employees can obtain real-­time data and instruction at their command. Caution abounds about being able to discern the integrity of the information appearing on the internet.
As a m
­ iddle ground, it is no won­der that orga­nizational leaders are interested in ideas that embrace action learning and team prob­lem solving. Action
learning results in learning and pos­si­ble solutions to real contextual prob­lems.
Team prob­lem solving results in solving a specific organization-­specific prob­lem
with learning as a vehicle or side benefit. Both action learning and team prob­
lem solving rely on the power of work and the work context.
Key T&D Terms and Strategies
Key training and development terms and concepts provide a basis for understanding the profession. Expertise, a ­human state, is acquired through a combination of knowledge and experience. It enables individuals to consistently achieve
per­for­mance outcomes that meet or exceed the per­for­mance requirements
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 229
12/3/21 3:04 PM
230
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
(see chapter 11 for a full discussion of expertise). Training is the pro­cess of developing knowledge and expertise in p
­eople. Development is the planned
growth and expansion of the knowledge and expertise of ­people beyond the
current job requirements. This is accomplished through systematic training,
learning experiences, work assignments, and assessment efforts.
T&D interventions vary in the amount of their structure. It is typical for
T&D programs focused on life and death ­matters—­such as medical surgery,
flight operation, nuclear power plant operation, and proprietary financial investment strategies—to be highly structured. This is especially true in managing
the experiential portion of the T&D program (beyond knowledge) and verifying the attainment of the required expertise.
T&D can take place on the job or off the job. On-­the-­job programs take advantage of the resources of the workplace and ­actual conditions in which the
person ­will be expected to perform. Off-­the-­job offerings allow learners to disconnect from the pressures of the workplace to entertain new information and
better ways of ­doing t­ hings.
Individual T&D program titles are generally derived from job titles, job
tasks, work concepts, work systems, work pro­cesses, or hardware/software. T&D
programs can be custom produced or purchased off the shelf. Custom-­produced
programs are designed to match the same per­for­mance, learning, and expertise requirements of a specific group of p
­ eople in a specific organ­ization. Off-­
the-­shelf programs are generic, generally cost much less, and are less likely to
fully address the organ­ization’s par­tic­u ­lar learning or per­for­mance needs.
Organ­izations sometimes buy off-­the-­shelf programs from external providers
and then customize portions of the program to establish a better fit.
SUBJECT M
­ ATTER FOCUS OF T&D
t hing,
Technical T&D programs are generally thought of as p
­eople–­
­people–­procedure, or ­people–­process focused. They are often classified and administered ­under varying banners within the same organ­ization. For example,
a large corporation with multiple divisions producing unique products or ser­
vices can have division-­level skill and technical training functions that are
focused on the substance of the division-­level technology.
In contrast, management and leadership T&D is almost always held constant
across an organ­ization. Th
­ ese programs focus on ­people–­people and ­people–­idea
expertise that mirrors orga­nizational culture and strategy that transcend specific divisions. Expertise required of man­ag­ers and supervisors focused on getting the work done—­maintaining the system—­with a lesser concern for improving
and changing the system. In comparison, leadership tasks are more likely focused on concerns about the ­future state of the system while not losing sight of
the pre­sent.
Motivational T&D is a smaller segment of programming that focuses on attitudinal content in the forms of values and beliefs. It is generally pursued
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 230
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
231
through intense, structured experiences. Dynamic pre­sen­ta­tions by role-­model
facilitators and placing ­people in unfamiliar settings, such as wilderness or survival situations (that are quite safe), are two familiar strategies. Motivational
T&D programs are often used to create readiness for change, followed by ­either
technical or management programs to develop the expertise required to carry
out the change.
­Career growth T&D is an extended view of the learning and expertise development journey. A s­ imple example would be to plan and construct a purposeful pattern of T&D experiences with an eye ­toward the long-­term development
of one’s ­career. A significant shift in this realm took place in the 1980s. Many
firms ­were sponsoring c­ areer development programs that groomed ­people to
move up in their stable orga­nizational system. Once the realization hit that firms
­were changing rapidly and unpredictably, organ­izations cut back on their ­career
development programs. Thus, the locus of control for ­career development moved
from the firm to the individual. When a person is asked t­ oday, “Who is in charge
of your ­career development?” the answer is most likely—­“I am.” Many employees are inadequately prepared to manage their ­career development and are working in organ­izations that are tenuous about their f­ utures. Individuals respond
by enrolling in public ­career development seminars or hiring personal coaches.
With the amount of orga­nizational disruption, it is common for individuals
to skip ­career tracks and essentially start over or at a lower level than they had
previously. In the past, this would have been an enormous negative, while t­ oday,
it is seen as acceptable.
The General T&D Pro­cess
HRD is characterized as essentially a problem-­defining and problem-­solving
method. A positive word could be used for ­those who react negatively to prob­
lems (e.g., opportunity, improvement, e­ tc.). HRD, T&D, and OD are all characterized as five-­phase pro­cesses. Variations in the wording for the HRD, T&D,
and OD pro­cesses capture the common thread used by professionals. H
­ ere are
all three variations:
Human Resource
Development
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 231
Training &
Development
Organization
Development
Phase 1
Analyze
Analyze
Analyze/Contract
Phase 2
Propose
Design
Diagnose/Feedback
Phase 3
Create
Develop
Plan/Develop
Phase 4
Implement
Implement
Implement
Phase 5
Assess
Evaluate
Evaluate/Institutionalize
12/3/21 3:04 PM
232
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
T&D professionals within HRD most commonly talk about their work in
terms of the ADDIE pro­cess (analyze, design, develop, implement, and evaluate). It is the most widely used methodology for developing systematic training
(Allen, 2006). The origin of the ADDIE pro­cess is rooted in the early four-­step
training method and the instructional systems development model. The WWI
and WWII training within industry proj­ect (Dooley, 1945b) laid out the four-­
step training method:
1. Prepare the learner.
2. Pre­sent instruction.
3. Try out per­for­mance.
4. Follow up.
The instructional systems development (ISD) model was developed by
the U.S. military in 1969 (United States, 1969; Campbell, 1984). Many con­
temporary training models are grounded in ­these early systematic training
efforts.
Instructional Systems Development (ISD)
The instructional system development (ISD) model was developed by the United
States to go about training systematically and effectively in the context of the
enormous military training enterprise. Furthermore, it was meant to provide a
common language and pro­cess that transcended the vari­ous branches of the military ser­vice.
The ISD model is illustrated in figure 11.3. The top level shows the five phases
of the training pro­cess in its original form as analy­sis, design, develop, implement,
and control. The control phase was l­ater changed to evaluation in most adaptations of the original ISD model. ­Under the phases are numerous steps within each.
In that the original ISD was designed for the military and not for smaller
organ­izations, the ISD is best suited to the following conditions:
•
•
•
•
Large numbers of learners must be trained.
A long lifetime is expected for the program.
Standard training requirements must be maintained.
High mastery levels are required b
­ ecause of criticalities, such as
safety or the high cost of errors.
• Economic value is placed on the learner’s time.
• Training is valued in the orga­nizational culture (Gagne and
Medsker, 1996).
The original IDS model began with the assumption that training is
needed. Thus, the beginning point of the analy­sis phase was to analyze the job
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 232
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
Analyze
Design
Develop
Implement
Control
I.1
Analyze
job.
II.1
Develop
objectives.
III.1
Specify
learning
events,
activities.
IV.1
Implement
instructional
management
plan.
V.1
Conduct
internal
evaluation.
I.2
Select tasks,
functions.
II.2
Develop
tests.
III.2 Specify
instruction
management
plan and
delivery system.
IV.2
Conduct
instruction.
V.2
Conduct
external
evaluation.
I.3
Construct job
performance
measures.
II.3
Describe
entry
behavior.
III.3
Review,
select
existing
materials.
I.4
Analyze
existing
courses.
II.4
Determine
sequence
and structure.
III.4
Develop
instruction.
I.5
Select
instructional
setting.
233
V.3
Revise
system.
III.5
Validate
instruction.
Figure 11.3: The Model of Interser­vice Procedures for
Instructional Systems Development (ISD)
and its tasks. The ending points ­were to assess trainee be­hav­iors and to revise
programs as needed. The sheer size of the military and the degree of standardization in personnel and equipment helped shape the original ISD model
with features that ­were incompatible with most business and industry training
requirements.
Allen (2006) offers the following reflections on the ADDIE training model:
The ADDIE pro­cess is an adaptation of the systems engineering pro­cess
to prob­lems of workplace training and instruction. The pro­cess assumes
that alternative solutions to instructional prob­lems ­will be more or less
cost efficient depending on the instructional need and environmental
constraints, and that a systems approach intelligently choosing among
alternative solutions ­will produce the most effective results. . . .
In practice beyond the military context, the ADDIE pro­cess was
found to be too rigid and did not account for the dif­fer­ent situations and
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 233
12/3/21 3:04 PM
234
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
applications for which it had to be used. To account for the situational
differences, the external control of the system (i.e., the boxes and arrows)
gave way to phases of ADDIE that could be manipulated in any order
by the training professional. This third generation model assumed that
ADDIE was an interactive pro­cess that could be entered at any point
depending on the current situation. Although behavioral learning theory was still dominant, cognitive theory was beginning to have an impact, such as in the use of simulations for acquisition of cognitive
expertise in decision-­making. (431)
The estimates on the evolution of ADDIE suggest that over one hundred variations of the model exist.
Training for Per­for­mance System (TPS)
The training for per­for­mance system (TPS) is a pro­cess for developing ­human
expertise to improve organ­ization, pro­cess, and individual per­for­mance.
The TPS was initially developed in 1978 by Richard A. Swanson for a major
U.S. manufacturing firm. The firm wanted a comprehensive training pro­cess
that would embrace training at all levels (corporate, division, and plant; management, technical, and motivational), thus allowing for a common systematic
approach and common language for personnel training throughout the com­
pany. The TPS can be viewed as a major adaptation of the ­earlier ADDIE model
and more appropriate for dynamic organ­izations.
When the TPS was developed in the late 1970s, the sponsoring firm raised
several issues about the existing state of the training profession. (1) Th
­ ere was a
concern about the inadequacy of the dominant ISD model to connect with core
business per­for­mance requirements at the analy­sis phase. (2) The firm pointed
out the inadequacy of the work analy­sis tools and pro­cesses used in management T&D to get at the substance of knowledge work. (3) The firm was also concerned about the inadequacy of the analy­sis tools and pro­cesses being used in
technical T&D in getting to the heart of systems/pro­cess work, not just procedural work. (4) ­There was a concern about the inadequacy of the dominant instructional systems development (ISD) model to connect with core business
per­for­mance outcomes at the evaluation phase.
The TPS embraces the titles of the traditional five phases of training presented in most models (Swanson, 1996b; see http://­w ww​.­richardswanson​.­com):
analyze, design, develop, implement, and evaluate with the addition of the critical overarching phase of “leading the T&D pro­cess.”
TPS MODEL
The TPS model is illustrated in two forms in figures 11.4 and 11.5. Figure 11.4
shows the basic five phases of the training pro­cess being integrated and sup-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 234
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
235
The training for performance system (TPS) is a process for developing human expertise
for the purpose of improving organizational, process, and individual performance.
1.0
Analyze
2.0
Design
3.0
Develop
4.0
Implement
5.0
Evaluate
Lead the Training and Development Process
Figure 11.4: Training for Per­for­mance System
Source: Swanson, 2002.
1.0 Analyze
2.0 Design
3.0 Develop
4.0 Implement
5.0 Evaluate
1.1 Diagnose
Performance
and Propose
Intervention
2.1 Design
Training
Program
3.1 Develop
Training
Materials
4.1 Manage
Training
Program
5.1 Evaluate
Training
Effectiveness
1.2 Document
Expertise
2.2 Design
and Plan
Lessons
3.2 Pilot-Test
Training
Program
4.2 Deliver
Training
5.2 Report
Training
Effectiveness
Lead the Training and Development Process:
• Champion T&D Mission/Goals • Manage the Process • Improve the Process
Figure 11.5: Steps within the Pro­cess Phases of the Training
for Per­for­mance System
ported through leadership. The second graphic of the TPS model, figure 11.5,
specifies the major steps within the phases and the leadership component.
It is impor­tant to note that the integrity of the TPS systematic pro­cess can
be maintained even in the simplest of situations (severe time and bud­get constraints) or can be disregarded in the most luxurious cases (generous time and
bud­get allocations). Professional expertise—­training pro­cess knowledge and
experience—is what is necessary to maintain training integrity.
PHASES OF THE TPS
The TPS is a pro­cess for developing h
­ uman expertise to improve organ­ization,
pro­cess, team, and individual per­for­mance. A closer look at its five phases and
the overarching concern for leading the pro­cess are below:
Phase 1: Analyze Two significant components: (1) diagnosing the per­for­mance
requirements of the organ­ization that can be improved through training, and
(2) documenting the expertise required to perform in the workplace. The integrity
of the TPS is in its connection to crucial orga­nizational per­for­mance goals and
in answering one or more of the following questions positively as a result of the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 235
12/3/21 3:04 PM
236
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
Assess
performance
variables.
Articulate
initial
purpose.
Specify
performance
measures.
Construct
improvement
proposal.
Determine
performance
needs.
Figure 11.6: Diagnosing Per­for­mance
Source: Swanson, 2007a, 58.
Conduct analysis
of procedural
tasks.
Prepare
job
description.
Prepare
task
inventory.
Conduct
analysis of
systems tasks.
Conduct
analysis of
knowledge tasks.
Figure 11.7: Documenting Expertise
Source: Swanson, 2007a, 130.
program: (1) Did the organ­ization perform better? (2) Did the work pro­cess perform better? (3) Did the individuals (group) perform better?
The front-­end orga­nizational diagnosis is essential in clarifying the program
goal and determining the per­for­mance variables that work together to achieve
the goal. It requires the analyst to step back from T&D and to think more holistically about per­for­mance. This diagnosis culminates with a per­for­mance improvement proposal requiring ­human expertise to be a part of the improvement
effort. The overall pro­cess is portrayed in figure 11.6.
Given the need for ­human expertise, the documentation of what a person
needs to know and do (expertise) is the second part of the analy­sis phase. The
TPS addresses job and task analy­sis with special tools for documenting procedural work, systems work, and knowledge work. Task analy­sis invariably requires close, careful study and generally spending time with a subject ­matter
expert in their work setting. The pro­cess is portrayed in Figure 11.7.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 236
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
Number of
Trainees
237
Few
Many
Changing
Content
over Time
Instructor-Led
Stable
Media-Led
Delivery
Method
Figure 11.8: Training Strategy Model
Phase 2: Design Create and/or acquire general and specific strategies for ­people
to develop workplace expertise. T&D design is at the program and session/lesson levels. The overall design strategy needs to be eco­nom­ically, systemically,
and psychologically sound at the program design level. Critical information that
­will influence the design is gathered. The “training strategy model” depicted in
figure 11.8 allows the program designer to consider the critical interaction between the stability of the content, the number of trainees, and the primary
method used to develop the required knowledge and expertise.
In thinking about delivery methods, one can plan using the continuum of
training being “media-­led” through “instructor-­led.” Both w
­ ill likely use media; the dividing point is when the locus of delivery control is with the instructor or within the media itself.
Media-led includes alternative technologies, such as virtual real­ity, internet,
interactive video, computer-­based training/per­for­mance support, programmed
instruction (video/audio/paper), and programmed instruction/job aid (paper).
In contrast, instructor-­
led involves off-­
site classrooms, on-­
site classrooms,
structured on-­the-­job, and team learning settings.
T&D Design Templates. The “whole-­part-­whole” learning model (Swanson
and Law, 1993) serves as the basis for T&D design templates. The basic ­human
psychological need for the “­whole” (as explained by Gestalt psy­chol­ogy) and
the need for the “parts” (as described by behavioral psy­chol­ogy) are utilized to
structure whole-­part-­whole (W-­P-­W) learning templates. The W-­P-­W model
can be applied at both the program design and individual lesson/session design
levels.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 237
12/3/21 3:04 PM
238
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
General Whole-Part-Whole Learning Model
Whole-Part
1.
2.
3.
Whole
Part
Whole
A. Whole-Part-Whole Technical T&D Design Template
Whole-Part
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Operation/equipment/system overview
Startup
Operation
Shutdown
Defects/faults
Troubleshooting
Solo performance
B. Whole-Part-Whole Management T& D Design Template
Whole-Part
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Objectives/purpose of training
Illustration of good/bad performance
Conceptual model
Elements of the model
Techniques
Practice/role playing
Managerial implications discussion
C . Whole-Part-Whole Motivational T& D Design Template
Whole-Part
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Acceptance of group/individuals
Problem/opportunity
Fear/greed illustrations (with role models)
The solution
Solicit commitment to solution
Vision success
Lesson/Session Plan Design. The lesson/session plan is the final and official
document in the design phase. It combines the original per­for­mance requirement, the documentation of expertise, and the resulting training objectives into
the “artful” articulation of content and method. The lesson/session plan is not
a private document. It is the property of the sponsoring organ­ization, and it
should be detailed to the point that another knowledgeable trainer could take
the lesson/session plan and the supporting materials and teach essentially the
same content via the same method in the same period.
Phase 3: Develop Develop and/or acquire participant and instructor training
materials needed to execute the training design. ­There is an almost unlimited range
of instructor-­and media-­based T&D materials and media options available to the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 238
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
239
T&D profession. The development of training materials is a paradox. While the
range of creative options is enormous, most training programs utilize planned
materials such as t­ hose portrayed in level 2 of the following five-­level portrayal:
Level 1: No planned instructor materials; no planned participant materials.
Level 2: Projected visuals; digital or paper copies of the visuals for the
participants.
Level 3: Projected visuals; trainee’s print materials in the form of a structured
trainee notebook (including paper copies of the visuals for the participants).
Level 4: Projected visuals; trainees print materials in the form of a structured
trainee notebook (digital or paper copies of the visuals for the participants
included); workplace objects and artifacts from the tasks to be learned; dynamic or interactive support materials such as video, interactive video, in-­
basket case, and simulation.
Level 5: Materials are designed to the level that they can mediate the development of knowledge and expertise without the need of a trainer.
­ ere are practical reasons for producing materials at level 2. It is easy to imagTh
ine a situation where only one to two trainees are participating, and the content is unstable. In such an instance, structured on-­the-­job training would likely
be the best method utilizing inexpensive level 2 training materials (see Sisson,
2001). In a similar vein, practical considerations are the primary basis for choosing any of the levels.
Once materials are developed, the critical issue emerges of testing T&D programs before program implementation. Organ­izations can approach pi­lot testing of training programs in five ways:
1. Conduct a full pi­lot test of the program with a representative sample of
participants.
2. Conduct a full pi­lot test of the program with a group of available
participants.
3. Utilize the program’s first offering as the pi­lot test, being sure to
inform the participants of this fact and gain their support in providing
improvement information.
4. Conduct a “walk-­through” of the entire program with a selected group
of professional colleagues and potential recipients.
5. Presenter of the program conducts a dry run by him-­or herself.
Most organ­izations rely on 5, 4, and 3 to meet the pi­lot test requirements. For
programs with ­limited offerings, options 4 and 5 are used.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 239
12/3/21 3:04 PM
240
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
Phase 4: Implement Manage individual training programs and their delivery
to participants. The issues around managing and delivering T&D to participants suggest that the strategies for both have been thought through and planned
into program materials.
Managing individual T&D programs should not be confused with leading
or managing a T&D department. The focus ­here is on managing unique programs that ­will most likely be offered on numerous occasions by vari­ous presenters. Managing T&D programs should be considered ­those activities (­things,
conditions, and decisions) necessary to implement a par­tic­u ­lar training program. They can also be regarded as generally taking place before, during, or
­after the training event with time specifications recorded in weeks (or days) for
the “before” and “­after” periods and hours (or minutes) on the lesson plans for
the “during” period of the training event.
­Either a ­simple paper-­or computer-­based proj­ect management system is typically used. It requires specification of the activity, activity details, initial and
completion dates, and the responsible party for each. ­These data can be matrixed
into a management chart or placed in a ­simple computer database for assignments and follow-­ups.
Delivery of T&D to participants is the pressure point in the T&D pro­cess.
Presenters want to succeed, and participants want high-­quality interaction. Critics of T&D lament that this often ­causes presenters to digress to gimmicks and
entertainment instead of facing and managing delivery prob­lems. One study
identified the following twelve most common delivery prob­lems of beginning
trainers and the general tactics used by expert trainers in addressing ­those prob­
lems (Swanson and Falkman, 1997):
Delivery Prob­lems and Expert Solutions (in Parenthesis)
1. Fear (Be well prepared; use ice breakers; acknowledge fear).
2. Credibility (­Don’t apologize; have the attitude of an expert; share
personal background).
3. Personal experiences (Report personal experiences; report experiences
of ­others; use analogies, movies, famous p­ eople).
4. Difficult learners (Confront prob­lem be­hav­ior; circumvent dominating
be­hav­ior; use small groups for timid be­hav­ior).
5. Participation (Ask open-­ended questions; plan small group activities;
invite participation).
6. Timing (Plan well; practice, practice, practice).
7. Adjust instruction (Know group needs; request feedback; redesign
during breaks).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 240
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
241
8. Questions (Answering: anticipate questions; paraphrase learners’
questions; “I d
­ on’t know” is OK) (Asking: ask concise questions; defer to
participants).
9. Feedback (Solicit informal feedback; do summative evaluations).
10. Media, materials, facilities (Media: know equipment; have back-­ups;
enlist assistance) (Material: be prepared) (Facilities: visit fa­cil­i­ty
beforehand; arrive early).
11. Openings and closings (Openings: develop an “openings” file; memorize; relax trainees; clarify expectations) (Closings: summarize concisely; thank participants).
12. Dependence on notes (Notes are necessary; use cards; use visuals;
practice).
Phase 5: Evaluate Determine and report T&D effectiveness in terms of per­for­
mance, learning, and satisfaction. The TPS draws upon a results assessment
system (Swanson and Holton, 1999) conceptually connected to the first phase—­
analy­sis. In effect, it is first and foremost a checkup on t­ hose three goal-­focused
questions from the analy­sis phase: (1) Does the organ­ization perform better?
(2) Does the work pro­cess perform better? (3) Do the individuals (group) perform better? With learning being an impor­tant per­for­mance variable, assessing
learning in terms of knowledge and expertise is an essential intermediate goal.
To a lesser extent, the perception of T&D participants and program stakeholders is viewed as necessary.
Based on an analy­sis of a­ ctual T&D practices, traditionally, t­here have
been three domains of expected outcomes: per­for­mance (individual to orga­
nizational), learning (knowledge to expertise), and perception (participant and
stakeholder). Focusing on a single realm changes the purpose, strategy, and
techniques of intervention. If an intervention is expected to result in highly
satisfied participant-­learners, T&D professionals ­will engage in very dif­fer­ent
activities than if the expected outcome ­were to increase orga­nizational per­for­
mance. With orga­nizational per­for­mance as the desired outcome, T&D professionals ­will spend time with man­ag­ers, decision makers, and subject-­matter
experts close to the per­for­mance setting throughout the T&D pro­cess. If the
outcome is satisfied learner-­participants, T&D ­people w
­ ill likely spend time
asking potential participants what kind of T&D experience they like, ­w ill
focus on fun-­fi lled group pro­cesses, and ­w ill have facilities with pleasing
amenities.
It is not always rational to think that ­every T&D program ­will promise and
assess per­for­mance, learning, and perception outcomes. Furthermore, it is irrational to believe that a singular focus on one domain (per­for­mance, learning,
­ thers. For example:
or perception) ­will result in gains in the o
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 241
12/3/21 3:04 PM
242
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
• An overly demanding T&D program could leave participants less
than thrilled with their experience.
• Participants may gain new knowledge and expertise that cannot
be used in their work setting.
• Participants can thoroughly enjoy a T&D program but learn ­little
or nothing.
Being clear about the expected outcomes from T&D is essential for good practice. As the saying goes, “If you do not know where you are g­ oing, you w
­ ill likely
end up someplace e­ lse” (Mager, 1966).
LEADING THE T&D PRO­CESS
Lead and maintain the integrity of the training and development pro­cess. The
leadership task is the most impor­tant task within the T&D effort. The training
pro­cess requires strong individuals to champion the mission, goals, method, and
specific training efforts in the context of the organ­ization. To do this, the champion must articulate to all parties the outputs of training and their connection
to the organ­ization, the pro­cess by which the work is done, and the roles and
responsibilities of the training stakeholders.
Outputs of Training The output of the TPS is ­human expertise to improve
per­for­mance. Such a decision radically affects the training pro­cess and the training stakeholders. The TPS acknowledges that training by itself can develop expertise and that workplace per­for­mance is beyond the training experience alone.
• Obtaining workplace per­for­mance almost always requires line
man­ag­er actions as well as training.
• Man­ag­ers must be fully responsible partners in per­for­mance improvement interventions that rely on training.
Other common and less effective outputs of training have been
• Clock hours of training or the number of ­people trained
• Meeting compliance requirements from an external or internal
source of authority
• Management and/or participant satisfaction apart from mea­sures of
knowledge, expertise, and per­for­mance
• Knowledge gains that are marginally connected to per­for­mance
requirements
• Expertise gains that are marginally connected to per­for­mance
requirements.
Pro­cess of Training Training professionals must have expertise in a defined
training pro­cess. The TPS is one such pro­cess, and DACUM (developing a cur-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 242
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
243
riculum) is another popu­lar system (https://­dacum​.­org). Training leaders must
advocate for a systematic training pro­cess based on findings from research and
experience.
Training Stakeholders Expertise among the stakeholders is required to carry
out the defined training pro­cess. Leaders select or develop the professional training expertise required by the defined training pro­cess. Roles and responsibilities of ­those working in the process—­the stakeholders—­must also be defined
and managed (see the next section).
Individual-­Focused T&D
Most traditional structured classroom T&D is or­ga­nized for groups of twelve
to twenty-­four. In the same organ­izations, workplaces are generally used for continuous delivery of one-­on-­one training involving a trainer and a trainee. Two
well-­documented systems provide methods for this work that typically is provided “just-­in-­time” (at the time the worker needs the knowledge and expertise) and is narrow in scope (task-­focused). The first method, hands-on training
(Sisson, 2001), involves using fellow workers to be trainers of realms in which
they are subject-­matter experts. The second is structured on-­the-­job training
(Jacobs, 2003). It involves a professional trainer engaging and preparing subject-­
matter experts to deliver task-­level training one-­on-­one in the workplace.
HANDS-ON TRAINING
Sisson (2001) describes hands-on training (HOT) as a way of orga­nizational life
and not training in the traditional sense. He sees it as a tool that can become
part of the natu­ral work setting, while still dependent on following a step-­by-­
step system—­a system with trainees learning the right way of ­doing the job and
a fellow worker instructor competent in using HOT.
Sisson pre­sents HOT as including six steps, ­under the acronym POPPER
(HOT POPPER) to be followed by the trainer/worker/subject-­matter expert:
1. Prepare for training.
2. Open the session.
3. Pre­sent the subject.
4. Practice the skills.
5. Evaluate the per­for­mance.
6. Review the subject.
Sisson’s one-­hundred-­page book describing HOT POPPER can be put directly
into the hands of workers taking on the role of training ­others in tasks they have
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 243
12/3/21 3:04 PM
244
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
mastered. The core arguments supporting HOT POPPER include it having
(1) low costs and high returns, (2) simplicity, and (3) the belief that it adds basic
order to something that is ­going to happen anyway—­learning from each other
in the workplace.
STRUCTURED ON-­THE-­JOB TRAINING
Jacobs (2003) defines structured on-­t he-­job training (S-­OJT) as “the planned
pro­cess of developing competencies on units of work by having an experienced employee train a novice employee at the work setting or a location that
closely resembles the work setting” (29). He estimates that 90 ­percent of job-­
specific knowledge is learned on the job (trial and error) and that more
money is spent indirectly by organ­izations on OJT than is spent directly on
structured training that takes place off the job. Furthermore, Jacobs (2003)
estimates that the costs of unstructured OJT job training (no training, trial
and error) consumes up to one-­t hird of the salary paid to an employee in the
first year.
The S-­OJT system is illustrated in figure 11.9. The four primary ele­ments
include training inputs, training pro­cess, training outputs, and orga­nizational
context.
S-­OJT relies on T&D professionals to oversee and carry out programs.
Subject-­matter experts are called upon as team members for content input, development, and delivery while u
­ nder the direction of a T&D specialist. This level
of professional oversight distinguishes it from the HOT POPPER methodology
that can be placed totally in the hands of the subject-­matter expert.
Training
Inputs
• Novice employee
• Experienced
employee
• Training location
in the work
setting
• Unit of work to
be learned
• Communications
technology
Training
Process
• Get ready to train
• Deliver the S-OJT
module
• Ensure the trainee
has learned
Training
Outcomes
• Training
performance
• Work
performance
• Trainee
development
Organizational Context
Figure 11.9: The Structured On-­the-­Job Training System
Source: Jacobs, 2003, 31.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 244
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
245
Team/Group-­Focused T&D
Team/group-­focused T&D is a relatively new phenomenon compared to
individual-­focused T&D programs. Vari­ous titles are used—­such as action learning, orga­nizational learning, and the learning organ­ization—­and they are
rooted in two thought streams. One has to do with the power of group learning
versus individual learning. The second is related to the anticipated gains from
creating an orga­nizational culture that values and captures the fruits of continuous learning. Th
­ ese T&D options are typically pursued outside the demand
for immediate per­for­mance results and anticipation of ­f uture demands. Two
well-­documented strategies include action learning (Yorks, 2005a) and the learning organ­ization (Marquardt, 2002).
ACTION LEARNING
Yorks (2005a) defines action learning as “an approach to working with, and developing p
­ eople, on an a­ ctual proj­ect or prob­lem as a way to learn. Participants
work in small groups to take action to solve their prob­lem and to learn from
that action. Often a learning coach works with the group in order to help members learn how to balance their work with the learning from that work” (185).
Yorks provides a work-­based learning pyramid (see figure 11.10) to help prac­ti­
tion­ers make one of four program design choices based on the outcomes desired.
High
noise
ois
al
n
on
ati
fo
rga
niz
Le
ve
lo
Low
noise
Same as levels one,
two, and three plus:
personal and
organizational
transformation
Critical
Reflection
Level Three Learning Goals:
Same as level one and two plus:
personal development goals and
learning about learning styles
t;
igh l
ins xtua
d Q te
un con
aro cal,
ing iti
rn , cr
lea plex
er
ep om
De re c
mo
e
Level Four
Learning Goals:
Critical
Reflection
Experiential
Critical
Level Two Learning Goals:
Reflection
Same as level one plus:
Experiential
problem reframing and problem setting;
Scientific
learning a process for learning from work experience
Level One Learning Goals:
Problem solving and implementation of solutions;
opening up thinking around issues
Critical
Reflection
Experiential
Scientific
Tacit
Figure 11.10: Work-­Based Learning Pyramid
Source: Yorks, 2005b, 189.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 245
12/3/21 3:04 PM
246
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
The pyramid illustrates learning experiences that increase in depth and
complexity as action learning moves up from its base from level one to level
four. The interplay with the intensity of the dynamics with the host organ­
ization also increases as the levels increase. He calls this f­ actor orga­nizational
noise.
Yorks (2005a) says that design decisions are impor­tant and that they must
be in alignment with the purpose of the program, the adequacy of the support
for the learning goals, and the orga­nizational culture readiness to support the
action learning program.
ORGA­NIZATIONAL LEARNING
Marquardt (2002) bluntly states that “organ­izations must learn faster and adapt
faster to changes in the environment or they ­will simply not survive. As in any
transitional period, the dominant but d
­ying species (nonlearning organ­
izations) and the emerging, more adaptive species (learning organ­izations)
presently exist side by side. Within the next ten years, I predict that only learning organ­izations ­will be left” (xi–­xii). Marquardt goes on to list sixteen general
steps in building a learning organ­ization and the extensive cultural shift it
demands:
1. Commit to becoming a learning organ­ization.
2. Form a power­ful co­ali­tion for change.
3. Connect learning with business operations.
4. Access the organ­ization’s capabilities on each subsystem of the
Systems Learning Organ­ization model.
5. Communicate the vision of a learning organ­ization.
6. Recognize the importance of systems thinking and action.
7. Leaders demonstrate and model commitment to learning.
8. Transform the orga­nizational culture to one of continuous learning
and improvement.
9. Establish corporate-­wide strategies for learning.
10. Reduce bureaucracy and streamline the structure.
11. Extend learning to the entire business chain.
12. Capture learning and release knowledge.
13. Acquire and apply the best technology to the best learning.
14. Create short-­term wins.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 246
12/3/21 3:04 PM
11. Overview of Training and Development
247
15. Mea­sure learning and demonstrate learning successes.
16. Adapt, improve, and learn continuously. (211)
Training Roles and Responsibilities
T&D leaders manage and improve the training pro­cess. Having a defined pro­
cess, such as TPS or S-­OJT, is a critical first step. Having ­people with adequate
expertise to function in their assigned training pro­cess roles is another critical
component. Even with t­ hese conditions in place, the training pro­cess w
­ ill not
necessarily work or work smoothly, let alone improve.
It is impor­tant to identify the specific stakeholder roles in the training pro­
cess, their responsibilities, and the pro­cess quality standards. The T&D phases
and steps constitute the pro­cess. The roles, responsibilities, and pro­cess quality
standard decisions could vary with specific organ­izations, but generally, they
would include the following:
Roles
Upper management; line man­ag­er; T&D man­ag­er; program leader; program
evaluator; T&D specialist; subject-­matter expert; support staff; external con­
sul­tant; and external provider.
Responsibilities
Leads program; manages program; produces outputs per program, phase,
and/or step; determines ­whether phase/step level outputs meet quality standards; provides information about program, phase, and/or step; and gets
information about program, phase, and/or step.
T&D Pro­cess Quality Standards Categories (applied to each T&D phase
or step outputs)
Quality features; timeliness; and quantity.
Best decisions as to the specifics on how the three sets of data above interact should be made, recorded, and communicated as a means of further defining the training pro­cess to ensure the highest quality of training. Th
­ ese training
roles, responsibilities, and quality standards decisions would approximate (or
actually become) training policy. Once they are stabilized and adhered to, improvements to the training pro­cess can be based on solid data and experience.
Conclusion
T&D is a pro­cess that has the potential of developing the h
­ uman expertise required to maintain and change organ­izations. As such, T&D can be strategically aligned to its host organ­ization’s strategy and per­for­mance goals. T&D also
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 247
12/3/21 3:04 PM
248
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
can develop the expertise required to create new strategic directions for the host
organ­ization.
Reflection Questions
1. How would you define T&D and describe its relationship to HRD?
2. What is the role of informal and incidental learning in T&D?
3. What are the unique aspects of the training and development
component of HRD?
4. What is the purpose of each of the five phases of T&D and the relationship between the phases?
5. How does T&D help with the orga­nizational challenges of managing
the system and changing the system?
6. Describe a hy­po­thet­i­cal situation where using the HOT POPPER
method makes the most sense.
7. Describe the basic differences between the ADDIE and TPS systems.
8. Describe a situation in your experience where action learning or
orga­nizational learning would have been appropriate and why.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 248
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12
The Nature of Expertise
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Knowledge versus Expertise
• Insights from Military Training Research and Practice
• Documenting Workplace Expertise
• Learning Strategies for Realms of Expertise
• Expertise and Expert Per­for­mance
Definitions of Expertise and Competence
• The Need for an Operational Understanding of Expertise
• Theoretical Perspectives on Expertise
• Forming an Operational Definition of Expertise
• Implications of Expertise for HRD
• Case Example: Selling Houses Expertise
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
The concept of expertise lies at the core of ­human resource development (HRD).
The definition of HRD posited by this book describes it as a pro­cess of developing and unleashing expertise to improve per­for­mance, with training and development (T&D) on the developing side and organ­ization development (OD)
on the unleashing side. “Workplace expertise is the fuel of an organ­ization. Expertise can be thought of as the level at which a person is able to perform within
a specialized realm of activity” (Swanson, 2007a, 125).
Expertise is more than just knowing. Pfeiffer and Sutton (2000) make the
extended and documented case that “knowing what to do is not enough” (1).
They go on to report: “One of the main reasons that knowledge management
efforts are often divorced from day-­to-­day activities is that man­ag­ers, consulting
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 249
12/3/21 3:04 PM
250
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
firms, and information technologists who design and build systems for collecting, storing, and retrieving knowledge have ­limited, often inaccurate, views of
how ­people actually use knowledge in their jobs” (Pfeiffer and Sutton, 2000, 18).
Expertise, not just knowledge, addresses the serious issue of the knowing-­
doing gap. Groopman’s book How Doctors Think magnifies the issue when he cites
studies of doctors’ diagnoses being wrong 15–20 ­percent of the time (2007, 24).
­These are errors at the diagnosis stage result in treatment errors posing additional risks.
The success of an HRD intervention, regardless of the philosophy on which
it is based—­learning or performance—is achieved through the development and
use of an organ­ization’s h
­ uman resources. The development of ­human resources
to improve per­for­mance requires an ability to understand expertise. While expertise is a complex ­human state, a basic grasp of the characteristics of expertise makes it pos­si­ble to formulate an operational definition of expertise and its
prerequisites that apply to HRD. A solid understanding of the nature of expertise is required of HRD professionals that desire to develop varying levels of expertise in ­others.
Knowledge versus Expertise
­ ere are impor­tant considerations related to HRD programs sponsored by
Th
organ­izations with par­tic­u­lar goals in mind. ­These considerations specifically
influence the T&D role as it relates to developing expertise and its prerequisite
knowledge.
INSIGHTS FROM MILITARY TRAINING
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
The disciplines of psy­chol­ogy and education have a long history of examining
the learning pro­cess, what happens inside the learner, and the external conditions that bear upon the learning pro­cess. Th
­ ese extensive studies have resulted
in numerous learning princi­ples and theories.
Learning psychologist Robert Gagne had a long and distinguished ­career
working in the military as a researcher and a university faculty member in psy­
chol­ogy and education. His presidential address to the American Psychological
Association resulted in an article titled “Military Training and the Princi­ples
of Learning” (Gagne, 1962). Addressing ­those with an orientation to studying
the learner and the learning pro­cess, he pre­sents a s­ imple countertheory for effective training. He concludes from his years of research and practice that it is
more impor­tant to analyze the detailed substance of the task to be learned than
to analyze the learner. Furthermore, he advances three princi­ples (Gagne, 1962):
1. Provide instruction on a set of component tasks that build ­toward a
final task.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 250
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12. The Nature of Expertise
251
2. Ensure that each component task is mastered.
3. Sequence the component tasks to ensure optimal transfer to the
final task.
All three of ­these princi­ples are based on the need to conduct a detailed analy­sis
of the task expertise to be learned. Assessment and feedback to the learners on
their task experience while learning was found to be essential. As for trial-­and-­
error learning, Gagne went on to illustrate its inefficiency and in­effec­tive­ness.
DOCUMENTING WORKPLACE EXPERTISE
Documenting required workplace expertise is a core activity in T&D. If done
correctly, this documentation has many uses. Documentation of workplace expertise clarifies the individual per­for­mance goals, provides invaluable information regarding the amount of effort needed to acquire the expertise, provides
insights to select the best methods for developing the expertise, and provides
the per­for­mance standards helpful in creating learning goals and the criteria
for assessing learner attainment of expertise. The overall pro­cess of documenting all forms of workplace expertise is illustrated in figure 12.1.
The true substance of this pro­cess of analyzing expertise, as described e­ arlier
by Gagne, is in the detailed analy­sis of tasks (see Swanson, 2007a). Three types
of tasks, each with a unique analy­sis pro­cess, are presented: procedural tasks,
system tasks, and knowledge tasks.
LEARNING STRATEGIES FOR REALMS OF EXPERTISE
A reactionary worry is that “T&D may become a kind of ritual, full of important-­
sounding terms and acronyms, trendy techniques, and clever activities, all supported by the latest technology but devoid of real learning” (Davis and Davis,
1998, 2). Davis and Davis, educational psychologists, have created T&D strategies that embrace Gagne’s view that studying the task to be learned is more
impor­tant than studying the learner for creating the desired expertise
Based on extensive field research of the learning needs in organ­izations, they
created specific learning strategies or­ga­nized around general areas of expertise
required in con­temporary organ­izations. Their approach is to first start from
the identified realm of expertise and then select an appropriate training development strategy. The seven training strategies proposed by Davis and Davis
(1998) include:
•
•
•
•
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 251
The behavioral strategy: skill development and coaching
The cognitive strategy: pre­sen­ta­tions and explanations
The inquiry strategy: critical, creative, and dialogical thinking
The m
­ ental models strategy: prob­lem solving and decision making
12/3/21 3:04 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 252
Analyzing Procedural Tasks
Select
job
task(s).
Develop a Job Description
Obtain
existing
descriptions.
Draft job
description.
Interview
or survey
experts.
Review and
approve
description.
Interview
or survey
experts.
Draft task
inventory.
Review and
approve
inventory.
Select
job
task(s).
Determine
system
description
and flow.
Draft,
review, and
approve
analysis.
Analyzing System Tasks
Identify
system
parts and
purposes.
Develop a Task Inventory
Obtain
existing
task
inventories.
Observe
experts
and record
data.
Obtain
existing
task
inventories.
Conduct
troubleshooting
analysis.
Draft,
review, and
approve
analysis.
Carry out
process
analysis.
Analysis information from other levels
Select
job
task(s).
Search
for and
analyze
experts.
Analyzing Knowledge Tasks
Create
synthesis.
Search
for and
analyze
literature.
Figure 12.1: Comprehensive Pro­cess of Documenting Workplace Expertise
Source: Swanson, 2007a, 132.
Prepare
description.
Draft,
review, and
approve
analysis.
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12. The Nature of Expertise
253
• The group dynamics strategy: h
­ uman relations and teamwork
• The virtual real­ity strategy: role-­play, dramatic scenarios, and
simulation
• The holistic strategy: mentoring and counseling
­ ese strategies intend to bridge the desired ­human expertise needs of an organ­
Th
ization to efficient and effective learning methods for achieving them. “The
standards of good work must be clear to ­people who are not themselves experts”
(Sennett, 2008, 249).
EXPERTISE AND EXPERT PER­FOR­MANCE
The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Per­for­mance, 2nd edition
(Ericsson, Hoffman, Kozbelt, and Williams, 2020), provides a voluminous account of the quest for understanding expertise. From a psychological perspective, the handbook offers the following generalizable characteristics of expertise
(Ericsson, Charness, Feltovich, and Hoffman, 2006, 47–60):
Expertise is ­limited in its scope, and elite per­for­mance does not transfer. ­People
hardly ever reach the highest level in more than one domain. Even when domains are seemingly very similar, ­there is very ­little transfer in proficiency from
one domain to another (Ericsson, Hoffman, Kozbelt, and Williams, 2020).
Knowledge and content ­matter are impor­tant to expertise. Prob­lem solving
and expert per­for­mance in a specific realm are primarily a function of knowledge, patterns, and associated actions within that par­tic­u­lar realm (Newell and
Simon, 1972). Identifying the tasks and substance of expert per­for­mance gets
beyond the general ability f­ actors that are used to describe novices.
Expertise involves larger and more integrated cognitive units. The working
environment of experts increases as they gain additional experience (Glaser and
Chi, 1988). Experts chunk their knowledge and increase the size of ­those chunks
for ready access.
Expertise involves functional, abstracted repre­sen­ta­tions of presented information. While experts chunk their knowledge and can readily access and integrate it, novices get caught up trying to impose organ­ization and meaning to
their tasks. “Experts see and represent a prob­lem in their domain at a deeper
(more principled) level than novices; novices tend to represent a prob­lem at a
superficial level” (Glaser and Chi, 1988, xviii).
Expertise involves automated basic strokes. Experts with g­ reat experience
perform faster, smoother, and with less cognitive effort. Thus, they have an additional reserve for reflection and added tasks (Ericsson, Hoffman, Kozbelt, and
Williams, 2020). Research has shown that automaticity is central to the development of expertise and that it is gained through practice.
Expertise involves selective access to relevant information. Experts demonstrate selectivity in sorting through very useful information versus tangential
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 253
12/3/21 3:04 PM
254
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
information (Patel and Groen, 1991). Experts demonstrate a capacity to invert
knowledge, as illustrated in understanding a normal functional pro­cess versus
thinking backward when troubleshooting that same pro­cess as it fails (Swanson, 2007a).
Expertise involves reflection. Experts have the cognitive capacity to perform
and reflect on their thinking and methods (Glaser and Chi, 1988). Experts reflecting can backtrack through information and evaluate, often withholding decisions ­until they are satisfied with their conclusions.
Expertise is an adaptation. “The development of expertise is largely a ­matter
of amassing considerable skills, knowledge, and mechanisms that monitor and
control cognitive pro­cesses to perform a delimited set of tasks efficiently and
effectively. Experts restructure, reor­ga­nize, and refine their repre­sen­ta­tion of
knowledge and procedures for efficient application to their work a day environments” (Ericsson, Hoffman, Kozbelt, and Williams, 2020, 57).
­Simple experience is not sufficient for the development of expertise. “Reviews
of the relation between the amount of experience and the attained level of per­
for­mance show consistently that once an acceptable level of per­for­mance is
attained, ­t here are hardly any benefits from the common kind of additional
experience” (Ericsson, Hoffman, Kozbelt, and Williams, 2020, 60). To go beyond
ordinary workplace competence, opportunities for reflection, exploration of alternatives, and prob­lem solving in a protected environment with the help of
other experts are required.
