Lloyd's SPARK-L framework

I was reminded recently of the SPARK-L framework (Career Voice, 2025) earlier this year - those aspects of Self-Awareness; Pathways, Action Planning, Reputation; Key Knowledge and Support; and Learning - and the benefits to the organisation of developing all staff so they stay (Career Voice, 2025; Lloyd, 2025).

While somewhat similar to DOTS (Law & Watts, 1977; read more here), this an organisational career development model, showing organisations the staff development payoff (Lloyd, 2025). Companies are unlikely to take any action unless there is going to be a payoff - and rightly so - because their first duty is to their shareholders. So what convinces an organisation that career development is worth the investment? Show the return on investment. Demonstrate how a CD programme will keep good staff in the organisation for longer. How it will boost productivity. And how it will assist to identify and grow staff skills that enable progression (Career Voice, 2025). 

Staff who are happy in their workplace and perceive a future with the organisation are less likely to leave, benefiting all participants (Kalamas & Kalamas, 2004). And a pilot programme can show an organisation what will work in their particular context (Career Voice, 2025). 

The six dimensions of SPARK-L are (Career Voice, 2025):

1. Self Awareness; assisting "talent identification, empowering employees to understand their unique strengths and interests"
2. Pathways; where staff member's own goals are connected "to meaningful opportunities within [the] organisation, exploring pathways in the ever-changing world of work"
3. Action Planning; staff create tailored "action plans, empowering [them] to take ownership of their career journey"
4. Reputation; staff work on networking and personal brand-building, positioning [them] for success in their chosen plans"
5. Key Knowledge and Support; developing "a culture of open communication and support, encouraging employees to seek guidance as they progress through their action plans"
6. Learning; whereby we "cultivate a culture of continuous career action planning in an ever-changing landscape"

The advice is to start small, get buy-in, and be clear about how success will be measured (Lloyd, 2025).

Sam

References:

Career Voice. (2025). The SPARK-L Framework. https://careervoice.com.au/sparkl/

Gollan, P. J., Kaufman, B. E., Taras, D., & Wilkinson, A. (2014). Voice and Involvement at Work. Routledge.

Kalamas, D., & Kalamas, J. B. (2004). Developing Employee Capital: Setting the stage for life-long learning. HRD Press.

Law, B. & Watts, A. G. (1977). Schools, Careers and Community: A study of some approaches to careers education in schools (pp. 8-10). Church Information Office.

Lloyd, N. (2025, May 20). Career Development in Organisations: It’s for Everyone (Honestly). Career Development Association of Australia. https://cdaa.org.au/CDAAWebsite/Web/Blog/Posts/Career-Development-in-Organisations--It-s-for-Everyone--Honestly-.aspx

read more "Lloyd's SPARK-L framework"

Evaluating employee strengths

In my reading, last year, I encountered a meta-analysis (of sorts) by Miglianico et al. (2022) where the researchers evaluated 27 value or strength instrument studies published between 2010 and 2019, using a range of methods: cross-sectional; diary; experimental; and quasi-experimental.

Out of the review of this range of studies, and supported by the literature, the researchers proposed a five-step flow diagram for workplaces to identify and develop employee strengths. The five steps are shown in the image accompanying this post, and the steps themselves - as outlined by Miglianico et al. (2022) are as follows:

1. Work with the employee and "educate the[m...] about the strengths approach and the proposed [career] intervention". Employees must understand "and appreciate the value of the approach, to understand the steps involved in the process, and to be actively and genuinely involved in the intervention (Clifton and Harter 2003). The approach’s origins, advantages and limitations, as well as the overall process, must therefore be presented, and all questions must be answered (Dubreuil and Forest 2017). This step helps reduce negativity bias, the natural tendency of humans to give more attention to negative than positive information (Ito et al. 1998), and fully engage participants in the intervention from the start" (Miglianico et al., 2022, p. 757)
2. Next we "identify the person’s strengths" via "a psychometric instrument (e.g., StrengthsFinder, VIA-Survey, StrengthProfile), or in a less restrictive way by observing oneself (e.g., identifying activities that involve performance, energy, authenticity and flow; Biswas-Diener et al. 2011; Linley 2008; Linley and Burns 2010), or by collecting feedback from peers". Using a range "of different methods (e.g., psychometric instrument and feedback from peers) can yield a more accurate and complete picture of an individual’s strengths" (pp. 757-758).
3. Following that, we assist the employee to absorb the identified strengths and integrate them into their identity. Allowing time for employees "to fully grasp and assimilate this new information, better understand the reasons for [their] actions and observe [their] behavior in light of personal strengths. This new conceptualization of self can then be integrated into the identity before planning the next steps (Clifton and Harter 2003). It can be facilitated by appropriation exercises, such as specific questions linking strengths to previous successes (Dubreuil et al. 2016), feedback analysis (Roberts et al. 2005b), and self-portrayal exercises (Forest et al. 2012), in order to help the individual gain a deeper awareness of [their] strengths" (p. 758)
4. Once complete, we next put the ideas into action, in two parts. To begin, the employee "decides the specific changes [they want] to put in place to make better use of [their] personal strengths. The individual then implements the intended transformations. To help workers move from theory to action, strengths must be invested in specific individual, group, or organizational goals and initiatives (e.g., personal objectives, team projects, new tasks and responsibilities, complementary partnerships, etc.), and their application must be monitored or closely followed by managers, peers or coaches, who can provide support and encourage progress (Linley 2008). In the long term, it is important that the person always remain careful to avoid the overuse of strengths, and rather aims to use the right strength, to the right amount, and at the right time" (p. 758).
5. Lastly we review. "[R]esults can be evaluated subjectively through the individual’s appreciation of the progress made (in terms of strengths awareness and use, goal achievement, overall well-being, etc.), or objectively through changes in various variables that were measured prior to the intervention: wellbeing, job satisfaction, motivation, work engagement, or job performance. A measure of the impact of the intervention can then make it possible to ensure the effectiveness of the procedure and allow for readjustment if necessary" (p. 758).

