Ask most people what HR does, and you’ll probably hear answers like hiring, benefits, compliance, or employee relations. Those responsibilities are certainly part of the job—but they don’t tell the whole story. We hope our recent study (Moore et al., 2026) helps researchers better understand the HR role and strengthen research-practice collaboration. We also hope it helps organizations better support HR professionals in their challenging roles.

What we did

Our recent qualitative study explored what HR professionals actually experience during their daily work. We interviewed 15 experienced HR professionals from manufacturing, higher education, staffing, consulting, public service, and other industries to better understand what happens beyond the job description. What we found suggests that HR work is far more about building relationships, responding to changing situations, and adjusting to unexpected challenges than many competency models imply.

HR doesn’t have a “typical day”

One of the distinctive themes was that nearly every participant rejected the idea of a normal workday. One HR professional laughed, “HR has no typical day.” Many described arriving with carefully planned schedules only to have those plans disappear within the first hour because of employee concerns, leadership questions, safety incidents, investigations, or operational emergencies. Rather than following a predictable checklist, HR professionals constantly reprioritized their work based on what organizations needed in that moment. Ulrich (1996) was right – an enduring HR competency is credibility.

Relationships are the real currency

One finding that consistently stood out was the central role of people in the HR professionals’ stories. Rather than beginning with policies or procedures, HR professionals talked first about people. Successful HR professionals described trust as their most valuable resource—not because trust feels good, but because it allows difficult conversations to happen. One participant explained: “Trust is the only way you can influence.” Whether coaching supervisors, supporting employees, or challenging leadership decisions, credibility developed over months and years became the foundation for organizational influence.

Strategy happens in everyday conversations

Many organizations think of strategy as something that happens during annual planning meetings. The HR professionals we interviewed described something different. Strategy happened while redesigning onboarding, simplifying payroll systems, coaching supervisors, and improving employee experiences. Instead of separating “strategic HR” from “operational HR,” participants described the two as inseparable. Small operational improvements often created significant strategic outcomes.

HR is constantly balancing competing priorities

Another important finding was that HR professionals rarely solve one problem at a time. During a single morning, they may be:

• supporting an employee experiencing a family crisis;

• advising a supervisor on discipline;

• responding to a safety incident;

• discussing succession planning; and

• preparing for labor negotiations.

Participants described constantly switching among counselors, coaches, investigators, business partners, and strategist roles. This complexity is largely invisible to those outside the profession.

What does this mean for organizations?

Organizations often evaluate HR using metrics such as time-to-fill, compliance rates, or training completion. While those measures matter, our findings suggest they tell only part of the story. Much of HR’s value comes from work that is difficult to quantify—building trust, coaching leaders, navigating conflict, and helping organizations respond to unexpected challenges.

Leaders can better support HR professionals by:

• Creating time for relationship-building rather than measuring success solely through administrative outputs.

• Involving HR early in operational and strategic discussions rather than after decisions have already been made.

• Recognizing that some of HR’s most valuable contributions occur through conversations, coaching, and informal influence.

• Providing opportunities for peer networking and professional reflection, especially for HR professionals who often carry significant emotional demands.

Supporting these aspects of HR work can strengthen decision-making, improve employee trust, and increase the organization’s ability to respond effectively to change.

Questions for reflection

If you’re an HR leader, consider these questions:

• Is the HR team’s time balanced between administrative work and relationship-building for employees?

• Do managers involve HR early in solving organizational challenges—or only after problems escalate?

• What informal work does your HR team perform that isn’t captured by performance metrics?

• How might your organization better recognize and support the relational side of HR work?

The bottom line

For HR professionals, the study validates that the complexity of your work is real and extends far beyond policies and compliance.

For organizational leaders, it is a reminder that HR’s greatest value often lies in the relationships, judgment, and influence that make effective organizations possible.

For HR educators, it reinforces the importance of preparing future professionals for ambiguity, relationship-building, and adaptive decision-making—not just HR processes.

Reference

Moore, K., Cho, Y., & Kroese, I. (2026). Behind the scenes: A qualitative look at HR practitioners’ daily work. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-08-2025-0746

Ulrich, D. (1996). Human Resource Champions: The Next Agenda for Adding Value and Delivering Results. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

About the Authors

Kelly Moore (kmoore59@patriots.uttyler.edu) is an adjunct professor in Human Resource Development (HRD) at the University of Texas at Tyler (UT Tyler). Before entering academia, she worked for over 30 years in manufacturing as an HR and EHS leader, holding SPHR and SHRM-SCP certifications. Her research focuses on bridging the research–practice gap in HRD through action research, with projects examining therapy dog interventions for teacher well-being. She is a co-author of How Can We Bridge the Research-Practice Gap? Let’s Hear from HR Practitioners! (Human Resource Development International), Behind the Scenes: A Qualitative Look at HR Practitioners’ Daily Work (Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance); and What Are We Learning About the Research-Practice Gap From HRD Scholars and HRD Scholar-Practitioners (Human Resource Development Quarterly). She has presented her work at UFHRD, AHRD, and the East Texas HR Association Symposium.

Yonjoo Cho (ycho@uttyler.edu) is a professor of HRD at UT Tyler. Before joining academia, she worked in diverse organizations: a telecommunications company, a non-profit organization, and a business school in South Korea. Over the past two decades, she has taught in two institutions: Indiana University (Bloomington) and UT Tyler and conducted research on action learning in organizations, international HRD, and women in leadership. To bridge research and practice, she has co-authored articles on action learning in Korean companies with practitioners, conducting interviews with almost 200 Korean women leaders in diverse organizations, and teaching graduate students how to work clients to solve their workplace issues using project-based learning. She has served as a board member of the Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) 2016-2018 and Editor-in-Chief of Human Resource Development Review 2020-2023 (Impact Factor: 6.4 in 2023).

Ingeborg Kroese (EdD) (ingeborg.kroese@open.ac.uk) is a scholar-practitioner and Visiting Fellow at the Open University, UK. Her academic work focuses on the diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) of learning and development (L&D) programs, with publications in journals such as Gender, Work & Organization, Human Resource Management Review, and Management Learning. As a practitioner, Ingeborg designs and delivers L&D programs globally, and she supports L&D professionals in creating inclusive, accessible, and equitable learning environments through workshops, webinars, conferences, podcasts, and publications. She brings over 15 years of corporate experience in sales, management, and leadership, along with 20 years as an L&D professional. She has worked in Pakistan, the UAE, the UK, Austria, and the Netherlands. Her work bridges academic research and business practice, with a focus on inclusive L&D.

Author: Dr. Talitha Batts, Assistant Director, Center of Excellence, University of Washington

Abstract

This study explores the impact of virtual vocational teacher education in Kenya that integrates apprenticeship learning to strengthen workforce development. Using narratives from vocational teachers, it highlights how virtual training enhances instructional practices, fosters hands-on skill acquisition, and improves alignment between education and labor market needs. Findings reveal that teacher preparation not only boosts instructional capacity but also contributes to economic growth by producing a skilled workforce. The study underscores the value of scalable, technology-driven teacher education models and offers practical implications for policymakers, educators, and HRD practitioners seeking innovative strategies for sustainable workforce development.

Introduction

Vocational education is critical in equipping individuals with skills for workforce participation and economic development. In Kenya, vocational programs often struggle to align with labor market demands due to limitations in teacher preparation and lack of access to ongoing professional development. Traditional vocational teacher education programs frequently emphasize theoretical knowledge over practical skill development, leaving a gap in instructional capacity and workforce readiness.

Virtual vocational teacher education, when combined with apprenticeship learning, offers a scalable solution to these challenges. Teachers gain flexible access to professional development while engaging in hands-on learning experiences.

Research Question:
How does virtual vocational teacher education that integrates apprenticeship learning influence teaching practices, workforce outcomes, and economic growth in Kenya?

Literature Review

Virtual Teacher Education in Developing Contexts

Virtual learning widens access to teacher professional development where training institutions and travel resources are limited. Evidence shows technology-enabled TPD improves pedagogical adaptability and digital competencies while lowering time and cost barriers (World Bank, 2022; Bates, 2022). Meta-analytic and sector reviews also find that well-designed online and blended models can equal or outperform traditional delivery when active learning, feedback, and assessment alignment are present (U.S. Department of Education, 2010).

Apprenticeship Learning and Workforce Readiness

Apprenticeships connect classroom learning with authentic workplace practice, strengthening the labor-market relevance of vocational qualifications. International guidance highlights standards, social partner engagement, and quality assurance to deliver job-relevant skills (International Labour Organization [ILO], 2020, 2024). In African TVET systems, aligning school-based teaching with industry practices is associated with improved employability and innovation (McGrath, 2020).

Teacher Education, Workforce Development, and Economic Growth

Teacher preparedness is a critical lever in skills ecosystems. UNESCO’s TVET Strategy (2022–2029) emphasizes relevance, inclusion, and responsiveness to digital and green transitions (UNESCO, 2022). In Kenya, national TVET policy—anchored in Vision 2030—prioritizes competency-based training, stronger industry linkages, and pathways to employment (Ministry of Education, 2022; Kenya Vision 2030 Delivery Secretariat, n.d.). Education has now evolved from the traditional classroom blackboard approach into a more technological advanced platform (Smith, 2022).

