Human Resource Development International PERSPECTIVES ON THEORY Clarifying the boundaries of human resource development Greg G.

Wang* and Judy Y. Sun This article clarifies the boundaries of human resource development (HRD) with respect to other concepts frequently used and misused in HRD literature. Through a proposition, a set of criteria for human resources is presented. This study has important implications for HRD research, practice and continued theory development effort. It relates to the identity and distinctiveness of HRD discipline, as well as the domain of HRD research and practice. Keywords: human resources; human capital; human development; HRD policy studies; NHRD A few recent human resource development (HRD) scholarly discussions have presented the idea of altering the established boundaries of HRD (e.g. McLean 2004; Paprock 2006). Definition of HRD has long been discussed. Weinberger (1998) listed 18 different HRD definitions that have influenced the field. Current HRD literature challenges existing connotations of human resources the subject and target population of HRD. Human resource development, as the term suggests, includes the critical components of human resource and development. In pursuit of the research question, this study is focused on human resource. Human resources: the subject of HRD A field combining human and development, human development, has been established prior to the existence of HRD. Human Resource Development International 95 human resources, therefore, is the resource(s) aspect. Combining scholarly and dictionary definitions, resource has the following characteristics. The concept of human resources defined here excludes those that are not available to be productive, cannot add value or be placed in socially productive roles. Criteria of human resources: a proposition The proposition defines several critical criteria that are important to frame the domain of human resources. Human resources are to include those who are ready and available to participate in, paid or unpaid, socially productive and value-added activities. Willingness and desire for productive activities This person should not be considered a human resource. Human Resource Development International 97 Individuals must have an initial minimum skills and ability corresponding to the level of tasks to be performed in the productive process to be qualified as part of human resources at that level. Human societies are complex political and legal systems. The boundaries of institutions

confine human systems in varying ways. Thus, institutional restrictions should also be considered a criterion in defining human resources. This reality demonstrates that institutional or legal restriction constitutes an important system boundary and a criterion for defining human resources. In summary, the connotation of human resources should be gauged simulta- neously by all the criteria in the proposition. Ignoring any one in HRD theory building and research may mislead the domain and boundary of HRD discipline. Chinese scholars established a field called human talentol- ogy (Ren Cai Xue) in late 1987 (Liu 1987) with a definition of human talent similar to the proposition presented. More recently, Xia and Zhou (2003) and Yin (2005) also defined human resources along the same lines. Human resources, human talents and workforce are used frequently and interchangeably in the Chinese literature. We summarize the translated Chinese definitions of human resources below: Human resources are physical and talent resources embedded in individuals, and are able to accomplish required work tasks independently and contribute to social economic development. Some also extends the definitions to specific age groups according to Chinese legal requirements, confirming the institutional restriction a criterion for human resources in the Chinese context. Human resources and related concepts: a lifespan view Figure 1 presents a typical lifespan with sectional life stages for a representative human being. This view covers most HRD-related concepts often interchangeably used and misused in the literature, such as human development, human capital investment, psychology and lifelong learning. A lifespan view: who should HRD develop? Human Resource Development International 99 education, general education (including college education for simplicity), human resource development or workforce development, adult learning and gerontology. The long span: human capital investment, human development, psychology and lifelong learning It shows human development, human capital investment and psychology overlapping and covering the entire lifespan. Human capital investment is the most frequently misused concept in HRD literature. From the beginning, economic research on human capital is comprehen- sive, encompassing all aspects of investment activities across the entire lifespan of human beings. As demonstrated in Figure 1, HRD only covers one major sectional lifespan of the lifelong human capital investment activities. Therefore, HRD is not equivalent to human capital investment in general term, and neither does HRD cover the same span as lifelong learning. Instead, HRD is a special form of human capital investment and

part of a life long learning, within a human beings productive life. The research and application of human capital theory in HRD must identify the applicable range and appropriate lifespan for human capital studies. The collective concept of human beings at a national level is often referred to as population. However, according to the proposition, population should not equate to human resources. Lifelong learning is an ambiguous term used frequently in HRD and adult learning literatures (Jarvis 2004). It refers to a learning process throughout ones lifespan and overlaps with the same span as human capital investment and human development. It may be considered a conscious effort in self-human capital investment (Jarvis, 2004). At the individual level, lifelong learning is consistent with the other two concepts in the lifespan, human development (HD) and human capital investment. Individuals within this particular lifespan generally do not meet all the human resources criteria. This sometimes disguises the fact that HRD is not to cover the entire human lifespan. Additionally, the lifespan covered by HRD is overlapping with the concept of workplace learning. Since most human beings in this life stage are no longer active in socially productive activities, they should not be Human Resource Development International 101 in the domain of HRD research and practice. This lifespan view effectively clarifies the target population and domain of research for adult education and HRD. Conclusion and implications for HRD theory building research Our study on the criteria of human resources and their relationships with other related concepts found in the HRD literature leads to the answer to the research question: HRD is not to develop all human beings, but to develop those who meet all the criteria simultaneously. This conclusion challenges some current HRD literature and offers the following implications for future HRD research and theory building. If scholars and practitioners can agree on the proposition and the criteria, the debate and development of HRD definition will at least be focused within the domain of human resources. For instance, in the field of human development, development is defined as Third, the analysis has particular implications to HRD national policy studies. Existing studies on HRD national policies mostly equated education with HRD (e.g. Morris and Sweeting 1997). The lifespan analysis demonstrated that HRD covers a larger portion of individual lives than general education does, suggesting that national education Clarifying the boundaries of HRD allows HRD scholars to conduct analysis on HRD-focused national policies and propose right policy recommendations to policy-makers at national level.