This is a very handy process outline. Because it is research-based, we can probably rely on this meeting the needs of both individuals and the organisation. I think it would be relatively easy to implement; and I suspect it would also be easy to monitor, and to tweak. 

A simple tool for organisational growth, delivered through individual development.

Sam

Reference:

Miglianico, M., Dubreuil, P., Miquelon, P., Bakker, A. B., & Martin-Krumm, C. (2020). Strength use in the workplace: A literature review. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21, 737-764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00095-w

read more "Evaluating employee strengths"

Wellness and effectiveness

I was reading an article about the effectiveness of employee wellness programmes in the Guardian earlier this year (Spicer, 2024) which drew on a large number of employee surveys analysed by Fleming (2024; and by a large number, I am talking about over 46,000 staff across 233 organisations: so quite large!). 

We all know that workplaces are trying to improve staff health is aimed at a quid pro quo pay-off: healthier staff means fewer absences and greater productivity. More stuff gets done with fewer mistakes. On the other side of the ledger, staff are more resilient, are less likely to injure themselves, and are under less pressure. That's the theory, anyway. Most of we older hands take a much more cynical view than this.

It reminds me of what a health and safety related to me about a regional hospital. Doctors were apparently provided with a house to have a sleep in when they were working double-shifts. The HR leader thought this was a great wellness initiative: what I termed a band-aid on a volcano. Never mind increasing the staffing so that doctors didn't have to double shift: let's give them somewhere close by to have a kip... and leave the highly pressured environment exactly as it is.

And what Fleming's research shows is that pretty much all the wellness programmes that HR departments around the UK accomplishes is pretty much nothing. Our cynical view is accurate. Fleming said that he challenged "the popularity and legitimacy of individual level mental well‐being interventions like mindfulness, resilience and stress management, relaxation classes and well‐being apps", finding "little evidence in support of any benefits from these interventions with even some small indication of harm that would confirm fears from critics" (2024, p. 18). Ouch.

If instead HR departments worked on reducing the stress felt by staff, and the workload, results would be much more effective. 

Sam

References:

Fleming, W. J. (2023). Employee well‐being outcomes from individual‐level mental health interventions: Cross‐sectional evidence from the United Kingdom. Industrial Relations Journal. Advance online publication, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/irj.12418

Spicer, A. (2024, January 17). Work 'wellness' programmes don't make employees happier - but I know what does. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/17/work-wellness-programmes-dont-make-employees-happier-but-i-know-what-does

read more "Wellness and effectiveness "

An HRM HRD metaphor

While I often consider the human resource management field as a pie (see the diagram below from Workhuman, 2022), I also consider it as a continuum. 

Down at one end are all the task-oriented functions, like data collection, payroll, tax, insurance, parking, PPE, and leave. I tend to think of this being the 'cool' end. Pretty much everyone in an organisation deals with output from the cool end all the time. The output is consistent across the group, there are rules, leaving little room for manoeuvring, or individualisation. 

At the other end of the continuum we find the relational human resource development (HRD) functions: such as culture, training and development, and organisational development. I think of this as the 'warm' end; the people end, the human end - the heart end. At the warmest part of the warm end we find career development (CD). It is here that the organisation has a dyad relationship with each individual within the organisation (Ulh-Bein, 2006). We get personal development plans, career mapping within the organisation, and see the humanistic Rogerian (1942) theories of client-centred practice embodied. 

The HRM pie is as follows:

But we can see that by unrolling the sphere, we could easily run from HRIS at the cold end, through HRM in the middle, to HRD at the warm end. Just like the diagram accompanying this post :-D

That enables us to think differently about the HRM functions covered inside organisations, and who is at the centre of each service. As career development people, our training encourages us to put the individual at the centre of our practice. It is not about the organisational need, but about determining the individual's need. And in general, if we take a client-centred approach (Rogers, 1942), the organisational need gets met on the way.

Sam

References:

Rogers, C. R. (1942). Counseling and psychotherapy: newer concepts in practice. Houghton Mifflin.