Integrating Virtual Learning and Apprenticeship Models

Blending virtual coursework with structured workplace mentorship offers scalability without sacrificing experiential depth. Open, modular digital resources guide pedagogical choices and media selection (Bates, 2022), while global guidance synthesizes effective technology-based strategies for teacher learning at scale (World Bank, 2022). Such integration enables rapid updating of curricula to meet shifting labor‑market needs, supports peer feedback loops online, and preserves hands‑on competence development through mentored practice.

Apprenticeship Learning and Workforce Readiness
Apprenticeships provide a structured approach to learning that bridges classroom instruction with practical, real-world skills. Integrating apprenticeship learning into teacher education enables instructors to model industry-relevant practices in their classrooms, improving the alignment between education and labor market needs (Allsopp, DeMarie & Doone, 2006).

Teacher Education and Economic Growth
Effective vocational teacher preparation is directly linked to workforce quality. Teachers trained to deliver industry-relevant instruction produce graduates with employable skills, contributing to local economic productivity and development (UNESCO, 2016).

Methodology

Research Design
A narrative research design was employed to capture the lived experiences of vocational teachers participating in virtual apprenticeship-integrated programs in Kenya. Narrative inquiry allows for rich, contextualized exploration of participants’ experiences and perceptions.

Participants
Ten vocational teachers participated in this study. Participants represented diverse vocational disciplines and were selected via purposive sampling to capture a variety of experiences with virtual teacher education.

Data Collection

Data were collected via in-depth semi-structured interviews and reflective journals maintained by participants during the program. Interviews explored experiences with virtual platforms, apprenticeship mentorship, and perceptions of instructional impact.

Data Analysis

Narrative data were analyzed thematically. Key themes included: instructional skill development, application of apprenticeship learning, alignment with labor market needs, and economic implications.

Findings

Enhanced Instructional Practices
Participants reported increased confidence and creativity in instructional strategies. Virtual platforms facilitated peer collaboration, resource sharing, and experimentation with simulation-based and project-based learning techniques.

Promotion of Practical Skill Acquisition
Apprenticeship experiences provided participants with firsthand industry exposure. Teachers emphasized that these experiences allowed them to integrate practical demonstrations into classroom instruction enhancing students’ hands-on skill development.

Bridging Education and Labor Market Needs
Participants highlighted that aligning curriculum with apprenticeship learning helped address skills gaps identified by local industries. Collaboration with businesses improved the relevance of instruction and prepared students for real-world expectations.

Economic Implications
Teachers observed that well-prepared students were more employable and productive. These outcomes suggested a direct link between teacher preparation, workforce readiness, and local economic growth.

Discussion

This study demonstrates that virtual vocational teacher education programs that integrate apprenticeship learning enhance teaching practices, promote practical skill acquisition, and strengthen workforce development. Findings align with prior research emphasizing the importance of experiential learning in teacher preparation (Brown et al., 2019; UNESCO, 2016).

For HRD practitioners, technology-enabled teacher education represents a scalable approach to professional development. Policymakers can leverage virtual apprenticeship programs to build teacher capacity, improve workforce readiness, and stimulate economic growth. The Kenyan context illustrates the potential of these programs in resource-constrained environments.

Implications for Practice

1. Policymakers: Prioritize investment in blended virtual-apprenticeship teacher education programs to address skill shortages and foster economic growth.
2. Educators: Integrate apprenticeship experiences into classroom instruction to increase alignment with labor market needs.
3. HRD Practitioners: Develop scalable, technology-driven professional development programs to strengthen instructional capacity and workforce readiness.

Conclusion

Virtual vocational teacher education in Kenya, enhanced with apprenticeship learning, demonstrates significant potential to improve instructional quality, promote practical skill acquisition, and support economic growth. By equipping teachers to model workplace practices, these programs prepare a skilled workforce and address critical gaps in vocational education. This study offers a framework for HRD stakeholders to implement scalable, technology-driven approaches to teacher education in developing contexts.

References

Allsopp, D. H., DeMarie, D., Alvarez-McHatton, P., & Doone, E. (2006). Bridging the gap between theory and practice: Connecting courses with field experiences. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(1), 19–35.

Bates, A. W. (2022). *Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning* (3rd ed.). BCcampus/Pressbooks. https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/teachinginadigitalagev3m/

International Labour Organization. (2020). *ILO toolkit for quality apprenticeships: Volume 2 – Guide for practitioners*. https://www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/%40ed_emp/%40ifp_skills/documents/publication/wcms_748751.pdf

International Labour Organization. (2024). *Quality apprenticeships: A guide to Recommendation No. 208 (2023)*. https://www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/2024-12/1684_SKILLS_Quality_Apprenticeships_WEB.pdf

Kenya Vision 2030 Delivery Secretariat. (n.d.). Education and training: Policy, legal and institutional reforms. https://vision2030.go.ke/project/education-and-training-policy-legal-and-institutional-reforms/

McGrath, S. (2020). Vocational education and training for African development: A literature review. *Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 72*(4), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2019.1679969

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. (2022). *Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) policy* (Final draft). https://www.education.go.ke/sites/default/files/2022-05/first_final_draft_tivet_policy.pdf

Njenga, M. (2023). How do vocational teachers learn? Formal and informal learning by vocational teachers in Kenya. *International Journal for Research in

Njenga, M. (2024). Continuing professional development of vocational teachers in Kenya: Challenges and coping strategies. *Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 30*(2), 348–369.

Smith, C. (2022). Globalization and new education frontiers: A look at the factors affecting virtual learning in Kenya. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 3(6), 50–56.

UNESCO. (2016). UNESCO strategy for technical and vocational education and training (TVET), 2016–2021. UNESCO. Retrieved from UNESCO-UNEVOC Publications database. https://unevoc.unesco.org/home/UNEVOC+Publications/lang=en/akt=detail/qs=5986#:~:text=UNESCO%20Strategy%20for%20Technical%20and,TVET)%20(2016%2D2021)&text=The%20Strategy%20sets%20out%20key,green%20economies%20and%20sustainable%20societies.

UNESCO. (2022). *Strategy for technical and vocational education and training (TVET) 2022–2029*. https://psda.punjab.gov.pk/system/files/UNESCO%20Strategy%202022-2029.pdf

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development. (2010). *Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies*. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf

Vocational Education and Training, 10*(1), 24–45. https://doi.org/10.13152/IJRVET.10.1.2

World Bank. (2022). *Effective teacher professional development using technology: Technology-based strategies from across the globe to enhance teaching practices*. https://teachertaskforce.org/sites/default/files/2024-04/2022_World-Bank_Effective-teacher-professional-development-using-technology_EN.pdf

About the Author

Assistant Director, Center of Excellence, University of Washington

Authors: Cynthia M. Sims, Associate Professor in Learning, Leadership and Organization Development, Department of Lifelong Education Administration and Policy in the Mary Frances Early College of Education, University of Georgia; Brittani Hawk, MSN, RN, CEN, CPN, CRAT, NPD-BC, Nursing Professional Development Practitioner, Emory Healthcare

The Problem

Healthcare is one of the largest and most complex work environments in the world, yet much of the workforce development literature and organizational attention remains centered on traditional daytime operations. In acute care hospitals, however, patient care is delivered continuously across nights, weekends, and holidays, with off-shift staff accounting for the majority of operational hours. The off-shift context presents unique challenges related to leadership, learning, workforce development, employee well-being, retention, engagement, and organizational inclusion—issues that sit squarely within the domain of Human Resource Development (HRD). For Nursing Professional Development (NPD) practitioners, these challenges are particularly relevant because professional role competence, onboarding, continuing education, competency management, and leadership development must occur across a 24-hour workforce, not solely during weekday business hours. For HRD researchers, off-shift healthcare work offers a rich context for examining how organizational systems, power structures, and workforce practices shape employee experiences and outcomes. For both HRD and NPD practitioners, understanding the realities of off-shift work is essential for creating equitable development opportunities, fostering inclusive workplace cultures, and supporting a workforce that directly influences organizational performance, employee retention, patient safety, and quality of care.

How We Approached the Problem

We conducted a systematic review of 37 scholarly articles between 2012-2025 on the topic of the off-shift context in acute care with off-shifts meaning nights and weekends and acute care referring to the level of care in hospitals.

The Findings

The systematic review identified eight interrelated issues specific to off-shift workers in acute care hospitals. The themes highlight systemic disparities that compromise both nurse well-being and patient outcomes. They reveal how fatigue, staffing inequities, and organizational disconnection converge to shape a work culture characterized by invisibility, marginalization, and elevated risk. Collectively, the findings underscore that off-shift nurses—those working nights, weekends, and holidays—operate under persistent strain that extends beyond clinical performance to affect psychological health, social stability, and professional longevity.

Actionable Takeaways for HRD & L&D

Below are each of the eight issues emerging from the systematic review of literature of the off-shift nursing acute care context. The first row refers to the likely outcomes emerging from these issues e.g Patient Safety and Quality of Care. The second row refers to the issue emerging from the literature with regard to that outcome. The third row illustrates the research-informed recommendations for better managing that issue. The last row “Practice” contains the practitioner-focused recommendations.

About the Author

Dr. Cynthia M. Sims is an Associate Professor in Learning, Leadership and Organization Development in the Department of Lifelong Education Administration and Policy in the Mary Frances Early College of Education at the University of Georgia. Her award-winning research focuses on the ways gender and diversity influence the enactment of leadership in the workplace. Dr. Sims founded and co-led a gender equity leadership development and mentoring program for faculty an NSF ADVANCE initiative. She is a member of the Board of Directors, Academy of Human Resource Development. She has a doctorate in organizational leadership from the University of Maryland Eastern Shore.

