Research Paper

What is the future for the human resource development professional? A UK perspective

Jeff Gold and Dr Helen Rodgers Leeds Business School

Dr Vikki Smith Learning and Skills Development Agency

Abstract: This paper seeks to explore the validity of HRD as a profession in the UK both now and into the future. The source of professional status is explored and Freidson’s (2001) ideal type of professionalism is used to assess the status of the HRD professional. It is suggested that the constitutive aspects of disciplinary knowledge and activity for the HRD professional field remain in flux, with inherent instability and lack of permanence in the foundations of professional expertise. The key forces for change in HRD work in the future are explored, leading to the development of four scenarios for the future of the HRD profession. It is concluded that, for the future of the HRD profession to be sustained and grow, the profession’s expertise and practice must concern the values and interests of others who face uncertainty and difficulty in relation to learning at work.

Keywords: HRD, professionalism, change, technology, futures

Introduction

The status, identity and territory of the human resource development (HRD) profession are filled with contention (Mankin 2001). Its origins in training and the close links to the fields of human resource management (HRM) and organizational development (OD) both inform and compound the problematic and often ambiguous nature of the concepts underpinning HRD. Walton (1999) acknowledges the ‘emergent nature’ of HRD, while other researchers recognize the interrelatedness of the fields of HRD and HRM (McGoldrick and Stewart 1996) and the mutual maximization of human resource potential in organizations (McLagan 1989; Mabey and Salaman 1995).

In a broader sense, the power of professionals and their institutional guardians, the professional associations, has dominated UK society for much of the last century. For practitioners in the field of HRD in the UK, the quest for professional recognition and status displays a colourful history, from independence under the Institute of Training and Development (ITD) through merger with the Institute of Personnel Management (IPM) to create the now Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD). Professionals involved in HRD now appear to be seeking a stronger self-identity by positioning their role as central to the development of knowledge, skills and learning, the so-called ‘soft skills’ required in professional and personal development. This

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Human Resource Development International ISSN 1367-8868 print/ISSN 1469-8374 online © 2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/1367886022000016046

HRDI 6:4 (2003), pp. 437–456

• P E E R - R E V I E W E D A R T I C L E S •

frequent re-positioning requires HRD professionals to be proactive in their approach to change (Mankin 2001).

This paper seeks to explore the validity of HRD as a profession both now and into the future. To achieve this end a historical review of the progression of HRD will be presented. This will make reference to the path that HRD has traversed and where it currently resides, in order to define more clearly where it may go and to understand what the future might hold. The paper will thus debate the future nature of HRD and the HRD professional and begin by exploring the idea of professionalism with particular reference to the constitutive features of professional knowledge. The degree of fit of HRD practitioners with an ideal-type model of professionalism will then be assessed. There will be an examination of the scenario methodology that was employed to explore the drivers influencing change in HRD, leading to the building of four possible future scenarios, and therein a series of possibilities, for the HRD professional. The main focus of the paper will be the position of the UK HRD professional but we would suggest that the coverage has implications for HRD professionals throughout the world.

Professionalism and HRD

Recent years have seen the advance of a learning movement (Smith and Gold 2003) and this has provided stimulus of the demand for HRD professionals and an enhancement to their status. After many years of low recognition, HRD professionals are increasingly acknowledged for their expertise in helping individuals, groups and organizations deal with the complex problems of training, learning and development. However, as with all professionals, the power of professionals to act and sustain or enhance their status is not entirely secured (Middlehurst and Kinnie 1997). The question in need of an answer, however, is whether HRD and those engaged in the practice of HRD have a valid claim to professional status.

According to Freidson (2001), the privilege of professionalism is bestowed on those whose work is specialized and beyond standardization so that those with the required training and experience should be allowed to control their own work. How does this situation arise and what are the constitutive features? Dietrich and Roberts suggest that potential purchasers of professional services face problems that require decision-making complexity where they are ‘incapable of pre-thinking all the issues involved’ (1997: 16). This provides the economic basis of professionalism and professionals must claim that their knowledge and skills provide the means to satisfy client ignorance. Continued satisfaction feeds a growing social recognition of such abilities and the acquisition of the privilege of professional status, including recognition from the state, leading to greater organization, institutionalization and closure (Witz 1992).

An important feature in this process, and one that will be highlighted later in this paper with respect to HRD, is that professionalism is not a naturally occurring phenomenon and that the constitution of an area of work as professional work is socially and culturally contingent. Thus, even where a profession might claim exclusivity, to develop legitimacy, a rhetoric must be employed to maintain, sustain and advance such claims (Middlehurst and Kinnie 1997). Of course, with over 350 professional asso- ciations in the UK, some of which can trace their historical roots to pre-Enlightenment times, many can point to a stable and permanent existence which appears to have a

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

438

palpable sense of natural life. However, as argued by Fournier (2000), professions do not exist because of independent and self-contained areas of knowledge and practice but that professional activity is constitutive in making such areas. Thus Fournier cites the example of medicine to suggest that ‘at the core of the professional project is the constitution of disciplinary knowledge as representing or mirroring a “naturally” isolated and self-contained referent object in the world’ (Fournier 2000: 71),

That ‘non’-professionals remain ignorant, and the professional satisfies client requirements in the face of decision-making complexity through the command of disciplinary knowledge underpins the emphasis that professions place on knowledge acquisition and application.

With reference to professional work, Eraut (2000) makes a distinction between ‘public knowledge or propositional knowledge’ and ‘personal knowledge’. The former is knowledge that is explicit and communicable. Within a profession, such knowledge has ‘foundational status’ and can be stated in abstract terms, which, for Abbott (1988), has been the key differentiation between professions and other groups. New entrants to a profession are required to prove their understanding of such knowledge and how it can be applied in various situations they will face as a professional. As the situations are encountered, professionals acquire expertise as ‘personal knowledge’. Such expertise accumulates over time, tacitly and informally. Cheetham and Chivers suggest that professional practice is based on a combination of specialist knowledge and ‘more intuitive forms of thought’ (2001: 381) which they refer to as ‘technically grounded extemporisation’. Such knowledge is highly situated within the practice of professional work, becoming difficult to codify and therefore copy. It is the source of expertise which can be utilized in a variety of unpredictable situations (Dreyfus and Dreyfus 1986).

