Theorizing Human Resource Development Practices in Extended Contexts: Invited Reaction 1

We offer our response to the two Invited Reaction papers that identify interesting and legitimate challenges to our theorizing study. In the sense-making process of interpreting the critiques, we discovered that the challenges were rooted in deeper issues related to broader theory building processes and approaches. Thus, our response is particularly focused on exploring how these challenges may inform and guide future theorizing efforts. We organize our response in four primary aspects raised: (1) generalizing from small N samples, (2) singularity in the unit of theory, (3) challenges associated with typological theories, and (4) challenges in the theoretical specification process. We hope that our theorizing and the ongoing dialogues establish a solid starting point that identifies promising opportunities for future human resource development research and generates more interest that other scholars will extend our theorizing and validation efforts.

Section: Our Positionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Our Positionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: The Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Response to Invited Reaction Articles 1 and 2

Wang

Doty

2022

“…I’d like to thank the editorial team of Human Resource Development Review for inviting me to write this meta reaction paper. My compliments go out to the authors of the initial paper (Wang & Doty, 2022a) as well as to the two respondents (Russ-Eft, 2022; Yoon, 2022), for showing us how human resource development (HRD) theory building works in practice. I’m happy to use the opportunity to contribute to this crucial process in our field.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Resource Development Should Aim to Make Closed Contexts More Open: A Meta Reaction to Wang and Doty, Russ-Eft, and Yoon

Poell

2022

In this meta reaction paper, I reflect on the initial paper by Wang and Doty (2022a), the two responses (Russ-Eft, 2022; Yoon, 2022), and the final response-to-respondents (Wang & Doty, 2022b). I focus on two observations that stood out for me, encompassing: (1) how HRD is defined; (2) what HRD should contribute to and to what extent the initial authors’ theorizing of HRD is actually “emancipatory.” First, I conclude that Wang and Doty’s systems perspective leaves little room for the individual agency and legitimate interests that various stakeholders have around the ways in which employee learning is organized. Connected with this, their treatment of “the mainstream HRD literature” is not convincing, which limits the rationale for and contribution of their own theorizing efforts. Second, I conclude that Wang and Doty’s work violates the ethical core of HRD and, moreover, falls short of being about “emancipatory theorizing” as they claim.

The State of Theorizing Human Resource Development (HRD) in Extended Context: A Review

Jabarkhail

2023

In this article, I examine and evaluate the human resource development (HRD) theorization presented by Wang and Doty (2022a) , as well as the reactions it received from Russ-Eft (2022) , Yoon (2022) , and Poell (2022) , and the response provided by Wang and Doty (2022b) . I observe that the principal criticism of the current HRD framework proposed by Wang and Doty revolves around the significance of culture within the host institution system (HIS). They argue that culture holds little to no importance in the HIS. However, upon examining the definition of HIS presented in this paper, it becomes apparent that the role of culture cannot be easily dismissed in any discussion pertaining to HIS, thereby calling for further theorizing and research. The suggestions put forth in this article have the potential to contribute to the advancement of the current theorization into a genuinely dynamic framework for the HRD discipline.