ERIC ED474232: Work Ethic and Values in HRD. Symposium.

36 Pages·2002·0.7 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 474 232
CE 084 667
Work Ethic and Values in HRD. Symposium.
TITLE
REPORT NO
No-27
PUB DATE
2002-00-00
NOTE
34p.; In: Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD)
Conference Proceedings (Honolulu, Hawaii, February 27-March
3, 2002); see CE 084 635.
PUB TYPE Reports
Research (143)
Speeches/Meeting Papers (150)
EDRS Price MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
DESCRIPTORS
Adult Learning; Case Studies; Comparative Analysis; *Cost
Effectiveness; Cultural Context; Delivery Systems; Education
Work Relationship; Educational Research; Factor Analysis;
Foreign Countries; Human Resources; *Labor Force Development;
Literature Reviews; Online Courses; Outcomes of Education;
Postsecondary Education; Protestants; Questionnaires;
Research Methodology; Research and Development; Researchers;
Teacher Attitudes; *Trainers; Universities; *Values; *Web
Based Instruction; *Work Ethic
IDENTIFIERS
Electronic Learning; Hofstede (Geert); Kuwait; Learning
Organizations; Organizational Learning; United States;
University of Illinois
ABSTRACT
This document contains four papers from a symposium on work
ethic and values in human resource development (HRD). "Value Priorities of
HRD Scholars and Practitioners" (Reid Bates, Hsin Chih Chen, Tim Hatcher)
presents the results of a study that identified and analyzed six HRD values
reflecting two value facets (locus of HRD influence and HRD outcomes) and a
seventh value reflecting a perceived normative component in all HRD activity.
"The Development of a Research Instrument to Compare Working Values across
Different Cultures Based on Hofstede's VSM (Value Survey Module)
Questionnaire" (Salwa Yousef Al-Sharqawi, Sally Anne Sambrook) discusses an
exploratory research approach used to adapt Hofstede's Value Survey Module
for use in a doctoral research project examining work values in public and
privte banks in Kuwait and replicating Hofstede's study of cultural
dimensions. "An Examination of the Viability of the Work Ethic
Construct" (Sharon S. Naquin, Elwood F. Holton) examines the protestant work
ethic (PWE) literature and presents an exploratory and confirmatory factor
analysis of leading- composite measures of PWE constructs. "Cost Analysis of
E-Learning: A Case Study of a University Program" (Tim L. Wentling, Ji-Hye
Park) examines cost drivers of e-learning programs and analyzes the
University of Illinois' online human resource education program. All four
papers include substantial bibliographies.
(MN)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
CENTER (ERIC)
BEEN GRANTED BY
This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
originating it.
Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality.
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
Points of view or opinions stated in this
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
document do not necessarily represent
official OERI position or policy.
1
2002 AHRD Conference
Work Ethic and Values in HRD
Symposium 27
Honolulu, Hawaii
March 3, 2002
February 27
-
?BEST COPY AVANLA
111,
2
Value Priorities of HRD Scholars and Practitioners
Reid Bates
Louisiana State University
Hsin Chih Chen
Tim Hatcher
University of Louisville
that reflect two value facets (locus of
This study identifies, describes and measures a set of six HRD values
perceived normative component
HRD influence and HRD outcomes) and a seventh value that relates to a
individual value priorities of
inherent in all HRD activity. Results indicated the value scales measured the
considerably. Suggestions for future
HRD scholars and practitioners and that these value priorities varied
research are offered.
Keywords: HRD Values, HRD Goals
and a good deal of literature has been
HRD has been characterized as a field in search of itself (Watkins, 1989)
HRD is or should be. In spite of the
published in the last decade aimed at defining the profession or describing what
moving the field toward an
fervent discourse, little has been accomplished in terms of generating consensus or
Lynham (1999, p. 215) have pointed out,
answer to these fundamental questions. It is, as Ruona and
conversation that is ongoing and becomes the prominent
. a
that is, .
conversation having us
. a
.
.
.
