The Handbook of Human Resource Development

The Handbook of Human Resource Development, edited by Chalofsky, Rocco, and Morris, is an official publication of the Academy of Human Resources Development (AHRD). The stated aim for this massive volume is to offer a comprehensive and authoritative treatment of HRD theory, research, and practice. The handbook is logically sequenced starting with parts on foundational theories and philosophical orientations, moving to systematic reviews of contemporary HRD concepts and issues, and closing with chapters on HRD innovation and the future of the field. The comprehensive nature of the handbook and the thorough analysis of timely HRD issues make it a great primer for students and a great resource for academics and scholar–practitioners.

Review and Evaluation of Content

Part I Foundations of the Discipline of HRD includes chapters on psychology, systems theory, adult learning, leadership, and organizational culture. Reading across these chapters, one will find a robust analysis of development in individuals, collectives, and organizations, as well as the role of leadership and organization culture in fostering system performance. Marsick, Nicholaides, and Watkin's chapter (3) on learning and Sashkin's chapter (4) on leadership also trace how these theories have moved from a reductionist, cause and effect explanation of individual behavior and cognition to a complex account of the subjective, intersubjective, and contested nature of organizational life. These two chapters complement Part II, which explores the impact of alternative perspectives on HRD theories and practices.

Part II Issues and Perspectives on HRD considers the philosophical dimensions of HRD and contested questions of ontology, epistemology and ethics in the field. Four of the five chapters reflect the Critical HRD (CHRD) perspective, and this emphasis results in a sharp, somewhat redundant, critique of the conventional view in HRD. HRD, according to these authors, is dominated by a post–positivist paradigm, performative values, [male] rationality, and a–political and instrumental view of people and relationships. Moreover, this hegemony creates a blind–eye to power and positionality in HRD leading to oppressive research and practices. The strength of these chapters is that they offer the reader actionable advice for conducting CHRD, as well as provide a thoughtful analysis of how CHRD has opened HRD to broader perspectives, innovative methods, and reflective and reflexive practices. However, by underscoring CHRD the editors missed an opportunity to challenge the reductionist debate between objectivist–performative and the critical–humanistic worldviews in the HRD field (Garavan, O'Donnel, McGuire & Watson, 2007). This section, indeed the handbook, could benefit from a more well–rounded treatment of the perspectives gaining traction in HRD literature, such as complexity (Yorks and Nicolaides, 2006), socio–material (Fenwick, 2010), pragmatism (Korte & Mercurio, 2017), and others.

Nevertheless, CHRD's distinction in this section signals its newly found legitimacy in AHRD, yet ironically, there is little evidence of CHRD's influence throughout the handbook. In general, the chapters reflect modernistic understandings of autonomous people living in reified structures that can be manipulated into being more productive, developmental, and just through HRD interventions. Even chapters that claim a social–culture perspective, including Thijssen, Knies, and Leisink (16); Rocco, Bowman, and Bryant (18); and McDonald and Hite (21), emphasize individual learning and development, while the reciprocal relationship between individual agency and organizational structure is largely unexamined. Indeed, only one set of authors (Gedro and Tyler, 19) adopt a critical reflective stance by naming and critiquing their assumptions and encouraging the reader to follow their lead. The lack of a critical perspective throughout the book moves me to question whether the critical turn in HRD suggested in Part II is indeed an accurate description of trends in the field, or the aspirational aims of the authors and editors.

Part III Developing the Workforce; Part IV Managing the Workforce; Part V HRD in the Organization provide a rigorous account of timely HRD issues and functions. A handful of chapters re–conceptualize established HRD constructs and variables and open the door to a rich, new stream of HRD research and practices. For example, Poell (chapter 13) employs an actor perspective to illustrate how employees chart their own learning pathway, a construct that challenges HRD's formal approach to training and development. Dirkx (chapter 15) applies the principles of psychodynamic development to show how HRD can help people exploit work in service to a dynamic and rewarding self–formation process, an idea that counters the longstanding debate between performance and development. Gedro and Tyler (chapter 19) surface assumptions underlying HRD's approach to LBGT issues and contribute new insight into HRD's role in creating an open workplace inclusive of all marginalized groups.

These three chapters and several others explicitly link theory, research, and practice to offer a robust account of a wide range of HRD issues and questions. The most notable are Grenier and Germain's chapter (11) on expertise, Byrd's chapter (17) on HRD and social justice, Osman–Gani's chapter (20) on cross–cultural management, Roman's chapter (24) on coaching, and Roma's chapter (26) on talent management. A close read of these chapters will also expose the reader to the recursive scholarly–practice knowledge development cycle (Lynham & McDonald, 2011) and thus are a must read for novices seeking to understand the dynamic relationship between theory, research and practice in HRD and other applied fields.

