This article was downloaded by: [Chung Ang University]

On: 09 March 2014, At: 17:51

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

Human Resource Development

International
Publication details, including instructions for authors
and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rhrd20

Commonly held theories of

human resource development
a
Lisa A Weinberger
a
University of Minnesota
Published online: 28 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: Lisa A Weinberger (1998) Commonly held theories of human
resource development, Human Resource Development International, 1:1, 75-93, DOI:
10.1080/13678869800000009

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13678869800000009

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014
Commonly held theories of human resource
development

Lisa A. Weinberger*
University of Minnesota

Abstract: Due to the interdisciplinary nature of human resource development

(HRD), there has been little agreement as to the underlying definition and
primary theories that form the basis for the field. In order t o reach some under-
standing, this paper will outline niany of the current US American definitions
now held in the HRD profession. Commonly held themes will be removed from
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

those definitions and the theories underlying those themes will be examined.
Each theory is reviewed and then tested with the first step of Patterson's (1986)
criteria for assessing the validity of a theory. This revie\\. of the definitions
and test of the underlying theories will give the field a primary interdisciplinary
foundation to begin to work from and to d o additional research.

Keywords: learning theory, systems theory, performance improvement,

economic theory, Human Resource Development

Introduction

HRD is a vast area of practice and knowledge. Since H R D is an inter-

disciplinary field, there are many areas of study that it has borrowed from. This
interdisciplinary nature contributes to the lack of distinctiileness of HRD, and
the bodies of knowledge that influence H R D tend t o he highly interrelated
(Jacobs 1990).
The research for this paper began with an in-depth literature search (focused
on US American literature) on the variety of definitions for HRD. These
definitions serve as indicators as to how the field has groivn and matured. Each
definition is based on one or more underlyi~lgthemes. From these themes, the
theoretical domains that underpin H R D can be identified. The underpinning
theoretical domains have been limited to those that appear most frequently in
the series of definitions. Then, within each of these theories, the first step of
Patterson's (1986) criteria for the soundness of a theory has been applied.
The author has attempted to uncover the many different definitions of
HRD; however, some may have been missed. Hopefully, thc definitions that
have been uncovered and consolidated represent the comn~onlpheld themes in

The author is employed by Micron Electronics, Inc., as a Senior Training Specialist.

The views expressed in this article arc solely those of the author, and d o not neccs-
sarily represent thosc held by Micron Electronics Inc.

HRDl 1:l (1998),pp. 75-93 O Routledge 1367-8868

76 Articles

the field today, from a US American perspective. As L. Nadler stated in 1992,

'there is still n o universally accepted definition of HRD' (p. 104). Until H R D
obtains a generally accepted definition it will be very difficult t o get common
agreement on the body of knowledge that H R D draws from.

HRD definitions

The H R D definitions begin in 1970 (see Table 1). At that time, L. Nadler
(1970) defined H R D as 'a series of organized activities conducted within a
specified time and designed t o produce behavioral change' (p. 3). Nadler's key
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

focus here was to change the behaviour of organizational members. Craig

(1976) refined the definition hrther by focusing on the goal of developing
human potential through lifelong learning. In 1981, Jones introduced the
concept of systematic expansion of people's work through attainment of
organizational and personal goals (p. 188). The previous definitions had only
learning and psychology as underlying theories, Jones had now introduced the
systems concept.
McLagan (1983) entered the national scene in her Models for Excellence.
The primary focus of her definition was training and developn~ent.But in
1989, her Models fop. HRD Practice shared a reworked definition including not
only training and development, but career development and organization
development as well.
Chalofsky and Lincoln (1983) defined the discipline of H R D as 'the study
of how individuals and groups in organizations change through learning' (p.
20). Chalofsky modified the definition in 1992, presenting the following
revised definition as a 'unifying definition' of HRD: 'HRD is the study and
practice of increasing the learning capacity of individuals, groups, collectives
and organizations through the development and application of learning-
based interventions for the purpose of optimizing human and organizational
growth and effectiveness' (p. 179). The common theme throughout each of
Chalofsky's definitions is adult learning theory.
The late 1980s continued to see a lot of definitions surface for HRD. In the
following decades, L. Nadler modified his original 1970 work several times
and published this definition in 1989: 'HRD is organized learning experiences
provided by employees within a specified period of time t o bring about
the possibility of performance improvement and/or personal growth' (p. 6).
Nadler, like Chalofsky, built his definition around adult learning as the key
theory. Another important change with Nadler's more recent definition was
the mention of performance improvement. It was not until the late 1980s that
H R D began t o see performance improvement as an underlying component of
the H R D definition.
Swanson first advocated a performance orientation to the profession in
1975. The University of Minnesota, via Swanson in 1987, published their
-
TABLE 1 Human Resource Development Definition Summary

