Trends in Australian human resource development practice, 1996-2009

Abstract

This research charts the evolution of human resource development (HRD) in Australian organisations over a critical 13‐year period and analyses the effect of the company size, industry sector and ownership pattern on HRD practices. The analysis is based on standardised data extracted from 793 responses to the 1996, 1999 and 2008–09 iterations of the CRANET Australia surveys. Seven sub‐indices and one overall index of HRD were constructed to monitor the level of ‘sophistication’ over time in different aspects of HRD practice and explore the ‘performance’ versus ‘learning’ dichotomy established in the HRD literature. The analysis revealed an aggregate decrease in HRD sophistication across all organisational types but divergent movement within the seven sub‐indices, with decrease in ‘learning’ oriented practices and an increase in ‘performance’ oriented practices. Only limited differences were found between public and private sector organisations. Higher levels of HRD sophistication were present in larger companies and industry sector had a significant effect on a majority of HRD practices.

Shifting the Australian Paradigm from the Management to the Development of People

“…This paper advocates a further bold step forward from this position already evident in Australia where HRD has made major shifts, but where the benefits are not evident in Australian industry. Peretz and McGraw (2011) found an overall shift in HRD focus towards performance which provides clear justification for what is proposed in this paper. What is argued here is a move from incremental, conservative change towards a radical shift in the HRD paradigm since the work of Peretz and McGraw (2011) shows an overall decreasing level of HRD sophistication in Australian organizations (with no significant pattern of difference between public and private companies) over a 13 year period.…”

“…Peretz and McGraw (2011) found an overall shift in HRD focus towards performance which provides clear justification for what is proposed in this paper. What is argued here is a move from incremental, conservative change towards a radical shift in the HRD paradigm since the work of Peretz and McGraw (2011) shows an overall decreasing level of HRD sophistication in Australian organizations (with no significant pattern of difference between public and private companies) over a 13 year period. These findings provide fundamental support for a need for an archetype shift to embed processes that value learning as a key driver, rather than relying heavily on management since "Australia is placing less emphasis on training employees than on appraising their performance and managing their careers" (Peretz & McGraw, 2011, p. 52).There is a new attention required to embed learning in performance, to develop people, diversity, vitality, professionalism, innovativeness and new worldviews on all levels (van der Sluis, 2007).…”

“…Alam, Khan and Dost (2011) illustrate that HRD is dependent on organizational learning and that knowledge creation processes strengthen this relationship. Peretz and McGraw's (2011) analysis of Australian trends in HRD practice from 1996 to 2009 reveals an aggregate decrease in HRD sophistication across all organizational types with a decrease in 'learning' oriented practices and an increase in 'performance' oriented practices. There is an increasing recognition of the potential of the HRD function in particular for positive long-term impact on organizational effectiveness.…”

Impact of Human Resource Information System on Firm Financial Performance

“…Similarly, an evolution on human resource development (HRD) in Australian organizations was conducted based on 13 years period from 1996-2009 and analyzed the effect of ownership pattern, the company size, and industry sector on HRD practices. Among the results, the study revealed limited differences in HRD practices between public and private sector organizations (Peretz & McGraw, 2011). Moreover, from the results of one sample T-test presented in the subsection 4.1 of this study, it is clear the applications of HRIS significantly vary among the organizations.…”

Workplace wellbeing programs: If you build it they may NOT come…because it’s not what they really need!

“…This refers to the observation that contemporary HR managers have moved away from their traditional focus on employee welfare and professional development, and are now primarily concerned with strategic goals and employee performance (Brown, Metz, Cregan, & Kulik, 2009;Peretz & McGraw, 2011). According to Brown et al (2009), this shift away from employee welfare has been challenging for many HR professionals, partially because it has eroded confidence amongst employees that they can (and will) continue to adequately represent their interests.…”