WorkHuman. (2022, December 12). What is Human Resource Development (HRD)? 2023 Complete Guide. https://www.workhuman.com/blog/human-resource-development-hrd/#what8 as modified by myself

Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational Leadership Theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 654-676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.007

read more "An HRM HRD metaphor"

Returning to the office

Apparently, to be productive in our work, what "we need from our workplaces are [the ability to] focus (a cognitive response allowing us to think and concentrate to complete our work), a sense of beauty (an emotional response, an essential, constitutive element of organisations which has important implications in organisation theory), and connectedness (a relational response that involves the extent to which the environment facilitates a sense of community and a feeling of belonging to the organisation)" (Sanders, 2023). Dr Saunders created a scale for measuring the attributes and requirements for our needs for these quiet spaces to think; unusual spaces to inspire us and for us to be creative; and communal spaces to get our relational needs met.

We need all three elements, at different times. However, working at work may not fit what we need to do. Why? There are a number of reasons. Our office spaces can be noisy (hard to think). We may be distracted by colleagues (hard to think). We may also get into a flow state, then be interrupted for 'information-only' meetings (feel anti-connected). It is also possible that we may "struggle to maintain energy or inspiration" because of "the sameness [of the office being] very boring to our senses" (hard to be emotionally engaged; Sanders, 2023).

We are generally social beings, needing to work with others to meet those social needs, to bounce ideas off each other, and to connect. It is possible that if we work from home too much, our kanohi ki te kanohi socialisation and social cue reading skills may get rusty; particularly true if we are an affiliative person where our work meets our identity, confidence and networks needs (McClelland & Burnham, 1976; Oxford Reference, 2023). 

Note that not all of us may be driven by a need for connection. There are two other key drivers; those of achievement, and power. There are tests so which we can use to could work out which elements drive us (McClelland & Burnham, 1976; Oxford Reference, 2023), though I am pretty sure that after Covid-19, those of us who have strong affiliative needs will have a clear understanding of the importance of that now on an individual basis.

However, working from home, or WFH, appears now dropping in the US. Apparently "72.5 percent of establishments had little or no telework, compared to 60.1 percent in July-September 2021" (US Bureau of Labour Statistics, 2023), while here in Aotearoa, 78% of respondents worked from home last year at least some of the time (Radio New Zealand, 2023). While the New Zealand data is a small sample of 1000, 54% of respondents said that - although they were theoretically able to work from home - they were actually unable to do so due to company requirements to be in the office (Radio New Zealand, 2023). Additionally, 53% of respondents would move cities for cheaper housing and better lifestyle, if they could keep their current role and work remotely (Radio New Zealand, 2023).

While we do need to be in the office sometimes, there is value in us NOT having to be there all the time. I had hoped that the WFH flexibility would be here with us for longer. 

But 'hoping' butters no parsnips. 

Sam

References:

McClelland, D., & Burnham, D. (1976). Power is the Great Motivator, Harvard Business Review, 54(2), 100-110.

Oxford Reference. (2023). Needs theory. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100227873

Radio New Zealand. (2023, March 7). 'An employee drive': People still keen on working from home, survey finds. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/485435/an-employee-drive-people-still-keen-on-working-from-home-survey-finds

Sanders, L. (2023, June 8). ‘Disastrous experiment’: Real reason behind hated return to work push. Site. https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/disastrous-experiment-real-reason-behind-hated-return-to-work-push/news-story/6f377ea396388a531de6cedf89936fe5

US Bureau of Labour Statistics. (2023, March 22). U.S. Business Response Summary [Economic News Release]. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/brs1.nr0.htm

read more "Returning to the office"

Quick HRM map

The field of human resource is complex, today forming a broad system which supports line managers with the tools they need to first develop and support their employees, and through those employees, to secondly drive - or facilitate - organisational performance (Grimard & Cossette, 2017). The difficulty is that often when we teach HRM, we tend to teach it as fragmented elements: legal aspects; taxation; conflict management; training... instead of providing an HRM overview showing how the elements fit together. We also tend also in courses to not relate HR functions to small businesses. We seem to 'assume' a corporate cloak when we talk about HR.

That can be more like an 'invisibility' cloak at times. Small businesses need HR too, but so often in Aotearoa do not have it.

The old adage is that HR is "having the right people in the right place at the right time", but HR today is far more complex than that. Two Canadian professors / researchers thought about this, and created the Quick HRM 'map' to show how HR is in fact "a coherent system of functions all integrally linked to each other" (Grimard & Cossette, 2017, p. 52). Each of the varied HR functions "consists of multiple steps, and each of these steps involves several tools" (p. 53), including: job analysis; planning; staffing; development; and maintenance (see below, p. 56). 

I particularly like this map as it shows the development elements - those which grow staff - separately to those of maintenance. Development aligns well with motivators or areas of satisfaction from Herzberg's Two Factor Theory (1959); while maintenance aligns well with dissatisfaction or demotivators. It is a nice division which helps clarify that HRD should have a developmental approach, which I feel may get lost in larger organisations, or be sacrificed during times of hardship in small organisations.

The authors have managed to locate the five HR areas on the map - job analysis, planning, staffing, development, maintenance - by repeating planning between the HRD and maintenance tasks; implying that it lies between all these tasks (Grimard & Cossette, 2017, p. 56). I was thinking that they could also have simply included a box behind all these elements to show that they all sit in 'a sea' of planning. 