Very few new
focus such that little else actually happens except the having of the conversation.
little progress is made
thoughts are generated, positions are defended, tradition weighs heavy, and very
in understanding and creating new meaning.
done to more fully understand the
It is noteworthy that, despite this state of affairs, scant research has been
definitions of HRD (Weinberger,
underlying drivers of the debate. Some valuable work has been done documenting
practice of HRD (Dirkx, 1996; Watkins,
1998; Mclean & Mclean, 2001), articulating different perspectives on the
2000a). However, nothing has been
1998), and describing the core beliefs of some leading HRD scholars (Ruona,
definitions, modes of practice, or
done to uncover and understand the foundation from which these competing
the discourse surrounding competing
philosophies emerge. This paper takes the perspective that to fully interpret
of the values that guide the
definitions, practices, and beliefs about HRD we must first gain some understanding
HRD professionals use to
Values are the relatively enduring evaluative criteria or standards that
HRD process.
future. Values thus represent normative
make decisions about how the HRD process should happen now or in the
and understanding these values is important
statements describing the ideal state of the HRD process. Discovering
have about the development of human
because they influence the beliefs and attitudes that HRD professionals
about individual actions or activities within the HRD process.
resources and help form the basis for decision making
The Importance of Values
and have become an increasingly interesting
Values have occupied a central place in the analysis of work systems
behavior, social psychology, ethics and other fields of
and important area of research in management, organizational
fundamental rationale for this research is the
study (e.g., Argyris & Schon,1982; Kahle, 1996; Schwartz, 1996). A
For example, values have been
notion that values can provide potentially powerful explanations of behavior.
behavior of organization (Munson & Posner,
applied to account for the productivity of nations (Hofstede, 1980), the
In addition, a key to understanding most
1980), and the performance of teams (Maznevski, & Peterson, 1997).
around which people organize their
theories of individual work motivation centers on the goals or desired outcomes
achieved, they contribute directly to
actions and cognitions. These theories assert that when goals or outcomes are
individual to individual.
the satisfaction of certain values, values that can and do vary from
provide a basis for assigning
Elements can be conceived of as falling within the value domain if they
tendency to prefer certain states of affairs
importance to a goal or behavior. In this sense, values represent "a broad
describe how an individual feels the world should work or how
over others" (Hofstede, 1980, p. 19) and, in effect,
Copyright © 2002 Reid Bates, Hsin Chih Chen and Tim Hatcher
27-1
behavioral guides capable of
Values thus provide standards for conduct and
he/she would like it to work.
transcending specific situations (Schwartz, 1992).
Attitudes address how individuals
than attitudes.
It is important to note that values are qualitatively different
them to respond in some manner (Rokeach,
feel about a specific situation, condition, or event which predisposes
the state of affairs an individual prefers or
Values on the other hand are abstract preferences that reflect
1972).
opportunities?' is an
In a survey, for example, 'how satisfied are you with your career
thinks is more important.
have career opportunities? is a value question.
attitude question, but 'how important should it be for to you to
not only in the mind of researchers,
Research has empirically shown that attitudes and values are different constructs
but also in the mind of respondents (Hofstede, 1998).
& Bilsky, 1990) values are important
According to value theory (Rokeach & Ball-Rokeach, 1989; Schwartz
values are acquired and hierarchically organized to
because they tend to be structured and stable over time. That is,
and
The structure of value systems emerges out of the social
become part of a relatively enduring system.
through action (Rokeach, 1973). For example,
psychological conflicts that accompany the expression of values
the creation of meaningful work: using the
actions aimed at improving job-specific performance may conflict with
actions aimed at enabling individuals to fulfill
HRD process to maximize individual work outcomes may preclude
priorities
Thus, the total pattern of conflicts and harmonies among value
important inner needs through work.
Value structures provide individuals with an ordered
produces a structure for value systems (Schwartz, 1994).
It is through their influence on decision-making that
framework for resolving conflicts and making decisions.
For example, an HRD
specific actions.
variations in value structures motivate individual behavior and affect
be help others learn, derives satisfaction
professional who values individual learning as a top priority is motivated to
The structure of values may therefore
from increasing learning, and fulfills a personal need when being so engaged.
given situation.
be used to understand how potential behaviors may be ordered in a
behavior including participation in civil rights
Research has in fact linked values to a wide range of individual
safety behavior, and absence (Judge & Bretz,
activities (Rokeach, 1973), personal doing (Levy, 1990), job search,
complex and not fully
However, the link between values and behavior is dynamic,
1992) to name a few.
link, ignoring antecedent and intervening
understood. Value research has tended to take too narrow a view of this
behavior as simple and direct. The failure to
variables, and generally viewing the relationship between values and
primary reason this research has not generally
study values in the context of other variables is seen by some as the
It is increasingly recognized that to
1997).
shown a robust effect between values and behavior (Shrum & McCarty,
include potentially important antecedents such as
fully understand the values -behavior relationship research must
1988)
Shrum, I 993a), mediators such as attitudes (Homer & Kahle,
age, education, gender, or income (McCarty &
the
1992), and moderators including situational factors as well as
or individual differences (Shrum & McCarty,
relationship among values themselves (McCarty & Shrum, 1993b).
