attached is the instructions, reading material and weekly lecture. please respond substantively to the questions using the reading material to support claims.




Unformatted Attachment Preview

Explicit, Implicit and Tacit Knowledge:
There are three types of knowledge discussed in the textbook: explicit, implicit, and tacit.
Describe the three types of knowledge. Give an example of each of the three types of knowledge
based on your position in your organization. Which of the three types of knowledge is the most
difficult for a trainer to teach?
Reference and cite the textbook in your original post.
Performance-Based Human Resource
Development and the Human Capital Theory
Koppe (2014) stated that performance-based human resource development is related to human
capital theory. Since performance-based views look at the organization’s profit and competitive
advantage as the measurements of success, understanding a management theory that examines
the individuals in an organization, and the bottom line, is a logical correlation. One of the
discussion questions this week requires summarizing the basics of performance-based HRD.
Understanding the effect of human capital aids in understanding performance-based
development. Please watch this video to gain more knowledge of human capital theory: The New
Science of Human Capital.
Psacharopoulos (2006) stated that the basis of human capital theory is “the formation of human
capital entails the sacrifice of resources today for the sake of a stream of benefits in the future”
(p. 114). This definition indicates that HRD should focus on improving the human capital in an
organization to increase the future bottom line.
Nafukho, Hairston, and Brooks (2004) posited that human capital theory is related to HRD.
According to Nafukho, Hairston, and Brooks (2004) a key similarity between human capital
theory and HRD is that investing in individuals in an organization will increase productivity.
Both human capital theory and performance-based HRD require the measurement of intangible
Psacharopolos (2006) and Nafukho, Hairston, and Brooks (2004) agreed that in performancebased HRD that human capital theory should be focused on the training of the individuals in the
organization. The cost of training and the development of the individuals in the organization
should be considered an investment in the future profit of the organization. The same argument
could be made for the decision to go to Ashford University. The prospective student has to weigh
the costs of the education, and for some, the loss of current income against the future return on
his or her educational investment.
Cornachionne and Daugherty (2013) stated that human capital theory is a tool for HRD. Human
capital theory can be utilized to predict and interpret the effects to the profitability of an
organization from the costs of investing in human capital. HRD staff and management should be
experts in human capital theory. The knowledge allows HRD to examine various investment
possibilities and determine which likely will have the highest rate of return for the organization
(Cornachionne and Daugherty, 2013).
Performance-based HRD is focused on the profitability of the organization rather than on the
employees themselves. The employees receive training and increases in pay because they are
viewed as assets of the organization rather than as individuals. This view has been criticized as
dehumanizing the individuals of the organization. The other common view of HRD is the
developmental view, which is a more humanistic approach.
As you focus on the reading and assignments this week, the different views of HRD will become
clear. The focus of this week is an overview of the basic functions of HRD. One question to
consider as you read is how your personal views of the development of individuals in the
organization connect to the theories.
Cornachionne, E., & Daugherty, J. L. (2013). Trends in opportunity costs of U.S. postsecondary
education: A national HRD and human capital theory analysis. New Horizons in Adult
Education & Human Resource Development, 25(2). Retrieved from ProQuest database.
Harvard Business Review (2008, December 1). The new science of human capital [Video file].
Retrieved from
Kopp, D. M. (2014). Human resource training & development: Performance improvement
through workplace learning. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education
Nafukho, F. M., Hairston, N. R., & Brook, K. (2004). Human capital theory: Implications for
human resource development. Human Resource Development International, 7(4). doi:
Psacharopoulos, G. (2006). The value of investment in education: Theory, evidence, and
policy (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. Journal of Education Finance,
32(2). Retrieved from
Introduction to Human Resource
Development: Performance
Through Learning
© Roger Richter/Corbis
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
• Define human resource development.
• Distinguish between human resource development and human resource management.
• Identify the historic roots of human resource development.
• Explain the consensus and debate in human resource development.
• Demonstrate the roles in human resource development and apply its competencies to the
What’s worse than training your workers and losing them?
Not training them and keeping them!
—Zig Ziglar
Chapter 1
1. Human resource development is best defined as workplace training for employees.
a. true
b. false
2. Some of the core skills of effective managers are human resource skills.
a. true
b. false
3. On-the-job training is the most common method of employee training today.
a. true
b. false
4. An assumption of human resource development is that employees should seek to be
competent in the workplace.
a. true
b. false
5. Managerial skills are important for people who work in the training and
development field.
a. true
b. false
Answers can be found at the end of the chapter.
Welcome! Let us start by confirming something you may already suspect: In today’s fastpaced, global marketplace, it is essential for organizations to attract, employ, and retain
skilled and motivated workers to maintain their competitive advantage (Agbettor, 2013;
Campbell, Coff, & Kryscynski, 2012; Hatch & Dyer, 2004; Neirotti & Paolucci, 2013). Training
and developing employees are keys to successful retention and can ensure that employees are
motivated to engage in continuous learning and fulfill their career aspirations while advancing the organization.