For my part, in the Quick HRM map, I colour-coded the blocks to show which function they belonged to, but did not include an yellow planning box behind all. Perhaps I should have done. And perhaps I should have coloured the task of job analysis yellow as well. And interestingly I did not colour the staffing elements as a different colour because I see these two elements as much more part of planning, and less of the separate function of 'staffing'. Interesting how biases come out when we work with a model! Further, I felt that the job analysis box did not quite fit the model. This is such a 'task' - or output - of the planning process, that it just didn't seem to fit. I totally get why the authors include it in the model, but there is something odd about it needing to be included that just doesn't quite gel. 

How does this model - and my interpretation - fit with your existing knowledge and understanding of HR practices?

Sam

References:

Grimard, C. M., & Cossette, M. (2017). Quick HRM: Using a brief case study to introduce students to HRM. In Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Proceedings of the Annual ABSEL conference, 44(1), 52-58. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5813/322a84a0da865a64aa1d8cf0677e0bf8a205.pdf

Herzberg, F. (1959). The Motivation to Work. John Wiley & Sons.

read more "Quick HRM map"

Human Capability Approach, not Human Capital Theory

The human capital school of thought arose at the University of Chicago, with human resources being treated explicitly as a form of capital, or wealth (Schultz, 1961; Becker, 1964). Human capital has been defined as “skill, knowledge, and similar attributes that affect particular human capabilities to do productive work” (Schultz, 1971, p. 35). The linkage between human capital and production is widely accepted "as the main method to evaluate the effectiveness of investment in human capital" (Liu, 2022, p. 3). It is used by the World Bank, and by Governments as "a straightforward way to measure returns to investment in education using economic indicators" (p. 4).

On the other hand, the concept of human capability arose from the work of Amartya Sen, an economic construct (Sen, 1999) now known as the human capability approach (or HCA), emphasising human capabilities and agency. This is "not the empty agency of ‘free choice’ in Neoclassical economics, where the optimal choice is already determined by the given economic structure and given individual preferences, but a real agency based on values that individuals hold" (Andreoni et al., 2021, p. 180; emphasis added). HCA "define[s] development primarily as a process of expanding people’s individual freedoms and capabilities" (p. 180), with the implication that economic growth is the logical end-point of human development. 

 Individually, HCA allows us "to lead lives we value and have reason to value, provides a much needed counterpoint to the largely organisationally instrumental and human capital assumptions that have dominated debates on work and skills" (Bryson, 2010, p. 3). Organisationally, developing staff capability should have an economic pay-off. We need to keep asking "who benefits" when implementing HR practices to prevent a disconnect between the rhetoric and reality. Focusing on 'human capability' allows us to consider how organisations might assist individual's ability to live lives that they value; and how barriers may be created.

Human capital theory seems to count people as things. Human capability seems to count humans as a work in progress. Further, there has been a global "shift in focus from economic indicators to 'human development' [possibly signalling] a transition from the production-oriented human capital model to a more humanistic view on the objectives of development" (Liu, 2022, p. 5). For example, the UN now has Sustainable Development Goals with 17 markers being measured across 144 nations.

I think I prefer that approach. 

Sam

References:

Andreoni, A., Chang, H. J., & Estevez, I. (2021). The missing dimensions of the human capabilities approach: Collective and productive. The European Journal of Development Research, 33, 179-205. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-020-00356-y

Becker, G. S. (1964). Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education. University of Chicago Press.

Bryson, J. (Ed.). (2010). Beyond Skills: Institutions, organisations and human capability. Palgrave Macmillan.

Liu, Y. (2022). Human Capital or Human Capability: Basic Education from a Capability Perspective [Pol 423: Poverty Studies Capstone Research]. Washington and Lee University. https://dspace.wlu.edu/bitstream/handle/11021/35838/WLURG38_Liu_POV_2022.pdf?sequence=1

Schultz, T. W. (1971). Investment in Human Capital: The role of education and of research. The Free Press.

Sen, A. K. 1999. Commodities and Capabilities (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

read more "Human Capability Approach, not Human Capital Theory"

The nature of the employment relationship

When considering how employee voice operates in organisations, we must first be clear about what the 'employment relationship' is. An employment relationship is established when one person gives their mental or physical labour in exchange for some type of reward. This was seminally defined as: “An economic, social and political relationship which provides manual and mental labour in exchange for rewards allocated by employers” (Gospel & Palmer, 1993, p. 3).

In New Zealand, employment relationships are formally structured to establish a fair and balanced agreement between parties - employees and organisation - as well as personal and psychological commitments, as follows:

Employment Contract	Psychological Contract
Employment Legislation (e.g. Employment Relations Act 2000). See latest legislation here (Employment New Zealand, 2023). Individual or collective Employment agreement: Statutory and express terms written into employment contract.	Unwritten & largely implicit expectations and perceptions of conditions of employment relationship between parties. Reciprocal agreement: but controlled by the employee. Emotional bond which sustains the employment relationship over time. (Millar, 2006; Rudman, 1994)

 

Power imbalances between parties when creating the employment relationship - or if there are breaches of the employment contract or the psychological contract - can undermine the effectiveness and value of both contracts. Employment relationship objectives need to combine "efficiency, equity and voice" (Budd, 2004, p. 8):

• Efficiency: "the effective use of scarce resources" – e.g. market-based transactions & contracts (p. 13)
• Equity: "a set of fair employment standards covering both material outcomes and personal treatment that respects human dignity and liberty" – e.g. minimum labour standards, equality of opportunity (p. 13)
• Voice: "the ability to have meaningful input into decisions" – e.g. industrial democracy; employee decision-making & autonomy. Importance of communication & consultation that has meaning - in other words, that the employee can effect a change in organisational decision-making (p. 13).

