Systems theory has been challenged in the recent literature due to its perceived disconnection from today’s research and practice demands. Moving away from the reductionist frameworks and the complicated domain predominated by known unknowns and order, a call is being made to the social sciences to begin adopting complexity theory and newer connectionist methods that better address complexity and open social systems. Scholars and scholar-practitioners will continue to find the need to apply complexity theory as wicked problems become more prevalent in the social sciences. This paper differentiates between general systems theory (GST) and complexity theory, as well as identifies advantages for the social sciences in incorporating complexity theory as a formal theory. Complexity theory is expanded upon and identified as providing a new perspective and a new method of theorizing that can be practiced by disciplines within the social sciences. These additions could better position the social sciences to address the complexity associated with advancing technology, globalization, intricate markets, cultural change, and the myriad of challenges and opportunities to come.
Among the requirements for engineering programs, the Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) criteria for student outcomes require students to have the ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences, recognize ethical and professional responsibilities, function effectively on a team, and apply new knowledge. A review of literature for skills comprised within these ABET criteria determined 26 topics necessary for the entry-level and continued success of engineers. Nearly 500 companies and organizations rated the importance and proficiency of their recent entry-level engineers for these 26 identified soft (professional) skills. The findings suggest that although entry-level engineers have proficiency in all of these ABET required skills, the entry-level engineers were not meeting the level of importance expressed by the organization for 24 of these 26 skills. A specific ABET required skill, the ability to communicate effectively with diverse groups of people, has the greatest difference between the level of proficiency and the level of importance. Analysis of variance was conducted using each of the demographic variables to determine the effect sizes in the ratings of importance, proficiency, and the differences between importance and proficiency. These results were shared with industry members to confirm the relevance of the survey findings during the pandemic. This survey research has implications for any university engineering department where students are seeking entry-level engineering positions after graduation.
18 September 2017 in Journal of Management & Organization
The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships among human resource development (HRD) efforts, top management support, and employees’ attitudes (job satisfaction and organizational commitment) in the Korean context. Based on the Korean Human Capital Corporate Panel survey data, 3,899 responses from 159 large companies were analyzed by adopting hierarchical multiple regression analysis and a regression-based path analysis. The results indicated that HRD efforts positively affected organizational commitment through job satisfaction. In addition, job satisfaction had a moderated mediation effect on the interaction of HRD efforts and top management support on organization commitment. Finally, top management support moderates the relationship between HRD efforts and employees’ attitudes such that increased top management support for HRD efforts improves employees’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment.
19 October 2018 in European Journal of Training and Development
Purpose: This paper aims to identify the life-cycle of leadership theory from both the human resource development (HRD) and the organizational/leadership literature while providing a contrast between the two bodies of literature. The current research identifies which theories are being represented within the HRD literature, followed by a review of current directions in the leadership fields, primarily from literature in the organizational and leadership fields. By identifying these two bodies of leadership theories, the following research question will be answered: How current are the leadership theories provided in the literature of HRD compared to research that is reported from other external leadership fields? Design/methodology/approach: This paper examines how leadership theories are represented in the HRD literature. Data for the current article provide a preview of leadership theories that are used to inform HRD scholars and scholar–practitioners for a period of 15 years (2000-2015) in the four Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) publications (Advances in Developing Human Resources; Human Resource Development International; Human Resource Development Quarterly; and Human Resource Development Review). The four journals within the AHRD were reviewed to identify which leadership theories were being researched and used to inform members of HRD. The search terms for the current study included “leadership AND theory,” “team AND leadership,” “leadership AND development” and “team AND development.” Studies that presented a leadership theory and either described or defined the theory were coded for the current study. Within this body of literature, there were a total of 74 leadership theories identified (some repeating), among those there were a total of 20 unique leadership theories. The literature external of HRD was identified using the ScienceDirect database for 10 years (2007-2017) with the topics limited to “topics–leadership.” Once the HRD and organizational/leadership literature are presented, a comparison between the two literature streams will be provided, highlighting any deficiencies within either body of literature and recommendations for future research efforts for the field of HRD. Findings: This examination of leadership theory study within HRD and other fields highlights the deficiencies within either body of literature and offers recommendations for future research efforts for the field of HRD. In line with the trend in leadership research, HRD should call for more longitudinal and multi-level research efforts to be conducted as opposed to cross-sectional studies. Research limitations/implications: The current study is limited in the literature that was used to collect/code data. Also, the time frame for the HRD literature ended in 2015 due to the long duration required to review articles and to code the data. Secondary data were obtained from organizational/leadership literature and are more current because they are more recent. Overall, even with an end date of 2015 for the HRD literature, the HRD field has not changed too much during this time and the authors recognize some minor changes, but the research findings are still relevant and the leadership deficits presented are still realized. Practical implications: The field of HRD is behind when it comes to leadership theories. This paper identifies this in an effort to aid researchers, students and practitioners to look beyond the leadership theories presented in the HRD literature for more relevant and current leadership theories. This paper highlighted a number of newer and current leadership theories and trends for scholars and scholar-practitioners to begin to focus on; however, this list is only a snapshot and is bounded by the data collected for the current paper. Originality/value: This paper is original in that it is both critical of leadership research within the HRD literature while also providing new directions for the field. The snapshot of where the field of HRD is compared to the leadership and organizational fields becomes apparent with multiple future directions for research.
11 January 2018 in Human Resource Development Review
The Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) has proven to be a source of knowledge providing research in the forms of theory development, literature reviews, educational and descriptive analyses, critical analyses, and empirical research studies. Given this vast body of knowledge, there has not been a call for researchers to provide a literature review format for tracing the life cycles of individual theories, differentiating between formal and informal theories within human resource development’s (HRD) body of knowledge. The current article proposes a format for conducting a theoretical literature review, using path-goal leadership theory and the learning organization as two examples to showcase the benefits of using a theoretical literature review. Incorporating theoretical literature reviews to some of the AHRD’s journals could help in identifying and mapping the field’s formal and informal theories while aiding in providing additional historical reviews for the discipline.