A rrthor Definition Key Components Underlying Theories

L. Nadler, 1970 H R D is a series of organized activities conducted within a specified

Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

Behavioural change Psychological

time and designed t o produce behavioural change (p.3). Adult learning
Craig, 1976 H R D focus o n the central goal of developing human potential in Human performance Philosophical
every aspect of lifelong learning. Psychological
Jones, 1981 H R D is a systematic expansion of people's work-related abilities, Performance, Philosophical
focused on the attainment of both organization and personal goals organizational & System
(p.188). personal goals Psychological
Economic
Training and development is identifying, assessing and - through Training & Psychological theory
planned learning- helping develop the key competencies which de\relopment
enable individuals t o perform current or future jobs (p. 25).
Chalofsky & Lincoln, Discipline of H R D is the study of how indi\iduals and groups in Adult learning Psychological theory
1983 organizations change through learning.
L. Nadler & Wiggs, H R D is a comprehensive learning system for the release of the Formal and informal System theory
1986 organization's human potentials-a system that includes both adult learning Economic theory
vicarious (classroom, mediated, simulated) learning experiences and Performance Psychological theory
experiential, on-the-job experiences that are keyed t o the
organization's reason for sunrival (p. 5).
Swanson, 1987 H R D is a process of improving an organization's performance Organizational Economic theory
through the capabilities of it's personnel. H R D includes activities performance Psychological theory
dealing with work design, aptitude, expertise and motivation. Philosophy theory
System theory
Jacobs, 1988 Human performance technology is the development of human Organizational and Unifting systems
performance systems, and the management of the resulting systems, individual theory
using a systems approach to achieve organizational and individual Performance
goals.
TABLE 1 continued
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

Author Definition IGy Components Underlying Theories

R. Smith, 1988 H R D consists of programs and activities, direct and indirect, Training & Economic theory
instructional and/or individual that positively affect the de\relopment development System theory
of the individual and the productivity and profit of the organization Organizational Psychological theory
( P 1). performance
McLagan, 1989 HRD is the integrated use of training and development, career Training & Psychological theory
development and organizational development to improve individual development System theory
and organizational effectiveness (p. 7). Career development Economic theory
Organizational
development
Watkins, 1989 H R D is the field of study and practice responsible for the fostering Learning capacity Psychological theory
of a long-term, work-related learning capacity at the individual, Training Pc System theory
group and organizational level of organizations. As such, it includes development Economic theory
- but is not limited to-training, career development and Career development Performance
organizational development (p. 427). Organizational itnprovement
development
Gilley & Eggland, H R D is organized learning activities arranged within at1 organization Learning activities Psychological theory
1989 to improve performance and o r personal growth for the purpose of Performance Spstcm theory
improving the job, the individual and or the organization (p. 5). improvement Economic theory
Performance
improvement
L. Nadler & Z. Nadler, H R D is organized learning experiences provided by employees Learning Performance
1989 within a specified period of time t o bring about the possibility of Performance improven~ent
performance improvement and/or personal gro\vth (p. 6 ) . impro\lement Psychological theory
TABLE 1 continued
D. Smith, 1990 H R D is the process of determining the optimum methods of Performance Performance
developing and improving the human resources of an organization improvement improvement
and the systematic improvement of the performance and productivity System theory
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

of employees through training, education and development and Psychological theory

leadership for the mutual attainment of organizational and personal Economic theory
goals (p. 16).
Chalofsky, 1992 H R D is the study and practice of increasing the learning capacity of Learning capacity System theory
individuals, groups, collectives and organizations through the Performance Psychological theory
development and application o f learning-based interventions for the improvement Human performance
purpose of optimizing human and organizational growth and
effectiveness (p. 179).
Marquardt & Engel, H R D skills include developing a learning climate, designing training Learning climate Psychological theory
1993 programs, transmitting information and experience, assessing results, Performance Human Performance
providing career counseling, creating organizational change and improvement
adapting learning materials.
Marsick & Watkins, H R D as a combination of training, career development, and Training & Human performance
1994 organizational development offers the theoretical integration needed development Organizational
to envision a learning organization, but it must also be positioned t o Career development performance
act strategically throughout the organization (p. 355). Organizational System theory
development Economic theory
Lxarning organization Psychological theory
Swanson, 1995 H R D is a process of developing and or unleashing human Training & Performance
expertise through organization development and personnel training development improvement
and development for the purpose of improving performance (p. 208). Organizational System theory
development Economic theory
Performance Psychological theory
improvement at the
organization, process
and individual levels.
80 Articles

faculty definition of HRD. This definition stated that 'HRD is a process

of improving an organization's performance through the capabilities of its
personnel. HRD i~lcludes activities dealing with work design, aptitude,
expertise and motivation'. Similar to other H R D definitions, this also went
through some slight modifications, and Swanson published a revised model in
his 1995 'Performance is the key' article. The new University of Minnesota
faculty definition has been revised to: 'HRD is a process of developing and/or
unleashing human expertisc through organization development and personnel
training and developn~entfor the purpose of improving performance' (p. 208).
Again within this definition, performance improvement is a key result. It is
interesting to note that the other components of training and development,
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

