A feminist poststructuralist analysis of HRD: why bodies, power and reflexivity matter

Abstract

A burgeoning amount of scholarship has attempted to unravel critical approaches to investigating human resource development (HRD). There are limited critiques, however, of gender, diversity and the intersections of these deliberations within HRD theorizing. Adopting a feminist poststructuralist approach, this paper advances critical understandings of HRD by challenging epistemological and dominant theorizing in HRD. The author examines what it means when HRD writings are said to be gendered; how the political and processual dynamics of doing HRD can be understood; how the differences for doing gender, doing HRD and embodying HRD can be unravelled; and how feminist modes of inquiry can engender the value of embodied reflexivity. Weaving together literature strands from gender and education, gender and organization, and women's studies and feminist writings, the paper provides a foundational framework for how HRD scholars can re-imagine new knowledge and inject notions of the feminine and difference in HRD writings. The analysis focuses on three interrelated areas and their implications for feminist critique: the importance of examining language and discourse in HRD; the performing body in HRD; and, finally, feminist embodied reflexivity. It is argued that the HRD scholarly community should consider critical modes of inquiry to refresh and renew HRD theory building, specifically that we should examine conceptualizations of the feminine and difference in HRD writings in order to aid transformational practice.

Keywords:

• HRD theory
• feminism
• poststructuralism
• power
• embodiment
• reflexivity

Notes

1. It is important to stress the different academic heritages in UK and USA research. In the UK, gender and education research is identified as a distinct discipline in its own right, incorporating all educational environments including adult education and university environments and evidenced by the Gender and Education Association (GEA), along with specialized, high-ranked journals such as Gender and Education and British Journal of Education. They are often positioned in university education departments. HRD UK scholars draw on these literatures as well as management writings, and tend to be in business schools. In contrast, HRD USA scholars tend to be in education and continuing education departments. My poststructuralist aim is to open out and bring in new insights from relevant subject disciplines to create new possibilities for thinking and learning about HRD.

2. Swanson's talk of unisex research is not fore grounded in feminist or social theory and therefore misses the nuances of how man/woman feminine/masculine have implications for researching and doing HRD.

3. See note 1.