Brittani Hawk, MSN, RN, CEN, CPN, CRAT, NPD-BC, is a Nursing Professional Development Practitioner with Emory Healthcare and a doctoral candidate in Adult Education, Leadership, and Organizational Development at the University of Georgia. With more than two decades of nursing and leadership experience, she specializes in clinical education, leadership development, onboarding, competency management, and workforce readiness across emergency and paediatric healthcare settings.

Why Better Conversations Come Before Better Solutions

Organizations often invite us in after the data arrives.

Engagement surveys reveal declining trust. Organizational assessments identify communication challenges. Strategic planning surfaces competing priorities. The data tells us something important about where an organization has been.

What it cannot tell us is how meaningful change begins.

Over the course of my career, I gradually realized that while data explains where an organization has been, conversations determine where it goes next.

Data is a lagging indicator. It reflects patterns that have been developing over time~~—sometimes for years~~. The report may be new; the underlying dynamics usually are not. By the time trust appears as a survey result, people have already experienced months of conversations that shaped whether trust grew or eroded. By the time collaboration becomes a strategic concern, countless daily interactions have already influenced how people work together.

That changed the way I understood organization development.

The past can inform us, but it cannot be altered. Organizations change only in the present, and the present is experienced through conversation.

After years of facilitating organization development, coaching leaders, and supporting strategic change, I eventually wrote a sentence in my notebook that captured what I had been observing across very different organizations and contexts.

Organizations don’t become what leaders intend. They become what conversations repeatedly make possible.

Leaders influence organizations through vision, strategy, and decisions. But those intentions only become real through the everyday conversations where people test them against the reality of the work.

When Organizations Begin to Recognize Themselves

I first began to understand this more fully during a strategic planning effort with a large mission support organization. The goal was to strengthen communication, collaboration, leadership development, and organizational effectiveness.

Rather than beginning with recommendations, we began with inquiry. Using an appreciative approach, we invited conversations across the organization, from individual contributors and influence leaders to supervisors, managers, and senior executives. Each group explored the same questions: When have we been at our best? What enabled those moments? What strengths should never be lost?

At first, each conversation sounded different because participants described the organization from where they stood. As those conversations accumulated, a pattern became visible. The same themes emerged across organizational levels.

No single perspective was sufficient. Yet every perspective contributed something the others could not. As people began valuing and exploring those different perspectives together, patterns emerged that no individual could have recognized alone. Collectively, the organization became capable of recognizing itself.

The most significant outcome was the richer understanding that developed as people began recognizing patterns together.

What Practice Gradually Revealed

Experiences like these caused me to examine my own practice more carefully.

Across strategic planning, executive coaching, organizational redesign, leadership development, and conflict facilitation, I noticed the same pattern. Conversations rarely shifted because someone introduced new information into the room. More often, they shifted when people began seeing familiar situations differently—together.

I learned that explaining more rarely changed the conversation. Curiosity did.

A participant would make a statement that changed the room.

Someone would hesitate before responding.

Several people would react in ways they could not yet explain.

Rather than offering my own interpretation, I became more interested in helping the group examine what it was already experiencing.

“What are you noticing?”

“What do you think is happening here?”

“What might we be overlooking?”

I do not think I was applying a facilitation model. I think I was responding to something the conversation itself required.

Sometimes the conversation needed enough trust that different perspectives could be offered honestly and explored with genuine curiosity. Sometimes it needed to slow down so emerging patterns could become visible. Sometimes it required challenging an assumption that had been influencing everyone’s thinking.

Only after participants developed a richer understanding of what they were experiencing could they make decisions they were ready to act on.

Over time I realized I was not there to provide better answers.

I was there to create and protect the conditions for a different conversation.

From Organizational Learning to Organizational Change

This changed how I approached organizational assessments, strategic planning, and other diagnostic processes.

I stopped thinking of these activities as the beginning of organizational change. I began seeing them as the beginning of organizational learning.

Learning begins when organizations become more aware of themselves.

Change begins when that awareness starts influencing the conversations people have every day.

A survey may identify declining trust. Whether trust is rebuilt depends on the conversations that follow.

An assessment may reveal ineffective collaboration. Whether collaboration improves depends on how people reinterpret their relationships and responsibilities.

A strategic planning process may clarify competing priorities. Whether those priorities become coordinated action depends on the conversations through which people build shared commitment.

Perhaps that is why the most significant moments in organization development rarely occur while reviewing reports or presenting recommendations. They occur when people begin recognizing something together that no individual could have seen alone.

Before we solve the problem, perhaps we should ask a different question.

What conversation is this data inviting us to have?

Organizations don’t become what leaders intend. They become what conversations repeatedly make possible.

About the Author

Judith Walton is a leadership coach and organizational development consultant who helps leaders navigate the emotional side of change—especially when the stakes are high and the path forward isn’t clear. With over 20 years of experience at NASA, she built and supported teams operating in complex, high-pressure environments where clarity had to emerge in real time.

What happens when researchers and practitioners stop working in separate worlds and start solving problems together? That question guided my recent action research project involving therapy dogs, teacher well-being, and collaborative problem-solving in a local elementary school.

As someone who has spent over 30 years in HR practice while also pursuing research in Human Resource Development (HRD), I have become increasingly interested in one persistent challenge: the research-to-practice gap. Too often, research is viewed as disconnected from the realities practitioners face every day. At the same time, practitioners are left solving complex workplace problems without access to evidence-informed approaches that could help.

Action research offers a different path. Rather than treating practitioners as subjects of research, action research invites them to become co-creators of knowledge. In this pilot study, our cross-functional team included an associate principal, two teachers, a certified therapy dog handler, and me as the researcher. Together, we designed and implemented a four-week therapy-dog intervention to support teacher well-being.

The process taught us just as much as the outcomes. Teachers consistently described the sessions as calming, restorative, and emotionally uplifting. Some shared that the visits provided a rare moment to pause, reset, and breathe during demanding school days. We also learned practical lessons about scheduling, session flow, school logistics, and the importance of flexibility in workplace interventions.

What stood out most, however, was the power of collaboration. Teachers did not simply participate in the intervention — they actively shaped it. Their feedback directly influenced changes to session length, scheduling consistency, and the structure of future visits. The study evolved through ongoing cycles of planning, action, reflection, and adaptation.

For me, this experience reinforced an important lesson for HRD scholars and practitioners alike: meaningful solutions often emerge when research is conducted with people rather than on people. As HRD continues exploring employee well-being, organizational learning, and workplace change, collaborative approaches such as action research may help us bridge the gap between theory and practice in more meaningful ways.

An earlier version of this work was presented as a poster at the 2026 Academy of Human Resource Development (AHRD) Conference.

Authors: Viktoria Loidl, PhD Candidate, Human Resource Development, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Jung Sun Jung, Postdoctoral Researcher, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Wenhao David Huang, Professor of Human Resource Development, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Purpose:

Voluntary turnover in the post-pandemic era is often interpreted as a retention failure. However, research on sustainable careers suggests that many career transitions reflect individuals’ efforts to restore alignment between personal values, well-being, and long-term career development. Our study of academic professionals who left their roles between 2020 and 2022 shows that voluntary turnover often represents a proactive attempt to realign careers across changing personal and organizational contexts. For HRD and L&D leaders, this reframes turnover as a signal of systemic misalignment and a guide for designing more sustainable work environments.

What problem or issue does this address?

This study challenges a dominant assumption in talent management: that voluntary turnover is primarily driven by dissatisfaction or compensation. Instead, findings suggest turnover often reflects:

• Breakdown in work-life integration

• Burnout and well-being concerns

• Leadership instability

• Misalignment between institutional priorities and personal values

What does the research suggest?

• Voluntary turnover is often a proactive attempt to restore alignment between health, happiness, productivity, and personal values rather than simply dissatisfaction with pay or work.

• Work-life integration was a decisive driver of turnover. Flexibility and remote options were viewed as non-negotiable.

• Burnout and stress significantly influenced exit decisions. Health concerns were frequently cited.

• Leadership changes and instability strongly disrupted perceived alignment.

• Organizational culture and mission alignment shaped career satisfaction.

• Increasing responsibilities without recognition intensified dissatisfaction.

• Compensation mattered but was rarely the sole driver of turnover.

Why does this matter for practice?

For HRD professionals, this means retention strategies must move beyond engagement surveys and address structural sustainability across career stages.

The Sustainable Career Framework (De Vos et al., 2020) emphasizes that careers are dynamic, evolving, and embedded within broader personal and professional systems. Careers are sustainable when person, context, and time interact in ways that support ongoing happiness, health, and productivity across the lifespan.

Sustainable careers are not about preventing all turnover. They are about designing work systems where health, happiness, and productivity reinforce each other over time. When that balance collapses, employees move, not necessarily because they failed, but because the system no longer supports a sustainable career.

What can practitioners do differently?

• Treat Turnover as a Diagnostic Signal
  Analyze exits through sustainability dimensions (health, happiness, productivity), not just compensation or engagement data.

• Protect Work-Life Integration
  Reversing flexibility policies carries retention risk. Flexibility must evolve with employee life stages.

• Address Burnout Structurally
  Well-being initiatives must extend beyond symbolic programs to workload design and leadership accountability.

• Stabilize Leadership Transitions
  Supervisor changes are high-risk moments. Clear communication and transition support reduce misalignment.

• Invest in Long-Term Career Development
  Employees seek growth, learning, and future employability. Development pathways enhance sustainability.

