1

Ref 10.13 The Changing Context & Role of the HRD Professional: Time to Recognise the Importance of Social Networking Competency Refereed Paper Claire Gubbins1 Department of Management & Marketing, College of Business & Law, University College Cork, Email: c.gubbins@ucc.ie Thomas N. Garavan Postgraduate Studies & Executive Education, Kemmy Business School, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland. Email: thomas.garavan@ul.ie Keywords: HRD Professional Role; HRD Practitioner; Changing Role, Social Networking, Social Capital, Strategic Business Partner

1 College Road, Cork. Ireland, tel: 00353 21 4903372

2

Introduction

Today’s organisations operate in an environment that is fast paced, continuously changing and uncertain. The key trends that are generally accepted, as the forces of these changes are global competition, growth in mergers, acquisitions and alliances, organisational restructuring and advances in technology and telecommunication (Dowling & Welch, 2004). Darling et al. (1999; p12) identified particular changes of specific relevance to the environment in which HRD professionals work. Those highlighted include: increased concern with labour market issues including long-term unemployment, skills shortages and equal opportunities, organisational restructuring including decentralisation and de-layering and the consequential increase in the power-base of senior operational managers, developments in information technology and investment in learning media and resources. The consequences of these changes are the need for more flexible organisations and new sources of competitive advantage. A more apparent consequence, that is increasingly accepted (Blunkett, 2000; Gratton, 2000; Iles, 1996), is that knowledge, skills and competencies are the key drivers of innovation and change and source of competitive advantage. Indeed, Boxall and Purcell (2003) state that these changes place a premium on knowledge work and workers. This suggests that HRD becomes the lynchpin around which organisations succeed and maintain competitive advantage (Keep, 2005). HRD can enable organisations to cope with change, be more flexible, continuously learn, deal with skills shortages and changing technology and most importantly develop ‘knowledge workers’-the source of competitive advantage.

However, HRD professionals need to adjust the roles they play in response to these

contextual factors. It is not simply the case that traditional approaches to HRD will fix it. So while, some may argue that the status and power of HRD professionals is enhanced (Carter et al. 2002) due the increasing need for ‘knowledge workers’, ‘learning organisations’ and organisational learning, this is really only likely where HRD professionals adopt new roles and competences to meet and help meet the organisations ever changing requirements. Therefore, the questions arise as to how do these contextual changes impact the roles of HRD professionals?, what roles do they need to perform to respond to these changes? and what are the most important elements of these roles?

This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review and synthesis of literature to date

pertinent to the evolution and changing nature of the HRD professional’s work environment and consequently role. It aims to discuss the various models, role descriptions and role components of HRD professional’s roles and extrapolate the most important role components for HRD professionals to operate most successfully and add value to organisations in today’s global and ever changing business environment. First, this paper will discuss changing context of HRD practice. It will discuss the influence of this changing context on HRD professionals’ role. Second, this paper will discuss the changes in HRD professionals roles, as a response to the changing context. Third, this paper will discuss the key roles of today’s HRD professionals, namely progressing towards strategic business partnering. Finally, this paper will illuminate the key competency requirements required of today’s HRD professionals in all his/her roles especially strategic business partnering, most notably social networking competency.

3

The Changing Context of HRD Practice

Globalisation is one of the most frequently cited forces of change and one which is driven by other forces of change i.e increasing number of global, multinational and transnational organisations, information technology, mergers, acquisitions and strategic alliances. Short and Callahan (2005) argue that as organisations look to go global or remain global, they are likely to look to HRD professionals for advice and support. However, the influence of globalisation and other associated drivers of change, demand radical transformation of the way HRD thinks about the nature, role and tools of developing people (Iles, 1996). Hart (1999) argues that organisations in the global era need new socio-technical systems, new strategic models and leaders who can lead the transformation to sustainability. Consequently, global HRD professionals face a number of additional challenges (Gilley, Quatro and Lynham, 2003), which national HRD professionals face to a lesser degree or not at all. These include; working with cultural diversity and conflicts, different styles of leadership and decision-making, geographically dispersed physical and human entities, global coordination and control requirements and maintaining communication richness over distance (Marquardt et al., 2004). Short and Callahan (2005) summarise the additional elements to the global HRD professional’s role over their domestic counterparts. These include understanding other cultures and increasing employees’ cultural competence, preparing employees for periods of expatriation, developing managers who can think, lead and act from a global perspective, with global skills and a global mindset (Kim, 1999), increasing employee competence in strategic communication knowledge (conflict avoidance, showing respect, correct language use), tactical communication skills (giving instructions, networking, writing, persuading, listening) and behavioural traits/cognitive abilities such as empathy, cognition and complexity (Sriussadaporn-Charoenngam & Jablin, 1999), employing cross-functional teams and encouraging cross learning (Branscombe, Florida, Hart, Keller, & Boville, 1999). As Barnett (1990;p7) highlights, the “global firm is not constrained by national boundaries as it searches for ideas, talent, capital and other resources required for its success”. Therefore, while routine personal workers will find their wages depressed, knowledge workers will gain finding a larger and larger market for their services (Ohmae, 1985). Thus, HRD professionals need to focus more strongly on maintaining and developing the knowledge worker and managing knowledge. Ohmae (1985) also argues that the importance of education, training, skill development and high technology will continue to grow. At the more strategic level, the global HRD professional is likely to be called upon to design more responsive organisational structures (Monge & Fulk, 1999) and push decision-making authority to lower levels (Branscomb et al., 1999).

A key driver of globalisation is the multinational corporation; responsible for

disseminating ‘best practice’ managerial knowledge and techniques internationally and worldwide (Martin & Beaumont, 1998). Those of the convergence strategy on multinational corporations (MNC)’s argue that markets, technology and managerial forces compel MNC’s to adopt common strategies and practices, thus fostering economic, organisational and employment homogenisation across borders (Quintanilla & Ferner, 2003). The alternative strategy is that of continuing diversity and divergence. The institutional approach suggests that the massive institutional complexity that MNC’s face as a result of operating in numerous host countries acts as a counterweight to pressures for convergence (Hollingsworth & Boyer, 1997; Quintanilla & Ferner, 2003). Similarly, Hall and Soskice (2001) argue that as forces of globalisation promote the standardisation of elements such as management systems, elements such as local cultures, institutional arrangements and labour practices manifest the resilience of capitalist variety. An

4

alternative to the either/or strategies of standardisation or maintaining diversity is that taken by transnational organisations (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1995). These firms combine strong local responsiveness with the ability to exchange and coordinate internationally or globally and thus perform a balancing act (de Wit & Meyer, 2004).

The responses to globalisation for HRD professional’s operating in MNC’s is influenced

by whether the firm in which they operate, tends towards global or international convergence, divergence or towards operating as a ‘transnational’ firm. The global-local issue is very prominent in the international HRM literature (Edwards & Kuruvilla, 2005). With regard to HR, one side of the debate is that MNC’s can reap benefits from the consistency that global, or at least international, HR policies provide, noting that these must be balanced against the advantages of sensitivity to the local context. For those firms who tend towards convergence, there is a requirement for a strong centre for global strategy (de Wit & Meyer, 2004). In relation to the HRD function, this strategy has specific implications for each subsidiary of the MNC. Each must reflect the HRD strategies, policies, practices and approaches taken towards developing people, of the national business system in which it originated. Krempl and Pace (2001;p.16) argue that failing to build global HRD practice models places the MNC at risk of “failing to reach mission-critical goals of managing knowledge in multiple locations, supporting diverse cultures and enhancing performance across geographic and national boundaries”. Thus HRD professionals are in a situation where they need to adopt global or international mindsets and influence national firm strategy to correspond with HRD practice in the home-country, ensure HRD interventions encourage a common corporate culture and enable the dissemination of ‘best practice’ throughout the MNC. Swanson and Holton (2001) highlight how information sharing on national HRD practices in MNC’s is essential in building practical global practice models. They also suggest that the literature is beginning to report explicit models for HRD in response to globalisation trends.