Understanding expert per­for­mance provides insights into t­ hose who perform higher than ­others up through ­t hose who attain the highest pos­si­ble
levels of ­human per­for­mance. In addition, understanding expert per­for­
mance also provides insights about the steps, stages, and pro­cesses of achieving expertise.
The following section is primarily based on Richard W. Herling’s distillation of related ideas related to expertise and competence (2000). The purpose is
to pre­sent a basic conceptual understanding of expertise as it applies to individual per­for­mance within the context of HRD. This understanding can then
be used to formulate an operational definition of ­human expertise applicable to
the theory and practice of HRD.
Definitions of Expertise and Competence
When discussing the concept of h
­ uman per­for­mance, ­t here is a natu­ral tendency to interchange the terms expert and expertise. Several assumptions
should be made in developing an operational definition of expertise. The
first assumption is that expertise represents a journey, not just a destination.
Therefore, the term expertise characterizes an active pro­cess from which experts emerge. The second assumption is that ­every person, b
­ ecause of their
acquired experiences, possesses some level of expertise. The final assump-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 254
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12. The Nature of Expertise
255
tion is that ­human expertise and its development are of primary importance
to HRD.
THE NEED FOR AN OPERATIONAL UNDERSTANDING
OF EXPERTISE
In many organ­izations, their ­human resources are recognized as a significant
competitive advantage (Pfeiffer, 1994; Reichheld, 1996). “Business success increasingly hinges on an organ­ization’s ability to use its employee’s expertise as
a ­factor in the shaping of its business strategy” (Torraco and Swanson, 1995, 11).
Stated another way, the combined knowledge, experience, and expertise of the
organ­ization’s ­human resources have become the new competitive edge in the
marketplace.
Competence May Not Be Enough Fortunately, a competent workforce is
well within the grasp of most organ­izations, but competence is not enough. As
a result of recognizing the workforce as a competitive advantage, caring about
their reservoir of ­human competence and how it is developed, business organ­
izations and governments now realize that their market value increasingly relies on the knowledge and expertise of their employees (McLagan, 2002).
Boyatzis defines a competency “as a capability or ability” (2008, 6). The potential to use specific sets of knowledge and skills is what Jacobs (2003) defines
as employee competence, noting “employee competence should be viewed within
its proper per­for­mance context” (281). Thus, he proposes five levels of competence: novice, specialist, experienced specialist, expert, and master (Jacobs, 2019).
In the context of most organ­izations, being competent only indicates that an
employee can do something (one’s job) at a satisfactory level and not necessarily at a level that would be considered as outstanding, exceeding expectations,
or even above average. Change is inevitable in open and adaptive systems, and
therefore, the “proper per­for­mance context” is constantly being redefined. For
example, the expertise required to maintain a system is dif­fer­ent from the expertise needed to change the system.
This constant change and redefining serve to highlight the limitations
of competence. To remain competitive, business organ­izations and the individuals within ­t hose organ­izations must be able to adapt to the “constantly
changing world of new strategies, memberships on multiple teams, customer
requirements, and competitive maneuvers” (McLagan, 1997, 45). They must become top performers, not satisfactory performers. Thus, to gain competitive
advantage, it is the development of workplace expertise, not minimal competence, that is vital to optimal individual and orga­n izational per­for­mance.
HRD pro­cesses, at their best, provide the methods and the means for improving per­for­mance through the development and unleashing of ­human
expertise.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 255
12/3/21 3:04 PM
256
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
The Context for Understanding of Expertise In the context of individual
per­for­mance and ­human resource development, expertise is defined as “the
optimal level at which a person is able and/or expected to perform within a
specialized realm of ­human activity” (Swanson, 2007a, 125). As a descriptive
definition of expertise, this provides clarity and focus, as expertise is generally
thought of as the possession of superior skills or knowledge in a par­tic­u­lar area
of study. Expertise is also generally recognized as implying proficiency, which
is based on a common understanding that an individual gains expertise, and
thus proficiency, only through experience and training.
The general level of expertise an individual possesses is readily observable
through their actions. The need to quantify and the ease of recognizing vari­ous
levels of expertness has resulted in the classification of dif­fer­ent levels of h
­ uman
expertise using myriad terms, typically ranging from novice to expert (Jacobs,
2003; Hoffman, Shadbolt, Burton, and Klein, 1995; Bereiter and Scardamalia,
1993). Unfortunately, the classification of dif­fer­ent levels of h
­ uman expertise
without quantitatively mea­sur­ing expertise has ­limited utility.
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON EXPERTISE
In the past thirty years, entire books, complete chapters, and numerous papers
have been written in response to the question: What is expertise? (Chi, Glaser,
and Farr, 1988; Slatter, 1990; Ericcson and Smith, 1991; Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1993; Swanson, 2007a; Sennett, 2008; Nichols, 2017). ­Here is a brief examination of several theoretical perspectives.
Cognitive Theories of Expertise Research efforts on the topic of experts
and expertise began with deGoot and his published findings in 1965 on the
study of expert chess players. The flurry of research activity that followed studied the differences in per­for­mance between experts and nonexperts (Johnson,
1988).
­A fter researchers studied expert and nonexpert differences in vari­ous
­human domains, the focus shifted to exploring basic information-­processing
capabilities inside individuals. Th
­ ese studies resulted in “theories of problem-­
solving being stated in terms of the h
­ uman information-­processing system”
(Kuchinke, 1997). ­These studies provided the basis for a second generation
focused on the expert’s ability to solve complex prob­lems. The outcome of
this refocused research effort, as summarized by Glaser and Chi (1988) and
included in Kuchinke’s (1997) reporting, was the identification of several key
characteristics of experts related to how they solve prob­lems and how they
acquire, pro­cess, and retrieve information. This research concludes that experts (1) know more, (2) use the information they have differently, (3) have
better recall, (4) solve prob­lems faster, (5) see prob­lems at a deeper level,
(6) analyze prob­lems qualitatively, and (7) are more aware of their ability to
make ­mistakes.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 256
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12. The Nature of Expertise
257
Research on expertise is still evolving. Based on a realization that t­ here may
be no single expert way, research work is examining expertise as an “ability to
rapidly or­ga­nize and pro­cess small bits of information into meaningful and creative solutions to specific prob­lems” (Kuchinke, 1997).
Overview of the Knowledge Engineering Theories of Expertise While
the cognitive psychologists attempted to discover what was required to be an
expert, knowledge engineering—­another area of study highly interested in
­human expertise—­took a dif­fer­ent approach and focused on replicating ­human
expertise.
Through their attempts to create artificial intelligence, the work of knowledge engineers focused on how an expert thinks. Their results and findings
closely paralleled the work of cognitive psychologists. Over the de­cades, the
knowledge engineers theorized expertise as a thinking pro­cess and formulated
five major model classifications of ­human expertise: heuristic, deep, implicit,
competence, and distributed (Slatter, 1990).
In the beginning, the heuristic models loosely defined expertise as the acquisition of lots of information, including heuristic knowledge—­k nowledge
about a specific domain. Heuristic knowledge, the problem-­solving rules of a
specific domain, was seen as shallow knowledge.
Deep knowledge models advanced the general theory of expertise by suggesting that experts use “hierarchical relationships, causal models and specialist repre­sen­ta­tion of domain objects . . . ​capturing the temporal, spatial, and/or
analogical properties” of the domain to solve complex prob­lems (Slatter,
1990, 138).
The implicit models that followed this initial work of the knowledge engineers attempted to explain expertise by differentiating between implicit knowledge and explicit knowledge. In this context, explicit knowledge was seen to
encompass the known facts of a specific domain. In contrast, implicit knowledge represented the “non-­articulable experience-­base knowledge that enables
a skilled expert to solve a task in an effortless, seemingly intuitive fashion” (Slatter,
1990, 141).
The competence models distinguished between domain knowledge (static
knowledge) and task knowledge (action knowledge). The implication is that expertise is a competence-­level term denoting the potential for ­doing something.
­These models of expertise recognize that experts know a ­great deal about a
specific domain, and they use this knowledge to effectively solve prob­lems. The
task knowledge, gained from the practice of domain-­specific be­hav­iors, is compiled by the expert within their domain of expertise in an ongoing search for
better ways to do t­ hings, including prob­lem solving.
The under­lying assumption of the fifth class of expertise models, the distributed models, is that the expertise required to solve complex prob­lems may
be distributed among many individuals. The distributed models explain expertise
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 257
12/3/21 3:04 PM
258
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
as a combination of domain knowledge, task knowledge, and cooperative knowledge (knowledge about how one communicates and interacts with ­others). Consequently, ­these models are more concerned with what an expert must know to
solve prob­lems cooperatively.
Ele­ments of Expertise A large body of knowledge has been and continues to
be added to our understanding of the nature of expertise by cognitive psychologists, cognitive scientists, and knowledge engineers. However, a­ fter thirty
years of advancing research on this topic, ­these experts have not agreed on
what expertise is. Kuchinke’s (1997) review of the expertise theories and
Slatter’s (1990) summary explanation of the expertise models have shown, through
a lack of consensus, that h
­ uman expertise cannot be operationally defined by
its pro­cesses. However, the combined summaries of the two reviewers have
brought to light several commonly shared ele­ments in the vari­ous theories of
expertise. (1) Expertise is a dynamic state; (2) expertise is domain-­specific; and
(3) the essential components of expertise are knowledge and associated skills,
experience, and problem-­solving heuristics. Figure 12.2 is presented as a
repre­sen­ta­tion of the relationship among ­t hese three foundational concepts of
expertise.
Working from this perspective, the most crucial concept of expertise is that
it is a dynamic state—an internal pro­cess of continuous learning by the individual and characterized by the constant acquisition of knowledge, reor­ga­ni­za­
tion of information, and progressive prob­lem solving. The importance of
recognizing expertise as a dynamic state lies in realizing that a person never
stops acquiring expertise. Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993) summarized the dynamic characteristic of expertise in their descriptive comparison of experts and
nonexperts. The “­career of the expert is one of progressively advancing on prob­
lems constituting a field of work, whereas the c­ areer of the nonexpert is one of
OWLEDGE
KN
E
NC
LVING
SO
M
EXPERI
E
DOMAIN
OF
EXPERTISE
PROB
LE
Figure 12.2: The Basic Components of Expertise
Source: Herling, 2000, 13. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 258
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12. The Nature of Expertise
259
gradually constricting the field of work so that it more closely conforms to the
routines the nonexpert is prepared to execute” (11).
The second shared ele­ment, that of expertise being domain-­specific, may
have the most impact on the f­ uture creation of programs designed to develop
expertise in individuals. Most research suggests that extensive, specialized
knowledge is “required for excellence in most fields” (Gleespen, 1996, 502). Research also indicates that “­there is ­little evidence that a person highly skilled in
one domain can transfer the skill to another” (Glaser and Chi, 1988, xvii). Cognitive psychologists have theorized that “­there are some domains where nearly
every­one becomes an expert, like reading En­glish words” (Posner, 1988, xxxi).
However, note that demonstrating expertise in one domain is no guarantee of
expertise in other areas (Glaser, 1985, 7).
The third foundational concept highlighted by the e­ arlier review of the expertise models and theories is that expertise is composed of a few basic components. Although t­ here was not always agreement among the researchers about
which component took pre­ce­dence, all identified in some manner knowledge,
experience, and problem-­solving heuristics as the distinguishing points of difference between experts and nonexperts. Th
­ ese three common ele­ments can be
viewed as the fundamental components of h
­ uman expertise. Each one is clearly
mea­sur­able. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that an operational definition
of expertise can be developed from them.
A closer examination of each of the three components is required to validate the proposed definition.
Knowledge Component of Expertise Knowledge appeared in ­every re-
viewed theory and model of expertise. In almost ­every case, it was ­either descriptively dif­fer­ent, or multiple types of knowledge w
­ ere specified.
Depending upon the theories or models being examined, the knowledge required for expertise could be implicit or explicit, shallow or deep, task-­specific
or heuristic. Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993), in their inquiry into the nature of
expertise, noted that “­every kind of knowledge has a part in expertise” (74). Their
definition for “­every kind of knowledge” included what they classified as the obvious kinds of knowledge—­procedural knowledge and formal knowledge—­
and what they referred to as the less obvious kinds—­informal knowledge, impressionistic knowledge, and self-­regulatory knowledge.
Although t­ here may be some disagreement among the theories and models
regarding the specific knowledge required for expertise, the theorists agree on
two points. First, for expertise, knowledge is and has to be domain-­specific. Second, knowledge is an interactive component of expertise, one of the requirements for expertise, but not expertise in and of itself. As noted by Bereiter and
Scardamalia (1993), nonexperts, as well as experts know “the difference is in how
much they have, how well integrated it is, and how effectively it is geared to
per­for­mance” (74).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 259
12/3/21 3:04 PM
260
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
Experience Component of Expertise Just as it is recognized that all ex-
perts are knowledgeable, it is also understood that all experts are experienced.
Based on their studies of master-­level chess players, Chase and Simon (1973), as
cited in Posner (1988), “reasoned that to achieve a master level of expertise a
player had to spend between 10,000 and 20,000 hours staring at chess positions”
(xxxi). Several years l­ater, through the studied biographies of experts in many
fields, it was generalized that 10,000 hours was the minimum amount of time
required to gain expert experience (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1993, 17). Thus,
it has been hypothesized from the research but not verified that to become an
expert, one must have the equivalent of ten years of combined studies and related work experience.
Unfortunately, the term experience, like expertise, is a term of varied meanings currently lacking qualifying and quantifying bound­aries. When specifically
related to the development of h
­ uman expertise, experience is an interactive component heavi­ly dependent on the type and quality, as well as the quantity, of
the events experienced by the individual. As Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993)
observed in the per­for­mance of equally experienced schoolteachers, based on
the training received and the number of years worked, experience in this context “distinguishes old-­timers from beginners, but does not distinguish experts
from experienced non-­experts” (81).
Problem-­Solving Component of Expertise The key to expertise appears to
lie in the third component, an individual’s propensity to solve prob­lems. In attempting to replicate the pro­cess of applying expertise, knowledge engineers
have viewed prob­lem solving as the core concept of expertise. Like the concept
of knowledge, they have ended up describing and identifying a multitude of
problem-­solving pro­cesses.
The concept of prob­lem solving as the primary component of expertise has
also been heavi­ly supported by the research of cognitive psychologists and scientists, as summarized by Glaser in his Thoughts on Expertise (Glaser, 1985, as
cited by Chi, Glaser, and Farr, 1988). Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993) took the
emphasis on this concept one step further by describing prob­lem solving as the
dynamic ele­ment in the growth of expertise.
As the term is currently used in cognitive psy­chol­ogy, prob­lem solving constitutes some amount of searching and/or deliberation to find a way to achieve
a goal, defining a prob­lem as any nonroutine purposeful activity (Bereiter and
Scardamalia, 1993).
Wertheimer, an early Gestalt psychologist whose studies and research centered on insightful learning, focused on the abilities required by the individual
to solve prob­lems effectively. In his book Productive Thinking (1945), Wertheimer
emphasized the solution used to solve a prob­lem rather than on the prob­lem
itself. Wertheimer believed that prob­lem solutions depended on the previous ex-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 260
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12. The Nature of Expertise
261
perience of the prob­lem solver, noting that “the prime difference was in the
originality used by the prob­lem solver to or­ga­nize information” (Hill, 1971, 102).
Wertheimer also believed that a­ ctual prob­lem solving involved a “real understanding” of both the prob­lem and the environment in which the prob­lem was
framed, which would then lead to an insightful solution.
Wertheimer’s concepts of genuine understanding and insightful solutions
can also be seen at the core of Bereiter and Scardamalia’s (1993) description of
expert and nonexpert prob­lem solving. Bereiter and Scardamalia see prob­lem
solving as the single dynamic ele­ment in the growth of expertise and experts as
being progressive prob­lem solvers, while “the problem-­solving efforts of the nonexpert is taken over by well learned routines . . . ​aimed at eliminating still more
prob­lems thus reducing the activity even further” (81).
FORMING AN OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF EXPERTISE
From the preceding examination of the foundational components of expertise,
it can be seen that nonexperts can have vast amounts of knowledge, many years
of experience, and solve prob­lems. Thus, a definition of expertise based simply
on combining the ele­ments of knowledge, experience, and prob­lem solving
would have very l­ittle value.
It is generally agreed that the presence of expertise is readily recognized in
an individual’s actions and that we know expertise when we see it. Basing an
operational definition on the characteristics of displayed be­hav­ior does carry a
degree of practicality.
Experts are capable of d
­ oing t­ hings at a higher level. They have more knowledge, a greater skill level, and better solutions (VanLehn, 1989). The expert-­
novice research of dif­fer­ent occupations (domains) has verified that this is true
(Glaser and Chi, 1988; VanLehn, 1989; Ericcson and Smith, 1991). The fundamental basis of expert research has been based on the fact that t­ here are observed
differences in the displayed be­hav­iors of individuals engaged in the same activities. Thus, the concept of “demonstrated be­hav­ior” is essential in formulating an operational definition of expertise.
Be­hav­ior, as applied to the discussion of expertise, implies an intended be­
hav­ior or action on the part of the individual. An action has a consequence; it
terminates with a result. Results, and the actions that lead to them, are mea­sur­
able. Gilbert (1996), equating individual per­for­mance to a relationship involving both a be­hav­ior and its resulting consequence, believed that the result of
be­hav­ior should be viewed in the context of value, “the consequence as a valuable
accomplishment,” a “valuable per­for­mance” (Gilbert, 1996, 17). Thus, individual
per­for­mance can be quantified by comparing the value of the per­for­mance to
a predetermined standard assessed in terms of time, quality, quantity, or cost.
From this perspective, individual per­for­mance represents the effectiveness of
the consequences of an individual’s intended be­hav­ior.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 261
12/3/21 3:04 PM
262
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
OF
AIN
M
EXPE
RT
E
IS
DO
Competence is related to expertise. Barrie and Pace (1997) identify this “capacity to think about per­for­mance and also to perform” (337) as competence,
which concurs with Morf’s (1986) much ­earlier definition. Morf defined competence as the product of “the worker’s motivational dispositions and abilities
that are relevant in the context of work” (15).
Morf (1986) attempted to operationalize this relationship of individual per­
for­mance to competence by stating that it is “a function of the interaction of
the person and the work environment” (113). Based on the premise that “the
aspect of the worker most frequently influenced by per­for­mance is ability levels,” Morf equated competence to the “new skills developed and new knowledge
acquired in the very pro­cess of ­doing a job” (14). In other words, the critical ele­
ment in Morf’s formula for per­for­mance was expertise.
Unlike Morf, Gilbert (1996) saw competence not as a component of per­
for­mance but as a function of “worthy per­for­mance” expressed as “the ratio
of valuable accomplishments to costly be­hav­ior” (18). Gilbert believed worthy per­for­mance was a product of both the work environment and an individual’s repertoire of be­hav­ior—or the specialized responses, knowledge,
and understanding of a specific area (domain). In Gilbert’s mind, competent
­people ­were ­those individuals who could create valuable results without using
excessively costly be­hav­ior, and his standard of competence was exemplary
per­for­mance, which he qualified as the “historically best instance of per­for­
mance” (30).
Competence can thus be seen as a displayed characteristic of expertise and
mea­sur­able subsets within an individual’s domain of expertise (figure 12.3).
From this examination of the characteristics of individual per­for­mance and
competence as displayed be­hav­ior that is effective, efficient, and thus mea­sur­
able, the remaining pieces of an operational definition of ­human expertise have
Areas
of
Competence
Figure 12.3: Competence as a Subset of Expertise
Source: Herling, 2000, 18. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 262
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12. The Nature of Expertise
263
been uncovered. As previously stated, we recognize expertise in ­others by their
demonstrated actions. Expanding upon this observation, we recognize experts
as ­those individuals who do ­things better than anyone ­else. Experts, in their area
of expertise, demonstrate their acquired expertise through outstanding per­for­
mance. This means that they can consistently do t­ hings more effectively and efficiently than nonexperts.
Expertise can thus be operationally defined by ­t hese two desired characteristics of displayed be­hav­ior—­the consistent demonstrated actions of an
individual which are (1) efficient in their execution and (2) effective in their
results.
IMPLICATIONS OF EXPERTISE FOR HRD
As a general premise, HRD exists to serve its host organ­ization. While learning
can contribute to per­for­mance, from the organ­ization’s perspective, only ­those
activities that clearly improve per­for­mance are viewed as value-­added. Optimal
per­for­mance has pre­ce­dence over minimal per­for­mance. In this context, the
ability to quantify expertise—­efficient and effective be­hav­ior—­can be seen as
having significant implications for HRD.
Although expertise and competence are clearly linked and unquestionably similar, they are distinctly dif­fer­ent. Figure 12.3 illustrates, by the relationship to expertise, the limitations of competence as the ultimate desired
outcome.
Competence can be visualized as subsets of expertise. In other words, competence reflects task-­specific actions and is therefore found within an individual’s domain of expertise, not encircling it. In addition, competence, with
its primary goal being efficient action, can be seen as both narrowing in its
nature and static, unlike expertise which is dynamic and expanding. While
competence is seen and described as an outcome (McLagan, 1997), a destination, expertise is a pro­cess (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1993), a journey. Fi­nally,
competence is ­limited to a specific domain of knowledge or expertise, while the
individual’s area of expertise, while also recognized as domain-­specific, is not
­limited to a single domain but often extends into several related fields (see the
case study that follows).
Having an operational definition of expertise allows the actions of exemplary performers within an organ­ization to be benchmarked in qualitative
and quantitative terms. This provides HRD the opportunity to focus on developing and implementing training interventions designed to accelerate
both the acquisition of specific knowledge and skills and the transfer of this
expertise.
However, even in this focused activity, t­ here is a potential danger should the
goal of ­these activities be misconstrued by HRD to be the development of experts instead of expertise.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 263
12/3/21 3:04 PM
264
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
CASE EXAMPLE: SELLING HOUSES EXPERTISE
In figure 12.4, the aspects of selling ­houses are shown as small circle tasks
specific to h
­ ouse sales. Examples include pricing of real estate comparables, obtaining listings, and scheduling showings. The expertise domain
of Selling Homes overlaps the related, but more general, domains of Selling, Marketing, and Real Estate. The development of Selling Houses Expertise as a desired outcome in improving per­for­mance draws upon t­ hese
overlapping domains.
­There remains the need to learn the competencies that support ­house
selling. It has always been generally understood that acquiring expertise
requires study, practice, and experience, although it has never been apparent how much of each is needed. Thus, gaining expertise is a journey.
Related Domain
of Marketing
Related Domain
of Selling
Domain of Expertise
“Selling Houses”
Related Domain
of Real Estate
Figure 12.4: Selling Homes Expertise Illustration
Source: Herling, 2000, 19. Used with permission.
Conclusion
“The study of expertise weaves its way through vari­ous communities of practice and disciplines” (Ward, Schraagen, Gore, and Roth, 2020, 1). Based on the
prior discussion, h
­ uman expertise is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon. Herling (2000) defines expertise as:
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 264
12/3/21 3:04 PM
12. The Nature of Expertise
265
Displayed be­hav­ior within a specialized domain and/or related domain
in the form of consistently demonstrated actions of an individual which
are both optimally efficient in their execution and effective in their
results.
Competence, a related construct and component of expertise, is defined as:
Displayed be­hav­ior within a specialized domain in the form of consistently demonstrated actions of an individual which are both minimally
efficient in their execution and effective in their results.
Through the use of an operational definition of expertise and the recognition
of domain-­specific (1) knowledge, (2) experience, and (3) prob­lem solving as being the core ele­ments of expertise, the HRD profession gains conceptual access
to one of the most power­ful tools for improving per­for­mance. Without the capacity to think and deal with substantive issues of the expertise required by
organ­izations, HRD interventions w
­ ill be l­ imited to low-­level programs like new
employee orientation training and general team-­building exercises.
Reflection Questions
1. What is expertise, and why is it impor­tant to HRD?
2. Cite a personal experience that illustrates the concept of expertise.
3. What is the difference between knowledge, competence, and expertise?
4. How would HRD/T&D differ if it ­were committed to developing
knowledge versus expertise?
­ ere committed to competence
5. How would HRD/T&D differ if it w
versus expertise?
6. What challenges to the profession arise from focusing on expertise as
an outcome of T&D? How could they be overcome?
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 265
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13
Training and
Development Practices
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Variations in T&D Practices
Core T&D Practices
• T&D Revolves around the Five-­Phase Pro­cess
• Use of Subject-­Matter Experts
• In­ter­est­ing and Effective Delivery
• Transfer of Learning to the Workplace
• Effective Use of Information Technology
• Case Example: Computer-­Based Training
Individual-­Focused T&D Practices
• Single Person Requiring T&D
• Multiple Job Holders Requiring Identical T&D
Group-­Focused T&D Practices
• Case Example: Hands-on Training
• Action Learning
• Team Prob­lem Solving
• Case Example: Action Learning
• Case Example: Equipment Maintenance
Work Process–­Focused T&D Practices
• Understanding and Studying Pro­cesses
• Process-­Referenced Training
Organization-­Focused T&D Practices
• Core Values through T&D
• Case Example: Mayo Clinic Core Values
• System-­Wide Knowledge and Expertise through T&D
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 266
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13. Training and Development Practices
267
Introduction
Part 4 of this book has been dealing with training and development (T&D).
Chapter 10 captured the essence of the T&D component of HRD, and chapter 11
delved deeper into the nature of expertise. This final chapter in part 4 provides
illustrations of T&D practices as they exist in host organ­izations, along with
variations in core thinking that guide T&D practices, interventions, and tools.
Variations in T&D Practices
The practices in T&D are highly varied ­because of several overarching variables.
They include variability in the host organ­ization’s mission, the purpose of the
T&D function in the host organ­ization, T&D professional expertise, the content of the T&D program, T&D delivery methodology, and expected results from
the T&D program. General commentary on t­ hese variables follows.
Mission and culture of the host organ­ization. Organ­izations vary significantly
in their missions and strategies, orga­nizational structures, technology, and
­human resources. T&D in a high-­tech financial firm or one that designs and
manufactures heart pacemakers w
­ ill look very dif­fer­ent from T&D in a professional lawn care ser­vice. High-­tech firms and multilocation organ­izations
tend to use information/virtual technology in program delivery more
than in low-­tech, single-­location organ­izations.
Purpose of the T&D function in the host organ­ization. T&D based inside a
general ­human resources function tends to be focused on new employee
training and is very dif­fer­ent from T&D directly u
­ nder a business unit, such
as sales or manufacturing. Business unit T&D efforts are most likely to focus on the core expertise related to the goods or ser­vices that the business
unit produces, its ­future technology, and business requirements.
T&D professional expertise. ­People hired into T&D positions ­because of their
subject-­matter expertise (e.g., a financial investment expert) are very dif­fer­
ent from ­those hired ­because of their T&D pro­cess expertise. Ideally, T&D
professionals have both realms of expertise. Having T&D expertise and
subject-­matter expertise on a T&D team is required for program excellence.
Purpose of the T&D program. T&D programs with the goal of creating participant basic understanding or awareness ­will be very dif­fer­ent from programs
with the intention of producing expert performers upon completion of the program. The level of expertise expected of ­people completing programs impacts
the training design. Examples include the amount and fidelity of in-­training
experience, use of role-­playing, and a­ ctual trainee per­for­mance within the
learning experience. On the negative side, T&D programs mandated by orga­
nizational leaders can be a cover for incompetent leadership. In­effec­tive leaders sometimes blame poor employee per­for­mance on in­effec­tive T&D rather
than in­effec­tive leadership and the inadequate work systems they promote.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 267
12/3/21 3:04 PM
268
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
Content of the T&D program. T&D programs with goals and content related
to influencing basic values and beliefs of individuals are very dif­fer­ent from
technical and management T&D programs. Motivational training programs
appeal to values and belief systems rather than logic. Technical training related to systems and procedures appeals to the inherent logic in the ­actual
work systems. Management T&D related to planning methods and ­people
skills appeals primarily to m
­ ental models of roles and strategies required to
succeed.
Expected results from the T&D program. Expectations of T&D programs
aimed at a high-­profile per­for­mance prob­lem w
­ ill be looked at very differently from one dealing with a nice-­to-­k now topic like general communication skills or new employee orientation. The closer the T&D effort is to
fundamental per­for­mance issues, the greater the expectations are for strategic contribution and accountability.
Core T&D Practices
Within T&D, ­there are many fairly standard practices. Six standard practices
are presented in this section.
T&D REVOLVES AROUND THE FIVE-­PHASE PRO­CESS
While the analyze, design, develop, implement, and evaluate (ADDIE) phases are
followed, T&D departments often supplement their staff’s professional expertise
as needed. One example is using external con­sul­tants on key proj­ects having
high expertise and credibility in the analy­sis and evaluation phases. Another
example is a T&D department holding on tightly to the analy­sis and evaluation
phases and outsourcing the design, development, and implementation phases to
maintain quality control. Done this way, a relatively small T&D department focused on the analy­sis and evaluation phases can multiply its impact by obtaining
required staff expertise on a consulting or contract basis for the m
­ iddle phases.
USE OF SUBJECT-­MATTER EXPERTS
Some would argue that relying on subject-­matter experts is overdone. P
­ eople
who are considered experts in a subject and have good p
­ eople skills are regularly recruited into the T&D profession. They are the best salespeople, best
man­ag­ers, or best software design p
­ eople. The organ­ization wants to multiply
that expertise. The alternative strategy is to utilize ­these subject-­matter experts
as members of the HRD team on a project-­by-­project basis working alongside
­those with formal T&D professional preparation. In this way, subject-­matter
experts continue with their work while having a temporary T&D assignment
or spending just a portion of their work time training p
­ eople in their domain
of expertise.
Professionally trained T&D prac­ti­tion­ers operate from the perspective that
they are experts in the T&D process—­not necessarily the subject m
­ atter of a
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 268
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13. Training and Development Practices
269
given T&D program. As such, they are skilled at identifying and using subject-­
matter experts as assistants in the pro­cess. The argument can be made that the
very best T&D professionals are experts in the T&D pro­cess plus the subject domains in which they function.
IN­TER­EST­ING AND EFFECTIVE DELIVERY
T&D has a tradition of wanting to conduct exciting and effective programs. T&D
professionals have the common sense goal of believing that T&D should be a
positive experience. Engaging learners with enjoyable activities has led to a perverted “fun-­filled” training goal that plays into the biggest false idea in T&D
practice. For example, it is not true that the more participants who like a program, the more effective it is. Best practice would say that you need to be effective first and worry about being in­ter­est­ing second. The research is clear about
this. You can get very high ratings of T&D programs from participants who have
not learned much and who have not changed at all when they are back on the
job (Alliger and Janek, 1989; Dixon, 1990b).
TRANSFER OF LEARNING TO THE WORKPLACE
The goal of transfer is the complete application of new knowledge and skills to
improve individual and/or group per­for­mance in an organ­ization or community. Necessary actions by a learning proj­ect man­ag­er and other stakeholders
to support the transfer of new knowledge and expertise are required for learning
transfer.
When managing support for learning transfer becomes part of the organ­
ization’s way of d
­ oing business, t­ here are no universal start or stop points. Stakeholder support becomes integrated into an organization-­wide strategy. HRD
professionals need to share responsibilities and actions with the client and stakeholders as partners. Without vis­i­ble involvement by man­ag­ers, learners ­will not
perceive the behavioral change as strategically impor­tant to their organ­ization.
The learning transfer pro­cess from the HRD professional perspective is as follows (Broad, 2000):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 269
Develop/maintain expertise in managing learning transfer.
Identify per­for­mance requirements (including learning).
Meet with client.
Identify stakeholders.
Meet with client and stakeholders.
Analyze orga­nizational context for transfer barriers and support.
Develop learning design.
Identify support for learners.
Identify specific stakeholder transfer strategies.
12/3/21 3:04 PM
270
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
• Implement learning proj­ect.
• Implement/manage transfer system.
EFFECTIVE USE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
The T&D component of HRD has a long tradition of utilizing information and
instructional technology in ­doing its work (Dobbs, 2006). This tradition was
heightened with the advancement of teaching machines by Crowder and Skinner in the 1950s. Over the years, many mediums have been and continue to be
used. Some include audio recordings, Power­Point slides, screen projections,
movies, videos, computers, and the internet.
CASE EXAMPLE: COMPUTER-­BASED TRAINING
Con­
temporary T&D often uses internet-­
based training. For example,
CIGNA HealthCare’s “Applying Underwriting Skills” computer-­based instruction (CBI) program was designed for salespeople with less than one year
of experience in their com­pany. The module contains basic-­to intermediate-­
level underwriting information. As with many such technology-­based training programs, this course was produced by CIGNA personnel in partnership
with external con­sul­tants. It was systematically developed using the ADDIE
pro­cess.
Extensive lesson design documentation was carried out, including the
whole-­part-­whole template, flow charts, content, checkpoints, and formative tests. Extensive documentation of the design was generated by a team
of CIGNA subject-­matter experts and external provider professionals.
The CBI materials w
­ ere designed to the level that they mediate the
development of participant knowledge and expertise without the need for a
trainer. A well-­organized “Applying Underwriting Skills Reports” notebook was distributed to personnel. It contained a ­table of contents, twenty
cases, job aids, and the CBI disk. This program is self-­instructional CBI in
that implementation was driven by the requirement to successfully “test
out” of the training modules.
The T&D design and development, in this case, w
­ ere exemplary. It
was conscious, purposeful, and orderly. The com­pany proj­ect staff used
external con­sul­tants while maintaining full control over the proj­ect (e.g.,
design documentation was provided to proj­ect staff for review and approval). The case studies ­were real com­pany cases and directly connected
training to work-­performance requirements. This proj­ect used existing
technological infrastructure (portable computers, com­pany local area
network [LAN], and general communication technology) to achieve its core
goal of developing impor­tant core workplace knowledge and expertise.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 270
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13. Training and Development Practices
271
Individual-­Focused T&D Practices
It is common to consider T&D in terms of individuals. Organ­izations that think
in terms of individual-­focused T&D engage in some special practices. The historical roots of T&D are in technical training, and it is easy to visualize the highly
skilled worker at a workstation surrounded by tools and materials ­doing their
craft while passing it on to the new worker. Training in this context has to do
with a person’s need to know how to use a tool or operate a piece of equipment.
The work system is well-­defined, and the new worker needs to learn it. Thus,
the focus is on the individual. The individual-­performer focus of T&D can be
thought of in one of two ways: a single person requiring T&D or a classification
of single performers requiring the same T&D over time. For example, a small
community bank may need to train one teller e­ very six months, while a major
metropolitan bank may train fifty tellers each quarter.
SINGLE PERSON REQUIRING T&D
Two general ele­ments are employed for meeting single-­person T&D requirements. One is to use an on-­the-­job T&D approach that embraces the worksite as a
learning site. The other utilizes a subject-­matter expert as the instructor. Hands-­on-­
Training (Sisson, 2001) captures the essence of on-­the-­job training while assuring a
reasonable amount of structure to avoid the pitfalls of it being a trial-­and-­error
learning experience (see case example, “Hands-on Training,” on the next page).
MULTIPLE JOB HOLDERS REQUIRING IDENTICAL T&D
Martelli (1998) reports on a T&D case involving a midwest steel com­pany. In this
instance, ­there was a very expensive steel mill modernization investment. Given
the new technology, ­there was “a need for a structured operator training program
for ladle preheater operators” (89). The case highlights that the firm was so e­ ager
to get the new technology operating that it ignored training ­until management
realized that it required a specialized body of knowledge and expertise for proper
and safe operation. As the training was being developed, existing workers ­were
unsuccessfully trying to learn on the job. Equipment damage and shutdowns occurred. Using systematic ADDIE training, a structured T&D program was produced and delivered. All the operators ­were trained, tested, and returned to the job.
In a ­matter of months, the training resulted in a 135 ­percent return on investment.
The conclusion was that, in this case, training was both cost-­effective and educationally effective. Martelli goes on to inform that proj­ect man­ag­ers in organ­
izations need to be aware that their system changes impact on other orga­nizational
and ­human aspects, and the T&D needs to be proactive in ­these change efforts.
Group-­Focused T&D Practices
In recent years ­there has been a realization that a “group of learning heads” is
better than one in a T&D effort. In addition, natu­ral work teams already in place,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 271
12/3/21 3:04 PM
CASE EXAMPLE: HANDS-ON TRAINING
Tim Horton was having a tough time on his new job. He knew it, his boss
knew it and so did every­one ­else. It ­wasn’t as if he ­didn’t try, but the computer system was complex, and ­there ­were a lot of tricks to learn. Tim
spent a week in formal training and had done well. Once he got on the
job, however, he c­ ouldn’t keep up with the workload. Two of Tim’s co-­
workers had tried to help. It d
­ idn’t work. Tim seemed like he simply ­wasn’t
catching on.
Tim’s boss, Shauna Davis, was now getting pressure to replace Tim
with someone who could get the job done. But Shauna was reluctant to
bring in yet another new person while ­there was still a chance that Tim
might improve. “Maybe it ­isn’t Tim’s fault. Maybe he ­isn’t getting the right
kind of help . . . ​­after all, ­there is a difference between the classroom and
the job,” she thought.
Shauna de­cided to have Tim work with a ­woman named Linda Hart.
Linda was one of the very best p
­ eople in their department. Linda was the
semi-­official department trainer and had been to a class about how to do
hands-on training. But Linda was very busy. If she was ­going to help Tim,
it would have to happen fast . . . ​three or four days at the most. They
­couldn’t afford more than that.
Tim met Linda in the break room. Linda spent a few minutes getting
to know him better and asked about his training so far. Then they went
out to Tim’s area and Linda watched him work for a while. As she watched,
Linda began to notice a c­ ouple of patterns. Tim was g­ oing through too
many steps, and he was making a number of ­mistakes. He was making the
job more complicated than it r­ eally was. Linda asked if she could show Tim
a c­ ouple of better techniques. She went through each one step by step,
clearly explaining what to do. One procedure at a time, she had Tim do
the job. As Tim practiced, Linda watched carefully. She asked him to say
what he was d
­ oing and why. When Tim got it right, she told him so. When
he made a ­mistake, she showed him how to do it better and had him try
again. She asked questions to make sure Tim r­ eally understood. This went
on for the rest of the day. It was smooth, it was natu­ral, and it was effective.
The next morning Linda started by reviewing what they covered the
day before. Then she had Tim go back to work while she watched. Linda
was very careful to give Tim all the help and advice he needed. A
­ fter a
­couple of hours, she started to leave Tim alone for a while and by noon,
Linda ­wasn’t even around. (Sisson, 2001, 1–2)
272
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 272
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13. Training and Development Practices
273
or newly formed workgroups poised to take on a new orga­nizational challenge,
are seen as logical focal points for T&D. This shift in perspective was primarily
a result of Japa­nese views on group work, group prob­lem solving, and group
learning in the 1980s to 1990s.
Group-­focused T&D practices have almost always utilized a real work-­
related prob­lem facing the group and the learning that must occur to address
the prob­lem adequately. The pivot point between two perspectives on group T&D
practices has to do with the relative importance of learning versus solving the
­actual prob­lem:
• Action learning is committed to participant learning as the
outcome—­with the use of an existing prob­lem that may or may not
end up being solved.
• Team prob­lem solving is committed to solving an ­actual orga­
nizational prob­lem—­which may or may not end up with all the
participants learning.
The difference is subtle yet essential. It is subtle b
­ ecause, in practice, the two
perspectives often look alike and often end up with the same result. They are
dif­fer­ent in that what an organ­ization is approving upfront is a dif­fer­ent potential outcome—­learning versus a solved prob­lem. More on t­hese two perspectives follows.
ACTION LEARNING
Action learning is defined as “an approach to working with and developing
­people that uses work on an ­actual proj­ect or prob­lem as a way to learn. Participants work in small groups, take action to solve their prob­lem, and learn from
that action. Often a learning coach works with the group in order to help the
members learn how to balance their work with the learning from that work”
(Yorks, O’Neil, and Marsick, 1999, 3). The accompanying case example (next
page) provides a vivid example of action learning.
TEAM PROB­LEM SOLVING
Team prob­lem solving can take many forms. In almost all cases, the team members learn one or more problem-­solving methods and then apply the method(s)
to a par­tic­u­lar prob­lem. The team must choose and then learn the appropriate
method before moving ahead to solve the prob­lem.
Scholtes (1988, 35–36) identifies fourteen specific strategies for team prob­
lem solving. A well-­k nown strategy is the plan-­do-­check-­act (PDCA) approach
developed by Walter Shewhart and pop­u­lar­ized by W. Edwards Deming in the
1980s during the quality improvement movement in U.S. business and industry. Team prob­lem solving is illustrated in the case example on equipment
maintenance (see next page).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 273
12/3/21 3:04 PM
CASE EXAMPLE: ACTION LEARNING
In a multinational food products com­pany, an action learning team’s recommendations for change result in savings of over $500,000 in a single division
in their com­pany. The com­pany is awarded a Corporate Excellence award by
a national h
­ uman resource management association in the pro­cess.
Struggling with breaking down strong business unit bound­aries that
had existed for years in the organ­ization, a com­pany creates a cross-­
functional action learning team to put together a plan for globally centralizing its materials management pro­cess. The very p
­ eople in ­those business
units who would be impacted by this centralization work together to come
to a consensus on a plan that anticipated and addressed the issues driven by
existing business unit bound­aries created by the change.
An organ­ization in a highly regulated industry has to move rapidly into
a competitive environment. ­There has been re­sis­tance to the kind of
changes needed to address this challenge. ­After involvement in an action
learning effort, individuals say ­things such as “Learning is ongoing, it never
ends. I’ve learned how to learn. We’ve changed our outlook to ‘we’ and w
­ ill
go out to meet the competition.”
Stories such as ­these have fostered increasing interest in the use of action
learning as an intervention that can produce individual, team, and orga­
nizational learning, and improve per­for­mance. (Yorks et al. 1999, v–vi)
CASE EXAMPLE: EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
An equipment maintenance department in a government agency realized
that to cut the number of complaints they received, ­they’d have to find out
what their customers wanted and start addressing ­those needs.
A group of mechanics and supervisors talked to representatives of
each department they served to identify customer needs. They found two
key concerns: First, the customers had dif­fer­ent priorities than the maintenance department—­despite severe cutbacks, the customers ­were still more
concerned about safety than repair costs. Second, the customers felt that the
repair pro­cess took too long.
The maintenance team then split into two groups. One found ways to
resolve conflicting priorities by developing appropriate solutions. The second studied the repair pro­cess, localizing prob­lems, looking for ­causes,
and developing solutions.
Conflicts in priorities are now settled between a maintenance supervisor and a designated person in each department. The repair pro­cess has
been streamlined with unnecessary steps cut out entirely. Other delays in
repairs have been eliminated by revising purchasing policies of equipment to be more standardized, and by keeping better rec­ords of failure
so that they can stock the right spare parts (Scholtes 1988, 35–36).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 274
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13. Training and Development Practices
275
Work Process–­Focused T&D Practices
In recent years, T&D has learned to think more about work pro­cesses, not
just jobs. The job perspective uses the job itself as the basis for thinking about
and carry­ing out T&D. When job roles ­were stable, T&D could be or­ga­nized
around jobs and job hierarchies, such as sales assistant, sales representative,
regional sales man­ag­er, state sales man­ag­er, division sales man­ag­er, and vice
president of sales. Work pro­cesses have become increasingly impor­tant given
the instability of jobs and the increased focus on how the work gets done,
including the connections between jobs (i.e., internal customer-­supplier
relationships).
Process-­focused T&D can be thought of in two forms. One is related to
understanding and studying pro­cesses, and the other is developing knowledge and expertise derived from work pro­cesses (versus traditional job and
task analy­sis).
UNDERSTANDING AND STUDYING PRO­CESSES
A major producer of consumable goods was experiencing severe prob­lems in
the quality of its product. An initial per­for­mance diagnosis made it clear that
training was required due to the loss of expertise in the workplace. Worker
turnover and changes in worker demographics w
­ ere the root c­ auses of this
loss.
The work involved a continuous production pro­cess, and no analy­sis or documentation of the pro­cess existed. The T&D man­ag­er chose to teach a team of
workers how to analyze their job and particularly to analyze systems tasks using systems task analy­sis (figure 13.1) as the basis for creating a T&D program
for existing and f­ uture workers.
Workers who ­were not functioning at an expert level ­were taught the
tools required to analyze expertise. Then they studied their work requirements, became experts as a result of d
­ oing the analy­sis work, and the production prob­lem went away (see figure 13.2). Even though the immediate prob­lem
dis­appeared by analyzing the work pro­cesses and documenting the required
expertise, a training program was produced for other workgroups and ­f uture
workers.
PROCESS-­REFERENCED TRAINING
Most T&D is or­ga­nized in relation to a person’s job. Process-­referenced ex­ ere is an
pertise is T&D connected to the work pro­cess instead of the job. H
example: Six ­people working in an organ­ization contribute to the successful execution of a sale. In the past, they viewed their work in terms of their
individual jobs, such as office man­ag­er. The office man­ag­er’s job requires
that person to support sales pro­cesses, sales marketing, and ­human resource
management.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 275
12/3/21 3:04 PM
276
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
Identify
systems
parts and
purposes.
Select
job
task(s).
Determine
systems
description
and flow.
Conduct
troubleshooting
analysis.
Draft,
review, and
approve
analysis.
Carry out
process
analysis.
Information from Other Task Analyses
Figure 13.1: Analyzing Systems Tasks
Source: Swanson, 2007a, 191.