Citation and link to the published paper:

This blog summarizes findings from:

Loidl, V., Sung, J. S., & Huang, W. D. (2026). From discontent to development: Crafting sustainable careers through voluntary turnover among academic professionals in higher education. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/19394225261424339

Reference

De Vos, A., Van der Heijden, B. I., & Akkermans, J. (2020). Sustainable careers: Towards a conceptual model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 117, 103196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.06.011

About the Authors

Viktoria Loidl is a PhD Candidate in Human Resource Development at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and serves as the Networking Manager of the Scholar-Practitioner Special Interest Group. Her scholarship explores how AI and digital transformation are redefining the future of work and career sustainability. Her research informs organizational strategy, workforce development initiatives, and evidence-based approaches to supporting employee well-being in technology-driven environments.

Jung Sun Sung is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Her scholarship spans higher education, instructional systems design, and the evaluation of STEM education and workforce development initiatives. Drawing on extensive experience evaluating academic and workforce training programs, her research also examines organizational contexts, professional development, and sustainable career pathways in higher education.

Wenhao David Huang’s career development scholarship advances a growing empirical base examining how diverse populations navigate career decision-making and workplace learning outcomes, informed by theoretical perspectives grounded in human motivation.

Author: Michael K. Horrigan, EdD and SPHR

Caring about the “leased” among us concerns the neglected leased employees in America’s workforce instead of the marginalized “least of these” in a Bible verse (Matthew 25:40). HRD professionals may be surprised to learn that millions of jobs are filled by leased employees, who are different from but often confused with independent contractors and others in the so-called gig economy. I only realized this while exploring freelancer engagement during my doctoral studies at Northeastern University. As a former HRM executive, I intentionally overlooked the skills, leadership roles, work engagement, and well-being of leased employees because I was concerned about compliance and cost issues. So, I rationalized the limitations HR placed on skills enhancement, leadership development, performance improvement, and the workplace resources available to leased employees. In other words, I ignored their HRD needs. Now a reflective practitioner, I wish to make amends by presenting you with strategic and enlightened self-interest reasons for believing that HRD should care about leased employees.

This Practitioner’s Examination of the Work Experiences of Leased Employees

Leased employees are typically full-time workers hired to perform job assignments for client companies based upon service contracts with third-party agencies. Client companies assign leased employees to specific roles, direct their labor, and determine the duration of their employment. Yet, they are legally employed by the leasing agencies, which are officially responsible for payroll, tax withholding, benefits administration, and HR-related obligations. Leased employees can be found in many countries, but regulations governing international employee leasing vary significantly. Most U.S.-based companies lease employees through an Employer of Record (EOR) or a Professional Employer Organization (PEO). Both can provide legally compliant payroll & benefits services, but PEO’s offer co-employment options for a broader range of HRM/HRD services. Unless specified, responsibility for the time and expense of providing individualized training & development, performance improvement, and work engagement support to leased employees is often left unassigned. Therein lies a risk and a problem for HRD.

A Challenging HRD Problem of Practice with Implications for Practice and/or Research

This framework for a researchable HRD problem of practice is built upon recently published literature:

• Fragmentation of the American workforce – accelerated by digital technology applications, gig work trends, and remote/hybrid policies – has changed the nature of traditional employment relationships. One outcome is an increase in the number of people in contingent, alternative, and other “non-standard” contract employment arrangements (Katz & Krueger, 2023). “This is a phenomenon with significant implications for individuals and for society” (Kuhn, 2016, p. 160).

• Scholars have acknowledged these trends when expounding on “why HRD and HRM should work together to solve emerging people management challenges for the benefit of employees, organizations, and society” (Harney & Gubbins, 2024, p. 161). However, others wonder whether HRD is doing what it should be doing to align its practices and research priorities with today’s workforce trends and development needs (Torraco & Lundgren, 2020).

• The underrepresentation of freelancers, contract workers, and other independent workers (IWs) in published literature was highlighted not long ago (Bergman & Jean, 2016). International HRM scholars then claimed “IWs are largely ignored or neglected by HR practice and research” (Cross & Swart, 2021, p. 233). They challenged HR scholars and practitioners to respond. Many did, and 98 cited this provocation paper as a reference – but not a one discussed leased employees.

This is most unfortunate because growth projections for employee leasing – fueled by HR outsourcing – could be unfavorable to the future of HRD. Companies that outsource HR functions often do so for cost reasons. When basic HR services, such as payroll, benefits, compliance, and HRIS administration, move from a client company to an EOR or PEO, HR practitioners are on both ends of this work transfer. However, HRD services like skills-based training and leadership development may not be part of an EOR or PEO service contract unless HRD practitioners can make a case for their added value. How can they do that?

Discussion of Accessible Populations of Leased Employees and Industry/Organization Data

Investigating leased employment begins with synthesizing information about the populations legally working for PEO’s and EOR’s. According to an industry trade association, 500+ PEO’s provide HR services to at least 4.5 million worksite employees in the United States. The five largest PEO’s payroll about 40% of the industry’s leased employees. Another 800+ EOR HR service providers employ untold millions of leased employees in 180+ countries. Driven by the needs of client companies employing remote workers based in international locations, the demand for EOR services has grown significantly. The top North American EOR’s make up 40-45% of the global market. Two of the largest agencies (ADP TotalSource, Insperity) offer basic global EOR service plans as well as full-service PEO options, including training & development. Accessible populations of leased employees and industry data are available.

Insights: What HRM and HRD Reflective Practitioners Could Be Doing About Leased Employees:

Based on my experiences as an HRM executive and HRD novice scholar, this is what I’m suggesting:

What HRM Could Do: HRM / “People Management” leaders could begin by identifying the leased employees within the workforce. Next, analyze their influence on the achievement of HR’s strategic priorities for 2026: (a) AI skills integration, (b) leadership development; and (c) employee wellbeing. Then, share new information with HRD practitioners and publish findings in widely read HR magazines.

What HRD Could Do: HRD leaders could begin by investigating the practical use of tools, techniques, and interventions to facilitate learning, development, and performance among leased employees. Next, work with HRM to identify populations of leased employees and the stakeholders that employ them. Then, conduct action research on leased employees and publish findings on important topics, such as:

• Virtual HRD, Technology, and AI – the role of remote leased employees in AI skills integration.

• Leadership, Strategic HRD, and Career Development – leased employees as virtual leaders.

• Workplace Learning and Training & Development – what is different for leased employees.

• Workplace Well-being & Engagement – how do leased employees experience engagement.

Granted, this is a lot to ask of HRD practitioners, scholars, and novice researchers – but it matters to us. If not HRD, then who? Otherwise, leased employees may become the “least of these” after all.

References

Bergman, M. E., & Jean, V. A. (2016). Where have all the “workers” gone? A critical analysis of the unrepresentativeness of our samples relative to the labor market in the industrial–organizational psychology literature. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(1), 84–113.

Cross, D., & Swart, J. (2022). The (ir) relevance of human resource management in independent work: Challenging assumptions. Human Resource Management Journal, 32(1), 232–246.

Harney, B., & Gubbins, C. (2024). Human Resource Development (HRD) meets Human Resource Management (HRM): A skills-based agenda for a FRAGILE world order. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 26(4), 160–178.

Horrigan, M. (2022). Exploring the work engagement of freelancers in America during the COVID-19 era Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) (Doctoral dissertation, Northeastern University).

Katz, L. F., & Krueger, A. B. (2019). Understanding trends in alternative work arrangements in the United States. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 5(5), 132-146.

Torraco, R. J., & Lundgren, H. (2020). What HRD is doing—What HRD should be doing: The case for transforming HRD. Human Resource Development Review, 19(1), 39-65.

About the Author

Michael K. Horrigan, EdD and SPHR

Michael Horigan is a retired HR executive who has turned to freelance writing about HR & HRD topics after earning a Doctor of Education degree from Northeastern University. His dissertation explored the work engagement of “freelancers” in American. Dr. Horrigan’s interests are informed by lessons learned during 30 years of work experience as a senior HR management professional.

Trust Your Gut by Eugene Sadler-Smith, University of Surrey, UK, explores how intuition (rapid, unconscious pattern recognition shaped by learning and experience) can be consciously developed and integrated with analytical thinking to improve decision-making. Trust Your Gut provides a seven-step pathway to building ‘intuitive intelligence’ defined as the ability to notice, understand and use your intuitions to improve decision-making and problem solving in professional and person life. Trust Your Gut was shortlisted for the Business Book of the Year Awards 2025 in the ‘smart thinking’ category.

Trust Your Gut is relevant to HRD because it reveals intuition as a critical, yet often overlooked, capability that shapes learning, leadership, talent development, and organisational decision-making. Trust Your Gut is grounded in dual-process theories of cognition (also known as ‘the two minds model’, popularised by Daniel Kahneman) and the seven steps to intuitive intelligence, which are: (1) Build intuitive muscle power; (2) get in touch with your gut feelings; (3) know when and when not to trust your gut; (4) think without thinking; (5) tune in and translate; (6) debias your intuitive mind; (7) hone your hunches. The book contains numerous individual and group exercises, case studies and take-aways for use in self-instruction or group learning.

Insights for HRD Practitioners:

• The book offers actionable tools for developing employees’ intuitive intelligence

• Intuition can be developed: Intuition is not a mysterious sixth sense but a learnable skill rooted in experience, reflection, and pattern recognition. This means that HRD can intentionally cultivate intuition through training, coaching, and experiential learning.