Employee involvement, participation, and voice clearly relate to equity and voice above, but may also assist efficiency due to the increased information quality from front-line workers regarding potential work process and resource efficiencies. 

Sam

References:

Budd, J. W. (2004). Employment with a Human Face: Balancing Efficiency, Equity, and Voice. Cornell University Press.

Employment New Zealand. (2023). Legislation: A range of legislation is relevant to employment relationships. https://www.employment.govt.nz/about/employment-law/legislation 

Gospel, H. F., & Palmer, G. (1993). British Industrial Relations. Routledge.

read more "The nature of the employment relationship"

Employee voice and participation

The employee voice provides the "opportunity to have a say" within workplaces (Mowbury et al., 2015, p. 385), but is formally defined as "how employees raise concerns, express and advance their interests, solve problems, and contribute to and participate in workplace decision making" (Pyman et al., 2006, p. 543). The employee voice is often in one of two frames: the 'direct' voice; or the 'indirect or representative' voice. 

Since the 1990s, thousands of organisations across the world have developed 'high commitment', 'high performance' and 'high involvement' work systems where employees are encouraged to contribute to decision-making and continual improvement. Employee participation efforts are associated with the following benefits (Mowbury et al., 2015):

• Higher employee engagement
• Increase productivity, worker and customer satisfaction
• Strengthening of organisational culture
• Greater flexibility - No legislative/ legal requirements

From an organisational perspective, employee participation strategies are underpinned by two key motives: 1) "to eliminate employee dissatisfaction"; and 2) to "capture suggestions in order to improve business performance" (Mowbury et al., 2015, p. 387). However, these participation strategies don't usually involve a collective union voice. What they do involve are work teams, for the most part. For example: self-managed teams; quality circles; team-based problem solving; health and safety committees.

Unions are often an effective way to hear collective, representative ‘employee voice’, BUT employers and employees can - and should - provide alternative/ additional mechanisms to facilitate 'direct' voice. For example, company, works, or consultative councils, health and safety committees, joint consultative committees (union and non-union).

Unions can be very useful at helping to share power, and giving employees a voice. But more channels are better, as organisations are often not that great at listening. 

Sam

References:

Mowbray, P. K., Wilkinson, A., & Tse, H. H. (2015). An integrative review of employee voice: Identifying a common conceptualization and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(3), 382-400. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12045

Pyman, A., Cooper, B., Teicher, J., & Holland, P. (2006). A comparison of the effectiveness of employee voice arrangements in Australia. Industrial Relations Journal, 37(5), 543-559. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2338.2006.00419.x

read more "Employee voice and participation"

Workplace Flexibility

Workplace flexibility has been defined as "the opportunity to adjust the where, when and how of work", which "encompasses the degree to which time, location and task features of work are adjustable to meet life, family and personal needs" (Putnam et al., 2014, p. 414). 

Organisations have always used flexible arrangements - such as overtime, shift-working, fixed term contracts, short time working etc - to ensure staffing meets system needs, and interestingly, while flexible work arrangements are often structured by HR, they are usually implemented by line managers. Arguments for flexible working can be made for the organisation, and for the worker, but it is more common for organisational outcomes to be prioritised. Even so, some organisations have made flexible working arrangements an HR key performance indicator (KPI). 

Like flexible work, the image illustrating this post may be 'seen' in different ways. Some may see the freedom to self-determine where work happens; others may see this as 'having' to work even in private time. The tension between organisational and employee needs is an HR constant: "Workplace flexibility initiatives as a potential remedy for work−life conflicts are the focus of [a great deal of] research [yet] findings reveal tensions and contradictions in the ways that employees, managers and organizations develop, enact and respond to these flexibility initiatives" (Putnam, Myers & Gailiard, 2014, p. 413). 

So workplace flexibility is a 'contested' field. In the blue corner: workplace flexibility gives employees greater control and scope to manage life and work. In the red corner: workplace flexibility is an organisational tool which increases organisational competitiveness to the detriment of employees due to less job security, more variable work and intensification of work. How do we fight this out? The truth is situational - varying from context to context - and lies between the blue and the red. 

Recently many organisations have extended flexible arrangements beyond those used traditionally. The environment (e.g. GFC, Covid-19), legislation (e.g. the Employment Relations (Probationary Employment) Amendment Bill 2006), and organisational practice (e.g. zero hour contracts) have pushed the boundaries of how flexible workers should be expected to be. 

Yet the shifting demography of the workforce has forced organisations to consider how to best support diverse workers with their diversity of responsibilities and commitments outside their employment. In this context, advocates, legislation (e.g. the Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Act 2007; 2014) and organisational practices (such as flexi-time, working from home, leave arrangements) have begun to push the boundaries of how flexible organisations should be expected to be.

It is important that organisations take a nuanced approach to workplace flexibility, flexible working arrangements and other 'family friendly' practices and hear the employee voice in the process. 