which McLagan introduced in 1983 and then revised with the addition of
organizational development in 1989, are still incorporated in the University
of Minnesota definition.
Another key individual within the HRD definition arena was Watkins.
Between 1989 and 1994 her definition of HRD changed from 'learning
capacity' to a 'learning organization'. In addition, she is thc only one to make
mention of H R D being positioned strategically throughout the organization.
There were adchtional contributors of definitions of HRD: Jacobs (1988),
Gilley and Eggland (1989), R.Smith (1988), D. Smith (1990) and Marquarde
and Engel (1993). Both Gilley and Eggland, and Marquardt and Engel, are
concerned with learning and the learning climate. R. Smith, D. Smith and
Jacobs emphasize performance improvement.
The review of these definitions, and their evolution, has brought fonvard
two continuing themes: learning and performance improvement. Chalofsky
(Chalofsky and Lincoln 1983) said that HRD has borrowed from several
overlapping disciplines. H e listed those disciplines as psychology, sociology,
anthropology, economics, counselling, education, management science and
behavioural science. McLagan (1989) has listed a similar set of disciplines as
the applied fields where HRD draws its theories from. She added organiza-
tional behaviour; split psychology into both industrial and individual; included
communication, sociology, general systems science and the humanities. Jacobs
(1990) included in his definition, education, systems, economics, psycho-
logical behaviour and organizational behaviour as the five major theoretical
bodies that have had the most influence in the field.
Drawing conclusions from this information and the definitions themselves,
the following are the key underlying theories associated with HRD:
Learning: adult learning - organizational learning - learning organizations
Performance improvement
Systems theory
Economic theory
Psychological theory - with the emphasis on learning
In the balance of this paper, each underlying theory will be examined for two
Weinberger: Commonly held theories of HRD 81

perspectives: (1) its role in HRD, and (2) as applied against Patterson's (1986)
first criteria for assessing a theory. Patterson's criteria for assessing a theory are
the synthesized works of several authors. This model was selected based
on: (1) its similarity to other authors' criteria for assessing a good theory, and
( 2 ) its previous use by Jacobs (1989) in evaluating the theory of human
performance technology.
The October 1989 edition of The Academy of Management Review
included a special forum on theory building. Within this forum, Whetten
stated that the four building blocks of theory development are answering: what
(comprehensiveness and parsimony), how and why. In addition, Bacharach
highlighted falsifiability and utility as criteria for evaluating organizational
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

theories. The framework of these criteria he provides for evaluating includes

most of the components of Patterson's (1986) model. Patterson's theory
assessment model consists of eight specific criteria against which Patterson
proposed the theories in psychotherapy and counselling be assessed. Many
of these theories have also contributed to HRD. Patterson's key components
\
are:

1 Importance
2 Preciseness and clarity
3 Parsimony and simplicity
4 Comprehensiveness
5 Operationality
6 Empirical validity or verification
7 Fruitfulness
8 Practicality

Step 1 of Patterson's criteria stipulates that: (1)the significance of the theory

is articulated; (2) the relevance of the theory is identified to life or real
behaviour; (3) identification of formal criteria that the theory must meet
and against which it must be evaluated, and (4) acceptance of the theory
against criteria by professionals and through literature review. Each of
these components needs to be satisfied to meet the first step of Patterson's
criteria.

HRD theoretical domains

There is a great deal of overlap and interdependence with the theoretical

domains that have been indicated. The following will examine each one
independently, citing some of the areas of overlap. Many of the current US
American writings include systems thinking as part of learning, organizational
performance and economic theory (Dixon 1992; Rummler and Brache 1988;
Senge 1990; and Vaill 1996). For organizational and individual performance,
82 Articles

learning is involved at both levels and, if successful, could lead to economic

benefits. Learning is deep in the psychological parameters.

Learning theory
Based on the US American literature search, it can easily be concluded that
learning should be included as part of the psychological component. Learning
theory arises primarily from psychological theory. Passmore (1997) defined
psychology as the 'science of behavior and mental processes of humans and
animals' (p. 210). He listed several perspcctives that guide psychological
inquiry: biological, evolutionary, behavioural, cognitive, humanistic and
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