• Balanced decision making uses both intuition and analysis: Effective decisions arise from a blend of intuition and analysis, so HRD programmes should help employees recognise when intuition is trustworthy, when it is biased, and how to combine it with evidence-based reasoning.

• Intuition supports leadership, talent management, and interpersonal effectiveness: Helping leaders and teams tune into gut feelings enhances judgment in complex, ambiguous, relational, and time-pressured situations and is vital in many HRD domains including communication, conflict resolution, selection, and leadership development.

Insights for HRD Researchers:

• the book opens fertile territory for investigating how intuitive and analytical processes interact in learning, expertise development, leadership effectiveness, and at the human–AI interface.

• Understanding intuitive intelligence as a developmental process: the book argues that intuitive intelligence can be developed through experience, reflection, and debiasing. It offers a framework for studying how intuition develops, how it can be applied in the workplace over the career lifespan, and how HRD interventions could accelerate this process.

• Interplay of intuition, analysis, and expertise: the book highlights the blended nature of decision-making, opening research questions on the cognitive, emotional, social, and contextual factors that influence when intuition helps or hinders decision-making.

• Human intuition in the age of AI: the book raises timely questions about how human intuitive judgment complements algorithmic systems and provides a platform for HRD researchers to study how uniquely human capabilities, such as intuition, can add value in the workplaces of the future

Link to where to source the book.

Sadler-Smith, E. (2024). Trust Your Gut. Harlow: Pearson

https://www.pearson.com/en-gb/subject-catalog/p/trust-your-gut/P200000011495

Author Bio:

Eugene Sadler-Smith is Professor of Organizational Behaviour, Surrey Business School, University of Surrey, UK. His research interests are intuition (in decision making) and hubris (in leadership). Trust Your Gut is his fourth book on this topic. He is also the author of Human Resource Development: From Theory into Practice (2022: Sage).

Fostering Wisdom at Work (2022) by Dr. Jeff M. Allen takes a thoughtful look at how wisdom can be developed both personally and collectively through self-awareness, learning, lived experience, and mentoring. It highlights wisdom as a vital part of individual growth and organizational success, especially in today’s fast-moving, knowledge-driven world.

This book reframes wisdom as a vital and learnable quality. While often overlooked in professional development, wisdom is a uniquely human capability that can be cultivated intentionally. Allen argues that fostering wisdom is not only possible but necessary as organizations face increasing complexity and uncertainty and the need for deeper human insight in leadership and workplace culture.

Insights for HRD practitioners, the book

• emphasizes that wisdom is not an innate or fixed trait, but something that can be intentionally fostered within individuals and cultivated in organizations. Through mentoring, reflection, and deliberate learning experiences, HRD practitioners can support the development of wiser decision-making and deeper interpersonal understanding.

• offers practical guidance for moving from a learning organization to a wisdom-based organization by cultivating emotional intelligence, adaptability, resilience, connection, and ethical leadership.

• helps people-centered professionals support employees in navigating complexity with better judgment, deeper self-awareness, and stronger human connection for a fast-changing global economy where technical skills alone are not enough.

Insights for HRD researchers, the book

• elevates wisdom to a serious area of inquiry for human resource development, blending insights from psychology, philosophy, social science, education, and organizational behavior.

• presents wisdom not just as a philosophical notion but as a construct that can be examined, defined, and developed.

• makes a strong case for treating wisdom as a legitimate and measurable construct. It moves beyond abstract or philosophical discussions and offers clear behavioral indicators and conceptual frameworks that can be empirically studied.

• opens up new avenues for empirical study, including how wisdom relates to leadership, organizational learning, performance, culture, and learning systems.

• bridges individual development and systemic change by linking personal growth—such as self-awareness, learning, and unlearning—to collective outcomes in organizational settings.

Link to where to source the book: https://amzn.to/39PCu6k

Author Bio:

Dr. Jeff Allen is a Regents Professor at the University of North Texas and Founding Director of the Center for Knowledge Solutions. A global expert in organizational wisdom and evidence-based decision-making, he brings over 30 years of experience helping leaders and teams bridge individual insight with collective knowledge to drive workforce transformation.

Our challenges are both the same and new.

Today’s challenges faced by HRD leaders are both the same and new. We’ve been talking about the ‘shifting landscape of HRD’ for 30+ years. We’ve been leading through complexity and ambiguity – albeit at ever-increasing rates – all this time. We’ve been looking for ways to strategically align learning strategy with the business and speak a language that resonates rather than alienates our leaders for as long as I’ve been in the profession. But new challenges emerge each year. Now, as a consultant and business owner, I’m most interested in hearing about the recent, challenges my clients and fellow practitioners face. It’s been a conversation of late that I’d like to share with you here.

What challenges are Talent Leaders talking about?

From insurance to logistics to government to manufacturing, I’ve listened to the challenges HR and business leaders face and their desire to overcome them. Most of my client organizations have fewer than 5,000 employees and lack a formal learning function - or any individuals dedicated to training. While this itself presents a unique set of internal challenges, some common external factors affect all. This time of the year (it’s November as I write this), the conversations are always a mix of overwhelm and optimism. Frustrations of what wasn’t fixed over the year emerge, alongside the hope of making things better next year.

This Fall, I began recording the themes in these conversations, sensing there was something to learn from others regarding what I was hearing. From a few of my current clients - a senior learning leader in the construction industry, a mid-level leader in agriculture, and a C-suite HR executive in auto parts – some commonalities emerged regarding their incoming 2026 challenges. Sprinkled into these formal conversations are discoveries from other talks with prospects and solopreneurs, along with a bit of my own experience and intuition about where we, as HRD practitioners, can make an impact. Some of these challenges are new to the stage but some we’ve been wrestling with as a profession for some time.

• Crafting an L&D strategy that aligns with the business – and executing it too

• Building a learning function from scratch

• Educating senior leaders on what talent development is and what it isn’t

• Continuing struggle to align learning initiatives with rapidly shifting business priorities

• Accepting that inclusion is no longer optional or programmatic – it’s expected from employees, stakeholders, and customers

• Leading in environments of uncertainty and ambiguity while talent leaders manage their own reactions to change

• Difficulty in finding the specialized skill sets needed in their industry

• Limited time available to onboard new employees

• Noticeable uptick in employee relations issues related to a lack of formal training programs

• Planning for learning that is both personalized and scalable

• Validating the impact of HRD interventions through measurable outcomes, and the age-old problem of having the time to do so

Where are Talent Leaders sourcing research to help solve these challenges?

Throughout my conversations, I became increasingly curious to know how talent leaders were solving these problems. Who are they talking to about these challenges? Where are they researching best practices? How are they gaining the knowledge and skills they need to navigate these shifts? Whether using AI to help curate research or still kicking it old school and ‘Googling’ for an answer, I knew they were searching for solutions.

So, I asked the obvious question, “What was the last topic you researched and where did you go for answers?” Here are the responses.

What is interesting to note is how talent leaders often turn to corporations rather than professional associations for their answers. That list of sources is presented, primarily, in order of how people responded– corporations first, then associations. I believe practitioners want research-based, proven solutions that are distilled and presented in a format that allows for immediate application. They told me they trust these organizations to have a bench of I/O psychologists and the like who can and do the best research. They go to associations to network with other local practitioners doing the same work, and while they would like more research and solution-based learning, they don’t expect it there. That expectation stems from experience, and disappointment, that their associations haven’t delivered in the past.

So, now what? In my opinion- look in new places

The future of our profession demands that HRD practitioners stay sharp and educate themselves on emerging interventions that address our new (and not-so-new) challenges. Where we go for this education must branch beyond ‘the usual suspects’ listed above and dig deeper into compelling research that challenges us rather than provides a quick (and not necessarily evidence-based) fix.

As a former in-house practitioner, I know finding and consuming this research takes time. In a time-crunched world, we tend to gravitate toward what we can get our hands on with the least amount of effort. Or, worse yet, we don’t do any research at all and go with what we’ve always done.

Looking in new places may take a bit more time, but it is worth the payoff in knowledge gained. Personally, I’ve relied on the Academy of Human Resource Development’s (AHRD) research at various points in my career. I know that when I dig into the vast array of research generated by this association, I will have to translate what I learn into language my business leaders can understand. This is my job: to distill it so they can use it.

After reading this, you may want to consider where you’ve been going to stay up to date on our profession and its challenges. I encourage you to answer the question, “What challenges are you seeing – and, more importantly, how are you responding?” Then, consider how your voice as a practitioner can influence how the body of research and its dissemination can have an influence for our profession over the next 30 years.

Author Bio:

Suzanne Murphy is the President and Founder of Abeo Consulting Group.

She has spent the past 30 years working in the field of Human Resource Development (HRD). She says “I cut my teeth on full-time learning facilitation roles, then slowly learned the practice of instructional design. Eventually, in-house roles grew in responsibility and depth to the point where I was leading a learning function and spending more time on organizational culture and design work. This is the work that continues into my current role as a consultant. Alongside my evolution, what has remained consistent over those years is the constant state of change in our profession.”

Early in her career, Suzanne discovered a deep-rooted passion for teaching and mentoring. She recognized the power of guiding individuals toward fulfilling and engaging careers. In 2006, she founded Abeo Consulting Group, driven by her belief that businesses thrive when their people are empowered to excel.

