HRD Attitudes: Or the Roles and Ethical Stances of Human Resource Developers

Fisher, C. (2005). HRD Attitudes: Or the Roles and Ethical Stances of Human
Resource Developers. Human Resource Development International, 8(2), 239-255.

Human resource development (HRD) is one of the more moral management functions

which are help people to learn and develop. According to Hatcher (2002), HRD departments

have a leadership role in transforming their organizations into good corporate citizens. Woodall

and Douglas (1999, p. 259, 2000, p. 116) has identify and challenge the comfortable assumption

about the intrinsic goodness of HRD. They mentioned an ethical critique of HRD practices that

are designed to manipulate people to adopt behaviors and values that are beneficial to their

employers.

The objective of this paper is to discuss about the ethics of HRD away from the

aspirational and towards the analytical. In short, the author debates on how HRD practitioners

should behave and what ethical difficulties face by HRD practitioners and how do them respond.

Author proposed two-stage of conceptual framework in this paper. The first stage describes the

roles of HRD practitioners. In the second stage, author identified ethical trade-offs which

associated with particular HRD roles, by using a semiotic square analysis.

The Role of HRD Practioners

a) Modernism

It is about a belief that objectively defined as better than others and that progress towards the

good things is possible. People thinking in a modernist mode can accept that the world may be

fragmented, transient, and fleeting but see this as merely a stage that can be transcended by

human reason and intention (Harvey, 1989, p. 15). Modernism in the HRD field involves the use
of rational, analytical, and systematic development methods directed to meeting the purposes of

an organization. Radical Critiques, value their use of rationality to challenge aspects of the

organizations they work. They adopt an emancipator form of modernism and see themselves as

devil’s advocates. It will cause people in the organization to rethink and help create a better

organization. Systems Designers, less driven by personal convictions and more desire to meet

the organization’s goals value. HRD practitioners emphasize the development of techniques to

maximize the chances that employees will deliver the organization’s objectives. Cynical Role, is

for those who disappointed by the failure of HRD to deliver on its promises. They have lost faith

but still have to do their jobs.

b) Neo-traditionalism

This role rejects modernism and seeks an organic form of existence. HRD practitioners believe

that this role concerns for individual and organizational growth. Gurus, they concerned with

developing people and attracted to fads and fashion. Culture Designers, seek to create a culture

in which people choose to take self-responsibility for developing themselves in ways that will

advantage both themselves and their employers. They provide the seminars and learning

resources that help employees to become competent. Counselors, are subjectivists who seek to

understand the individuals’ own values and concerns and help them identify their own solutions.

c) Traditionalism

They unified values and customs. Traditional values are immutable. They not affected by

changes in fashion and technology because the traditional view of time is circular rather than

linear. HRD practices are that it will take place within the confines of a locality and it based on

the methods the practitioners learnt early in their careers. Mentor, learn by watching and
interacting with an experienced senior employee and it’s consider as a modern process that

shares these terms’ values. Training Officer, focused on equipping people to do their jobs well.

Ritualists are like priests who no longer believe in God but who still find the liturgy comforting.

d) Postmodernism

They reject the neo-traditional belief in shared values. It is a way of thinking that views the

world as a confused and ambiguous place. HRD observe flexibility and ambiguity and reflect the

shift from jobs standardized by job description and grade to ones that are flexible, multi-skilled,

and evolving (Legge, 1995, p. 301). Intellectuals, delight in playing with ideas. Pragmatists try

to link the intellectuals’ postmodernism with attempts to improve the world. Game player role is

the nearest to what might be called hard postmodernism. It is similar to the ritualism position, but

in this case, even the ritualism’s comfort in routines and symbols has gone.

The Ethical Problems Associated with the Roles

Author mentioned that HRD roles cannot divided into good and bad but that all the roles have

potential ethical limitations. Author used semiotic square to explore these ethical limitations.

The Semiotic Square

It is a tool for analyzing connections and relationships within a text. In this paper, it is used to

analyze roles rather than texts. Begin with a key theme and continues by plotting three types of

relationships that necessarily stem from it. The first type of relationship is opposition which

means its begin with good its opposite is bad. When each of these two terms has contradiction, it

is second form of relationship. Complementarity is third relationship that has connection with

bad.
The Ethical Limitations of Prophets

Prophets want to act on the world, or at least their organizations, without the constraint of

comment or caution from others. They may do great harm if their vision happens to be wrong or

bad. Gurus are positive prophets who have a prescription for how things should be changed and

people developed. Radical critiquers are an example of prophets who wish to change the world,

or organizations, but may not have a clear idea of how. They are driven by disapproval of what is

rather than a vision of what might be. The ethical danger posed by prophets is that they are

closed to the challenges and dialogue that can test whether their criticisms, nostrums, or systems

are good.

The Ethical Limitations of Subjectivists

Subjectivists are doubters. They are the opposite of the prophets who doubt little. They believe

that everyone must make their own choices while recognizing that individuals’ own choices

implicitly impose expectations on others. They suffer an instability caused by the collective

implications of their individualism. The counselling role illustrates subjectivism by its

acceptance of gnosis. In classical Greek gnosis is a form of knowledge that is distinct from

rational and instrumental knowledge such as knowing how to use project management software.

The Ethical Limitations of Rhetoricians

Rhetoricians’ enjoyment of debates contradicts the prophets’ intolerance of dissent. Their role is

subaltern to that of the subjectivists because it provides the context of argument that allows the

subjectivists to make their choices.

The Ethical Limitations of Quietists

Quietism is the resignation of self to achieve contentment. It is a disengagement from the ethical

problems of the world. It complements the prophets because it withdraws from the field and
leaves them free to act. The intellectual role exemplifies this ethical danger. It combines a

willingness to stand on principle with a belief in the indeterminacy of languages and values. The

instability of this combination leads its proponents to value the internal intellectual process for

itself. That is their principle and it leads to disengagement. Quietists would not act against

unethical organizational behavior. The most action they might take is to resign from an

organization of whose behavior they disapproved.

Conclusions

The author present in this paper a model that can be used to plot the various ethical limitations or

dangers that the different roles that HRD practitioners may take are prey to. The semiotic square

has been the chosen tool for the task. The semiotic square imposes a logical discipline on the

analysis presented in the paper. For the present, the paper has tested, successfully it is argued, the

semiotic square analysis for theoretical consistency and prima facie evidence that it captures the

ethical dilemmas HRD practitioners may face.

References

1. Harvey, D. (1989) The Condition of Postmodernity (Oxford: Blackwell).

2. Hatcher, T. (2002) Ethics and HRD: A New Approach to Leading Responsible

Organisations (Oxford: Perseus).

3. Legge, K. (1995) Human Resource Management: Rhetoric and Realities (London:

Macmillan).

4. Woodall, J. and Douglas, D. (1999) Ethical issues in contemporary human resource

development, Business Ethics: A European Review, 8(4), pp. 249 – 61.

5. Woodall, J. and Douglas, D. (2000) Winning hearts and minds: ethical issues in human
resource development, in: D. Winstanley and J. Woodall (Eds) Ethical Issues in
Contemporary Human Resource Management (Basingstoke: Macmillan).