psychodynamic. The intention here is to look only into the roles of learning
(behavioural), cognitive perspective and humanistic perspective in this analysis.
Huberty and Kramlinger (1990) outlined the three approaches to learning
as: (1) behaviourism, (2) humanism and ( 3 ) cognitivism. Behaviourism is
based on the premise that learning occurs primarily through the reinforcement
of desired responses. This point of view sees learning as a series of connections
between stimuli and responses. Many well-known names have dominated this
perspective including Watson, Guthrie, Thorndike and Skinner to name but a
few (Hergenhahn and Olson 1992).
The Gestalt view (cognitivism) is concerned with the holistic cognitions an
individual has about his or her world and the way they determine his or her
perceptions. Field theory is another name for cognitivism. This view is based
on learning occurring primarily through exposure to information that is
presented logically. Werthmeier, Kohier, Kofia and Rogers are some key
contributors in this area (Hergenhahn and Olson 1992).
These two views of learning appear to be almost diametrically opposed;
therefore, a combination of the two was envisioned by Tolman on purposive
behaviourism, by Bandura for observational learning and by Norman for
an information processing approach (Hergenhahn and Olson 1992). Gagne
(1962) proposed synthesized learning principles to make a difference on
learning. Other scholars in the area of synthesizing learning principles are
Watkins and Marsick (1992), Marsick and Watkins (1994) in the learning
organization, and Jacobs and Jones (1995) for structured on-the-job training.
Adult learning theory is the hrthest from behaviourism. Key contributors in
this arena are Knowles (1980), Knowles and Associates (1984), Rogers (1969)
and Maslow (1970). Adult learning theory argues that the learner 'becomes
the focus in determining what needs to be learned, how to learn it and what
specific goals should constitute success in the learning process' (VanWart et al.
1993: 138). The emphasis from these humanists was on the importance of
goal-setting by the learners.
With all the various foundations of learning to be found within psychology,
one would expect to see a variety of definitions of learning in the field
today. Hergenhahn and Olson (1992) modified Kimbles's 1961 definition of
Weinberger: Commonly held theories of HRD 83

learning to make it more widely accepted, rewriting it as: 'Learning is a

relatively permanent change in behavior or in behavioral potentiality that
results from experience and cannot be attributed to temporary body states
such as those induced by illness or fatigue' (p. 7). Vaill(1996) defined learning
as 'the changes a person makes in himself or herself that increase the know-why
and/or the know-what and/or the know-how the person possesses with
respect to a given subject' (p. 21). Senge (1990) said that through learning
we recreate ourselves, as individuals we are able to d o something we could
never do, we extend our capacity to create, to be a part of the process of life
( P 14).
Learning is a process by which behaviour is modified (Megginson e t al.
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

1993). Experience is the basic process which leads to a person learning.

Malcolm Knowles (1990) surmises that adults learn best when they can invest
their experience in the learning effort. Rogers (1969) stated that 'the most
usehl learning is learning the process of learning, a continuous openness
to experience and incorporation into oneself of the process of change'
(p. 163).

Organizational learning
Learning is a journey not a destination (Laird 1978). The field of HRD should
not only be concerned with individual learning, but also with organizational
learning, and the concept of the learning organization. Organizational
learning refers to learning at the system level rather than at the individual level
(Dixon 1992). Argyris and Schon (1978) state that 'there is no organizational
learning without individual learning and that individual learning is a necessary
but insufficient condition for organizational learning' (p. 20). Argryis
(1990) describes two levels of learning that occur in organizations. The first is
single-loop learning which results from the organization considering the
consequences of its actions when the consequences d o not match the desired
outcome. This discrepancy enables the organization to modify the actions
it takes. The second level is double-loop learning which occurs when an
organization's reaction to a discrepancy is to examine and possibly modify the
theories-in-use upon which the action is based. Double-loop learning, though
rare, allows the organization to improve its capacity to learn.

Learning organization
Marsick and Watkins (1994) have defined the learning organization as 'one
that learns continuously and can transform itself. The learning organization is
a sustainable vision for the development of the human in organizations'
(p. 354). Watkins and Marsick (1992) believe that the learning organization is
an integrating vision for the field of human resource development. 'Human
resource developers who are systematically and developmentally increasing
84 Articles

the learning capacity of the organization are creating learning organizations'

(p. 117). The learning organization links individual learning with organiza-
tional learning.
Similar to the concept of individual learning, the organization has learned
when it has developed better systems, unlearned old ways of thinking and
changed its mental models (Watkins and Marsick 1992). Senge (1990) and
-Argyris and Schon (1978) emphasize learning which is a shift of mind,
redesigning our mental models. It is this kind of learning which is at the heart
of Senge's learning organization.
The learning organization has also been defined as 'an organization which
facilitates the learning of all its members and continuously transforms itself'
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

(Pedlar, Boydell and Burgoyne, cited in Hawkins 1991: 179). Brooks (1992)
references a study conducted in a Fortune 500 company; through this study,
it was determined that the understanding of how individual development and
learning contribute to organizational transformation seems to have important
implications for intentional transformation efforts in organizations. The tran-
sition in the field today is going from an emphasis on individual learning
(training) to one of organizational learning. Any individual learning that takes
place needs to keep the organization's strategic objectives in mind.
Dixon (1992) believes that HRD professionals need to design new learning
processes rather than expand only the old models, to reframe learning to meet
the new challenges. Therefore, learning, organizational learning and the learn-
ing organization all include theories of adult learning, whether as individuals
or groups.
Applying Patterson's (1986) first criteria for assessing the soundness of
theory shows that learning theory is important to the HRD profession. The
significance and relevance of learning theory to real behaviour is more than
evident in the literature and it is overwhelming, and learning can easily be
shown as a fundamental premise for HRD. In addition, learning or improving
organizational and individual learning is a common practitioners' role in
HRD. Consequently, learning theory is key to HRD and based on research will
fall into a component of psychological theory which is extremely important to
the profession.