The acquisition of expert knowledge and skills has the potential to solve client problems. However, beyond this necessary condition for professional status is the recognition from clients, highlighting the socially constructed features of professional work. Over time, such recognition leads to an enhancement of professional status, accompanied by the emergence of a valuational ethos and espoused standards of conduct, set and defended by a recognised professional association. Together, these elements are combined to produce what we recognize as a profession. Freidson (2001: 127), for example, refers to an ideal type of professionalism composed of the following elements:

a) specialized work that is grounded in a body of theoretically based, discretionary knowledge and skill that is given special status;

b) exclusive jurisdiction created and controlled by occupational negotiation; a) a sheltered position with labour markets based on qualifying credentials of the

occupation; b) a formal training programme to provide qualifying credentials; c) an ideology that asserts a commitment to doing good and quality.

We now propose to use this framework briefly to assess the professional status of those working in the HRD field.

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

439

HRD and the ideal type of professionalism

Specialized work that is grounded in a body of theoretically based, discretionary knowledge and skill that is given special status

Professionals claim a privilege for a discretionary control of their work because they are the specialists in the application of an identifiable body of knowledge. How far can HRD professionals point to such a body of knowledge? In recent years, there appears to have been a quest to identify and build an HRD theory or indicate the underlying theoretical sources of the field. Swanson (1999, 2001), for example, presents an image of a three-legged stool to portray what he sees as the three core theories, which, he suggests, provide the foundations of HRD. The theories are psychology, economics and systems theories; the stool image captures their integration into a ‘unique theory of HRD’. McLean (1998) sees the three-legged stool as too simplistic since the three core theories offered by Swanson are inadequate. Instead, he presents the image of an octopus so that he can add anthropology, sociology, speech communications as well as a consideration of other disciplines such as music, philosophy and, in the future, chaos theory. These perspectives tend towards the need to secure the fundamentals of HRD practice in order to build political and philosophical value and justification into the actions of professionals. Additionally, they argue in favour of setting the boundaries of HRD as a body of ‘unified’ theory and practice.

However, there is also evidence of diversity, especially as the situations of HRD practice are increasingly researched by researchers with variegated lenses (see McGoldrick et al. 2001a), and this will prevent unification and closure on what con- stitutes HRD knowledge. These debates present a more pragmatic approach to the philosophical dilemma facing the future of human resource development. McGoldrick et al. (2001b: 346), accepting the multidisciplinary character of HRD, argue that there is ‘no single lens for viewing HRD research’ and that a variety of perspectives are being employed, pointing to a growing sophistication in theorizing. Here theory is chosen on the basis of relevance and usefulness to concepts as and when required by recognizing the importance of embedding the practice in the ‘process of theorizing’. Within this McGoldrick et al. (2001a) present a ‘holographic’ metaphor to address the multi- layered context of HRD that is subject to constant flux. HRD needs to be developed on the basis of the research that is emerging. Despite this complexity, HRD is being taught in higher education (and elsewhere) and students are being prepared for specialized practice. There is probably much agreement, among those who teach and learn, on what constitutes the body of theoretical knowledge.

Exclusive jurisdiction created and controlled by occupational negotiation

Freidson (2001: 56) suggests that professionals are able to claim specialized expertise in the performance of work, where the boundaries of expertise are negotiated so that only those deemed ‘bona fide members of the occupation’ may practise. This raises two crucial issues for the claim of HRD professionalism. First, what is the HRD field of competence? Second, who negotiates the boundaries and has exclusivity been established?

Clearly, with respect to the first issue, there are continuing debates about the field of HRD, how it is constituted and what exactly its ‘objects’ are. We have already

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

440

indicated the diversity and incompleteness of the theoretical specification of HRD. In addition, others argue that there is equal diversity among those who claim to practise HRD that resists closure on its constitution (Lee 2001). We would suggest that part of the difficulty lies with the lack of a clear identification of its objects. For example, while medical professionals and lawyers can point to bodies in various states of health or legality, HRD professionals seeking a starting point for theorizing and practising have a less obvious referent. Thus, they may point to ‘learning in the workplace’ in all its forms (individual, team, organization, formal and informal) as the objects; however, the terms employed may attempt or categorize entities or processes that are difficult or impossible to observe (Sandelands and Drazin 1989). For example, the verb ‘to learn’ may not refer to an activity performed by someone with the consequence that the term operates at a high level of abstraction to cover a wide range of common processes, which reduces the clarity of such processes (Holmes 1998).

With respect to the second issue, the growing importance that is attached to learning at work has assisted HRD professionals in establishing occupational division. Supporting this process has been the nexus with HRM and the umbrella coverage, in the UK, of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD). Ostensibly a merger between the Institute of Personnel Management and the Institute of Training and Development, CIPD now has 110,000 members and has enjoyed considerable growth in membership (50 per cent) since the merger in 1996 (CIPD 2001a) and a significant enhancement to image, augmented by the move to chartered status in 2000.1 However, while there is probably growing recognition of HR professionals in general and acceptance of boundaries of practice, this has not yet extended to exclusivity. That is, membership of CIPD does not yet regulate a licence to practise.