More than just a consultant, Suzanne’s your partner on the journey to transformation. Her strengths — honesty, trustworthiness, humor, passion, and reliability — permeate every interaction. She’s the listening ear, the confidant, and the cheerleader who ensures you’re never alone as you navigate the path to change. Her work style involves strategic thinking, approachability, and asking the right questions to uncover meaningful insights. Suzanne’s clients often grapple with challenges like limited in-house resources for learning and development, leaders who excel technically but struggle with people dynamics, and the absence of a dedicated Talent Management leader. Her expertise shines as she dives into these “people problems” and crafts effective solutions that drive growth and harmony within organizations.

As a life-long learner, Suzanne consistently and intentionally works to develop important skills she can implement for her clients. Her commitment to professional development echoes the lessons she shares. Armed with a Master of Arts in Human Resources Development from the University of St. Thomas, and a Bachelor of Science in Interpersonal Communication from Ohio University, Suzanne is a well-equipped guide. Her certifications include Prosci Certified Change Practitioner, Leadership Circle 360 Profile, California Psychological Inventory - CPI260, FIRO, and the Myers Briggs Type Inventory (MBTI).

My academic career commenced in 1995 and was preceded by HRD consultancy and corporate work in a range of different public and private sector organisations. In 1988, alongside my organizational HRD roles, I worked as a tutor with the UK Open University, an early pioneer making education and learning accessible to all, regardless of their prior background or qualifications. Subsequently I fulfilled academic roles at the University of Northampton (UK), Westminster University (UK) and the University of Portsmouth. Over the course of my career I served as UFHRD Deputy Chair of the Learning and Teaching Committee, Chair of the Research Activities Committee and then as Chair of the Forum until 2024. In February 2024 I was honoured to be Inducted into the Academy of Human Resource Development HRD Scholar Hall of Fame. I was honoured to serve, alongside Jon Werner and Kim Nimon as co-Editor of Human Resource Development Quarterly between 2016 and 2018. I continue to service on Editorial Boards for various HRD journals. I was appointed in 2021 as Chair of the British Standards Institute (BSI) Technical Committee focused on Human Capital Management and contributed to three Working Groups of the International Standardization Organization (ISO) Technical Committee for HRM standards. I was convenor of the Working Group that successfully developed the first International Standard for Learning and Development and part of the development team for International Standards for the management of Internships and for Human Resource Management systems. In addition to my HRD research interests in employability, learning and development in work organizations, and standards and standardization issues for the Human Resource Management field I am committed to scholarship and academic development for HE practitioners and new career academics. I continue to partner with early career academics as they seek to publish their pedagogic research.

Key priorities for HRD research and practice

As someone committed to the research-practice connection, the unresolved challenge throughout my career was how to balance the need for careful, robust, trustworthy HRD research with timely and accessible knowledge sharing with practitioners. Good research takes too long to get published and it often ‘turns off’ practitioners who need to solve HRD problems fast. I remain hopeful that AI tools that scan and summarize our research outputs can provide a timely and accessible knowledge sharing process. Careless use of AI is a problem so it falls to us to promote its thoughtful and evaluative deployment.

I would also like to see a rethink of the Western-centric assumptions that dominate our field. People from different regions of the world have a right to ask why the voices, experiences, and theories of fewer than 25% of the world’s population dominate the way HRD problems are framed, researched and theorized, regardless of different cultural settings. Traditional HRD theories have served the field well but I would love to see research and practice that is more inclusive, equitable and relevant to non-Western knowledge, wisdom, and practice.

The Future of HRD

As our field matures I hope we can rethink our competitive and economically orientated assumptions and justifications of the value of HRD. Work organizations contribute substantially to climate change so why is HRD reluctant to challenge this so that business models and processes emerge to both meet the needs of the present and to safeguard the life chances of future generations? The rhetoric of sustainability is easy but the change of mind-set to make it happen is hard. Can we dig deep into our values and principles to find ways through which HRD can contribute meaningfully to social and ecological goals?

We also have to wake up to the changing nature of work. Although there is much excitement, both positive and negative, about generative AI, we have yet to fully envisage the impact on labour markets of the wider processes of technological change that creates new forms of non-traditional, virtual, and precarious work and which will also affect our assumptions about working life span, employability and occupational identity.

Global patterns of labour migration also present a big challenge. Populist and anti-immigrant sentiments come and go but the larger reality of economic, social, political and climate crisis factors continue to accelerate global migration. Across the world, two thirds of global migrants are labour migrants, so the HRD field needs to find intentional HRD strategies for migrant integration through continuous learning, upskilling, reskilling, talent spotting and organizational agility.

Advice for HRD scholars and practitioners

The world is changing fast and my advice is likely already time expired. However here are some general thoughts to hold onto, especially when the going gets tough.

• Networks are crucial. They provide opportunities and they sustain you through the bad times. I would have been lost without my involvement with networks I encountered through (amongst others) the AHRD and the European University Forum for Human Resource Development (UFHRD).

• Collaborate with and support others - and accept or solicit their support of you. I did not do this nearly enough.

• You will have to compete for all the career gains you make (employment, research funding, promotion, tokens of prestige). This can be exhausting so make sure that you celebrate what you have achieved and try not to be obsessed by what you have not yet achieved.

• Act strategically – identify and nurture your area of repute, leadership, contribution. Be fairly ruthless about prioritization but also be alert to strategically opportunistic moments.

• Think creatively about informal means of professional or career development. Balance activity that you find personally meaningful with work that you know will be attractive to journal editors, institutions and employers.

• Most importantly - play to your strengths - be yourself and be genuine.

The purpose of this article is to reflect about my time in the field of human resource development (HRD) and comment upon where we currently stand as a field and where we might be headed. I present a number of novel things to ponder, particularly in the “where we are headed” section. My hope is my thoughts will generate deep thinking and eloquent discussion. Due to the nature of this article, I do not cite previous research, acknowledging we all stand on the shoulders of giants, and rely entirely on my personal reflections to guide the conversation.

Where we are…

These have been exciting times! The academic discipline of HRD has journeyed far from its origins in the last half of the 20^th century. As is consistent with any emerging field, there have been definitional and conceptual issues.

For example, what exactly is HRD and what is it not? In a similar vein, there have been passionate and interesting philosophical debates concerning the nature of HRD in that are we really about facilitating learning or is it performance? Or perhaps development? What are the ethical implications of these orientations? Likewise, critical discussions of what the role of HRD should be, if at all, in challenging the status quo and honoring identity exploration and development for all workers and not just for those who are in power.

Moreover, HRD tends to be dominated by research from a few select regions of the world—how do we embrace more cross-culturally and internationally relevant research and practice?

Theoretically speaking, what are the most powerful and fruitful theoretical foundations to support HRD theory building and testing, research and practice—is it psychological, sociological, economic, educational or from some other theoretical tradition relatively unknown to the field?

Methodologically speaking, deliberation concerning what constitutes the most rigorous, valid research—is it qualitative or quantitative or mixed-method designs?

Last, how do we best bridge the scholar-practitioner gap? And understanding if there is such a gap, what is its applicability to fostering learning, development and performance in organizations?

The beauty of all the aforementioned is that there is no single, best solution for any of these issues. Indeed, I am convinced that a one, best solution should not necessarily be the case. What these creative tensions suggest is not that HRD is merely in search of definitional and conceptual clarity, philosophical and ethical contentment, learning, development or performance orientation, critical identity discourse, provincial or international focus, theoretical foundation, methodological direction or anything that might be perceived as altogether negative. Indeed, none of these are intractable challenges per se; rather, they are opportunities for growth attuned to creatively and skillfully handling change in uncertain times. Each points to the health and vigor of HRD as a field that is constantly evolving to meet the needs of the 21^st century worker and workplace through creating novel avenues for individual and organizational growth. Consequently, I do not think of HRD then as a field “in search of” as it was in its earliest days, but more as a rapidly evolving field, aligned with perpetually adapting to the wide array of workplace contingencies presented in our daily work lives.

Where we are going…HRD Research

Although these are exciting times, moving forward as a field will require a continued strong emphasis on theoretical refinement and development, well-designed and rigorous empirical research, and compelling practical application. The creative tensions mentioned earlier will remain, each ebbing and flowing as to their salience over time. Collectively, however, they will serve as an engine to structure the evolution of our thinking about how best to make meaningful contributions to not only optimizing learning, development, and adaptive performance for workers, supervisors, and leaders, but also organizations, for-profit and not-for-profit, educational systems at local, regional and national levels, the social sciences, and the common good.

To meet the requirements for theoretical, empirical and practical development, the field of HRD will be moving toward expanding its scope to more thoroughly embracing, as yet, undervalued theoretical traditions and selecting promising new topical areas.

• Lifespan developmental theory, for example, has undergirded a scant amount of HRD research; if we are to understand learning and change over time and thereby support longitudinal research, lifespan theory can be an excellent way to do so.

• HRD research into under-researched topic areas like disabilities, emotion and emotion regulation strategies, spirituality and faith, ambivalence, intrinsic motivation (ideally, we want our workers to be self-motivated), psychological states and traits, prosocial behavior, ambiguous (incivility) and intentional (bullying, physical) aggressive behavior, and risk-taking and creativity will help the field evolve to meet the needs of today’s workers and organizations.

All these topic areas are relevant to HRD research and practice, yet to what degree it remains unclear.

• Cross-cultural and international perspectives will continue to be emphasized to meet the need for theoretical and empirical validation. Therefore, instrument refinement and the development of new validated measures will be required because many have not been validated for conducting rigorous research in cross-cultural and international settings.