The alternative argument to convergence of HR practices is for MNC’s to segment their

processes so that distinct parts are located in different countries. It is argued that there is little incentive to develop standardised policies for groups of workers who differ in terms of their skill levels, the nature of the technologies that they operate, the level of discretion that they are subject to and so on (Edwards, P.G.). Further, Purcell (1999) argues that if organisational strategy is about developing rare and imperfectly imitable competence, then questions of diffusion of HRD are largely irrelevant. De Wit and Meyer (2004) suggest that companies that tend towards diversity can regard each country’s unique circumstances as an opportunity to be exploited. Each one poses different challenges, requiring different competences. Different national ‘climates’ create opportunities for innovation. National managers need to be responsive to specific local conditions so as to ensure international success. In this context, HRD professionals need to adopt changing national mindsets to devise specific HRD policies and approaches for each country. They also need to be cognisant of any implications for the broader international MNC. It can be argued that HRD in diversity orientated MNC’s needs to consider how processes, systems, knowledge and skills of each country can be exploited for the benefit of the larger MNC.

The key strategic components, which have implications for HRD strategy and practice,

and consequently the role of the HRD professional, are the interunit linkages and internal operations (Schuler, Dowling & De Cieri, 1993). Interunit linkages in terms of strategic HRM is concerned with differentiating and integrating the units of the MNC. The key objective for

5

strategic human resource management at an international and global level is to balance the need for autonomy (thereby facilitating variety and diversity) with the needs of co-ordination and control (Schuler, Dowling, & de Cieri, 1993)(p. 328). This is facilitated through three particular HR policies and practices (Schuler, Dowling & De Cieri, 1993; p.1) determining and maintaining staffing levels that are an appropriate mix and flow of parent country nationals, third country nationals and host-country nationals, 2) developing HR policies and practices that link units but allow local adaptation and 3) using management development to create shared visions and mindsets and create a pool of global managers (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1992; Evans, 1992). With respect to HRD, the implications are obvious. Firstly, the HRD function needs to develop policies that link units but allow local adaptation. For example, an overall human resource development philosophy will define the role of HRD in the corporation but does not prescribe how HRD is to be practiced in each unit. Secondly, management development is to the fore of strategic HRM in the global and international context and thus a key function of the HRD professional. Finally, the diversity of the workforce combined with their physical proximity has severe implications for the ability of individuals and the corporation to learn and share knowledge. To this end, the HRD professional needs to focus his/her attention on developing structures and processes as well as novel interventions that facilitate and encourage learning across such boundaries or barriers and so maintain the MNC’s competitive advantage.

Internal operations is concerned with each unit within the MNC working within the

confines of its environment and relative to the competitive strategy of the MNC. The major objective of strategic HRM regarding internal operations is to be responsive and effective in the local environment, yet willing and ready to act in a co-ordinated fashion with the rest of the MNC units (Schuler, Dowling & De Cieri, 1993 p. 330). Schuler et al., (1993) argue that three HR policies and practices are key in executing this objective. The first is matching and adapting HR(D) practices with the competitive strategy of the unit and the local culture and legal system. The second is to create a modus operandi whereby these HR(D) practices can be modified to fit changing conditions. The third is creating a set of global HRM (D) policies at the MNC level that can encompass and legitimate the HR(D) practices at local level.

In a similar vein, MNC’s hoping to operate as transnational organisations need to perform

more of a balancing act; tap into each countries opportunities and then adapt and leverage the acquired competences and innovations to other countries (de Wit & Meyer, 2004). In this context, the HRD professional has to balance his/her roles of strategic business partner and service provider at both national and international level. S/he needs to devise strategies and develop interventions that utilise particular competences from one country and enable their exchange and coordination with other countries.

In terms of HRD practice, HRD professionals need to recognise and differentiate between

HRD approaches practiced in a global or international arena with those practiced in the traditional domestic arena. Marquardt, Berger and Loan (2004) identify the key factors that global HRD professionals need to be cognisant of. First, the demographic characteristics of trainees are more diverse in terms of nationality, culture, whether they are host or home country employees, learning styles and language. HRD has a role to play in enabling organisations, managers and employees to deal with cultural diversity. This role is not just about developing competences for dealing with cultural diversity and awareness and acceptance of diversity. It is also about facilitating the development of ‘corporate cultures’ that are globally acceptable. This

6

increased diversity also results in greater administration issues for global HRD professionals, including, for example, translating interventions across languages, sensitising interventions to national cultures and learning and adhering to different national and government practices. The global HRD professional is also likely to experience political and economic environments of great diversity. For example, s/he may be in a situation where there are elaborate resources or few resources, operate in demographic environments with booming economies or in environments that are military controlled and experiencing negative growth. Finally, the roles and expectations of HRD professionals and their national partners are significantly different across countries and cultures. Whereas some ‘trainers’ command respect in countries where education is highly valued, others may not value such a role. Some HRD partners may value lectures more than discussion, may insist women are not permitted in the sessions or may consider religion more important than education.

The increasing diversity and number of contexts and cultures which HRD professionals

have to work in necessitates that they either become experts of all contexts and cultures or work with experts of each context and culture. However, it is commonly argued that decisions on many HR issues are best handled by experts in the local context and culture who are more favourably placed than their counterparts in HQ to make sure HR decisions are adapted to respond to specific peculiarities (Dowling & Schuler, 1990).

It is generally recognised that with the spread and diversity of international business and

as firms from developing nations and transitional economies become more involved with global activities, the levels of competition will increase (Dowling & Welch, 2004, p.19). While globalisation creates opportunities for larger markets it also exposes organisations to competitive threats from across the globe (Sadler-Smith, 2006). For example, Levitt (1983) argues that technological change and the ‘proletarianisation’ of communications, transport and travel have caused consumer tastes across the world to converge. This requires companies to operate as if the entire world was a single entity and thus it has to compete with numerous other organisations selling the same things in the same way everywhere. However, Keep (2005) argues that different organisations try to compete in different ways, in often fundamentally different markets.

How organisations deal with these increasing levels of competition is what is

fundamentally important here. The research suggests that firms in price sensitive, mass service markets will see labour as a cost and have limited skill requirements. In contrast, firms that compete in high-level business services, where differentiation of product or service is very important, will invest heavily in skills development (Boxall, 2003). Purcell (1999), therefore highlights that rather than the universal adoption of best practice approaches to HRD, as would be expected in MNC’s tending towards convergence, the issue is one of ‘fit’ between competitive strategy and personnel issues such as HRD.

As competition becomes more intense and global, strategic human resource management

issues will become more significant (Kobrin, 1992; Sundaram & Black, 1992). A specific HR response coming to the fore as a way of dealing with increasing levels of competition is that of utilising human resources as the source of competitive advantage. Purcell (1999, p.35) states that organisations will achieve competitive advantage through possessing a ‘unique set of competencies and distinctive organisational routines’. Porter (1998) adds that competitive advantage will be achieved by preparing for continuous change through upgrading and expanding

7

the skills of employees and improving the firms knowledge base (Porter, 1998). Sadler-Smith (2006) states that the learning of an organisation’s employees is a rare, valuable and costly-to-imitate form of capital and a core competence for success. An organisation, which possesses learning and development competence, can face outwards to the threats and challenges posed by the external environment. It can also face inwards and engage in information and knowledge sharing and collective learning and thus enable the creation of new knowledge and better products and services (Sugarman, 2001).