A sheltered position with labour markets based on qualifying credentials of the occupation

HRD professionals seek employment in various markets made with consumers and/ or managers of their skills. Sheltering would occur if the operation of these markets was influenced to the point of control by the CIPD through its ability to accredit qualifications which grant membership. While HRD work can be found through a variety of means and internal promotion may often be the path for many, especially new entrants to the field, increasingly, in the UK, a degree of occupational control is evident in the use of the professional journal, People Management, for recruitment and the specification of CIPD membership as a criterion for selection. However, the variegated character of HRD work continues to allow the operation of a free and ‘unsheltered’ market. Indeed, the rhetorical presentation of such work as niche or expert could lead to a degree of control over such markets, but this can never be guaranteed and is subject to the vicissitudes of client preferences.

A formal training programme to provide qualifying credentials

Freidson’s (2001) ideal-typical professionalism posits the importance of control over the training of recruits conducted in higher education institutions by academic members of the profession. In addition, such training needs to be sufficiently theoretical to prepare professionals for the discretionary judgement they will need to exercise. HRD

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

441

professionals may enter the field without such training but they are able to seek formal training through CIPD programmes and other qualifications. CIPD’s professional qualification scheme includes a framework of professional standards at three levels. Working from a Certificate in Training Practice, the prospective HRD professional can qualify by acquiring core knowledge and skills in HRM before specializing through the choice of HRD electives. There are 400 accredited providers throughout the UK.2

In addition, a growing range of master’s level qualifications in the HRD field is available, usually with approval from CIPD. Most of these are delivered in conjunction with experts in the burgeoning HRD theory and research in higher education and an increasing number of professors and readers in HRD. It might even be suggested that there is a growing move towards corralling the development of HRD knowledge within higher education centres. Delivery is made by recognized members of the profession, but often with their own institutions and journals,3 who are able to devote themselves to scholarship in the field. Thus, within HRD, there is emerging a formal institu- tionalization which Freidson (2001: 98) suggests is a ‘powerful’ resource to a) maintain and expand a defensible jurisdiction and b) encourage refinement, growth and legitimation.

An ideology that asserts a commitment to doing good and quality

The claim to specialized knowledge and skills in dealing with indeterminacy underpins the high value placed on individualism within professional practice (Boreham 1983). Further, the unique circumstances of such practice and the coincidence of production and consumption require safeguards to ensure the doing of good and the achievement of quality. Such safeguards are provided by a professional ideology expressed in codes of conduct and statements of values. HRD professionals in the UK, as members of CIPD, are apparently committed to a code of professional conduct ‘to which members must adhere’ (CIPD 2001b). Complaints against members are dealt with under the professional conduct disciplinary procedure, which, among a range of possibilities, has the power to expel members from the institution. However, without exclusive regula- tion, expulsion would not prevent a continuation of practice.

In summary then, the constitutive aspects of disciplinary knowledge and activity for the HRD professional field remain in flux, with inherent instability and lack of permanence in the foundations of HRD professional expertise. Further, changes in technology and the political-social environment add to the uncertainty of future development. Some of the factors impacting on professional work in the future, such as technological advances, will now be outlined in relation to the field of practice that is HRD.

Professional work in the future

Much of the futures literature envisages an interesting tension between the future of professional work and what is happening to the status of professionals (Gold et al. 2000). These tensions apply to the field of human resource development. It is claimed that the future will see demise in the concept of the professional as a human expert (Pearson 2000). The basis of this claim is grounded in the rapid advances in information

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

442

technologies and advanced expert systems to almost super-intelligent levels over the next twenty years or so. Yet, in the short to medium term at least, the demand for professionals is forecast to increase steadily (National Skills Task Force 2000). Indeed, professionalism is a status in our society to which many people aspire and which they value.

As the flux and dynamism of change occurring throughout the world continues, the nature of decision-making complexity will intensify. While access to information and knowledge will improve, and people recognize the power of such access through a variety of new configurations of relationships, the exponential increase in available knowledge and information will maintain decision-making complexity while also challenging pre-existing notions of professional expertise. People will continue to seek the help of others more expert than themselves to make decisions only when decision- making complexity and social recognition for expertise are evident. Such dynamics, when applied to the future of the HRD profession, mean that professional expertise must be underpinned by an ability to participate in the definition and re-definition of the world. In this process, new professions are and will continue to emerge while existing professions will need to adjust their views of their disciplines and extend their fields more proactively if they are to survive. There are many advantages to be gained from thinking and talking about the future of professional work. This requires adjusting talk to include what futurists refer to as the ‘present of the future’ as well as the security of the ‘present of the past’ and the here and now of the ‘present of the present’. However, there are also risks in becoming more future oriented and a demanding learning effort is required. As futurists Rogers and Tough (1996: 495) would state, ‘Facing the future is definitely not for wimps.’

Interestingly, while there are many speculations and debates about the shape of the future landscape (Tate 2000), a key area of agreement is that, driven by changes in technology and globalization, a growing proportion of economic activity will be based upon information and knowledge. However, there is disagreement and uncertainty about how different professions will maintain and sustain their status. One of most challenging forces affecting the nature of professionalism arises in the re-adjustment of both personal and socially driven values. As Tate (2000) asserts, increased concern with quality of life, self-expression, freedom and creativity is leading to more discerning and individual consumer needs, while it may also present more demanding challenges to organizational and management systems of control. This presents an interesting paradox for the future of HRD. In effect, the social re-ordering of systems of authority, attention to individual liberty, higher standards of governance and raised stakeholder expectations will challenge the already complex relationship between the expert, the client and those bodies with a vested interest in the governance and regulation of human resource development. This is compounded by the increasing requirements for professional validation, certification and continuing licence to practise. While people demand more from the services that they receive, professionals will continue to be subject to increasingly stringent processes of scrutiny and accountability. The complexity of demands placed upon HRD professionals will be compounded by an increasing attention to issues of quality, standards, ethics, codes of conduct and redress for professional liability. Further, any social justification for the professional power to act may be challenged, as reduced deference (Tate 2000) and increased cynicism, distrust and suspicion (Scase 1999) of authority figures and systems are manifested in the

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

443

personal value sets of individuals. Increasing access to information via technology will not only challenge the role of existing HRD experts in assisting complex decisions but will also trigger the emergence of newly recognized professions. By attending to the demands of an increasingly discerning and critical marketplace, HRD professionals can present a stronger case for social justification and hence maintain and even advance a position of value-driven expertise.