Sam

References:

Putnam, L. L., Myers, K. K., & Gailliard, B. M. (2014). Examining the tensions in workplace flexibility and exploring options for new directions. Human Relations, 67(4), 413-440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726713495704

read more "Workplace Flexibility"

So, what is organisational development?

Swanson suggests that organisational development, or OD, can be defined as "a system-wide application of behavioral and social science knowledge (primarily psychological, systems, and economic theories) to the planned development, improvement, and reinforcement of the strategies, structures, and processes that lead to organization performance" (2022, p. 286). 

While this is pretty long-winded, a shorter version is also supplied: "Organization development is a process of systematically unleashing expertise to improve performance at all levels" (p. 286). So OD can be thought of as (a) a continuous, holistic organisational improvement process, and (b) the department for change, and - somewhat tongue in cheek - (c) the hit squad. 

 Two sentences that Swanson outlines clearly shows the 'rock and a hard place' which OD practitioners may find themselves in: "Using OD to get employees to accept unfair and exploitative policies and practices is rarely discussed. Most organization bankruptcy and restructuring efforts rely on sophisticated OD tools to get employee acceptance of downward compensation and benefits while at the same time, upper management often retains and even gains added rewards" (2022, p. 287). The executive bonuses paid during the global banking crisis illustrated the latter point very well. 

 OD focuses on improving organisational effectiveness and efficiency by having: improved strategic alignment; a productive organisational structure; the 'right' people in the 'right' roles; appropriate remuneration; sound measurement and data; and reliable and rigorous management processes (Association for Talent Management, 2023a). Then the OD decisions made need to be grounded in research, tapping into the disciplines of organisational psychology; management (HR, Leadership, OB); social sciences; education (pedagogy); and research methods (Association for Talent Management, 2023a).

In thinking about the job of OD, it is to increase organizational effectiveness and competitive advantage. Organisational outcomes from improvement need to be clear, and - while differing between organisations - usually include "financial performance, customer satisfaction, organizational member engagement, and an increased capacity to adapt and renew the organization" (AIHR, 2023). 

I hope that helps!

Sam

References:

AHIR. (2023). What is Organizational Development? A Complete Guide. Academy to Innovate HR. https://www.aihr.com/blog/organizational-development/

Association for Talent Development. (2023a). What Is Organizational Development?. https://www.td.org/talent-development-glossary-terms/what-is-organization-development

Association for Talent Development. (2023b). OD Strategy [image]. https://d22bbllmj4tvv8.cloudfront.net/23/c8/3a130d734b41a011ae822f4b890c/563492443-organization-development-graphics-r2.jpg

Swanson, R. A. (2022). Chapter 14: Overview of Organization Development. In Foundations of Human Resource Development (pp. 286-305). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

read more "So, what is organisational development? "

The difference between education, training and development

So, what is the difference between education, training and development? Let's start by defining each of the terms, education, training and development; and showing the differences between the three. "In the context of [HRD, it is] necessary to define and delineate" the following terms (often used as synonyms): "'training’, ‘education’, [and] ‘development’", "in order to clarify the associated activities and desired outcomes within an organisation" (Masadeh, 2012, p. 62).

1. Education has been defined as "formal educational commitments and experiences, [...] encompass[ing] a wider scope", or "learning by thinking’" (p. 65); or "broadly defined as a more general, less specialized or hands-on approach to enhancing knowledge" (p. 64). Education relates to "the general development of knowledge, moral values and understanding required in all walks of life" (Dearden, 1984, pp. 57-58). So: education is learning that is longer term, broader, more theory-based, more thinking-oriented.
   
   
2. Training can be defined as "a learning activity that is designed for immediate impact, for the job or role that one does at present", and is "associated with ‘learning by doing’" (Masadeh, 2012, p. 65). It is related to specific skills, attitude or behaviour "to achieve effective performance in any activity or range of activities" (p. 63). The implication is that training is about vocational tasks (Dearden, 1984). So: training is shorter-term, specific, more hands-on, more doing-oriented learning.
   
   
3. Development is defined as "a learning activity that is designed for future impact, for a role or job one will do in the future" but one that is "the resulting outcome of [training]" (Masadeh, 2012, p. 65). The implication is that, by being related to training, the development outcome is quite specific to the organisation. So: development is the outcomes or results of the organisational hands-on training which has been delivered.

If we use the terms as they are supposed to be used, I think it makes it much clearer what we are supposed to be delivering, and therefore much clearer what the results are likely to be. And - for that matter - just what the pay-off might be.

Sam

References:

Dearden, R. (1984). Education and training. Westminster Studies in Education, 7(1), 57-66. https://doi.org/10.1080/0140672840070104

Masadeh, M. (2012). Training, education, development and learning: what is the difference?. European Scientific Journal, 8(10), 62-68. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/236411025.pdf

read more "The difference between education, training and development"

Four organisational cultures

All organisations form a unique culture based on the culture of their founder, the work and professional practices within the organisation, their sector, their nation, and how they began. How we start tends to be how we carry on: think how a group behaves on the first meeting, which tends to set the tone for the rest of recorded history. 