Another response to global competition and the increasing power of MNC’s, is an increase

in the number of mergers and acquisitions (M&A’s) and strategic alliances (Dowling & Welch, 2004). Where such strategies are adopted, there are still implications for the HRD function. In the case of mergers and acquisitions these issues relate to linking units, developing a common corporate culture, mission and vision and putting structures in place to facilitate information and knowledge sharing and learning across the merged units. Iles (1996) discusses the role of HRD in alliances and partnerships. He notes that alliances and partnerships involve more than sharing money, technology and products; they also involve sharing people and HRD practices. Often collaboration is limited to specific activities, as in other areas the partners remain competitors. Whereas, he argues, in alliances such as joint ventures, more interaction is required perhaps including a blending of national and corporate cultures and styles. As alliances are set-up to deal with increasing global competition, Iles (1996) proposes that there needs to be a set of International HRD (IHRD) guidelines so that HRD can maximise the benefits of strategic alliances and reduce their disadvantages (Lei & Slocum, 1992). Also, as alliances are entered into to promote learning, HRD professionals need to remove any barriers to organisational learning in such environments. Pucik (1988) highlights that barriers may include structural factors, HR planning factors, recruitment and selection, training and development and appraisal and reward factors. There is a greater need, in alliances, to focus on managing information, knowledge and learning across geographically dispersed units, while protecting the core knowledge and sharing that which will prove advantageous. The nature of ‘careers’ for employees may also be wider and longer-term, focusing on international transitions, cross-cultural transitions and lateral and vertical moves (Iles, 1996), thus pointing to the need for HRD professionals to adopt a new perspective on ‘careers’.

Rapid advances in technology and telecommunications are also a key force of change.

This means that the shelf-life of equipment and machinery and consequently the skills needed to operate that equipment will become obsolete at an ever-increasing rate (Johnston, 2001). Thus, the trend for employee engagement in continuous learning and skill updating, at least with regard to technology, is once again paramount. Swanson and Holton (2001) also highlight that for the most part, HRD itself has functioned at a low-tech level throughout its history. They argue that the challenge for HRD in the twenty-first century is to engage in high-tech means of developing and unleashing human expertise. Johnston (2001) states that IT-mediated learning will be an essential feature of lifelong learning and of the learning organisation. Benson, Johnson and Kuchinke (2002) identify three areas in which HRD will be affected as the workplace becomes more digitalised. First, there will be broader scope for needs analysis and programme design as technology begins to play a larger role in the workplace and in terms of available and preferred methods of learning and training delivery. Second, HRD professionals will increasingly utilise e-learning technologies and web-based learning methods of delivery, thus requiring them to develop facilitation skills for managing web-based discussions and presentations. Third, HRD

8

professionals will need to provide more support for informal or self-directed learning. Fourth, the notion of HRD in the virtual organisation also needs to be considered. Swanson and Holton (2001) suggest that this presents HRD with a new challenge of retaining its core value of connecting with human beings in a meaningful way but in a ‘low touch’ virtual environment.

There are also many changes occurring in the demographic make-up of the workforce,

other than diversity as discussed previously. The global population is showing a relative decline in the rate of increase, the consequences of which are an ageing workforce and key skills gaps. Knowledge workers and highly-educated workers in many parts of the developed world are entering the workforce with higher aspirations of satisfaction and remuneration. In less developed countries, labour is low-skilled and cheap, which attracts cost conscious organisations. There are more women in the workforce and greater tendencies towards flexible employment practices. This positions training and knowledge management to the fore. It is necessary to develop strategies to continuously update the knowledge and learning of knowledge workers and also focus on retaining them. There is an increasing need to focus on and eliminate skills gaps and encourage knowledge sharing to retain and develop existing knowledge amongst knowledge workers, even after they leave. This form of knowledge management is also necessary between the flexi-time workers so that all knowledge is utilised and available to them despite their shorter or more variable working hours.

Each of the external forces for change requires the HRD function to make a number of

decisions. The HRD professional can only make these decisions by considering, in tandem, the particular environment, the particular type of business, who the competitors are, the political, economic, legal, socio-cultural environment of the home and host organisational units, the structure of the international operation, headquarter’s international orientation, competitive strategy and the extent to which those in management have experience in managing in an international or global context (Schuler, Dowling & Cieri, 1993). Garavan et al. (1995) using Duncan’s (1972) environmental complexity framework, submit that the precise nature of the influence of the external environment on the HRD function will depend on the level of environmental uncertainty. Firms operating in environments of low uncertainty are less likely to experience skill obsolescence. However, firms in high uncertainty environments are likely to use training and development to cope with the external environment and uncertainty.

Hitt, Keats & DeMarie (1998) suggest that organisations can take a number of actions to

address the uncertainty and turbulence in the external environment. These actions include developing employee skills, effectively using new technology, developing new organisational structures and building cultures that foster learning and innovation. Where organisations are restructured, they will be more fluid, giving more flexibility both vertically and horizontally and eliminating the tight demarcations around job boundaries. Between tasks or projects, periods of unemployment or underemployment will be filled by retraining and multi-skilling. In addition to this ‘recurrent’ education, where new skills are acquired at intervals as old ones become redundant, workers will also have to develop skills of continuous rather than recurrent learning, much of it on-the-job (Johnston, 2001). These pressures for change result in a greater need to downsize, increased performance expectations, a drive for greater employee involvement in quality enhancement processes and a greater importance placed on knowledge work and workers (Boxall & Purcell, 2003; Sadler-Smith, 2006).

9

Evident from the preceding discussion is the fact that there are many factors in the

environment, which influence the role of and decisions taken by the HRD professional. While the key factors are highlighted and attempts made to discuss the implications for HRD, the discussion is by no means exhaustive. It is sufficient, for the purposes of this paper, to recognise the key influences these contextual factors have on the role of HRD professional. The changing context of the work environment of HRD professionals emphasises the importance of human resources and competency development. Human resources have a very important role to play in organisations of the future and they are increasingly being recognised as a source of competitive advantage. The over-riding implication is that these contextual changes may (Keep, 2005) have increased the power of the HRD function. However, as mentioned at the opening of this discussion, this ‘power’ is only likely to be obtained where the HRD professional adopts a role suited to this changing context. The HRD professional must show that they can obtain and sustain competitive advantage for the organisation in a time of continuous change.

The Changing Role of the HRD Professional

Traditionally HRD as a functional activity was highly centralised and operated using

activity-based HRD strategies (Gilley & Maycunich Gilley, 2003; Robinson & Robinson, 1989). The primary responsibility of HRD professionals in this context was identifying, selecting and evaluating training programmes from a myriad of outside training houses or vendors and addressing individual employee performance issues through customising or designing training interventions. Thus the training intervention was the focus of HRD (Gilley, Quatro, Lynham, 2003). HRD professionals operating in an activity-based HRD function are considered transactional professionals (Gilley, Maycunich & Quatro, 2002). Internal customers purchase their services (training programs) to solve immediate or short-term problems at the individual or team level. As activity-based and transactional professionals, HRD professionals could also be described as having a maintenance orientation and utilising traditional approaches to training, development and education (Pettigrew et al., 1982; Bennett & Leduchowicz, 1983). The HRD professional who provides many training activities, develops partnerships with departmental and divisional managers. However, these are often short-term engagements that don’t require or necessitate serious dialogue or follow-up. Equally, training activities and interactions of this nature are not likely to have strategic links (Gilley, Quatro & Lynham, 2003).

While this approach to HRD may still prove effective for those organisations that choose a

low labour cost strategy, its effectiveness in an ever-changing environment is likely to be less effective. For example, where the HRD professional waits to be asked by internal customers to resolve an urgent problem, it will not be long before another one arrives thus emphasising the organisations reactive rather than proactive strategy. Where the HRD professional utilises his/her tried and tested programmes and delivery methods in a copy-exact manner throughout the MNC, it may be rejected or at least ineffective where it has not accounted for cultural variations. Also, where the HRD professional continues to network on a short-term basis with line managers and employees only and not develop long-term collaborative relationships with strategic business partners, they are likely to fail in the necessary task of managing and creating knowledge and developing strategies to develop a learning organisation- the source of competitive advantage.

10

Thus in recent years, the HRD focus has changed to deal with the environmental forces. The preceding commentary on environmental influences on organisations and the consequent implications for HRD illuminated the greater emphasis and value placed on human resources as a source of competitive advantage. Also highlighted is the recognition that knowledge sharing, continuous learning and developing unique competencies are important activities through which to obtain competitive advantage through people and through which to prevent the closure of an organisational unit. Additionally, management development was identified as a means through, which to enable global organisations maintain a sense of unity. The implications for HR/HRD highlighted how HRD activities are now of strategic importance. Thus, HRD professionals need to engage in more strategic roles.