According to the 2012 State of the Industry Report from the American Society for Training
& Development (ASTD), which is now known as the Association for Talent Development
(ATD), U.S. companies spent approximately $160 billion on employee training and development for their employees—about as much as New Zealand’s gross domestic product (TradingEconomics, 2013).
Simply put, a trained and developed workforce is no longer just desirable or advantageous,
but is now necessary for an organization to survive and ultimately succeed (Campbell et al.,
2012; Hatch & Dyer, 2004). In view of this reality, this textbook will explore every phase of the
framework for employee training and the human resource development (HRD) ­process—
analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation (ADDIE)—as well as HRD theories
Defining Human Resource Development
Chapter 1
and practice and human resource development’s implications to the business, management
environments, as well as, society, at large. After reading this text, you will possess insight into
the means, manner, and methods of employee training, and you will know how a trained and
developed workforce affects and drives organizational performance.
Navigating This Text
This text is organized to help you learn about the functions, duties, and responsibilities of
training, as well as the social responsibility of training and development. The book covers
every phase of training, performance management, training transfer, career development,
and organizational development. Additionally, the book will discuss the current consensus
and debate within the training and development field, considering questions such as:
• Is training about learning or performance?
• Is human resource development a support or a lead function?
• What return on investment (ROI) should organizations expect from training
• Who is responsible for training transfer?
• Is there an ethical dimension to training and development?
1.1 Defining Human Resource Development
At its core HRD entails training employees in the workplace so they can perform their jobs
effectively (Chalofsky, 1992; Kelly, 2000; McGuire & Jørgensen, 2011; Swanson, 1995; Werner
& DeSimone, 2011). However, to conclude that HRD is just about training is tantamount to
saying that the Beatles were just a rock-and-roll band from the 1960s. Although both statements are partially true, they are insufficient.
Still, in the spirit of a social science, HRD’s definition does vary depending on who you ask.
Some in the field contend that—semantics aside—HRD does, in fact, mean “training and
development” (Stewart & Sambrook, 2012). Others in the field not only refuse to define HRD
(Lee, 2001), but also claim that it defies definition entirely (Blake, 1995).
Even the idea of what training employees means seems to be up for debate. Mayo and DuBois
(1987) suggested that although “training involves learning, not all learning is training” (p. 2);
others advised that definitions of training will vary depending on the given objectives (Nadler
& Nadler, 1990; O’Toole, 2010). For example:
• Training is learning when it relates to the present job requirements.
• Training is development when it facilitates employee career growth within the present job and organization.
• Training is education when it refers to the state of the worker’s long-term competency framework—not only ability, but also experiences—which go beyond the present job or organization.
So, if you have concluded that there is no unified definition for HRD, then you would be right.
However, there is hope. One tool we will use is the typology that Gilley, Eggland, and Gilley
(2002) introduced that shows HRD’s depth and breadth (see Table 1.1).
Distinguishing Between Human Resource Development and Human Resource Management
Table 1.1: How do I HRD? Let me count the ways…
Chapter 1
Individual domain focus
Organizational domain focus
Short term
Performance management
Long term
Source: Gilley, Eggland, & Gilley, 2002.
Career development
Organizational development
What Table 1.1 shows are the domains of HRD practice; that is, a day in the life of HRD. We
see that, beyond training, HRD also includes the processes, products, and functions of career
development, performance management, and organizational development. Additionally, two important dimensions or points of reference are considered: time frame (short term
or long term) and focus (individual or organizational, including work teams). We therefore
define and discuss training from a short-term, individual focus (Chapter 3); performance
management (Chapter 2) from a short-term, organizational perspective; career development
(Chapter 9) from a long-term, individual focus; and organizational development (Chapter 9),
from a long-term, organizational point of view.
Now, let us start our HRD journey by distinguishing between human resource development
and human resource management. Then we will take a brief look at the history of training so
we can better appreciate these modern perspectives—and definitions—of HRD.
1.2 Distinguishing Between Human Resource
Development and Human Resource Management
Human resource development is not an exact science; that is, it is interdisciplinary, drawing
from other social sciences like sociology and anthropology, as well as business and economics. HRD shares similar missions to other disciplines, such as industrial and organizational
psychology and organizational behavior, which focus on employee behaviors and attitudes
and how these can be improved through both training programs and hiring practices, feedback, and management systems (Anderson, 2001).
HRD itself, though, is a subset of the larger human resource management (HRM) field,
which has as its professional organization the Society for Human Resource Management. The
society was founded in 1948 and represents more than 250,000 members in more than 140
countries ( HRM traditionally encompasses all the human resources
functions, including recruitment, selection, payroll, benefits, employee relations, and legal
issues (Alagaraja, 2012). One way to look at the differences between HRM and HRD is to
consider that, whereas HRM spends most of its efforts managing functions, HRD spends its
energies developing people.
Additionally, although the training and development function in many organizations falls
within the HRM department or division, training and development are not necessarily bound
to the HRM department. That is, any effective supervisor or manager should also possess the
competencies of those who would train and develop. Such skills include managing individual
performance, motivating employees, allocating resources, and monitoring the environment
(Werner & DeSimone, 2011).