Purpose of Research
identify the underlying values about the HRD
This research is exploratory in nature and represents an initial effort to
how HRD scholars
Our goal was to create a cpantifiable description of
process held by HRD professionals.
the HRD process should be viewed. Rather than
(students, academicians and researchers), and practitioners believe
individual values as they relate to the HRD process in
investigate values in general, we were interested in specific
specific frame as opposed to a general frame
organizations. An explicit focus of this nature has been referred to as a
insight into the ongoing debate about what
(Wilkins & Dyer, 1988). It is hoped that this research will provide greater
aimed at a more complete understanding of both the
HRD should be and provide a basis for future research
philosophy and practice of HRD.
Methodology
made to define its essential facets. Facet theory
To analyze the HRD values domain systematically, an attempt was
that can be used to formulate a definition of a
defines facets as "characteristic components of relevant variables . ..
that depicts the
reflects an essential component of a content universe of variable
. each facet
construct because .
.
representing semantic or perceptual properties
construct" (Dancer, 1990, p. 367). Facets are hypothesized elements
frame and approach for measuring a content domain
that distinguish the basic components of variables and provide a
is through
One means of identifying and characterizing value facets
(Edmundson, Koch, & Silverman, 1993).
Therefore the identification and classification of HRD
1992).
content analysis of cultural products (Schwartz,
HRD research and literature representing what
values in this study was based on an extensive content analysis of the
(the learning, performance, and
is recognized as the three fundamental philosophies about the HRD process
27-1
2001). Two basic facets were identified as
spirituality of work philosophies) (Bates, Hatcher, Holton, & Chalofsky,
of HRD influence. Six values emerged
representing the content domain of HRD values: HRD outcomes and locus
building caring organizations (BCO),
from the matrix of these two facets: creating empowering work (CEW),
(CLS), improving job-specific
building competence through learning (BCTL), creating learning systems
and values are shown in Figure 1 along
performance (IJSP), and meeting organizational goals (MOG). The facets
(MG), was also identified. This value
with sample items for each value scale. A seventh value, macro HRD goal
is described below.
was seen as distinct from the two primary facets and
the HRD process. In general, these are
Facet A: HRD Outcomes. A variety of outcomes are attainable from
performance. Meaning of work
reflected in three fundamental outcome domains: meaning of work, learning, and
individuals to create work that is personally meaningful
outcomes emphasizes processes that empower and enable
emphasize increases in the long-term,
and that fulfills important emotional and social needs. Learning outcomes
the development and application of
work-related learning capacity of individuals, groups and organizations through
Figure 1. HRD Value Matrix with Sample Items
Facet A: HRD Outcomes
Performance
Learning
Meaning
Job-Specific
Improving
Competence
Building
Empowering
Creating
Performance (IJSP)
Individual
Through Learning (BCTL)
Work (CEW)
'
HRD activities should
KBD's focus should be
HRD should create
enable people to meet
on building individual
that
workplaces
job-related
specific
through
competence
to
people
enable
performance
Facet
B:
learning.
important
fulfill
of
requirements.
Locus
inner needs.
Influence
Meeting
Creating
Caring
Building
Goals
Organizational
Learning Systems (CLS)
Organizations (BCO)
of
(MOG)
creation
The
A key goal for HRD
Organization
goal should
HRD 's
learning
should be to build a
effective
improve
to
be
systems should be the
culture of trust and
organizational
most important goals
in
openness
performance.
for HRD.
organizations.
organizational growth and effectiveness
learning-based interventions for purpose of optimizing human and
focus on those elements of work behavior
(Chalofsky, 1992; Watkins, 1989). Outcomes in the performance domain
Performance
those behaviors are embedded.
that directly advance the mission of the work system in which
other outcomes can be nurtured and respected these are secondary
outcomes are work-system specific and although
work system is defined as an interdependent, organized
to a core focus on mission-related performance. A
It is a more
of a valued goal or outcome.
architecture of human activity directed toward the accomplishment
of HRD activity. Conceptually, the
inclusive construct than organization and is thought to better reflect the range
HRD process can be exerted at multiple levels in a work system.
of influence of the HRD process and is seen
Facet B: Locus of Influence. The second facet concerns the locus
is
influence refers to the point in work systems that the HRD process
as cutting across HRD outcomes. Locus of
reflect two classifications: individual
The locus of influence elements that emerged in this analysis
applied.
directed at meeting the needs of
influence and organization influence. Individual influence refers to HRD processes
HRD processes directed at meeting the
individuals performing in a work system. Organization influence refers to
design, structure, management, and process needs of a work system.