Learning and development in the digital age

As mentioned in the previous section there is much talk of the potential obsolescence of professional work and the role of professions in Western society. For example, according to a number of futurists, changes in the nature, form and content of knowledge in combination with new technologies, especially where technology is used to provide access to professional sources of knowledge, will eventually replace professional expertise (Pearson 2000). The cumulative effects of ICT on information and knowledge can be most dramatically seen in the progress of database technologies using information that has been digitised, making such data more widely available for professionals and non-professionals alike. Thus, in the future decisions faced will be of an even greater complexity, which may strengthen and enhance the status of an HRD profession. On the other hand, developments in ICT are already threatening the position of many professions as specialist mediators of information who have the know- how to access the right information and transform it into the knowledge that is required to make complex decisions. It has been a time of significant change in the way that ICT has been used to store, retrieve, analyse and communicate information. For Castells (1996), an important characteristic of the information technology revolution is how information and knowledge are applied to knowledge-generating and information- processing/communication devices with a feedback loop that enables knowledge and information to be viably accumulated and transferred.

A significance of these developments for HRD professionals lies in the potential of the technology to provide sources of knowledge and expertise for a variety of problem contexts. Pearson (1999: 425) accepts that not all professional work can be replaced by technology; however, he suggests that the ‘human expert’ will become less dominant and that, within twenty years, almost any intellectual task will be avail- able cheaper, faster and better by means of artificial intelligence. The key issue for HRD professionals here is how far the technology can replace indeterminacy with technicality through the development of what Bromstrom (1998: 1) refers to as ‘superintelligence’, whereby computational intelligence surpasses ‘the human brain in practically every field, including scientific creativity, general wisdom and social skills’. Needless to say, developments in these technologies are rapidly expanding knowledge and producing many new medical, industrial, social, hygienic and agricultural goods and services. It is claimed that such products can be targeted more effectively to solve specific problems with fewer unintended consequences or side-effects (Massey 2000). In relation to this there are claims that ICT will move HRD professionals to the very heart of the organization (EPIC 1999). While such claims are encouraging, they need to be coupled with swift and sudden consideration for the integration of digital and human expertise.

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

444

Of further significance are developments within what is now referred to as the e-learning industry. As well as the provision of information and knowledge via computer and web-based technologies, e-learning also involves the provision of interactive materials and packages designed to facilitate learning for individuals and/or groups both with and without HRD specialists. Sloman and Reynolds (2002) differentiate between three forms of e-learning: a) web-based training – focusing on the delivery of content, b) supported online learning – courses delivered online with support from tutors and others learners, and c) informal e-learning – use of the Internet to support interactions between individuals and groups. Undoubtedly, e-learning could provide an enormous boost to opportunities for training, learning and development. As Clarke and Hermens (2001) suggest, e-learning has the advantages of scalability, access and timeliness. It is also leading to innovative configurations and alliances in terms of provision, posing both a new threat and an opportunity for HRD professionals (Pollard and Hillage 2001).

What becomes increasingly apparent, however, is that the myriad factors impacting on the future of HRD as a profession do not preclude the potential for those in the field to become active and ‘agentive’ (Powell et al. 1999: 15) in making and re-making their field. For these reasons, we now intend to examine some scenarios for the future of the HRD profession.

Scenarios

Scenarios represent one of a number of methods that can be employed to create the condition for interested parties to engage in talk about the future. In scenario events, participants with a variety of views join a conversation and, through their talk, create different stories of future possibilities. As suggested by de Geus (1988: 70), scenarios ‘are the scenery into which actors walk’ through the creation of a number of ‘internally consistent stories of possible futures’. Given the emerging features of the HRD profession, inherent within such emergence is a large degree of ‘not knowing’. Thus, scenarios invite a response to such uncertainty, allowing a variety of ideas to be developed relating to the future HRD professional.

A workshop was designed to develop four scenarios, broadly following a method explained by Ringland (1998). The stages were as follows:

1. Introduction, current state of the HRD profession 2. Generation of issues and factors considered to be important to the future of the

HRD profession 3. Clustering of issues and factors into themes 4. Development of the four scenario logics 5. Scenario development.

The workshop lasted one day and was held at Leeds Metropolitan University in November 2001. There were nine participants from a variety of sectors of the HRD field – three academics, three consultants, two organization practitioners and one student of HRD.4

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

445

Participants were asked to consider the question: ‘What are the key factors concerning the future of the HRD profession?’ They were given a time orientation of 2020.

The key focus in this first stage of scenario formation is to list factors that are believed to be significant to the issue. This process uses a similar methodology to that underpinning the European Commission’s Forward Studies Unit approach,5 early stage SRI techniques6 and Schwartz’s (1991) first step checklist for the Global Business Network scenario development.7

In contrast to more formal methods of scenario development, e.g. the Delphi questionnaire method of scenario building, this approach uses smaller groups of nominated experts to generate lists of factors in an informal, open environment, and all ideas and viewpoints are accepted and listed. In essence, what has been termed a ‘quick and dirty’ approach (Ringland 1998: 213) has the advantage of producing speedy results, although these may lack the apparent precision of more formal methods in the early stage scenario development. As in Schwartz’s (1991) Step 1, the development of the scenario begins from the inside out rather than the outside in, with a focal point of significant importance to the experts involved. This creates a warranty that the differences that distinguish the final scenarios are built around issues that make a difference to decision makers and stakeholders involved in the HRD business or profession (Ringland 1998: 229).