Theory of performance improvement

Several authors emphasized that learning needs to be tied to the organization's
strategic objectives, as a method for improving performance (Rummler and
Brache 1995; Swanson 1995). The theme of performance or performance
improvement also kept emerging from the HRD definitions as a fundamental
theory of H R D from a US American perspective.
There are several scholars who have written about a theory of performance,
beginning with Gilbert in 1978, who wrote extensively about human
competence. Gilbert defined human competence as a 'function of worthy
Weinberger: Commonly held theories of HRD 85

performance' (p. 18), and proposed four 'leisurely theorems' in his writings:
(1) human competence is a hnction of worthy performance; (2) that human
competence is inversely proportional to the potential for improving perform-
ance (p. 30); (3) that for any accomplishment, a deficiency in performance
always has, as its immediate cause, a deficiency in behaviour (p. 76); and (4)
human accomplishments can be viewed at several levels of generality (p. 112).
There are six performance factors that can be manipulated to enhance
individual, group and organization performance (modified by Rosenberg
1996):

1 consequences, incentives and rewards;

Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

2 data and information, the feedback and standards of performance;

3 resources, tools and environmental support;
4 individual capacity, the capabilities of an individual's performance;
5 motives and expectations, internal views the employees hold; and
6 skills and knowledge.

Gilbert (1978) designed what he called the 'behaviour engineering model'

(p. 88). H e suggested that this model could serve as an analytic tool for
identifying performance problems and their causes.
Though presented as a theory of human competence and not of perform-
ance improvement, human competence is a hnction of performance. Gilbert
proposed that the costs of improving human performance be viewed as
investments in human capital (economic theory), which yield returns valued by
both organizations and individuals in terms of their performance potential.
Gilbert's model can be applied as a theory of performance improvement to
HRD.
Rummler and Brache (1988, 1995) utilized Gilbert's behaviour engineer-
ing model as a foundation for the human performance system. The human
performance system applied only to the individual level in Rummler and
Brache's model. This system consisted of six components:

1 Performance specifications: standards, output.

2 Task support: the resources that are available.
3 Consequences: those that are aligned to support the desired performance.
4 Feedback: d o the performers receive information about their performance?
5 Skills/knowledge: d o the performers have the skills/knowledge to perform?
6 Individual capacity: are performers physically, mentally and emotionally
able t o perform?

Rummler and Brache theorize that evaluating performance based on the

three-level framework of organizational, process and job/performer is actually
a unifying theory of performance improvement (p. 216). The human
performance system is an example of the individual level of evaluation.
86 Articles

Gilbert (1988) believes that performance by itself is not competence. H e

defined performance as the ratio of the exemplar's performance to typical
performance. This results in a potential for improving performance, a measure
of competence.
D. A. Nadler and Gerstein (1992) propose the concept of a high-
performance work system. They defined this as

an organizational architecture that brings together work, people, technology,

and information in a manner that optimizes the congruence or 'fit' among them
in order to produce high in terms of the effective responses to
customer requirements and other environmental demands and opportunities
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

[p. 1181.

The authors characterized these high-performance work systems as:

1 a way of thinking about organizations;

2 a set of principles for designing organizations;
3 a process for applying these design principles; and
4 a variety of specific organizational design features.

The high-performance work system was recognized as a third theory of

performance improvement that can be applied in the H R D field.
Organizational improvement strategy based on employee involvement is
proposed by Lawler (1986). Lawler states that when employees are involved,
(a) they are motivated to perform, (b) they have a higher commitment to the
organization, and consequently, (c) the quality of their work improves. This
employee involvement is a component of high-involvement management
which is a core principle that can be viewed as another theory of performance.
An additional theory of performance is that of human performance tech-
nology (HPT). This is defined as 'the process of improving an organization's
performance through the abilities of personnel' (Swanson 1992). Jacobs
coined the phrase human performance technology and roots it deep in systems
theory. Consequently, this theory of performance will be reviewed in the
systems component.
Swanson (1995) emphasizes performance as the key to HRD, believing that
performance occurs and should be assessed at three levels: the organizational
level, the process level and the individual level. This performance is affected by
five factors (goals, environment, motivation, expertise and capacity) upon
which Swanson proposes a matrix of enabling questions for diagnosis of
the disconnects from performance. Like the model proposed by Rummler
and Brache (1995), Swanson's matrix can also be looked at as a theory of
performance improvement and can be applied by the practitioner in the field
of HRD.
Swanson (1995) envisions the three theories of H R D as systems,
Weinberger: Commonly held theories of HRD 87

psychology and economics as a three-legged stool and sees performance as

a component of each. Instead of the three-legged stool Swanson suggests, a
fourth leg needs to be added, the all-encompassing component of perform-
ance. The performance component viewed this way can be shown as the theory
which ties together the other three underlying theories of HRD. Because
performance improvement is important to H R D and successhl performance
leads to economic benefits, is based on a systems perspective of an organization
and is rooted in the psychological/learning domains, it should be viewed as an
underlying theory of HRD.
By again applying Patterson's (1986)step 1 criteria to these various theories
related to performance improvement, agreement in the US American literature
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