Moves towards this higher level of strategic involvement are evident. HRD is being

decentralised (Gibb, 2003; Megginson, Joy-Matthews, & Banfield, 1993; Walton, 1999) and thus the activity-based functions are devolved to the line (de Jong, Leenders, & Thijssen, 1999; Gibb, 2003; Heraty & Morley, 1995; Maxwell & Watson, 2004; Upton, Egan, & Lynham, 2003). Line managers are increasingly given key responsibilities for the delivery of HRD (Morley & Heraty, 1997). These stakeholders are frequently involved in decisions concerning HRD interventions, resource allocation and evaluation and are key enablers of transfer of learning (Ellinger, 2004; Rouillier & Goldstein, 1993). HRD professionals need the active support of line managers as although managers and supervisors can play a crucial role in making training pay off in performance improvement, their commitment and ability to do so is often flawed (Holton & Baldwin, 2003), which can negatively influence perceptions of HRD (Gubbins, Garavan, Hogan & Woodlock, 2006). Thus the relationship between the HRD professional and the line manager is elevated to a higher status. Now the line manager relies on the HRD professional for advice, information and support in relation to his/her HRD role and the HRD professional requires the line managers cooperation and involvement in identifying training needs, designing training and development interventions that meet these needs, facilitating transfer of learning and evaluating transfer of learning to the job.

In parallel with decentralisation and the increasing role of line managers for HRD, the

HRD function focuses more on results-based HRD strategies aimed at improving individual, team and more importantly organisational performance and effectiveness (Torraco & Swanson, 1995; Wognum & Mulder, 1999). Results-driven programmes focus on implementing and managing change to improve organisational effectiveness. Thus the orientation is more for change and interventionist approaches to training, development and education (Pettigrew et al., 1982, Bennett and Leduchowicz, 1983). HRD professionals operating in results-based, change oriented HRD functions are transformational professionals (Gilley & Maycunich, 2002); the service provided is aimed at helping the organisation to achieve its strategic goals through change and development interventions. This leads to HRD professionals operating in a strategic partnership role (Kaufman, 1986; Robinson & Robinson, 1989) and it results in more commitment and a positive attitude towards training and development (Wognum, 2001).

As HRD becomes more important at the strategic level, the HRD professional who

operates in a transformative capacity must develop collaborative relationships with senior management to identify change champions and facilitate change. Co-operation between all those involved at strategic level- top, middle and lower executive management, as well as national, international and global HRD representatives, is necessary in order to arrive at strategically

11

aligned HRD interventions (Wognum, 2001). Results-driven HRD professionals must also build strategic business partnerships throughout the organisation as a means to facilitate change. Gilley, Quatro and Lynham (2003) identify that these HRD professionals are responsible for serving as agents of change and responsible for organisational development partnerships, which improve the organization’s performance capacity and effectiveness.

These transitions from activity-based to results-based models of HRD operation,

centralised to decentralised functions, transactional to transformational HRD professional roles, maintenance to change orientations, traditional to interventionist approaches and national to global mindsets require HRD professionals to perform new roles and be more focused on meeting the needs of and facilitating key groups in and connected to the organisation. Evident from the preceding discussion is that HRD practitioners perform a multiplicity of roles in organisations and these roles are continuously evolving. Studies dating back to the 1970’s have aimed to identify and classify these roles (McArdle & Edwards, 2004; McLagan, 1996; Nijhof, 2004; Pettigrew, Jones, & Reason, 1982; Spoor & Bennett, 1984; Tjepkema et al., 2000). Generally, HRD roles are progressing towards those of change agent, internal consultant and strategic business partner (CIPD, 2005, Ulrich, 2005; Kenton & Yarnall, 2005; McLagan, 1996; Nijhof, 2004; Tjepkema et al., 2000). Table 1. summarises the HRD professionals roles, the perspective which these roles most adhere to and the role descriptions.

Key role of today’s HRD professional

The preceding discussion concerning the progression of HRD professionals roles towards

roles valuable for organisations operating in today’s global, competitive, increasingly diverse, geographically dispersed and technologically and information driven age, points to the need for HRD professionals to become strategic business partners.

Ulrich’s (2001) strategic business partner model recognises the need for HRD

professionals to play a key role in organisational strategy. This strategic business partnering model involves the restructuring of HR and HRD functions into three specialist sub-functions. The first is shared services that handle all the routine transactional services across the business such as vendor supplied training programmes. The second are centres of excellence, which consist of small teams of experts with specialist knowledge of leading-edge HR solutions. The role of centres of excellence is to deliver competitive business advantages through HR innovations such as learning and talent management. The third function consists of strategic partners who are HR professionals working closely with business leaders influencing strategy and steering its implementation. The task of strategic partners is to ensure the business makes best use of its people and its people opportunities. It aims to highlight HR issues that other executives may not see and also inform HR strategy so that it meets the organisational needs. Some organisations may have a fourth function- a consultancy role that facilitates and supports change initiatives (CIPD, 2005). The HR strategic business partnering model makes HR accountable to the business and expects HR to add real value. Ulrich (1997, 2001, 2005) defined a number of HR roles within this model. The strategic partner is responsible for aligning HR and business strategy. The administrative/functional expert reengineers organisational processes. The employee champion/employee advocate/human capital developer listens and responds to employees. The change agent/strategic partner manages transformation and change. Ulrich (2001) also argued

12

that ‘HR professionals must be more than partners, they must be players….in the game not at the game’. He also identified the ‘player’ roles of coach, leader, conscience, facilitator, builder and architect.

The third and fourth functions identified in this model of strategic partner and consultant

are strategic in nature and as is evident from the preceding discussions, are a crucial role of HRD professionals to engage in if they are to contribute to organisation success in todays environment. However, Wognum’s (2001) research indicates that HR/HRD professionals are not moving towards the roles of strategic business partner. Wognum (2001) found that “the HRD alignment process was not really strategic and hardly interactive”. The results indicated that while stakeholders attached great interest to contributing to the alignment processes, their interests were insufficiently converted into real contributing activities. It can be argued that such a situation impedes the reaching of ‘strategic partnership’. Holbeche (2008) highlights how fifty-seven percent of HR functions have introduced some form of the Ulrich model but experienced challenges to its full implementation. These challenges included costs of outsourcing the transactional activities, unprepared line managers and a lack of understanding of what it meant and how to be strategic. Ulrich (Crabb, 2008) also argued that his model had been mis-interpreted to mean dis-engage from transactional activities completely and adopt transformational roles only. This, is argues is incorrect and the HR function needs to perform both levels of activity. Thus HRD professionals need to progress towards strategic business partner roles, while still engaging in transactional activities. Figure 1. displays the changing nature of HRD professionals roles from transactional facilitator to transformational strategic business partner.

The role of HRD professionals today: the importance of social networking competency

In the face of theoretical recognition of the need for HRD professionals to adopt strategic partnering roles and the evidence that this is not the case, the question arises as to what competencies HRD professionals need so as to further their progression towards the role of strategic business partner. In order to surmount the challenges to this progression, Holbeche (2008) emphasised that HR professionals needed new skills, most notably consultancy, relationship management and business acumen. Evident from the preceding discussion and review of the contextual environmental influences on HRD professionals roles and the differences between the traditional roles played by the HRD professional in comparison to the current requirement to engage in strategic partnering, is the increasing need for HRD professionals to develop multiple, more enduring and reciprocal relationships with organisational stakeholders. Thus, with increased sophistication in HRD professional roles comes a strong ‘relationship building’ and networking component. Further examination of a few of these roles highlights the important of this component. The transactional HRD professional who operates as a learning agent disseminates information and interacts with learner's experiences (Gilley, Eggland, Gilley, 2002; 163). The transformational HRD professional who performs the role of performance engineer positions the HRD professional in a situation where s/he needs to interact with clients, subordinates, peers and other professionals potentially affected by the performance breakdown (Stolovitch, Keeps and Rodrigue, 1999:158). It is suggested that HRD leaders who attend purposes but neglect partnering often fail in their work (Bellmen, 1998). The HRD professional’s role of internal consultant, which becomes more significant with the decentralisation and devolution of responsibilities to managers (Walton, 1999) and subsequently becomes less tied to an organisation structure, hinges on the personal and professional relationships established by the HRD professional (Prete and Boschetti, 1990). The internal