100%
100%
90%
90%
80%
Rework
80%
70%
70%
60%
50%
Scrap
60%
50%
40%
30%
30%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0%
Jan. ’99
Feb. ’99
Mar. ’99
Apr. ’99
May ’99
Jun. ’99
Jul. ’99
Aug. ’99
Sep. ’99
Oct. ’99
Nov. ’99
Dec. ’99
Jan. ’00
Feb. ’00
Mar. ’00
Apr. ’00
May ’00
Jun. ’00
Jul. ’00
Aug. ’00
Sep. ’00
Oct. ’00
Nov. ’00
Dec. ’00
Jan. ’01
Feb. ’01
Mar. ’01
40%
Figure 13.2: Scrap and Rework Chart for a Fortune 100 Food-Processing Company
Before and After Implementing the Training for Performance System
Instead of beginning with an analy­sis of the sales man­ag­er’s job, the starting point is to analyze the core pro­cesses and then see how the office man­ag­er
fits into the pro­cesses. Figure 13.3 is a conceptual illustration of an integrated
flowchart showing pro­cess activity steps 1 through 17 that p
­ eople holding six
dif­fer­ent jobs (A–­F) contribute work in. Imagine that job E in figure 13.3 is the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 276
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13. Training and Development Practices
277
Integrated Flow Chart of Sales Process “A”—Activity Steps 1–17
Jobs (A–F)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
___ A
___ B
___ C
___ D
___ E
___ F
(Process Activities over Time)
Process–Referenced
Tasks for Job E
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Figure 13.3: Process-­Referenced Expertise
sales man­ag­er job. The sales man­ag­er participates in selected activity steps as
shown by the dots. The sales man­ag­er’s activity steps are then classified into tasks
by themselves or in clusters. Th
­ ese process-­referenced tasks are then used as the
unit of expert analy­sis and training. This illustrates a fundamental re­orientation
of the isolated job activity to a composite of work activities directly connected
to core orga­nizational pro­cesses. Activity steps are shared by o
­ thers in the organ­
ization. This approach results in process-­referenced training (Swanson, 2007a;
Swanson and Holton, 1998).
Organization-­Focused T&D Practices
Almost e­ very sound T&D effort has an OD component, and almost ­every sound
OD effort has a T&D component. Large system change almost always requires
T&D. The overall change effort ­will likely be classified as OD with a heavy dose
of T&D. Organization-­focused T&D can be thought of in two forms—­one
focused on organization-­wide core values and the other on organization-­wide
core knowledge and expertise.
CORE VALUES THROUGH T&D
Standard business vocabulary has come to include vision and values. T&D regularly gets called upon to engage personnel with defining the com­pany vision
and values and internalizing them to harmonize the workforce. Often, such efforts
require changing one value set for another (one Gestalt for another). For example, companies that embraced the total quality movement engaged in up-­front
training at all levels to get their personnel to accept the paradigms of customer,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 277
12/3/21 3:04 PM
278
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
CASE EXAMPLE: MAYO CLINIC CORE VALUES
World-­famous Mayo Clinic is a highly successful values-­based organ­ization.
They report the following (Mayo Clinic 2017):
­ ese values derive from our found­ers, the Doctors Mayo and the ­Sisters
Th
of St. Francis. Over the years, many individuals and cultural traditions
have enriched the life of our institution. T
­ oday, the Mayo Clinic Values
Council helps perpetuate the values at e­ very location and ensure the continuing Franciscan legacy on the Saint Marys Campus of Mayo Clinic
Hospital in Rochester, Minnesota.
A helpful way to remember the Mayo Clinic Values is with the acronym RICH TIES (Re­spect, Integrity, Compassion, Healing, Teamwork,
Innovation, Excellence, Stewardship).
For patients and staff alike, experiencing the Mayo Clinic Values is akin
to ­going on a pilgrimage. The ­Little Book of Mayo Clinic Values: A Field
Guide for Your Journey is written in the style of a handbook or journal, telling Mayo’s history through the prism of values in action.
Note: A copy of the guide is also found on the website supporting this book.
pro­cess, and quality as being essential for sustainable per­for­mance. Th
­ ese ­were
in place of short-­term output and financial mea­sures.
Rasmussen (1997, 132) proposes nine steps to establishing a total organization-­
focused values-­learning effort through T&D:
1. Survey internal customers to identify need.
2. Form partnership with se­nior management.
3. Form vision team.
4. Communicate two-­way with all employees.
5. Design/conduct the vision conference.
6. Design/conduct vision team training.
7. Design/conduct interdepartmental forum.
8. Design/conduct training for individuals.
9. Hold on-­going vision pro­cess meetings.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 278
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13. Training and Development Practices
279
SYSTEM-­WIDE KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE THROUGH T&D
­There are times when T&D addresses an overarching system condition or state
of affairs, not an individual contributor, workgroup, or work pro­cess prob­lem.
For example, in one Fortune 50 insurance organ­ization, training efforts had been
distributed across many dif­fer­ent functions and levels. Uniformity was needed to
ensure system-­wide knowledge and expertise. ­Here is a portion of its T&D story:
A new team was formed to merge vari­ous training activities ­under one
umbrella: Product training with sales training with technical training
with operations training efforts. This “new training pro­cess” started the
journey to becoming a performance-­based effort.
The charter started with a request assuring that e­ very employee receives the training they need to be successful in his or her position. In
the sales organ­ization, the charter is to significantly “touch” ­every person twice a year in a way that substantially improves that individual’s
per­for­mance as verified by self-­report and documented evaluation. This
resulted in an overall training and per­for­mance consulting vision: To
exceed the expectations of our business partners by providing world-­
class per­for­mance development pro­cesses, expertise, and tools driving
superior per­for­mance. To achieve this vision by: (1) Consulting with our
business partners to assess per­for­mance gaps, recommend improvement
strategies and shepherd on-­going per­for­mance improvement, (2) Designing, developing, delivering, and producing HRD/per­for­mance improvement interventions for work pro­cesses and employees—­new and
old, (3) Evaluating the impact of T&D/per­for­mance improvement interventions focused on the strategic imperatives of achieving customer/
provider satisfaction, dominating market share, maximizing profitability, and promoting a culture of winning with highly motivated, well-­
informed, diverse associates.
Recognizing that this required a shift in internal functioning and a
realignment of relationships with customers, the training staff met as a
team to consider what to rename what had been a training function.
Based on the perceptions of a new role in the organ­ization they selected “Training and Per­for­mance Consulting.” Training provided a
connection to the past and a framework for internal customers to engage in the shifts implied by per­for­mance consulting. The name illustrated the recognition of the need to redesign T&D efforts around
per­for­mance improvement from the beginning of ­every intervention
and not to justify programs based on participant satisfaction (McClernon and Swanson, 1997, 1–2).
Furthermore, a per­for­mance improvement roundtable of corporate stakeholders was established to guide the overall effort (see Figure 13.4).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 279
12/3/21 3:04 PM
280
part iv: developing expertise through training and development
Product
Mgm’t
Local
Mgm’t
Human
Resources
Technical
Experts
PERFORMANCE
IMPROVEMENT
Corporate
Mgm’t
Finance
Training
and Perf.
Consulting
Employee
Figure 13.4: Per­for­mance Roundtable
Source: McClernon and Swanson, 1997.
Conclusion
Personnel training and development takes many forms. For example, at the narrow and specific end of the spectrum, a very small training program teaches
employees how to properly use their electronic access card to the building. It may
end up being packaged as a self-­instructional job aid that comes in the envelope
with the access card. At the other end of the spectrum, one could find employees self-­directing their learning ­under the auspices of a company-­sponsored
tuition reimbursement plan in conjunction with a systematic self-­managed ­career
planning and c­ areer development pro­cess.
The dominant practices in the ­middle of the T&D spectrum described in
this chapter focus on imparting the expertise required of personnel to perform
their pre­sent work or to prepare for the new work required of their changing
workplace.
Reflection Questions
1. Briefly describe an organ­ization with which you are familiar. Speculate
as to how that organ­ization’s mission could impact the T&D practices.
2. Describe a positive personal experience as a trainee, and describe the
aspects that made it effective.
3. What are two to four major T&D implications of needing to train one
person in an area versus two hundred p
­ eople needing the same
training?
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 280
12/3/21 3:04 PM
13. Training and Development Practices
281
4. When does team or group learning make sense? When does it not
make sense?
5. How does thinking about T&D at the work pro­cess level impact the
work of T&D professionals?
6. What does T&D need to do to be instrumental in organization-­wide
expertise issues?
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 281
12/3/21 3:04 PM
This page intentionally left blank
PART V
Unleashing Expertise
through Organ­ization
Development
Part 5 captures the essence of the organ­ization development component of HRD
in unleashing expertise and the nature of the change pro­cess. Illustrations of
organ­ization development practices that exist in host organ­izations and variations in core thinking, pro­cesses, interventions, and tools are presented.
CHAPTERS
14 Overview of Organ­ization Development
15 The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
16 Organ­ization Development Practices
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 283
12/3/21 3:04 PM
This page intentionally left blank
14
Overview of
Organ­ization
Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Views of OD
• The Outcome Variable and Definitions of OD
• Early Change Models
• Whole-System Change
Key OD Terms
The General OD Pro­cess
Action Research: Problem-­Solving Method
OD Pro­cess Model
OD for Per­for­mance System
• The ODPS Model
• Phases of ODPS
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
The central view of organ­ization development (OD) is that OD can unleash
­human expertise, resulting in improvements at the organ­ization, work pro­cess,
team, and individual levels. OD constitutes the smaller realm of HRD practitioner activity when compared to training and development (T&D). However, it
can also be argued that OD has a larger or more systemic influence on the organ­
ization. Historically, most OD effort has been focused on studying individuals
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 285
12/3/21 3:04 PM
286
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
in organ­izations versus studying the organ­izations themselves. Although this is
the history of OD, the shift in OD theory and practice is to an organizational-­
wide system focus.
OD practice is more likely to be focused on existing conditions that are not
functioning well than on long-­range improvement or holistic change efforts. In
all cases, ­whether pre­sent per­for­mance issues related to system maintenance or
system changes for the ­future, OD interventions deal with the change pro­cess
for improvement. Cummings and Worley provide a definition of organ­ization
development that helps introduce this chapter: “Organ­ization development is a
system-­wide application of behavioral science knowledge to the planned development, improvement, and reinforcement of the strategies, structures, and pro­
cesses that lead to organ­ization effectiveness” (Cummings and Worley, 2018, 1).
In ­earlier chapters, three core theories ­were identified that stand as the foundation of HRD, T&D, and OD. They are psychological, systems, and economic
theories. Embracing the three necessarily c­ auses OD definitions to go beyond
the behavioral science base (psychological only) that has ­limited OD. A con­
temporary definition would read as follows:
Organ­ization development is a system-­w ide application of behavioral
and social science knowledge (primarily psychological, systems, and
economic theories) to the planned development, improvement, and reinforcement of the strategies, structures, and pro­cesses that lead to
organ­ization per­for­mance.
Our concise definition of OD is as follows:
Organ­ization development is a pro­cess of systematically unleashing expertise to improve per­for­mance at all levels.
Orga­nizational leaders need help in their quest for sustainable per­for­mance.
The man­tra for the twenty-­first c­ entury is to “lead change,” according to Beer
and Nohria (2000). They go on to report, “The results are not always encouraging, however. . . . ​The dramatic reduction in CEO tenure confirms that leaders
do not have the knowledge and skills, or perhaps the ­will to transform their companies” (ix). Organ­izations need OD, and high-­quality OD interventions are
required to help organ­izations achieve their per­for­mance goals.
Views of OD
­ ere is no single view of OD. The nature of organ­izations, the conditions
Th
surrounding the need for system change, and the pro­cess of change all vary so
greatly that one lens would be inadequate. Alternative views are helpful. Multiple snapshots are presented in this chapter to capture the range of thinking
in OD. The first is at the variation in the outcomes and definitions of OD as presented by OD experts. Second is revisiting early change models, including Lewin’s
classic unfreeze-­move-­refreeze change pro­cess. Third is looking at ­whole systems
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 286
12/3/21 3:04 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
287
change such as the rigorous Brache (2002) holistic approach to orga­nizational
health.
THE OUTCOME VARIABLE AND DEFINITIONS OF OD
Vast lit­er­a­ture and practice are aimed at systematically implementing orga­
nizational change for the purpose of improving per­for­mance that does not formally call itself “OD.” From Beckhard’s 1969 definition (the first reported use
of the term in the lit­er­a­ture) to the pre­sent, OD has been on an evolutionary
journey. Egan (2002) produced an extensive report of this definitional history
that is worth reviewing. Se­lections from that review, along with some more recent additions, are presented in figure 14.1.
Egan (2001) concludes from his analy­sis that 10 key outcome variables are
reported throughout the definitional lit­er­a­ture (figure 14.2). Reviewing t­ hese
purported outcomes of OD highlights the range of thinking. For example,
facilitating learning and development as an outcome is very dif­fer­ent from enhancing profitability and competitiveness. The compilation of OD definitions found
in the lit­er­a­ture helps in understanding the range of thinking in OD and its historical development.
Once again, the taxonomy of per­for­mance (see Figure 11.1) is one way of
gaining perspective on OD. It poses the two significant challenges of “maintaining the system” and “changing the system.” Both realms can demand OD
interventions as the development of h
­ uman expertise (T&D) may not be enough
to improve the system. The “changing the system” portion of the taxonomy of
performance—in the form of improvements or inventions of w
­ hole new
systems—is where the most challenging and risky OD work occurs. This is also
where the dark side of OD is most evident. OD (and HRD) tools are power­ful
in directing, controlling, and manipulating h
­ uman be­hav­ior for negative and
positive ends. Using OD to get employees to accept unfair and exploitative policies and practices is rarely discussed. Most organ­ization bankruptcy and restructuring efforts rely on sophisticated OD tools to get employee ac­cep­tance
of downward compensation and benefits while at the same time, upper management often retains and even gains added rewards. OD that is a partner
in facilitating ac­cep­tance of an increase in a disproportionate slice of the consequences of per­for­mance is an ethical prob­lem facing the profession. For example, the financial burden required for United Airlines to reemerge from
bankruptcy in 2003 was disproportionately borne by workers and retirees while
­ ere used to gain employee
top management went unscathed. Familiar OD tools w
concessions.
Inevitable change—an orga­nizational system that is mature, works well, and
yields g­ reat returns—will not necessarily remain in that state. Vari­ous forces cause
organ­izations to deteriorate and sometimes simply dis­appear. Fundamental
shifts in technology or customer demands are two examples. Thus, leaders and
man­ag­ers have the continuing pressure of changing their orga­nizational systems
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 287
12/3/21 3:04 PM
Author
Date
Definitions
Outcome Variable
Beckhard
1969
Organ­ization development is an
effort (1) planned, (2) organization-­
wide, and (3) managed from the
top, to (4) increase organ­ization
effectiveness and health through
(5) planned interventions in the
organ­ization’s “pro­cesses,” using
behavior-­science knowledge.
Increase organ­ization
effectiveness and
health
Bennis
1969
Organ­ization development (OD)
is a response change, a complex
educational strategy intended to
change the beliefs, attitudes,
values, and structure of organ­
izations so that they can better
adapt to new technologies,
markets, challenges and the
dizzying rate of change itself.
Adapt to new to
technologies,
markets, and challenges and change
Beer
1980
Organ­ization development is a
system-­wide pro­cess of data
collection, diagnosis, action,
planning, intervention, and
evaluation aimed at (1) enhancing
congruence between orga­
nizational structure, pro­cess,
strategy, ­people, and culture;
(2) developing new and creative
orga­nizational solutions; and
(3) developing the organ­ization’s
renewing capacity. It occurs
through collaboration of orga­
nizational members working with
a change agent using behavioral
science theory, research, and
technology.
Enhance congruence; develop
creative orga­
nizational solutions
and develop renewing capacity
Figure 14.1: Selected Organ­ization Development Definitions
Source: Adapted from Egan, 2001, 14–16. Used with Permission.
288
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 288
12/3/21 3:04 PM
Author
Date
Definitions
Outcome Variable
Porras
and
Robertson
1992
Orga­nizational development is a
set of behavioral science-­based
theories, values, strategies, and
techniques aimed at the planned
change of the orga­nizational work
setting for the purpose of enhancing individual development and
improving orga­nizational per­for­
mance, through the alteration of
orga­nizational members’ on-­the-­
job be­hav­ior.
Enhance individual
development and
orga­nizational
per­for­mance
Cummings
and
Worley
1993
Organ­ization development is a
system-­wide application of
behavioral science knowledge to
the planned development and
reinforcement of orga­nizational
strategies, structures, and
pro­cesses for improving an
organ­ization’s effectiveness.
Improve orga­
nizational
effectiveness
Burke
1994
Organ­ization development is a
planned pro­cess of change in an
organ­ization’s culture through the
utilization of behavioral science
technologies, research, and
theory.
Culture change
McLagan
1989b
Organ­ization Development:
Assuring healthy inter-­and
intra-­unit relationships and
helping groups initiate and
manage change. Organ­ization
development’s primary emphasis
is on relationships and pro­cesses
between and among individuals
and groups. Its primary intervention is influence on the relationship of individuals and groups to
effect and impact the organ­ization
as a system.
Initiate and manage
change to effect and
impact the
organ­ization
Figure 14.1: ­(Continued)
289
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 289
12/3/21 3:04 PM
Author
Date
Definitions
Outcome Variable
French,
Bell, and
Zawacki
1999
Organ­ization development is a
long-­term effort, led and supported by top management, to
improve an organ­ization’s
visioning, empowerment, learning, and problem-­solving pro­
cesses, through an ongoing,
collaborative management of
organ­ization culture—­with special
emphasis on the culture of intact
work teams and other team
configurations—­using the
consultant-­facilitator role and the
theory and technology of applied
behavioral science, including
action research.
Improve visioning,
empowerment,
learning, and
problem-­solving
pro­cesses
Lynham
(2000c)
Organ­ization development is a
pro­cess of planned, systemic
change through the utilization of
­human expertise for the purpose
of improving individual, group,
pro­cess, and organ­ization
per­for­mance.
Improve per­for­
mance: individual,
group, pro­cess, and
organ­ization
McLean
2006
Organ­ization development is any
pro­cess or activity, based on the
behavioral sciences, that, e
­ ither
initially or over the long term, has
the potential in an orga­nizational
setting to enhance knowledge,
expertise, productivity, satisfaction, income, interpersonal
relationships, and other desired
outcomes, w
­ hether for personal
or group/team gain, or for the
benefit of an organ­ization,
community, nation, region, or,
ultimately, the w
­ hole of humanity.
Enhance knowledge,
expertise, productivity, satisfaction,
income, interpersonal
relationships, and
other desired
outcomes
Swanson
2008a
Organ­ization development is a
pro­cess of systematically unleashing ­human expertise for the
purpose of improving
per­for­mance.
Improve per­for­
mance: individual,
group, pro­cess, and
organ­ization
290
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 290
Figure 14.1: ­(Continued)
12/3/21 3:04 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
291
Facilitate Learning and Development
Improve Prob­lem Solving
Advance Orga­nizational Renewal
Strengthen System and Pro­cess Improvement
Increase Effectiveness
Enhance Profitability and Competitiveness
Ensure Health and Well-­Being of Organ­izations and Employees
Initiate and/or Manage Change
Support Adaptation to Change
Engage Organ­ization Culture Change
Figure 14.2: Ten Key Outcome (Dependent) Variables from
Definitions of Organ­ization Development
Source: Egan, 2001. Used with permission.
to meet the new needs of the immediate and far ­future. Curiously, it gives rise
to this odd variation of a familiar phrase, “If it a­ in’t broke, fix it!”
EARLY CHANGE MODELS
The classic change model of “unfreezing, moving, and refreezing” is attributed
to Kurt Lewin (1951). This s­ imple and basic model still has utility ­today as a
­mental change picture. The rigid beginning and end states of this view are limiting. But the 1950s was a dif­fer­ent time. T
­ oday’s view of the world is closer to
continuous change. As power­ful as Lewin’s frozen imagery remains, it was refuted by emerging systems theory in the 1950s, which informed us that all systems are open and therefore fluid and adapting.
It is impor­tant to note that the focal point of Lewin’s work was on individuals and groups within organ­izations. The unfreeze-­move-­freeze model declares that information highlighting the discrepancy between the ­actual and
desired be­hav­iors among stakeholders ­will result in their willingness to engage in the change process—or to unfreeze. This was a fairly popu­lar notion
among vari­ous scholarly communities and remains a basic tenet among many
OD professionals.
Moreover, before Lewin’s work, Gunnar Myrdal (1966), the Swedish economist who studied the white–­black racial divide in the United States, proposed
that in a demo­cratic society, the higher-­order beliefs among its members would
win out over unexamined illogical practices. This idea is fundamental to OD
practice. It is in­ter­est­ing to note that so many of the implicit values of OD coming out of the behavioral sciences are predicated on democracy. Myrdal was
named Nobel Laureate in 1974 for his pioneering and penetrating analy­sis of
the interdependence of economic, social, and institutional phenomena. The
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 291
12/3/21 3:04 PM
292
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Donald Trump presidency in the United States, with Trump’s shocking disregard for demo­cratic ideals and pro­cesses, suggests that democracy is more fragile than Myrdal reported.
Lewin’s moving phase involves intervening in the organ­ization through
changes in the orga­nizational pro­cesses and structures to develop a new set of
values and be­hav­iors. The refreezing phase is one that systemically installs and
reinforces the new set of values and be­hav­iors. Again, while the freeze-­move-­
refreeze meta­phor dominates the interpretation of Lewin, it is his reliance on
information that showcases discrepancies between ­actual and desired states that
is prob­ably the greater contribution to OD.
That Lewin was a scholar (not simply a prob­lem solver) who experimented
with the change pro­cess of individuals in ­actual social situations—­the milieu
of life—­led to field theory. Field theory is the proposition that h
­ uman be­hav­ior
is related to one’s personal characteristics and the environment (Lewin, 1951).
This view of OD—­working through the individuals and groups from a psychologist’s view—­resonates in OD theory and practice. A rival to this behavioral
science view is to study the orga­nizational system and its connection with individuals from a social science perspective.
WHOLE-­SYSTEM CHANGE
One of the key characteristics of substantive whole-­system change through OD
is the commitment to study the orga­nizational system carefully. This stands in
contrast to engaging groups in a generic problem-­solving method along with a
reliance on stakeholder perception data as a mea­sure of the intervention effectiveness. Whole-­system change requires (1) careful study of the organ­ization and
(2) reliance on multiple sources of data. A fair amount of trite lit­er­a­ture about
whole-­system change misses ­these two requirements and is reduced to action-­
oriented prob­lem solving on narrowly focused issues.
Two examples of whole-­system OD can be characterized by system-­level per­
for­mance improvement by Brache (2002) and scenario planning by Schwartz
(1996). Brache (2002) advocates a holistic analy­sis, planning, and an action approach to orga­nizational health that is “a function of understanding and managing an intricate and entwined set of variables” (3). Schwartz advocates a
scenario pro­cess of planning for an uncertain ­future and preparing for alternative f­ utures. His holistic f­ uture state systems planning aims to provide paths to
strategic insight for individuals and the com­pany. Scenario planning can be seen
as the expansive thinking that precedes traditional strategic planning.
The role of HRD and OD in strategic orga­nizational planning is rarely
explored. One model for thinking about the theory and practice of strategic
HRD combines scenario planning and strategic planning into strategic orga­
nizational planning (Swanson, Lynham, Ruona, and Provo, 1998). Central to
this thinking is the inclusion of scenario building and traditional strategic
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 292
12/3/21 3:04 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
293
ENVIRONMENT
STRATEGIC ORGANIZATIONAL PLANNING
Strategic Planning
Scenario Building
HRD supporting and shaping SOP
Figure 14.3: Strategic Orga­nizational Planning (SOP)
Source: Swanson, Lynham, Ruona, and Provo, 1998, 591.
planning into an overall framework of strategic orga­nizational planning (see
figure 14.3).
HRD that is genuinely of strategic value to an organ­ization is (1) performance-­
based—it must contribute directly to impor­tant business goals and must be
based on key business per­for­mance requirements; (2) it demonstrates its strategic capability—­provides strategic orga­nizational planning education and learning, and actively participates in the strategic orga­nizational planning pro­cess;
and (3) it is responsive to the emergent nature of strategy—it assumes a deliberate role in the emergent nature of strategic orga­nizational planning (Torraco and
Swanson, 1995).
Key OD Terms
Beyond the definition of OD, key concepts and terms provide a basis for understanding the profession. A range of definitions is provided in figure 14.4 that
includes basic OD terms as well as strategic OD and change role OD terms.
The General OD Pro­cess
OD has been defined as a five-­phase pro­cess that is essentially a problem-­defining
and problem-­solving method related to the organ­ization. For ­those who react
negatively to the notion of prob­lems, the use of a positive word is suggested (e.g.,
opportunity, change, improvement, ­etc.). ­There is an OD methodology called appreciative inquiry that demands a positive approach to change (Cooperrider
and Srivastva, 1987). This method only allows for the search and use of positive
information in the OD pro­cess and thus is criticized for not presenting the complete picture (McLean, 2006).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 293
12/3/21 3:04 PM
OD Term
Description/Definition of the Term
Client
The client is the organ­ization, group, or individuals whose interests
the change agent primarily serves. It is to the client that the
con­sul­tant is responsible. On occasion the “client” may differ from
­those who originally sponsored, or participated in, the change
effort.
Culture
The basic assumptions and beliefs that are shared by members of
an organ­ization, that operate unconsciously, and that define in a
basic “taken-­for-­granted” fashion an organ­ization’s view of itself
and its environment.
Intervention
A change effort or a change pro­cess. It implies an intentional entry
into an ongoing system for the purpose of initiating or introducing
change. The term intervention refers to a set of planned activities
intended to help the organ­ization increase its effectiveness.
Environment
­ hose external ele­ments and forces that can affect the attainment
T
of strategic goals, including suppliers, customers, competitors, and
regulators, as well as cultural, po­liti­cal, and economic forces.
­Human
pro­cess
intervention
Intervention pro­cesses focus on improving communication,
prob­lem solving, decision making, and leadership. Derive mainly
from the disciplines of psy­chol­ogy and the applied fields of group
dynamics and ­human relations.
Strategic
intervention
Interventions that link the internal functioning of the organ­ization
to the larger environment and transform the organ­ization to keep
pace with changing conditions. They are organization-­wide and
bring about a fit among business strategy, structure, culture, and
the larger environment.
Techno-­
structural
intervention
Interventions focused on the technology and structure of organ­
izations. Are rooted in the disciplines of systems engineering,
sociology, and psy­chol­ogy and in the applied fields of sociotechnical
systems and organ­ization design.
Client-­
centered
consultation
Using the client’s knowledge and experience, by the OD practitioner,
in delivery and conduct of the consulting pro­cess. Ensures
con­sul­tant’s views are not imposed on the client and that the client
develops the expertise and knowledge to conduct and sustain the
intervention.
Pro­cess
Refers to “how” ­things are done. Is a key definitional component
of OD and is dynamic in nature. For example, products or ser­vice
delivery methods and how inputs get converted to outputs.
Figure 14.4: Definitions of Selected Organ­ization Development Terms
294
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 294
12/3/21 3:04 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
295
OD Term
Description/Definition of the Term
Mission
The organ­ization’s major strategic purpose or reason for existing.
May include specification of target customers and markets,
principal products or ser­vices, geographic domain, core technologies, strategic objectives, and desired public image.
Change
A departure from the status quo and implies movement t­oward a
goal, an idealized state, or a vision of what should be, and movement away from pre­sent conditions, beliefs, or attitudes.
Change
agent
A person or team responsible for beginning and maintaining a
change effort. May come from inside the organ­ization (internal
consultant) or from outside the organ­ization (external con­sul­tant).
Sponsor
The one(s) who underwrites, legitimizes, and champions a change
effort or OD intervention.
Stakeholder
The one who has an interest in the change intervention. Includes
such stakeholders as customers, suppliers, distributors, employees,
and government regulators.
Figure 14.4: ­(Continued)
The general five-­phase pro­cess that captures the essence of OD is as follows:
1. Analyze/contract
2. Diagnose/feedback
3. Plan/develop
4. Implement
5. Evaluate/institutionalize
Recall the HRD phase wording as analyze, propose, create, implement, and assess and the T&D phase wording as analyze, design, develop, implement, and
assess.
Several overriding constructs undergird sound OD. First, organ­ization development involves planned and systemic change instead of short-­term, intuitive, or segregated change. Second, organ­ization development aims to ensure
the development of the requisite h
­ uman expertise necessary to initiate, implement, maintain, and sustain the targeted change. Third, organ­ization development is guided by system theory, meaning that the planned change is understood
and managed in terms of integrated inputs, pro­cesses, outputs, and feedback.
Fourth, it is itself a pro­cess. That is, organ­ization development involves a specific
way of implementing change, which is informed by humanistic values, theories,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 295
12/3/21 3:04 PM
296
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
techniques, and tools. Fifth, organ­ization development takes place within a
host system and for purposes of per­for­mance improvement within that system. Fi­nally, organ­ization development results in outputs in vari­ous domains
of performance—­for example, individual, group, pro­cess, and or­ga­ni­za­tion/
system per­for­mance.
Unfortunately, the application of OD is not always implemented in a manner that reflects ­these characteristics. Common criticisms of organ­ization development include (1) change interventions that are fragmented and disconnected
from the core business per­for­mance outcomes; (2) interventions that build dependence on the external con­sul­tant for the expertise needed by the organ­ization
to maintain and sustain the change effort; (3) change “cures” that are based more
on the expertise of the change agent (usually external to the organ­ization) than
on the per­for­mance needs of the organ­ization; (4) a lack of ability and intent to
show mea­sur­able results—­verifiable outcomes throughout and in conclusion of
the implemented change; and (5) the dilemma of short-­term, high-­turnover leadership in the context of needed long-­term, large-­scale change that depends on
ongoing leadership support.
OD professionals within HRD often do not talk about their work in universally agreed-­upon terms. Many OD pro­cess models have unique terminology. Three models are reviewed ­here to illustrate some of the range in thinking.
They are action research (AR), the organ­ization development pro­cess (ODP), and
the organ­ization development for per­for­mance system (ODPS).
Action Research: Problem-­Solving Method
Cummings and Worley (2018) have summarized action research (actually a
problem-­solving method) in eight steps (figure 14.5). Some claim that action research is the foundation for most OD interventions (Rothwell et al., 1995). The
Cummings and Worley (2001, 24–26) portrayal of the action research pro­cess
and their description of each pro­cess step follows:
1. Prob­lem identification. This stage usually begins with a key executive
in the organ­ization or someone with power and influence who senses
that the organ­ization has one or more prob­lems that might be solved
with the help of an OD practitioner.
2. Consultation with a behavioral science expert. During the initial
contact, the OD practitioner and the client carefully assess each other.
The practitioner has his or her own normative, developmental theory
or frame of reference and must be conscious of t­ hose assumptions and
values. Sharing them with the client from the beginning establishes an
open and collaborative atmosphere.
3. Data gathering and preliminary diagnosis. This step is usually completed by the OD practitioner, often in conjunction with organ­ization
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 296
12/3/21 3:04 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
297
Problem Identification
Consultation with
Behavioral Science Expert
Data Gathering and
Preliminary Diagnosis
Feedback to Key
Client or Group
Joint Diagnosis
of Problem
Joint Action Planning
Action
Data Gathering
after Action
Figure 14.5: Action Research Model
Source: Adapted from Cummings and Worley, 2018.
members. It involves gathering appropriate information and analyzing
it to determine the under­lying ­causes of orga­nizational prob­lems. The
four basic methods of gathering data are interviews, pro­cess observation, questionnaires, and orga­nizational per­for­mance data (the latter,
unfortunately, is often overlooked). One approach to diagnosis begins
with a questionnaire to mea­sure precisely the prob­lems identified by
the ­earlier steps. When gathering diagnostic information, OD prac­ti­
tion­ers may influence members with whom they are collecting data. In
OD, e­ very action on the part of the con­sul­tant constitutes an intervention that ­will have some effect on the organ­ization.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 297
12/3/21 3:04 PM
298
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
4. Feedback to a key client or group. B
­ ecause action research is a collaborative activity, the diagnostic data are fed back to the client, usually in
a group or work team meeting. The feedback step, in which members
are given the information gathered by the OD practitioner, helps them
determine the strengths and weaknesses of the organ­ization or the
department u
­ nder study. The con­sul­tant provides the client with all
relevant and useful data. Obviously, the practitioner ­will protect
confidential sources of information and, at times, may even withhold
data. Defining what is relevant and useful involves considerable
privacy and ethics as well as judgment about when the group is ready
for the information or if the information would make the client overly
defensive.
5. Joint diagnosis of the prob­lem. At this point, members discuss the
feedback and explore with the OD practitioner ­whether they want to
work on identified prob­lems. A close interrelationship exists among
data gathering, feedback, and diagnosis ­because the con­sul­tant summarizes the basic data from the client members and pre­sents the data
to them for validation and further diagnosis. An impor­tant point to
remember, as Schein (1970) suggests, is that the action research pro­cess
is very dif­fer­ent from the doctor–­patient model in which the con­sul­
tant comes in, makes a diagnosis, and prescribes a solution. Shein
notes that the failure to establish a common frame of reference in the
client–­consultant relationship may lead to faulty diagnosis or to a
communications gap whereby the client is sometimes “unwilling to
believe the diagnosis or accept the prescription.” He believes “most
companies have drawers full of reports by con­sul­tants, each loaded
with diagnoses and recommendations which are e­ ither not understood
or accepted by the ‘patient’ ” (78).
6. Joint action planning. Next, the OD practitioner and the client members jointly agree on further actions to be taken. This is the beginning
of the moving pro­cess (described in Lewin’s change model), as the
organ­ization decides how best to reach a dif­fer­ent quasi-­stationary
equilibrium. At this stage, the specific action to be taken depends on
the culture, technology, and environment of the organ­ization, the
diagnosis of the prob­lem, and the time and expense of the
intervention.
7. Action. This stage involves ­actual change from one orga­nizational state
to another. It may include installing new methods and procedures,
reor­ga­niz­ing structures and work designs, and reinforcing new be­hav­
iors. Such actions typically cannot be implemented immediately but
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 298
12/3/21 3:04 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
299
require a period as the organ­ization moves from the pre­sent to a
desired f­ uture state.
8. Data gathering ­after action. ­Because action research is a cyclical
pro­cess, data must also be gathered a­ fter the action has been taken to
mea­sure and determine the effects of the action and to feed the results
back to the organ­ization. This, in turn, may lead to rediagnosis and
new action.
OD Pro­cess Model
The organ­ization development pro­cess (ODP) model is presented by Gary N.
McLean in his classic 2006 textbook. ODP represents a fully developed methodology for achieving positive gains within an orga­nizational setting. Figure 14.6
illustrates the ODP model and its unique pro­cess characteristics. The eight core
phases are a variation of the basic input, pro­cess, output, feedback, and open
system model that organizes most HRD methods.
Environment
Organization
or Suborganization
Individual
Team
Process
Global
Entry
Start-Up
Organization-Wide
Assessment
and Feedback
Action
Planning
Community and National
Implementation
Evaluation
Adoption
Separation
Figure 14.6: Organ­ization Development Pro­cess Model
Source: McLean, 2006, xiii.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 299
12/3/21 3:05 PM
300
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Entry
Start-up
Assessment and feedback
Action plan
Implementation
Evaluation
Adoption
Separation
Beyond the eight phases, the expanded description of the orga­nizational context distinguishes and enhances the ODP model. McLean briefly describes the
eight phases as follows (2006, 20–22):
• Entry. The first phase is when the OD professional (con­sul­tant),
having done the requisite marketing, and a person representing the
client organ­ization (or part of an organ­ization, or “client”) meet to
decide ­whether they ­will work together, assess the readiness of the
organ­ization for change, and agree on the conditions u
­ nder which
they w
­ ill work together.
• Start-­Up. The next phase occurs ­after an agreement has been reached
to work together, and a basic infrastructure (such as a client team
with whom the con­sul­tant w
­ ill work) is in place.
• Assessment and Feedback. This phase is sometimes called analy­sis
or diagnosis; in this phase, the con­sul­tant and the client together,
determine the orga­nizational culture, including its strengths and
weaknesses.
• Action Plan. Based on what was determined to be in the previous
step, plans are mutually developed as to how the organ­ization wishes
to move forward, in terms of both goals and objectives and how this
­will be accomplished.
• Implementation. In this phase, the plans that ­were made in the
previous step are implemented; in OD jargon, this is called an
intervention.
• Evaluation. This phase answers the question, “How well did our
intervention accomplish the objectives that ­were planned?”
• Adoption. If the evaluation indicates that the objectives of the
intervention ­were accomplished, then the change that was implemented becomes institutionalized; that is, it becomes part of the way
in which business is done in the organ­ization. If the evaluation
indicates that desired objectives ­were not met, then this phase is
skipped. In both cases, the pro­cess begins all over again.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 300
12/3/21 3:05 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
301
• Separation. At some point, the con­sul­tant ­will withdraw from the
intervention pro­cess, having transferred his or her skills to the client
organ­ization (again, ­whether the OD con­sul­tant is internal or
external). This may occur b
­ ecause additional change is no longer a
priority to the client organ­ization, or it is not ready for the next stage
of change. It may be ­because OD skills are needed that the current
OD con­sul­tant does not possess. It may be that the con­sul­tant has
been co-­opted by the orga­nizational culture and is no longer able to
maintain objectivity. For what­ever reason, separation should occur
intentionally and not just by letting it happen.
OD for Per­for­mance System
Organ­ization development for per­for­mance system (ODPS) (Lynham, 2000c)
again represents a basic OD pro­cess while highlighting per­for­mance improvement. The ODPS methodology focuses more on the conceptual phases of
the intervention than on the professional activity of the OD con­sul­tant. Many
authors who write about change talk about it out of context of rigorous identification of the needed change or the resulting excellence, improvement, and per­
for­mance. For example, one edited handbook that details eigh­teen change
methods pays scant attention to the question of the resulting excellence, improvement, and per­for­mance from any of the change methods (Holman and
Devane, 1999). In contrast, ODPS is a pro­cess of planned, systemic change
through the use of h
­ uman expertise to improve individual, group, pro­cess, and
organ­ization per­for­mance.
THE ODPS MODEL
The ODPS model is illustrated in figure 14.7, which shows the five phases of the
organ­ization development for the per­for­mance pro­cess being integrated and
supported through leadership. Worthy of note is that the systematic pro­cess of
The organization development for performance system (ODPS) is a process of planned,
systematic change for developing human expertise for the purpose of improving
individual, group, process, and organization performance.
1.0
Analyze
and Contract
2.0
Diagnose and
Feedback
3.0
Plan, Design,
and Develop
4.0
Implement
5.0
Evaluate and
Institutionalize
Lead the Organization and Development Process
Figure 14.7: Organ­ization Development for Per­for­mance System
Source: Susan A. Lynham, 2000c.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 301
12/3/21 3:05 PM
302
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
the ODPS can be maintained even in the simplest of situations (e.g., u
­ nder severe
time, resource, and bud­get constraints) or can be ­violated in the most luxurious
of conditions (e.g., ample time, resource and bud­get allocations). Professional
expertise—­organ­ization development pro­cess knowledge and experience—is
necessary to maintain organ­ization development integrity.
PHASES OF ODPS
The five phases of the ODPS model are analyze and contract; diagnose and feedback; plan, design, and develop; implement; and evaluate and institutionalize.
Phase 1: Analyze and Contract The first phase of the ODPS is composed of
two steps. First, it is necessary to analyze the perceived per­for­mance prob­lem
and need for change. This first step requires that an initial analy­sis be done of the
organ­ization’s per­for­mance requirements that can be improved by documenting
and developing planned, systemic change and the development of ­human expertise required to implement, maintain, and sustain workplace change and per­for­
mance. Therefore, the analy­sis provides the initial documented evidence that the
prob­lem presented for resolution and change is real. Furthermore, analy­sis initially helps clarify the issues surrounding the prob­lem, establishes the organ­
ization’s apparent commitment to prob­lem resolution and change, and provides
an opportunity to determine and optimize the “match” between the needs, values, and expertise of the organ­ization and ­those of the change con­sul­tant or agent.
The second step in phase 1 involves the contract. Informed by the outcomes
of step 1, the contract documents agreements about how the OD pro­cess w
­ ill
proceed. The contract includes the specification of agreements in terms of mutual expectations, time, money, and other resources that ­will be made available
during the change pro­cess and the ground rules u
­ nder which all involved parties ­will operate.
Phase 2: Diagnose and Feedback The second phase of ODPS consists of
two steps: to diagnose the per­for­mance prob­lem and provide feedback to the
per­for­mance system on the change needed and the accompanying ­human expertise required to address and advance per­for­mance. A thorough diagnosis of
the per­for­mance prob­lem is critical to a successful organ­ization development
intervention. This step ensures that the prob­lem’s root cause(s) and need for
change are uncovered and made explicit to the per­for­mance system. Diagnosis
plays a critical role in informing the rest of the organ­ization’s development pro­
cess. It is intended to ensure that the ­actual, and not necessarily the presenting,
per­for­mance prob­lem that gave rise to the need for the change intervention is
effectively addressed.
Multiple data collection methods are used to perform a thorough diagnosis
of the per­for­mance prob­lem. Four commonly used methods of data collection
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 302
12/3/21 3:05 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
303
used to diagnose the per­for­mance prob­lem and inform the change needed include questionnaires or surveys, interviews, direct observations, and unobtrusive data (e.g., organ­ization rec­ords). Each method of data collection has strengths
and weaknesses. As a result, triangulation must be pursued, and as many data
collection methods as pos­si­ble used to conduct the diagnosis and inform the
feedback steps in the ODPS.
Feedback, the second step in phase 2, involves returning the data collected
during the diagnostic step to the per­for­mance system for further verification,
prob­lem solving, decision making, and corrective action. The effectiveness of
feedback varies according to both content and process—­that is, what data are
fed back and how data are fed back. Some criteria of good feedback data include
relevance, appropriateness, timeliness, comparability, validity, clarity, and engagement. Criteria of a good feedback pro­cess include an appropriate setting,
structure, and se­lection of participants and using the feedback data to facilitate
the development of ­human expertise for further prob­lem solving and decision
making regarding the per­for­mance prob­lem and desired change.
Both steps in phase 2 of ODPS, diagnosis and feedback, are critical in harnessing and activating commitment and energy for the rest of the organ­ization
development process—­namely to plan, implement, and evaluate and institutionalize the desired and necessary change in the per­for­mance system.
Phase 3: Plan, Design, and Develop Phase 3 of the ODPS involves three
steps. First is compiling the plan required to ensure corrective action and development of the necessary ­human expertise to address the per­for­mance prob­lem
in multiple per­for­mance domains (individual, group, pro­cess, and organ­
ization) and in an enduring way. During the plan’s development, the kind of
planned change (or intervention) and ­human expertise needed to address the
per­for­mance prob­lem effectively are discussed and agreed upon. Numerous
types of planned change pro­cesses (also referred to as interventions) can be selected at this stage. ­These vary according to the per­for­mance domain and corresponding ­human expertise development at which they are targeted (individual,
group, pro­cess, and organ­ization). Due to the systemic nature of organ­ization
development, the plan of action often spans multiple types of planned change.
Also typically included in the program for change is the recognition and initial
consideration of the steps required to manage the changes that ­will likely accompany the change intervention(s).
A suitable intervention plan is specific, clear about roles and desired outcomes, makes the resulting h
­ uman expertise explicit in terms of knowledge and
experience, includes an achievable timeline, and is derived in a participative and
commitment-­seeking manner.
The second step of phase 3 is the design, through e­ ither creation and/or acquisition of general and specific change strategies (or interventions) for ­people
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 303
12/3/21 3:05 PM
304
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
to develop the expertise to implement and sustain workplace change and per­
for­mance. The third step involves developing or acquiring specific participant
and change agent materials needed to execute the planned change strategy(ies)
and/or programs.
Phase 4: Implement The fourth phase in the ODPS is to implement the
planned change strategies selected, designed, and developed in phase 3. This implementation involves managing the individual change strategies and programs and their delivery to the participants of the per­for­mance system.
Phase 5: Evaluate and Institutionalize To determine ­whether the planned
change has been successfully implemented, the effectiveness of the planned change
strategies/programs in terms of per­for­mance, learning, and satisfaction must
be established. The first step in phase 5 of the ODPS requires evaluating multiple
aspects of the ­actual outcomes of the planned change strategies and comparing
them against the desired outcomes. Evaluation, therefore, requires determining
and reporting on change strategy/program effectiveness in terms of per­for­mance,
learning, and satisfaction.
It is generally recognized that it is easier to implement change than maintain and sustain it. As a result, it is imperative that the new be­hav­iors, practices,
and pro­cesses that accompany planned change strategies are embedded into the
organ­ization’s culture and become part of the way business is done daily. This
embedding or stabilization of the new ways that accompany the planned change
pro­cesses refers to the need to institutionalize the change strategies/programs,
constituting the second step of phase 5. Institutionalizing the change strategies/
programs for integrated and long-­term per­for­mance requires both management of the institutionalization pro­cess and reinforcement of the changes
through further feedback, rewards, and development of ­human expertise.
Leading the OD Pro­cess The OD pro­cess, like any per­for­mance system, re-
quires leadership and management to maintain integrity regarding inputs,
pro­cesses, outputs, and feedback. For example, leading an OD effort requires
championing the OD mission, values, and goals and managing the pro­cess
itself.
Conclusion
Although the lit­er­a­ture describes numerous OD pro­cesses, three have been selected h
­ ere for illustration and comparison. Organ­ization development is a pro­
cess with the potential of unleashing the expertise required to maintain and/or
change organ­izations. As such, OD can strategically align the orga­nizational
components of its host organ­ization in the context within which it must function. It also has can search out and use the expertise required to create new strategic directions for the host organ­ization.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 304
12/3/21 3:05 PM
14. Overview of Organ­ization Development
305
Reflection Questions
1. How would you define OD and its relationship to T&D and HRD?
2. What are the unique aspects of the OD component of HRD?
3. What is the role of the OD con­sul­tant in the OD pro­cess?
4. Which OD model (AL, ODP, or ODPS) is most attractive to you?
Explain why.