In this first stage, around 120 factors were generated, which were then clustered into the following themes:

a) Societal context b) Organization context c) Government context d) Client focus e) HRD identity and recognition f) HRD skills g) Learning technology

The clustering activity builds a level of internal consistency into the development of scenarios by confirming the meaning perspectives of the participants. Here participants started to make sense of their possible futures by merging ‘shaping factors’ and ‘shaping actors’ (Ringland 1998: 229) into meaningful themes that constituted the ‘driving forces’ for the possible futures.

What was immediately striking was the importance of the changing circumstances and contexts that would be faced by anyone in the HRD field in the future. Changes in the society and technology would both affect the future of work and organizations (and be affected by it). In addition, the legislative and government framework would continue to fluctuate but continue to influence the HRD agenda at a national or regional level, although there would be continuing limitations of such frameworks in terms of influence on organization decisions. Against such a background, HRD pro- fessionals face many quandaries regarding the identification of clients who are essential for the ongoing recognition of the profession and the skills and knowledge that will be necessary to satisfy their needs and desires. The future of HRD is also inevitably linked to changes in learning technology, particularly where professional knowledge becomes

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

446

‘public’, communicable and explicit (Eraut 2000), increasingly packaged in formats appropriate for delivery through e-learning mechanisms and other technologies. HRD professionals may claim that their ‘personal’ and non-transferable ‘soft’ skills will be valued, enhancing favourably what Jamous and Peloille (1970) referred to as the indeterminacy relative to technicality ratio.

From the themes, a set of dimensions was developed as participants started to set the limits of their perspectives. The dimensions help to define the axes along which the eventual scenarios will emerge. This is one of the most important steps in scenario building as these axes will provide the differentiation and contrast between possible futures. An important feature of this stage is that the dimensions must have significance to those who have generated them. They must be internally consistent with the focus of the issue and they must be sufficiently compelling and interesting to invoke intuitive commitment to developing further detail around the scenarios.

The following dimensions provided the axes upon which scenarios would be constructed.

A) Shaping

b) Inclusivity

These will be briefly explained as follows:

The shaping dimension varies between two extremes. The first indicates that, by 2020, the arguments to support learning as the source of prosperity and well-being for individuals, organizations, nations and the world will have been won. HRD professionals will have, with others, been highly agentive in making the case for HRD; they will be able to shape circumstances favourably and their skills will be highly recognized and valued. In contrast, mechanistic training indicates that, even in 2020, HRD professionals will have to continue their struggle to make learning important and decisions about learning will continue to be made in response to other decisions. They will be confined to reactive responses and the provision of training with pre-determined inputs and predictable outcomes.

The inclusivity dimension ranges from high inclusivity to a more limited view. In the former, HRD has become an activity that is available to everyone. Barriers to learning in terms of access and availability are minimized and this requires a growing number of HRD professionals and the spread of their influence. Ghetto-ization indicates that HRD activities are limited to a select few. There are key issues regarding the boundaries between those who have access to HRD and those who do not.

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

447

Learning becomes the organization v. Mechanistic training norm

HRD is an inclusive activity v. HRD is ghetto-ized

Using these dimensions, the views of HRD professionals in the future as shown in Figure 1 provided the basis for the construction of four scenarios. The scenarios developed were as follows.

Knowledge power to the people (learning becomes the organization norm, HRD is an inclusive activity)

This is a highly positive scenario for HRD professionals. The learning society has been truly achieved and learning values pervade the whole of society. All individuals have a fundamental basic right to access learning activities and are able to purchase these through their learning bank balances, an initiative launched by government to early cynicism but now well-established. Learning to learn skills are deeply embedded into the national curriculum and, most importantly, learning skills are applied in supportive work environments. The consequence is that learning skills are highly valued and provide an incentive to young people to fully embrace the previously derided notion of lifelong learning. In all organizations, the rhetoric of learning is matched by a reality. Organizations revived the idea of the learning company and embraced it. The value of learning is indicated in company accounts under the heading of ‘intellectual capital’ and this constitutes a significant feature of the net asset value of the company. The learning assets of the company are considered as a vital factor in all decision making. Managers and staff see learning as the key performance indicator and are rewarded for their achievement.

Learning is much discussed and there is a great interest in how learning occurs. There is an understanding of the social features of learning and an interest in exploring new ideas. Technology has a crucial role to play but is a servant rather than a master. Everyone has access to resources from cradle to grave. Some of these appear techno- logically novel, e.g. Super-Ted, but they are forging the way forward as super-intelligent learning systems. As a result, ‘ageism’ within society is diminished.

HRD expertise has become a vital prerequisite for organizational work. Because learning has moved to the heart of the social and organisation infrastructures, HRD

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

448

Figure 1 Views of HRD Professionals in the Future

Learning becomes the organization norm

Mechanistic training

HRD is an inclusive activity

HRD is ghetto-ized

Fit for purpose

Knowledge power to the people

Limited potential

Demise of the HRD professional?

professionals are key to providing an interpretation of new ideas and theories. As the field has grown, there has been an accompanying specialization but also moves towards trans-disciplinary activities with other professional groups and, because learning is so important to all professionals, there is a plethora of hybrid professional groups that all include HRD as a feature of qualification and CPD. As a consequence most graduates undertake CIPD membership. However, there are different grades of membership and their advanced understanding of learning, skills of implementation and their command of the location of vast stocks of disciplinary knowledge distinguish HRD professionals.

Demise of the HRD professional? (Learning becomes the organization norm, HRD is ghetto-ized)

This scenario presents mixed fortunes for the HRD professional with the possibility of professional marginalization and ultimate demise. Learning is accepted as the norm in organizations but the interpretation of the importance of learning results in a particularized provision of activities. Instead of the view that everyone at work is an asset, organization leaders identify those groups and sections of their workplaces where learning can be enhanced. The consequence is that decisions have to be made about who is within the ‘learning ghettos’ and who is not. For those that lie within, learning becomes standard and an ongoing privilege. They have access to advanced resources and technologies. For those outside the ‘ghettos’, there are opportunities for learning but they are very limited. Access to advanced resources and technologies is prohibited within organizations unless selected to move into the ghetto.

