Chapter 6 Reflection

The paradigm that I would most likely adopt is the learning paradigm, however, I do feel that I would integrate parts from the performance paradigm. I do believe that it is the humans that make up an organization, therefor their development individually should be the first priority. Through their development, personally and together, the organization develops as well. However, I don't disagree with the performance paradigm, like the book says many do, I would just chose learning over it.

I see the paradigms more as reinforcing rather that competing. I feel that in order to have a performance paradigm, you need to have the learning paradigm first. Also, in order for the learning paradigm to reach its full potential, you need the mission and organization outputs to drive the individual learning. Therefor, they go hand in hand.

First, to ensure that human development isn't neglected in a performance paradigm, the organization can not put its primary mission on profit and outputs. Although these may by the end-resulting goals, it can not be its sole purpose, for then the employees will only be seen as a means to accomplish this & become dehumanized. Second, if seeing the organization as a system (Which seems that most organizations having a performance paradigm does), they need to acknowledge and nurture all parts of the system, which includes the inputs, i.e. its human resources. These two things alone, along with many others can help the performance paradigm be successful & ensure human development is supported.

In order for HRD to operate as a learning paradigm, it must pull some aspects of performance paradigm to be successful. Some things that a learning paradigm would need to develop in order to play a strategic role would be to educate "the learners" (As Dr. Hollenbeck likes so much) that they are part of a whole. They need to see that although they are trying to reach their maximum potential individually, reaching that high level of achievement with a group of people is an even greater task. Empower them to see the impact they can have on the whole and that their learning is important because it assists a bigger good.

I think that an employee & employee manager would view this issue the same & mostly see things from a learning paradigm perspective. I would expect that the CEO would be able to view both paradigm & have a balance between both. The CEO may favor the performance paradigm, because most likely his job is to lead to success in profitability. However, one would think after a CEO working his way up the chain he wouldn't forget his roots and not be naive to see that those underneath him, his human resources, are the driving force of his company.

Knowledge management could really fit into both and almost be a link between the two. To manage the knowledge in which employees receive could do two things. First, employees knowledge would be part of their individual development and if this is properly managed then they could very well prosper as humans. Second, if this knowledge is managed strategically, it could train the employees to be on board with the company to get a conceptual view and understanding what it is and what its missions are. I almost feel that knowledge management may be the most important thing.