\ Theoretical Foundations

/ Performance I ~erfor'mance \ \

'erformance - \ A

stem \ \

Economic Psychology
FIGURE 1 Adapted from R. A. Swanson (1995). The Theory of
Performance needs to be added to Swanson's model for an additional
theoretical foundation of HRD. Performance is a key ingredient in
Economic, System and Psychological theory and ties them all together
as an additional foundation theory of HRD.
88 Articles

shows that performance (individual and organizational) is extremely impor-

tant, and this importance is emphasized in the reviewed definitions of HRD.
The concept of performance is significant and relevant; however, the literature
search has revealed that there is not one single theory of performance. The
role of performance as espoused by Rummler and Brache (1995), Gilbert,
D. A. Nadler and Swanson, serves as an introduction to what could be
described as a theory of performance for HRD and, similar to learning, this
role of performance is key to the HRD practitioner as well.

Systems theory
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

The next field of underlying theory for HRD is systems theory. Much of the
literature speaks of the importance of a systems view of the organization and
processes within (Dixon 1992; Jacobs 1989; Knowles 1985; Passmore 1997;
Rummler and Brache 1995; Senge 1990; Sleezer 1993; Swanson 1994;
Vaill 1996). The previous two theories of learning as a part of psychology
and performance improvement can also be viewed from a systems perspective.
Learning does not occur in and of itself, it is rather a component of the
learning resources in an organizational system (Knowles 1985). Learning has
inputs, processes and outputs. Consequently, with the acceptance of the
systems approach, the HRD professional needs to be less concerned with
planning, scheduling and instructing and more concerned with managing the
system (Knowles 1985).
Von Bertalanffy (1968) studied general systems theory and applied it in
many different contexts, and Berrien (1968) and Katz and Kahn (1966) used
systems theory as applied to organizations. Jacobs (1989) proposes that
systems theory be the unifylng theory for HRD in his chapter on 'Systems
theory applied to human resource development'.
Jacobs (1988) proposes a domain of human performance technology
(HPT) and defined the theory: 'HPT is the development of human perform-
ance systems and the management of the resulting syseems, using a systems
approach to achieve organizational and individual goals'. This is an example
of another link to performance improvement within the systems concept.
Jacobs (1989) !ays additional groundwork on system theory and applies seven
of the eight of Patterson's (1986) criteria for assessing a theory.

Economic theory
The final theory underlying HRD is economic theory. The bottom line for any
HRD intervention is providing financial benefits to the organization. The basic
model is: performance value less costs = benefits to the organization (Swanson
and Gradous 1988). Swanson and Gradous present this practical model for
forecasting HRD's financial benefits.
One of the key components for economic theory that can be applied to
Weinberger: Commonly held theories of HRD 89

H R D is human capital theory. Becker (1975) states that 'investments in

human capital are activities that influence h t u r e monetary and psychic income
by increasing the resources in people' (p. 9). These investments take many
forms, but all improve skills, knowledge or health. The concept of human
capital is that people possess skills, experience and knowledge, and therefore
have economic value to organizations. These skills, knowledge and experience
represent capital because they enhance productivity (Snell and Dean 1992), a
key focus for the practice of HRD.
Therefore, it need not be argued that economic theory is a foundation
of HRD. As Pfeffer (1994) surmises, the competitive advantage of an organi-
zation is through its people. An investment in the human capital. There are
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

several investments one can make in human capital, however; on-the-job

training illustrates the effect of human capital on earnings, employment and
other economic values (Becker 1975; Jacobs and Jones 1995). Additionally,
schooling, productive wage increases and other knowledge are all cited by
Becker as forms of investments in human capital. The rate of return on one's
investment in human capital is important for an HRD professional to calculate.
Mosier (1990), Swanson and Gradous (1988) and Swanson (1992) all have
models to d o this calculation.
The importance criteria for Patterson's (1986) model can be applied here as
well. Most organizations are in the business for economic gain, therefore
resources, such as people, are a form of cost to the organization. Investments
in this resource, developing the human capital, needs to demonstrate a
financial benefit to the organization. All of this is tied to economics. So
economic theory, specifically human capital, is certainly significant and
relevant. Investment in people is viewed as an economic cost, the H R D
profession needs t o ensure that it is a beneficial one to the organization.