Government policy has to work on two fronts. First, it provides rhetorical support to organization decision makers who advocate learning as a norm. Second, it has to deal with the consequences of ghetto-ization within organizations where learning resources are concentrated on the few rather than the many. There is an acceptance that governments cannot legitimately intervene in organization decision-making processes and strategies. One consequence has been severe over-supply of qualified people emerging from the formal education system – not everyone can enter the learning ghettos. Those who seek entry need to show advanced skills and understanding to cope with the technologies they will encounter. As a result, a plethora of specialized schools and agencies has developed to credentialize the process of entry and HRD professionals are tightly involved.

Overall however, HRD professionals face a number of quandaries cause by the gap between the rhetoric and reality of learning. Within organizations, HRD professionals play a vital role in setting up and maintaining the learning ghettos. However, beyond this, they cannot be certain of the recognition of their expertise; indeed, they become dangerously limited by their own professional identity. Learning is managed locally and HRD expertise can be easily replaced by technology. The learning ghettos become the guardians of the knowledge created by powerful ‘knowledge barons’ who also control what knowledge is given validity from outside the ghetto. HRD provides just one voice among many. One consequence is the virtual disappearance of HRD theorizing into an academic black hole. Outside the ghettos, there is a knowledge black market that shadows the learning within the ghettos. Some HRD professionals are able to track the learning, feeding the knowledge underclass as they seek to survive on the

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

449

boundaries of the learning ghettos. In many cases, as learning is diminished and focused on the few, HRD becomes an unattractive profession and its demise looms.

Fit for purpose (mechanistic training, HRD is an inclusive activity)

This scenario indicates a positive but largely reactive role for the HRD professional. The positive features stem from the high inclusivity of HRD activities. However, there are significant constraints imposed by the requirements of organizations.

Organizations regard learning as a third-order decision-making requirement. Responding to strategy and structures, once individual and team roles can be specified, everyone can compute a learning plan. The plan translates automatically to specific skills and supporting resources, most of which can be downloaded from company or resource centre databases. Through expert search facilities, all plans can be activated. HRD technicists specialize in maintaining and updating the databases. There is a significant emphasis on standards and their specification, which provide the parameters for any resources developed.

Within organizations, there is no concern about differing views of learning and human behaviour. The behavioural/functional paradigm is dominant and this guides HRD responses. HRD professionals are found only in larger organizations, although smaller organizations can access on-line diagnosis of HRD needs and resources. HRD professionals prove their worth through their ability to devise organization-wide training strategies that link every plan with appropriate resources. By liasing with their technicists, they can ensure that each person’s requirements can be matched. They can also ensure that no person is able to access resources beyond their requirement as specified by the plan. At all times, a high degree of control must be exercised and senior management is able to monitor performance on a daily basis.

HRD professionals are recognized for their ability to fit in with organization requirements and administer the HRD framework. There is no room for creativity and this stifles theoretical development within higher education, which concentrates on electro-human interactions. There are two grades of professional membership, technicist and administrator. The former provides key grounding in the formation of plans and resource matching from databases. The latter allows the development of an electronic tool-bag that provides for diagnosis of requirement against specific company plans and measurement of outcomes against standards. Some professionals are able to act as ‘theatrical agents’ between different organizations or within collaborating global networks by matching requirements with appropriate HRD frameworks, all of which are electronically available in a standardized form.

Limited potential (mechanistic training, HRD is ghetto-ized)

This scenario suggests that HRD professionals have a limited future. This stems from the low status given to learning and the limitation on HRD activities for the selected few. Training is focused on those selected as members of various sections of organi- zations (the ghettos). Most work has been diagnosed and computed to form prescribed skill packages, composed of definitions, and access to resources and a virtual practice and testing environment. All packages are rigorously standardized. HRD professionals play a significant role in establishing the packages but, once set, they become the

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

450

property of the sections. HRD professionals may then be called upon to service or reset the packages.

Each section creates an exclusive boundary to limit entry, using the skills packages as a means to create a rite of passage. There are clear standards to be met in completing training and within each section senior section members administer simple training rules. Completion of the training eventually leads to professional qualification. The enforcement of section boundaries and their control through access to training prevents many from acquiring qualifications. HRD professionals have a limited role in providing simple skills packages through a state-sponsored system of provision.

There is a mechanistic view of how people learn and interaction with technologies provides the main stimulus for research in higher education. There is little room for creativity and new ideas in learning and this causes interest in HRD theory development to decline. As advances in technologies occur, how people will learn is always a second- or third-order consideration. The advances determine skills and sections within organizations compete with each other to claim ownership. Skills packages can then be formulated by calling up HRD professionals.

It is a world of sections that control skills and protect their boundaries from those who are not members. HRD professionals have little choice but to respond accordingly. There could be many more contributions from them, but working within a limited framework of learning is the only option. Further, certain groups who are not able to gain access to skills packages are provided only with basic training. HRD’s status as a profession appears to have made scant progress since 1995.8

Conclusion

HRD professionals have so far faced a disorderly history, and one that looks set to continue in to the near future. In struggling for recognition we have seen, in the UK, the formation of a chartered IPD, and this signalled a real attempt to move HRD forward as a profession. Juxtaposed to this, HRD per se has also experienced greater public and organizational awareness. However, a lack of tangibility in quanti- fying and qualifying what constitutes HRD practice, combined with the fact that there are no formal barriers to practice, has the potential to diminish the status of HRD as a profession or act as brake on its progress. The enforcement of a regulatory framework in the form of a code of conduct serves only as a barrier for membership, and not as a barrier to practice. Add to this the prevailing notion that learning, however it is defined, could be seen as an expensive luxury and we can also see a non-too rosy picture for the future of HRD as a profession, a point borne out in the scenarios where HRD activities become ghetto-ized and training mechanistic.