13

consultant role mandates the HRD professional to interact with line managers and other professionals and adapt internal consultancy models of practice. Furthermore, the use of external consultants has also increased due to a number of factors including the underdeveloped consulting skills of managers and supervisors (Lippitt & Lippitt, 1986; Gilley, Eggland & Gilley, 2002). The critical skill and knowledge requirements of these HRD consultants include client relationship building skills (Gilley, Eggland & Gilley, 2002; McCartney & Holbeche, 2003). Global HRD professionals need to increase the quantity and quality of linkages and improve communication with international suppliers, subsidiaries, alliance partners and customers (Parker, 1996). Also, in an effort to ensure that any practices or information is transferred and understood or adapted to suit national and cultural differences the global HRD professional needs to develop strong relationships with those, best placed (Edwards, P.G.), in the local context to respond to and deal with the national peculiarities. Strategic business partners need to build collaborative relationships with and work closely with business leaders, collaborate with other functions, communicate with employees (CIPD, 2005), and maintain their expertise through information and knowledge sharing with peers, professional associations and other organisations. They must build relationships of trust with the business leader and the team so as to perform their coaching role (Ulrich & Beatty, 2001). They must also develop relationships with top management team members in the organisation and across any subsidiaries to develop strategies to effectively utilise the competences of individual organisational units.

Thus, with the evolution of the HRD professional’s role, they now have multiple

‘customers’. Wang’s (2003) two-way customer service model (Wang, 2003) is one such model, which is concerned with the relationship element of HRD professionals’ roles. It recognises the increasing need for HRD professionals to build reciprocal rather than one-way relationships. This model proposes that the HRD profession is a bi-directional customer service profession. On the one hand the HRD professional is the service provider, providing, for example, training solutions, advice and guidance on change interventions to customers with a need or problem to address. However, under the auspices of traditional customer service models, this would require the HRD professional to give customers what they want and not necessarily what they need. For example, the HRD professional may after some analysis of the situation recognise that the organisations problems reside with management and not with employees. The client organisation may request training or a change intervention at employee level believing that to be the source of the problem. The HRD professional has to decide whether to provide what the client wants- employee training- or what the client needs – management intervention. Operating under a one-way customer service model (Holton, 1998, 2003), the HRD professional will provide what the client wants- employee training. However, HRD professionals who wish to maintain their professional integrity will operate under the two-way customer service model. In this capacity the client needs to meet the HRD professionals needs for information, support and collaboration so that the ultimate customer – the client- receives what is needed. Wang’s (2003) discussion highlights the HRD professionals’ role as customer service provider and receiver.

Reviewing these models of HRD professionals roles in tandem, - the strategic business

partner model and the two-way customer service model- the HRD professional as strategic business partner provides HRD services, such as HRD transactional services, HRD information, HRD strategic advice and support in its integration with organisational strategy, to his/her customers- the other executive board members. The HRD professional is also a customer to these executive board members. The executives need to provide the HRD professional with services

14

such as strategic information on the organisation, function specific information, macro and micro information, collaboration in integrating HRD with organisation strategy and resources to implement HRD strategy. If a one-way customer service model were to operate, the HRD professional may give the executives what they want- maintenance training- rather than what they need – strategic development of employees, teams and organisation to keep pace with organisational strategies and change. Integrating these two models recognises the HRD professionals’ role as a true ‘equal partner’ in organisational strategy formulations and operation, ‘playing’ with and ‘partner’ to other organisational stakeholders. The consideration of the combined models also emphasises the need for strong long-lasting reciprocal relationships between the HRD professional and his/her clients and acknowledges that the ‘clients’ of HRD professionals are numerous and from many different units, hierarchical levels, subsidiaries and organisations. This illuminates the extent to which HRD professionals are socially dependent and thus require social networking competency.

Conclusion

The increased importance attached to the social networking competency requirement for

HRD professionals is evident from examining the changing context of HRD practice, the evolution of the HRD professional’s roles and the need for HRD professionals to progress towards strategic business partnering and two-way customer service models of HRD practice. Key competency requirements are those focused on building relationships, social networking, communication and interpersonal skills, as well as knowledge and understanding of social capital. HRD professionals work has an increasingly dynamic quality. They manage different projects and activities that require diverse information and expertise. They have to interact with many subsidiaries, departments, functions and groupings, particularly where HRD is recognized as a shared responsibility (Gilley & Coffern, 1994; Gilley & Maycunich Gilley, 2003; Tjepkema, ter Horst, & Mulder, 2002). They must foster multiple sets of relationships. Therefore, to be effective, HRD practitioners need to understand and know how to develop useful networks. They have to continuously monitor their networks and may need to create new networks when faced with a new problem or opportunity.

Second and in addition to the increasing reliance on social relationships to do their work,

there is also increasing evidence that the work of the HRD professional is knowledge intensive work. Key functions include facilitating knowledge sharing and development, supporting and enhancing learning and operating as a source of expertise for others involved in the HRD function (Gourlay, 2001; Tjepkema et al., 2000). HRD practitioners are frequently required to solve novel and challenging problems, for example when operating in a strategic partnership role (Gilley & Maycunich Gilley, 2003), and when they are responsible for facilitating learning (Tjepkema et al., 2002). They are therefore reliant on contacts that are willing to cooperate and engage in knowledge sharing and development with them as customer receivers of such knowledge as business acumen.

HRD practitioners therefore operate as a customer service provider and receiver and in a

knowledge intensive and dynamic environment, which has a strong relationship-building and social interaction component. They are essentially socially dependent and need to be effective networkers in order to be valuable and successful. Without the support and collaboration of relevant stakeholders they are less likely to gain legitimacy (Gold et al., 2003) and have the

15

power to implement initiatives that require resources and buy-in to be effective, feasible and a source of competitive advantage.

Implicatios for research & practice

It is evident from the preceding discussion that successful strategic business partner HRD

professionals are those that effectively engage in building relationships and networking. This has a number of implications for HRD professionals. To work effectively in this scenario it is likely that the HRD professional’s stock of social capital will be important in determining his/her ability to access requisite benefits, such as tacit and explicit knowledge, information, resources and support. Indeed, Tjepkema et al. (2000) found that for HRD professionals, communication with managers and employees was a key strategy for changing their views on the need for learning and gaining their support and involvement in realising the HRD professional’s role. Social capital is also valuable in enabling the HRD professional to assert and communicate how HRD can facilitate the organisation in managing the external environment and developing a competitive strategy. Also, Jones and Fear (1994) and Knapp (1995) found some support that networking was valued in itself, by HR professionals, as a developmental activity. HRD professionals thus need to be concerned with gaining an understanding of social capital accumulation strategies and developing their social networking competency. This knowledge and competency is firstly vital for developing their personal bank of social capital. It needs to account for the need for multiple relationships and thus a large network. It needs to identify those relationships which need to be strong, reciprocal and long-lasting. It needs to focus on relationships which provide valuable and requisite resources such as information, support, power etc., which aid their efforts at progressing towards strategic business partnering. Secondly, the HRD professional needs knowledge and competency on social networking in order to do their work: developing systems and strategies for organisational knowledge management, developing a learning organisation and facilitating organisational and collective learning, facilitating change, developing, managing employee and organisational social capital and effectively targeting HRD interventions (see Storberg & Gubbins (2007), for further discussion on the importance of social networks to do HRD).