• Furthermore, we will need simple, but elegant models to inform and guide such research. There seems to be little need for unintelligible, overly complicated conceptual or statistical models; instead, we need to find ways to present conceptual linkages, conduct research, and convey the results and their interpretations appropriately, yet unambiguously without jargonistic, imprecise language. Thus, I am arguing for clarity; intellectual rigor is best when it can be clearly conveyed.

Where we are going…HRD Practice

In addition, HRD practitioner intervention efforts (e.g., creating supportive workplace climates, promoting work-life balance) can have a pronounced impact on employee health. Accordingly, health-related issues like stress and strain and their links to chronic short- and long-term physical conditions including sleeplessness, high blood pressure, heart disease, obesity, and diabetes will be increasingly emphasized by HRD researchers because of their dire consequences if left unchecked. Equally, psychological conditions arising from stress and strain like anxiety, depression, and burnout will not be ignored as well. Finally, we are just coming to grips with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) and their ethical, correct use for data-driven decision making and the like. Their development is so new that little theory and research exists that clarifies the advantages and disadvantages of their uses. HRD can make important contributions to promoting awareness, conveying advantages and disadvantages, and training workers to use the technology ethically; proceeding carefully with their use is necessary if we are not to lose focus as a field.

In conclusion…

HRD as a field has evolved decidedly from its humbler beginnings where definitional and conceptual clarity, its relevance to both individuals and organizations, and the extent of its contribution to learning, development, and performance were studied extensively. Embracing creative tensions (e.g., learning or performance; provincial or international focus; qualitative or quantitative research designs) has enabled the field to evolve to meet the unrelenting demands of competitive pressures by producing skillful, well-prepared workforces to handle change. The future entails re-examining tried-and-true as well as utilizing new theoretical perspectives to better explain organizational phenomena. Cross-cultural and international research will expand to reflect the nature of workplace behaviors more accurately across the globe. Instrument refinement and development will evolve in parallel fashion to support such research. Simple, but elegant models will be developed by HRD researchers to guide research skillfully and a wide range of new topic areas will be explored to enrich what we already know about learning, development, and performance in organizations. AI and ML will continue to be heralded as a profoundly useful tool to aid data-based decision making in organizations, but cautions are in order if we are to embrace this technology ethically and correctly.

As I write at age 83, I find myself reflecting not only on HRD, but on the full arc of a life shaped by diverse experiences. My worldview has been influenced by a working mother who was an RN, a father in business, a grandmother who raised me until I was 12, and a wide network of teachers, friends, and family across Canada and the U.S. A multidisciplinary path—through business education, secretarial studies, theology, adult education, and international work--further shaped how I came to understand people, learning, and development. These varied influences formed the foundation for how I later approached HRD.

My early academic career began in Business Education and evolved organically as I consulted in Organization Development while at the University of Minnesota. With declining demand for teachers and the arrival of colleague Dick Swanson, we built a program in Training and Development that later became one of the early HRD programs in the U.S. Naming the field HRD brought both opportunities and turf battles, particularly with the business school’s HR program. Yet over time, HRD became widely recognized, even as debates continued about the human as resource framing.

Throughout the 1980s and beyond, my work increasingly extended across borders. International and cross‑cultural experiences broadened the ways I understood development, opening pathways toward International HRD, National HRD, and Societal HRD. These global engagements also exposed me to multiple forms of oppression, fueling my interest in Critical HRD, a body of work informed by adult education that confronts inequity, power, and exclusion. My own scholarship gravitated toward issues of gender, poverty, and marginalized communities, especially in international contexts.

The Future of HRD

In more recent years, I have turned my attention to HRD in the context of global migration, digitalization, and AI. I have been fortunate to collaborate with a small international group of scholars who met monthly and are now writing a book on how HRD must transform. These conversations have reinforced both my optimism about HRD’s potential and my unease about the forces shaping the world: political fracture, technological acceleration, rising autocracy, and deepening inequities. These dynamics raise urgent questions: How can HRD remain relevant? Who will safeguard the human dimensions of work as AI and robotics advance? How can academic programs keep pace, and how will we prepare scholars to lead ethically in such a volatile landscape?

As I look back across the many decades of my life and career, I am struck by how profoundly the world and HRD have changed. HRD has expanded, reinvented itself, and struggled at times to keep pace with the social, political, and technological forces shaping human lives. The challenges we now face are complex: accelerating digitalization, mass migration, widening inequities, political polarization, and the relentless advance of AI and robotics. These forces test our core values and threaten, at times, to eclipse the very human at the center of our work. And yet, even as I find myself wrestling with growing pessimism about some global trends, I remain hopeful because of the emerging scholars and practitioners who are stepping into this field with fresh eyes and a renewed sense of purpose. It is to them that I now turn.

Advice for HRD Scholars and Practitioners

To those who will shape HRD long after my generation is gone, I offer this advice. First, hold on to the human. No matter how sophisticated our systems become, no matter how deeply AI embeds itself into work and daily life, your primary responsibility is to safeguard human dignity. Always ask who benefits, who is harmed, and who is left out. This moral vigilance is essential if HRD is to remain a force for justice rather than simply an instrument of efficiency.

Second, cultivate critical consciousness. The future of HRD depends on professionals who can see beyond surface-level problems and challenge the assumptions that sustain inequity and exclusion. Critical HRD is not merely an academic niche—it is the compass that can guide us through an era of biased algorithms, authoritarian tendencies, and corporate pressures that may value profit over people.

Equally important is the ability to think across academic boundaries. The most pressing issues of our time cannot be understood through a single disciplinary lens. HRD professionals must become comfortable drawing insight from fields such as sociology, technology studies, global policy, ethics, business, economics, education, anthropology, theology, systems, philosophy, and adult education, among others. This kind of interdisciplinary fluency was central to my own journey, and I believe it will be even more vital for those who follow.

Embrace a genuinely global perspective. HRD is shaped by migration patterns, cultural worldviews, geopolitical tensions, and economic disparities that cross national borders. Listen deeply to voices beyond your own context. Be wary of exporting Western assumptions into spaces where they may not belong.

Technology, too, requires your active engagement. While you need not be an engineer, you must be able to interpret and influence how digital systems are designed and deployed. Advocate for transparency, fairness, and ethical use of data. The speed of technological change will not slow down; your responsibility is to ensure that wisdom keeps pace with innovation.

Perhaps above all, commit to lifelong learning, not as a slogan, but as a practice. The half‑life of knowledge is shrinking, and the ability to remain curious, adaptive, and open‑minded will be one of your greatest assets. Seek mentors, build community, and value collaboration. Scholarship and practice flourish when we learn together, challenge one another, and extend generosity across generations.

Finally, nurture hope--critical, grounded hope. The world you inherit will be turbulent, but it will also be full of possibility. HRD at its best is not just a field of study; it is a commitment to shaping more just, humane, and life‑affirming ways of working and living. If you can carry this commitment forward with courage and imagination, then I believe our field will not only endure but evolve in ways we cannot yet fully foresee.

I will probably not witness the full arc of HRD’s transformation, but I trust deeply in those who will carry it forward. The future of our field is in your hands. May you lead with clarity, compassion, integrity, and conviction, and may you never lose sight of the humanity that has always been at the heart of HRD.

Bio of Author

Gary N. McLean (EdD, PhD hon, MDiv, MA, BA) is a professor emeritus, HRD, University of Minnesota, and a former professor at Texas A&M University; the International Islamic University, Malaysia; Assumption University, Bangkok; and the National Institute for Development Administration (NIDA), Bangkok. He is a past editor of several refereed journals and served as President of AHRD and IMDA. He was President of McLean Global Consulting, a family business, and was active in OD for over 50 years. He has authored or co-edited almost 40 books, including award-winning books in OD and HRD in Vietnam. He has a lifelong interest in gender and international OD and HRD research. Email: mclea002@umn.edu

AI, automation, and digitalization are reshaping work faster than traditional HR systems can respond. Employees must continuously adapt their tasks, relationships, and skill sets, while organizations must support this adaptation without losing alignment or engagement. At the same time, employees increasingly evaluate organizations based on growth opportunities, meaningful work, and leaders who actively support development. Within this context, HRD faces a central challenge: How can organizations enable employees to adapt their work in ways that also support sustainable career development?

THE QUESTION AND PROBLEM

This integrative review asked three main questions.

1. Which key theories, terms, and concepts emerge across the leadership, job crafting, and career development literatures?

2. How have leadership, employee job crafting, and career development been studied, and what patterns or gaps exist across findings?

3. What crucial connections link leadership, job crafting, and career development, and how can these insights guide future HRD research and practice?

How We Approached the Problem

We conducted an integrative literature review using systematic search procedures across interdisciplinary academic databases. From more than 600 articles on leadership, job crafting, and career development, a clear “blank space” emerged: no study had integrated all three constructs in a single framework. By connecting two streams of research leadership and job crafting, and job crafting and career development, we proposed a unified model of how organizational leaders support employees in adapting their work and enhancing their job, work, and career outcomes.

What Theories Did the Literature Use and Why?

Across the 47 studies, three theories appeared most frequently and together form the conceptual backbone of the leadership–job crafting–career development pathway.

1. Job Crafting Theory (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001)
   This theory frames employees as proactive agents who reshape tasks, relationships, and work meaning. It explains how employees respond to leadership cues and why job crafting enhances fit, engagement, and meaning.

2. Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) Model (Demerouti et al., 2001; Bakker et al., 2005)
   JD-R is widely used to show how job resources—such as autonomy, feedback, and support—fuel motivation and engagement. Studies drawing on this model demonstrate that supportive leadership increases the resources employees need to craft their jobs.

