No abstract

This article presents a new model, generated through applied theorybuilding research methods, that helps human resource development (HRD) practitioners evaluate the return on investment (ROI) of organization develHuman resource development interventions allow organizations to maximize their human capital across the entire employment life cycle (Rao & Rothwell, 2005). This employment life-cycle perspective includes strategic planning

No abstract

The problem and the solution. This introductory article presents the concepts of social networks and social capital and illustrates how they are deeply connected to contemporary HRD. Despite widespread research utilizing a network or social capital perspective in disciplines such as management, sociology, and organization theory, there are few articles in the HRD literature that focus on the role of networks in HRD (Cross & Parker, 2004; Gubbins & Garavan, 2005; Lengnick-Hall & Lengnick-Hall, 2003; Storberg, 2002). This first article, and the subsequent articles in the issue, contributes toward filling this gap. Specifically, in this first article we present an analysis and synthesis of a diverse array of conceptual and empirical social network and social capital research in order to answer two questions: (a) How can a network perspective explain or help us understand more about the process of achieving the outcomes of HRD? and (b) Given the network perspective, how should we practice HRD? The subsequent articles in this special issue engage with one or both of these research questions from a variety of perspectives relevant to contemporary HRD.

This qualitative case study adopted the position that health and health behaviors are complex social constructs influenced by multiple factors. Framed by the social ecological model, the study explored how work interactions enhanced or detracted from the perceptions of well-being and health behaviors. Despite the fact that previous studies indicated that the social workplace environment contributed to employee health, there was little information regarding the characteristics. Specifically, little was known about how employees perceived the connections between workplace interactions and health, or how social interactions enhanced or detracted from well-being and health behaviors. The participants included 19 volunteers recruited from four companies, who shared their experiences of workplace interactions through interviews and journaling assignments. The findings indicated that feelings of well-being were enhanced by work interactions, which were trusting, collaborative, and positive, as well as when participants felt valued and respected. The study also found that interactions detracted from well-being and health behaviors when interactions lacked the aforementioned characteristics, and also included lack of justice and empathy. The enhancing and detracting relationships generated physical symptoms, and influenced sleeping and eating patterns, socializing, exercise, personal relations, careers, and energy. Surprisingly, the study found that regardless of how broadly participants defined health, when they were asked to rate their health, participants uniformly rated theirs on physical attributes alone. The exclusive consideration of physical attributes suggests that participants may have unconsciously adopted the typical western medical view of health – an individually determined and physiologic characteristic. Despite research suggesting health is more than biology, and despite defining health broadly, participants uniformly adopted this traditional view. The study also offers human resource development professionals with evidence supporting interventions aimed at minimizing workplace incivility. Interventions designed to improve employee engagement could minimize financial and human costs of negative interactions. The bottom line is that workplaces should be physically, emotionally, and psychologically safe for well-being and healthy behaviors to flourish.