For the future of the HRD profession to be sustained, grow and gain continued recognition for the services it provides, it too must take learning (surely, a key tenet of the profession) seriously and strategically. In the most optimistic scenario, this will embody organizations where learning, in any of its manifestations, would be built into the ethos of practice, however dispersed, networked or fragmented the physical structure of the organization. They would also have an inclusive approach to HRD, increasingly using technology as a vehicle to achieve learning. In such conditions, HRD as a profession can only thrive and prosper. But how can this be achieved?

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

451

In many ways, much of the future of the HRD professional, like all other professions, lies partly in the hands of the professionals themselves and partly in the hands of those that value what they can do (Gold et al. 2002). That is, as a socially constructed phenomenon, HRD professionalism relies on the social recognition of its expertise (Dietrich and Roberts 1997), which creates ‘information asymmetry’ and the possibility of professional work. HRD professionals therefore will need be proactive in persuading clients of the legitimacy of their expert knowledge and potential to act. In addition, according to Middlehurst and Kennie, part of this persuasion rests on working with ‘dedication, reliability, flexibility and creativity in relation to the “unknown”’ (1997: 52) and this leads us to a further requirement. Sooner or later, HRD will need to determine the core elements of its ‘disciplinary knowledge’ (Fournier 2000: 71). This is not to argue for any kind of closure or unification of knowledge; like all other professions, HRD should be characterized by diversity, creativity and debate about the meanings and practices that constitute its field. However, there does need to be some agreement about what its field actually is and where the boundaries lie relative to other fields. HRD professionals need to be seen as expert and competent in relation to an aspect of knowledge and practice in part of the world.

A key part of their expertise and practice has to concern the values and interests of others who face uncertainty and difficulty in relation to learning at work. If the HRD profession is seeking to advance to a more inclusive future, where learning is the norm, there will need to be more persuasive efforts to make HRD a strategic consideration in the workplace. This image contrasts sharply with current evidence in the UK, where HRD is usually a fourth-order consideration (Coleman and Keep 2001) in strategic discussions. Overall, people issues do not form a top priority in organizations where marketing and finance have much greater persuasive appeal (Guest 2000). However, there is increasing evidence that there is benefit in the adoption of a ‘high-road’ HRM strategy, which includes high training (Cooke 2000; Guest et al. 2000). HRD needs to work within the nexus with the HRM professional, gradually adding its own distinctive voice. In particular, HRD professionals will need to work to find a variety of ways of showing links between HRD and measurable outputs and outcomes and the value that can be achieved by people learning at work as a feature of an organization’s intellectual capital. As more organizations become knowledge-based in the future, HRD professionals will need to seize the opportunity to show how new knowledge production is a key differentiator between different organizations (Garvey and Williamson 2002).

Address for correspondence

HRD Unit Leeds Business School Cavendish Hall Beckett Park Leeds, LS6 3QS, UK E-mail: [email protected]

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

452

Notes

The work for this paper has been supported by the University Forum for HRD and the Council for Excellence in Management and Leadership, Professions Working Group. The views expressed, however, are those of the authors.

1 The response to CIPD’s annual membership questionnaire in 2001 totalled 101,634 and of these: 39,393 members stated key responsibilities involved training (38.75 per cent); 12,248 members stated a key responsibility as management development (12.05 per cent); 8,875 members stated a key responsibility as organization development (8.73 per cent). Of the total CIPD membership 52.36 per cent had achieved their full CIPD qualification, 27 per cent were currently following an approved course and had achieved part qualification and a further 15.42 per cent were in the process of studying (source: Membership Secretary CIPD).

2 From July 2002, a revised set of professional standards will come into operation at three levels – Support, Practitioner and Advanced Practitioner. In addition to core personnel management at Practitioner Level, which includes employee development, there will be five learning and development electives in learning and development, management devel- opment, managing organizational learning and knowledge, managing the training and development function and designing and delivering training. At Advanced Practitioner Level, there will be standards in personnel and development, strategic personnel and development, organizational change and transition and international personnel and development.

3 The University Forum for HRD and journals such as Human Resource Development International and the International Journal of Training and Development might be such examples.

4 The authors would like to thank Chief Inspector Stephen Barrowclough, Owen Jones, David Lloyd, Philippa Bogle, Professor Jim Stewart, Geoff Lawday, Dr Rick Holden and Vicky Harte.

5 For more details, go to <http://europa.eu.int/comm/cdp/index_en.htm> 6 For more details, go to <http://www.sri.com/> 7 For more details, go to <http://www.gbn.org/public/gbnstory/scenarios/> 8 The authors recommend some further development of these scenarios. A process similar to

Schwartz’s (1991) Steps Seven and Eight would assist stakeholders in further engagement. Step Seven assists in thinking through the implications and vulnerabilities contained in each scenario and Step Eight requires the establishing of signposts or indicators to gauge the real unfolding of possible scenarios.

References

Abbott, A. (1988) The System of Professions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Boreham, P. (1983) ‘Indetermination: professional knowledge, organization and control’,

Sociological Review 31: 693–718. Bromstrom, N. (1998) ‘How long before superintelligence?’, International Journal of Futures

Studies 2: 1–13. Castells, M. (1996) The Rise of the Network Society, Oxford: Blackwell. Cheetham, G. and Chivers, G. (2001) ‘How professionals learn in practice’, Journal of

European Industrial Training 24(7): 247–92. CIPD (2001a) Annual Report, London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

453

CIPD (2001b) Code of Professional Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures, London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Clarke, T. and Hermens, A. (2001) ‘Corporate developments and strategic alliances’, Education and Training 43(4): 256–67.

