A philosophical framework for thought and practice in human resource development

A citation network analysis among four journals in human resource development (HRD) A geographical position of a text in the citation network is highly associated with the topics (theory building or training transfer) and with the nature of the study (foundational or applied).Implications of the current study and suggestions for future study based on the limitations of the study are addressed. Nothing comes from nothing. ParmenidesDefining human resource development (HRD) and identifying the disciplinary and theoretical foundation of HRD have apparently been essential requirements for the HRD field (McGuire & Cseh, 2006). However, these

“…Ruona and Lynham (2004) foundation and practice in HRD. In addition to this conceptual basis, Roth (2004) emphasized the interdisciplinary perspective for the theory and practice in HRD.…”

Section: Block 1 (Foundations Of Theory Building)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who is citing whom: Citation network analysis among HRD publications from 1990 to 2007

Jeung

Park

et al. 2009

“…The debate among scholars around these different perspectives has at times been heated but has done little to move the field forward in terms of a definition or purpose. It is, as Ruona and Lynham (1999) have pointed out, ". .…”

Section: Hrd As a Disciplinementioning

confidence: 94%

The seminal foundation of the discipline of HRD: People, learning, and organizations

Chalofsky

2007

Human resource development (HRD) has long been considered a field with an interdisciplinary foundation. Unfortunately there has never been a consensus on the composition of the seminal disciplinary base of HRD. A description of the concept of an applied discipline is presented, and HRD, as represented by its academic association, the Academy of Human Resource Development, is compared to a set of criteria of a discipline that is set forth in the scholarly literature. A seminal foundation for a curriculum of the HRD discipline is presented around the framework of people, learning, and organizations.Human resource development (HRD) has long been considered a field with an interdisciplinary foundation. Galagan (1986), then editor of Training and Development, referred to this issue in an editorial when she described the field as an omnivorous discipline, incorporating over the years almost any theory or practice that would serve the goal of learning in the context of work. Like an amoeba, it has ingested and taken nourishment from whatever it deemed expedient in the social and behavioral sciences, in learning theory, and business. Indeed, it is a field that has borrowed heavily over the years from other disciplines, and will continue to do so in order to apply the best of approaches to the learning needs of the workplace [p. 4]. Jacobs (1990) stated that

“…This study is an effort toward conducting sound qualitative research that may not only generate much-needed new theory (Watkins, 1990), new knowledge (Hansen, 1998), or new doctrine (Marsick, 1990) that can mature and advance the profession (Lynham, 2000;Ruona & Lynham, 1999), but ultimately contribute to the building of sound theory and research practice urgently needed for this emerging academic discipline (Swanson & Holton, 1997;Watkins, 1990). With respect to research practice, given this analytical experience, we are now more circumspect in how we write up the findings from qualitative studies that use thematic representations of the interview data.…”

Section: Implications For Hrdmentioning

confidence: 99%

An alternative approach to conceptualizing interviews in HRD research

Wang

Roulston

2007