5. How does OD help with the orga­nizational challenge of managing the
system and changing the system?
6. Discuss the personal attributes you believe would help facilitate OD
proj­ects and ­those personal characteristics that could hinder them.
7. Do you think OD efforts are best managed by internal staff or external
con­sul­tants? Explain your answer.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 305
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15
The Nature of the
Change Pro­cess
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
• Perspectives on Change for HRD
Core Dimensions of Change
• Incremental versus Transformational Change
• Continuous versus Episodic Change
Change Outcomes
General Theories of Change
• Field Theory
• Case Example: Orga­nizational Change
• Sociotechnical Systems Theory
• Typology of Change Theories
Re­sis­tance to Change
• Nature of Re­sis­tance
• Forms of Re­sis­tance
Focused Perspectives on Change
• Orga­nizational Theories
• Work Pro­cess Theories
• Group Theories
• Individual Theories
Leading and Managing Organ­ization Change
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 306
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
307
Introduction
Change has been a central concept in ­human resource development (HRD) from
the beginning. Individual change and orga­nizational change are the basic change
perspectives in HRD.
Individual change models focus narrowly on ways that individuals change.
While this may affect an organ­ization, the primary emphasis is on the individual
and helping the individual change herself or himself. Individual learning and
expertise development through T&D can be seen as a par­tic­u­lar type of change
at the individual level, especially transformational learning. ­Career development
specialists focus on helping ­people change their lives and jobs over a longer term.
Adult development theory focuses on the many ways that adults change throughout their life. While none of ­these are usually thought of as change theory, change
is the overarching construct that unites them within HRD.
Organ­ization change models embrace the individual but within the larger
context of changing the organ­ization. Most of ­these models emerge from what
is generically known as organ­ization development (OD). OD professionals specialize in change, usually at the group, work pro­cess, or organ­ization levels.
Thus, all HRD professionals can be seen as leading or facilitating change
for the goal of improvement (Holton, 1997). This chapter’s purpose is to examine change as an organ­izing construct for ­human resource development in its
effort to contribute to per­for­mance requirements. This chapter focuses on the
core understandings of the change pro­cess that cut across all areas of practice
and research and not the specific contexts of change.
PERSPECTIVES ON CHANGE FOR HRD
Change is a familiar concept but is seldom explic­itly defined. It is impor­tant to
understand what is meant by change.
Change as Individual Development Some definitions of change focus first
on the fact that change in organ­izations always involves changing individuals:
“Induction of new patterns of action, belief, and attitudes among substantial
segments of a population” (Schein, 1970, 134). From this view, orga­nizational
change involves getting p
­ eople in organ­izations to do, believe, or feel something
dif­fer­ent. It is this view of change that has dominated training-­oriented change
interventions.
Change as Learning The second definition of change speaks to how change
occurs: “Change is a cyclical pro­cess of creating knowledge (the change or innovation), disseminating it, implementing the change, and then institutionalizing what is learned by making it part of the organ­ization’s routines” (Watkins
and Marsick, 1993, 21). This definition reminds us that change usually involves
learning. “Learning and change pro­cesses are part of each other. Change is a
learning pro­cess and learning is a change pro­cess” (Beckhard and Pritchard,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 307
12/3/21 3:05 PM
308
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
1992, 4). This fundamental relationship points out why change is one of the core
constructs for the discipline of h
­ uman resource development.
Change as ­Career Development Within ­career development, ­there is some
disagreement about the exact definition of a ­career. ­Here are two leading
definitions:
The evolving sequence of a person’s work experiences over time (Osipow
and Fitzgerald, 1996, 51)
The combination and sequence of roles played by a person during the
course of a lifetime (Super, 1980, 282; Super and Sverko, 1995, 23)
The point of agreement is that a c­ areer is conceptualized as the sequence of
roles a person fills. The point of disagreement is ­whether ­those changes include
just work roles or work and life roles. Regardless, ­career development is fundamentally concerned with change and evolution of a person’s roles.
Change as Internal Adult Development Another view of change comes
from adult development theory. The generally accepted notion that adults continue to develop throughout the life span—­biologically, psychologically, cognitively, and socially—­links adult development with change (McLagan, 2017). “The
concept of development, as with learning, is most often equated with change”
(Merriam and Caffarella, 2006, p. 93). Adult development theory defines the
types of internal changes that adults experience in their lives in contrast to c­ areer
development theory, which defines the roles adults fill in society.
Change as Goal-­Directed Activity The previous definitions offer ­little guid-
ance ­toward the purpose of change. Other definitions suggest that change should
have a purpose: “Change is a departure from the status quo. It implies movement ­toward a goal, an idealized state, or a vision of what should be, and
movement away from pre­sent conditions, beliefs, or attitudes” (Rothwell,
­Sullivan, and McLean, 1995, 9). Change should therefore be directed at some
goal or outcome that represents a vision of a more desirable end state. However,
they remind us that not all change is good. Change can be in negative directions,
resulting in a less effective organ­ization if it is not focused on desired outcomes.
Change as Innovation Poole and Van de Ven (2004) define orga­nizational
change as “a difference in form, quality, or a state over time in an orga­nizational
entity (xi). Equally purposeful is the definition of innovation in organ­izations:
“The innovation journey is defined as new ideas that are developed and implemented to achieve outcomes by ­people who engage in transactions (relationships)
with ­others in changing institutional and orga­nizational contexts” (Van de Ven,
Polley, Garud, and Venkataraman, 2008, 7). Change in ­these definitions consists of new ideas implemented in a social pro­cess directed at achieving outcomes
to change organ­izations.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 308
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
309
Core Dimensions of Change
Two core dimensions of change are impor­tant to consider: the depth of change
(incremental vs. transformational) and the tempo of change (continuous vs.
episodic).
INCREMENTAL VERSUS TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE
The distinction between incremental and transformational change is concerned
with the depth and scope of change. Incremental change deals with smaller,
more adaptive changes, while transformational change requires major shifts in
direction or perspective. This distinction is found in organ­ization development
and adult learning lit­er­a­ture. Not surprisingly, the two are closely aligned.
OD and Planned Incremental Change A fundamental issue for OD has
been the scope of change in which its tools are applied. The traditional focus of
OD has been on planned incremental change. The OD approach is distinguished
from other organ­ization change approaches in this way:
OD and change management both address the effective implementation
of planned change. They are concerned with the sequence of activities,
pro­cesses and leadership issues that produce orga­nizational improvements. They differ, however, in their under­lying value orientation. OD’s
behavioral science foundation supports values of ­human potential, participation, and development, whereas change management is more focused on economic potential and the creation of competitive advantage.
As a result, OD’s distinguishing feature is its concern with the transfer
of knowledge and skill such that the system is more able to manage
change in the ­future. Change management does not necessarily require
the transfer of such skills. In short, all OD involves change management,
but change management does not involve OD. (Cummings and Worley,
2001, 3; emphasis added)
The change pro­cess that lends itself best to the values of h
­ uman potential, participation, and development is incremental change. That is, change that “produces appreciable, not radical, change in individual employees’ cognitions as
well as be­hav­iors” (Porras and Silvers, 1991).
The traditional emphasis on planned incremental change has ­limited OD’s
influence on orga­nizational change. This pre­sents a perplexing dilemma for
HRD. The philosophical ideals of ­human potential, participation, and development embedded in the OD approaches to change are also ones traditionally embraced by HRD professionals. Most OD professionals have now embraced
more holistic models of change (Poole and Van de Ven, 2004).
Transformational Change Transformational change has increasingly moved
to the forefront of orga­nizational and individual change and is defined as an:
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 309
12/3/21 3:05 PM
310
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
extension of organ­ization development that seeks to create massive
changes in an organ­ization’s structures, pro­cesses, culture, and orientation to its environment. Organ­ization transformation is the application
of behavioral science theory and practice to large-­scale, paradigm-­
shifting orga­nizational change. An organ­ization transformation usually
results in totally new paradigms or models for organ­izing and performing work. (French, Bell, and Zawacki, 1999, vii)
Indeed, transformational change goes well beyond the incremental change
characterized by traditional OD and is the more recent addition to OD practice. Transformational change has five key characteristics (Cummings and
Worley, 2001):
1. Triggered by environmental and internal disruptions—­organ­izations
must experience a severe threat to survival.
2. Systemic and revolutionary—­t he entire nature of the organ­ization
must change, including its culture and design.
3. Demands a new organ­izing paradigm—by definition, it requires
gamma change (discussion to follow).
4. Is driven by se­nior executives and line management—­transformational
change cannot be a “bottom-up” pro­cess ­because se­nior management
is in charge of strategic change.
5. Continuous learning and change—­the learning pro­cess ­will likely be
substantial and require considerable unlearning and innovation.
Clearly, this type of change does not lend itself to traditional OD methodologies.
Sometimes transformational change threatens traditional OD values b
­ ecause
it may entail layoffs or significant restructurings. In addition, it is not always pos­
si­ble to have broad participation in planning transformational change, and it is
often implemented in a top-­down manner.
More recent methods have emerged in an attempt to expand OD’s reach into
large-­scale whole-­systems change in a manner that is consistent with OD val­ ese include techniques such as f­ uture search
ues (Bunker and Alban, 1997). Th
(Weisbord and Janoff, 2007), open space technology (Owen, 2008), real-­time
strategic change (Jacobs, 1994), and the ICA strategic planning pro­cess (Spencer, 1989).
Incremental and transformational change can be implemented in reaction
to events (reactive) or in a proactive way in anticipation of events that may occur (anticipatory) (Nadler and Tushman, 1995). Thus, Nadler and Tushman suggest four types of change: tuning, adaptation, re­orientation, and re-­creation
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 310
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
Anticipatory
Reactive
Incremental
Discontinuous
(Transformational)
Tuning
Reorientation
Adaptation
Re-Creation
311
Figure 15.1: Types of Orga­nizational Change
(see figure 15.1). Adaptation, which is reactive incremental change, is prob­ably
the most common type of change and constantly occurs in organ­izations. Re­
orientation, which is anticipatory transformational change, is the most challenging type to implement.
CONTINUOUS VERSUS EPISODIC CHANGE
Another critical dimension of change is its tempo, defined as the rate, rhythm,
or pattern of the change pro­cess. The first tempo, continuous change, is described
as “a pattern of endless modifications in work pro­cesses and social practices. . . . ​
Numerous small accommodations cumulate and amplify” (Weick and Quinn,
1999, 366). Continuous change has historically been closely related to incremental change but is actually a dif­fer­ent construct, which has an impor­tant implication in t­ oday’s fast-­changing world.
The second tempo, episodic change, is defined as “occasional interruption
or divergence from equilibrium. . . . ​It is seen as a failure of the organ­ization
to adapt its deep structure to a changing environment” (Weick and Quinn,
1999, 366). Episodic change tends to be infrequent and occurs in short-­term episodes. In this view, organ­izations have a certain amount of change inertia ­until
some force triggers them.
While this description is close to the definition of incremental versus transformational change, considering tempo of change (continuous vs. episodic) separately from the scope of change (incremental vs. transformational) is useful.
The prob­lem is that deep change is defined as episodic. In t­ oday’s world, companies like internet-­based firms have to make continuous transformational
change, which is not even contemplated in the original definitions. The notion
that transformational change only occurs episodically has been true historically
but is increasingly challenged t­ oday. Furthermore, it is also pos­si­ble for organ­
izations to make an episodic change that is only incremental rather than transformational. Corporate management teams are viewed as most likely to lead to
incremental change—­even when attempting strategic change—­that ultimately
­causes them to overlook disruptive changes, technological and other­wise, that
threaten their business (Christensen, 1997).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 311
12/3/21 3:05 PM
312
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Change Outcomes
When considering the multitude of individual, pro­cess, group, and orga­nizational
dimensions that can be affected, the pos­si­ble outcomes from change are enormous. A more fundamental way to describe outcomes from change is through
four basic types of change (Porras and Silvers, 1991, 57):
• Alpha change—­change in the perceived levels of variables within a
paradigm without altering their configuration (e.g., a perceived
improvement in skills).
• Beta change—­change in ­people’s view about the meaning of the value
of any variable within an existing paradigm without altering their
configuration (e.g., change in standards).
• Gamma(A) change—­change in the configuration of an existing
paradigm without the addition of new variables (e.g., changing the
central value of “production-­driven” paradigm from “cost containment” to “total quality focus”). This results in the reconfiguration of
all variables within this paradigm.
• Gamma(B) change—­the replacement of one paradigm with another
that contains some or all of new variables (e.g., replacing a
“production-­driven” paradigm with a “customer-­responsive”
paradigm).
General Theories of Change
In this section, three general theories of change are discussed. Most other theories or models of change pro­cesses can be located within t­ hese three basic
frameworks.
FIELD THEORY
The classic general theory of change is Kurt Lewin’s (1951) field theory. This theory has influenced most change theories. The essence of field theory is deceptively s­ imple and enduring.
The most fundamental construct in this theory is the field. According to
Lewin, “All be­hav­ior is conceived of as a change of some state of a field in a given
unit of time” (xi). For individuals, he says this is “the ‘life space’ of the individual. This life space consists of the person and the psychological environment as
it exists for him” (xi). It is helpful to realize that a field also exists for any unit
of social structure or organ­ization. Thus, a field can be defined for a team, department, or organ­ization.
The field or life space includes “all facts that have existence and excludes
­those that do not have existence for the individual or group ­under study” (xi).
This is vitally impor­tant in considering change ­because individuals or groups
may have distorted views of real­ity or may not see certain aspects of real­ity. What
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 312
12/3/21 3:05 PM
CASE EXAMPLE: ORGA­NIZATIONAL CHANGE
Suppose you are dealing with an organ­ization with declining per­for­
mance (e.g., profits) requiring some orga­nizational change. An example of
alpha change would be for them to focus on ­doing a better job at what
they are already ­doing, perhaps by eliminating errors and waste. Beta
change would result if the organ­ization realized that the industry had become so competitive that their previous notions of what high per­for­mance
meant had to be revised upward. An example of gamma(A) change might
be introducing enterprise software to run their business more effectively
but requiring a reor­ga­ni­za­tion of their work pro­cesses. Gamma(B) change
would result if they discarded their old business model of selling through
retail stores and replaced it with one selling through the internet.
This case is helpful ­because ­these dif­fer­ent types of outcomes clearly
would require dif­fer­ent change strategies. ­These are portrayed in the
model shown in figure 15.2 (Porras and Silvers, 1991). Note that they begin with two basic types of change interventions discussed ­earlier: organ­
ization development (incremental) and organ­ization transformation. The
target variables are ­those at which interventions are aimed. As a result of
the interventions on ­these target variables, alpha, beta, or gamma cognitive change results in individual members leading to enhanced individual
development and improved orga­nizational per­for­mance.
Change
Intervention
Organization
Transformation
(OT)
Organizational
Target
Variables
VISION
• Guiding
Beliefs and
Principles
• Purpose
• Mission
WORK SETTING
Organization
Development
(OD)
• Organizing
Arrangements
• Social Factors
• Technology
• Physical
Setting
Individual
Organizational
Member
Alpha
C Change
O
G
N Beta
I
T Change
I
V
E
Gamma
C
(A)
H
A Change
N
G Gamma
E
(B)
Change
Organizational
Outcomes
Improved
Organizational
Performance
Behavior
Change
Enhanced
Individual
Development
Figure 15.2: Model of Change Outcomes
Source: Porras and Silvers, 1991, 53. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 313
12/3/21 3:05 PM
314
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
­ atters to the person or group and what shapes their be­hav­ior is only what
m
they see.
Fi­nally, field theory acknowledges that be­hav­ior is not dependent on what
happened in the past or what is expected to happen in the f­ uture but rather on
the field as it exists in the pre­sent. Lewin did not ignore the effects of history or
anticipated events. Instead, he said that it is how ­those past or anticipated events
manifest themselves in the pre­sent that affects be­hav­ior. In other words, it is how
­those events are perceived ­today that is part of a person’s field and influences
the person’s be­hav­ior ­today.
According to field theory, change is the result of a constellation of psychological forces in a person’s field at a given point in time. Driving forces are t­ hose
that push a person ­toward a positive outcome while restraining forces are t­ hose that
represent barriers. Driving forces push a person t­ oward movement, while restraining forces may inhibit locomotion. Forces in a person’s field create tension. If
the driving and restraining forces are equal and opposite, conflict results and
no motion is likely to result. Thus, to understand a person or group’s likelihood of
changing, driving forces have to be stronger than restraining forces. A field where
the forces are approximately in balance results in a quasi-­equilibrium state where
no change is likely.
Perhaps the best-­k nown part of Lewin’s field theory is his three-­step change
pro­cess: unfreezing, movement, and refreezing. However, it is rarely discussed
in field theory, which is the most helpful way to understand it.
From the preceding discussion, it would appear that all one has to do to invoke change is to increase driving forces or decrease restraining forces, and
a proportional change would result. According to Lewin, this is not the case.
Social systems in a quasi-­equilibrium develop an inner re­sis­tance to change,
which he calls a social habit or custom. In force terms, the equilibrium level acquires a value itself, becoming a force working to maintain that equilibrium.
Furthermore, “the greater the social value of a group standard the greater is the
re­sis­tance of the individual group member to move away from this level” (227).
To overcome this inner re­sis­tance, Lewin says that “an additional force seems
to be required, a force sufficient to ‘break the habit,’ to ‘unfreeze’ the custom” (225).
In other words, to begin the change pro­cess, some larger force is necessary to
break the inherent re­sis­tance to change. The unfreezing force ­will result in a
less than proportional movement, but it w
­ ill begin movement ­toward a new
equilibrium. Lewin also notes that this is one reason group methods are so
power­ful in leading change. B
­ ecause the inner re­sis­tance is often group norms,
change is more likely to happen if the group can be encouraged to change ­those
norms themselves.
Lewin goes on to note that change is often short-­lived. A
­ fter exerting the
effort to unfreeze a group, change may occur, but then ­people revert to the previous level. Therefore, equal attention must be paid to what he called freezing,
usually referred to t­ oday as refreezing, rather than just moving ­people to a new
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 314
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
315
level. Lewin defines freezing as “the new force field is made secure against
change” (229). Freezing involves harnessing the same power of the social field
that acted to prevent change in the beginning by creating new group norms that
reinforce the changes.
SOCIOTECHNICAL SYSTEMS THEORY
Sociotechnical systems theory was developed by Eric Trist and was based on work
he did with the British coal mining industry while he was at the Tavistock Institute (Fox, 1995). First presented in the early 1950s (Trist and Bamforth, 1951),
it, too, has stood the test of time and remains at the core of most orga­nizational
development change efforts. Trist and Bamforth ­were studying a successful British coal mine when most of the industry was experiencing a g­ reat deal of difficulty, despite large investments to improve mining technology. They observed
that this par­tic­u­lar mine had improved the social structure of work (to autonomous work teams), not just to the technology. They realized that the cause of
much of the industry’s prob­lems was a failure to consider changes in the social
structure of work to accompany the technical changes being made. While this
may sound obvious, the same ­mistake is still being made t­oday. For example,
many organ­izations have strug­gled to implement software systems mainly
­because they have approached them as a technology prob­lem without considering the ­people aspects.
From that work emerged the relatively s­ imple but power­ful concept that work
consists of two interdependent systems that have to be jointly optimized. The
technical system consists of the materials, machines, pro­cesses, and systems that
produce the organ­ization’s outputs. The social system is the system that relates
the workers to the technical system and each other (Cooper and Foster, 1971).
Usually, orga­nizational change initiatives emphasize one more than the other.
Typically, the technical system is highlighted more than the social system ­because
it is easy to change computers, machines, or buildings and ignore the effect of the
change on ­people.
Sociotechnical systems have remained a loosely defined metatheory without detailed explication. Instead, the intent and ele­ments of sociotechnical systems theory are pre­sent in detail in many change models, such as total quality
management reengineering (Shani and Mitki, 1996) and the enterprise model
(Brache, 2002). Thus, sociotechnical systems provide a handy framework for
orga­nizational analy­sis and change.
TYPOLOGY OF CHANGE THEORIES
Van de Van and Poole (2005) pre­sent four basic pro­cess theories of change
that they say underlie change in the social, biological, and physical sciences.
They contend that ­t hese four schools of thought about change are distinctly
dif­fer­ent and that all specific theories of orga­nizational and individual
change can be built from one or a combination of ­these four. As a result,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 315
12/3/21 3:05 PM
316
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
EVOLUTION
Multiple
Entities
Unit of
Change
Selection
Variation
DIALECTIC
Retention
Thesis
Antithesis
Population Scarcity
Environmental Selection
Competition
Pluralism (Diversity)
Confrontation
Conflict
TELEOLOGY
LIFE CYCLE
Dissatisfaction
Stage 4 (Terminate)
Single
Entity
Stage 3
(Harvest)
Synthesis
Conflict
Stage 1
(Startup)
Search/
Interact
Implement
Goals
Stage 2 (Grow)
Set/Envision Goals
Imminent Program
Regulation
Compliant Adoption
Purposeful Enactment
Social Construction
Consensus
Prescribed
Mode of Change
Constructive
Figure 15.3: Pro­cess Theories of Orga­nizational Development and Change
Source: Van de Ven and Poole, 1995, 520. Used with permission.
t­ hese four offer a more parsimonious explanation of orga­nizational change
and development. “In each theory: (a) pro­cess is viewed as a dif­fer­ent cycle of
change events, (b) which is governed by a dif­fer­ent “motor” or generating
mechanism that (c) operates on a dif­fer­ent unit of analy­sis, and (d) represents
a dif­fer­ent mode of change” (520).
This four-­part framework is beneficial for understanding the variety of
change theories in the lit­er­a­ture (figure 15.3). Using ­these four general theories,
you can find the commonalities among diverse approaches. It is helpful in practice ­because it enables one to understand the multiple forces for change that
occur. Van de Ven and Poole (2005) also identify sixteen pos­si­ble combinations
of ­these four theories that represent logically pos­si­ble composite theories.
Life cycle theory depicts change as progressing through stages governed
by a natu­ral or logical “law” that prescribes the stages. For example, life cycle
theories of organ­izations (Adizes, 1988) proj­ect certain critical stages that ­every
firm experiences as it grows from a small com­pany to a larger, more complex
organ­ization.
Teleological theory also operates within a single entity but offers constructive rather than prescribed stages of change. Teleological theory views development as a cycle of goal formulation and implementation. Individuals within the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 316
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
317
entity construct t­ hese goals. Strategic planning could be a classic example of this
theory whereby an organ­ization sets goals for its f­ uture and works to implement
them. C
­ areer planning might be an individual-­level teleological theory.
Evolutionary theory differs from the previous two in that it operates on multiple entities. This model views change as occurring out of competition for
scarce resources within the entity’s environment. As a result, entities within the
population go through cycles of variation, se­lection, and retention. That is, some
grow and thrive; some decline or die. ­These cycles are somewhat predictable, so
the change pro­cess is prescribed in t­ hese theories. Theories of organ­ization development that focus on external competitive forces and how firms thrive or die
within competitive environments fall within this theory.
Dialectic theory also operates on multiple entities but with constructed
change pro­cesses. In this model, change arises out of conflict between entities
espousing opposing thesis and antithesis. Change occurs through the confrontation and conflict that results. Many instances of orga­nizational change that
arise due to changes in societal norms fit within this framework. For example,
changes in the workplace reflecting racial, gender, and ethnic diversity often
arise out of dialectical tensions.
Re­sis­tance to Change
“All change requires exchanging something old for something new. P
­ eople have
to unlearn and relearn, exchange power and status, and exchange old norms and
values for new norms and values. Th
­ ese changes are often frightening and threatening, while at the same time [are] potentially stimulating and providers of
new hope” (Tichy, 1983, 332). The notion of exchange is particularly impor­tant
­because ­there are costs and benefits to each side of the exchange. Ultimately,
the benefits have to outweigh the costs for change to succeed.
NATURE OF RE­SIS­TANCE
Re­sis­tance to change is a universal phenomenon, w
­ hether one is implementing a new strategy in an organ­ization or helping individuals lose weight. In
fact, without re­sis­tance, change would not be difficult, and many change interventions and models would be greatly simplified. It is re­sis­tance that shapes
most change strategies and makes effective change leaders so valuable. If the
­causes of re­sis­tance are understood, then strategies to overcome them become
clearer.
Re­sis­tance is a multidimensional phenomenon. Piderit (2000) summarizes
the resistance-­to-­change lit­er­a­ture and proposes that re­sis­tance to change consists of three dimensions:
• Cognitive—­beliefs about the change
• Emotional (affective)—­feelings in response to change
• Behavioral—­actions in response to change
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 317
12/3/21 3:05 PM
318
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
This three-­part view of re­sis­tance is particularly impor­tant b
­ ecause a person may
not be consistent on all three dimensions. If a person is negative on all three
dimensions, re­sis­tance occurs. If positive on all three dimensions, support for
change occurs. However, it is not uncommon for a person to be conflicted. For
example, a person may believe change is needed (cognitive) but still fear it (affective). Or, a person may not believe in it and fear it but act as if they support the
change. Piderit (2000) calls this ambivalence, defined as the state where two alternative perspectives are both strongly experienced (787). She also suggests that
this phenomenon may be more widespread during change than is acknowledged.
Tichy (1983) approaches orga­nizational change from three aspects of orga­
nizational real­ity: the technical, po­liti­cal, and cultural views. The technical perspective focuses on organ­izing to get the work accomplished most effectively.
The po­liti­cal view focuses on power and the allocation of rewards. The cultural
view focuses on the norms and values in the organ­ization.
FORMS OF RE­SIS­TANCE
Prob­ably the most vexing question in the lit­er­a­ture is why re­sis­tance to change occurs. King and Anderson (1995) suggest four fundamentally dif­fer­ent views of
­causes of re­sis­tance in the lit­er­a­ture. We w
­ ill explore each in the following sections.
Re­sis­tance as Unavoidable Behavioral Response This is prob­ably the
dominant view of re­sis­tance to change. In this view, individuals resist change
simply ­because it represents a move into the unknown. Therefore, re­sis­tance is
a natu­ral and unavoidable response. The fact that individuals have a strong need
to hold onto what is familiar is a power­ful force, a point that has been neglected
in the change lit­er­a­ture (Tannenbaum and Hanna, 1985). This deep-­seated need
to hold on may be the root cause of much re­sis­tance to change. Tannenbaum
and Hanna (1985) suggest that ­there are four primary reasons for this need:
• Change is loss, requiring us to let go of something familiar and
predictable.
• Change is uncertainty, requiring us to move from the known to the
unknown.
• Change dissolves meaning, which in turn affects our identity.
• Change violates scripts, disrupting our unconscious life plans.
Change leaders who understand the natu­ral psychological pro­cess individuals
undergo can facilitate letting go and moving on. Th
­ ose who ignore it encounter
re­sis­tance to change that may seem insurmountable.
Re­sis­tance as Po­liti­cal and Class Strug­gle The most radical of the four
views, this view holds that re­sis­tance stems from the fundamentally inequitable relationship between workers and the organ­ization. B
­ ecause workers often
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 318
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
319
feel alienated and exploited, they sometimes resist change that benefits the
organ­ization. King and Anderson (1995) suggest this type of re­sis­tance may be
more prevalent among l­abor groups who feel most alienated from management
and the organ­ization. For example, some u
­ nions have been known to resist
change ­because it is perceived to exploit workers. Also, one of the chief criticisms
of corporate restructuring is that it has exploited employees in organ­izations
and rewarded top executives (Economist, 2008). As a result, many employees
­were reluctant to embrace other changes proposed in t­ hose organ­izations.
Re­sis­tance as Constructive Counterbalance From this view, re­sis­tance
may not always be a bad ­thing but instead acts as a counterbalance to change
that is ill-­conceived, poorly implemented, or viewed as detrimental to the organ­
ization. Re­sis­tance to change has most often been discussed from a managerial
point of view whereby re­sis­tance is seen as a barrier employees pre­sent to management’s change initiatives and something that must be overcome. However,
implicit in that traditional view is that management is “right” and employees
are “wrong” when it comes to change. Yet, management’s change initiatives frequently may not be the right course of action, and re­sis­tance is a healthy response by the organ­ization to ill-­conceived change. Thus, re­sis­tance may not be
harmful but instead serve as a check-­and-­balance system to prevent poorly conceived change from destroying the organ­ization.
This is supported by evidence that employees are increasingly cynical about
change (Reichers, Wanous, and Austin, 1997). According to Reichers, Wanous,
and Austin, cynicism about change is dif­fer­ent from re­sis­tance in that it involves
a loss of faith in leaders of change due to a history of failed attempts at change.
It is related to poorer job attitudes and motivation. A common cause of this is
a history of “program-­of-­the-­month” types of change efforts. Cynicism may lead
to re­sis­tance, which is usually viewed negatively by employees. However, if an
organ­ization has a history of “program-­of-­the-­month” change efforts, then re­
sis­tance may be a valuable counterbalance to force management to think more
carefully before proposing new change.
Re­sis­tance as Cognitive and Cultural Restructuring In this perspective,
re­sis­tance is conceived as a byproduct of restructuring cognitive schemas at
the individual level and as a recasting of orga­nizational culture and climate at the
orga­nizational level. The paradox is that individuals and organ­izations seek both
change and stability (Leana and Barry, 2000). Individual schemas help ­people
maintain a sense of identity and meaning in their day-­to-­day activities. Yet,
change is also necessary to prevent boredom. Orga­nizational schemas are necessary for efficient daily operation and help perpetuate successful practices. Continuous change is required to adapt to fast-­changing environments. Thus, t­ here
is always a tension between maintaining schemas and changing them when
necessary.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 319
12/3/21 3:05 PM
320
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
The focus on individual schema has increased, in part due to Senge’s (1990)
­earlier popu­lar work on the learning organ­ization in which he cites m
­ ental models (a closely related term) as one of his five disciplines. He defines m
­ ental models
as “deeply held internal images of how the world works, images that limit us to
familiar ways of thinking and acting” (174). In other words, m
­ ental models are the
cognitive structures that arise from an individual’s experiences. While they
help employees become more efficient, they also impede change b
­ ecause many
­people resist changes that do not fit their m
­ ental model, particularly if change
involves restructuring long or deeply held schema.
Argyris (1982, 1999) describes two fundamental theories (­mental models)
that ­people use to guide action in organ­izations. Model I, as he calls it, has four
governing values: (1) achieve your intended purpose, (2) maximize winning and
minimize losing, (3) suppress negative feelings, and (4) behave according to what
you consider rational. This theory leads ­people to advocate their positions and
cover up ­mistakes, which he calls defensive routines. Defensive routines are
blocks to individual and orga­nizational learning. Model II, on the other hand,
is predicated on the open sharing of information and detecting and correcting
­mistakes. As a result, defensive routines are minimized, and genuine learning
is facilitated. The ability to change the schema or m
­ ental models has been linked
to a firm’s ability to engage in strategic change and renewal (Barr, Stimpert, and
Huff, 1992). Unfortunately, model I is predominant in most organ­izations, serving as a fundamental source of re­sis­tance to change. Conversion to model II
usually requires double-­loop learning.
Similarly, the role of orga­nizational culture in blocking or facilitating change
is widely recognized. Changing culture remains one of the most difficult challenges in orga­nizational change. Orga­nizational culture, which is usually deeply
rooted, can be a tremendous source of re­sis­tance to change. It represents orga­
nizational ­mental models of shared assumptions about how the organ­ization
should function.
As Schein (2010) points out, “changing something implies not just learning
something new but unlearning something that is already t­ here and possibly in
the way” (116). He equates the unlearning pro­cess to overcoming re­sis­tance to
change. In the case of major change, such as changing culture, change has to
begin with some disconfirmation such that survival anxiety exceeds learning
anxiety. If so, then cognitive redefinition results for the learner.
In summary, re­sis­tance to change is a complex but vitally impor­tant change
construct. ­Whether viewed from the individual, group, or orga­nizational level,
addressing re­sis­tance to change is a central concern for theory and practice.
Focused Perspectives on Change
Numerous middle-­range theories have arisen alongside the general theory of
change to describe change from a par­tic­u­lar perspective or lens. Each lens is instructive and valuable for understanding change in more depth. This section is
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 320
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
321
not intended to be a comprehensive review but rather to pre­sent several focused
theories representative of major perspectives.
ORGA­NIZATIONAL THEORIES
Four theories are presented h
­ ere: organ­izations as per­for­mance systems, the
Burke-­Litwin model, innovation diffusion theory, and the orga­nizational communications approach.
Organ­izations as Per­for­mance Systems Thinking about the organ­ization
as a per­for­mance system functioning within the larger environment and as a
collection of subsystems has been the work of numerous orga­nizational scholars, including Senge’s (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the
Learning Organ­ization and Wheatley’s (1999) Leadership and the New Science:
Learning about Organ­ization from an Orderly Universe. Both influential pieces
have minimal direct connections of their theories to the substantive work of
change.
In contrast, Rummler and Brache’s (1995) and Brache’s (2002) holistic and
systemic views of the organ­ization as a per­for­mance system intricately bridge
the theory-­practice gap. The entire model is discussed in more detail in chapter 9. They begin by viewing organ­izations as adaptive systems.
As the Rummler and Brache inquiry model unfolds, the organ­ization, work
pro­cess, and individual contributor per­for­mance levels are laid out. In addition,
the three per­for­mance needs of goals, design, and management are specified.
The resulting 3 × 3 matrix creates nine per­for­mance cells (see figure 15.4). Together they create a framework for thinking about the per­for­mance variables that
impinge upon change. Their overall methodology is portrayed in figure 15.4.
The Rummler and Brache change pro­cess is aimed at orga­nizational per­
for­mance, and it is both a theoretically sound organ­ization development change
pro­cess (see Wimbiscus, 1995) and one that has been proven in practice. It combines thinking models, systemic relationships, tools, and metrics to guide the
change effort. More than most change models, the Rummler and Brache model
requires the OD con­sul­tant and the improvement team to be serious students
of the organ­ization, its larger environment, and the inner working of the organ­
ization’s pro­cesses and ­people.
A relationship map of a hy­po­thet­i­cal computer com­pany is presented in Figure 15.5 to illustrate an early analy­sis step of their change pro­cess.
Burke-­Litwin Model of Orga­nizational Per­for­mance and Change One
of the more complex but comprehensive models of orga­nizational change is the
Burke–­Litwin (1992) model. Burke and Litwin attempted to capture the interrelationships of complex orga­nizational variables and distinguish between transformational and transactional dynamics in orga­nizational change (Burke,
1994). Furthermore, the model portrays the primary variables or subsystems that
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 321
12/3/21 3:05 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 322
strategy
Phase 0
Performance
Improvement
Planning
Process
Improvement
and
Management
Plan
core
processes
without
issues
MANAGING THE ORGANIZATION AS A SYSTEM
continuous
improvement
Phase 4
Process Management
MANAGING INDIVIDUAL PROCESSES
issues
processes
with
issues
Phase 1
Project
Definition
Phase 2
Process
Analysis
and
Design
Phase 3
Implementation
Process Improvement Project
“Should”
project, goals, roles,
and boundaries Implementation Plan
Figure 15.4: Pro­cess Improvement and Management Methodology
Source: Rummler and Brache, 1995, 117. Used with permission.
improved
process
12/3/21 3:05 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 323
new product specifications
Labor
Markets
people
Human
Resources
product/service promotion
MARKETING
staff
Research technology
Community
PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT
needs and applications
FIELD OPERATIONS
custom software and support
Consulting and
Systems Designs
sales forecasts
generic software
sales effort
Sales
software orders
invoices
FINANCE
cash
software
orders
material
needs
purchase orders
production
forecasts
orders/contracts
capital
MARKET
leads
Capital
Markets
consulting and custom software
orders
MANUFACTURING
Production
Control
Vendors
Copying
Individual
Consumers
Retail
Distributors
Assembly
and
Shipping
blank diskettes
and packaging
Figure 15.5: Relationship Map for Computec, Inc.
Source: Rummler and Brache, 1995, 38. Used with permission.
invoices
cash
software packages
Other Companies/
Gov’t Agencies
Aerospace
Companies
contracts
12/3/21 3:05 PM
324
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
predict and explain per­for­mance in an organ­ization and how ­those subsystems
affect change. Figure 15.6 shows the complete model.
The top part of the model shows the transformational subsystems: leadership,
mission and strategy, and orga­nizational culture. Change in ­these areas is usually
caused by interaction with the external environment and requires entirely new
be­hav­ior by the organ­ization. For organ­izations that need significant change,
­these are the primary levers. The lower part of the model contains the transactional subsystems: management practices, systems, structure, work unit climate,
motivation, task requirements and individual skills/abilities, and individual needs
and values. Change in t­ hese areas occurs primarily through short-­term reciprocity among p
­ eople and groups. For organ­izations that need a fine-­tuning or improving change pro­cess, ­these subsystems are the primary levers. The arrows in
External
Environment
Leadership
Mission and
Strategy
Organizational
Culture
Structure
Systems
(Policies and
Procedures)
Feedback
Feedback
Management
Practices
Work Unit
Climate
Task
Requirements
and Individual
Skill/Abilities
Motivation
Individual
Needs and
Values
Individual and
Organizational
Performance
Figure 15.6: Model of Orga­nizational Per­for­mance and Change
Source: Burke and Litwin, 1992, 528. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 324
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
325
the model represent the causal relationships between the major subsystems and
the reciprocal feedback loops. Burke and his associates have also developed a diagnostic survey that can assess and plan change using the model.
Innovation Diffusion Theory Diffusion research focuses on f­ actors influencing the rate and extent to which change and innovation are spread among and
­adopted by members of a social system (e.g., organ­ization, community, society,
­etc.). Rogers (1995) offers the most comprehensive and authoritative review of
diffusion research. He defines diffusion as “the pro­cess by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among members of
a social system” (10). The four key components of a diffusion system embedded
in this definition are innovation, communication channels, time, and the social system.
The body of research on diffusion is im­mense and is often overlooked by
HRD professionals. An instrumental part of this research is the rate at which
change is ­adopted in social systems. It turns out that the rate is reasonably predictable and almost always follows a normal distribution, as shown in figure 15.7.
Rogers defines five categories of adopters (of change or innovation):
• Innovators—­venturesome with a desire for the rash, daring, and risky
• Early adopters—­are respected by peers and are the embodiment of
successful, discrete use of new ideas; often the opinion leader
• Early majority—­tend to deliberate for some time before completely
adopting a new idea but still adopt before the average person
• Late majority—­approach innovation with a skeptical and cautious
air and do not adopt ­until most ­others in the system have
• Laggards—­tend to be suspicious and skeptical of innovations and
change agents; the last to adopt and most resistant to change
Adopter Categorization on the Basis of Innovativeness
Innovators
2.5%
Early
Majority
34%
Early
Adopters
13.5%
x– – 2sd
x– – sd
Late
Majority
34%
–
x
Laggards
16%
x– + sd
Figure 15.7: Adopter Categories
Source: Rogers, 1995, 262. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 325
12/3/21 3:05 PM
326
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Orga­nizational Communications Approach Communication is central to
any successful change effort. Surprisingly, few OD change models have focused
on this aspect of change. Armenakis and his colleagues (Armenakis, Harris,
and Mossholder, 1993; Armenakis, Harris, and Field, 1999) are a notable exception to this, offering an orga­nizational change model built around the change
message. In their view, “all efforts to introduce and institutionalize change can
be thought of as sending a message to orga­nizational members” (Armenakis,
Harris, and Field, 1999, 103). The change message must have five key components that address five core questions orga­nizational members have about the
change:
Message Ele­ment
Discrepancy
Appropriateness
Efficacy
Principal support
Personal valence
Question Answered
Is the change ­really necessary?
Is the specific change being introduced an
appropriate reaction to the discrepancy?
Can I/we successfully implement the change?
Are formal and informal leaders committed
to successful implementation and
institutionalization of the change?
What is in it (the change) for me?
Their model is considerably more complex than this, but the change message is the unique component. Also included in the model are seven generic
strategies to transmit and reinforce the message: active participation, management of external and internal information, formalization activities, diffusion
practices, persuasive communication, h
­ uman resource management practices,
and rites and ceremonies. ­These strategies and the message combine to move
­people in the organ­ization through stages of readiness, change adoption, commitment to the change, and institutionalization.
WORK PRO­CESS THEORIES
The quality improvement revolution of the 1980s was led by two el­derly scholar–­
prac­ti­tion­ers—­Dr. Joseph M. Juran and Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Both ­were
called to help rebuild the Japa­nese economy ­after World War II and then again
by the captains of American industry in the 1980s to help save the faltering
economy. Their basic thesis was that producing quality goods and ser­v ices
ends up costing less money, increases profits, delights customers who ­w ill
return for more, and provides satisfying work to p
­ eople at all levels in the
organ­ization
Both of ­these men began their journey in the realm of change at the work
pro­cess level. In addition, they started at a time when the rate of change was much
slower. Over the years, they expanded their pro­cess improvement models—up
to the leadership level and down to the individual worker level. Even so, the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 326
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
327
core of their work has been anchored at the work pro­cess level. A few defining
features from each are highlighted ­here.
Juran’s Quality by Design At the pro­cess level, Juran (1992) defines pro­cess
control and pro­cess design as follows: “Pro­cess control is the systematic evaluation of per­for­mance of a pro­cess, and taking of corrective action in the vent of
nonconformance” (509). “Pro­cess design is the activity of defining the specific
means to be used by the operating forces for meeting product quality goals” (221).
At the overall level, Juran identified three universal pro­cesses of managing for quality: quality planning, quality control, and quality improvement
(figure 15.8).
Deming’s Fourteen Points for Management Like Juran, Deming was a
statistician who relied heavi­ly on hard data to make decisions about pro­cess improvement. He believed in documenting pro­cesses to the point that many of
the flaws in the work pro­cess would simply reveal themselves. While he generally distrusted work pro­cesses that informally emerge and evolve in the workplace, he trusted numbers from good mea­sures of t­ hose pro­cesses as the basis
of improving them. He also trusted ­human beings and h
­ uman nature—­t he
­people who work in the pro­cesses. Over time, Deming became better known for
his fourteen points for management that he believed would produce saner and
more productive workplaces. They are as follows:
Managing for Quality
Quality Planning
• Establish quality goals
• Identify who are the
customers
• Determine the needs of
the customers
• Develop product
features that respond
to customers’ needs
• Develop pro­cesses
able to produce the
product features
• Establish pro­cess
controls; transfer the
plans to the operating
forces
Quality Control
Quality Improvement
• Evaluate ­actual
per­for­mance
• Compare ­actual
per­for­mance to
quality goals
• Act on the
difference
• Prove the need
• Establish the
infrastructure
• Identify the improvement
proj­ects
• Establish proj­ect teams
• Provide the teams with
resources, training, and
motivation to:
—­Diagnose the c­ auses
—­Stimulate remedies
• Establish control to hold
the gains
Figure 15.8: The Three Universal Pro­cesses of Managing for Quality
Source: Juran, 1992, 16. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 327
12/3/21 3:05 PM
328
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
1. Create constancy of purpose for improvement of product and ser­vice.
2. Adopt a new philosophy.
3. Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality.
4. End the practice of awarding business on price tag alone. Instead,
minimize total cost by working with a single supplier.
5. Improve constantly and forever ­every pro­cess for planning, production, and ser­vice.
6. Institute training on the job.
7. Adopt and institute leadership.
8. Drive out fear.
9. Break down barriers between staff areas.
10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the workforce.
11. Eliminate numerical quotas for the workforce and numerical goals
for management.
12. Remove barriers that rob p
­ eople of pride in workmanship. Eliminate
the annual rating or merit system.
13. Institute a vigorous program of self-­improvement for every­one.
14. Put every­body in the com­pany to work to accomplish the transformation. (Deming, 1986)
GROUP THEORIES
Group dynamics researchers have long been interested in how groups change
and evolve. The result has been a plethora of sequential stage theories describing predictable stages that groups move through as they grow and develop. While
they appear dif­fer­ent on the surface, ­there is more agreement than disagreement
among them.
Prob­ably the best-­k nown group change theory is described by the following five stages (Tuckman,1965; Tuckman and Jensen, 1977):
• Forming—­As the group comes together, a period of uncertainty
prevails as members try to find their place in the group and the
group’s rules are worked out.
• Storming—­Conflicts begin to arise as members confront and work
out their differences.
• Norming—­The group reaches some consensus regarding the structure and norms for the group.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 328
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
329
• Performing—­Group members become proficient at working
together.
• Adjourning—­The group disbands.
­These stages are a fundamental part of orga­nizational life and HRD. They
help explain critical features of group dynamics and help prac­ti­tion­ers work effectively with groups.
INDIVIDUAL THEORIES
Two groups of theories, adult development theory and ­career development theory, represent significant change theories at the individual level.
Adult Development Theory Adults do not grow up overnight—­they un-
dergo a developmental pro­cess. Researchers now understand that development
does not end when adulthood is reached but instead continues to pro­gress in
vari­ous ways. Adult development theories have a profound influence on thinking about learning and change ­because adults’ learning be­hav­ior varies considerably due to developmental influences. It is unclear exactly how it changes—­mainly
­because adult development theory is still mostly an array of untested models.
This section provides only a brief overview of adult development theory. Readers seeking a more complete discussion of adult development should consult
Knowles, Holton, and Swanson (1998), Bee (1996), Tennant and Pogson (1995),
Knox (1986a), or Merriam and Caffarella (2006).