Conclusion

The field of H R D is inter-disciplinary in nature, on that point there is no

disagreement. What is not agreed upon is a uni@ing definition of the theories
that underpin this field. It is not suggested that psychology with a learning
emphasis, systems, economics and performance are the only fields that impact
HRD, simply that they are primary. As many authors have pointed out, H R D
also draws from the fields of philosophy, communication theory, sociology and
humanities, to name a few.
This analysis has shown the breadth of H R D with the definitions of the field
and how these definitions have changed with the increased knowledge of adult
learning, systems theory, and the importance of economics and performance to
HRD. This analysis is limited in its usage of primarily US American scholars.
Through a better understanding of the background from which H R D
emerged, researchers and practitioners can now focus on the primary theories
90 Articles

underlying the field of HRD and move forward with an agreed-upon foun-
dational base for additional research. T o hrther these theories, additional
research is also needed to compare these results with the multitude of literature
in the European journals and determine if the proposed underlying theories
can be the universal theories underpinning HRD.

Address for correspondence

Micron Electronics, Inc.

2359 Walnut Street
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

Building 2, Entrance 8
Roseville, MN 55 113
USA

References

Argyris, C . (1990) Overcoming Organizational Defenses: Facilitating Orgnnizational

,!.earning, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Argyris, C. and Schon, D. (1978) Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action
Perspective, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bacharach, S. B. (1989) 'Organizational theories: some criteria for evaluation', The
Academy of Management Review 14(4): 496-5 15.
Becker, G. S. (1975) Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with
Special Reference to Education, 2nd edn, New York: Columbia University Press.
Berrien, F. K. (1968) General and Social Systems, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers
University Press.
Bertalanffy, L. V. (1968) 'General systems theory - a critical review', in W. Buckley
(ed.) Modern Systems Research for the Behavioural Scientist, Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Brooks, A. K. (1992) 'Building learning organizations: the individual-culture inter-
action', Human Resource Development Quarterly 3(4): 323-35.
Chalofsky, N. (1989) 'What is HRD?', in D. Gradous (ed.) Systevfis Theory Applied to
Human Resource Development, fourth in the Theory-to-Practice Monograph series,
Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press, pp. 12-19.
Chalofsky, N. (1992) 'A unifying definition for the human resource development
profession', Human Resource Development Quarterly 3(2): 175-82.
Chalofsky, N. and Lincoln, C. (1983) Up the H R D Ladder, Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Craig, R. (ed.) (1976) Training and Development Handbook, 2nd edn, New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Dixon, N. M. (1992) 'Organizational learning: a review of the literature with irnplica-
tions for H R D professionals', Human Resource Development Quarterly 3( 1 ): 29-49.
Weinberger: Commonly held theories of HRD 91

Gagne, R. M. (1962) 'Military training and principles of learning', American

Psychologist 17(2): 83-9 1.
Gilbert, T . F. (1978) Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance, New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Gilbert, T . F. (1988) 'Measuring the potential for performance improvement',
Training 25(7): 49-52.
Gilley, J. and Eggland, S. (1989) Principles of Human Resource Development, Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hawkins, P. (1991) 'The spiritual dimensions of the learning organization',
Management Education and Development 22(3): 172-87.
Hergenhahn, B. R. and Olson, M. H . (1992) A n Introduction t o Theories of Learning,
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Huberty, T. and Kramlinger, T. (1990) 'Behaviorism versus humanism', Training and
Development 44( 12): 4 1-5.
Jacobs, R. (1988) 'A proposed domain of human performance technology:
implications for theory and practice', Performance and Instruction l(2): 2-12.
Jacobs, R. (1989) 'Systems theory applied t o human resource development', in
D. Gradous (ed.) Systems Theory Applied to Human Resource Development, fourth in
the Theory-to-Practice Monograph series, Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press, pp. 27-60.
Jacobs, R. (1990) 'Human rcsource development as an interdisciplinary body of
knowledge', Human Resource Development Quavterly 1( 1): 65-71.
Jacobs, R. and Jones, M. (1995) Structrrred On-the-JobTraininn: Developing Expertise
in the Workplace, San Francisco: Herrett-Koehler.
Joncs, J. (1981) 'The organizational universe', in J. Jones and J. Pfeiffer (eds) The
1981 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators, San Diego, CA: University
Associates.
Katz, D. and Kahn, R. L. (1966) The Social Psychology of Orpantzations, New York:
Wiley.
Kimble, G. A. (1961) Hilgard and Marquis' Conditioning and Learning, 2nd edn,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prenticc-Hall.
Knowles, M. S. (1980) The Modern Practice of Adult Education: From Pedagony to
Andrapogy, 2nd edn, New York: Cambridge Books.
Knowles, M. S. (1985) 'Shifting t o an H R D systems approach', Training and
Development Journal 39(5): 24-5.
Knowles, M. S. (1990) The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species, 4th edn, Houston:
Gulf.
Knowles, M. S. and Associates (1984) Andragcgy in Action: Applying Modern
Principles of Adrtlt learn in^, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Laird, D. (1978) Approaches t o Training and Development, Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.
Lawler, E. E. (1986) H$h-Involvement Management: Participative Strategies for
Improving Organizational Performance, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
92 Articles

