ABSTRACT
Over recent years there has been a growing interest by a number of researchers regarding the aims and purpose of HRD theory and practice. Many of these researchers have practical and theoretical roots in other areas, and have demonstrated a concern to challenge traditional notions of HRD practice, particularly that which is characterised by the performance metaphor. To confine HRD theory and practice to the strictures imposed by a particular financial management framework is, critical researchers would argue, to condemn HRD to a minor functional role whose specificity renders it incapable of moving beyond the boundaries of any one organisation. Many authors now argue that HRD must become more strategic (Walton, 1999; Grieves, 2003), that it is not a ‘sub-set’ of HRM (Stewart and McGoldrick, 1996) and that it must reflect more critically on, for example, its emotional (e.g. Turnbull, 1999) and ethical (e.g. Hatcher and Lee, 2003) impact, as well as its broader political (e.g. Vince, 2003), historical-cultural (e.g. Stead and Lee, 1996) and historical-political (e.g. Hamblett and Thursfield, 2003) contexts.