3. Career Construction Theory (CCT) (Savickas, 2005)
   CCT frames careers as a meaning-making process. Research using this theory shows how job crafting strengthens career adaptability, calling, and long-term development, connecting everyday work redesign to broader career outcomes.

Notably, none of these dominant frameworks are leadership theories. This absence reveals a critical theoretical gap: while leadership is repeatedly identified as influential, the field lacks clarity on which leadership approaches most effectively enable job crafting as a developmental mechanism.

The Results We Found: The Missing Link

Our review highlights job crafting as a key mechanism through which employees actively reshape their work to meet changing demands. When employees modify tasks, relationships, or the meaning of their work, they build resources that support not only current performance but longer-term career success. However, job crafting does not occur in a vacuum. Leadership plays a pivotal role in signaling whether such proactive behavior is supported, safe, and valued.

The missing link

The literature remains fragmented. Leadership, job crafting, and outcomes across job, work, and career domains have been examined in isolation or in pairs, but not as a coherent developmental system. Our review addresses this gap by outlining a new model:

Leadership → Job Crafting → Job, Work, and Career Outcomes

This model reframes leadership not as a distal influence, but as the driver that activates job crafting as a central intervening construct.

In this model:

1. Leadership is the spark.
   People-focused leadership styles, especially empowering, humble, servant, and inclusive leadership, most consistently predict whether employees engage in job crafting.

2. Job crafting is the engine.
   Job crafting translates leadership support into tangible outcomes, including higher job satisfaction, work engagement, interpersonal citizenship behaviors, and career success.

3. Career-related resources amplify the process.
   Career adaptability and a sense of calling strengthen the job crafting process, reinforcing positive work behaviors and reducing turnover intention.

4. Geography matters.
   Studies conducted in Asian contexts tend to focus on how leaders influence job crafting, whereas European studies more emphasize the career outcomes of job crafting behaviors. This pattern highlights important contextual nuances in how job crafting is understood and studied.

Actionable Takeaways for HRD & L&D

1. Move beyond performance monitoring.
   Managers need to see their role as more than enforcing compliance with redesigned workflows. In the age of AI, leaders must act as change agents whose primary job is to support employees in redesigning their roles so they can respond to change more effectively and creatively.

2. Train for autonomy.
   HRD initiatives should develop empowering and servant leadership capabilities, equipping managers with skills to legitimize and support job crafting.

3. Promote collective crafting.
   Job crafting can occur at the team level. Collective crafting distributes adaptation efforts, strengthens collaboration, and supports shared development.

4. Customize by culture.
   Leadership approaches should reflect cultural context. Charismatic leadership may legitimize job crafting in hierarchical settings, while autonomy-based approaches may be more effective in Western contexts.

Citation
Kim, K. N., & Yoon, S. W. (2024). Plotting the Blank Space Among Leadership, Job Crafting, and Career Development: An Integrative Review and Future Agendas for HRD. Human Resource Development Review, 24 (1), 70-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/15344843241280999

Bio of Authors

1. Kyung Nam Kim is a Ph.D. candidate in Human Resource Development at Texas A&M University. She serves as Co-Chair of the Scholar–Practitioner Special Interest Group (SIG) and as a member of the Connecting Research and Practice Working Group at the Academy of Human Resource Development. Drawing on industry experience and interdisciplinary academic training in business, sociology, psychology, and education, her research examines how organizational culture, leadership, and networks shape outcomes at the individual, team, and organizational levels. Her work focuses on bridging HRD theory and practice to address workforce dynamics in rapidly changing workplaces.

2. Dr. Seung Won Yoon, Professor of HRD and People Analytics at Texas A&M University, is President of the Academy of Human Resource Development for the 2024 to 2026 term. His work advances employee and organizational growth through leadership that enables learning, knowledge sharing, and responsible use of technology. Drawing on social capital, network science, and data analytics, his research connects leadership and learning with evidence based HRD solutions. He currently serves as a Faculty Research Fellow in the College of Education and Human Development, leading college wide initiatives that integrate HR and education expertise with STEM fields and business functions. His recent work emphasizes that human wisdom and agency must guide the use of AI and data analytics. Across his roles, he is deeply committed to translating rigorous research into practical insights that inform leadership development, workplace learning, and organizational decision making.

Subscribe now

Professor of Learning, Leadership and Organizational Development in the College of Education at The University of Georgia

In 1989, I was asked to write a chapter for the Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education on Human Resource Development (HRD). In it, I defined HRD as fostering a long-term learning capacity at the individual, group, and organizational levels. I believe my whole career has been spent unpacking that definition- exploring what it means to develop a learning capacity at individual, group and organizational levels through informal and incidental learning at the individual level and by creating a learning culture at the organizational level. More recently Victoria Marsick and I examined the influence of uncertainty and complexity on learning in organizations- calling on individuals and organizations to heighten their capacity to learn in the moment, to embrace uncertainty to see what emerges. Studies using our questionnaire, the Dimensions of a Learning Organization Questionnaire [DLOQ], demonstrated that developing these capacities at the organizational level enhances knowledge performance and innovation.

I began my HRD career in faculty and in the area of organizational development. When a faculty member said to me, “We’re tired of you people coming and telling us we can set the world on fire by rubbing two sticks together,” I knew I had to have a deeper understanding of managing change because of course I do want to help people “set the world on fire,” figuratively at least. This led to my dissertation on managing federally funded innovations and subsequently teaching managing change. In fact, I got my first HRD faculty position because they asked me to come teach this course. My teaching since has focused heavily on group change and organization development.

The Future of HRD

What then do I think the future holds for HRD? What are the innovations the future is calling us to create? Generative Artificial Intelligence [AI] is a major innovation demanding our attention. It is replacing people, jobs, and some say even critical thinking. What is the role of HRD in an AI dominated workplace? Will AI be a tool human resource developers use to facilitate learning in individuals and systems—or will it be a staff member? These are critically different scenarios. Research is needed both on how HRD is currently using AI and on optimal use of AI in HRD. Personally, I find AI a very useful, creative tool that is constantly improving; but it is not a replacement for my judgment. What is produced may look good on first blush, but on second look; it is often thin and less useful. We need to take that second look to avoid misusing this powerful tool.

What will the coming demographic cliff mean for HRD? The recession of 2008 triggered a decline in the birth rate that has persisted. The long term impact of this anticipated decline in college enrollment is that there will be fewer skilled, highly trained new entrants to the workforce. Companies such as Unilever with its focus on reskilling for employees whose jobs will be made obsolete by robotics and AI and IBM with its focus on upskilling offer a way forward as HRD helps the organization retain skilled workers.

I worry about the emphasis on employee adaptability and resilience. An article I read many years ago on the limits of malleability offered the metaphor of a rubber band. Stretch it too far and it breaks. Even as employees are urged to be more adaptable, more willing to embrace change—I find myself thinking we are blaming the victim. I focus on creating a learning culture because of my conviction that it is the organization that has to develop the capacity to adapt, learn and change. In a culture where learning is primary- errors are opportunities to learn; uncertainty is an opportunity to invent new ways forward, and learning becomes our new work.

Bridging HRD Research and Practice

HRD scholarship must remain anchored in practice. I have tried to consult or conduct research in organizations on learning and development projects throughout my career to keep myself current and to help build and confirm theory. Much of our work in this applied field is often disseminating and validating what was first invented in practice. Robert Blake once said that the most powerful form of intervening in organizations is theory driven intervention. My work has also been driven by theory- theories of informal and incidental learning and of the learning organization. What HRD theories will be needed to help grow learning capacity at individual and organization levels in this high technology, less global, highly networked, environmentally precarious, often divisive world?

Advice for HRD Scholars and Practitioners

Ultimately the future is uncertain and more volatile than ever. The best advice I can give HRD scholars and practitioners is to keep developing your own capacity to work at individual and system levels. Learning at the edge of chaos is incidental learning- learning in the moment, often tacit or a felt sense that is best surfaced and made explicit through sharing. Being part of supportive learning communities of our own such as AHRD will enable all of us to ready ourselves for changes we cannot yet imagine. We stand on the shoulders of giants- and I have been privileged to learn beside many of them (especially my dear friend and co-author Victoria J. Marsick) and at the same time I’ve been able to help generate the next generation of giants. It has been an incredibly rewarding journey to watch our field develop into this rich and fertile arena of scholarship and practice.

Dr. Karen E. Watkins is Professor of Learning, Leadership and Organizational Development in the College of Education at The University of Georgia. She holds a Ph.D. from the University of Texas at Austin and an M.A. from the University of Wisconsin. Karen’s scholarly interests include organizational learning assessment, informal and incidental learning, and. action science. Watkins & Marsick developed and validated the Dimensions of the Learning Organization Questionnaire (1997) used in several hundred published studies. Watkins is the author or co-author of numerous articles and chapters, and 11 books. Named Scholar of the Year by the Academy of Human Resource Development; she was inducted into the International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame and the Academy of Human Resource Development Scholar Hall of Fame. She consults with many organizations including work with Pepsico, Covidien [Medtronic], OECD, the World Health Organization, the Australian Army, and IFRC on learning organizations. She helped found HRD graduate programs at The University of Texas at Austin and at the University of Georgia. She co-founded the Generative Learning and Complexity Laboratory at the University of Georgia. She was one of the founding presidents of the Academy of Human Resource Development and is currently President of the Board of Trustees of the Geneva Learning Foundation in Switzerland.