27-1
of the facets identified above.
HRD goal, emerged independent
Macro HRD Goal. A seventh value, macro
inherent in
should be explicitly recognized as
the normative component that
This value relates to what many see as
that the
makes exp licit the understanding
As a value, the macro HRD goal
all human resource development activity.
This
acknowledged overarching criterion.
be evaluated against an
propriety of different HRD objectives must
reinforces the idea that improvement, a
in any specific work system and
criterion extends beyond HRD activities
growth, productivity, or
equated simply with economic
definitions of HRD, can no longer be
core theme in all
multiple paths of improvement
of recognizing that there are
It also underscores the necessity
shareholder return.
economic
ecological, political, cultural, and
with reference to larger social,
that ultimately can only be evaluated
have a responsibility for human
this value include "HRD should
considerations. Examples of items used to measure
work to build healthy relationships
boundaries" and " HRD should
development that goes beyond organizational
environment".
social, cultural, and ecological
between an organization and the external
Instrument
pencil survey. Items on the survey were
the use of a standard paper and
Data collection in this study employed
individual learning) and designed
HRD should support and accelerate
worded in a normative manner (e.g.,
normative
to which they believed the
Respondents were asked to rate the extent
specifically to tap values.
from 1
scale was used with anchors ranging
practice. A five-point Likert -type
statements should be used to guide
almost always).
(never or almost never) to 5 (always or
Subjects
practitioners, and students in HRD
consisted of HRD educators, researchers,
The sampling frame of this study
have been invited
2001 AHRD conference, or who
members of AHRD, who attended the
programs of study who are
and
here were provided a paper and pencil survey
Respondents in the data set reported
to participate in this study.
and as of this writing 84 responses
Participation in this study was voluntary
asked to return it to the author by mail.
of age, 31 % of the respondents were
female and 36 % were male. In terms
have been collected. Of these, 64 % were
56 years of age. Respondents reported an
and 55, and five percent were over
35 or younger, 64 % were between 36
child. About 39% of
first year of formal education as a
formal education counting their
average of 21 years of
in HRD programs in colleges or
(instructors, professors, or researchers
respondents were classified as HRD scholars
training
graduate or undergraduate HRD or
and eight percent as students in
universities), 53% as HRD practitioners,
and development programs.
Results
development.
acceptable range for early scale
.89 and can be considered in the
Scale reliabilities ranged from .60 to
of
through learning (BCTL) to a low
high of 4.05 for building competence
Scale means for the sample range from a
into three
the scale means appear to fall
(MG). When viewed as an aggregate,
3.02 for the macro HRD goal
(El = 3.90); a
= 4.05) and CLS
consisted of two values, BCTL
hierarchical value groupings. A high group
and a third
(1)33 =3.53), and MOG (1;11 =3.42):
included CEW (CM =3.65), IJSP
second mid-range constellation that
be found in Table 1.
Scale means and reliabilities can
(MI =3.21) and MG (CD = 3.02).
group comprised of BCO
important findings. First, the low
(see Table 2) yielded several
Examination of the value scale intercorrelations
the scales are
scales in this study strongly suggests
intercorrelations between the value
to moderate level of
data showed several interesting
Second, examination of this
values.
measuring qualitatively different
61, p s .05) and BCO (r =.
correlation between MG and CEW (r =.
intercorrelations. For example, the significant
that HRD
(CEW, BCO) highly also believed
who rated meaning-related values
55, p s .05) suggests that individuals
value
Examination of the performance outcome
goal as a guiding value.
should have a overarching normative
shows that the MG scale is negatively
relationships with other value scales
elements (IJSP and MOG) and their
who
scales. This suggests that individuals
.05) and MOG (r = -.23, p s .05)
correlated with both IJSP (r = -.29, p s
high
guide the HRD process do not give
the most important values to
believe performance outcome values are
related to
BCO and CEW were negatively
goal as a guiding value. In addition,
priority to an overarching normative
-.24, p s .05 and .13, ns). This
-.28, and r = -.28, ps .05; for MOG, r =
both performance elements (for IJSP r =
should be high priority values to lead
performance outcome- related values
indicates individuals who believe that
priority.