Most cultures fit within one or more of the following four types which are mapped using two dimensions: that of whether the organisation has an internal or external focus; and whether the organisation is flexible or stable (click on the heading to view the details):

1. Clan Culture. A clan culture has an internal focus on employees involvement and participation to meet rapidly changing external environment expectations. If our organisational culture is like a family, we may be in a clan culture; which can be pretty social, friendly, responsible and respectful. These organisations focus on values, and on meeting employee needs. Organisations may encourage employees to view leaders in these organisations as mentors; and leadership will emphasise fairness, consideration & avoid status differences. These companies emphasise employee involvement and team building. Smaller companies exhibit clan culture more often than large companies. These companies will state that they prioritise employee wellbeing and health and simultaneously challenge and motivate the team. Clan cultures may prioritise HR, taking a long-term approach emphasising inclusion. But they can get stuck on tradition and demand loyalty: leaving may see people effectively expelled from the culture (McDonald & Gandz, 1993, as cited in Daft, 2007).
2. Adaptability culture (aka Adhocracy approach). The Adaptability culture is characterised by values that support org's ability to interpret & translate environmental signals into new behaviour. This is an organisation where employees have autonomy to make decisions. It emphasises creativity and innovation, and tries to maintain an dynamic work environment. These workplaces typically encourage employees to experiment and test new ideas, and leaders encourage & reward experimentation & risk-taking. In fact the organisation views its leaders as 'calculated' risk-takers. Organisations exhibiting an Adaptability culture seek to expand their business and develop new products. They measure success based on whether they can anticipate the needs of the market and create solutions that meet those demands (McDonald & Gandz, 1993, as cited in Daft, 2007). 
3. Achievement culture (aka Market culture). The Achievement culture is characterised by a clear vision of organisation's goals; while leaders focus on achievement by specific targets. This organisation creates a results-oriented culture which values competitiveness, aggressiveness, personal initiative, willingness to work long & hard to achieve results. This organisation values accomplishing tasks quickly and efficiently. These organisations often use competition to motivate both leaders and employees. In an Achievement culture, people focus their work around contributing to defined goals, measuring their success on stock and market results. Winning is the glue that holds the organisation together (McDonald & Gandz, 1993, as cited in Daft, 2007). 
4. Bureaucratic (or Hierarchy) organisation. The Bureaucratic organisation has an internal focus & consistency orientation for a stable environment. It supports a methodical, rational, orderly way of doing business. The organisation adheres to strict institutional procedures, with leaders encouraging employees to correctly follow process. These organisations value efficiency and uniformity in their pursuit of results. Process control and systematic problem-solving help these organisations operate effectively, valuing following the rules & being thrifty. This type of organisation succeeds by being highly integrated & efficient. While few organisations operate in a stable environment today - most leaders are shifting away from bureaucracy because of need for flexibility - examples of a Bureaucratic organisation are government departments where tax-payer money is being spent, fairness in applying rules is required, and Treasury demands accounting to the cent (McDonald & Gandz, 1993, as cited in Daft, 2007). 

Most successful organisations lean toward one cultural category. An organisation's emphasis on cultural values depends on strategic focus & on external environment needs, so any of the four can be successful. However, some organisations may have cultural values in more than one category, or in all categories (McDonald & Gandz, 1993, as cited in Daft, 2007).

Sam

Reference:

Daft, R. L. (2007). The Leadership Experience (4th Edition). Thomson South-Western.

read more "Four organisational cultures"

What is HRD?

HRM sometimes seems designed and implemented purely for improving organisational performance with little regard for the outcomes for individual employees in and of themselves. Further, HRM may have positive or negative outcomes depending on how services are delivered, and for whom. This is where we transition into the development space. 

The organisational activities considered as part of HRD are numerous and varied. HRD is a sub-field of HRM designed to develop the skills, knowledge and capabilities of individual workers, and includes 'training and development' (or learning and development), organisational development, and organisational career development.

Typically led by the HR function, HRD can have a significant influence on individual careers within organisations. Talent management and onboarding also tends to fall under the HRD banner: though are sometimes considered to be separate functional domains (Bryson, 2007).

All the following could be considered part of an HRD plan:

• Onboarding
• Familiarisation tours with different departments
• Literacy training
• Language training
• Skill development: technical skills, customer service skills etc
• Up-dating or refreshing current technical or technology skills (forklift licences etc)
• Team-building or culture-building activities
• Supporting workers to attend conferences, networking activities
• Supporting further study or research projects
• Mentoring
• Management training
• Career conversations/development...the list goes on!

Considering the type, outcomes and availability of HRD interventions when analysing organisational needs and making an HRD plan is essential, particularly as not all HRD activities are equally valuable to the individual - or to the organisation - and not all workers of an organisation can necessarily access HRD interventions. 

Equity and parity of access needs to be a key philosophy.

Sam

References:

Bryson, J. (2007). Chapter 10: Human Resource development or developing human capability? In S. Bolton, M. Houlihan (Eds.), Searching for the Human in Human Resource Management: Theory, Practices and workplace contexts (pp. 171-192). Palgrave Macmillan.

WorkHuman. (12 December 2022b). What are the 7 elements of human resource development?. https://www.workhuman.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/HRD-wheel_PNG.png

read more "What is HRD?"