It is therefore apparent that there is value in studying how social capital concepts (such as

networking and relationship building) enable HRD professionals to access key stakeholders and the necessary resources, information and support to perform their role effectively and make a valuable contribution to the organisation. Despite widespread research utilizing a network or social capital perspective in other disciplines and a few articles concerned with social capital and social networking concepts in the HRD field (Cross & Parker, 2004; Lengnick-Hall & Lengnick-Hall, 2003; Storberg, 2002; Storberg & Gubbins, 2007), there are few that focus specifically on the importance or role of social networking competency for HRD professionals roles (Gubbins & Garavan, 2005 being an exception). To this end, there is a need for greater theoretical discussion and empirical investigation on the importance of, role of, influence of social networking competence and practice on HRD professionals’ efforts to progress towards strategic business partners operating with a two-way customer service model.

16

Table 1: HRD Roles, Perspectives and Descriptions2 PERSPECTIVE HRD ROLE ROLE DESCRIPTION Activity-Based Transactional Maintenance Traditional

Learning Agent Instructor Trainer Learning Facilitator Training Officer Passive provider Caretaker

“Individual responsible for presenting information to employees in a meaningful, manageable way” (Brookfield, 1994) “adopts a ‘sit back and wait for clients to come forward’ approach and then provides training aimed at maintenance and improvement but not major change” (Pettigrew, Jones & Reason, 1982) “provides training to maintain smooth running of organisation. Adopts traditional educational practices. Responds to requests for training (i.e. passive and reactive) (Bennett & Leduchowicz, 1983)

Activity-Based Transactional Traditional Maintenance

Instructional Designer Provider

“Someone skilled in the design and development of performance improvement interventions……….. customises training programs to better fit the organisational culture” (Gilley, Eggland & Gilley, 2002) “concerned with the maintenance and improvement of performance but without major change” (Pettigrew, Jones & Reason, 1982)

Results-Based Transformational Maintenance Change Traditional Interventionist Partnership

Performance Engineer Role in transition Educator Evangelist Relationship Builder

“primary responsibility is to identify & analyse stimuli within the system that may affect performance, responses that are emitted & the consequence of those responses in order to uncover root causes of performance inadequacy…adopt a total systems approach to organisational performance” (Stolovitch & Keeps, 1999) “in between the role of provider and change agent, no longer content to provide courses but desires to have a more proactive & influential role” (Pettigrew, Jones & Reason, 1982) “concerned with training to maintain present systems and procedures. Adopts learner-centred (not educational) approaches. Facilitator of learning rather than subject expert” (Bennett & Leduchowicz, 1983). “sees need for training to change systems and procedures. Adopts traditional educational approaches. Anticipates the need for change” (Bennett & Leduchowicz, 1983).

Results-Based Transformational Professional Partnership

Organisational Architect

“concerned with the critical components of an organisation and their congruency or incongruency, which ultimately determine the efficiency and effectiveness of operations…..demonstrate knowledge of how multiple systems work in harmony to achieve targeted results” (Gilley & Gilley, 2003)

Results-Based Transformational Leadership

Political Navigator “negotiate organisational obstacles….address clients’ attitudes toward HRD, which establishes a level of credibility which becomes a source of power from which to make recommendations, provide suggestions and share ideas useful to the organisation” (Gilley & Gilley, 2003)

2 Developed from material by Gilley & Maycunich Gilley (2003); Marquardt, Berger & Loan (2004); Phillps & Shaw (1998); Laird, Naquin & Holton (2003); Sadler-Smith, (2006); Pettigrew et al. (1982); Bennett & Leduchowicz, (1983); Pettigrew, Jones & Reason (1982); Pinto & Walker (1978); Nadler (1969)

17

Results-Based Transformational Interventionist Change Leadership

Change Agent Change Champion Innovator

“promotion and facilitation of strategically focused learning and development processes, particularly at divisional & corporate levels” (Harrison, 2003) “sees need for training to change systems and procedures. Attempts to understand real needs and causes. Persuasive, problem solver and catalyst for change (Bennett & Leduchowicz, 1983). “main concern is organisational development and complex issues of cultural change” (Pettigrew, Jones & Reason, 1982)

Results-Based Transformational Interventionist Change Directive Professional

HRD Consultant Innovator

“search for problems and synthesize solutions to them…in service to organisation….focus on desired changes rather than individuals involved” (Walton, 1999) “business partnership to ensure L&D at any level achieves added value (Harrison, 2003) “sees need for training to change systems and procedures. Attempts to understand real needs and causes. Persuasive, problem solver and catalyst for change” (Bennett & Leduchowicz, 1983). “directive consultants lead the project, initiating and directing the activities involved” (Lippitt & Lippitt, 1986) “a person ins a position to have some influence over an individual, group or organisation, but who had no direct power to make changes or implement programmes (Block, 1981)

Results-Based Partnership Professional Leadership

Business Partner Strategist

“works alongside senior managers, providing the link between business and organisational strategies, providing support and challenge to the senior team and developing credible initiatives in a setting of ongoing cost reduction (Holbeche, 1999)

Dependent on perspective taken by function

Training Manager Learning and Development Manager/Director

“management of the L&D function across the organisation” (Harrison, 2003) “concerned with the smooth running of the training function” (Pettigrew, Jones & Reason, 1982). “T&D manager must perform typical managerial duties. This means planning, organising, directing and controlling the ongoing function” (Laird, Naquin, Holton, 2003)

Dependent on perspective taken by function

HRD Leader

“HRD leadership involves emphasising the importance of HRD for the organisation and its staff, creating a vision and strategic direction for the HRD function and working in collaboration with stakeholders to create a vision and strategic direction for the organisation and its employees. It also involves establishing a culture that facilitates this journey” (author)

18

Figure 1: Changing Roles of HRD Professional

Facilitator Instructional Designer

Performance Engineer Organisational Architect

Change Agent HRD Consultant Strategic Business Partner

Activity-Based Transactional Maintenance Traditional Methods One-Way Customer Service Model Short-Term Relationships

Maintenance Results-Based Transactional Transformational Change Traditional Interventionist

Results-Based Transformational Interventionist Change Two-Way Customer Service Model Long-Term Relationships

19

References

Bachler, C. J. (1997). Competencies all trainers need. Workforce, 76(6), 94-96. Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, J. K. (1988). Transfer of training: A review and directions for future

research. Personnel Psychology, 41, 63-105. Barnett, R. (1990). The idea of higher education. Buckingham: Open University Press. Barrett, I. C., Cervero, R. M., & Johnson-Bailey, J. (2004). The career development of black

human resource developers in the United States. Human Resource Development International, 7(1), 85-100.

Bartlett, C., & Ghoshal, S. (1992). What is a Global Manager? Harvard Business Review(Sept-Oct), 124-132.

Bellman, G. (1998). Partnership phase: Forming partnerships. In D.G.R. & J.C. Robinson (Eds.), Moving from training to performance: A practical guide (pp. 39-53). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Benson, A. D., Johnson, S. D., & Kuchinke, P. K. (2002). Information technology in the workplace: A framework for HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(4), 392-404.

Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2003). Strategy and Human Resource Management. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

Branscombe, L. M., Florida, R., Hart, D., Keller, J., & Boville, D. (1999). Investing in Innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Brinkerhoff, R. O., & Gill, S. J. (1994). The Learning Alliance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Broad, M. L., & Newstrom, J. W. (1992). Transfer of Training: Action packed strategies to

ensure payoff from Training Investments. Reading: MA: Addison-Wesley. Burke, R., J., & McKeen, C. A. (1994). Training and Development Activities and Career Success

of Managerial and Professional Women. Journal of Management Development, 13(5), 53-63.

Carnevale, A. (1990). Training in America. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Carter, A., Hirsh, W., & Aston, J. (2002). Resourcing the Training and Development Functions.

Brighton: IES. Chapman, D. D. (2004, March). Preferences of Training Performance Measurement: A

Comparitive Study of Training Professionals and Non-Training Managers. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development Conference, Austin, Texas.

CIPD. (2001). Training and Development 2001: Survey Report, London: CIPD. CIPD. (2005). HR business partnering. Retrieved Sept. 2006, from the World Wide Web:

http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/corpstrtgy/general/hrbusprtnr.htm. Crabb, S. (2008). Don’t drop transactional role, Ulrich warns HR. People Management Magazine, April; p.10. Cross, R., & Parker, A. (2004). The Hidden Power of Social Networks: Understanding how work

really gets done in organizations. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press. Darling, L.W. (1986). The mentoring mosaic: A new theory of mentoring. In W.A. Gray & M.M.