Marquardt, M. J. and Engel, D. W. (1993) 'HRD competencies for a shrinking

world', Training and Development 47(5): 59-65.
Marsick, V. and Watkins, K. (1994) 'The learning organization: an integrative vision
for HRD', Human Resource Development Quarterly 5(4): 353-60.
Maslow, A. H . (1970) Motivation and Personality, 2nd edn, New York:
HarperCollins.
McLagan, P. (1983) Models for Excellence, Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.
McLagan, P. (1989) Models for H R D Practice, Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.
Megginson, D., Joy-Matthews, J. and Banfield, P. (1993) Human Resource
Development, London: AMED.
Mosier, N. R. (1990) 'Financial analysis: the methods and their application t o
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

employee training', Human Resource Development Quarterly l(1): 45-63.

Nadler, D. A. and Gerstein, M. S. (1992) 'Designing high-performance work systems:
organizing people, work, technology, and information', in D. A. Nadler, M. S.
Gerstein, R. B. Shaw and Associates (eds) Oganizational Architecture: Designsfor
Changing Organizations, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 1 10-32.
Nadler, L. (1970) Developing Human Resources, Houston: Gulf.
Nadler, L. (1992) 'HRD - where has it been, where is it going?' Studies in Continaiszg
Education 14(2): 104-14.
Nadler, L. and Nadler, Z. (1989) Developing Human Resources: Concepts and a Model,
3rd edn, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nadler, L. and Wiggs, G. (1986) Managing Human Resouvce Development: A
Practical Guide, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Passmore, D. L. (1997) 'Ways of seeing: disciplinary bases of research in HRD', in
R Swanson and E. Holton (eds) Human Resource Development Research
Handbook, San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, pp. 199-2 14.
Patterson, C. (1986) Theories of Counseling and P~ychotherfipy,4th edn, New York:
Harper & Row, pp. xix-xxii.
Pfeffer, J. (1994) Competitive Advantage throirgh People: Uuleashing the Power of the
Workforce, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Rogers, C. R (1969) A Freedom to Learn, Columbus, O H : Charles E. Merrill.
Rosenberg, M. J. (1996) 'Human performance technology', in R. L. Craig (ed.) The
ASTD Training and Development Handbook: A Guide to Human Resource
Development, 4th edn, New York: McGraw-Hill, pp. 370-93.
Rummler, G. A. and Brache, A. B. (1988) 'The systems view of human performance',
Training 25(9): 45-53.
Rummler, G. A. and Brache, A. G. (1995) Improving Perfo~inance:How to Manage
the White Space on the Organizational Chart, 2nd edn, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Senge, P. M. (1990) The FiPh Discipline: The Art and lJractice of the Learning
Organization, New York: Doubleday.
Sleezer, C. M. (1993) 'Training needs assessment at work: a dynamic process',
Human Resource Development Quarterly 4(3): 247-64.
Weinberger: Commonly held theories of HRD 93

Smith, D. (1990) The Dictionary for Human Resource Development, Alexandria, VA:
ASTD Press.
Smith, R. (1988) Human Resource Development: An Overview, Office of Educational
Research and Improvement, Washington, DC.
Snell, S. A. and Dean, J. W. Jr (1992) 'Integrated manufacturing and human resource
management: a human capital perspective', Academy of Management Journal
35(3): 467-504.
Swanson, R. A. (1987) Human Resource Development Definition, St Paul: University
of Minnesota, Training and Development Research Center.
Swanson, R. A. (1992) 'Demonstrating financial benefits t o clients', in H. Stolovitch
and E. Keeps (eds) Handbook of Human Performance Technology, San Francisco:
Downloaded by [Chung Ang University] at 17:51 09 March 2014

Jossey-Bass, pp. 602-1 8.

Swanson, R A. (1994) Analysis for Improving Performance: Tools for Diagnosing
OrganizationsandDocumenting WorkplaceExpertise, San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Swanson, R. A. (1995) 'Performance is the key', Human Resource Development
Quarterly 6(2): 207-13.
Swanson, R A. and Gradous, D. B. (1988) Forecasting Financial Benefits of Human
Resource Development, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Swanson, R. A. and Sawzin, S. (1975) Industrial Training Research Project, Bowling
Green, O H : Bowling Green State University.
Vaill, P. B. ( 1996) Learning as a Way of Being: Strategies in a World of Permanent
White Water, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
VanWart, M., Cayer, N. and Cook, S. (1993) Handbook of Training and Development
for the Public Sector, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Watkins, K. (1989) 'Business and industry', in S. Merriam and P. Cunningham (eds)
Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp.
422-30.
Watkins, K. and Marsick, V. (1992) 'Building the learning organization: a new role
for human resource developers', Studies in Continuing Education 14(2): 115-29.
Whetten, D. A. (1989) 'What constitutes a theoretical contribution?', The Academy of
Management Review 14(4): 490-5.