Coleman, S. and Keep, E. (2001) Background Literature Review for PIU Project on Workforce Development, London: Cabinet Office, available from <http://www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/innovation/2001/workforce/literaturereview.pdf>

Cooke, F. L. (2000) ‘Human resource strategy to improve organisational performance: a route for British firms?’, Working Paper 9, ESRC Future of Work Programme, Swindon: ESRC.

De Geus, A. (1988) ‘Planning as learning’, Harvard Business Review 66(2): 70–4. Dietrich, M. and Roberts, J. (1997) ‘Beyond the economics of professionalism’, in J.

Broadbent, M. Dietrich, and J. Roberts (eds) The End of the Professions?, London: Routledge.

Dreyfus, H. L. and Dreyfus, S. E. (1986) Mind over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer, Oxford: Blackwell.

EPIC (1999) Taking Training Online: Exploiting the Potential for Web-Based Training in the UK, Technologies for Training Ltd and Epic Group plc.

Eraut, M. (2000) ‘Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 70: 113–36.

Fournier, V. (2000) ‘Boundary work and the (un)making of the professions’, in N. Malin (ed.) Professionalism, Boundaries and the Workplace, London: Routledge.

Freidson, E. (2001) Professionalism, Cambridge: Polity Press. Garvey, B. and Williamson, B. (2002) Beyond Knowledge Management, Harlow: Pearson

Education. Gold, J., Rodgers, H. and Smith, V. (2000) ‘The future of the professions’, report conducted

for the Council for Excellence in Management & Leadership, professions working group. Gold, J., Rodgers, H. and Smith, V. (2002) ‘The future of the professions: are they up for it?’,

Foresight 4(2): 46–53. Guest, D. (2000) ‘Piece by piece’, People Management 6(15): 26–30. Guest, D., Michie, J., Sheehan, M. and Conway, N. (2000) ‘Getting inside the HRM-

performance relationship’, Working Paper 8, ESRC Future of Work Programme, Swindon: ESRC.

Holmes, L. (1998) ‘Learning as a confidence trick: exorcising the ghost in the machine’, paper presented to the Emergent Fields in Management Conference, Leeds University, July.

Jamous, H. and Peloille, B. (1970) ‘Changes in the French university hospital’, in J. A. Jackson (ed.) Professions and Professionalization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lee, M. (2001) ‘HRD: a refusal to define HRD’, Human Resource Development International 4(3): 327–41.

Mabey, C. and Salaman, G. (1995) Strategic Human Resource Management, Oxford: Blackwell Business.

McGoldrick, J. and Stewart, J. (1996) ‘The HRM-HRD nexus’, in J. Stewart and J. McGoldrick (eds) Human Resource Development: Perspectives, Strategies and Practice, London: Pitman.

McGoldrick, J., Stewart, J. and Watson, S. (eds) (2001a) Researching Human Resource Development, London: Routledge.

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

454

McGoldrick, J., Stewart, J. and Watson, S. (2001b) ‘Theorizing human resource development’, Human Resource Development International 4(3): 343–56.

McLagan, P. (1989) ‘Models for HRD practice’, Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development.

McLean, G. N. (1998) ‘HRD: a three-legged stool, an octopus, or a centipede?’, Human Resource Development International 1(4): 291–4.

Mankin, D. P. (2001) ‘A model for human resource development’, Human Resource Development International 4(1): 65–85.

Massey, A. (2000) ‘What is biotechnology?’, available at: <http://bio.org/aboutbio/guide2000/whatis.html>, accessed 23 October 2000.

Middlehurst, R. and Kinnie, T. (1997) ‘Leading professionals: towards new concepts of professionalism’, in J. Broadbent, M. Dietrich and J. Roberts (eds) The End of the Professions?, London: Routledge.

National Skills Task Force (2000) Skills for All: Research Report from the National Skills Taskforce, London: Department for Education and Employment.

Pearson, I. (1999) ‘The power of information’, Foresight 1(5): 413–26 Pearson, I. (2000) ‘Our view of the future: architects’, available at:

<http://bt.com/innovation/viewpoints/pearson/architects.htm>, accessed 10 October 2000.

Pollard, E. and Hillage, J. (2001) ‘Exploring e-learning’, Report 376, Institute of Employment Studies, Sussex.

Powell, M. J., Brock, D. M. and Hinings, C. R. (1999) ‘The changing professional organization’, in D. M. Brock, M. J. Powell and C. R. Hinings (eds) Restructuring the Professional Organization, London: Routledge.

Ringland, G. (1998) Scenario Planning, Chichester: Wiley. Rogers, M. and Tough, A. (1996) ‘Facing the future is not for wimps’, Futures 28(5):

491–6 Sandelands, L. and Drazin, R. (1989) ‘On the language of organization theory’, Organization

Studies 10(4): 457–78 Scase, R. (1999) ‘Britain towards 2010: the changing business environment’, Office of Science

and Technology, Economic and Social Research Council. Schwartz, P. (1991) The Art of the Long View, New York: Doubleday. Sloman, M. and Reynolds, J. (2002) ‘Developing the e-learning community’, paper presented

to the Researching HRD Conference, Edinburgh, January. Smith, V. and Gold, J. (2003) ‘Advances toward a learning movement: translations at work’,

Human Resource Development International, forthcoming. Swanson, R. A. (1999) ‘HRD theory, real or imagined’, Human Resource Development

International 2(1): 2–5. Swanson, R. A. (2001) ‘HRD and its underlying theory’, Human Resource Development

International, 4(3): 299–312. Tate, W. V. (2000) Futures Project: Implications of Futures on Studies for Business,

Organisation, Management and Leadership, London: Council for Excellence in Management and Leadership.

Walton, J. (1999) Strategic Human Resource Development, Harlow: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.

Gold et al.: The future for the HRD professional

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

455

Witz, A. (1992) Professions and Patriarchy, London: Routledge.

Peer-Reviewed Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

456