Distinguishing Between Human Resource Development and Human Resource Management
Chapter 1
Depending on whether HRD is part of the HRM department will also usually dictate the jobs
and whether job duties and roles are centralized or differentiated. For example, for smaller
organizations, the human resources manager may be responsible for both the administrative aspects of the organization’s human resources as well as the training and development
In larger companies with a substantial number of employees, there will typically be larger
training budgets, and as a result, the HRD function may stand alone and even include the position of chief learning officer, a corporate officer responsible for all the organization’s learning
and development. Figure 1.1 shows an example of a training and development department.
Figure 1.1: Organization chart of a large HRD department
HRD departments in larger organizations can be decentralized with specialized positions
filled by individuals who are responsible and accountable for their particular aspect of the
training and development function.
Office of Human
Director of Human
Human Resource
Executive Support
and Leadership
Human Resource
Research and
Evaluation Specialist
Skills Training
Service Trainer
As we will discuss in Chapter 2, the practice of HRD can also be directly impacted by HRM
systems and policies. For example, if poor job performance is due to a trend of unable and
unwilling employees, the organization must look at its personnel recruiting and selection
practices. In sum, not only are HRM and HRD parallel functions, they also must be collaborative (DeCenzo, Robbins, & Verhulst, 2012).
The Advent of Human Resource Development
Chapter 1
1.3 The Advent of Human Resource Development
Although the expression “human resource development” was used as early as 1962 (Harbison, 1962), Professor Leonard Nadler popularized the term in a speech given in 1969 at the
ASTD’s annual conference in Miami, Florida. The concept of training, however can be traced
back to antiquity. Steinmetz (1976) even concluded that as “primitive man invented tools,
weapons, clothing, shelter, and language, the need for training became an essential ingredient
in the march of civilization” (p. 3).
In ancient Babylonia, training processes between artisan and apprentice were codified so
that artisans could teach their crafts to the next generation; this system also ensured that they
could maintain an adequate number of craftsmen, in general (Usher, 1920).
The Code of Hammurabi had laws chiseled into its black diorite for all citizens to read. Most
of these laws dealt with strict moral and civil conduct in the 18th century BCE; for example,
according to Section 218, a doctor could have his hands cut off after an unsuccessful surgery
on a patient who died. But part of the code, specifically in
Sections 188–189, detailed the relationship between the
artisan and the unskilled novice, and this relationship could
be considered a rudimentary method of apprenticeship.
The sections state: “If an artisan take a son for adoption, and
teach him his handicraft, one may not bring claim for him. If
he does not teach him his handicraft, that son may return to
his father’s house” (King, 2008).
As a result, the Code of Hammurabi stands as a forerunner
to the early apprenticeship programs of the 18th century
that served as a foundation for today’s HRD.
Training in the Late 1800s and Early 1900s
© Bettmann/CORBIS
The Code of Hammurabi loosely
established the parameters of what
would become the master–apprentice
In the apprenticeship systems that followed centuries after
Hammurabi’s time, the unskilled protégé would train under
an experienced master to learn the craft and develop from
an apprentice to a journeyman, and then from a yeoman
to a master (King, 1964; Sleight, 1993). Even modern-day
organizations like Wikimedia, the nonprofit foundation that
operates Wikipedia, use a similar classification system to
rank their editors:
Novice editor
Apprentice editor
Journeyman editor
Yeoman editor
Experienced editor
Senior editor I
The Advent of Human Resource Development
Chapter 1
Senior editor II
Senior editor III
Master editor I
Master editor II
Master editor III
Direct instruction was essential in these early apprenticeship programs because the trainee
was usually illiterate (Fleming, Gallichan, & Lamonde, 2005). The direct instructional method
gave rise to what is today called on-the-job training (OJT) (King, 1964; Jacobs, 2003; Sleight,
1993; Steinmetz, 1976; Usher, 1920).
In OJT, a new employee might be paired up with an experienced coworker who trained the
newcomer by demonstrating the proper way to perform the job tasks. OJT is still the most
common method—and considered the most economical—used for training today (Craig,
1987; Steinmetz, 1976; Werner & DeSimone, 2011).
As the Industrial Revolution took hold, the traditional apprentice programs for unskilled
workers were replaced by more formal vocational education programs located within factory premises (Kincheloe, 1999; Jacobs & Phillips, 2002; Sharma, 1994). According to Steinmetz (1976), in 1872 Hoe and Company opened a manufacturer of printing presses in New
York City, one of the first factory schools.
Similar factory schools followed, hosted by Western Electric, the Ford Motor Company, Westinghouse, and Siemens (Berg & Hudson, 1992 ; Kincheloe, 1999; Sharma, 1994; Sleight, 1993;
Steinmetz, 1976). These factory schools used what is known as vestibule training, or “nearthe-job” training (Hardman, 1963; Naik, 2007), whereby the classroom or training room is
located as close as conditions permit to the department for which the worker is being trained,
and is furnished with the same machines that are used in production (Diemer, 1922; Hardman, 1963; Kelly, 1920; Steinmetz, 1976; U.S. Training Service, 1918).
As training techniques became more sophisticated in the 19th and early 20th centuries, an
understanding grew that in order to optimize job performance, not only did em …
Purchase answer to see full