The human resource development field has long been struggling to develop an identity as a profession, especially in terms of its applied and interdisciplinary nature. One of the more debated issues in the field has been the need for a unifying definition that would not only provide a focus for the development of the profession but would also set limits on the boundaries of the field. This article presents a justification for a unifying definition, a history of the existing definitions of HRD, and several common themes or patterns found in these definitions and other literature in the field. The author proposes a unifying definition that would provide a vision for the profession and identifies several “next steps” that the field should consider in its quest for professional recognition and growth.
[1]
Jerry W. Gilley,et al.
Principles Of Human Resource Development
,
1989
.
[2]
Leonard Nadler,et al.
Developing human resources
,
1970
.
[3]
Victoria J. Marsick,et al.
Learning in the Workplace: The Case for Reflectivity and Critical Reflectivity
,
1988
.
[4]
Ronald L. Jacobs,et al.
Human resource development as an interdisciplinary body of knowledge
,
1990
.
[5]
Peter Jarvis,et al.
Twentieth century thinkers in adult education
,
1987
.
[6]
P. Senge.
THE FIFTH DISCIPLINE
,
1997
.
[7]
V. Marsick.
Learning in the workplace
,
1987
.
[8]
Patricia A. McLagan.
Models for HRD practice
,
1989
.