Overview of Adult Development Theories Adult development theories are
generally divided into three types: physical changes, personality and life span
role development, and cognitive or intellectual development (Merriam and
Caffarella, 2006; Tennant, 1997). Role development theory’s primary contribution is to help explain how adults change in life roles. Cognitive development
theories help explain key ways adults’ thinking changes over their life.
Bee (1996) characterizes development theories as varying along two dimensions. First, theories vary in ­whether they include defined stages or no stages. Stage
theories imply fixed sequences of sequentially occurring stages over time. Stage theories are quite common, while ­others offer no such fixed sequence of events.
Second, some theories focus on development, while some focus on change
during adult life. Change theories are merely descriptive of typical changes experienced by adults. Th
­ ere is no normative hierarchy intended, so one phase is
not better than another. They merely seek to describe typical or expected changes.
Many of the life-­span role development theories fit into this category. The premise of t­ hese theories is that certain predictable types of changes occur throughout an adult’s life. ­Here are some examples of ­these:
• Levinson’s (1978, 1990) life stage theory, which divides adult life into
three eras with alternating periods of stability and transitions. Each
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 329
12/3/21 3:05 PM
330
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
era brings with it certain predictable tasks, and each transition
between eras certain predictable challenges.
• Erikson’s (1959) theory of identity development, which proposes that
an adult’s identity develops through the resolution of eight crises or
dilemmas.
• Loevinger’s (1976) ten-­stage model of ego development progressing
from infancy to adulthood.
The contribution of all life span theories to HRD is similar. First, they say
that adult life is a series of stages and transitions, each of which pushes the adult
into unfamiliar territory. Second, each transition to a new stage creates a motivation to learn.
Development theories imply a hierarchical ordering of developmental sequences, with higher levels being better than lower levels. They include a normative component, which suggests that adults should pro­gress to higher levels
of development. Many of the cognitive development theories fit into this category. The core premise of cognitive development theories is that changes occur
in a person’s thinking pro­cesses over time. The foundation of most adult cognitive development theories is the work of Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget. Piaget
hypothesized that c­ hildren move through four stages of thinking: sensory motor, preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operations. Formal operations, at which a person reaches the ability to reason hypothetically and abstractly,
is considered the stage at which mature adult thought begins—­t hough many
adults never reach it. ­Because Piaget was a child development specialist, his
model implies that cognitive development stops upon reaching adulthood. Adult
development theorists dispute that idea, focusing on vari­ous ways that cognitive development continues beyond formal operations.
Though few of the theories about adult development have been thoroughly
tested, they have persisted ­because most adults intuitively recognize that change
and growth continue throughout life. The implications of the adult development
perspective for HRD are im­mense b
­ ecause adult learning is inextricably intertwined with adult development. We tend to agree with the prevailing thinking
that ­there is no one theory that is “best.” Instead, adult development should be
viewed as consisting of multiple pathways and multiple dimensions (Daloz, 1986;
Merriam and Caffarella, 2006).
­Career Development Theory While McLagan (1989b) defines ­career devel-
opment as one of the three areas of practice for HRD (see chapter 2), in recent
de­cades, it has had a declining influence within HRD. HRD has increasingly
coalesced around personnel training and development and organ­ization development as the primary fields of practice. C
­ areer development functions as an
extension of the development component of T&D.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 330
12/3/21 3:05 PM
15. The Nature of the Change Pro­cess
331
This shift in responsibility for ­career development is due to changes in the
workplace, where the notion of long-­term c­ areers with single organ­izations is
mostly gone. Individuals have taken control of their c­ areer development where
organ­izations once had prevailed.
­Career development has been slighted as a contributor to HRD. ­Career development theories about c­ areer choice among young ­people are less impor­tant
to HRD b
­ ecause they do not fit traditional venues for HRD practice. However,
­career development theories that describe adult ­career development are vital
contributors to HRD practice ­because they describe adult progression through
work roles—­a primary venue for HRD practice (see chapter 20). Fundamentally,
­these theories are a special type of change theory at the individual level. Two
streams of research are beneficial to HRD: Super’s life span, life space approach
to ­careers, and Dawis and Lofquist’s theory of work adjustment. Readers wishing more information on ­these theories are encouraged to consult Brown and
Brooks (1996), Osipow and Fitzgerald (1996), Super and Sverko (1995), and Dawis
and Lofquist (1984).
Super’s Life Span, Life Space Approach Super’s theory developed over a
lifetime of research. Currently, the theory consists of fourteen basic propositions
(Super et al., 1996). ­Because it is the most complex c­ areer development theory,
many ele­ments are included in the propositions. Fundamentally, it includes t­ hese
basic components:
• Self-­concept—­Development through life is a pro­cess of defining,
developing, and implementing one’s self-­concept, which ­will change
over time.
• Life space—­A person’s life is composed of a constellation of work and
nonwork roles, the balance of which changes over life.
• Life span—­Life also consists of a macrostructure of developmental
stages as described in adult development theory.
• Role changes in life—­A person’s self-­concept changes as life roles
change, resulting in c­ areer changes as a person fits work to the
changes in life roles and self-­concept.
Unlike more traditional trait approaches to c­ areer choice and development,
Super’s theory is focused on change. Super sees adult life as built upon change
and development (the adult development perspective), which changes a person’s
self-­concept. A person’s work and c­ areer is, then, a place where the self-­concept
is acted out.
The power of this theory for HRD is that it directly explains many of the
work-­related changes adults undergo. A large portion of the demand for HRD
in organ­izations is influenced by adults changing roles and acting out their
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 331
12/3/21 3:05 PM
332
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
changing needs at work. Furthermore, adults often turn to HRD to help them
make ­career changes outlined in this theory. Thus, ­because this theory is change-­
oriented, it is a power­ful c­ areer development theory for HRD.
Theory of Work Adjustment This theory is built on the pro­cess of individu-
als and organ­izations adjusting to fit each other (Dawis and Lofquist, 1984).
According to this theory, individuals and organ­izations have needs, and they
interact to meet t­ hese needs through the other. When the interaction is mutually satisfying, the person and environment are said to correspond with each
other. Correspondence w
­ ill mean that workers are satisfied, and they are satisfactory to the organ­ization ­because they possess the necessary skills and expertise. This is called person–­environment correspondence.
What makes this a change-­oriented theory is that correspondence rarely
lasts b
­ ecause the needs of the worker and the organ­ization are constantly changing (Morris and Madsen, 2007). Thus, work and a ­career are an ongoing pro­
cess of the organ­ization and the worker providing feedback. Both may attempt
to make changes to accommodate the other, called adjustment be­hav­iors. A person’s perceptions of needed adjustments are influenced by their self-­concept.
This adjustment often takes the form of development as capabilities are expanded
to meet orga­nizational requirements.
Like most good theories, it is deceptively s­ imple to describe but power­ful in
practice. It describes the fundamental systemic dynamics under­lying much of
the employee–­organ­ization interaction. Again, many of the adjustments made
as a result of the interactions lead directly to HRD interventions. For example,
changes in skills needed by the organ­ization ­will result in developmental opportunities for employees. Similarly, changes in individual employee needs ­will
often lead to HRD assistance for changing work roles. When combined with
Super’s work, ­these theories provide valuable insights to change dynamics at the
individual level in organ­izations.
Leading and Managing Organ­ization Change
Of primary interest to the study of change has been the development of prescriptive pro­cess models to help change agents understand the best approach
to leading change. Th
­ ese models provide specific tasks that change agents must
accomplish to lead change successfully. Many dif­fer­ent pro­cess models have
developed, and while each has vari­ous nuances, at the core, most are quite
similar.
Five key activities for contributing to effective change management have
been proposed: motivating change, creating a vision, developing po­liti­cal support, managing the transition, and sustaining momentum (Cummings and
Worley, 2001, 155). A more detailed eight-­stage model for creating significant
change is shown in figure 15.9.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 332
12/3/21 3:05 PM
1. Establishing a Sense of Urgency
• Examining the market and competitive realities
• Identifying and discussing crises, potential crises, or major opportunities
2. Creating the Guiding Co­ali­tion
• Putting together a group with enough power to lead the change
• Getting the group to work together like a team
3. Developing a Vision and Strategy
• Creating a vision to help direct the change effort
• Developing strategies for achieving that vision
4. Communicating the Change Vision
• Using ­every vehicle pos­si­ble to constantly communicate the new vision
and strategies
• Having the guiding co­ali­tion role model the be­hav­ior expected of
employees
5. Empowering Broad-­Based Action
• Getting rid of obstacles
• Changing systems or structures that undermine the change vision
• Encouraging risk taking and nontraditional ideas, activities, and actions
6. Generating Short-­Term Wins
• Planning for vis­i­ble improvements in per­for­mance, or “wins”
• Creating t­hose wins
• Visibly recognizing and rewarding ­people who made the wins pos­si­ble
7. Consolidating Gains and Producing More Change
• Using increased credibility to change all systems, structures, and policies
that ­don’t fit together and d
­ on’t fit the transformation vision
­ eople who can implement the change
• Hiring, promoting, and developing p
vision
• Reinvigorating the pro­cess with new proj­ects, themes, and change agents
8. Anchoring New Approaches in the Culture
• Creating better per­for­mance through customer-­and productivity-­oriented
be­hav­ior, more and better leadership, and more effective management
• Articulating the connections between new be­hav­iors and orga­nizational
success
• Developing means to ensure leadership development and succession
Figure 15.9: Stages of Change Phases
Source: Kotter, 1996. Used with permission.
333
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 333
12/3/21 3:05 PM
334
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Conclusion
By understanding the complexities of change, HRD professionals can be more
effective in organ­izations. The integration of learning, per­for­mance, and change
­under one umbrella discipline makes HRD unique and power­ful. ­These three
constructs are central to orga­nizational effectiveness and ­will continue to become even more impor­tant in the ­future.
Reflection Questions
1. Why is change an impor­tant organ­izing construct for OD?
2. How can HRD become more of a change leader in organ­izations rather
than a change facilitator?
3. What similarities and differences do you see among the organ­ization,
work pro­cess, group, and individual change theories?
4. Can all change theories be captured in one type or a combination of
types within Van de Ven and Poole’s typology? Explain.
5. What is the responsible connection between change and per­for­mance?
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 334
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16
Organ­ization
Development Practices
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Variations in OD Practices
• Expected Results from OD Interventions
• OD in Relation to the Host Organ­ization
• OD Pro­cess Expertise
Core OD Practices
• OD Practices Revolve around the Change Pro­cess
• Trust and Integrity in OD
• OD Dynamics
Organization-­Focused OD Practices
• Organ­ization Strategy and Culture
• Case Example: Corporate Culture
• Planning for the ­Future
Work Process–­Focused OD Practices
• Pro­cess Improvement
• Benchmarking
Group-­Focused OD Practices
• Cross-­Cultural Team Building
• Case Example: Tunneling
• Group Conflict
Individual-­Focused OD Practices
• 360-­Degree Feedback
•­Career Development Assessment Center
• Coaching
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 335
12/3/21 3:05 PM
336
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Introduction
Part 5 of this book deals with organ­ization development (OD). Chapter 14 captured the essence of the OD component of HRD, and chapter 15 delved deeper
into the nature of change, the heart of OD interventions. This third chapter in
part 5 provides illustrations of OD practice. It spans from organ­izations to individuals and variations in the core thinking that guides OD practices, interventions, and tool se­lection.
Variations in OD Practices
OD is the pro­cess of implementing orga­nizational change to improve per­for­
mance through the direct and indirect utilization of expertise. U
­ nder this banner, ­there are variations in OD practice. Practices in OD have historically been
rooted in the psychological realm, with intervention outcomes being h
­ uman perceptions of effects versus tough business mea­sures. This remains a fundamental prob­lem for OD, as the field values the journey more than its results.
Scholarly reviews of the organ­ization change and development lit­er­a­ture pay
scant attention to verified outcomes (Clegg, Hardy, Lawrence and Nord, 2006;
Weick and Quinn, 1999). OD authors spend large amounts of time talking about
the inner workings of change process—­adaptation, learning, intervention,
and transformation—­w ith minimal connection to orga­nizational success or
failure other than the stakeholder perceptions of effectiveness. Similarly, Church
and McMahan (1996) studied OD practitioner-­leader perceptions in top U.S.
firms regarding the purpose of OD. When asked to react to the statement, “Prac­
ti­tion­ers should focus more on effectiveness, efficiency, and competitive advantage to remain v­ iable organ­izations for the ­f uture,” only 53 ­percent strongly
agreed, 29 ­percent moderately agreed, 12 ­percent slightly agreed, 6 ­percent
slightly disagreed, and none strongly disagreed.
EXPECTED RESULTS FROM OD INTERVENTIONS
Expected outcomes from OD interventions have shifted to an emphasis on
organ­ization results. This coincides with the inclusion of economic and systems
princi­ples and tools increasingly utilized in OD practice. Historically, OD has
been noted for its focus on behavioral science pro­cesses and tools. For example,
the iconic “OD cube” (Schmuck and Miles, 1971) with the three axes of (1) diagnosed prob­lems, (2) focus of attention, and (3) mode of interventions illustrates this point. The list of diagnosed prob­lems does not include any mission-­level
outcomes or financial mea­sures as a focus of prob­lems. Instead, the cube offers
solutions to unidentified mission-­level organ­ization prob­lems.
Thinking more clearly about the anticipated results from the onset of any
OD effort fundamentally affects the pro­cess. For example, the assessment domains of per­for­mance, learning, and perceptions from the results assessment
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 336
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
337
system (Swanson and Holton, 1999, 14) help frame the anticipated results. Per­
for­mance results are defined as follows:
System: The units of mission-­related outputs in the form of goods and/
or ser­vices having value to the customer and that are related to the core
orga­nizational, work pro­cesses, group/individual contributors in the
organ­ization.
Financial: The conversion of the output units of goods and/or ser­vices
attributable to the intervention into money and financial interpretation.
Learning results are defined as follows:
Knowledge: ­Mental achievement acquired through study and experience.
Expertise: ­Human be­hav­iors, having effective results and optimal efficiency, acquired through study and experience within a specialized
domain. (Swanson and Holton, 1999, 17)
Perception results are described as follows:
Participant perceptions: Perceptions of ­people with first-­hand experience
with systems, pro­cesses, goods and/or ser­vices.
Stakeholder perceptions: Perceptions of leaders of systems and/or ­people
with a vested interest in the desired results and the means of achieving
them. (Swanson and Holton, 1999, 18)
OD IN RELATION TO THE HOST ORGAN­IZATION
The range of OD providers spans from a single con­sul­tant (internal or external)
to con­sul­tant firms larger than their clients (e.g., Accenture Global Ser­vices and
Deloitte Touche) to guru status con­sul­tants (e.g., management con­sul­tant Roseabeth Moss Kanter). The authority and credibility of the OD organ­ization and
the OD person leading the pro­cess have a fundamental impact on OD work.
OD PRO­CESS EXPERTISE
OD pro­cess expertise is considered a strategic variable. Con­sul­tants and con­
sul­tant firms often define themselves through their par­tic­u­lar method of entry
into the firm or by their up-­front analy­sis method. For example, large consulting firms pride themselves on their industry-­level data (e.g., banking or auto industry) and holistic analy­sis methods; high-­profile con­sul­tants (e.g., Brache,
2002; Chermack and Walton, 2006; Nadler, Gerstein, and Shaw, 1992; Rummler
and Brache, 1995) may have a unique up-­front orga­nizational diagnosis methodology that they market through their books; and o
­ thers use an inviting planning or diagnostic tool (e.g., ­future search or 360-­degree assessment) for entry
into organ­izations.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 337
12/3/21 3:05 PM
338
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Core OD Practices
OD does not employ numerous standard practices; instead, issues related to
practices are fairly standard. Three of t­ hese standard issues are presented h
­ ere.
OD PRACTICES REVOLVE AROUND THE CHANGE PRO­CESS
OD is committed to change and to guiding the change pro­cess. With all the evidence of the constancy of change and the increasing rate of change, OD is e­ ager
to assist and help organ­izations and individuals drive change not for the sake
of change but for the attainment of worthy goals. McLagan (2001, 44) writes
about change being every­body’s business and offers the following beliefs about
change:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Both stability and change are normal.
Re­sis­tance is a wake-up call.
Change starts before we see it.
Change moves in cycles and waves.
Leaders are co-­learners.
Followers have power.
She goes on to say that “beliefs are more impor­tant in change than techniques.
Beliefs affect ­whether you even think to or want to use techniques” (McLagan
2001, 3). In that OD practice is rife with techniques and advocates of ­those techniques, her words are impor­tant.
TRUST AND INTEGRITY IN OD
OD pro­cesses rely on information from stakeholders and ultimately provide information back to ­those stakeholders. This information is often very uncomfortable, even threatening. Information confidentiality is an overriding practice
issue with OD. Intelligent synthesis and sensitive pre­sen­ta­tion of information
to clients build both trust and integrity. The trust in the OD pro­cess itself and
the integrity of the pro­cess depends on the essential character of the OD con­sul­
tant. Peter Drucker, management guru, wrote in 1974 that “it is character through
which leadership is exercised; it is character that sets the example and is imitated” (462). OD tools and techniques can change p
­ eople and organ­izations for
better or worse, for personal gains or for the larger good. Acknowl­edgment of
this power elevates trust and integrity as being essential to sound OD practice.
OD DYNAMICS
The analogy of the card game and the challenge of knowing when to play, hold,
or fold the cards is useful in thinking about the OD pro­cess dynamics. Prac­ti­
tion­ers know that once the OD practitioner is engaged in an intervention, they
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 338
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
339
become part of the ongoing organ­ization. Change is a dynamic pro­cess that can
stretch out over time. It may be that this dynamic is the most challenging part
of OD and why some ­people enjoy the pro­cess. The threats to an OD con­sul­
tant, as with most helping professions, are in overrating one’s importance in the
pro­cess and not utilizing power­ful analy­sis methods. Con­sul­tant humility and
the engagement of sound sources of authority (beyond the con­sul­tant) are essential in managing the dynamics of the OD pro­cess.
Organization-­Focused OD Practices
As noted elsewhere in discussions about HRD, almost e­ very sound OD effort
has a T&D component, and nearly ­every sound T&D effort has an OD component. A change effort in an organ­ization ­will likely be classified as an OD intervention or carry a mission-­focused title, such as the classic Ford Motor Com­pany
man­tra, “Quality is Job 1.” Organization-­wide OD practice is often focused on
organ­ization culture or a ­future state to ensure the sheer existence of the organ­
ization and its advancement. Amid the 2020 world pandemic and the emergence of electric vehicles, “Further with Ford” feels abstract. Thus, OD is best
thought of as originating from concerns about the organ­ization and then drops
to the individuals and then back to the organ­ization. In contrast, T&D is usually considered as originating with concerns about individuals and up to the
organ­ization and then back to the individuals. Both function within and are
held accountable by their host organ­ization.
ORGAN­IZATION STRATEGY AND CULTURE
Given shifts in the environment (economic, po­liti­cal, and cultural forces) and
the organ­ization itself (mission/strategy, orga­nizational structure, technology,
and ­human resources), an organ­ization can find itself in or on the cusp of mission erosion, cultural disarray, and system disconnects. Consider the accompanying case example on corporate culture.
Culture Survey Practices Culture surveys can be used to gather informa-
tion directly from all employees that are not quickly available from other sources.
For example, man­ag­ers experiencing prob­lems in operations often use production reports to get information about the status of operations. Still, production
reports are insufficient for guiding any organization-­wide change effort.
A culture survey, by its nature, is a participatory and highly vis­i­ble orga­
nizational assessment. Culture surveys can be useful in up-­front orga­nizational
analy­sis. They can also be used to benchmark a pre­sent state and to monitor
change over time. Management can use a culture survey to communicate its
vision and per­for­mance expectations for the organ­ization’s culture to the organ­
ization and operationalize the vision. For example, if management’s vision of
the organ­ization culture emphasizes employee participation in decision making
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 339
12/3/21 3:05 PM
340
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
CASE EXAMPLE: CORPORATE CULTURE
In a three-­phase change effort, OD experts led the management team of
a small manufacturer through a strategic planning pro­cess including
(1) strategic planning, (2) culture assessment and realignment, and (3) quality improvement. Based on careful and deliberate analy­sis, a revised vision and mission of the firm ­were produced by the top management team.
It was painfully apparent that the existing state of the firm was far from
this new vision and that all employees in the firm needed to be informed
of and seriously consider the implications of the change required. It was
de­cided to use external OD con­sul­tants to oversee a culture assessment
and realignment pro­cess before moving on to any effort at quality improvement implementation. This intermediate phase was seen as critical in
moving from strategic planning to the focused issues of quality improvement. Culture surveys, an impor­tant tool for man­ag­ers in business and
industry in heading off such prob­lems and facilitating the change journey, w
­ ere employed. What is done with the survey data is critical in getting the full benefit.
for improvements, items on the culture survey could mea­sure employees’ perceptions of their involvement in specific decision-­making pro­cesses.
Some princi­ples that have proven useful in successfully implementing a cultural survey include the following (Sleezer and Swanson, 1992):
•
•
•
•
•
Analyze the situation before developing the survey.
Design the survey instrument to collect specific information.
Administer the survey consistently.
Take care not to overreact to the data.
Act on the results of a survey.
One company-­wide change effort was driven by the use of culture surveys
filled out by all employees e­ very six months (Sleezer and Swanson, 1992). The
survey was first or­ga­nized around the dimensions of the strategic plan of the
com­pany. Th
­ ose dimensions w
­ ere then used as means of selecting the general
cultural variables and the specific survey questions. McLean’s (1988) bank of culture climate questions framed the categories and specific questions for the culture survey. The first survey provided baseline information to which management
and employees reviewed and reacted. The con­sul­tants identified the key issues
related to the purpose of this survey and suggested specific actions in sharing
the data with all employees through group meetings. Employees became trusting when they discovered that their responses had been accurately reported and
confidentiality had been maintained.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 340
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
341
When the second survey was implemented six months l­ater, the newfound
trust in the survey pro­cess and follow-up meetings allowed for more open and
honest discussion and planning. When management examined the report from
the second survey, they ­were surprised at the intensity of the employees’ feelings and the specificity of their concerns.
The culture survey results caused man­ag­ers to look closer at its reor­ga­ni­za­
tion plan and to reexamine their vision. Workers and man­ag­ers then de­cided
to focus on quality, be a more participative organ­ization, and execute an open-­
door policy. They also supported a six-­point action plan with such items as
(1) changing the structure of the workforce and (2) insisting that man­ag­ers and
supervisors work in participation with employees.
By the time management implemented the third survey, they had begun to
see changes in the way workers talked about their com­pany and responded to
prob­lems. Employees ­were beginning to contribute t­ oward product quality and
quantity. The culture survey pro­cess forced management to listen to employees. Their listening began to pay off in increased employee satisfaction and increased productivity mea­sures. A new com­pany culture was emerging, and they
began to engage in full-­blown quality improvement efforts that continued to result in pro­cess efficiencies and significant reductions in reject rates.
PLANNING FOR THE ­FUTURE
As more organ­izations face continuous change, OD prac­ti­tion­ers have developed expertise and tools to operate successfully in such an environment. In an
environment of constant change and challenge, nontraditional tools for anticipating and planning for change are being used, such as ­future search conferences, large-­scale interventions, and scenario planning—­all aimed at attaining
­future per­for­mance results.
Organ­ization development for an ill-­defined f­ uture state of an organ­ization
is the purpose of the scenario-­planning pro­cess (Chermack, 2005). A scenario
is “a tool for ordering one’s perceptions about alternative ­future environments
in which decisions might be played out” (Schwartz, 1996, 4). The pro­cess of scenario planning generally involves the development of several plots and supporting narratives that illustrate primary forces driving change within a system,
their interrelationships, and uncertainties in the environment (Wack, 1985b).
Scenarios help decision makers structure and think about uncertainty, test
their assumptions about how critical driving forces ­will interact, and reor­ga­nize
their ­mental model of real­ity (Wack, 1985a). Chapter 17 devotes a major section
to scenario planning.
Many think of scenario development as an art rather than a science
(Schwartz, 1996). The pro­cess provides safe and often engaging opportunities
to explore the implications of uncertainty and to think through ways of responding to it. Scenarios enable planners to deal more confidently in the midst of
uncertainty (Chermack and Burt, 2008; Schwartz, 1996; van der Heijden, 1997).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 341
12/3/21 3:05 PM
342
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Van der Heijden (1997) characterizes the individual and orga­nizational
learning pro­cess of scenario planning as organ­izing complex information on
­future trends and possibilities into a series of plausible stories. Scenarios are seen
as interpretive tools that create meaning and thereby guide action. The use of
multiple plausible ­futures helps decision makers think more expansively about
change and adopt multiple perspectives for understanding f­ uture events. In the
end, scenarios offer entrepreneurial and protective benefits to organ­izations
(Wack, 1985b).
The Centre for Innovative Leadership (van der Merwe, 1997) describes the
scenario development pro­cess as follows:
1. Identification of a strategic orga­nizational agenda, including assumptions and concerns about current strategic thinking and vision
2. Challenging of existing assumptions of orga­nizational decision makers
by questioning current m
­ ental models about the external environment
3. Systematically examining the organ­ization’s external environment to
improve understanding of the structure of the key forces driving
change
4. Synthesis of information about pos­si­ble f­ uture events into three or
four alternative plots or storylines about pos­si­ble ­futures
5. Development of narratives around the storylines to make the stories
relevant and compelling to decision makers
6. Use of the stories to help decision makers “re-­view” their strategic
thinking
Chapter 17 deals with the strategic roles of HRD and contains a discussion
of the integration of scenario planning and strategic planning into a strategic
orga­nizational planning pro­cess.
Work Process–­Focused OD Practices
W. Edwards Deming (1982) believed that 80 ­percent of the prob­lems in organ­
izations w
­ ere the result of bad systems, not bad p
­ eople. Nevin (1992) went on to
say, “If you want to drive p
­ eople crazy, give them a g­ reat sense of responsibility
and no authority.” Good p
­ eople often work in bad pro­cesses over which they
have no authority. The g­ reat advantage of studying work pro­cesses is that they
exist and they are inanimate—­something apart from individual perceptions and
emotions.
While work systems and work pro­cesses are inventions of individuals, they
take on a life of their own. When work pro­cesses are used as the entry point
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 342
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
343
into an organ­ization prob­lem (versus p
­ eople prob­lems), they simply represent
the way t­ hings get done. So many of the OD models and methods start with
­people and finger-­pointing (usually an exercise in power). When an OD practitioner asks would-be finger-­pointers to review and document the a­ ctual way
­things get done (the work pro­cesses that are regularly carried out), the pre­sent
work pro­cess (good or bad) becomes more a ­matter of fact versus blame—­“it is
simply the way it is.”
Engaging stakeholders in studying work pro­cesses is one of the most underused OD strategies. Two specific practices are pro­cess improvement and
benchmarking.
PRO­CESS IMPROVEMENT
Numerous strategies are available for improving work pro­cesses. Not all are
good. Pro­cess reengineering as proposed by Hammer and Champy (1993) was
the most radical and unacceptable methodology at the time. It failed in most
cases and caused systemic havoc (Swanson, 1993). Shewhart’s classic plan-­do-­
check-­act cycle (Schultz and Parker, 1988) is one established and positive
method of studying pro­cesses (figure 16.1). Rummler and Brache (1995) have a
Cycles of Transformation Efforts
Though no hard and fast rules exist, there seems to be adequate testimony and
experience to roughly describe the first “cycles of transformation” for a typical
organization. We have chosen “cycles of transformation” as the descriptive
phrase because transformation is an iterative process and the Shewhart cycle is
an elegant model. Each iteration of the cycle includes:
ACT: Do the data confirm the “plan”?
Are other “causes” operating? Are
the “risks” of proceeding to further
change necessary and worthwhile?
CHECK: Measure and observe
“effects” of change or test.
PLAN: What could be? What changes
are needed? What obstacles need to
be overcome? What are the most
important results needed, etc.? Are
data available? What new information
is needed?
A
P
C
D
DO: Small-scale implementation of
change or test to provide data for
answers.
Figure 16.1: Shewart’s Plan-­Do-­Check-­Act Cycle
Source: Schultz and Parker, 1988, 53. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 343
12/3/21 3:05 PM
344
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Process
Improvement
Pace of
Change
One Quality
Program
Process
Innovation
Time
Figure 16.2: Pro­cess Improvement and Pro­cess Innovation
Source: Davenport, 1993. Used with permission.
very practical tool in their larger organ­ization development methodology
for producing “is” and “should” pro­cess flow charts. The act of documenting
­things just as they are produces a pragmatic and objective view of real­ity. This
strategy is in contrast to the accumulation of ­people’s feelings and perceptions of their real­ity, the focus of many OD methods. In both pro­cess improvement models noted, the gap between the existing pro­cess and the redesigned
pro­cess represents the improvement focus that can be easily understood and
pursued.
Another pro­cess improvement plan has been put forward by Davenport
(1993) (see figure 16.2). It is conceptually between incremental pro­cess improvement and radical reengineering. Calling it pro­cess innovation, he believes it
“encompasses the envisioning of new work strategies, the ­actual pro­cess design
activity, and the implementation of the change in all its complex technological,
­human, and orga­nizational dimensions” (2). A high-­level depiction of his unique
five-­step pro­cess includes: (1) identifying pro­cesses for innovation, (2) identifying change levers, (3) developing pro­cess visions, (4) understanding existing pro­
cesses, and (5) designing and prototyping the new pro­cesses. Work pro­cess
expertise is required to engage in pro­cess innovation. Pro­cess improvement is
much more focused on systems than many of the people-­oriented problem-­
solving methods used by OD prac­ti­tion­ers.
BENCHMARKING
Benchmarking is the search for and implementation of best practices (Camp,
1995, 15). It is a pro­cess of learning from the best of the best and emulating ­those
best practices. As such, it is suited to analyzing work pro­cesses aimed at defined
organ­ization goals. The five phases of the benchmarking pro­cess include planning, analy­sis, integration, action, and maturity (see figure 16.3).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 344
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
345
• P
lanning: Identify what to benchmark, identify whom to benchmark, and
gather data.
• Analy­sis: Examine the per­for­mance gap and proj­ect f­uture per­for­mance.
• Integration: Communicate the findings and develop new goals.
• Action: Take actions, monitor pro­gress, and recalibrate mea­sures as needed.
• Maturity: Achieve the desired state.
Phase 1: Planning
A plan for benchmarking is prepared.
• Decide: What to benchmark
• Identify: Whom to benchmark
• Plan: The investigation and conduct it
—­Gather necessary information and data
—­Observe the best practices
<cols>1:100.00</cols>
Phase 2: Analy­sis
The gap is examined and the per­for­mance is assessed against best practices.
• Determine: The current per­for­mance gap
• Proj­ect: ­Future per­for­mance levels
<cols>1:100.00</cols>
Phase 3: Integration
The goals are redefined and incorporated into the planning pro­cess.
• Communicate: Benchmark findings and gain ac­cep­tance
• Revise: Per­for­mance goals
<cols>1:100.00</cols>
Phase 4: Action
Best practices are implemented and periodically recalibrated as needed.
• Develop: Action plans
• Implement: Actions and monitor pro­gress
• Recalibrate: The benchmarks
cols>1:100.00</cols>
Phase 5: Maturity
Leadership may be achieved.
• Determine: When leadership position is attained
• Assess: Benchmarking as an ongoing pro­cess
<cols>1:100.00</cols>
Figure 16.3: The Five Phases of the Benchmarking Pro­cess
Source: Camp, 1995. Used with permission.
Walton (1999, 306) notes that “best practice benchmarking entails comparing a par­tic­u­lar aspect of an organ­ization’s product or ser­vice against organ­
izations which are held to be ‘best in class’ in that par­tic­u­lar area. They may or
may not be competitors. Techniques tend to be more overt than competitive
benchmarking and often include prearranged site visits in order to confirm by
observation what one has been told.”
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 345
12/3/21 3:05 PM
346
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
Group-­Focused OD Practices
Group-­focused OD has been the mainstay of organ­ization development practice. More OD discussions and tools are aimed at this level than any other. Two
examples highlighted ­here are team-­building and group conflict.
CROSS-­CULTURAL TEAM-­BUILDING
Team building is “the pro­cess of helping a work group become more effective in
accomplishing its tasks and satisfying the needs of group members” (Cummings
and Worley, 2001, 676). Personnel Decisions International (1996) describes a
cross-­cultural team-­building challenge, which is summarized in the case on
tunneling that follows.
CASE EXAMPLE: TUNNELING
based Oresund Tunnel Contractors was
The Challenge: Copenhagen-­
formed in 1995 to build a tunnel that would connect Copenhagen, Denmark, and Malmo, Sweden. Oresund’s parent companies—­NCC (Sweden), John Laing (United Kingdom), Dumez GTM (France), Boskalis
(Netherlands), and Phil and Soen (Denmark)—­challenged the com­
pany’s new management team, which included forty-­five representatives
from each of the founding companies, to create a cohesive culture that
would benefit from the leadership of a diverse management team and
communicate clear goals and consistent strategies.
The Solution: Early in 1996, the con­sul­tants from each com­pany’s parent country administered a questionnaire to Oresund’s management team
that examined the impact of cultural differences on their success. The con­
sul­tants also interviewed certain members of the team about the effectiveness of the group’s new working relationships. Using the results of their
research, the con­sul­tants designed and facilitated workshops that addressed how cultural differences affect corporate culture. The program
culminated in a three-­day team-­building event consisting of exercises
that developed the communications skills and trust levels between Oresund management team members.
The Result: Members of Oresund’s management team reported that
their new understanding of how cultural differences impact working be­
hav­ior reduced the potential for misunderstanding and conflicts among
colleagues. They also said that the positive relationships that existed among
key man­ag­ers improved the consistency and flow of information. The
con­sul­tants planned a follow-up session to track how the management team
had progressed against a “change” questionnaire.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 346
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
347
GROUP CONFLICT
OD is often called upon to intervene when group conflict arises or could arise.
OD prac­ti­tion­ers employ any number of diagnostic and communication techniques to analyze and resolve relationship and communication prob­lems. While
differences in perception can vary between any two p
­ eople, situations are heightened when t­ here are age, ethnic, gender, educational, and national differences.
OD prac­ti­tion­ers must be sensitive to t­hose differences and fair in their
transactions.
At a national level, Hofstede’s (2001) classic model for understanding
national-­level cultural differences highlights the differences and challenges ­those
differences pose to the OD practitioner (figure 16.4). The ideal situation would
be that the potential for conflict would be anticipated and that interventions
would be carried out to ward off conflict rather than react to them.
Value
Definition
Context
The extent to which
words carry the
meaning of a
message; how time
is viewed
Organ­ization
Customs When
the Value Is at
One Extreme
Ceremony and
routines are common.
Structure is less
formal; fewer written
policies exist.
­ eople are often late
P
for appointments.
Power
distance
The extent to which
members of a
society accept that
power is distributed
unequally in an
organ­ization
Decision making is
autocratic.
Superiors consider
subordinates as part
of a dif­fer­ent class.
Subordinates are
closely supervised.
Representative
Countries
High: Asian and
Latin American
countries
Low: Scandinavian
countries, United
States
High: Latin
American and
Eastern Eu­ro­pean
countries
Low: Scandinavian
countries
Employees are not
likely to disagree.
Power­ful p
­ eople are
entitled to privileges.
Figure 16.4: Cultural Values and Organ­ization Customs
Source: Based on Hofstede, 2001. Used with permission.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 347
12/3/21 3:05 PM
Value
Definition
Uncertainty
avoidance
The extent to which
members of an
organ­ization
tolerate the unfamiliar and
unpredictable
Organ­ization
Customs When
the Value Is at
One Extreme
Representative
Countries
Experts have status/
authority.
High: Asian
countries
Clear roles are
preferred.
Low: Eu­ro­pean
countries
Conflict is
undesirable.
Change is resisted.
Conservative practices are preferred.
Achievement
orientation
The extent to which
organ­ization
members value
assertiveness and
the acquisition of
material goods
Achievement is
reflected in wealth
and recognition.
Decisiveness is
valued.
Larger and faster are
better.
High: Asian and
Latin American
countries, South
Africa
Low: Scandinavian
countries
Gender roles are
clearly differentiated.
Individualism
The extent to which
­ eople believe they
p
should be responsible for themselves
and their immediate
families
Personal initiative is
encouraged.
High: United
States
Time is valuable to
individuals.
Low: Latin American
and Eastern
Eu­ro­pean
countries
Competitiveness is
accepted.
Autonomy is highly
valued.
Figure 16.4: ­(Continued)
At a work-­group level, the Myers-­Briggs Type Indicator identifies the personality dichotomies of individuals as being extroverted-­introverted, sensing-­
intuitive, thinking-­feeling, and judging-­perceiving. Combinations within
individuals and among work groups are believed to predict communication and
relationship prob­lems, needs, and solutions (Myers and Myers, 1995). In a related realm, attention to the emotional intelligence of p
­ eople working in organ­
izations has gained interest along with questionable utility (Weinberger, 2002).
348
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 348
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
349
Individual-­Focused OD Practices
Much of OD’s history has been focused on individual development (primarily
the pro­cess of changing a person’s Gestalt from one pattern or another) and the
expectation that such a transformation would result in organ­ization development. The highly criticized T-­groups advanced in the 1950s are the most vivid
example. The ave­nue to organ­ization development through individual development and the unleashing of ­human expertise remains strong. Two OD practices
that are focused on the individual include 360-­degree feedback and ­career assessment centers.
360-­DEGREE FEEDBACK
Individual contributors in organ­izations almost universally desire to be effective. Even so, they nearly always function in their environments with l­imited
feedback about how well they are functioning in the eyes of ­those around them.
Addressing this need is 360-­degree feedback, sometimes referred to as multirater appraisals, multisource feedback, or 360-­degree profiling. It is essentially a
pro­cess that enables a person to receive feedback from a number of p
­ eople, usually entailing developmental feedback relating to be­hav­iors, skills, and competencies. Typically, in a 360-­degree feedback scenario, an individual would receive
feedback from their peers, direct reports, and man­ag­er. Sometimes other stakeholders such as clients, professional associates, and friends are polled.
Feedback can include ratings against questions or statements as well as comments and suggestions. The purpose of the feedback is usually to help individuals determine areas they need to develop. In some organ­izations it is also used
to determine per­for­mance increases as part of a per­for­mance appraisal pro­cess.
The question of ­whether 360-­degree feedback should be used to determine per­
for­mance increases is the cause of debate, however, and the misuses of this tool
have been cited (McLean, 1997). In other contexts, this approach could be part
of an ongoing leadership development pro­cess.
Suggestions for making 360-­degree feedback work include the following:
• Enable participants to contribute to the design of the 360-­degree
feedback system.
• Develop a competency standard with careful consideration and
much feedback from the ­people who ­will use it and from experts in
the field.
• Develop a system that ­will not require employees to spend excessive
time learning and then using.
• Run a small trial before implementing across the organ­ization.
• Make changes to the system based on the feedback from the trial.
• Educate every­one in the organ­ization before implementing the
system.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 349
12/3/21 3:05 PM
350
part v: unleashing expertise through organ­ization development
• Ensure that confidentiality is maintained.
• Monitor the success of the system and modify appropriately.
­ AREER DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT CENTER
C
Assessment centers within organ­izations or external consulting firms provide
in-­depth information about individual contributors. They are used for se­lection,
individual development, and organ­ization development purposes. Assessment
centers engage p
­ eople in high-­fidelity simulations, role-­plays, and in-­basket exercises. The military has done a g­ reat deal of work with the assessment center
approach, and it has been used for upper management and executive-­level ­career
development.
­Career development assessment centers sponsored by large organ­izations are
often part of the ­career development assistance they provide to benefit individual and organ­ization objectives. Responsible assessment centers do both.
Centers gain a large amount of information on individuals that can be used
as a basis for advancing individual ­career development and ­actual c­ areers in the
sponsoring firm. When this is not feasible, assessment centers help individuals
get to new employment that offers a better fit. With this level of integrity being
known to com­pany personnel, ­there is a willingness to “risk the growth.”
Overview of an assessment pro­cess as reported by the Personnel Decision
International (1999) website is as follows:
1. Understand the com­pany’s business strategies, context, and requirements of the role.
• Review documentation.
• Interview ­those knowledgeable about the role.
2. Determine the purpose of the assessment.
• Needs that drive the assessment
• How the results ­will be used
• Key questions to be addressed
3. Design the assessment to meet orga­nizational requirements.
• Ensure the content of the assessment matches the content and
requirements of the target role.
• Use multiple, valid mea­sure­ment techniques (e.g., could include
tests of thinking ability and work style, structured interviews,
work simulations) to assess the needed capabilities.
• Use mea­sures that are appropriate for the person’s culture and
language.
• Tailor the output to meet the organ­ization’s needs.
• Communicate clearly to all stakeholders about the purpose,
pro­cess, and outcomes.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 350
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
351
4. Conduct the assessment.
• Provide a standardized setting.
• Create a supportive environment.
• Use well-­trained staff.
5. Provide feedback/results.
• Address the com­pany’s needs and questions.
• Address the needed capabilities.
• Provide input on how to develop the person’s potential.
• Protect confidentiality.
6. Use the results to align p
­ eople with the business requirements.
• Review the fit between p
­ eople’s capabilities and the needs
of the business.
• Advise on how to optimize allocation and development of
competencies.
COACHING
Coaching involves a se­nior man­ag­er or external con­sul­tant working one-­on-­one
with another worker, focusing on the results of a job and what it takes to achieve
­those results (Walton, 1999). Mentoring is dif­fer­ent in that it is more likely a life-­
long or extended personal relationship.
Coaches help clarify per­for­mance goals and development needs, reinforce
effective on-­the-­job per­for­mance, recommend specific be­hav­iors needing improvement, and serve as role models in demonstrating professional be­hav­ior
(Liebowitz and Schlossberg, 1981). The pro­cess requires multisource feedback
from the coach and for the coach to help the man­ag­er or executive absorb the
information (Church, Walker, and Brochner, 2002). Coaches, working in confidence, help the person being coached deal with a variety of sensitivities. ­These
sensitivities are profiled in figure 16.5.
Conclusion
Organ­ization development takes many forms. At the narrow and specific end
of the spectrum, it can be focused on one person who has difficulty fitting in
and contributing to an organ­ization. At the other end of the spectrum, it can
emphasize shaping the ­f uture state of the organ­ization through ­whole systems
analy­sis, alignment, and improvement or through guided ­f uture search or
scenario planning. The dominant OD practices in the m
­ iddle of the OD spectrum center on team functioning, improving existing work pro­cesses, and work
group conditions in a changing environment.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 351
12/3/21 3:05 PM
SENSITIVITY TO . . . ​
Intellectual
interde­pen­dency
Being/appearing weak
Impact on Per­for­mance
Underdo–do too ­little
Overdo–do too much
­ oesn’t contribute ideas
D
in meetings
Strains to prove self
­Doesn’t trust own feelings
Avoids technical learning
Impatience with the pace
of ­others
Avoids industry analy­sis
and strategic planning
Overprepares for meetings,
pre­sen­ta­tions
­ oesn’t delegate or
D
empower
Talks too much, or
“knows-­it-­all”
­ oesn’t seek, listen to, or
D
use input
Taking over when prob­lems
arise
­ oesn’t check own
D
judgment
Has to always be right,
always with arrogance
Works extra hours
Short on praise or
encouragement
Disapproval/rejections
­Doesn’t hold ­people
accountable
­Doesn’t express
dissatisfaction
­ oesn’t defend his/her
D
ground
Indiscriminate with praise
Sugarcoats tough
messages
Too inclusive
Overreacts to constructive
criticism
Not ­viable
Depending on ­others
Difficulty building a team
Micromanages
­ oesn’t delegate or seek
D
help
Tries to do it him/herself
Reluctant to partner with
peers
Authority
Parochial—­too focused on
own self
Avoids conflict with
superiors
Too aggressive with
superiors
Ambivalent about own
authority
Unduly deferential
Figure 16.5: ­Common Types of Sensitivities and Associated Distortions
in Performance
Source: Kaiser and Kaplan, 2006, 469.
352
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 352
12/3/21 3:05 PM
16. Organ­ization Development Practices
353
Reflection Questions
1. What are three princi­ples of good OD practice?
2. Identify an organ­ization you are familiar with, and briefly describe it.
Speculate about how that organ­ization’s mission would impact the
OD practices.
3. What are two to four major implications of having an OD effort in a
single site location versus ten sites across the nation?
4. When does work process–­focused versus group-­focused OD make
sense?
5. How does ­career development and OD connect?
6. Discuss how OD tools and techniques could be used for unethical ends.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 353
12/3/21 3:05 PM
This page intentionally left blank
PART VI
Advancing ­Human
Resource Development
This section addresses leadership areas required for advancing HRD. The areas
include strategy, accountability, and policy and planning. They are generally
thought of as activities that involve se­nior HRD professionals.
CHAPTERS
17 Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
18 Assessment in ­Human Resource Development
19 Policy and Planning for ­Human Resource Development
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 355
12/3/21 3:05 PM
This page intentionally left blank
17
Strategy and ­Human
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Schools of Strategic Thinking
Strategic Roles of H
­ uman Resource Development
Contributed by Richard J. Torraco, University of Nebraska
• HRD, Expertise, and Strategy
• HRD as a Shaper of Strategy
• Case Example: Strategic Roles in Two Companies
• Adopting a Strategic HRD Perspective
• Strategic Role 1: Performance-­Based HRD
• Strategic Role 2: Demonstrating the Strategic Capability of HRD
• Strategic Role 3: Emergent Strategy and HRD
Scenario Planning
Contributed by Thomas J. Chermack, Colorado State University
• Interviews and Interview Questions
• Workshops
• Creating the Scenario Stories
• Using Scenarios to Examine Strategy
• Advancing Scenario Planning Theory and Practice
• Strategic Planning
• Contributions of HRD to Strategic Orga­nizational Planning
• The Strategic Agenda Facing the HRD Profession
Conclusion
• Case Example: Scenario Planning
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 357
12/3/21 3:05 PM
358
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
Introduction
Viewing ­human resource development (HRD) as a strategic partner is an evolving stance (Wognum and Mulder, 1999). Several textbooks (Prasad, 2012;
Walton, 1999; Yorks, 2005b) are dedicated to increasing such strategic awareness
and effectiveness among HRD professionals. The systems view of organ­izations,
with HRD as a pro­cess within the organ­ization and the organ­ization functioning within the larger environment, provides the big picture framework to begin thinking about the strategic roles of HRD (see figure 2.2 in chapter 2).
