Advances in Developing Human Resources

The scholarship of leadership abounds with the affordances, limitations, antecedents, and outcomes associated with the different theories in Human Resource Development (HRD) literature. However, a clear delineation between the host of individual leadership theories does not exist. Absent is a nuanced view of the similarities, differences, and any overlap between the various leadership theories. Without a clear understanding of the relationships between leadership theories, knowing when to apply which theories and when becomes difficult.

A systematic review of the literature surrounding servant leadership (SL) through 2022 was conducted to position SL among the more extensively researched transactional and transformational leadership theories. This article outlines the histories of the three theories, focusing on the characteristics, pervasiveness, antecedents, outcomes, and measurement of SL to distinguishing it from transactional and transformational leadership.; Stakeholders: Human resource development, human resource management, and organizational behavior scholars, practitioners, educators, and students. In addition, organizational leaders responsible for setting the organization’s vision and practitioners responsible for designing leadership development programs will benefit from this article.

Despite organizations adopting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in organizational initiatives, discrimination, and unjust practices persist. Consequently, organizational environments where individuals feel safe and valued are critical not only to organizational effectiveness but for individual learning, growth, and development.

Inclusive leadership models that: (1) integrate organizational learning as the driver for social transformation at the individual, group, and broad organizational levels and (2) develop inclusive leaders who espouse pro-diversity beliefs, enact social change and envision a workplace that values human relations as a basic need for achieving the highest possible degree of human well-being.

Organizational leaders, human resource development educators, researchers, scholars.

The field of human resource development (HRD) is recognized for its contributions to the body of literature on learning and performance. However, the lack of literature on problems emanating from the social systems (e. g. racism, sexism, ageism, sexual orientation, disability, to name a few) that create a barrier for optimal learning and performance is troubling. In this article, racism is called out as an enduring and pervasive social injustice that has become normalized and encompasses the whole of society as well as those spaces that are frequently occupied each day. Nonetheless the ideology of racism is egregious and continues to threaten individual well-being, dignity, and simply put, rights as a human being. As a program within numerous departments of higher education, the lack of literature that addresses racism and subsequently provide resources for educators is problematic. While it is understood that HRD is an interdisciplinary field that draws from multiple bodies of literature, the lack of contributions from HRD researchers, scholars, and practitioners on a topic that counteracts learning and performance is a problem.

HRD is uniquely positioned as a field of practice with an affiliate in higher education. HRD researchers and scholars are often instructors in HRD educational programs. This unique position can hugely impact what is learned and therefore what is practiced in the workplace. We propose a framework for an anti-racism curriculum in HRD educational programs that teaches students, the future workforce, how to recognize and disrupt racism and contribute to building workplaces that are equitable, fair, and psychologically safe. We use critical theory as a conceptual framework for an anti-racism curriculum that teaches students about the continued and pervasive system of racism.

There is a continued, well documented disconnect between HRD scholars and practitioners. Specifically, the ‘Implications for HRD Practice’ section in academic articles is often lacking in relevance and meaning. This is harmful for both academia and practice, but especially for the well-being of learners.

This essay focusses on how to write a meaningful ‘Implications for HRD Practice’ section and suggests five areas to consider: why writing for practice is important; understand who practice is; relate to practitioners’ knowledge; provide evidence-based suggestions and finally, connect with practice.

HRD scholars who are committed to write for, and connect with, practice.