Training, Development, Education and Learning: Different or the Same?
Training, development, education and learning: different or the same?
Thomas N. Garavan Lecturer, Department of Personnel and Employment Relations, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
Attempts to discuss the concepts of training, development, education and learning with regard to employees in terms of their substantive differences. Discusses how these concepts have evolved historically within human resource management and development (HRM/D) literature. Provides an analysis of how alternative models of HRM/D may influence the meaning given to these concepts in an organizational context. Concludes that it is perhaps more appropriate to view training, development and education as an integrated whole with the concept of learning as the glue which holds them together.
Introduction
The training, development and education of employees at all levels within organizations is now considered a vital component in maintaining competitiveness in the international arena. It is also of some significance within the human resource management (HRM) and development (HRD) literature. If one accepts a competitive market perspective on HRM/D then a central notion is the view that training, development and education strategies are key means by which the inefficiencies of the employment relationship can be reduced and a closer approximation to competitive labour market outcomes attained. At the level of the firm these activities provide a means by which a number of key organizational outcomes can be achieved. Some of the most common outcomes cited in the literature include quality, employee empowerment, teamwork and multi-skilling. (Arrow, 1962; Metcalf et al., 1994; Williamson, 1985). There is, however, considerable debate within the HRM/D literature relating to the distinction, if any, which exists between these three activities and a fourth concept, learning. This question is of some significance because it is arguable that the extent to which an organization’s HR specialist
Thomas N. Garavan Lecturer, Department of Personnel and Employment Relations, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
Attempts to discuss the concepts of training, development, education and learning with regard to employees in terms of their substantive differences. Discusses how these concepts have evolved historically within human resource management and development (HRM/D) literature. Provides an analysis of how alternative models of HRM/D may influence the meaning given to these concepts in an organizational context. Concludes that it is perhaps more appropriate to view training, development and education as an integrated whole with the concept of learning as the glue which holds them together.
Introduction
The training, development and education of employees at all levels within organizations is now considered a vital component in maintaining competitiveness in the international arena. It is also of some significance within the human resource management (HRM) and development (HRD) literature. If one accepts a competitive market perspective on HRM/D then a central notion is the view that training, development and education strategies are key means by which the inefficiencies of the employment relationship can be reduced and a closer approximation to competitive labour market outcomes attained. At the level of the firm these activities provide a means by which a number of key organizational outcomes can be achieved. Some of the most common outcomes cited in the literature include quality, employee empowerment, teamwork and multi-skilling. (Arrow, 1962; Metcalf et al., 1994; Williamson, 1985). There is, however, considerable debate within the HRM/D literature relating to the distinction, if any, which exists between these three activities and a fourth concept, learning. This question is of some significance because it is arguable that the extent to which an organization’s HR specialist