A Model of Human Capital Theory and ADDIE
BUSI 240-Organizational Behavior 1
Liberty University
2022
Analysis, Design, Develop, Implement and Evaluate (ADDIE) Model
The concept of Instructional System Design (ISD) has been around since early 1950. While the
concept of Analysis; Design, Develop, Implementation and Evaluation represent (ADDIE) first
appeared in 1975. It was created by centre for educational technology at Florida State University
for the US Army in 1975. The model has since evolved several times over the years to become
interactive, dynamic and user friendly (Eddie Timeline, 2015). Culatta and Kearsley (2016)
explained that ADDIE model is a generic process traditionally used by instructional designers and
training developers. The five phase: Analysis; Design, Develop, Implementation and Evaluation
represent, a dynamic flexible guideline for building effective training and performance support
tools. In the ADDIE Model each step has an outcome that feeds into the subsequent step.
Some of the weaknesses of ADDIE model includes: First, the typical process require unrealistically
comprehensive up-front analysis most teams respond by doing very little at all and fail to access
critical elements; secondly, learning program are designed to meet criteria that are measured
(schedule, cost, throughout) and fail to focus on identifying behavioural changes and no
accommodation for dealing with faults or good ideas throughput the process (Culatta & Kearsley,
2016).
This model supports training as independent variable. The implication of this model to the study is
that for training to be conducted, the organization needs to conduct Training Needs Analysis
(TNA), determine the training method; develop a program, implement through conducting training
and evaluate the effectiveness at the end of training. Effective instructional designs provide a
method that if followed, can facilitate the transfer of knowledge, skills and attitudes to the learner.
The Combined Trait Activation and personality-job fit theory
The study adopts combination of trait activation and personality-job-fit theory, to explain the
phenomena in talent attraction. The principle of trait activation theory can be traced back as early
as 1938, when Henry Murray described that situation “press” individuals to exhibit certain
traits. Trait activation theory is a personality theory of work based on the concept of trait
activation that is derived from the integration of trait theory, situationism and personality- job fit
theory (Tett, Simonet, Walser & Brown, 2013). Trait theory of personality implies that personality
is biologically based. This theory also supports the independent variable, talent acquisition. This
theory is relevant to the study since it is suitable in employee placement after acquiring the right
candidate with the right attitude for the job. The theory emphasizes the uniqueness of the individual
and consequently adopts an idiographic view and psychological assessments.
The trait activation theory works better when combined with personality job theory, during talent
acquisition and job placement. The interactions perspective of personality job fit theory has a long
theoretical tradition, beginning with Lewin’s (1951) proposition that behavior is a function of the
person and the environment. Personality is the dynamic organization within the individual of those
psychophysical systems; determine the characteristics, behavior and thought (McLeod, 2014).
Personality is the characteristics or blend of characteristics that make a person unique.
McLeod (2014) stated that this theory suggests that certain job environments are more suited to
individuals with certain personality characteristics and that hiring individuals who are the best fit
will result in higher employee satisfaction, well being and better performance. The combination of
trait activation and personality job fit theory supports talent acquisition and is based on an
interactional model which suggests that both person and situation interact to influence. This theory
also supports the independent variable, talent acquisition. This theory is relevant to the study since
it is applicable as it helps during talent identification and attraction to assess the best candidate.
Human Capital Theory
Becker (1964) elaborates the notion of human capital in the context of neoclassical economics.
Further another economist, Theodore Schultz, set out to map how rates of return from education
could be calculated in countries with different levels of income, different attitudes to forgoing
earnings to develop human capital (Odhong et al., 2014). The theory is rooted from the field of
macroeconomic development theory by Schultz (1993). Human capital theorists have typically
argued that organizations can increase their human capital by internally developing the knowledge
and skills of their current employees, and by attracting individuals with high knowledge and skill
levels from the external labour market (Choudhury & Mishra, 2010). Malose and Boris (2012)
developed a model that he used to explain the human capital theory.
Swanson (2001) cited in Malose and Boris (2012), explained the relationships as follows;
Relationship 1 in Figure 2.2 represents the concept of production functions as applied to education
and training. Relationship 2 in Figure 2.2 represents the human capital relationship between
learning and increased productivity. Relationship 3 in Figure 2.2 represents the human capital
relationship between increased productivity and increased wages and business earnings.
In the study, Human Capital Theory supports all the variables: training, knowledge management,
skills development and talent acquisition as independent variables. The theory is very relevant in
every situation in the workplace since human capital is a collection of various resources such as
knowledge, talents, skills, ability, experience, intelligence, training, judgment and wisdom
possessed individually or collectively in order to effectively enhance organizational performance.
In conclusion, human capital contributes to the organizational competitive advantage and profits
maximization. The Figure 2.2 below shows the model of human capital theory.
Figure 2.2: A Model of Human Capital Theory
Source: Adopted from Malose and Boris (2022).
1
OutcomesEducation and trainingResource/inputs
Production
process
23
Citizen process Efficacy /effectiveness
Earning/output
Resources/inputs
