Oceans and notions apart? An analysis of the US and European human resource development literature

Abstract

A systematic content analysis of the human resource development (HRD) research articles published between 1990 and 2003 revealed notable differences in the underlying orientations and methodological approaches across the US and Europe. The US literature, in comparison to Europe, was observed to be more practice-oriented as reflected in a prescriptive and less critical approach to the study of human resource development (HRD). In terms of science orientation, the US literature was characterized to be more nomothetic and universalistic. While a subtle tendency towards becoming more prescriptive emerged in the US, over time the European literature had become less practice-oriented and more empiricist, although the latter trend did not reflect itself in the quantity but quality of quantitative research.

Keywords:

• human resource development
• research methods
• scholarly publication

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to express their sincere gratitude to the University Forum of Human Resource Development for granting a research honorarium, which contributed in part to the completion of this study. The authors would also like to thank Behlül Üsdiken for his very helpful comments throughout the progress of this research and Bram Metsers for his invaluable assistance to the project.

Notes

1. In line with Augier, March and Sullivan (2005), we use the term ‘organization studies’ to include research on organizations occurring under labels such as ‘organization theory’, ‘administrative theory’, ‘management theory’, ‘organizational psychology’, ‘human resource management’ and ‘organizational and economic sociology’.