人力资源开发应致力于使封闭的环境更加开放:对王和多蒂、拉斯·埃夫特和尹的元反应

IF 4.6 3区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Human Resource Development Review Pub Date : 2022-10-12 DOI:10.1177/15344843221134654
R. Poell
{"title":"人力资源开发应致力于使封闭的环境更加开放:对王和多蒂、拉斯·埃夫特和尹的元反应","authors":"R. Poell","doi":"10.1177/15344843221134654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":51474,"journal":{"name":"Human Resource Development Review","volume":"21 1","pages":"465 - 472"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human Resource Development Should Aim to Make Closed Contexts More Open: A Meta Reaction to Wang and Doty, Russ-Eft, and Yoon\",\"authors\":\"R. Poell\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15344843221134654\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51474,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Resource Development Review\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"465 - 472\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Resource Development Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15344843221134654\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Resource Development Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15344843221134654","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

在这篇元反应论文中,我回顾了王和多蒂的最初论文(2022a)、两个回应(Russ-Eft,2022;尹,2022)以及对受访者的最终回应(王和多迪,2022b)。我关注两个对我来说很突出的观察,包括:(1)人力资源开发是如何定义的;(2) 人力资源开发应该为什么做出贡献,以及在多大程度上,最初作者对人力资源开发的理论实际上是“解放”。首先,我得出结论,王和多蒂的系统视角几乎没有为各个利益相关者在员工学习组织方式方面的个人代理和合法利益留出空间。与此相关,他们对“主流人力资源开发文献”的处理并不令人信服,这限制了他们自己理论化努力的理由和贡献。其次,我得出的结论是,王和多蒂的工作违背了人力资源开发的伦理核心,而且没有达到他们所声称的“解放理论”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Human Resource Development Should Aim to Make Closed Contexts More Open: A Meta Reaction to Wang and Doty, Russ-Eft, and Yoon
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
17.20%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: As described elsewhere, Human Resource Development Review is a theory development journal for scholars of human resource development and related disciplines. Human Resource Development Review publishes articles that make theoretical contributions on theory development, foundations of HRD, theory building methods, and integrative reviews of the relevant literature. Papers whose central focus is empirical findings, including empirical method and design are not considered for publication in Human Resource Development Review. This journal encourages submissions that provide new theoretical insights to advance our understanding of human resource development and related disciplines. Such papers may include syntheses of existing bodies of theory, new substantive theories, exploratory conceptual models, taxonomies and typology developed as foundations for theory, treatises in formal theory construction, papers on the history of theory, critique of theory that includes alternative research propositions, metatheory, and integrative literature reviews with strong theoretical implications. Papers addressing foundations of HRD might address philosophies of HRD, historical foundations, definitions of the field, conceptual organization of the field, and ethical foundations. Human Resource Development Review takes a multi-paradigm view of theory building so submissions from different paradigms are encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Plotting the Blank Space Among Leadership, Job Crafting, and Career Development: An Integrative Review and Future Agendas for HRD What is Known About Development-Oriented Performance Management Practices? A Scoping Review Exploring Opportunities for Artificial Intelligence in Organization Development Responsible AI in Organizational Training: Applications, Implications, and Recommendations for Future Development Theorising Later-Career as a Basis for Enhancing Inclusion and Extending Working Lives Through Human Resource Development
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1