meaning-related values much lower
the HRD process also give
274
Standard Deviations
Table 1. Scale Re liabilities, Means and
I Practitioner
I Scholar
I- Female
I Male
SD
®
SD
CEO
SD
LE
SD
SD
GiJ
Dia
3.87
.61
.42
4.22
.53
4.02
.59
4.03
.55
4.05
83
BCTL
.64 .72
3.77
.59
4.10
.67
3.87
.73
3.93
.69
3.90
83
.78
CLS
.75
3.42
.62
3.90
.64
3.62
.84
3.65
.71
3.65
83
CEW
.62
.83
3.73
.60
3.36
3.56
.61
.66
3.46
.63
3.53
83
.64
.78
3.46
USP
.65
3.33
.73
3.42
.67
3.32
3.42
.71
81
.70
MOG
.81
3.07
.71
3.44
.66
3.11
.84
3.35
.73
3.21
81
.60
BCO
.84
2.71
1.04
3.32
.97
3.06
.99
2.93
.98
3.02
Job-
81
.89
MG
Creating Empowering Work USP = Improving
CLS = Creating Learning Systems CEW =
BCTL = Building Compaence Through Learning
MG = Macro HRD Goal
Goals BCO = Building Caring Organizations
Specific Performance MOG = Meeting Organizational
Table 2. Scale Intercorrelations
MG
MOG
USP
CLS
BCTL
BCO
CEW
--
CEW
--
.65'
BCO
--
.42'
.53*
BCTL
--
.63'
.28'
.37'
CLS
--
.26*
-.28'
.03
-.28'
USP
--
.58'
.39'
-.24'
.12
-.13
MOP
-.23'
-.29'
.31'
.11
.55'
.61'
MG
p
.05
differences in HRD value priorities by
(MANOVA) was used to examine
Multivariate analysis of variance
included three categories: students
classifications of interest in this study
gender and job classification. The job
scholars
and development programs);
undergraduate HRD or training
(individuals enrolled in graduate or
engaged in
and HRD practitioners (those
working in colleges or universities);
(instructors, professors or researchers
students in
of the relatively small number of
For analysis purposes, because
the full or part time practice of HRD).
researchers to form a single
combined with instructors, professors, or
the sample this category of respondents was
between genders
differences in HRD value ratings
analysis showed no significant
subset titled scholars. Although
(Wilks
differences by job classification
it did indicate some significant
(Wilks Lambda =. 61, F =. 1020.26),
scholars and
showed significant differences between
of between-subjects effects
Lambda =. 001, F =. 77). The tests
.01,
BCO, BCTL, CLS, IJSP, and MG were
MOG (p-values for CEW,
practitioners in ratings of all values except
.04, .01, .04, .01, and .01 respectively).
and across the
by gender, job classification,
relative mean ratings of values
A final analysis examined the
of individuals rated learning-related
Analysis showed that the highest percentage
sample as a whole (see Table 3).
Thirty-four percent of the sample
important in guiding the HRD process.
values (BCTL & CLS) as those most
interesting to
rating. On the other hand, it is
ranked CLS highest in terms of mean
ranked BCTL highest and 30%
Classification
Individuals. Gender, and Job
Table 3. Top Ranked Values by
By Job Classification
By Gender
By Individuals
Practitioner
Scholar
I Female
Male
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N'
N
%
Value
29
40
10
12
33
14
37
10
34
24
BCTL
29
10
37
28
11
12
33
9
30
CLS
21
14
5
10
9
II
3
4
4
15
CEW
8
3
10
1
3
12
5
4
9
6
MG
1
14
--
5
--
9
4
4
7
5
1
9
LISP
3
7
4
3
6
4
MOG 1
3
3
2
I
1
4
1
3
BCO
2
1
35
30
43
27
Total"
70
rated
specific value the highest of all values
N' = number of individuals who rated a
in this table
with equal top ratings are not included
Total" = Individuals with two or more values
of
In addition, a larger percentage
(MG) highest.
sample rated the macro HRD goal
note that nine percent of the
4%).
guide the HRD process (12% versus
the most important value that should
females than males felt that MG was
27-1
7
and
of individuals than did IJSP (7%), MOG (5%),
Overall MG had the highest mean rating for a larger percentage
lowest mean rating of all the value scales.