This chapter discusses the issues surrounding the role of HRD in orga­
nizational strategic planning as proposed by several HRD scholars (Torraco
and Swanson, 1995; Swanson, Lynham, Ruona, and Provo, 1998; and Chermack,
2002, 2003, 2004, 2005). Two f­actors have influenced the evolution of HRD
­toward a more active role as a key determinant of business strategy: (1) the centrality of information technology to business success and (2) the sustainable
competitive advantage offered by workforce knowledge and expertise. Th
­ ese
­factors work together in such a way that the competitive advantages they offer
are nearly impossible to achieve without developing and maintaining a highly
competent workforce. They go on to build the case for a view of HRD that truly
holds strategic value to an organ­ization.
The major sections in this chapter include the schools of strategic thinking,
the strategic roles of HRD, adopting a strategic HRD perspective, and scenario
planning plus strategic planning.
Schools of Strategic Thinking
Mintzberg, Ashstrand, and Lampel (1999) have summarized ten schools of strategic thinking. They argue that having a wider picture allows man­ag­ers, con­
sul­tants, and academics to better understand and pursue strategy. The schools
are summarized through comparison of their features, including sources, base
discipline, champions, intended messages, realized messages, school category,
and an associated homily (see figure 17.1).
The profiles of the strategic thinking schools depicted in figure 17.1 help
stake out the range and variation in thinking in general with regard to strategy. They can also be used to examine one’s own dominant strategic thinking
model and to classify the strategic approaches taken by partners and competitors. This level of strategic consciousness is an impor­tant ingredient in strategic
positioning.
Strategic Roles of ­Human Resource Development
Contributed by Richard J. Torraco, University of Nebraska
HRD serves the needs of organ­izations by providing employees with up-­to-­date
expertise. ­Here expertise is defined as the optimal level at which a person is
able and/or expected to perform within a specialized realm of ­human activity.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 358
12/3/21 3:05 PM
1. Design School
• Sources
P. Selznick
• Base discipline
None (architecture as a meta­phor)
• Champions
Case study teachers (e.g., Harvard)
leadership aficionados
• School category
Prescriptive
• Associated homily
“Look before you leap.”
2. Planning School
• Sources
H. I. Ansoff
• Base discipline
Some links to urban planning, systems theory,
and cybernetics
• Champions
Professional man­ag­ers, MBAs, staff experts,
and con­sul­tants
• Associated homily
“A stitch in time saves nine.”
3. Positioning School
• Sources
Purdue University (D. Schendell and
K. Hatten); then M. Porter
• Base discipline
Economics (industrial organ­ization) and
military history
• Champions
Analytical staff types, con­sul­tants, and
military writers
• School category
Prescriptive
• Associated homily
“Nothing but the facts, ­ma’am.”
4. Entrepreneurial School
• Sources
­ thers in
J. A. Schumpeter, A. H. Cole, and o
economics
• Base discipline
None (although early writings came from
economics)
• Champions
Popu­lar business press, individuals,
small-­business ­people
• School category
Descriptive (some prescriptive)
• Associated homily
“Take us to your leader.”
5. Cognitive School
• Sources
H. A. Simon and J. G. March
• Base discipline
Psy­chol­ogy (cognitive)
• Champions
­ hose with a psychological bent—­pessimists
T
and optimists
• School category
Descriptive
• Associated homily
“I’ll see it when I believe it.”
Figure 17.1: Ten Schools of Strategic Thinking
Source: Based on Mintzberg, Ahlstrand, and Manpel, 1999.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 359
12/3/21 3:05 PM
6. LEARNING SCHOOL
• Sources
R. Cyert, J. March, K. Weick, J. Quinn,
C. Prahalad & G. Hamel
• Base discipline
None (perhaps links to learning theory and
chaos theory)
• Champions
­ eople inclined to experimentation, ambiguity,
P
and adaptability
• School category
Descriptive
• Associated homily
“If at first you ­don’t succeed, try, try again.”
7. Power School
• Sources
G. Allison (micro), J. Pfeiffer and G. Salancik:
W. Astley (macro)
• Base discipline
Po­liti­cal science
• Champions
­People who like power, politics, and conspiracy
• School category
Descriptive
• Associated homily
“Look out for number one.”
8. Cultural School
• Sources
E. Rhenman and R. Normann
• Base discipline
Anthropology
• Champions
­ eople who like the social, the spiritual, and the
P
collective
• School category
Descriptive
• Associated homily
“An apple never falls far from the tree.”
9. Environmental School
• Sources
M. Hannan and J. Freeman; contingency theorists
• Base discipline
Biology
• Champions
Population ecologists, organ­ization theorists,
and positivists
• School category
Descriptive
• Associated homily
“It all depends.”
10. Configuration School
• Sources
A. Chandler, H. Minzberg, D. Miller, R. Miles,
and C. Snow
• Base discipline
History
• Champions
Lumpers and integrators in general, as well as
change agents
• School category
Descriptive and prescriptive
• Associated homily
“To every­thing ­there is a season.”
Figure 17.1: ­(Continued)
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 360
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
361
Advances in HRD models and pro­cesses have kept pace with the increasingly sophisticated information and production technologies that continue to
spread throughout vital industries (Swanson and Torraco, 1994). During this
period of rapid technological development, the HRD function can be relied on
to support a broad range of business initiatives that require a competent workforce. Critical business issues, from new marketing strategies to innovations in
production methods, are based on the per­for­mance capabilities of t­hose expected to use ­these new work systems among other ­factors. As a f­ actor integral
to business success, employee competence itself has been expanded through
effective development programs. In short, the development and unleashing
of workplace expertise through HRD has been vital to optimal business
per­for­mance.
Yet ­today’s business environment requires that HRD not only support the
strategies of organ­izations but also assume a pivotal role in shaping business
strategy. Orga­nizational success increasingly hinges on the ability to use employee expertise as a major force in shaping business strategy.
In a time of extreme uncertainty and complexity, decision makers need to
be using solid planning tools more than ever. LeGault’s book, Think: Why Critical Decisions C
­ an’t be Made in a Blink of an Eye (2006) argues passionately that
intellect, factual knowledge, and critical analy­sis ­ought to influence decision
making.
Pierre Wack—­the undisputed f­ ather of modern scenario planning—is a hero
to many. Wack repeatedly emphasizes that his success with scenarios came from
an extensive understanding of forces in the external environment based on deep
research and analytical thinking. It was no accident that Royal Dutch Shell Oil
was prepared for ­things that caught other oil companies by surprise. Shell had
systems in place designed to help workers see the landscape differently, to learn
how they learned, and to constantly challenge themselves to do it better. Perhaps most importantly, they spent a g­ reat deal of time thinking about the f­ uture.
HRD, EXPERTISE, AND STRATEGY
The influence of HRD on strategic planning is moving from being exclusively
in a role supportive of business strategy to becoming an impor­tant force in the
shaping of business strategy. However, pre­sent conceptions of the strategic role
of HRD, if it is even thought of in a strategic context at all, still view HRD in a
supportive role. Strategies for product innovation or cost leadership, for example, are usually conceived and a­ dopted by the organ­ization. When implementation constraints surface, only then is formal consideration given to employee
expertise and the HRD implications of the strategy. Although the role HRD
serves in support of strategy is necessary and impor­tant to operational success,
HRD can offer an organ­ization even greater strategic value.
Although not always obvious, t­ here is a natu­ral fit between initiatives for
developing/unleashing employee expertise and the organ­i zation’s strategic
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 361
12/3/21 3:05 PM
362
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
direction. This “HRD–­business strategy linkage” is the basis for HRD’s influential role as shaper of strategy. Jacobs (2003) posits the argument as follows:
“Organ­izations in the new economy have come to realize that employee expertise is a vital and dynamic living trea­sure. The desire for employee expertise is
meaningless ­unless an organ­ization can develop it in ways that respond to the
business needs” (178).
Strategic Value of HRD Two ­factors that have influenced the evolution of
HRD ­toward a more active role as a key determinant of business strategy are
(1) the centrality of information technology to business success and (2) the sustainable competitive advantage offered by workforce expertise. Th
­ ese two ­factors
work together so that the competitive advantages they offer are nearly impossible to achieve without developing, maintaining, and utilizing a highly competent workforce.
Organ­izations embrace information technology as a way to improve overall efficiency and reduce costs. Yet, it is not the information technology itself
but the way it is thoroughly integrated into major business pro­cesses that is the
greatest opportunity for the successful transformation of outdated business pro­
cesses (Davenport, 1993). Information technology is applied across industries
in virtually ­every major ser­vice and manufacturing pro­cess as a way of rapidly
transmitting data to crucial pro­cess decision points, integrating component
functions that ­were formerly isolated, and improving the overall quality and
timeliness of essential business pro­cesses. However, ­those who have successfully
used information technology to improve business per­for­mance ­w ill quickly
point out that ­these advantages ­will not materialize without highly competent
­people to implement and utilize ­these innovative work systems. The ­human capacity must exist to use information technology to maximize per­for­mance.
HRD is, then, in a strategic position to assure that the required expertise is available and effectively utilized.
Once competitive advantage is attained and begins to attract the attention
of other key players in the marketplace, an organ­ization’s premier market position can quickly erode ­unless the organ­ization finds ways to sustain its pre­sent
advantage or generate new ones. Organ­izations in market leadership positions
realize sooner or ­later that ­human resources are ultimately the only business
resource with the creativity and adaptive power to sustain and renew an organ­
ization’s success despite changing market conditions. The development and unleashing of employee expertise provides a potentially inexhaustible source of
ideas for further innovation and increased productivity b
­ ecause the most basic
output of highly competent employees—­k nowledge—is not used up in the pro­
cess of producing it. Investments in employee education and training increasingly fund the development of an infrastructure to support the sustainable
competitive advantage that a highly developed workforce provides. Developing
employee expertise at all levels of the organ­ization and using expertise as a cat-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 362
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
363
alyst for growth and competitive advantage represent a major frontier in orga­
nizational per­for­mance that is only now beginning to be fully appreciated.
HRD AS A SHAPER OF STRATEGY
We have examined the strategic role that HRD plays in supporting strategies to achieve the organ­ization’s goals. Next, a more influential role of HRD is
examined—­that of a major force in shaping emergent strategy.
HRD’s expanding influence can be seen in patterns of business development
from within organ­izations and from a more global perspective. Both views of
the strategic role of HRD are examined in this section. First, strategic initiatives based on employee expertise are briefly illustrated in successful manufacturing and ser­v ice organ­izations where they have become firmly established.
Then, the business planning and relocation strategies of multinational corporations are examined. ­These strategies are increasingly based on the availability of a competent workforce and reflect changing patterns of workforce skill
development at the global level.
HRD and Strategy in Organ­izations Successful companies advance from a
solid base of proven competence within distinctive market niches to exploit
emerging business opportunities in related areas. For general direction, the
guidance offered by deliberate, purposeful strategy is useful and relevant for
organ­izations operating in familiar markets where they possess a distinctive
competence. By continuously developing employee expertise in key domains of
product and market expertise, competitive advantage is achieved and expanded.
The nature of this strategy is closer to the deliberate than the emergent end of
the strategy continuum. This is when organ­izations use existing patterns of strategy to expand in areas where they already enjoy sales leadership or other mea­
sures of market success. While employee expertise is developed to maintain
pre­sent advantages, HRD also serves as a key enabler of strategy for expanding
growth. Examples of the strategic role of HRD from companies that rely on employee expertise to capitalize on business opportunities are described in the
accompanying case example.
HRD and Expertise from a Global Perspective HRD as a major force in
the shaping and emergence of business strategy can also be seen from a global
perspective. Levels of education and expertise among populations of geographic
regions in the world vary widely when viewed from a global perspective. The
traditional view that the most educated and most educable ­people are predominantly in the Western industrialized nations is changing rapidly. In some regions, the levels of education, particularly in technical and scientific areas, and
the readiness of the population to acquire even higher levels of training, are at
least as favorable as they are in the United States. Singapore and Malaysia, for
example, have invested heavi­ly in an infrastructure for developing targeted
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 363
12/3/21 3:05 PM
CASE EXAMPLE: STRATEGIC ROLES IN TWO COMPANIES
L. M. Ericsson Corporation is a Swedish telecommunications equipment
manufacturer. It reconfigured its sprawling international operations in
1994 to streamline its design and product development functions (Flynn,
1994). To outsiders, what appeared as a major corporate restructuring
was in fact a fundamental reconception of how work was accomplished
based on expanding the breadth and depth of employee expertise across
previously inviolable divisional and functional bound­aries. Using recommendations offered by design and production technicians themselves, the
­wholesale renovation of major pro­cesses was undertaken. A matrix system for production and information sharing emerged among the forty
labs of this research-­intensive organ­ization. Based on newly acquired expertise in systems thinking, business pro­cesses, and key technical skills,
employees ­were able to design telecommunications equipment and set up
manufacturing and ser­vice networks si­mul­ta­neously. Once an organ­
ization that behaved like seven dif­fer­ent companies and was slow in bringing new products to an innovation-­conscious market, Ericsson became a
leader in lightweight, digital mobile phones and asynchronous switching,
surpassing $10 billion in annual sales. They have since joined with Sony
to serve the world market ­under the name Sony-­Ericsson.
Home Depot became a dominant force in the home improvement
business in part by making a conscious effort to learn from e­ very aspect
of its business (McGill and Slocum, 1994). It continued to achieve a phenomenal annual growth rate within the industry by dedicating its ­people,
policies, and practices to developing expertise and learning through
­every dimension of its business. Home Depot explic­itly pursues objectives to ensure a long-­term, competitive advantage through learning from
experience and maintaining employee expertise at state-­of-­the-­art levels.
Com­pany interactions with employees, customers, vendors, suppliers, and
competitors are constantly analyzed to reap value-­added lessons from a
variety of business experiences—­whether they involve a sales transaction,
a delivery, a management meeting, or an unhappy customer or employee.
On the one hand, Home Depot invested in developing employees at all
levels of the organ­ization. Entry-­level employees receive nearly four weeks
of training and participate in periodic conferences and training sessions
at the store and company-­wide levels. On the other hand, Home Depot
values learning from customers in any way it can. It allows building contractors to use its makeshift classrooms in each store to share their needs
and expertise with employees and other customers. Home Depot has added
contractor check-­out areas, self check-­out, and new products for first-­time
home buyers in response to suggestions from both its own employees and
customers. Home Depot demonstrated a compelling example of the
growth that can be achieved when organ­izations make a conscious effort
to learn and develop new expertise from ­every aspect of their business. Critics would argue that more recent losses have been influenced by cutbacks
in their HRD investments.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 364
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
365
industry-­specific expertise and have attracted export-­oriented manufacturers
and advanced technology from abroad. China and India are rapidly developing
workers capable of absorbing new technologies. They direct a large proportion
of their top students into elite technical institutes.
Just as we witnessed a shift in domestic manufacturing offshore to take advantage of lower l­abor costs for unskilled workers, large corporation planning and location strategies increasingly target countries other than the United
States for business development based largely on the availability of a technically
competent workforce. Rather than the offshore relocation of manufacturing
based on unskilled l­ abor, ­today’s relocation patterns are based more on the need
for more skilled ­labor. Business strategies are increasingly predicated on the
availability and sustainability of state-­of-­the-­art expertise.
As HRD efforts and worker expertise in less developed countries rapidly improve, corporations have shifted their locations and centers of expansion away
from the West to countries like China, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Singapore.
Always an uncertain undertaking, devising strategy is a particularly precarious pro­cess ­under uncertain and uneven volatile circumstances, such as
­those seen in credit markets, oil and healthcare needs, and crises both in the
United States and abroad. Pursuing deliberate strategy, although systematic and
goal oriented, is certainly less fruitful during periods of business instability.
Direction from pre­sent plans can be quickly lost as the need for strategic adjustments, new business directions, and global events emerge. It is during such
periods that the emergent nature of strategy offers the most promise that ­future
business growth can evolve from quite uncertain origins.
Yet, how does HRD assume such a strategic role in actively shaping the direction of the firm? HRD that is truly of strategic value to an organ­ization has three
impor­tant attributes: (1) it is rooted in needs and outcomes that are performance-­
based, (2) it has earned credibility and re­spect among key stakeholders by demonstrating its strategic capability, and (3) its role as shaper of strategy arises as
orga­nizational leaders acknowledge the importance of strategy’s emergent properties, for only emergent strategy can be actively ­shaped by influential forces such
as HRD. ­These strategic attributes of HRD are examined next.
ADOPTING A STRATEGIC HRD PERSPECTIVE
HRD that truly has strategic value to an organ­ization (1) is performance-­based,
(2) demonstrates its strategic capability, and (3) is responsive to the emergent
nature of strategy.
The first two of ­these are attributes of HRD itself, whereas the third ele­ment
is dependent on the nature of the strategy with which HRD interacts. All three
of ­these features taken together determine HRD’s strategic value and must be
attended to if it is to adopt a strategic perspective.
The employee expertise development now represents a critical strategic imperative for organ­izations wishing both to create new opportunities for growth
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 365
12/3/21 3:05 PM
366
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
and take advantage of the opportunities that inevitably unfold in a rapidly
changing business environment. Only through explic­itly adopting policies for
advancing employee expertise can organ­izations fully capitalize on the ­human
resource properties of strategy. As business conditions force strategy reshaping,
competence and flexibility at all levels of the organ­ization become more critical
to business success. In the midst of emergent strategies, planners and decision
makers with HRD backgrounds are in the best position to examine business
opportunities, determine the essential per­for­mance requirements of new busi­ eople within state-­of-­t he-­art
ness objectives, and position highly competent p
work systems to achieve ­those objectives. The realization of strategy inevitably
requires high levels of employee expertise to fully and quickly capitalize on opportunities for growth as they become available.
STRATEGIC ROLE 1: PERFORMANCE-­BASED HRD
HRD serves a broad range of interests and outcomes in organ­izations. The primary purposes served by HRD can range from programs intended to meet the
personal development needs of individuals (e.g., identifying personal learning
styles or ­family financial planning) to HRD efforts that involve every­one in the
organ­ization (e.g., programs addressing a new per­for­mance appraisal method
or structural reor­ga­ni­za­tion). Although HRD can potentially address many employees’ personal interests and can serve a variety of orga­nizational needs,
HRD that offers real strategic value to the organ­ization must contribute directly
to impor­tant business goals and must be based on key business per­for­mance
requirements (Swanson, 2007).
­Viable organ­izations continuously encounter new per­for­mance requirements in their efforts to successfully adapt to changing market demands. Although t­ hese per­for­mance needs may exist at the orga­nizational, group, or
individual levels, true per­for­mance needs are ultimately rooted in the core pro­
cesses that constitute the distinctive competencies for which customers rely on
the organ­ization (e.g., providing premium quality, innovative products, high
value-­added ser­vice, e­ tc.). HRD functions that adopt a systems perspective of
the organ­ization and its environment and that recognize the centrality of employee expertise to optimal business per­for­mance are in the best position to provide the performance-­based interventions needed for continued growth and
success. Performance-­oriented HRD also distinguishes itself through consistently offering high-­leverage interventions based on critical insights gained
from per­for­mance analy­sis.
Performance-­based HRD must be based on a clear definition of the per­for­
mance prob­lem through accurate identification of a­ ctual and desired per­for­mance
requirements at the organ­ization, pro­cess, and individual levels (Swanson, 2007a).
Upfront analy­sis that acknowledges the multiple determinants of per­for­mance
provides a reliable framework that leads to improvement. None of the strategic
roles of HRD discussed in this chapter can be assumed ­unless HRD is first based
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 366
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
367
on an analy­sis of key per­for­mance needs and directed at meeting impor­tant business outcomes. Even HRD that simply supports the execution of a given business
strategy must be, first and foremost, performance-­based. The f­ uture business direction that strategy hopes to clarify for the organ­ization is based on its core
strengths and competencies. Ultimately, it is the organ­ization’s per­for­mance in the
marketplace that determines success.
STRATEGIC ROLE 2: DEMONSTRATING THE STRATEGIC
CAPABILITY OF HRD
Yet, being performance-­based is not enough to fully demonstrate the strategic
importance of HRD. HRD ­will only be perceived as having strategic value if it
also demonstrates genuine strategic capability. As HRD demonstrates strategic
capability, it earns re­spect and credibility as a full partner in forging the organ­
ization’s ­future direction.
HRD’s demonstration of strategic capability goes beyond simply providing
interventions that support a given strategic initiative. Strategic capability is based
on an HRD philosophy that reflects the unique value of h
­ uman resources to pursue long-­range business goals flexibly and the conviction that ­people are the
only orga­nizational resource that can shape and re-­create the ways that all other
business resources are used. HRD demonstrates its strategic capability as it adds
two impor­tant dimensions to the organ­ization’s business-­planning pro­cess:
(1) HRD provides education and learning in the concepts and methods of strategic planning and systems thinking to t­ hose responsible for setting the strategic
direction for the organ­ization; and (2) the HRD function itself plays an active
role in strategic planning through direct participation of HRD professionals
in the business planning pro­cess. Together, ­t hese two features dramatically
emphasize HRD’s value to the business planning pro­cess and distinguish HRD
having strategic capability from traditional HRD functions that can only offer
marginal benefits to the organ­ization.
Education and Training in Strategic Planning The first of ­these capabili-
ties, providing education and training in business planning and systems thinking to ­those responsible for setting the strategic direction for the organ­ization,
is needed ­because many who participate in business planning may not possess
a broad perspective on the business or may not be able to apply readily the perspectives they have to the planning issues at hand. Presumably, ­those who participate in strategic planning possess the business acumen and understanding
needed for meaningful contributions to long-­term planning. However, strategic planning requires a sophisticated array of conceptual, analytical, and interpersonal skills. Business planning involves strategic decisions that are frequently
group decisions. Planners, therefore, need skills in prob­lem definition, facilitating analy­sis by the group, resolving communication breakdowns, reaching consensus, and building commitment. Impor­tant analytical and visioning skills
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 367
12/3/21 3:05 PM
368
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
needed by business planners include performing environmental scanning, analyzing industries and competition, conducting orga­nizational analy­sis (SWOT),
employing competitive benchmarking, using systems frameworks to identify
inconsistencies and threats to business development, and clarifying and articulating a unified orga­nizational mission.
­Those who participate in business planning are often strong in some of t­ hese
planning skills but not in ­others (Catalanello and Redding, 1989). And even
­those who seem to have a more complete picture of the business-­planning scenario often fail to account fully for the emergent properties of strategy. The training function can take the initiative by ensuring that business planning is not a
pro­cess that is entered into blindly by some who w
­ ill inevitably lack a few of
­these vital skills and perspectives.
Active Participation in Strategic Planning The second capability that demonstrates HRD’s strategic value is the active participation of HRD professionals in the business-­planning pro­cess. The importance of HRD to strategic
planning is reflected in the centrality of developing employee expertise to maintaining competitive advantage in t­oday’s business environment. As emphasized ­earlier in this chapter, even well-­planned strategies cannot stand up to the
uncertainties of the marketplace. However, ­human competence is a stable and
renewable resource on which t­ oday’s orga­nizational strategies must be based if
they are to remain ­viable. HRD professionals add a valuable dimension to the
strategic planning pro­cess by ensuring that planning is based on an accurate
assessment of current and achievable levels of employee expertise. In addition,
HRD professionals represent unique perspectives on the workforce when answering the following questions central to the strategic planning pro­cess:
• Given critical success ­factors in the organ­ization’s market niche or
industry, what domains of employee expertise are crucial to achieving key business objectives in each operational area? That is, what
skills must the organ­ization make the most of to succeed?
• What are the capabilities of the HRD function (in terms of its
strengths and weaknesses) to provide state-­of-­the-­art development
of workforce skills?
• How do the organ­ization’s HRD systems, methods, and technologies
stand up against best practices in the HRD profession?
The proactive use of data in ­t hese and other areas provided by the HRD
function is indispensable to effective business planning. Like ­t hose who lead
other functions considered crucial to the business, HRD professionals must
communicate to the organ­ization that, in response to even the most pressing
business demands, the HRD function can be relied on to deliver and support
key expertise when and where it is needed by the workforce. Ultimately, this is
the most vis­i­ble and valuable mea­sure of strategic capability.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 368
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
369
HRD that is directed at business per­for­mance requirements and that demonstrates strategic capability w
­ ill not need elaborate promotional mea­sures to
be widely recognized as offering strategic value to the organ­ization. But HRD
cannot consistently represent ­these attributes without a close partnership with
planners and the planning pro­cess itself. That is, in addition to being performance-­
based and demonstrating strategic capability, strategic HRD is also dependent
on the nature of the strategy with which HRD interacts. Treating strategy as an
emergent pro­cess is an impor­tant prerequisite for HRD that consistently offers
strategic value. This determinant of HRD’s strategic role is considered next.
STRATEGIC ROLE 3: EMERGENT STRATEGY AND HRD
At pre­sent, HRD serves a role that is predominantly supportive to strategy. HRD
that primarily serves to support the execution of a given strategy fills an adjunctive role that is clearly more deliberate than emergent. Unfortunately, a majority of ­today’s HRD that purports to be of strategic value may provide the
workforce with impor­tant expertise, but it does so ­a fter the formulation and
adoption of strategy. HRD cannot add value to the shaping of strategy if the strategy is already fully formulated.
Strategy is a dynamic phenomenon that necessarily unfolds over time in a
business environment that is inherently unstable (Mintzberg, 2007). While strategies may be based on structured planning and analy­sis, they also emerge out
of the many business opportunities and constraints that continually challenge
organ­izations. That is, strategies may be deliberate, but they may also emerge
from events. As expressed by strategy theorist Henry Mintzberg (1987), “strategy can form as well as be formulated. A realized strategy can emerge in response
to an evolving situation, or it can be brought about deliberately, through a pro­
cess of formulation followed by implementation” (68). While we may be capable of even more clever strategies, enlightened strategists also allow strategy to
develop out of the organ­ization’s expertise, action, and experiences. They acknowledge that decision makers cannot possibly think through all pos­si­ble events
and contingencies in advance. Indeed, as longitudinal research on strategy has
shown, strategy that has materialized through a­ ctual events has both deliberate
and emergent components.
While HRD can improve operational per­for­mance by providing skills in areas such as pro­cess improvement and customer sensitivity, HRD is inhibited
from making truly formative contributions to strategic innovation and per­for­
mance if deliberate strategic plans are handed down from a small group of management elite to the rest of the organ­ization in prepackaged form.
The benefits of developing and using employee expertise to capitalize on
evolving business opportunities can only be fully realized if strategy is treated
as both a deliberate and emergent phenomenon. Further prescriptions for advancing the HRD’s strategic contributions are of ­little value if strategy is fully
formulated and ­adopted without the per­for­mance perspectives that HRD offers.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 369
12/3/21 3:05 PM
370
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
Examples of Active Participation The following examples are of delibera-
tive strategic planning involving HRD. The first example is from a medical high-­
technology corporation that produces artificial body organs. The firm’s core
expertise has been a creative integration of multidisciplinary theory and practice in a technological context.
The general strategic business goal is to keep the com­pany on the cutting
edge of an intense and competitive industry through an expert workforce. HRD,
as a part of the top management team, works to determine the workforce expertise required by the firm to invent and produce products that do not yet exist and
that most likely require expertise in theoretical and technical areas that are
often viewed separately.
The HRD strategic contribution is in (1) systematically guiding the pro­cess
of visioning the technological ­future through the eyes of the technological and
business leaders of the firm and (2) determining the workforce knowledge and
expertise required to perform in ­those “­future states.” The outputs of this ongoing strategic analy­sis pro­cess serve as a primary input to the overall strategic
business planning pro­cess, thus influencing the business direction of the firm
and the plans to meet the corresponding workforce expertise and development
requirements.
The second example of deliberative strategic planning involving HRD is a
large healthcare insurance provider. The traditional core expertise of the insurance firm had been defined by a conservative culture. Furthermore, the culture
was built on power relationships among an uneasy mix of underwriting and
sales personnel. The changing conditions of regulations, increased costs, competition, and new technology shook the organ­ization to its core. The old power
relationship model was filled with in­effec­tive methods of achieving goals in the
new business environment.
Revitalized through an infusion of new leadership and a new per­for­mance
consulting model (Robinson and Robinson, 2008), HRD took on the role of improving per­for­mance rather than simply providing training events. In this new
role, the analy­sis of per­for­mance gaps within and between the individual, pro­cess,
and organ­ization levels yielded broad-­based participation in per­for­mance diagnosis, systemic understanding, and strategic goal-­setting that shape the firm.
HRD regularly engages top management as diagnosis partners and provides
critical core information to the top management team about per­for­mance disconnects existing in pre­sent strategies and developing strategies. For example,
it is common that systemic per­for­mance issues that are initially viewed as job-­
level concerns may turn into process-­level mapping at the job level. From that
level of analy­sis, major business pro­cess redesign and redefinition of per­for­
mance goals often emerge as the strategic mandate.
­These two illustrations highlight the potential of HRD as a partial determinant of the organ­ization’s strategic and operational direction. Each example
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 370
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
371
clearly demonstrates that expertise at the three levels of performance—­individual,
pro­cess, and organ­ization—­can be aligned for the purpose of shaping strategy.
Scenario Planning
Contributed by Thomas J. Chermack, Colorado State University
Parallel to the concept of traditional strategic planning is the idea of scenario planning. Schwartz (1996) defines a scenario as “a tool for ordering one’s
perceptions about the f­ uture environments in which decisions might be played
out” (4). This tool is most often a story or plotline that allows the organ­ization
members to fully explore a rich story of pos­si­ble f­ uture events. Th
­ ese scenarios
describe the current and f­ uture states of the business environment, and they
become stories about alternative pos­si­ble f­ utures (Ramirez & Wilkinson, 2016;
van der Heijden, 1996).
“Scenarios deal with two worlds: the world of facts and the world of perceptions. They explore for facts, but they aim at perceptions inside the heads of
decision-­makers. Their purpose is to gather and transform information of strategic significance into fresh perceptions” (Wack, 1985b, 140). Used in this way,
scenario planning pre­sents “an efficient approach to strategic business planning,
focusing on business ideas in an uncertain world” (van der Heijden, 1996, 2).
The prob­lem is one of not knowing the fit between strategic planning and
scenario-­building along with the role of HRD in shaping and supporting strategic orga­nizational planning.
Scenario planning expertise has grown within the HRD community. Scenario Planning: H
­ uman Resource Development’s Strategic Learning Tool (Chermack and Burt, 2008) positions scenario planning as a key activity to be directed
by HRD professionals. This book serves as a manual with many practical tips
for managing scenario planning proj­ects in organ­izations. It also identifies areas that need further exploration, attention, and understanding to leverage the
benefits of scenario-­building.
As more organ­izations face continuous change, HRD professionals are developing expertise and tools to operate successfully in such an environment. The
traditional tools of strategic planning, which are commonly extrapolations of
the past to determine the f­ uture, are not effective when f­ uture forces do not mirror past forces (Warren, 2012). In an environment of constant change and challenge, nontraditional tools for anticipating and planning for change are needed.
One impor­tant tool is scenario planning. The following sections summarize the
purpose of scenario planning and outline the major ele­ments of any scenario
planning effort.
The pro­cess of scenario planning generally involves development of several
plots and supporting descriptions that illustrate the primary forces driving
change within a system, their interrelationships, and uncertainties in the
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 371
12/3/21 3:05 PM
372
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
environment (Wack, 1985b). Scenarios help decision makers structure and
think about uncertainty, test their assumptions about how critical driving
forces ­will interact, and reor­ga­nize their m
­ ental model of real­ity (Vecchiato,
2019; Gordon, 2020).
Ramirez and Wilkinson (2016) characterize the learning pro­cess of scenario-­
building as follows: by organ­izing complex information on ­future trends and
possibilities into a series of plausible stories, scenarios are seen as interpretive
tools that create meaning and thereby guide action. The use of multiple plausible
­futures helps decision makers think more expansively about change and adopt
multiple perspectives to understand f­ uture events. In the end, scenarios offer entrepreneurial and innovative benefits to organ­izations (Tiberius, 2019).
While ­there are numerous variations on this pro­cess, a thorough examination of the vari­ous scenario planning models (Ramirez and Wilkinson, 2016;
Keough and Shanahan, 2008) finds that any complete scenario-­planning effort
begins with and is based on some initial concern or prob­lem in the organ­ization
related to how the organ­ization fits in its environment. E
­ very scenario effort is
essentially customized based on this initial issue. All incorporate interviews with
members of the organ­ization at multiple levels, workshops for brainstorming
and forming the scenario logics, creating the scenario stories, and fi­nally, using
the scenarios in strategy formation. Each of t­ hese major components of the
scenario-­building pro­cess is described.
INTERVIEWS AND INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Interviews are a basic analy­sis tool that should be a part of any orga­nizational
change effort. In scenario planning proj­ects, interviews form the basis of investigating the issue, allowing the change agent to understand the issue more fully
and serve as a means of enrolling key members of the organ­ization into the
planning pro­cess. Perhaps most importantly, interviews are what allow scenario
planners to understand the deepest concerns of man­ag­ers. Th
­ ese concerns
must show up ­later in the scenario storylines. Essentially, the stories have to
­ ental models of man­ag­ers and decision makers
be tailored to challenge the m
(Vecchiato, 2019).
Typically, CEOs, se­nior executives, se­nior man­ag­ers, and a cross-­section of
­people involved in the scenario-­planning effort should be interviewed. Usually
seven interviews with selected participants who genuinely see the situation differently is enough (Chermack, 2011). Sometimes, a second tier of individuals that
can be engaged include a cross-­section of man­ag­ers at the remaining levels of
the organ­ization. One impor­tant aspect of scenario planning is that it is designed
to include a variety of voices and opinions on the strategic issues the organ­ization
is facing—­cognitive diversity. Therefore, it is ultimately impor­tant to interview
a sample that includes a repre­sen­ta­tion of all the major voices, levels, and
perspectives.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 372
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
373
Pierre Wack developed a series of questions that are used to surface the strategic agenda of the organ­ization (Chermack, 2017). ­These are commonly referred to as “the seven questions” and are presented as key words along with a
translation example for each:
1. Clairvoyant: If you could speak with an [industry] oracle from 2028,
what three t­ hings would you like to know about the [organ­ization]?
2. Good Scenario: If the [organ­ization, industry, ­etc.] ­were to collapse by
2028 (a “bad” scenario), what might have caused the collapse and why?
3. Bad Scenario: If the [organ­ization, industry, e­ tc.] ­were thriving, growing, and moving in a genuinely positive direction (a “good” scenario)
by the year 2028, what would be true of it?
4. Inheritances from the Past: What has surprised you (pleasantly or
unpleasantly, specifically or generally) about the [organ­ization,
industry, ­etc.] in recent years? What have been the memorable
“turns” and why?
5. Impor­tant Decisions Ahead and Priorities: What are the major challenges to be faced by [organ­ization, industry, ­etc.] professionals in the
next five years? What are the obstacles to be overcome that keep you
awake at night?
6. Constraints in the System and Changes that Need to Be Made: What
would hinder the field from moving past t­ hese obstacles? What forces
could constrain the [organ­ization, industry, e­ tc.]?
7. Epitaph: Imagine that your program is in danger of being completely
cut. What is your argument for keeping it?
WORKSHOPS
Once the initial issue is understood, a series of workshops is designed to build
scenarios that stretch the thinking among decision makers around that issue
(Ramirez and Wilkinson, 2016). The number and length of t­ hese workshops vary
according to the number of ­people involved and the complexity of the issue,
but a minimum number of recommended workshops is three. The first is for
general brainstorming about the issues and concerns of the group and general
group dialogue. Dialogue is a key component of the scenario-­building pro­cess,
as it is the mechanism for revealing individual ­mental models and working
­toward a shared group m
­ ental model of the issue, organ­ization, and its external
environment.
The second workshop is aimed at creating the scenario logics. Th
­ ese scenario
logics are the general frameworks—or the plots of the scenarios that are written
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 373
12/3/21 3:05 PM
374
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
in detail at a ­later time. The group is asked first to rank the issues and concerns
that resulted from the brainstorming exercise on their potential impact on the
orga­nizational strategic agenda. This can take an entire day, as members of the
group converse over which items have a greater potential impact than o
­ thers
and is a vital part of ­mental model sharing (David and Efstathios, 2020).
The group is asked again to rank the same issues on uncertainty, which
again, can take an entire day, but is also critical to the development of a shared
­mental model among orga­nizational members.
Items that ­were ranked high on potential impact and uncertainty are called
“critical uncertainties.” ­These are the major forces out of which the scenarios
are constructed. It is also impor­tant to note that items ranked low on potential
impact and uncertainty are called the “predetermined ele­ments.” Wack (1985c)
further defined predetermined ele­ments as “­those forces that have already happened, but whose consequences have not yet unfolded” (27). The predetermined
ele­ments are commonly items like population and should appear in the scenarios as well. In the case that one or more of the scenarios simply do not make
sense or are not realistic, other critical uncertainties are chosen u
­ ntil scenarios
emerge that are relevant, plausible, and challenging.
CREATING THE SCENARIO STORIES
Once the scenario logics have been constructed and the basic plots of four scenarios have emerged, the team can turn its attention to writing the scenario stories themselves. Flowers (2003) recommended beginning by considering the
newspaper headlines that might appear in each scenario and creating a ­simple
timeline with a key event occurring e­ very five years. As the timeline is filled in
and the major events that correspond to each scenario become clear, further details can be added. Of course, creative writing skills are certainly an asset in
this part of the pro­cess, and many organ­izations seek writing expertise at this
stage. Additional research on major trends and d
­ rivers in the industry related
to the issues that surfaced in the workshops is also necessary to compose useful
scenarios.
Some scenario planners prefer to have groups of client participants write the
scenarios, while ­others prefer to overtake the pro­cess themselves (Chermack,
2017). ­There are pros and cons to each—­engaging the client in scenario writing
increases owner­ship and engagement, though ­there are usually prob­lems with
voicing and style as each scenario is usually written by a dif­fer­ent person or
group. This approach also increases the time and cost of the proj­ect. Overtaking the pro­cess allows the scenario planner to isolate certain ideas to a specific
scenario or weave them throughout. This also solves any prob­lems with voicing
and style. Experienced scenario planners typically know what kinds of additional research to conduct to make the stories more in­ter­est­ing, provocative,
and plausible. The trade-­off is that the client does not have a hand in the sce-
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 374
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
375
nario construction. It should be noted that Wack’s original approach involved
the scenarios being constructed by the scenario team and then presented to
man­ag­ers, decision makers, or the board (Chermack, 2017).
Whichever approach is used, the scenarios must take a form that is easily
disseminated throughout the organ­ization. Traditionally this has been a scenario workbook. Increasingly, however, scenario planning con­sul­tants are using websites, videos, and other technologies to roll out scenarios across the
organ­ization.
USING SCENARIOS TO EXAMINE STRATEGY
One par­tic­u­lar weakness in the available guidance on scenario planning is specifically how scenarios can be used once they are developed. Some texts suggest
using scenarios to stress test strategies, yet they offer l­ ittle specific guidance.
­Others suggest using scenarios to generate strategies, manage orga­nizational
change, and explore uncertain ­futures. Though, again, the practical guidance
remains vague. While a ­later section of this chapter discusses the integration of
scenario-­building and strategic planning, scenarios can serve as a forum to examine potential weaknesses in a strategic plan. In fact, some companies use
scenarios exclusively for this purpose. In the lit­er­a­ture, this pro­cess is referred
to as “wind tunneling” and is described as follows:
Scenarios represent the dif­fer­ent ­future conditions within which the
strategy, business model or other decisions must fit. Wind tunneling is
used to test decisions for robustness and for exposing opportunities
and risks. An impor­tant additional benefit of wind tunneling is that
the leadership engaged in wind tunneling is continually adjusting their
assumptions as they enter the dif­fer­ent worlds described in each scenario. As leaders check their decisions or business models in the vari­
ous scenarios they are often required to adjust their thinking based on
evidence of flawed assumptions. This pro­cess is filled with critical
learning opportunities in the scenario-­based strategy framework, and
draws highly on constructivist learning princi­ples. (van der Merwe,
2008, 233)
Leaders can use the scenarios to examine their strategy, goals, h
­ uman resource
capacity, specific decisions and outcomes, business model, and a variety of other
items (see figure 17.2).
While t­ here is an overall lack of specific guidance on how to use scenarios,
one practical and valuable use of scenarios is to test and examine a set of strategic options (Chermack, 2017). A case example is a com­pany wanting to enter
a new geographic market having options to partner with other companies already t­ here, acquire a firm, open an office in the area, and more. A list of twelve
options emerged (usually between ten and twenty), and each was “pushed”
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 375
12/3/21 3:05 PM
376
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
IDEA
ORGANIZATIONAL ELEMENTS
STRATEGY GOALS HR CAPACITY
ETC.
SCENARIO OPTIONS
1. (named option)
2. (named option)
3. (named option)
4. (named option)
5. (named option)
Figure 17.2: Using Scenario Options to Examine Orga­nizational Ele­ments
through the rival scenarios while considering the potential risks and benefits of each. This is similar to wind tunneling a strategic plan, though it is more
specific and allowed the com­pany team to isolate three to five options that ­were
resilient across the set of scenarios. The follow-up work considered the scope,
schedule, and bud­get of the three to five most resilient scenario options. In this
case, the options testing activity clearly linked com­pany scenario-­building and
strategic planning. The space for developing specific ways of using scenarios is
wide open and provides a significant opportunity to advance scenario planning
practices.
ADVANCING SCENARIO PLANNING THEORY AND PRACTICE
While the practice of scenario planning was thriving in the late 1990s and early
2000s, ­little research and theory was in place to anchor the pro­cess (Chermack,
2001; 2002; 2003; 2004). Chermack’s (2005) theory of scenario planning has since
been the basis for ongoing research aimed at examining the utility of the theory (see figure 17.2)
Extensive research has been conducted that confirms the overall theoretical model in figure 17.3. In addition, more specific outcome variables (within
the major constructs of the theory) have been studied. Th
­ ese have included the
effects of scenario planning on employee engagement (Chermack, Freshwater, Hartig, Pearson, Fowler, Delgado and Sagas, 2020), orga­nizational climate
(Chermack, Coons, Nimon, Bradley and Glick, 2015), orga­nizational agility
(Chermack, Lindsey, Grant and Barber, 2019), emotional intelligence (Chermack, Fofanah, Balthaser, Coons, Harmon, Wichmann and Nathan, 2020),
and resilience (Chermack, Coons, O’Barr and Khatami, 2017), among o
­ thers.
The research base of scenario planning is catching up with its practice. Th
­ ere is
now a firm body of research that establishes the overall utility of scenario planning and confirms a wide range of outcomes.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 376
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
377
The Natural and Social Worlds
Organizational and Contexted Environment
Performance System
PLANNING SYSTEM
PROCESS
Categoric Law #2 Categoric Law #3 Categoric Law #4 Categoric Law #5
Mental
Models
Learning
Scenarios
(Unit 1)
(Unit 2)
Sequential
Law #1
Decisions
Sequential
Sequential
Law #2
Law #3
Categoric Law #6
(Feedback)
Option Generation
Performance
(Unit 4)
(Unit 3)
(Unit 5)
Sequential
Law #4
Decision Formulation
Figure 17.3: Theory of Scenario Development
Source: Chermack, 2005.
STRATEGIC PLANNING
Traditional strategic planning refers to the business planning and systems thinking required of ­those responsible for setting the strategic direction for the
organ­ization (Mintzberg, 1994). Presumably, ­those who participate in strategic
planning possess the business acumen and understanding needed for meaningful contributions to long-­term planning. However, strategic planning by itself
requires a sophisticated array of conceptual, analytical, and interpersonal skills.
Business planning involves strategic decisions that are frequently group decisions. Planners, therefore, need skills in prob­lem definition, facilitating analy­
sis by the group, resolving communication breakdowns, reaching consensus,
and building commitment. Skills associated with strategic planning include environmental scanning, analyses of industries and competition, orga­nizational
analy­sis (e.g., SWOT), competitive benchmarking, using systems frameworks
to identify inconsistencies and threats to business development, and clarifying
and articulating a unified orga­nizational mission.
Together, scenario-­building and strategic planning are proposed as a holistic view of strategic orga­nizational planning (SOP). Figure 17.4 illustrates the
SOP components and their relationships. The SOP “double funnel” graphically
contrasts the roles and relationships between scenario-­building and strategic
planning in the SOP pro­cess. Scenario-­building flares out the thinking in its
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 377
12/3/21 3:05 PM
378
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
ENVIRONMENT
STRATEGIC ORGANIZATIONAL PLANNING
Strategic Planning
Scenario Building
HRD supporting and shaping SOP
Figure 17.4: Strategic Orga­nizational Planning (SOP)
Source: Swanson, Lynham, Ruona, and Provo, 1998, 591.
expansiveness, and strategic planning reins in the thinking into an action plan.
All the while, both SOP phases are operating in the complex environment, and
SOP is viewed as a continuing pro­cess. HRD engages in supporting and shaping the entire pro­cess.