Gray (Eds)., Mentoring Aid to Excellence in Career Development, Business and the Professions, (Vol. 2, pp. 1-7). Vancouver, B.C. : International Association for Mentoring.

Davies, G., & Wilson, T. (2002). Implications for Reflective HRD Practitioners of the Influence of Life Experience on Managers' Career Decisions. In J. McGoldrick & J. Stewart & S. Watson (Eds.), Understanding Human Resource Development: A research based approach (pp. 293-314). London: Routledge.

20

Davis, S., & Botkin, J. (1994). The coming of knowledge-based business. Harvard Business Review, 72, 165-170.

de Jong, J. A., Leenders, A. J., & Thijssen, J. G. L. (1999). HRD tasks of first level managers. Journal of Workplace Learning, 11(5), 176-183.

de Wit, B., & Meyer, R. (Eds.). (2004). Strategy: Process, Content and Context: An International Perspective (3 ed.). London: Thomson.

Devins, D., & Gold, J. (2004). The value of HRD in small owner-managed organisations: the role of external coaching. In J. Stewart & G. Beaver (Eds.), HRD in Small Organisations (pp. 244-264). London: Routledge.

Dirani, K. (2004, March). Professional Training Programs as Tools for Effective Staff Development: A Case Study. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development Conference, Austin, Texas.

Dowling, P.J. & Welch, D.E. (2004). International Human Resource Management: Managing people in a multinational context (4 ed.). United Kingdom: Thomson.

Duncan, R. B. (1972). Characteristcis of organizational environments and perceived environmental uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 313-327.

Edwards, T., & Kuruvilla, S. (2005). International HRM: National Business Systems, Organisational Politics and the International Division of Labour in Global Value Chains. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(1), 1-21.

Ellinger, A. D. (2004, March). Contextual Factors and Detractors Shaping Informal Workplace Learning: The Case of 'Reinventing Itself Company'. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development Conference, Austin, Texas.

Evans, P. (1992). Management Development as Glue Technology. Human Resource Planning, 15(1), 85-106.

Finkelstein, S. (1992). Power in Top Management Teams: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 505-538.

Fricker, J. (1994). Training for change: an investment in people. In J. Prior (Ed.), Gower Handbook of Training and Development (pp. 21-31). Hampshire, England: Gower Publishing Ltd.

Garavan, T. N., Costine, P., & Heraty, N. (1997). Training and Development in Ireland: Context, Policy and Practice. Dublin, Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Gibb, S. (2003). Line manager involvement in learning and development: Small beer or big deal? Employee Relations, 25(3), 281-293.

Gilley, J. W., & Coffern, A. J. (1994). Internal Consulting for HRD Professionals: Tools, Techniques and Strategies for Improving Organizational Performance. New York: McGraw Hill.

Gilley, J. W., Eggland, S. A., & Gilley Maycunich, A. (2002). Principles of Human Resource Development (2 ed.). Cambridge, MA: Perseus.

Gilley, J. W., & Maycunich Gilley, A. (2003). Strategically Integrated HRD: Six transformational roles in creating results-driven programs (2 ed.). Cambridge: Perseus.

Gilley, J. W., Quatro, S., A., & Lynham, S. A. (2003). Strategic HRD and Its Transformation. In A. Maycunich Gilley & J. Callahan, L. & L. Bierema, L. (Eds.), Critical Issues in HRD: A New Agenda for the Twenty-First Century (pp. 23-48). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books Group.

Gold, J., Rodgers, H., & Smith, V. (2003). What is the future for the human resource development professional? A UK perspective. Human Resource Development International, 6(4), 437-456.

21

Gourlay, S. (2001). Knowledge management and HRD. Human Resource Development International, 4(1), 27-46.

Gratton, L. (2000). Living strategy: putting people at the heart of corporate purpose. London: Financial Times/Prentice Hall.

Gubbins, C & Garavan, T.N. (2005) Studying HRD Practitioners: A Social Capital Model, Human Resource Development Review, 4, (2), pp 189-218.

Gubbins, C., Garavan, T. N., Hogan, C., & Woodlock, M. (2006). An Examination of a Public Sector HRD Function. Irish Journal of Management.

Guest, D., King, Z., Conway, N., Michie, J., & Sheehan-Quinn, M. (2001). Voices from the Boardroom. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD).

Hall, P., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of Capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Harrison, R. (2003). Learning and Development (3 ed.). London: CIPD. Hart, S. L. (1999). Corporations as agents of global sustainability: beyond competitive advantage.

In D. L. Cooperrider & J. E. Dutton (Eds.), Organizational Dimensions of Global Change (pp. 346-362). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Henderson, R. M., & Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strategic Management Journal, 15(Winter Special Issue), 63-84.

Heraty, N., & Morley, M. (1995). Line managers and human resource development. Journal of European Industrial Training, 19(10), 31-37.

Hitt, M. A., Keats, B. A., & De Marie, S. M. (1998). Navigating in the new competitive landscape: Building strategic flexibility and competitive

Holbeche, L. (2008) HR transformation- high road or rocky road?, People Focus, 6:1; p22-24. Holder Kunder, L. (1998). Employees' Perceptions of the Status and Effectiveness of the Training

and Development System and of the Value of Training and Development. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Falls Church, VA.

Hollingsworth, J. & Boyer, R. (1997). From National Embeddedness to Spatial and Institutional Nestedness. In J. Hollingsworth & R. Boyer (Eds)., Contemporary Capitalism: the embeddedness of institutions (pp. 433-484). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Holton, E. F., & Baldwin, T. T. (2003). Improving Learning Transfer in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Holton, I. E. F. (2002). Theorectical assumptions underlying the performance paradigm of human resource development. Human Resource Development International, 5(2), 199-215.

Iles, P. (1996). International HRD. In J. Stewart & J. McGoldrick (Eds.), Human Resource Development: Perspectives, Strategies and Practice. London: Pitman Publishing.

Iles, P., & Yolles, M. (2003). International HRD alliances in viable knowledge migration and development: the Czech Academic Link Project. Human Resource Development International, 6(3), 301-324.

Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (2003). Managing human resources through strategic partnerships. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.

Jacobs, R. L., & Washington, C. (2003). Employee development and organizational performance: A review of literature and directions for future research. Human Resource Development International, 6(3), 343-354.

Johanston, J.-E. (2001). Intra-organisational network: Analysing organisation structure, social capital and social influence. Unpublished Phd, University of Helsinki, Yliopistopaino, Helsinki.

Jones, N., & Fear, N. (1994). Continuing Professional Development: Perspectives from Human Resource Professionals. Personnel Review, 23(8), 49-60.

22

Kanter, R. M. (1983). The Change Masters. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kaufman, R. (1986). Assessing needs, Introduction to Performance Technology (Vol. 1, pp. 25-

50). Washington, DC: The National Society for Performance and Instruction. Kim, P. S. (1999). Globalization of human resource management: a cross-cultural perspective for

the public sector. Public Personnel Management, 28(2), 227-243. Knapp, S. L. (1995). Reframing paradox: a grounded theory of career development in HRD.

Unpublished doctoral thesis, The University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Kobrin, S. J. (1992). Multinational Strategy and International Human Resource Management

Policy. Unpublished paper, University of Pennsylvania. Krempl, S.F. & Pace, R.W. (2001). Training across multiple locations: developing a systems that

works. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Laird, D. (1985). Approaches to Training and Development (2 ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-

Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. Latham, G. P., & Crandall, S. (1991). Organizational and social factors. In J. Morrison (Ed.),

Training for performance: Principles of applied human learning (pp. 259-285). Chichester, England: Wiley.