BCO (2.86%). This despite the fact that the MG scale received
BCO) is
four of the value scales (BCTL, CLS, CEW, and
In terms of job classification, the ranking pattern of
One of the most
practitioners ranking each the highest.
comparable in terms of the percentage of scholars and
highest mean
of practitioners gave either IJSP or MOG the
striking findings is that although nearly a quarter (23%)
outcome-related values the highest mean rating. It is
ratings, none of the scholars gave either of these performance
should
of scholars (10%) rated MG as the value that
also interesting to note that a substantially higher percentage
These findings are
only 3% of practitioners rated it so.
always or almost always guide the HRD process while
for
while the domain of HRD values may be the same
consistent with value theory and strongly suggest that,
of those values may vary based on the differing
scholars and practitioners, the structure and relative priority
challenges individuals face in the expression of those values.
Conclusions
First, this research demonstrates that HRD
this research.
At least two important conclusions can be drawn from
described and measured. For example, this study
professionals operate from a structured set of values that can be
high
meaning-related values (CEW, BCO) also tend to give
suggests that individuals who place high priority on
place high
guiding value. On the other hand, individuals who
priority to a normative, macro-level goal (MG) as a
do not give high priority to a normative, macro-level
priority on performance outcome-related values (IJSP, MOG)
learning-related values highly. Understanding value structures
goal (MG) as a guiding value nor do they tend to rate
evaluative standards that individual HRD professionals
such as these is important because they represent enduring
give
should work. Describing and measuring such structures can
use to make decisions about how the HRD process
the HRD process as well as the beliefs and attitudes that
insight into both the actions that individuals undertake in
HRD professionals have about the development of human resources.
study tapped individual value priorities rather than a set
Second, the data indicate that the measures used in this
This is an important conclusion because, to the
of normatively approved values of HRD professionals as a group.
rather
be inclined to report values that reflect group norms
extent that values represent group ideals, individuals may
priorities identified in this study would
If this were the case, then the values and value
than personal priorities.
profession rather than reflective of individual motivations
better be understood as cultural conventions of the HRD
and beliefs.
of
identifying and describing the personal value priorities
However, our focus and interest in this study was
For
evidence that we have been successful in this endeavor.
HRD professionals. We believe the data provide
of individual HRD professionals vary considerably.
instance, it is clear from this research that the value priorities
of
lop rankings', at most only about one-third
Not only did each of the seven values measured received one or more
specific value as that which should be most
the individuals in this sample were in agreement about any one
that individual
In addition, a number of findings in this study suggest
important in guiding the HRD process.
differences. For example, a higher percentage of women
variation in value priorities was associated with individual
the top priority
percentage of scholars (10%) rated MG as
rated MG as a top priority than did men; a substantial
either of the
(3%); and none of the scholars in this study rated
while only a small proportion of practitioners did
of
whereas nearly a quarter of practitioners gave one
performance-related values (IJSP or MOG) as the top priority
in the respondent's
If these differences were due to measurement error or error
these values the top ranking.
kinds of systematic differences would have emerged.
perception of cultural beliefs then it is unlikely that these
from this data
it would be misleading to draw conclusions
Because this study tapped individual value priorities,
in this study
Although the descriptive and inferential statistics used
about the normative value structure for HRD.
this data to conclude that
priorities and differences in this sample, we cannot use
were used to characterize the value
In short, the
value structure of the HRD profession as a whole.
these findings in any way represent the normative
ideals of a
priorities and it is not possible to derive the normative
values assessed in this study reflect individual
(Schwartz, 1992).
larger group or culture from the average of individual responses
in HRD
How This Research Contributes to New Knowledge
what
done a very good job of working to identify who we are,
It is perhaps true that u[a]s a profession, we have not
2000b). If HRD is to
importantly should] do for those we serve" (Ruona,
we stand for, and what we can [or more
ourselves as
of our practice should be or how we should define
make headway in determining what the driving goals
be
understanding of fundamental values driving the HRD process must
a field of research and practice then some
27-I
8
and to
identify a specific set of HRD values
perhaps the first empirical attempt to
reached. This research represents
should be
professionals believe the ideal HRD process
description of how individual HRD
create a quantifiable
viewed.