CONTRIBUTIONS OF HRD TO STRATEGIC
ORGA­NIZATIONAL PLANNING
What, then, are the potential contributions of HRD to SOP? To explore this
question, a matrix of the three HRD strategic roles in context of the two SOP
components, scenario-­building and strategic planning, is proposed in Figure 17.5.
It is impor­tant to highlight the definitions of scenario-­building as an expansive
pro­cess and strategic planning as a reductionist pro­cess as being crucial to the
exploration of the interpretation of HRD contributions to SOP.
THE STRATEGIC AGENDA FACING THE HRD PROFESSION
The following research agenda is based on the contribution cells of the supporting and shaping of strategic organ­ization planning matrix (figure 17.4). HRD’s
three strategic roles are used as the major organizers of the proposed action
agenda.
Performance-­Based
1. From a strategic planning perspective, the profession needs to learn
more about why HRD ­can’t consistently provide a road map for
developing and/or unleashing the ­human expertise required of an
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 378
12/3/21 3:05 PM
Strategic Orga­nizational Planning
HRD Strategic Roles
SCENARIO BUILDING
STRATEGIC PLANNING
Defined: SB is a pro­cess
for ordering perceptions
about the ­future environments in which decisions
might be played out
(Schwartz, 1996, 4).
Defined: SP is a pro­cess
for developing a comprehensive statement of the
organ­ization’s mission,
objectives, and strategy.
PERFORMANCE-­
BASED
Contribution:
Contribution:
Defined: HRD must
contribute directly to
impor­tant business goals
and must be based on
key business per­for­
mance requirements
(Torraco and Swanson,
1995).
• HRD provides critical
judgments as to the
organ­ization’s probability of being able to
develop and/or unleash
the ­human expertise
required of the vari­ous
scenarios being
proposed and what
each would require.
• HRD provides a road
map for developing
and/or unleashing
the ­human expertise
required to achieve
the strategic plan and
commitment to execute
related SP action plans.
STRATEGIC
CAPABILITY
Contribution:
Contribution:
Defined: To demonstrate
genuine strategic
capability, HRD (1)
provides SOP education
and learning, and
(2) actively participates
in the SOP pro­cess
(Torraco and Swanson,
1995).
• HRD oversees the SB
education and learning
required of personnel
for building “shared,
integrated ­mental
models of multiple
plausible ­futures”
(Lynham, Provo, and
Ruona, 1998, 6).
• HRD oversees the SP
education and learning
required of personnel
for planning strategy,
including the analy­sis
and synthesis of
internal and external
conditions.
• HRD experts serve as
contributors of key
­human resource
information and value
all information being
considered during the
SB pro­cess.
• HRD experts participate on the SP team
and act as a catalyst to
create new business
based on the strategic
development and/or
unleashing of ­human
expertise (see Mintzberg, 1994).
Figure 17.5: ­Human Resource Development’s Contribution
in Supporting and Shaping SOP
Source: Swanson, Lynham, Ruona, and Provo, 1998, 592. Used with permission.
379
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 379
12/3/21 3:05 PM
380
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
Strategic Orga­nizational Planning
EMERGENT STRATEGY
Contribution:
Contribution:
Defined: HRD assumes a
deliberate role in the
emergent nature of SOP
(Torraco and Swanson,
1995).
• HRD creates and
maintains “an institutional learning and
memory system . . . ​
and helps an organ­
ization avoid repeating
­mistakes” (van der
Heijden, 1996, 2) within
the realm of core
expertise and new
learning requirements.
• HRD creates and
maintains a system for
ongoing learning (in the
forms of internalization,
comprehension, and
synthesis) from its own
SP effort.
• HRD assumes itself
critical to the ongoing
strategic SB conversations of the organ­
ization. SB makes
“discussing strategy a
natu­ral part of any
[HRD] management
task and not the
exclusive domain of
specialist” (van der
Heijden, 1996, 22).
• HRD assumes itself
critical in the catalytic
information sharing,
strategic partnering,
and strategy finding
SP challenge facing its
host organ­ization (see
Mintzberg, 1994).
Figure 17.5: ­(Continued)
organ­ization to achieve its strategic plan and ­can’t consistently fulfill
its commitment to execute its related strategic planning action plans.
2. From a scenario-­planning perspective, the HRD profession needs to
cull out valid tools for making critical judgments about an organ­
ization’s probability of developing and/or unleashing the h
­ uman
expertise required of the vari­ous scenarios.
Strategic Capability
3. From a strategic planning perspective, the HRD profession needs to
develop and validate a core strategy for overseeing the strategic planning education and learning required of personnel for planning
strategy (including the analy­sis and synthesis of internal and external
conditions).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 380
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
381
4. From a strategic planning perspective, the HRD profession needs to
develop and validate a pro­cess (grounded in performance-­based
strategic contributions) for legitimizing its role as experts on the
strategic planning team in creating new business based on the strategic
development and/or unleashing of ­human expertise.
5. From a scenario planning perspective, the HRD profession
needs to develop and validate a core strategy for overseeing the
scenario-­building education and learning required of personnel for
building shared, integrated ­mental models of multiple plausible
­futures.
6. From a scenario planning perspective, the HRD profession needs to
develop and validate a pro­cess (grounded in performance-­based
strategic contributions) for legitimizing its role as experts on the
scenario-­building team in contributing key h
­ uman resource
information and valuing all information being considered during
scenario-­building.
Emergent Strategy
7. From a strategic planning perspective, the HRD profession needs
to develop and validate a system for creating and maintaining
ongoing learning and systems thinking (in the forms of internalization, comprehension, and synthesis) from its own strategic planning
effort.
8. From a strategic planning perspective, the HRD profession needs to
develop and validate a strategic planning pro­cess of information
sharing, strategic partnering, and strategy finding critical to its host
organ­ization.
9. From a scenario planning perspective, the HRD profession needs to
develop and validate an institutional learning and memory system
that helps an organ­ization avoid repeating m
­ istakes within the realm
of core expertise and new learning requirements.
10. From a scenario planning perspective, the HRD profession needs
to develop and validate a pro­cess of engaging in ongoing strategic
conversations of the organ­ization from the HRD perspective.
Conclusion
A scenario planning case example serves to conclude this chapter. The ele­ments
of scenario planning, including the challenges, pro­cesses and key players, are
highlighted.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 381
12/3/21 3:05 PM
CASE EXAMPLE: SCENARIO PLANNING
To illustrate the main points of this section, a short case study of a recent
scenario-­planning proj­ect is helpful. While this case is based on an ­actual
proj­ect, some details have been changed to preserve the confidentiality of
the organ­ization.
The situation involved an environmental firm focused on ­water and
wastewater management looking to expand its operations into California.
­There had been several attempts to break into the California markets over
the past ten years. However, none w
­ ere considered successful. During the
interview pro­cess, the historical context was uncovered, as well as the potential barriers, priority decisions, and seven interviewees revealed numerous varied perspectives on how to be successful in market expansion.
The primary relevant HRD expertise involved the basics of entry and
contracting, negotiation and, of course, interview skills.
The next phase of the proj­ect was the design, conduct, and facilitation of
the first workshop, which combined workshops one and two as described
above. The workshop was a full day with nineteen selected participants.
During the first workshop, participants ­were led through a brainstorming
exercise with sticky notes, consolidation of the brainstorm material into
twenty-­five categories, ranking of the categories on impact for the external
environment and ranking on uncertainty. ­These exercises allowed the group
to separate truly uncertain categories from t­ hose somewhat well-­understood.
The relevant HRD expertise was in the design and facilitation of the workshop. While the pro­cess for ­these activities is well-­established, t­ here is always
some customization, time management, and general facilitation expertise
required in all cases of scenario planning.
In the same workshop, once the categories ­were defined and or­ga­
nized, several combinations of critical uncertainties (categories ranked high
on impact AND uncertainty), w
­ ere used to construct a few scenario matrices. Facilitated dialogue prompted the group to s­ ettle on a single scenario
matrix that provided a provocative set of four scenario frameworks.
­After workshop 1, the work was to fill in the four quadrants of the
scenario matrix with other variables from the ranking activities. Requiring additional research, careful attention was paid to construct four written scenarios (each three pages in length) that met the criteria of being
plausible, challenging, and relevant to orga­nizational decision making. In
this case, the facilitator took over the scenario writing pro­cess. The relevant expertise was specifically scenario writing, which is a specific domain
of skill, developed over time.
Si­mul­ta­neously, the facilitator worked with the leadership team (a subgroup of the larger participant group) to determine a set of pos­si­ble California-­
382
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 382
12/3/21 3:05 PM
17. Strategy and H
­ uman Resource Development
383
market expansion strategies. Fifteen potential strategies ­were identified and
included ­things like “open an office in Sacramento,” “acquire a firm in Los
Angeles,” and “partner with a firm in San Francisco,” among o
­ thers.
For workshop 2, the facilitator worked again with the leadership team to
“stress-­test” the fifteen potential strategies. The format of the workshop involved immersing the group in scenario 1 and then asking each participant
to consider the potential risk and benefit (scale of 1–10) for each of the fifteen
potential strategies. The pro­cess was replicated for scenarios 2, 3, and 4.
Once workshop 2 was complete, the facilitator compiled all of the ranking information related to potential risk and benefit and produced a final
report. The outcome was a set of six of the fifteen potential options that ­were
generally high-­benefit, low-­risk in all four scenarios. The follow-up work
left to the leadership team was to consider the scope, schedule, and bud­get
for each of the six most resilient potential strategies.
Overall, the most impor­tant HRD-­related expertise was in interview
skills and analy­sis and workshop design and facilitation. Specific to scenario planning, the ability to construct four written scenarios out of the
interviews and workshop materials was also critical.
Reflection Questions
1. How is strategic planning dif­fer­ent from planning?
2. Select the strategic thinking school you believe to be best for HRD and
explain why.
3. What are the three strategic roles of HRD? Give an example of each.
4. What is the primary difference between scenario planning and traditional strategic planning?
5. What are the major components of any scenario planning proj­ect as
described in this chapter? What component is most difficult and why?
6. What are the opportunities to advance scenario planning practices
from an HRD perspective?
7. How do you think HRD professionals can most effectively contribute
to the scenario planning pro­cess?
8. Based on your experience, describe how scenario planning and traditional strategic planning can complement each other?
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 383
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18
Assessment in ­Human
Resource Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Program Assessment Approaches to Accountability
• The ­Limited Historic Four-­Level Evaluation Model
• Criticisms of the Historic Four-­Level Evaluation Model
• HRD Program Assessment in Practice
• Results Approach to Program Assessment
Balanced Scorecard and Intellectual Capital
Results Assessment System
• Per­for­mance Results
• Learning Results
• Perception Results
• Case Example: Sample Results Assessment Report
Financial Assessment
• Practical Means of Assessing HRD Financial Benefits
• Case Example: Organization Development—Actual
Financial Benefit
• Meeting the Assessment and Accountability Challenge
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
Perhaps one of the toughest issues in H
­ uman Resource Development (HRD) is
how HRD and its orga­nizational sponsors can structure an effective assessment
and accountability system. Such a system must meet a sponsor’s need to know
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 384
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18. Assessment in H
­ uman Resource Development
385
that HRD resources are deployed effectively and HRDs need to have mea­sures
that indicate w
­ hether desired results are achieved. Organ­izations are increasingly demanding that HRD develop valid mea­sures as a result of the increasing
importance of HRD interventions for orga­nizational effectiveness.
The primary focus of this chapter is assessment and accountability—­not
evaluation in the traditional sense. HRD professionals have traditionally relied
on variations of program evaluation models derived from educational evaluation methodology. This approach has not been widely ­adopted in the business
and orga­nizational context of HRD.
Unlike staffing and other h
­ uman resource management efforts, HRD is a
virtual kaleidoscope of activities, only a portion of which is u
­ nder the control
of the organ­ization. Development ranges from the informal and nearly impossible to detect and mea­sure (e.g., when one employee informally teaches another
how to do something without the host organ­ization knowing) to the formal and
easily mea­sured (e.g., a systematic organ­ization development intervention aimed
at a well-­defined per­for­mance issue).
Program Assessment Approaches to
Accountability
Program assessment in HRD generally has a greater emphasis on summative
mea­sures than formative mea­sures. The focus of most assessments in business
and industry is on mea­sur­ing a program’s effect on (1) the bottom financial
line, (2) the organ­ization, (3) the participants’ work, and (4) the participants themselves (Brinkerhoff, 1991; Broad and Newstrom, 1992; Dixon, 1990b; Kirkpatrick, 1998; Phillips, 1997a; Swanson and Holton, 1999; Wang and Spitzer, 2005).
THE ­LIMITED HISTORIC FOUR-­LEVEL EVALUATION MODEL
The four-­level training “evaluation” model by Kirkpatrick has dominated HRD
evaluation discussion since it was first published more than sixty years ago
(Kirkpatrick, 1959a, 1959b, 1960a, 1960b). It suggests that training should be
evaluated at four “levels”: level 1, participant reactions; level 2, learning; level 3,
on-­the-­job be­hav­iors, and level 4, results from be­hav­ior change. The Association for Talent Development (formerly the American Society for Training and
Development) has embraced this framework from its origin and continues using
it in its outcome reports (see Bassi and Ahlstrand, 2000).
Despite the four-­level popularity, “it’s prob­ably fair to say that the bulk of
all employee training programs conducted in the United States are evaluated
only at Level 1 [participant reaction], if at all. Of the rest, the majority are mea­
sured only at Level 2 [participant learning]” (Gordon, 1991, 21). Very l­ ittle comprehensive training evaluation is carried out across American industry (Dixon,
1987; Phillips, 1997a; Robinson and Robinson, 2008). When evaluation is done,
the lowly participant reaction form is the most frequently used versus summative program assessment. This observation has been confirmed in management
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 385
12/3/21 3:05 PM
386
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
training as well as skill training (Saari, Johnson, McLaughlin, and Zimmerle,
1988).
CRITICISMS OF THE HISTORIC FOUR-­LEVEL
EVALUATION MODEL
Despite its popularity with prac­ti­tion­ers, the four-­level model has come ­under
intense criticism (Alliger, Tannenbaum, Bennett, Trave, and Shotland, 1997;
Alliger and Janak, 1989; Holton, 1996b; Swanson and Holton, 1999). The chief
criticisms are as follows:
• Not supported by research—­Research has consistently shown that the
levels within the taxonomy are not related or are only correlated at a
low level.
• Emphasis on reaction measures—­Research has shown that reaction
mea­sures have nearly a zero correlation with ­actual learning or
per­for­mance outcome mea­sures.
• Failure to update the model—­The model has remained the same
for the last sixty years with l­ ittle effort to substantially update or
revise it.
• It is not used—­As discussed in the next section, the model is not
widely used. Despite de­cades of urging ­people to use it, most do
not find it a useful approach.
• Can lead to incorrect decisions—­The model leaves out so many
impor­tant variables that four-­level data alone are insufficient to
make correct and informed decisions about training program
effectiveness.
HRD PROGRAM ASSESSMENT IN PRACTICE
One stream of research in HRD has been to document the extent to which assessment methods are used in practice. This research is impor­tant ­because it
shows to what extent assessment models and methods are actually utilized.
The overall conclusions from survey reports are that many organ­izations use
participant reaction learning assessment for at least some programs. Most
organ­izations do not even try business results assessments. Only a small percentage of programs assess both participant be­hav­ior and business results. Overall, the findings pre­sent a very disappointing view of HRD assessment practices.
Especially so, in that every­thing impor­tant in organ­izations is usually assessed.
As early as 1953, researchers discussed the need for and lack of HRD assessment evaluation (Wallace and Twitchell, 1953).
The main reason that HRD is not formally assessed is ­because it is typically
not required by the organ­ization. The second most cited reason for not d
­ oing
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 386
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18. Assessment in H
­ uman Resource Development
387
higher-­level assessments is usually lack of time. Assessment continues to be seen
by HRD prac­ti­tion­ers as something harder to do than it should be. This raises
the question as to ­whether HRD assessment models and methods are sufficiently
clear to assist the average practitioner. What is unknown is the causal sequence:
Do organ­izations not require assessments ­because HRD professionals do not
know how to do it efficiently, or do HRD professionals not learn how to do it
­because organ­izations do not require it? (Swanson, 2005)
RESULTS APPROACH TO PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
It would be easy to lament the lack of HRD assessment and encourage prac­ti­
tion­ers to make use of available methodologies. Popu­lar press and business leaders uniformly discuss the need to increase the rate of growth in productivity in
the face of ever-­increasing competition. Furthermore, increasing research evidence indicates that ­human resource practices contribute significantly to orga­
nizational outcomes (Huselid, 1995; Lau and May, 1998; Wellbourne and
Andrews, 1996). The HRD lit­er­a­ture pre­sents evaluation/assessment as a necessary component in providing HRD that can help organ­izations increase ­these
outcomes. ­There are numerous case studies of effective assessment (e.g., Hartz,
Niemiec, and Walberg, 1993; Sleezer, Cipicchio, and Pitonyak, 1992; Smith, 1993;
Russ-­Eft and Preskill, 2001; Wang and Spitzer, 2005). Even estimating financial
return, which is often presumed to be the hardest part of evaluation, has been
widely demonstrated to be very feasible (e.g., Becker, Huselid, and Ulrich, 2001;
Kaufman et al., 1997; Lyau and Pucel, 1995; Phillips and Phillips, 2016; Mattson,
2005; Swanson, 1998a, 2001a; Swanson and Sleezer, 1989; Werner and DeSimone, 2012).
Yet, the lit­er­a­ture on how much assessments are used by business and industry suggests that less than half of the HRD programs are evaluated for intended
outcomes. Additionally, less than one-­third of HRD programs are evaluated in
any way that mea­sures changes in orga­nizational goals or profitability.
Researchers have offered elaborations, updates, and variations in an attempt
to improve HRD assessments. Some have stressed the addition of return-­on-­
investment (ROI) to HRD assessments (Phillips and Phillips, 2016; and Swanson,
2001a). Figure 18.1 displays the Phillips and Phillips pro­cess model. Essentially,
ROI in their model’s data analy­sis segment is a fifth level and beyond Kirkpatrick’s four levels.
Kaufman and Keller (1994) propose the addition of societal impact as a fifth
level. Lewis (1996) has offered an expanded model that captures context, pro­
cess, and outcome ­factors. Brinkerhoff (1991, 2005) offers a six-­level system to
blend formative and summative evaluation and a case method. ­Others have suggested that completely new approaches are needed (Abernathy, 1999). Preskill
and Torres (1999) offer evaluative inquiry as a dif­fer­ent approach, emphasizing
evaluation as a learning pro­cess.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 387
12/3/21 3:05 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 388
Evaluation Planning
Develop
Objectives
Plan
Evaluation
Data Analysis
Data Collection
Collect
Data
during
Program
Collect
Data
after
Program
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Isolate the
Effects
of the
Program
Convert
Data to
Monetary
Value
Figure 18.1: Return on Investment Methodology Pro­cess Model
Source: Phillips and Phillips, 2016, 48.
Tabulate
Fully
Loaded
Costs
Reporting
Calculate
ROI
Report
Results
Level 5
Identify
Intangible
Benefits
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18. Assessment in H
­ uman Resource Development
389
Balanced Scorecard and Intellectual Capital
The Balanced Scorecard assessment strategy is a more holistic approach to per­
for­mance mea­sure­ment (Kaplan and Norton, 1996; Niven, 2006). It was created
in 1990 as a strategy implementation tool. The scorecard is set of quantifiable
mea­sures connected to the host organ­ization’s strategy. Beyond the organ­
ization’s mission and strategy, t­ here are four perspectives built into a balanced
scorecard (Niven, 2006):
•
•
•
•
Customer perspective
Internal pro­cess perspective
Employee learning and growth perspective
Financial perspective
Figure 18.2 highlights sources of useful orga­nizational background information
for each balanced scorecard component. Valid discoveries serve as a basis for
Financial
•
•
•
•
•
Customer
Annual report
Performance reports
Analyst reports
Trade journals
Benchmark reports
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Marketing department
Trade journals
Consulting studies
Project plans
Strategic plan
Performance reports
Benchmark reports
Mission, Values, Vision,
and Strategy
• Mission statement
• Values
• Vision statement
• Strategic plan
• Organizational histories
• Consulting studies
• Project plans
Internal Process
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Employee Learning
and Growth
Operational reports
Manufacturing reports
Competitor data
Benchmark reports
Trade journals
Consulting studies
Project plans
•
•
•
•
•
Human resources data
Trade journals
Core values
Benchmark reports
Consulting studies
Figure 18.2: Using the Balanced Scorecard to Find Background Information
Source: Niven, 2006, 106.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 389
12/3/21 3:05 PM
390
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
Lag
Lead
Definition
• Mea­sures focusing on
results at the end of a
time period
• Normally characterizes
historical per­for­mance
• Mea­sures that “drive” or lead to the
per­for­mance of lag mea­sures
• Normally mea­sures intermediate
pro­cesses and activities
Examples
• Market share
• Sales
• Employee satisfaction
• Hours spent with customers
• Proposals written
• Absenteeism
Advantages
• Normally easy to identify
and capture
• Predictive in nature, and allows the
organ­ization to make adjustments
based on results
Issues
• Historical in nature
• Does not reflect current
activities
• Lacks predictive power
• May prove difficult to identify
and capture
• Often new mea­sures with no
history at the organ­ization
The Balanced Scorecard should contain a mix of lag
and lead mea­sures of per­for­mance.
Figure 18.3: Lag and Lead Per­for­mance Mea­sures
Source: Niven, 2006, 145.
the final scorecard, which ultimately serves as a cornerstone for management
decisions and actions.
Objectives for each of the four scorecard perspectives and subcomponents
evolve into a strategy map. Once to the point of specifying scorecard mea­sures,
­there should be a mixed bag of lagging and leading per­for­mance mea­sures. Take
some time reviewing the breakdown of lagging and leading mea­sures in figure 18.3.
This profile helps illustrate the holistic approach to assessment using a balanced
scorecard.
The “intellectual capital” approach is another holistic assessment method
for determining results. In recent years, the concept of knowledge or intellectual capital has received increasing attention. This movement has been driven
largely by the recognition that traditional accounting systems failed to capture
the value of an organ­ization’s h
­ uman capital. In a knowledge economy, the
contribution of ­human capital is likely to meet or exceed the value of financial
capital. What has been missing are metrics to mea­sure and manage h
­ uman capital. Thus, the intellectual capital strategy has been to create new mea­sure­ment
systems.
In 1995, Skandia Corporation released what is believed to be the world’s first
Intellectual Capital Annual Report (Edvinsson and Malone, 1997). Since then,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 390
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18. Assessment in H
­ uman Resource Development
391
more organ­izations have tackled the difficult task of mea­sur­ing their intellectual capital, spawning several approaches to mea­sure­ment. Skandia made some
contributions by offering useful definitions. First, they defined the total value
of the organ­ization as
Market value = Financial capital + Intellectual capital
This is a fundamentally dif­fer­ent view of an organ­ization ­because it suggests that
value results from employing two forms of capital, not just financial capital,
which traditional accounting and financial systems do. Intellectual capital was
then defined simply as:
Intellectual capital = ­Human capital + Structural capital
Structural capital was defined as all ­those ­things left ­behind when the employees went home. In the old industrial economy, it was the structural capital that
created the greatest competitive advantage. In the knowledge economy, it is the
­human capital that creates competitive advantage, but accounting systems do
not adequately account for its value. Thus, Skandia and o
­ thers created new metrics. The metrics created at Skandia that could be used to mea­sure intellectual
capital development are shown in figure 18.4.
Training Focus
Training expense/employee (dollars)
Time in training (days/year) (number)
Per capita annual cost of training, communication, and support programs
for full-­time permanent employees
Renewal and Development Focus
Competence development expense/employee (dollars)
Share of training hours (percentage)
Share of development hours (percentage)
Training expense/employee (dollars)
Training expense/administrative expense (percentage)
Growth/Renewal
Total competence of experts in years
Value added per employee
Figure 18.4: Skandia Corporation Metrics
Note: More information can be found at www​.­icvisions​.­com
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 391
12/3/21 3:05 PM
392
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
The intellectual capital approach has gone further than any other approach
in mea­sur­ing and valuing h
­ uman capital development in organ­izations. As such,
it has made a significant contribution to ­human resource metrics.
In addition, standard advice is that each organ­ization should create its own
mea­sure that represents the key ­drivers of per­for­mance. While this recommendation is very sound, it almost guarantees that cross com­pany comparisons ­will
be difficult or impossible.
Results Assessment System
The Results Assessment System was created to provide prac­ti­tion­ers a systematic
and theoretically sound pro­cess for assessing per­for­mance, learning, and perception results from HRD and per­for­mance improvement interventions (Swanson
and Holton, 1999). One descriptive change was to abandon the term evaluation
­because it is essentially misunderstood outside educational arenas. Results assessment was a­ dopted instead as a term more descriptive of the business pro­cess
they propose for making outcome assessment an integral part of organizationsponsored HRD. The results assessment pro­cess is displayed in figure 18.5.
Front-End Analysis Inputs
1
Specify
Expected Results
2
Plan Assessment
of Results
3
Develop Measures
of Results
4
Collect and Analyze
Results Data
5
Interpret and Report
Results Assessment
Decision Outputs
Figure 18.5: Results Assessment Pro­cess
Source: Swanson and Holton, 1999, 15.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 392
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18. Assessment in H
­ uman Resource Development
393
The results assessment system specifies three domains of results—­performance,
learning, and perceptions—­with two options within each domain.
PER­FOR­MANCE RESULTS
• System: The units of mission-­related outputs in the forms of goods
and/or ser­vices having value to the customer and that are related to
the core orga­nizational outputs, work pro­cesses, and group or
individual contributors in the organ­ization.
• Financial: The conversion of the output units of goods and/
or ser­vices attributable to the intervention into money and
financial interpretation.
LEARNING RESULTS
• Knowledge: ­Mental achievement acquired through study and
experience.
• Expertise: ­Human be­hav­iors having effective results and optimal
efficiency, acquired through study and experience within a
specialized domain.
PERCEPTION RESULTS
• Stakeholder perceptions: Perceptions of leaders of systems and/or
­people with a vested interest in the desired results and the means
of achieving them.
• Participant Perceptions: Perceptions of p
­ eople with first-­hand
experience with systems, pro­cesses, goods, and or ser­vices.
In addition to the three domains of the results assessment system, a pro­cess
for results assessment, a plan for designing results assessment, tools for mea­sur­
ing outcomes, and reporting assessment results are detailed. The pro­cess begins with HRD front-­end analy­sis critical in establishing clarity to the need for
HRD, the HRD intervention per­for­mance goals, and the outcomes to be assessed
(Swanson and Holton, 1999; Swanson 2007a).
The case example results assessment report that follows illustrates the executive summary assessment report for a development program aimed at healthcare sales personnel. Backing up the report would be a breakdown of the raw
data and findings. Such reports provide orga­nizational decision makers (1) evidence of HRD program effectiveness and (2) changes in the status of HRD as an
impor­tant and strategic partner to the enterprise.
Regular use of the Results Assessment System reporting supports decisions
about HRD effectiveness and importance. The Results Assessment System is significantly enhanced by including methodology for assessing the financial benefits of HRD (Swanson, 2001a).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 393
12/3/21 3:05 PM
CASE EXAMPLE: SAMPLE RESULTS ASSESSMENT REPORT
(Com­pany) Healthcare Sales Per­for­mance Consulting
Program:“Communicating the (Com­pany)
Advantage”
Dates:January–­September, XXXX,
24 Groups
Participants: 180 Healthcare Sales/Account man­ag­ers
Com­pany
Logo
Program Purpose
When a (Com­pany) employee meets with a potential or existing customer,
he or she creates a professional impression, builds a credible, trustworthy
relationship, and communicates the value of (Com­pany) with a direct
emphasis on our medical management capabilities.
Program Description
“Communicating the (Com­pany) Advantage” is an intensive two-­day
program that focuses on listening, questioning, and pre­sen­ta­tion skills. It
is designed to improve sales associates’ ability to communicate the “medical management capability” in a way that improves sales results. During
the two-­day program, sales man­ag­ers co-­facilitate by providing technical
expertise and serving as communications coaches. Sales man­ag­ers also
are required to go through the program and to coach and evaluate sales
associates back on the job.
Evaluation Summary
In summary, the “Communicating the (Com­pany) Advantage” programs
­were very effective. The program exceeded its goals in all of the areas evaluated thus far, ten months following the first program. See page two for a
further breakdown of t­ hese results and contact Sales Per­for­mance Consulting if you wish additional information.
Per­for­mance
• Financial Results
Goal Attainment
409%
Learning
• Expertise
117%
Perception
• Participant Perception
• Sponsor Perception
149%
147%
394
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 394
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18. Assessment in H
­ uman Resource Development
Approval
VP of Per­for­mance Consulting
395
Date: M/D/YR
Distribution List
• President
• VP of H
­ uman Resource
• Se­nior VP of Sales and Marketing
Development
• Se­nior VP of ­Human Resources
• Area Operating Officer
• VP of National Accounts
The evaluation of this program is reported according to the effectiveness
domains of per­for­mance, learning, and perceptions.
Per­for­mance
The overarching goal of this program was to increase sales through communication and pre­sen­ta­tion skills. Listed below is a summary of sales
attributed directly to this per­for­mance improvement program.
Business Results by Type of Sale
2 Markets “Y” Business
1 Dental
2 PPO Firms
18 Markets “X” Business
1 National Account
24 Sales
Financial Results in Terms of
Total Premium Equivalent
$5,500,000
290,000
2,000,000
57,620,000
13,000,000
Totals
$78,410,000
Source: Swanson and Holton, 1999, 162–163.
Financial Asssessment
­ uman resource functions have not usually looked to finance and accounting
H
for assessments. While it is clear that metrics other than financial ones are
needed, the separation between h
­ uman resources and finance is unnecessary
and counterproductive. The financial approach has arisen from ­human capital
economics, utility analy­sis from industrial-­organizational psychologists, intellectual capital, and financial analy­sis. One financial assessment approach has
been to use existing financial mea­sures to place a value on ­human capital (Cascio and Boudreau, 2008).
Intellectual capital theory posits that some employees are more productive than ­others due in large part to their acquired knowledge, skills, and
abilities. The presumption is that returns from ­human capital are represented
by the difference between the worth of a firm’s assets and the value placed on
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 395
12/3/21 3:05 PM
396
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
it by the stock market. Intellectual capital assessments use financial mea­sures
to determine the return from h
­ uman capital. One h
­ uman capital formula is
the following:
­Human Capital Return = Market Value − Book Value
From this perspective, all returns over the book value of the firm are attributable to returns from ­human capital development.
The use of market value to calculate ­human capital returns is problematic—­
except in the long run. You need only look to the stock market crashes to see
how market valuations can become disconnected from real firm per­for­mance.
Thus, linking development metrics to stock market valuations could create tremendous short-­term volatility in the metric, rendering it unusable.
Another useful metric comes from ­human capital economists (Cascio, 1999;
Cascio and Beaudreau, 2015). They consider tenure in the organ­ization as an
indicator of accumulated competence. H
­ uman capital theory makes a sharp distinction between general training and specific training. General training offers
no unique contribution ­because it is applicable in any organ­ization. Specific
training offers unique value to the organ­ization and is not easily transferred to
other organ­izations.
Thus, tenure in the organ­ization is a proxy for accumulated firm-­specific
expertise, encompassing both knowledge and experience. Both h
­ uman capital
economics and utility analy­sis (Cascio, 1999; Cascio and Boudreau, 2015) consider an employee’s wages and salaries to represent the economic value of the
employee. Thus, analyses of returns on development begin with an assumption
that compensation reflects the cost of ­human capital.
The metric that is quite useful is tenure in the organ­ization as a proxy for
accumulated expertise. It is certainly reasonable to expect that employees with
longer tenure ­will, on average, have greater expertise than ­those with less tenure. However, it must be noted that t­ here are instances where newcomers with
less tenure might bring new expertise into the organ­ization.
The intellectual capital approach has gone further than any other approach
in mea­sur­ing and valuing ­human capital development in organ­izations. As such,
it has made an impor­tant contribution to ­human resource metrics.
Unfortunately, the primary focus of the intellectual capital assessments has
been on organ­izations that are predominantly knowledge-­driven. The mea­sures
are not as appropriate for organ­izations that have huge investments in plants
and equipment. ­These organ­izations carry a significant cost of financial capital
that must be accounted for. While ­human capital is still a vital source of competitive advantage in t­ hese companies, it is not the only source—­financial capital plays a large role as well. For an assessment to be widely used, it must be
applicable in any type of organ­ization and account for the contributions of financial and ­human capital.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 396
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18. Assessment in H
­ uman Resource Development
397
In addition, standard advice is that each organ­ization should create its own
mea­sure that represents the key ­drivers of per­for­mance. While this recommendation is very sound, it almost guarantees that cross-­company comparisons ­will
be difficult at best.
PRACTICAL MEANS OF ASSESSING HRD FINANCIAL BENEFITS
The HRD financial assessment model is simplicity itself (Swanson, 2001a, 26):
Per­for­mance Value
− Cost
Benefit
(per­for­mance value resulting from the HRD
intervention)
(cost of the HRD intervention)
(benefit is the per­for­mance value minus the cost)
­ ere are three practical perspectives on assessing the financial benefits of HRD.
Th
They include forecasting the benefits, the ­actual benefits, and approximated benefits. A framework of ­these three over time is presented in figure 18.6 along
with key questions.
The assumption is that for each method, a unit of per­for­mance can be identified and the unit of per­for­mance can be mea­sured and financially valued. Forecasting financial benefits gains approval for HRD programs. Reporting ­actual
financial benefits validates HRD as a valuable orga­nizational investment. Reporting approximate financial investments a­ fter the fact backfills the appreciation for HRD investments. This approach is illustrated in the case example of
­actual financial benefits (see next page).
Before-­the-­Fact → During-­the-­Process → After-­the-­Fact
Forecasted
Assessing
Financial
Benefit
Methods
­Actual
What Is the
­ orecasted
F
Financial
Benefit?
What Is
the ­Actual
Financial
Benefit?
What Is the
Approximate
Financial
Benefit?
Approximate
Figure 18.6: Framework and Key Questions for Assessing
HRD Financial Benefits
Source: Swanson, 2001, 6.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 397
12/3/21 3:05 PM
CASE EXAMPLE: ORGAN­IZATION DEVELOPMENT—­
ACTUAL FINANCIAL BENEFIT
Situation. Universal Healthcare operates in a very aggressive market. The
organ­ization’s market research has pointed out that its ser­vices are not
much dif­fer­ent from t­hose of its competitors. They further have stated
that ­there is room for growth in the com­pany’s market. As director of
HRD, you agree with top management’s conviction that poor customer
ser­vice is a serious prob­lem for Universal Healthcare and that an organ­
ization development intervention aimed at creating a new “sense of the
customer” in employees ­will result in maintaining current members and
attracting new members. Plans include a companywide organ­ization development effort to instill a “sense of the customer” in Universal’s employees and a specific customer relations training program for ten salespeople
whose goal is to attract new members.
The options w
­ ere to produce an in-­house organ­ization development
intervention using Universal’s HRD staff or to use a similar off-­the-­shelf
program that is available from an external development firm. Both options would involve participants in several sessions over the next year.
The in-­house version promised a gain of 1,200 new members in one year’s
time. The gain from the off-­the-­shelf program is expected to be 500 in the
same time period. The in-­house program was selected and ­actual financial benefits assessed. Universal’s financial director valued that each new
member, ­after all expenses, leaves Universal Healthcare with $200 net
profit. This was a key figure in calculating the total value of the added subscribers at year’s end.
Critique. This case has four in­
ter­
est­
i ng aspects. First, the unit of
performance—­new members—­was easy to identify and difficult to value.
Only a few p
­ eople at the top of the organ­ization knew the dollar value of
the annual net profit from each membership. It took probing to fi­nally
discover it.
Second, since all employees of the organ­ization participated in the
customer-­service program, the entire organ­ization was considered to be a
single work group. The increase in membership was not an individual
worker goal—it was an orga­nizational goal.
Third, the custom-­made, in-­house option, b
­ ecause it fit the prob­lem
so well, proved to be more effective in terms of expected per­for­mance at
the end of the one-­year evaluation period—1,400 members instead of the
forecasted 1,200. An extension of this per­for­mance picture had to do with
the accounting procedures used by Universal Healthcare. A membership
sale is based on a business calendar year. Thus, a new member joining at
398
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 398
12/3/21 3:05 PM
18. Assessment in H
­ uman Resource Development
399
midyear only pays and joins for half a year. This unit is thus a one-­half
member rather than a full member. B
­ ecause of this—­and ­because the exact
per­for­mance rate was not easily accessible and the com­pany traditionally
used this conservative approach to ­handling data—­the average membership units during the assessment period w
­ ere calculated. Seven hundred
new members w
­ ere attributed to the in-­house program, 50 ­percent of the
1,400 new members.
­ ctual Costs and Benefits. The ­actual benefits in the organ­ization develA
opment case proved to be a sound investment. The HRD intervention cost
$24,000 (salaries are not included in such calculations in Universal
Healthcare and no additional staff ­were added) compared to the lower-­
cost $15,000 option that was not selected. Cost, however, is not an assessment of economic benefit. The higher-­
cost option yielded so much
additional per­for­mance value that the cost difference was meaningless.
The in-­house version significantly altered corporate values as they related
to the importance of customers. The program intended to challenge each
employee to develop a “sense of the customer,” which had been lacking in
the organ­ization, and succeeded in terms of bottom-­line assessment.
Given their competitive situation, the decision makers found it too risky
to not change the organ­ization’s culture. The final benefit of $256,000 was
an ROI of 11:1 (per­for­mance value of $280,000 divided by the cost of
$24,000 is 11.67 to 1 and conservatively reported as 11:1).
MEETING THE ASSESSMENT AND
ACCOUNTABILITY CHALLENGE
The HRD profession still has assessment and accountability challenges that need
to be conquered. Some critics maintain that HRD is impossible to mea­sure and
that learning should not be evaluated by external means. This argument is
grounded mostly in a humanistic perspective from adult education that views
the learners themselves as the primary evaluators of development outcomes.
Organ­izations, on the other hand, are asking questions such as ­these:
• Are employees developing the expertise necessary to achieve orga­
nizational goals?
• Are scarce HRD resources being utilized most effectively?
• Is HRD adding value to the organ­ization?
• Is the learning necessary to drive orga­nizational effectiveness readily
available?
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 399
12/3/21 3:05 PM
400
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
Conclusion
The good news is that most con­temporary organ­izations care about HRD. They
care ­because it is increasingly central to orga­nizational success. Along with increased status comes increased accountability. The argument is a pragmatic
one: it is not a question of ­whether HRD ­will be held accountable but how. If
HRD does not define approaches to accountability, someone e­ lse w
­ ill. HRD leaders think it best if the profession defines appropriate approaches to accountability rather than allowing accountants to do it.
Accountability is also healthy for the profession. Being accountable only to
learners is not sufficient for HRD to be a strategic partner. Accountability forces
HRD to reassess its practices and pushes the field to learn how to focus its resources. ­There is no reason that HRD should not be held accountable, just as
marketing, production, engineering, or any other department would be. In the
end, such an approach ­will advance the profession.
Reflection Questions
1. What aspect of the results assessment system is most challenging?
Why?
2. Why do you think t­ here is re­sis­tance to assessing per­for­mance results
of HRD interventions?
3. In carry­ing out the work of HRD, explain when assessment and
accountability should first be considered.
4. What are the professional gains to regularly and systematically assessing and reporting HRD program results?
5. What are lagging and leading per­for­mance indicators? Additionally,
describe a situation and a hy­po­thet­i­cal lagging and leading indicator.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 400
12/3/21 3:05 PM
19
Policy and Planning
for ­Human Resource
Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
• The Work of HRD and Its Host Organ­ization
• Fostering Alignment and Tension
­Human Resource Development Policy and Planning
Contributed by Toby M. Egan, University of Mary­land
•­Human Resource Development Value Chain
•­Human Resource Development Policy
• Levels of ­Human Resource Development Policy and Planning
•­Human Resource Development Planning
• Design Thinking
•­Human Resource Development Proj­ect Management
Conclusion
Reflection Questions
Introduction
­ uman resource development (HRD) policy and planning is an impor­tant realm
H
of professional activity that is generally in the hands of the top HRD leaders in
an organ­ization or system. This planning work can be thought of as a component of, or aligned with, orga­nizational strategy.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 401
12/3/21 3:05 PM
402
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
THE WORK OF HRD AND ITS HOST ORGAN­IZATION
Most discussions related to HRD policy and planning are connected to program
management. As an extension of HRD management, the case is regularly made
for leadership skills related to proj­ect management, including a strong case for
planning skills and the ability to promote collaboration (Gilley, Eggland, and
Gilley, 2002).
Given orga­nizational demands for effectiveness and efficiency, HRD upper-­
level man­ag­ers and administrators should ensure that they and their proj­ect
man­ag­ers have adequate planning, controlling, and communication expertise
(Fabac, 2006). Additionally, having a clear HRD mission, policies, and defined
pro­cesses promotes clear expectations and is fundamental to consistent orga­
nizational success.
HRD adds value in helping its host organ­ization through development efforts. HRD is not a desk-­bound profession. HRD professionals are students of
their organ­izations, getting directly involved in the work and with the p
­ eople
­doing it. In helping to advance the per­for­mance of their organ­izations, HRD
gets involved in maintaining the systems and in changing the systems. From an
HRD operations point of view, it is recommended that development efforts from
­these two perspectives be kept discrete to avoid confusion and conflict.
FOSTERING ALIGNMENT AND TENSION
Almost all organ­izations are concerned about efficiency and effectiveness. Efficiency is generally the easiest target to see. ­Things like cutting costs, ­going
faster, and ­doing more with less are by themselves not worthy if the goods and
ser­vices being produced lose their quality. ­There is a healthy tension between
the pursuit of effectiveness and efficiency. HRD professionals require an understanding and appreciation of this dynamic.
­There is another level of tension where HRD professionals are less likely to
involve themselves. The natu­ral partnership between HRD and the quality
movement is fed by the notion of alignment (Semler, 1997), or getting p
­ eople and
pro­cesses all on the same page—­agreeing and harmonizing. Carried to an extreme, the reengineering movement (Hammer and Champy, 1994) forwarded
the man­tra of “carry the wounded and shoot the stragglers.” Th
­ ose that resisted
alignment ­were ousted. The ­human dimension and openness to critique ­were
lost in reengineering, and the movement faltered (Davenport, Prusek, and Wilson, 2003; Swanson, 1993).
The paradox for HRD is to deal with the need for harmony and dissent—­
enough harmony for the short term and enough dissent for needed renewal.
­There is clear evidence that both creativity and innovation in organ­izations
comes from individuals working outside the regimen of the orga­nizational systems (Kelly, 2001).
To foster corporate creativity and innovation, ­there is a call for HRD professionals and their host organ­izations to establish understandings and policies
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 402
12/3/21 3:05 PM
19. Policy and Planning for H
­ uman Resource Development
403
that address alignment, self-­initiated activity, unofficial activity, serendipity, diverse stimuli, and intracompany communication (Robinson and Stern, 1997).
­Human Resource Development Policy and Planning
Contributed by Toby M. Egan, University of Mary­land
The resource-­based view of organ­izations (Wernerfelt, 1984) postulates that employee knowledge and skill are impor­tant sources of competitive advantage
(Garavan, 2007) and add value to the well-­being and capacity of broader society (Woodall, 2001). From a ­human capital theory perspective, the capacity of
any organ­ization or system is rooted in individual expertise and collective core
competencies. Organ­izations protect their core capabilities and capacity by utilizing HRD—­and its aims t­ oward learning and performance—to advance their
mission and goals and to react to the changing environment (Becker, 1993). HRD
research has effectively demonstrated connections between HRD practices,
learning, and organ­ization per­for­mance (Akdere and Egan, 2020; Egan, Yang,
and Bartlett, 2004). As orga­nizational and large system goals expand and become more complex, the need is for policy and planning to be more rigorously
pursued.
What is policy and planning? How do they relate to HRD? As an or­ga­nized,
systematic pro­cess and function, HRD is deployed at individual, group, organ­
ization, regional, state/provincial, national, and even international levels
(Garavan, McGuire, and O’Donnell, 2004). In order to deploy HRD within any
organ­ization or system, policy and planning is involved. Policy provides an intentional system of princi­ples for action based on strategic priorities that specify
the course and timeline for related planning. HRD policy and planning is a critical
catalyst within and between the aforementioned levels. It is necessary to guide
and coordinate HRD related pro­cesses ­toward common goals. HRD planning is a
continuous system-­focused pro­cess aimed ­toward maximization of employee outcomes aligned with mission, vision, learning, and per­for­mance goals that are guided
by policy. HRD planning is used to create the best likelihood that the current workforce is aligned to serve customers, stakeholders, and the impact the organ­ization
was designed to achieve.
­ UMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT VALUE CHAIN
H
The concept of orga­nizational value chain (Porter, 1985) emphasizes using orga­
nizational systems to transform inputs into outputs. Beneath the creation and
sustainability of superior per­for­mance is policy and planning. The value chain
concept refocuses thinking about orga­nizational productivity by framing organ­
izations and their pro­cesses as key to meeting expectations for customers and
stakeholders. HRD practice should support the orga­nizational value chain
not only as a ­matter of alignment with orga­nizational strategy, structure, and
goals, but also as a logical connection to systems theory regardless of sector—­
for-­profit, nonprofit, or governmental (Jacobs, 1989). The HRD value chain
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 403
12/3/21 3:05 PM
404
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
should be designed to directly support primary orga­nizational activities—­
inbound logistics, operations, outbound logistics, marketing and sales, and ser­
vice (Porter, 1985). Although the terminology used may be dif­fer­ent in nonprofit
or governmental settings, the core notion of the HRD value chain contributes to
the key strategic focus of organ­izations by contributing to the primary activities
of an organ­ization or large system.