Latham, G. P., & Wexley, K. N. (1994). Increasing Productivity Through Performance Appraisal. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Lengnick-Hall, M. L., & Lengnick-Hall, C. A. (2003). Human Resource Management in the Knowledge Economy: New Challenges, New Roles, New Capabilities. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Leonard-Barton, D., & Sinha, D. K. (1993). Developer-user interaction and user satisfaction in internal technology transfer. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1125-1139.

Levitt, T. (1983). The globalisation of markets. Harvard Business Review, 61, 92-102. Lien, Y. H., & McLean, G. N. (2001, Feb). What is it like to be a Taiwanese HR practitioner

performing HRD Tasks? Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development Conference, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA.

Lippit, G., & Lippit, R. (1986). The Consulting Process in Action (2 ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Mabey, C., & Salaman, G. (1995). Training and Development Strategies. In C. Mabey & G. Salaman (Eds.), Strategic Human Resource Management. Oxford: Blackwell.

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

Marquardt, M., Berger, N., & Loan, P. (2004). HRD in the age of globalization. New York: Basic Books.

Martin, G. & Beaumont, P. (1998). Diffusing ‘best practice’ in multinational firms: Prospects, practice and contestations. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 9(4), 671-695.

Martinez, M. N. (1998). The collective power of employee knowledge. HR magazine, 43(2), 88-94.

Massie, J. L. (1965). Management Theory. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of Organizations (pp. 387-422). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Maxwell, G., & Watson, S. (2004, March). Devolving HRM and HRD to line managers: The Case of Hilton International's UK Hotels. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development, Austin, Texas.

23

McArdle, G., & Edwards, N. (2004). The Realities of Clarifying and Redefining the Trainer Role. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development Conference, Austin, Texas.

McCall, M. W., Lombardo, M. M., & Morrison, A. M. (1988). The Lessons of Experience: How Successful Executives Develop on the Job. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

McLagan, P. A. (1989). Models for HRD Practice. Training and Development Journal, 43(9), 49-59.

McLagan, P. A. (1996). Great ideas revisited. Training and Development, 50(1), 60-64. McLagan, P. A., & McCullough, R. C. (1983). Models of Excellence: The Conclusions and

Recommendations of the ASTD Training and Development Competency Study. Washington, DC.: American Society for Training and Development.

McLean, G. N., & McLean, L. (2001). If we can't define HRD in one country, how can we define it in an international context? Human Resource Development International, 4(3), 313-326.

Megginson, D., Joy-Matthews, J., & Banfield, P. (1993). Human Resource Development. London: Kogan Page.

Meyerson, E. M. (1994). Human capital, social capital and compensation: The relative contribution of social contacts to. Acta Sociologica, 37(Issue 4), 383.

Monge, P., & Fulk, J. (1999). Communication technology for global network organizations. In G. DeSanctis & J. Fulk (Eds.), Shaping Organization Form: Communication, Connection and Community (pp. 71-100). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nevis, E. C., DiBella, A. J., & Gould, J. M. (1995). Understanding organizations as learning systems. Sloan Management Review, 36(2), 73-85.

Nijhof, W. J. (2004). Is the HRD profession in the Netherlands changing? Human Resource Development International, 7(1), 57-72.

Ohmae, K. (1985). Triad Power: The Coming Shape of Global Competition. New York: Free Press.

Pettigrew, A. M., Jones, G. R., & Reason, P. W. (1982). Training and Development Roles in their Organisational Setting. London: Manpower Services Commission.

Porter, M. E. (1998). Competitive strategy: techniques for analyzing industries and competitors: with a new introdcution. New York: The Free Press.

Prete, M. & Boschetti, C. (1990). The Corporate Planner as Consultant. Long Range Planning, 27 (December), 23-30.

Pucik, V. (1988). Strategic alliances, organisational learning and competitive advantage. Human Resource Management, 27(1), 77-93.

Purcell, J. (1999). Best practice and best fit: Chimera or cul-de-dac? Human Resource Management Journal, 9(3), 26-41.

Quintanilla, J., & Ferner, A. (2003). Multinationals and human resource management: between global convergence and national identity. International Journal of Human Resource Management.

Robinson, D. G., & Robinson, J. C. (1989). Training for Impact: How to Link Training to Business Needs and Measure the Results. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Rogers, C. (1977). Freedom to Learn (1 ed.). London: Kogan Page. Rothwell, A., & Arnold, J. (2005). How HR professionals rate 'continuing professional

development'. Human Resource Management Journal, 15(3), 18-32. Rouillier, W. J., & Goldstein, I. L. (1993). The relationship between organizational transfer

climate and positive transfer of training. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 4, 377-390.

24

Sadler-Smith, E. (2006). Learning and Development for Managers. Oxford: Blackwell. Schuler, R. S., Dowling, P., J., & de Cieri, H. (1993). An Integrative Framework of Strategic

International Human Resource Management. In R. S. Schuler & S. Jackson, E. (Eds.), Strategic Human Resource Management (1999 ed., pp. 319-356). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Senge, P. M., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., Smith, B. J., & Kleiner, A. (1994). The fifth discipline fieldbook: strategies and tools for building a learning organisation. London: Nicholas Brealy.

Short, D., C., & Callahan, J., L. (2005). 'Would I Work for a Global Corporation?' And Other Ethical Questions for HRD. Human Resource Development International, 8(1), 121-125.

Spoor, J., & Bennett, R. (1984). Guide to Trainer Effectiveness. London: Manpower Services Commission.

Sriussadaporn-Charoenngam, N., & Jablin, F. M. (1999). An exploratory study of communication competence in Thai organizations. The Journal of Business Communication, 36(4), 382-418.

Stolovich, H. D., Keeps, E. J., & Rodrique, D. (1999). Skill sets for the Human Performance Technologist. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 8(2), 40-67.

Storberg, J. & Gubbins, C. (guest editors) (2007), Social Networks to Understand and “Do” HRD, Special Issue in Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9 (3). Sundaram, A. K., & Black, J. S. (1992). The Environment and Internal Organization of

Multinational Review. 17, 729-757. Swanson, R. A. (1995). Human resource development: performance is the key. Human Resource

Development Quarterly, 6(2), 207-213. Swanson, R., A., & Holton III, E., F. (2001). Foundations of Human Resource Development. San

Francisco, CA: Berrett Koehler. Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice

within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 27-43. Tjepkema, S., ter Horst, H., & Mulder, M. (2002). Learning Organisations and HRD. In S.

Tjepkema & J. Stewart & S. Sambrook & M. Mulder & H. ter Horst & J. Scheerens (Eds.), HRD and Learning Organisations in Europe (pp. 8-19). London: Routledge.

Tjepkema, S., ter Horst, H. M., Mulder, M., & Scheerens, J. (2000). The role of HRD within organisations in creating opportunities for lifelong learning: concepts and practices in seven European countries-Area II: Future Challenges for HRD Professionals in Europe. Enschede, University of Twente: European Commission.

Torraco, R. A., & Swanson, R. A. (1995). The strategic roles of human resource development. Human Resource Planning, 18(4), 10-21.

Ulrich, D., & Beatty, D. (2001). From Partners to Players: Extending the HR Playing Field. Human Resource Management, 40(4), 293-307.

Upton, M., Egan, T. M., & Lynham, S. A. (2003, Feb). Career development: Definitions, theories and dependent variables. Paper presented at the The Academy of Human Resource Development, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Van den Broeck, H. (1994). Lerend management: verborgen krachten van managers en organisaties. [Learning management: hidden powers of managers and organisations]. Tielt/ Schiedam, Lanoo/ Scriptum.

Walton, J. (1999). Strategic Human Resource Development. London: Prentice Hall. Wexley, K. N., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Developing and Training Human Resources in

Organizations (3 ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

25

Wognum, A. A. M. (2001). Vertical Integration of HRD Policy within companies. Human Resource Development International, 4(3), 407-421.

Wognum, A. A. M., & Mulder, M. M. (1999). Strategic HRD within companies. International Journal of Training and Development, 3(1), 2-13.

Woodall, J., Gourlay, S., & Short, D. (2002). Trends in outsourcing HRD in the UK: the implications for strategic HRD. International Journal of Human Resource Development and Management.