PurposeThe aim of this paper is to identify how human resource (HR) professionals can best approach the measurement of human capital. This is an evolving area and those organizations held up as exemplars are constantly reviewing their approach and measures and striving for better understanding of people contribution.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on experience and research from within the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development in the UK since 2000 and up to 2011, as well as external research sources.FindingsThe paper finds that there is no one way to carry out human capital measurement as it is context‐specific. However, there are certain people management measures that when applied would provide managers with useful insights in most organizations. More important than specific measures is that the processes around measurement are accurate and trustworthy.Practical implicationsAll forms of capital must be evaluated and analyzed in context to understand how people drive business performance. Human capital only adds value if it can be successfully converted into goods and services that will make a profit.Originality/valueThe paper examines people management measures which provide managers with useful insight in most organizations. However, it concludes that it is more important that the processes around measurement should be accurate and trustworthy.

An open label, comparative study to compare the efficacy of thermotherapy to meglumine antimoniate in treating cutaneous leishmaniasis patients in an operational context was carried out in Chaparral, Colombia. After enrollment patients were followed-up for up to 100 days. Per protocol and intention-to-treat cure rates for 47 patients treated using thermotherapy (one-time 50 degrees C applications for 30s) were 100 and 19%, respectively. Per protocol and intention-to-treat cure rates for meglumine antimoniate (20 mg/kg body weight administered intramuscularly for 21 d) were 78 and 23%, respectively.

SummaryWe calculated ranges for the cost per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) treatment during an ongoing epidemic of CL in Chaparral, Colombia. Using operational clinical and cost data, we calculated that the cost of treating leishmaniasis patients with standard pentavalent antimony was US$345 (95% CI 277-488) per patient treated and cured. The cost per DALY averted per patient cured with antimony was estimated to be approximately US$15 000 (95% CI 12 226-21 532).

PurposeKnowledge management (KM) is a key driver of organisational growth and development. It is a major conduit for the development of varying organisational capitals, and pivotal to learning, innovation and employee engagement. It is the authors' belief that KM has over‐focused on structures, processes and technologies and not enough on learning, innovation and engagement. This paper aims to discuss these issues.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on experience and research from within the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development in the UK since 2000 and up to 2012, as well as external research sources.FindingsThis lack of alignment can be attributed to three issues: the often diffuse and vague nature of the concept itself; the undue focus on tracking, capturing and storing KM assets; and the lack of a coherent organisational purpose and focus for knowledge management.Practical implicationsThe paper suggests that by focusing on the three key areas of learning, innovation and engagement, both a business rationale for KM and a “why bother” focus for employees can be developed, as well as contributing to sustainable organisation performance.Originality/valueThe paper examines knowledge management and links it to core HR processes.

No abstract

PurposeThis paper aims to discuss how and with what employees engage at work. It seeks to offer an explanation of “locus of engagement” – what aspects of their work individuals engage with to a lesser or greater extent – and “emotional” and “transactional” engagement – demonstrating that people can engage at different levels, both of which might result in performance but also in very different behaviors.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on research completed for CIPD by The Kingston Engagement Consortium drawing on both quantative and qualitative data collected from member companies over a six‐year period of study.FindingsThe paper argues that managers need a deeper understanding of how employees are engaging with their work to effectively leverage performance through engagement. It finds that despite much work on engagement, the issues of with what and at what level people are engaging is still relatively unexplored. It also finds that how and with what people engage can have implications for their performance and other behavior which will impact on the success of the organization.Originality/valueThis has practical implications for managers and demonstrates that engagement surveys alone will not give sufficient information to enable them to manage engagement effectively.

No abstract

No abstract