Content area
Full Text
Theorising in HRD: building bridges to practice
Edited by Jim Stewart and Jeff Gold
Introduction
The main impetus for this paper stemmed from various questions raised by participants attending the University Forum for Human Resource Development (UFHRD) Workshop on "Theorising HRD" held on 18 November 2008 in Leeds, UK. Concerns were expressed about the lack of clarity regarding what human resource development (HRD) is and where its boundaries lie. It was thought the absence of a common understanding of the identity of HRD was a potential "obstacle" for theorising and researching this field of study and practice. In our view, this could be particularly problematic for those engaged in developing HRD-related categories, concepts and theories on the basis of empirical evidence derived from empirical research. All academic research requires effective design and, as part of that as [13] Flick (2007) argues in respect of qualitative research, it must have a clear focus. We suggest clarity is desirable regarding where the boundaries lie between specific "professional" domains when "theorising" or "building theory" in a particular disciplinary field. The starting point for such research should be a clear focus of the domain's identity, for which there should be substantial consensus and acceptance. As yet there is no such consensus within the HRD domain. The paper seeks to address this perceived shortcoming by examining how HRD has been defined over the past 40 years or more, with three aims in mind. The first is to bring greater clarity, or at least a greater awareness as to what appears to be commonly understood by the term HRD, by reviewing a selected range of definitions offered by various writers. The second aim is to identify the similarities and differences existing between a synthesis of the varied "intended purposes" and "processes" of HRD, and those of other professional domains concerned with the development of people and organisations. The third aim is to highlight what we perceive to be dilemmas and challenges for HRD scholars and practitioners, arising from where the boundaries of "HRD" appear to lie relative to the boundaries of these other closely related domains of study and practice.
Problem statement
In her editorial to the Human Resource Development International special issue on defining HRD, Professor Jean Woodall wondered...