On the other hand, I was surprised by the number of chapters in these three sections focused on untested models, especially considering the number of authors throughout the book who suggest the need for more clarity on HRD constructs and variables. While models have their place in the knowledge creation process, I expected more emphasis on empirically–based understandings of HRD concepts in an authoritative handbook.

Part VI Managing HRD This section makes a unique contribution for it concerns the broad, contextual dimension of HRD often overlooked in the literature. Nolan and Garavan (chapter 31) explicitly explore this gap and offer an insightful analysis of how HRD's bias towards large firms disregards and disparages the informal and idiosyncratic HRD strategies in small and mid–sized firms. Similarly, Hawley (chapter 27) observed that HRD's narrow focus on firms’ internal experience leads to theories and practices that do not consider the impact of external dynamics, like public policy, on individual, organizational, and social outcomes. These authors call for a new, contextually sensitive HRD (Nolan and Garavan) to generate more discriminating HRD theories. Also deserving of the readers’ attention is Russ–Eff's chapter (30) on how practitioners can use moral frameworks to make ethical decisions, providing yet another exemplar of scholarly–practice in the handbook.

Part VII Innovative Applications; Part VIII Future Directions. After traversing a wide range of perspectives, theories, and issues to delineate the state of the HRD profession, these final two parts of the handbook fall short of their stated purpose to identify innovations and future directions in HRD. Though all the topics in the innovations section (part VII) are important to HRD, action learning (chapter 32) and emotional intelligence (chapter 36) are well established in HRD. Also, the chapter on Virtual HRD (33) focuses on how technology is changing work and knowledge flows and not on how technology is innovating HRD functions (McWhorter, 2010). Thus these three chapters appear misplaced in this section.

Regarding the final, future directions section, the emphasis on institutional strategies to professionalize HRD is quite narrow and disconnected from the robust stream of HRD theory, research, and practice contained in the handbook. Though professional certification (chapters 38 and 40), program accreditation (chapters 39 and 40), and codification of ethical standards (chapters 30 and 40) may help legitimize HRD, this section could be strengthened by chapters on the consequences, as well as the alternatives to this form of conceptual closure (Sambrook, chapter 9) for the recursive scholarly–practice knowledge development cycle that moves the field forward.

Discussion and Conclusion

In the introduction Chalofsky asked “…So what is HRD, really”? (p. I) Citing an established body of knowledge studied in over 300 academic programs in the United States, he concluded that HRD is a profession and a discipline. The final chapters reinforce Chalofsky's conclusion, while also pointing to a new, institutionalizing phase in HRD concentrated on legitimizing the field's knowledge and position in the broader system of organizational science professions. However, I question whether the impressive range of issues here truly constitutes a body of knowledge. As an HRD academic and scholar–practitioner, I wanted a more coherent story of my field. Indeed, while reading the book, I was reminded of C. Wright Mills (1959) critique of sociology and its tendency towards the study of unrelated contemporary problems that, in his opinion, did not contribute to broader theories of society. He warned…”[I]nsofar as sociology is defined as a study of some special area of society, it readily becomes a sort of odd job man [sic] of the social sciences” (p. 23). Shuck, Nimon, and Zigarmi (chapter 35) raised a similar concern for HRD practitioners by calling for more conceptual clarity in HRD, because, without agreement, practitioners are unable to make the business case for HRD initiatives. All of this suggests that the push to legitimize HRD may be weakened, and not strengthened, by the large number of conceptual models and frameworks contained in this handbook.

The call for more coherence, however must be tempered by Lee's (chapter 6) and Sambrook's (chapter 9) warning against the conceptual closure in HRD. Delimiting and defining HRD and engaging in strategies to institutionalize the field would, according to these scholars, diminish its ability to adapt to and respond to the many situations and circumstances where HRD is practiced. A thorough read of this handbook provides insight into this and other potentially developmental tensions in the field, including whether HRD should seek conceptual clarity (Shuck, et al., chapter 35) or resist conceptual closure (Sambrook, chapter 9); focus on formal or informal processes at play in organizations (Poell chapter 13; and Nolan and Garavan, chapter 31); adopt a hard or soft ontology in HRD, described by Lee (chapter 6) as being vs becoming; and assume a descriptive or aspirational research agenda (Bierma & Cseh, chapter 8).

To be sure, the strengths of this handbook far outweigh its weaknesses. It is a wonderful resource to academics seeking to expose students to the field of HRD and to scholarly–practice. In addition, the contrasting views presented throughout reveal a dynamic and evolving discipline constituted by scholars, who, as Pace wrote in the Preface, “…are attempting to make sense of the varied dimension of the field” (p. viii).