HRD
that the roles and practices that
field in search of itself is
One reason that HRD is viewed as a
individual behavior in these roles and
widely. The rules that govern
professionals develop and institutionalize vary
Ohayv, &
espoused values (Hofstede, Neuijen,
of core values. Even though
practices reflect an underlying set
of
1985) we believe the identification
in use (Posner, Kouzed, & Schmidt,
Sanders, 1990) can differ from values
professionals
from which individual HRD
fully illuminate the woridview
values in this study has helped to more
individual research and practice.
operate and the standards framing
the
that could significantly contribute to
for future values-related research
This research also lays the foundation
differences in
fully understand individual
in this research can be used to more
field of HRD. The values assessed
investigating
They also provide a means for
practices of HRD professionals.
beliefs, attitudes, and organizational
the values-
system factors might affect
practice of HRD and how person or
how values may affect the actual
of HRD
the individual value priorities
these measures to investigate how
behavior link. It may also be fruitful to use
For
the expected outcomes from HRD.
the perceived value of HRD or
professionals in an organization influence
management, line managers and
stakeholders in organizations (e.g., top
example, questions about how other
and interpret these values and how are
trade unions, customers, etc.) respond to
supervisors, individual employees,
important future research questions.
and perceived value of HRD represent
these perceptions are related to the status
data
word on HRD values. The present
the current findings as the final
Finally, it would be a mistake to accept
clearly excluded a
exclusively AHRD members. This
sample of U.S. professionals, almost
was drawn from a small
This is
those from other parts of the world.
HRD professionals, particularly
potentially large number of other
to another, and the national
definition of HRD varies "from one country
critical since research suggests that the
1997,
professional work" (Hillion & Mclean,
determining the way in which HRD
differences are a crucial factor in
of HRD may be related to a
values underlying the role and process
The clear implication is that the
p. 695).
cycle
b the point in the life
the level of economic development, or
country's cultural or national values, to
Consequently, the cross-national and
(Mclean & Mclean, 2001).
development of the field in any particular country
values not included here.
lead to the identification of additional
cross-cultural study of HRD values may
References
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Theory in practice learning. San
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1982).
development: An
(2001). Redefining human resource
E. F., III, & Chalofsky, N.
Bates, R. A., Hatcher, T., Holton,
In 0. Aliaga (Ed.), 2001
perspectives.
and spirituality of work
integration of the learning, performance,
Meeting.
Resource Development Annual
Proceedings of the Academy of Human
Resource
development profession. Human
definition for the human resource
Chalosfky, N. (1992). A unifying
Development Quarterly, 3,175-182.
Applied Psychology: An International
application.
Introduction to facet theory and its
(1990).
Dancer, L. S.
Review, 39(4), 365-377.
New
Fostering the educative workplace.
development as adult education:
Dirkx, J. M. (1996). Human resource
Education, 72, 41-47.
Directions for Adult and Continuing
content and construct
(1993). A facet analysis approach to
Silverman, S.
Edmundson, E. W., Koch, W. R., &
Measurement, 53,351-368.
validity. Educational and Psychological
R. J.
development in French companies. In
(1997). The status of human resource
Hillion, B., & McLean, G. N.
Baton
Conference Proceedings (pp. 694-701).
Resource Development 1997
Torraco (Ed.), Academy of Human
Rouge, LA: AHRD.
Organization
culture: disentangling the concepts.
Attitudes, values, and organizational
(1998).
Hofstede, G.
Studies, 19(3), 477-492.
related values. Beverly Hills, CA:
International differences in work -
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences:
qualitative and
Sage.
Measuring organizational cultures: A
D., & Sanders, G. (1990).
Hofstede, G., Neuijen, B., Ohayv,
35,286-316.
Administrative Science Quarterly,
quantitative study across twenty cases.
hierarchy. Journal
the values - attitudes- behavior
A structural equation test of
Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (1988).
Psychology, 54, 638-646.
of Personality and Social
Psychology, 77,
job decisions. Journal of Applied
(1992). Effects of work values on
Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D.
261-271.
27-1
9
Seligman, J. M.
from the List of Values. In C.
and consumer behavior: Research
Kahle, L. R. (1996). Social values
Ontario symposium (vol. 8, pp.
125-152).
The psychology of values: The
Olson, & M P. Zanna (Eds.),
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
International Perspective, 39(4), 379-400.
deeds. Applied Psychology: An
Levy, S. (1990). Values and
In C. S.
interpretation, and multinational teams.
(1997). Societal values, social
Maznevski, M., & Peterson, M. F.
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Cross-cultural work groups (pp. 61-89).