The HRD value chain brings (1) focus and supports, (2) learning, and
(3) per­for­mance resulting in (4) proven customer outcomes that are a key indicator of sustained orga­nizational per­for­mance (Leimbach and Baldwin, 1997). According to AIHR Analytics (2020), such a ­people development–­oriented value
chain contributes to orga­nizational per­for­mance results and centers HRD-­
related practices as a critical contributors to long-­term success. Only recently
have substantial empirical studies that include customer and stakeholder outcome
data begun to verify previously anecdotal evidence supporting the HRD value
chain—­connecting HRD practices to orga­nizational per­for­mance outcomes
(e.g., customer satisfaction; Akdere and Egan, 2020). Th
­ ese positive findings support the importance of the under­lying mechanisms that bolster the HRD value
chain and per­for­mance outcomes—­HRD policy and planning.
HRD policy and planning is fundamentally about achieving sustained per­
for­mance and accountability through actively crafting a talented workforce.
Such policy and planning is most often ­shaped and guided by HRD leaders in
collaboration with governance and management teams. When well-­formulated,
HRD policy becomes a necessary tool in executing core strategies, innovation,
per­for­mance, learning and development, and desired outcomes.
­ UMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT POLICY
H
Policy is defined as a deliberate, broad-­based, high-­level plan framing and embracing general goals and aligned procedures (Wognum, 2001). It is established
through laws, regulations, procedures, administrative actions, incentives, or the
voluntary practice of organ­izations, institutions, and governments. Policy decisions are frequently reflected in resource allocations. The largest scope of policy is international and national policy, with the smallest being orga­nizational
and departmental policy. Although policy in orga­nizational ­human resources
contexts has been used to differentiate HRD from ­human resource management
(HRM), HRD is frequently tied to policies that set expectations for how it is deployed, utilized, resourced, and evaluated (McLagan, 1989a). Policies are impor­
tant tools to create the greatest impact on learning and per­for­mance. In several
sections of this chapter, training ­will be used as an example of HRD policy and
planning. Examples of training-­related HRD policy and planning may include
mandatory training and certification; utilization of evidence-­based training
research and results; and establishing pro­cesses for training design, development,
implementation, and evaluation. In addition to organization-­level considerations,
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 404
12/3/21 3:05 PM
19. Policy and Planning for H
­ uman Resource Development
405
HRD policy is found at international, national, state/provincial, municipal and
community levels.
LEVELS OF ­HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
POLICY AND PLANNING
In ­today’s knowledge and ser­vice economies, a skilled and productive workforce
is central for success and the agility required to adjust to ongoing changes. National and orga­nizational success is interdependent, as both broad workforce
development and organization-­specific training contribute to growth and, ultimately, global capacity building (Rothwell, Gerity, and Gaertner, 2004). ­Human
capital developed through effective HRD practices is central to economic growth.
It is also dependent on a comprehensive strategy aligning learning, development,
and training with governmental l­abor market policies. W
­ hether at a large systems level or a part of a single organ­ization’s leadership team, HRD professionals skilled in policy and planning enable purposeful operational alignment
(Wognam, 2001). Ideally, governments develop comprehensive and coherent
HRD policy frameworks reflecting a broader strategy. Policy and planning relate to the implementation capacity to deploy HRD-­related solutions t­ oward defined aims.
To support HRD professionals in framing and analyzing economic entities
from a comparative perspective, Wang and Swanson (2008) developed a Comparative Study Framework for ­Human Resource Development (figure 19.1). This
generalizable approach examines a specific orga­nizational entity from vision/
mission to specific results not dependent on a par­tic­u­lar type of operation or
industry, size, location, culture, or history. As represented in the left vertical column in figure 19.1, such entities can range from a small ­family business to an
entire country.
On the horizontal axis, the system level of an entity is selected (1.A–1.H).
The entity can be a single function within an organ­ization, community, or nation. In order to be able to set the direction for HRD activities, HRD professionals determine established vision/mission for the entity being assessed. Once
the direction of the host organ­ization is determined, the HRD function can be
effectively aligned, therefore ensuring value-­added HRD to the entire organ­
ization. At the following level, corresponding HRD strategy and related policies are formed in alignment with the focal entity. Subsequently, HRD
implementation of programs and pro­cesses fits well within subsequent goals and
objectives. Throughout HRD deployment, HRD professionals engage in ongoing assessment pro­cesses and improvement efforts aimed at effective and efficient learning and per­for­mance. Related results can be compared against all
levels, including high-­level vision/mission, strategy, and policy to determine current alignment and potential for adjustments based on constructive feedback
and data analy­sis. This systems-­level approach to calibrating and establishing
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 405
12/3/21 3:05 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 406
Examples of Traditional Systems Levels
Comparison
Dimensions
of HRD
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Nation
National
Region
Agency
Government
Function
Multinational
Com­pany
Com­pany
Com­pany
Division
Com­pany
Function
1. Vision/Mission
1.A
1.B
1.C
1.D
1.E
1.F
1.G
1.H
2. Strategy
2.A
2.B
2.C
2.D
2.E
2.F
2.G
2.H
3. Policies
3.A
3.B
3.C
3.D
3.E
3.F
3.G
3.H
4. Agents
4.A
4.B
4.C
4.D
4.E
4.F
4.G
4.H
5. Programs
5.A
5.B
5.C
5.D
5.E
5.F
5.G
5.H
6. Pro­cesses
6.A
6.B
6.C
6.D
6.E
6.F
6.G
6.H
7. Results
7.A
7.B
7.C
7.D
7.E
7.F
7.G
7.H
8. Other: ___________
8.A
8.B
8.C
8.D
8.E
8.F
8.G
8.H
Figure 19.1: Comparative Study Framework for ­Human Resource Development*
* Using all or selected Comparison Dimensions of HRD (1–8), comparisons are typically between selected, rival, or parallel systems (A–­H).
For example, one corporation compared to another corporation, or one country compared to another.
Source: Wang and Swanson, 2008.
12/3/21 3:05 PM
19. Policy and Planning for H
­ uman Resource Development
407
HRD alignment extends well beyond episodic evaluation t­oward comprehensive discovery.
Within figure 19.1, the term other can be utilized and defined broadly to national contexts, industries, markets, the stakeholder environment, or other ele­
ments of internal and external dimensions of a focal entity. Along with setting
HRD direction from this framework, it can also support the establishment of
benchmarking, best practices, and comparative research, including HRD policy analy­sis. This type of research can be conducted across (A–­H) industries, in
comparing crossnational (e.g., regional differences within the same financial ser­
vices firm) or international organ­izations with parallel missions and operations (e.g., Amazon versus Alibaba), within or even between sectors (e.g.,
for-­profit versus nonprofit versus government healthcare organ­izations). By conducting such comparisons, HRD professionals can establish best practices, determine relative competitiveness, and set aspirational outcomes. Aspirational
outcomes are aligned with policy and planning goals, the scope of which depends on the vantage point of the stakeholders and the HRD professional.
Large System H
­ uman Resource Development Policy The broadest fram-
ing of HRD policy was first described by Harbison and Myers (1964) who
framed HRD strategy in relation to education, ­human capital, and economic
growth in approximately 90 ­percent of the world population. Th
­ ese economists
established the centrality of HRD for national success and the value chain of
economic planning t­ oward expanded h
­ uman capital and, ultimately, improved
economic growth. The capacity and adaptability of the ­labor force is a critical
driver in forming foreign and domestic enterprises regardless of industry or
sector—­for-­profit, nonprofit, or governmental (OECD, 2014). The United Nations
(UN) Millennium Development Goals reflect the framing of HRD brought forth
by Harbison and Myers by broadly defining HRD and recommending necessary steps for advancement across the globe. “Current patterns of growth have
reaffirmed the centrality of ­human resource development both as a goal in itself and as a means to achieve equitable, inclusive and sustainable growth and
development” (United Nations, 2013). With the broadest framing of HRD came
a set of eight strategic goals reflecting the needs of the global populace—(1) eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; (2) achieve universal primary education;
(3) promote gender equality and empower w
­ omen; (4) reduce child mortality;
(5) improve maternal health; (6) combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases; (7) ensure environmental sustainability; and (8) maintain global partnership for development (United Nations, 2013). As might be expected, ­these goals
address collective critical needs across humanity. Importantly, the UN views HRD
policy and planning to be a central mechanism for accomplishing sustainable global
social, environmental, and economic growth.
To accomplish t­ hese global goals, UN leadership (United Nations, 2013) recommended that (1) science, technology, and innovation (STI) and HRD systems
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 407
12/3/21 3:05 PM
408
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
should be well integrated into all national development strategies; (2) strategies
should be accompanied by HRD policies attuned to f­ uture l­abor market needs
across all sectors; (3) increasing science, technology, engineering, and mathe­
matics (STEM) education and employment opportunities, particularly for ­women,
youth, and other disadvantaged groups is critical; (4) STI participation should
involve policies and investment that support the innovation chain of government, universities, research institutions, and businesses; (5) government plays a
key role in setting in place adequate infrastructure, institutions, policies, and
incentives for all relevant contributors to promote STI for society as a w
­ hole;
(6) the private sector plays a key critical role in transforming the outcomes of
scientific research, new technologies, and ideas into new commercial products
and ser­vices and supporting a culture of innovation and learning; and (7) the
international community has an obligation to diffuse innovation in a manner
that creates new internationalized, collaborative, and open innovation models
that make STI innovations accessible across the globe (United Nations, 2013).
The Millennium Development Goals depend on HRD strategies, policies, and
planning that are crucial to establishing sustainable social pro­gress, environmental sustainability, and long-­term economic growth.
Implicit in the UN’s framing of HRD, governmental systems commonly
engage in policy formation aimed at developing citizens’ capacities for work.
Increasingly, HRD policymakers are exploring creative ways to preserve ­labor
market dynamism while providing employees adequate security (OECD,
2019a). Four key areas of emphasis at the governmental level include (1) facilitation of ­labor force talent and competency development, (2) addressing product and ­labor market impediments to ­labor demand, (3) removing obstacles to
­labor workforce development, and (4) sustaining microeconomic fundamentals. As reflected in the formation of aspirational international policy, the
UN included health and well-­being as integral to HRD at the local and orga­
nizational levels.
HRD is planned across the ­human lifespan (Jung and Takeuchi, 2018).
This includes government policies that provide for workforce training and retraining across the span of options—­from academic degrees and certificates to
on-­t he-­job training and apprenticeships. Such governmental policies impact
orga­nizational decision making through business strategies, external and internal ­labor market needs, development capacity, and external support for training (McLean, 2006). Considering HRD at the global level can seem overwhelming,
but this perspective provides crucial insights into the notion that ­there are
common princi­ples for HRD policy and planning regardless of the scope. From
the UN’s 195-­country perspective to a single nation, state/province, multinational organ­ization, or even small business or nonprofit, HRD policy is designed to elaborate upon a learning and development course of action aimed
­toward achieving desired per­for­mance outcomes. In the midst of the large system policy environment, organ­izations need to be responsive to increasingly
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 408
12/3/21 3:05 PM
19. Policy and Planning for H
­ uman Resource Development
409
evolving and complex environments. Therefore, it is more impor­tant than ever
before to implement HRD policies and planning that advance orga­nizational
per­for­mance.
Human Resource Development Policy at the Organ­ization Level It is
critical that HRD policy reflect the strategic interests of organ­izations. The HRD
policymaking pro­cess should be based on a systems-­level analy­sis of orga­
nizational mission, strategy, goals, pro­cesses, and feedback systems. A key focus should be alignment of learning and development with key per­for­mance
indicators (Alagaraja and Shuck, 2017; Semler, 1997). Ideally, policy formation
­will be evidence-­based—­both broadly from HRD research and based on internal systems, pro­cesses, and outcomes. HRD policymaking is a multilevel, interactive pro­cess whereby HRD policy leads to the formation of HRD goals/
objectives. ­These goals/objectives both support existing aligned HRD programs and lead to the formation of additional activities aimed at employee comfor­
mance improvement for
petency acquisition that addresses needed per­
greater orga­nizational efficiency and effectiveness. Such policies can span from
requiring licenses and certifications and mandatory training to internal online
learning libraries and funding for external learning programs (even college tuition reimbursement).
An area of HRD policy most common to organ­izations is related to training.
For the orga­nizational leaders and HRD prac­ti­tion­ers with scholarly-­practitioner
orientations, training provides an opportunity to align both research-­based and
situational evidence in forming HRD policy. By reviewing available research
organ­izations, one ­will find a mounting evidence base to guide HRD policy related to training that has grown substantially over the past thirty years (Salas,
Tannenbaum, Kraiger, and Smith-­Jentsch, 2012). Training research is grounded
in the science of learning, theoretically based, empirical in nature, and specifically applicable to orga­nizational contexts.
Overall, research on HRD supports the efficacy of orga­nizational training
and managerial and leadership training, team training, and be­hav­ior modeling. Research also supports a systems approach to training and development,
including conducting needs analy­sis, job-­task analy­sis, orga­nizational analy­sis,
and individual-­level competency analy­sis. Learning climate, the use of instructional princi­ples, technology utilization, training evaluation, and support from
supervisors and leaders have all been key contributors to training effectiveness
(Salas et al., 2012). A learning transfer systems approach supported by research
evidence (Holton and Baldwin, 2003) has practical implications that can be applied in any firm ­toward improved training results and the ultimate goal of
individual and orga­nizational impact. Therefore, organ­izations serious about
HRD develop training policies that reflect t­ hese evidence-­based practices. In addition to research-­based policymaking, policies that support customized interventions aligning with industry standards, firm-­specific knowledge, customer-­and
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 409
12/3/21 3:05 PM
410
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
stakeholder-­related data, and other key per­for­mance metrics ­will advance orga­
nizational impact. Such policies set expectations for the learning environment,
the pro­cess for producing training, pre-­/post-­training practices, and data use
for both the formation and evaluation of training transfer and related outcomes.
Ultimately, organ­izations should be able to point to the ways that per­for­mance
management systems are tied to training and support feedback loops that allow for better understanding of multilevel competency development and orga­
nizational per­for­mance.
­ UMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
H
Once overlooked as an impor­tant ele­ment of economic and orga­nizational wellbeing, h
­ uman capital and HRD planning are considered key ele­ments for survival and success. This has become especially true in ser­vice delivery economies
where the effects of ­human capital in relation to investment and return on investments (Becker, 1993) and related planning pro­cesses where HRD is a central
consideration (Zula and Chermack, 2007). From the perspective of renowned
economists like Gary Becker (1993), h
­ uman capital analy­sis and planning is dependent on HRD, learning, and development.
HRD planning is essential to effectiveness at all aforementioned levels
­because of the importance of h
­ uman capital alignment. Ideally, the best HRD
planning efforts lead to well-­prepared personnel in well-­defined roles and possessing requisite competencies to perform efficiently and effectively. Ideally,
HRD planning serves system-­wide orga­nizational development goals through
integration of strategic priorities with environmental demands. In general, planning involves setting and/or support of goals, policies, and procedures within
an organ­ization or system (Wang and Swanson, 2008). Within organ­ization contexts, HRD planning is most commonly tied to program planning and proj­ect
management. The most traditional example of HRD planning involves the
thoughtful alignment of learning and development activities with orga­nizational
goals. HRD-­sponsored efforts could be planned to align with compliance policies (e.g. safety procedures, soft skills, customer ser­vice), required certifications
(e.g., Lean Six Sigma, skilled trade licensure, professional software certificates),
or policies regarding expectations for promotion. Such examples are often tied
to larger orga­nizational strategy. However, HRD can also be framed from a multilevel perspective—by individual, group, orga­nizational, industry, country, or
even among international trading partners.
­Those engaged in HRD planning seek to ensure that pre­sent and ­f uture
needs are addressed, with an eye to the ­future including (a) the right number of
employees (b) assigned to meet established orga­nizational needs (c) who have
needed talents, skills, and knowledge (d) aligned, proactive attitudes t­ oward
work with a (e) capacity to work effectively with stakeholders and who (f) are
cost effective in supporting orga­nizational goals and objectives (Farndale, Pai,
Sparrow, and Scullion, 2014).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 410
12/3/21 3:05 PM
19. Policy and Planning for H
­ uman Resource Development
411
Sound HRD planning involves (a) effective task analy­sis at the orga­nizational
and unit levels, (b) establishment of comprehensive orga­nizational HRD needs,
(c) gap analy­sis between needs and current state HRD capacity, (d) resource
allocation, and (e) establishment of short-­and long-­term HRD needs across the
organ­ization. Many prac­ti­tion­ers and scholars view HRD-related planning to
be focused on broad strategic plans through the alignment of organ­ization
development, training, and individual development. Deployment of learning
organization–oriented approaches involve analy­sis of learning and development efforts and anticipated needs for organization-­wide HRD efforts across
the socio-­technical span, unit-specific planning and action, individually focused knowledge and skill development. Such strategies should not only focus
on HRD-­related activity development but should also clearly connect to key per­
for­mance outcomes that extend to orga­nizational competitive advantages and
anticipated ­future HRD-related demands (Jang and Ardichvilli, 2020). It is critical that such alignment requires organ­ization development (OD) integration
with HRD practice and that the focus is on mea­sur­able achievements (Rao and
Rothwell, 2000).
Related resources are a key ele­ment of HRD planning that involve the procurement and/or development of a workforce well aligned with identified needs.
The desired resourcing outcome is man­ag­ers and employees with the needed
talents, abilities, skills, and knowledge along with motivation to learn and a willingness to transfer new learning. Related resourcing plans clarify internal talent and assets and the extent to which they align with key strategic aims. The
ultimate aim of HRD resource planning is to maximize the capacity of a system or organ­ization through the formation of a workforce endowed with the
capacity, knowledge, and skills; the capacity for ongoing learning; and the ability to successfully transfer new learning to workplace applications (Keep, 1989).
A crucial ele­ment in HRD policy and planning is the identification and elaboration of ongoing learning and per­for­mance standards with an eye on responding to anticipated needs and to the changing environment while also expanding
capabilities for innovation.
According to Armstrong (2000) two ele­ments associated with such planning
are (1) resourcing plans and (2) flexibility plans. A final ele­ment is systemwide
learning transfer plans that support the application of resources across the organ­
ization (Holton and Baldwin, 2003). Resourcing plans involve identifying
­people from within the organ­ization to support in learning new skills and, when
needed, searching outside of the organ­ization for more skilled candidates. Flexibility plans maximize the adaptability in using HRD to enable the best utilization of ­people and respond rapidly to the changing environment. Fi­nally, learning
transfer plans involve a systemic approach to aligning employee learning with
per­for­mance at the individual, group, and orga­nizational levels. Such strategies
are benefitted by using design thinking (Plattner, Meinel, and Leifer, 2016) and
scenario planning (Chermack, 2011).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 411
12/3/21 3:05 PM
412
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
DESIGN THINKING
Design thinking is a solution-­focused methodology for creative prob­lem solving that ultimately supports planning (Neumeier, 2008). It can be used in a variety of HRD-­related contexts (and can also be a helpful pro­cess for employees
to utilize in a variety of situations). According to the Stanford d.school (2020),
the steps used in design thinking include: (1) empathize; (2) define (the prob­
lem); (3) ideate; (4) prototype; and (5) test (figure 19.2). During the empathize
stage, a design team led by HRD prac­ti­tion­ers focuses on gaining an empathic
understanding of the current situation. The focus is on key stakeholders related
to the focal area of concern and can involve observation, engagement, and empathizing to understand perspectives of customers and internal-­/external stakeholder perspectives. During the define stage, the HRD design team puts together
information gathered from the empathize stage to define the identified prob­
lem(s). The define stage w
­ ill help with the HRD-­related design in collaboration
with stakeholders and/or customers to establish ele­ments that w
­ ill allow them
to solve the prob­lem(s) identified. During the ideate stage of the design thinking
pro­cess, HRD prac­ti­tion­ers facilitate thinking-­outside-­of-­the-­box pro­cesses
that support the generation of new prob­lem solutions. The next step involves
prototyping in which the HRD-­related interventions or new approaches are
formulated at a scaled-­down level (e.g., a pi­lot training, learning module, intervention scenario, technology solution, or customer-­centered model or approach).
Fi­nally, HRD prac­ti­tion­ers would test to evaluate the outcomes. If it is a training solution, they evaluate at multiple levels, including learning and per­for­
mance outcomes. If it is an orga­nizational redesign solution, they may use town
halls or other large-­space meeting techniques to test their ideas and assumptions.
As an iterative pro­cess (repeat), the test stage can lead to adjustments that better address the identified prob­lem(s) and an eventual reengagement of the pro­cess.
In addition to receiving considerable attention from design-­t hinking-­oriented
IDEATE
EMPATHIZE
DEFINE
REPEAT!
PROTOTYPE
TEST
Figure 19.2: Stanford d.School Design Thinking Model
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 412
12/3/21 3:05 PM
19. Policy and Planning for H
­ uman Resource Development
413
consulting companies like IDEO (https://­w ww​.­ideo​.­com), research results support design thinking as an impactful practice with HRD-­related benefits coming both from within HRD applications and HRD-­facilitated opportunities
(Plattner, Meinel, and Leifer, 2016).
Scenario planning, a formal strategic planning technique, is an envisioned
succession of ­future events that can be used to determine perspectives about pos­
si­ble changes that can be anticipated and pos­si­ble orga­nizational responses (see
chapter 17). Orga­nizational leaders and/or an orga­nizational cross-­section articulate plausible stories of external changes that are likely to impact their current state and aims to increase understanding of the pos­si­ble situation that may
occur in the ­future (Bushe and Marshak, 2009). Central to ­these considerations
is the dialogic development of reactions to ­these plausible stories regarding the
potential directions the organ­ization may go regarding HRD requirements and
how best to prepare the workforce. Scenario stories can then be aligned into the
overall “strategic orga­nizational planning model” (Swanson, Lynham et al.,
1998).
Such scenario building can also be situated within broader pro­cess perspectives, such as appreciative inquiry (Cooperrider, 1995) or dialogic organ­ization
development (Bushe and Marshak, 2015). Both design thinking and scenario
planning require extensive investment on the part of the organ­ization in terms
of executive, managerial, and key stakeholder time. But when faced with the alternative of neither engaging in needed design changes nor formulating pos­si­
ble responses to the ­future, HRD and orga­nizational leaders often choose
proactive solutions like t­ hese that lead to beneficial HRD policy and planning.
Such in-­depth engagement in HRD policy and planning have the potential to
extend organization-­wide planning capacities. Fi­nally, one key ele­ment of design
thinking and scenario planning is the impor­tant learning that can occur for engaged teams and organ­izations. While t­hese pro­cesses are rarely perfect, the
learning that occurs through ongoing discussions about pos­si­ble ­futures for an
organ­ization, team, or even pro­cess can have a meaningful long-­term impact.
­ UMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
H
PROJ­ECT MANAGEMENT
Ultimately, HRD policy and planning must be tied to implementation, and the
use of proj­ect management strategies and tools is impor­tant in supporting HRD.
While overseeing HRD policy and planning, HRD leaders can fall short and
“fail to provide a practical approach and techniques to planning and managing
proj­ects” (Gilley, Eggland and Gilley, 2002, 231). According to McLean (2006),
the establishment of effective proj­ect management is essential throughout HRD
implementation. Increasingly, all orga­nizational work has been framed as a set
and/or series of interrelated proj­ects (Packendorff, 1995), making proj­ect management an essential HRD competency (Carden and Egan, 2008).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 413
12/3/21 3:05 PM
414
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
Proj­ect management is “the art of directing and coordinating h
­ uman and material resources throughout the life of the proj­ect by using modern management
techniques to achieve predetermined objectives of scope, cost, time, quality and
participant satisfaction” (PMI Standards Committee, 1987, 4-1). Organ­izations
such as PMI provide frameworks that can be used to implement planned HRD
programs and interventions (figure 19.3). The most common PMI framework involves the five-­phase proj­ect life cycle—­initiating, planning, executing, monitoring
and controlling, and closing—­can be found in PMI’s Proj­ect Management Body
of Knowledge (PMBOK).
Effective HRD proj­ect management includes appropriate deployment of
HRD teams; tracking financial investment and related returns; maintaining effective contact with stakeholders; supporting HRD efforts by serving as an active liaison between operations, management, and HRD; and utilizing risk
assessment modeling while anticipating options to address potential barriers.
Without effective proj­ect management, HRD policy and planning ­will not be
implemented with maximum impact. Pak, Carden, and Kovach (2016) provide
a clear synthesizing framework involving the integration of proj­ect management,
HRD, and business teams that is not only a solid model that can support
planning-­related deployment but can also be transferred to a variety of HRD
contexts, from training and development to large-­systems design. Extending
the ­earlier example of HRD-­related policy and planning in the training context,
the Pak and colleagues Proj­ect Management, HRD and Business (PMHRDB)
Partnership Model explicates an approach to synthesizing HRD with proj­ect
management.
Key stakeholder teams with expertise in proj­ect management and HRD
team up to align with a business team to focus on meeting an HRD-­related planning goal aligned with a business unit. By combining ­these stakeholders (represented in the three vertical pillars) in the five-­phase proj­ect life cycle pro­cess,
the model was pi­loted in a U.S. corporation and found to be successful at achieving key training design, development, and implementation goals tied to the
organ­ization’s HRD policy and planning (Pak et al., 2016). Ideally, such a proj­ect
management approach supporting planning and policy utilizing the PMHRDB
model would become part of HRD policy and planning.
Conclusion
At its core, HRD policy and planning is about sustainable per­for­mance and accountability through the development of a resilient workforce. HRD policy
and planning is best when clearly aligned with overarching strategic goals and
in collaboration with governance and management teams. When well executed,
HRD policy and planning is established as an essential part of large system or
orga­nizational growth and impact.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 414
12/3/21 3:05 PM
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 415
Project Management
Team
HRD Team
Business Team
Phase 1: Initiating
Establish project
charter
Evaluate training
needs
Assess technical
knowledge
Phase 2: Planning
Identify activities,
resources, and
associated durations
(PMP, WBS, and
project schedule)
Determine training
content
Identify activities,
resources, and
associated durations
(WBS and project
schedule)
Phase 3: Executing
Upload training
program
Establish training
design and develop
training content
(test)
Establish training
design (test)
Phase 4: Monitoring
and Controlling
Conduct project
status meetings,
document notes,
and update PMP
Participates in
project status
meetings
Participates in
project status
meetings
Phase 5: Closing
Assess performance
of project and
document
lessons learned
Assess performance
of project and
participate in
discussion of
lessons learned
Assess performance
of project and
participate in
discussion of
lessons learned
Figure 19.3: Proj­ect Management, HRD, and Business (PMHRDB) Partnership Model
12/3/21 3:05 PM
416
part vi: advancing ­human resource development
Reflection Questions
1. Identify one concept related to HRD policy and planning that is most
in­ter­est­ing to you and explain why.
2. Explain why policy is impor­tant for HRD.
3. Elaborate on two of the most in­ter­est­ing United Nations Millennium
Development Goals. Why did you choose t­ hese?
4. Describe an example of how HRD policy and practice are connected.
5. Describe how cross-functional proj­ect management could be an advantage for HRD planning.
Internet Resources. Instructional support materials for this chapter can be
found on this website: www​.­texbookresources​.­net
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 416
12/3/21 3:05 PM
PART VII
­Human Resource
Development into
the ­Future
The seventh and final part springboards into the ­future of HRD. Attention is
given to selected individual development challenges, the impact of technology,
and the role of globalization on HRD systems and practice. In the closing chapter, large issues facing HRD are presented in the hope of provoking discussion
and further thoughts about the f­ uture of HRD.
CHAPTERS
20 Challenges of Self-­Managed Learning and ­Career Development
21 The Age of Digitalization, Automation, Big Data, and
Artificial Intelligence
22 Globalization Impacting ­Human Resource Development
23­Human Resource Development Moving Forward
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 417
12/3/21 3:05 PM
This page intentionally left blank
20
Challenges of Self-­
Managed Learning and
­Career Development
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Introduction
Self-­Managed Learning: Agent Learners
Contributed by Patricia A. McLagan, McLagan International
The External Context for Learner Agency
Evolutionary Path ­toward Increasing Conscious Agency
The HRD Professional and Learner Agency
The Learning Pro­cess and Learner Agency
A New HRD Role: Unleashing Learner Agency
On the Horizon: Machine Intelligence and Learner Agency
­Career Development and H
­ uman Resource Development
Contributed by Hyung Joon Yoon, The Pennsylvania State University
Defining ­Career Development in HRD
The Nature of ­Today’s ­Career Development: A C
­ areer Cycle
Key Players in Employee ­Career Development
Employee ­Career Development Integration Model
­Future of ­Career Development in HRD: Integration with T&D and OD
Case Example: ­Career Development Workshop
Reflection Questions
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 419
12/3/21 3:05 PM
420
part vii: ­human resource development into the ­future
Introduction
The overarching ­Human Resource Development (HRD) perspectives of per­for­
mance and learning have been its two major categories of activity. Through the
years, variations within and between t­ hese realms have gained high visibility.
The purpose of this chapter is to highlight two challenges that HRD professionals should acknowledge and deal with in the twenty-­fi rst ­century. They are
(1) self-­managed learning and (2) ­career development.
Without the assistance of ­others, self-­managed learning is a pro­cess where
individuals take the initiative in determining their learning their needs, setting
learning goals, amassing ­human and material resources for learning, implementing appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating learning results. Just
how much can we expect individuals to manage their own learning versus having their affiliated organ­izations provide the work-­related learning experiences
required to be successful?
­Career development is the lifelong pro­cess of managing one’s ­career through
learning, work experiences, and life transitions. The ­career development goals
of personal control with optimal f­ uture success are at the core. Twentieth-­century
­career development thinking was based on societal and orga­nizational stability
that has been upended in the twenty-­first c­ entury. How many high-­risk p
­ eople
­will be able to effectively h
­ andle ­career decisions? It is very useful to hold on to
­these two challenging perspectives and reflect on them as you contemplate HRD
theory and practice.
Self-­Managed Learning: Agent Learners
Contributed by Patricia McLagan, McLagan International
In the Wizard of Oz, a tornado whisks the heroine, Dorothy, into a world reputedly controlled by an omniscient wizard who lives in a faraway palace. A good
witch appears, giving Dorothy red shoes. Although apprehensive, Dorothy starts
her journey to plead with the wizard to send her back home. Following a yellow
brick road ­toward the wizard’s palace in Oz, she meets ­others who also want
the wizard’s help. It’s a heroic adventure, as the travelers strug­gle to overcome
many obstacles, strengthening their qualities and building confidence along the
way (Campbell, 1972; Murdock, 1990). At the end of the road, Dorothy discovers that the wizard r­ eally d
­ oesn’t control her destiny. At any time during her
journey she could have clicked her heels (prob­ably with or without the red shoes)
and willed her way home.
This treatise is about realizing that all of us wear the red shoes of learning
power. We almost always have full power—­agency—­for our own learning.
Agency being the capacity to act in­de­pen­dently and make one’s own f­ ree choices.
Even though ­people around us and our environment influence it, learning ultimately happens inside us. Subconsciously or consciously, we each decide what we
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 420
12/3/21 3:05 PM
20. Challenges of Self-­Managed Learning and C
­ areer Development
421
pay attention to, w
­ hether or not we w
­ ill learn, and how we w
­ ill approach it. We
have agency but not always the mindset, w
­ ill, or the best skills for executing it.
Culture and pre­ce­dent are partly responsible for this. For centuries, hierarchical power structures and de­pen­dency mindsets (e.g., boss/subordinate) have
made it difficult to activate the power we already possess. Meanwhile, knowledge about and responsibility for how we learn have been the purview of teachers. Who is responsible for learning? Individuals often assume or say “the
com­pany.” HRD professionals answer, “We are.”
Learning ­doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It happens in a world of exponentially increasing information, complexity, and social influence. ­Human learning capacity and agency take time to mature. Let’s explore the implications of
both the external context and the development pro­cess before looking at what
it means to be smart, self-­directed agent learners.
THE EXTERNAL CONTEXT FOR LEARNER AGENCY
As the world grows more connected, more dependent on technology, and more
complex, t­ here’s a paradox. Individuals become a smaller part of a larger world,
but individual actions r­ ipple beyond local bound­aries, amplified by the accelerators of media, communication technologies, social platforms, and global
interactions.
Individual agency is also impor­tant in institutions. Authoritarian, paternalistic, and dependency-­creating modes d
­ on’t support the agility and innovation
needed for success in fast-­changing times. Rather, institutions rely on individuals willing to unleash their capacity for a common cause. This context pre­sents
a challenge for rethinking the roles and responsibilities of learners and the HRD
professionals who support them.
EVOLUTIONARY PATH ­TOWARD INCREASING
CONSCIOUS AGENCY
Most theorists of h
­ uman development agree that we are born to unfold t­ oward
greater complexity, self-­management, and something like larger purpose or self-­
transformation. Jean Piaget initiated this awareness, focusing on how our cognitive abilities change as we become more capable of abstract thought (Piaget,
Piercy, and Berlyne, 1950). Lawrence Kohlberg tracked the development of our
moral sense—­noting that we start with the self-­centeredness of a small child,
move through a morality ­shaped by our tribes, and then develop broader perspectives on what is good and ethical for life as a ­whole (Kohlberg, 1984). Robert
Kegan documents how consciousness—­t he awareness of self in the world—­
starts as fantasy, evolves through seeing ourselves through the lens of social
groups, and eventually leads to a view of ourselves as “self-­authoring” and “self-­
transforming” (Kegan, 1982, 1998).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 421
12/3/21 3:05 PM
422
part vii: ­human resource development into the ­future
­ ese and other theorists of ­human development agree that being ­human
Th
is to evolve to greater agency and ability to function in complexity and uncertainty. Yet, ­these psychologists acknowledge that many of us ­don’t reach the last
developmental stages (Kegan, 1998). We get stuck along the way. We may not
have the w
­ ill, confidence, or skills to click our red shoes at transition points.
Environment, the availability of help at critical stages, and opportunity play a
role (Vygotsky, 1978). So do the many barriers that exist in traditional socie­ties
and institutions that operate in authoritarian and patriarchal ways. In ­these
­ eople learn a de­pen­dency that then defines them.
conditions, p
­Today’s learning environment and our own evolutionary drive require competent, self-­managing learners. But the de­pen­dency legacy lurks, even though
learners are born with agency.
THE HRD PROFESSIONAL AND LEARNER AGENCY
HRD interventions are increasingly more science-­based and engaging (Bresciani-­
Ludvik, 2016; Taylor and Marienau, 2016; McLagan, 2018). The traditional assumption about who’s in control is blurred as HRD professionals use terms
that imply learner agency: “learner-­centered programs,” “micro-­learning,” and
“adaptive learning.” H
­ ere are three selected conference session descriptions
(italics added).
Micro-­learning—­defined as learning that occurs in bite-­sized chunks
that are less than fifteen minutes—­a hot topic in talent development, and
for good reason. With a plethora of competing distractions and shrinking attention spans, attracting and keeping employee attention has never
been more difficult.
Adaptive learning technology is any system that takes information about
a learner’s skill, knowledge, and per­for­mance levels and uses it to change
the material or tasks presented to the learner.
How to produce be­hav­ior change among individuals and demonstrate
specific techniques and incentive programs that are tailored to the person’s readiness for change.
Of course, it’s the job of the HRD professional to help define what the organ­
ization needs, curate information, package learning so it is learnable, and create supportive conditions for both learning and transfer. But, the real leverage
belongs to the learners. Learning happens inside us. This ­doesn’t negate the
learning professional’s role, but it does change it.
THE LEARNING PRO­CESS AND LEARNER AGENCY
From a neuroscience perspective, the learning pro­cess starts with attention, proceeds through information pro­cessing and internalization, and fi­nally may
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 422
12/3/21 3:05 PM
20. Challenges of Self-­Managed Learning and C
­ areer Development
423
express in new be­hav­ior at work or in life (Dehaene, 2020). Physiologically, senses
transport information into the brain that then notices what’s new. If t­ here is
enough pro­cessing to activate the chemicals and electrical activity necessary,
neurons change and new connections form. Sometimes new neurons emerge.
The brain has massive learning capacity, 86 billion neurons connected in more
than 100 trillion ways (Rudy, 2014). But our learning ability also has constraints
due to species features (e.g., specific functionality of dif­fer­ent brain/body parts),
personal ge­ne­tics, and individual histories.
All learning happens inside us. Consciously or unconsciously, through attention and inattention, via effective or in­effec­tive pro­cessing and internalization, and by steps we take to bring learning into life and work, we exercise our
agency for our own learning pro­cess. Seven practices assist this amazing pro­
cess, w
­ hether the learning proj­ect is in the moment or requires action over time
(McLagan, 2017):
1. Notice calls to learn.
2. Be guided by a desired ­future.
3. Search and select the best learning resources.
4. Orchestrate the learning journey.
5. Extract information from resources.
6. Learn to last.
7. Transfer learning to life.
The following describes how skilled agent learners might implement ­these practices, and how HRD professionals can support them.
Notice Calls to Learn Learning starts when we notice a learning opportunity. Opportunities are everywhere, but most pass by unnoticed b
­ ecause conscious attention is a scarce brain resource and the default mode is to see what
we expect to see. Skilled agent learners, however, notice more learning opportunities when they occur. They notice learning calls in the pre­sent moment: in
meetings, messages, conversations, and articles. They recognize when past experiences contain lessons: completed proj­ects, regrets, successes, failures. Skilled
agent learners also notice when the ­future calls in the forms of new business
strategies, pending ­family transitions, personal goals, projected societal and environmental changes, and more. Calls come from inside the body, too, as discomfort, per­sis­tent fatigue, restlessness, excitement. Th
­ ese internal calls may
signal unfinished psychological business—­for example, an unfulfilled dream, a
repressed issue. Fi­nally, curiosity can call us to explore something for the pure
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 423
12/3/21 3:05 PM
424
part vii: ­human resource development into the ­future
joy of learning. Skilled agent learners have a wide bandwidth for noticing t­ hese
calls. This noticing is an internal personal pro­cess.
One way HRD professionals can support this practice in learning programs
is to suggest attention triggers to watch for. “When this happens[,] . . . ​attend to
and explore. . . .”
Be Guided by a Desired ­Future The ­human brain has an amazing ability
to create motivational pull: its ability to imagine—to create internal virtual
real­ity experiences (Thomas and Brown, 2011; Strauch, 2010). Skilled agent
learners harness this power to dream by creating a multisensory virtual real­ity
version of their desired ­future. Pro­gress ­toward it then activates rewarding
brain chemicals and self-­evaluations that function as interim motivators. An
­imagined ­future also prepares a learner’s subconscious to recognize opportunities to achieve it. It also helps sustain learning when ­there are internal or external barriers.
Skilled agent learners know that their imaginations can help focus attention and motivate learning and be­hav­ior change. They take the time to deliberately incorporate their ­imagined ­future into their learning pro­cess.
HRD professionals can improve the impacts of their interventions by expanding the range of pos­si­ble ­futures and providing space for learners to create
their own virtual views. The goal is to help learners fully exercise their power
to bring dreams of the ­future to life.
Search and Select Skilled agent learners know that the most accessible resources may not be the best for their purpose. Therefore, they take time to frame
guiding questions and find the best information for their needs. They go to experts, search engines, aggregators, forums, learning professionals, information
specialists, and more for shortcuts to the best resources. This search is not ­limited
by their preferred learning style (“I’m a reader,” “I am an experiential learner.”)
­They’ll use any resource or learning mode that meets their needs.
Skilled agent learners recognize when the resources around them ­won’t meet
their learning needs, and they get help to find what is best for their purposes.
HRD professionals make this part of the learning pro­cess more conscious by
including advice about how to find the best information and resources. This reminds learners to continue developing ­after the program.
Orchestrate the Learning Journey Most learning opportunities occur at a
point in time. More complex learning requires a journey of many learning activities over time. The learner or someone ­else may plan and schedule ­these
activities. Or the journey may unfold organically t­ oward the desired f­ uture, each
step opening new learning options as learners hear new calls, refine their ­future
visions, and continually search for the best resources. The desired ­future may
itself change as learning occurs. Skilled agent learners recognize what is happening on both levels of execution and destination.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 424
12/3/21 3:05 PM
20. Challenges of Self-­Managed Learning and C
­ areer Development
425
Skilled agent learners know that learning is a dynamic pro­cess. They preplan and structure what they can but are open to improvisation when better
learning paths open up or when new perspectives on the learning prob­lem or
opportunity emerge.
HRD professionals traditionally support this pro­cess by providing journey
maps. However, b
­ ecause learners inevitably shape their own paths, learning professionals provide additional value when they remind them that this is their
journey and help them tailor it for themselves.
Extract Information This is the first of two practices that internalize infor-
mation and turn it into learning. Internalizing starts when learners capture and
initially store learning value from resources and experiences (Doyle and
Zakraisek, 2013). Skilled agent learners are masters h
­ ere. They use techniques
tailored for each resource. While internalizing new information, they recognize and correct for biases in the resource and in themselves (Kahneman, 2013).
Knowing that their energy-­gulping prefrontal cortex can only focus on one complex cognitive task at a time (Evans and Stanovich, 2013), they manage their
attention and concentration, noticing when to take a break or refocus. They look
for themes, main points, patterns, and they make connections between old and
new information that ­will lead to lasting learning.
Skilled agent learners understand that extracting and pro­cessing information is the first phase of the neurological activity that leads to new capabilities.
They take responsibility for launching the initial changes in their neurons that
­will underlie the personal changes they aspire to.
HRD professionals assist by suggesting effective learning strategies when
they introduce learning activities (“­Here’s how an expert learner reads a book,
participates in a simulation, ­etc.”). They challenge learners to be aware of their
assumptions and examine a variety of perspectives—­especially ­those they disagree with. They ask learners to find deeper insights and to link and compare
new ideas to what they know. They see their programs as opportunities to help
­people learn how to learn.
Learn to Last Initial information pro­cessing ­doesn’t automatically lead to
lasting knowledge, skills, and affects (e.g., attitudes, beliefs). Skilled agent learners know this and use techniques that lead to durable neuron changes, varying
their methods to match the learning result they want.
If the goal is to remember something, it’s impor­tant to recall rather than
relisten or reread (Roediger and Karpicke, 2006). In addition to this memory
practice, skilled agent learners engage many parts of their brains to make information memorable. They use mind maps, create m
­ ental images as memory
hooks, teach ­others, and more. They also delegate some of the learning work to
their subconscious and their sleeping brains, knowing that neuron changes continue “incognito” (Ea­gleman, 2001).
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 425
12/3/21 3:05 PM
426
part vii: ­human resource development into the ­future
Skill development requires dif­fer­ent actions. This is ­because skills involve coordinating many areas of the brain and body for synchronized action in specific
environments. Skilled agent learners appreciate that this synchronization takes
time (e.g., understanding a skill is dif­fer­ent than being able to execute it). Also,
new skills may require replacing a habit, which means retraining, not just training. Skilled agent learners use a variety of skill development aids—­checklists,
spaced practice, perceptual learning, working with coaches, and more to ensure
new skills become a way of life.
While we seldom identify affective changes (changes in assumptions, beliefs, attitudes, intentions, values, biases) as learning goals, ­these changes are often the most impor­tant learning outcomes ­because they influence intentions,
choices, and be­hav­ior (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). Skilled agent learners know
this. They recognize when their affect is holding them back, and they use learning methods that help them make changes. For example, we w
­ ill change when
we believe the new affect is more life enhancing for us than the old. One technique is to list the pros and cons of continuing to believe and value as we do,
then to make the new way of thinking more attractive by listing as many reasons to support it as pos­si­ble.
Skilled agent learners ensure that their learning w
­ ill last. They use learning
techniques tailored to the outcomes they want to achieve. HRD professionals
also tailor their learning support to the knowledge, skill, and affect changes they
want to facilitate. However, ­because they re­spect the agency of each learner, they
are transparent about their methods. This ensures that e­ very time individuals
participate in a formal learning program, they learn more about learning and
become more conscious of their agency and the skills they need to exercise it.
Transfer Learning to Life New knowledge, skills, and affect remain latent
capabilities ­unless we transfer them to work and life. This learning transfer may
not happen ­because old habits or barriers in the environment interfere. So, we
need to take extra steps to complete the learning cycle.
Skilled agent learners know to change and replace habits. They first identify the conditions that trigger their routine responses (the clock strikes six, it’s
time for a snack), then they reprogram the connections (it’s six ­o’clock, time for
a walk). When they face environment barriers, they bring o
­ thers onboard with
their changes, remove any barriers to change that they can, and influence or find
ways to compensate for what they ­can’t change on their own.
Skilled agent learners are change agents in their world. Without expertise
in this seventh practice, learning can languish—­remaining only a potential.
HRD professionals can help reengineer the application environment so that it
supports new be­hav­iors (Robinson and Robinson, 2015). But, learners decide
(consciously or unconsciously) if they ­will use what they have learned. So, ­every
program and intervention should help learners accept their change agent role
and equip them with tools to apply their learning.
501-99825_ch01_5P.indd 426
12/3/21 3:05 PM
20. Challenges of Self-­Managed Learning and C
­ areer Development
427
A NEW HRD ROLE: UNLEASHING LEARNER AGENCY
A big challenge for HRD ­today is to step out from ­behind the pseudo Wizard of
Oz curtain and help learners unleash the agency they already possess. ­Here are
four implications for professionals.
1. First, it’s impor­tant to accept learners’ power in their own learning.
Learners are in control but often a­ ren’t aware of or skilled to competently exe