Talk:Training and development/Archive 1

Untitled
No Traning and Development needs to be separate page and is different from talent management or talent development. Moreover Training is what everyone understands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.138.127.49 (talk) 12:24, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

why must training go along with development? 03:37, 5 August 2007 User:41.205.175.88

It is not clear what this article is about, if it could be called an article as opposed to a laundry list. Is it about a concept that is distinct from training, professional development etc.? Nurg 07:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Much of the content on this page is old academic tradition or opinion, not fact. Training and Development (T&D) is not always a subset of Human Resource Management. In some cases HR is considered a subset of T&D. Moreover, the profession of T&D has evolved over the last 20 years to become what is now termed "Workplace Learning & Performance." Additionally, any page on this topic should reference the American Society of Training & Development (ASTD). --Denalidragon (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

The article should also throw light for OD through Human Resource Development —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.200.214.231 (talk) 07:59, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

This article assumes that training and development is a specifically Human Resources function, and doesn't really discuss the different kinds of training and development there are. As a corporate trainer who specializes in training and development (who is married to a Human Resources director) I can say that there are many companies out there that provide corporate training and developmental training as consultants. This is often more effective than the internal HR department providing training simply because there is no tendency of upper management to be recalcitrant to the training concepts with an outside facilitator. (I've written an article that discusses this concept here). I believe this page should at least include a section on developmental training, including the kinds of training that are provided, as there most certainly are categories of training. This article states that all training and development are only related to the job the person holds or will hold in the future, and development relates to the activities of the organization or individual... and thus "almost impossible to evaluate." This is completely false, as there are plenty of skill development and training programs that work on topics like communication, behavior style, conflict resolution, productivity, and time management, all of which are developmental, and NONE of which are specific to job, task or organizational activity.Denbradshaw (talk) 18:13, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Agree with the above, and would add that while Human Resource Development as still an emerging field, it is certainly more broad than training and development, and different from HRM although it can be considered a sub-set of HRM. While the field as a whole is not as established or well-known as others, and it has not emerged as "a single cohesive concept or field of study" (Lee, 2015, p. 6), there are multiple HRD specific organizations and journals dedicated to the field: AHRD, HRD Quarterly, and HRD Review, to name a few. The field is also of interest and expanding internationally. It was extremely surprising to see that the pages for Human Resource Development and Training and Development had been merged for these reasons and I suggest that the subjects be separated again with appropriate differentiation and cross-references (Training and Development would fall more appropriately as a sub-topic under HRD, at the least).

Lee, M. (2015). The History, Status and Future of HRD. In R. Poell, T. Rocco, G. Roth (Eds). The Routledge Companion to Human Resource Development. ThrilledConfetti (talk) 19:30, 31 December 2015 (UTC)