Granrose & S. Oskamp (Eds.),
predicting television
values and demographics in
(1993a). The role of personal
McCarty, J. A., & Shrum, L. J.
of Advertising, 22(4), 77-101.
theory and application. Journal
viewing behavior: Implications for
personal values,
analysis of the relationships of
(1993b). A structural equation
McCarty, J. A., & Shrum, L. J.
In L. McAlister & M.
products.
and the recycling of solid waste
attitudes and beliefs about recycling,
Provo, UT: Association for
research (Vol. 20, pp. 641-646).
Rothschild (Eds.), Advances in consumer
Consumer Research.
it in an
country, how can we define
If we can't define HRD in one
(2001).
McLean, G. N., & McLean, L. D.
200! Conference
of Human Resource Development
In 0. A. Aliaga (Ed.), Academy
international context?
Rouge, LA: AHRD.
Proceedings (pp. 1064-1071). Baton
inventories in predicting job
Concurrent validation of two value
(1980).
Munson, J., M., & Posner, B. Z.
Psychology, 65(5), 536-542.
personnel. Journal of Applied
classification and success for organizational
empirical test of
values make a difference: An
Schmidt, W. H. (1985). Shared
Posner, B. Z., Kouzes, J. M., &
Resource management, 24(3), 293-309.
corporate culture. Human
and values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rokeach, M. (1972). Beliefs, attitudes,
Press..
human values. New York: Free
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of
American value priorities, 1968-1981.
Stability and change in
(1989).
Rokeach, M., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J.
American Psychologist, 44, 775-784.
Kuchinke
Views of leading scholars. In K. P.
define the profession of HRD?
Ruona, W. E. A. (2000a). Should we
Proceedings (pp. 188-195). Baton Rouge,
Development 2000 Conference
(Ed.), Academy of Human Resource
Development.
LA: Academy of Human Resource
profession and its
development: A journal for the
Core beliefs in human resource
Ruona, W. E. A. (2000b).
development
foundation of human resource
Roth (Eds.), Philosophical
professionals. In W. E. A. Ruona & G.
Berrett-Koehler.
practice (pp. 1-27). San Francisco:
In K. P.
framework of thought and practice.
(1999). Toward a philosophical
Ruona, W. E. A., & Lynham, S.
Conference Proceedings, (206-215).
Resource Development 2000
Kuchinke (Ed.), Academy of Human
Development: Baton Rouge, LA.
Academy of Human Resource
between personal values and consumer
Issues involving the relationship
(1997).
Shrum, L. J., & McCarty, J. A.
and
Chiagouris (Eds.), Values, lifestyles,
application. In L. R. Kahle & L.
behavior: Theory, methodology, and
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
psychology (pp. 139-159). Mahweh,
psychographics: Advertising and consumer
In C.
value systems.
Applying a theory of integrated
Value priorities and behavior:
(1996).
Schwartz, S. H.
The Ontario symposium (vol. 8, pp.
1-
(Eds.), The psychology of values:
Seligman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna
24). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
H. C.
dimensions of values. In U. Kim,
individualism/collectivism: New cultural
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond
and
and collectivism: Theory, method,
& G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism
Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi,
Oaks, CA: Sage.
applications (pp. 85-119). Thousand
empirical tests in
values: Theoretical advances in
the content and structure of
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in
1-65.
Experimental Social Psychology, 25,
20 countries. Advances in
Personality
of human values. Journal of
(1990). Toward a psychological structure
Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W.
and Social Psychology, 58, 878-891.
values: The
differentiation in the rating of personal
(1992). Individual differences in
Shrum, L. J., & McCarty, J. A.
Bulletin, 18, 223-230.
Personality and Social Psychology
role of private self-consciousness.
(Eds.), Beyond
In B. R. Stewart & H. C. Hall
for HRD in a knowledge era.
Watkins, K. E. (1998). Foundations
Council
55-70). Columbia, MO: University
for tomorrows workforce (pp.
tradition: Preparing HRD educators
Education.
for Workforce and Human Resource
D. G. Gradous
human resource development. In
metaphors: Alternative theories for
Watkins, K. E. (1989). Five
Alexandria, VA: ASTD.
human resource development.
(Ed.), Systems theory applied to
Human Resource
development.
Commonly held theories of human resource
(1998).
Weinberger, L. A.
Development International, 1(1), 75-93.
Academy of
theories of cultural change.
Toward culturally sensitive
(1988).
Wilkins, A. L., & Dyer, W. G.
Management Journal, 13(4), 522-533.
27-1
BEST COPY MAILABLIE
10