The changing role of HRM

The focus of Human Resource departments is often thought of as "to pick and maintain the right person for the job" in a "one-size-fits-all" way (Workhuman, 2022a). However, in a VUCA - volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous - world (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014), this approach is no longer providing the pay-offs to organisations or individuals that it once did. 

In the diagram accompanying this post, the developmental aspect of HR is clearly illustrated in the Human Resource Development (or HRD) quadrant's four sections including: T&D (sometimes known as L&D); organisational development; career development (aka OCM); and orientation and culture (Workhuman, 2022b, amendments by Young, 2023).

Considering these elements reminds us that that the functions of HR are quite varied and complex. This model presents HRD as one of three key areas, which I like to think of as growth, processes, and information. The other two areas are HRIS (including HRISS, Labour Relations, EAPs, and rewards), and the HRM functions (organisation and job design, selection and staffing, HR planning, and performance management). 

Today the role of HR appears to focus more on matching the needs of staff to organisational needs, while providing internal organisational support so that both staff and the organisation are able to accomplish their specific goals. This requires the creation of a "growth culture with program[me]s and policies that promote up-skilling and development" (Workhuman, 2022a). 

There is a greater focus on training and development within the HR function enabling all organisational players to become "more agile and resilient" (Workhuman, 2022a) ...and more adaptable. This means that - finally - organisations take a truly developmental approach to staff and to the organisation (Inkson et al., 2015). 

Organisations are very complex systems, requiring a lot of varied expertise to run well. Just a simple tour through a model brings that complexity home to us. 

Sam

References:

Bennett, N. & Lemoine, G. J. (2014). What VUCA Really Means for You. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2014/01/what-vuca-really-means-for-you

Inkson, K., Dries, N., & Arnold, J. (2015). Chapter 14: Organizational Career Management. In Understanding Careers (2nd ed., pp. 309-324). SAGE Publications Ltd.

WorkHuman. (12 December 2022a). What is Human Resource Development (HRD)? 2023 Complete Guide. https://www.workhuman.com/blog/human-resource-development-hrd/#what8

WorkHuman. (12 December 2022b). What are the 7 elements of human resource development? [image]. https://www.workhuman.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/HRD-wheel_PNG.png

read more "The changing role of HRM"

Reframing VUCA

Human Resource Management (HRM) may be defined as "the strategies, policies, plans, processes and practices which an organisation uses to attract and engage, manage, develop, and reward its workers, and to encourage, maintain, and improve their performance and contributions" (Rudman, 2017, p. 13). HRM may also be termed the management of people and work in organisations (Bryson & Ryan, 2012). 

HRM comprises a set of organisational activities, designed to improve organisational performance within a highly dynamic organisational, social, economic and environmental context... or within a 'VUCA' world of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014b). Dealing with our VUCA world's impact on today's workplaces requires the use of strategic HRM and HRD.

Reframing - or cognitive reframing as it is now more commonly known - was the work of Aaron Beck in the 1960s. Working with clients with clinical depression, Beck found that if clients could recognise negative thoughts, they could then shift or challenge themselves into a more positive mindset which lessened or halted their depression (Beck, 1997).

How does this relate to VUCA? If we reframe VUCA from the negative into a more positive HRD perspective, we can consider the counters to volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity: vision, understanding, clarity and caring, and agility. We can use these concepts as proactive strategies as we plan our counter-approaches, instead of passively having the world avalanche on us (CANNEXUS, 2023).

• Vision: seeing further. What is coming towards us in this wild world. Regularly using tools such as SWOT, Porters and audience analyses, as well as wide reading, will help us to stay alert
• Understanding: gathering knowledge so we understand the impact. Collecting both internal and external LMI
• Clarity and caring. Being clear about responsibility and tasks. First getting our organisational 'house' in order through good quality processes, instructions, onboarding, job analysis and performance. Then being compassionate about caring for all the people in the organisation so that they care for the organisation in return
• Agility. Being as flexible as we can so that when everything goes pear-shaped, everyone can move quickly. Planning for crises. Practicing the plan. Sharing technology and ideas. Assuming - particularly in a post-Covid world, that a crisis like Covid will happen again and being prepared for it

Let's stay awake out there.

Sam

References:

Beck, A. T. (1997). The past and the future of cognitive therapy. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 6(4), 276-284. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3330473/pdf/jp64276.pdf

Bennett, N. & Lemoine, G. J. (2014b). What VUCA Really Means for You. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2014/01/what-vuca-really-means-for-you

Bryson, J., & Ryan, R. (2012). Human resource management in the workplace. Pearson Education.

CANNEXUS. (2023). Old VUCA to New VUCA [image]. https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipNQk16EAHKZYvsaGX35kBYX05ZzCrM6s_yyczL8fiPxKGg7Uax-5Pe6wqYUjWcfyA/photo/AF1QipM3ggRHEXg8-3H4TCKKwiln7MdguW2unb2tlPWd?key=NElTVWhRQy1BZXdkS3VZX1BHVlFGQlotR0FJeWZR

Rudman, R. S. (2017). Chapter 2: Human Resources Management today. In HR Manager: A New Zealand handbook (2nd ed. pp. 37-56). Wolters Kluwer/CHH New Zealand.

read more "Reframing VUCA"