Aysha Saeed Humaid AlHosani

1
Deep insights into the modern Human Resource Development:
An analysis of scholarly perspectives on learning written by Engstrom(2!"#
$enger(22"# and %immerman(2"&
'earning and development is one of the main and critical operations of Human
Resource (anagement in organi)ations& *t is one of the most changing and
challenging areas of functioning& Due to the dynamic nature of economic conditions
and the advancement in business research# this particular area has been sub+ective to
multiple theories and studies that aim to develop practices within this )one and bring
to a level that ma,es it purposefully adaptive to positive change& -rgani)ations around
the world are becoming increasingly aware of the crucial necessity of the function of
learning in development# which is becoming a significant determining factor of how
well a particular organi)ation is to perform in a strongly competitive economy# and
how is it going to retain its asset of distinctive human capital&
.his essay e/plores the notion of 'earning and Development through comparing and
contrasting three different scholarly perspectives of learning written by Engestr0m
(2!"# $enger (2"# and %immerman (2"& *n addition# it highlights the relation
of those theories with direct Human Resource practices&
.he first article titled: E/pansive 'earning at $or,: toward an activity
theoretical reconceptuali)ation# and written by: 1r+0 Engestr0m& *t e/plores the
evolution of the 2ultural3historical activity theory and elaborates on the concept of
E/pansive 'earning& 'et4s begin by e/plaining the 2ultural3historical activity theory&
According to 5ictor 6aptelinin# a 7rofessor at the Department of *nformation Science
and (edia Studies# 8niversity of 9ergen# :orway:
;Activity theory is a conceptual framework originating from the socio-cultural
tradition in Russian psychology. The foundational concept of the framework is
activity, which is understood as purposeful, transformative, and developing
interaction between actors sub!ects" and the world ob!ects".<
(6aptelinin#2!="&
.he 2ultural3historical activity theory has evolved through three stages# in which it
reached a final stage where > as written by Engestr0m > ;the concept of boundary
crossing is being elaborated through activity theory<& .here are two interacting
activity systems as ;minimal model< in the third generation of activity theory& .he
actor3networ, theory was the core idea on which Engestr0m formed a matri/ for the
analysis of E/pansive 'earning that consists of four ?uestions to e/amine the
E/pansive 'earning theory# and five principles of activity theory# which are: ;activity
system as unit of analysis, multi-voicedness of activity, historicity of activity,
contradictions as driving force of change in activity, and e#pansive cycles as possible
form of transformation in activity<& (Engestr0m# 2!"& .hose five principles correlate
in the matri/ with four ?uestions# which are: ;$. %ho are the sub!ects of learning& '.
%hy do they learn& (. %hat do they learn& ).*ow do they learn&< to produce answers
that in return form the essence of E/pansive 'earning&
2
.he final outcome of that matri/ is reflected in the framewor, of E/pansive 'earning
that is presented in the figure below& (Engestr0m# 2!"&
$hat distinguished Engestr0m4s research is that learning is no longer limited to a
cognitive process that occurs within an individual4s system# but it is rater a
distributive process among members and materials of an interactive community&

.he second article titled: 2ommunities of 7ractice and Social 'earning System#
and written by: Etienne $enger& $enger4s article highlights the concept of social
learning system# e/plores the ;three modes of belonging< that define how individuals
participate in a social learning system# and it also analy)es the elements of social
learning systems# which are: ;communities of practice, boundary processes among
these communities, and identities shaped by participation in these systems.
As stated by $enger, in a social learning system, competence is historically and
socially defined. ($enger# 2"& -btaining ,nowledge in that conte/t means
reflecting on those defined competences& .he involvement in a social learning system
can be e/pressed through the ;three modes of belonging< which are: Engagement#
*magination# and Alignment& As each defined by $enger# Engagement is: ;ways in
which we engage with each other and with the world that profoundly shape our
e#perience of who we are<# *magination refers to how individuals ;construct an
image of themselves, of their communities, and of the world, in order to orient
themselves, to reflect on their situation, and to e#plore possibilities<# And finally
Alignment# which means: ;making sure that local activities are sufficiently aligned
with other processes so that they can be effective beyond engagement<& ($enger#
2"&
.o elaborate on $enger4s article# the following analysis of the elements of social
learning system is represented through three main concepts mentioned in the article&
.he first concept is: 2ommunities of 7ractice# which are characteristically recogni)ed#
culturally distinctive groups of individuals who collaborate and share certain
,nowledge& (i&e& 7ractitioners in medical fields# architects# and fashion designers @
etc"& Each group of those individuals learn and reflect on their learning through
similar approaches& Also they share similar ,nowledge bac,grounds which in return
3
create fluid boundaries between them and other communities of practice& .his brings
us to the second concept: 9oundaries between communities of practice& .he different
forms of engagement within communities of practice# different historical
bac,grounds# and different communication channels and approaches can +ustify the
e/istence of such boundaries between communities of practice& According to $enger#
boundaries can actually offer wider opportunities for individuals to connect and learn
than the learning opportunities offered by communities& $hile in communities the
learning is an outcome of the convergence between competence and e/perience# ;at
the boundaries, competence and e#perience tend to diverge+ a boundary interaction is
usually an e#perience of being e#posed to a foreign competence<& ($enger# 2"&
.his divergence actually creates the base of innovative learning through active
boundary processes& Such processes create bridges may lin, different communities of
practice& .he effectiveness of boundary processes can be observed through three
dimensions: coordination (the efficient interpretation of different ob+ects the is
reflected through coordinated actions"# transparency (Access to the meaning of
ob+ects in various practices"# negotiability (if processes provide a one3way or a two3
way connection"& 8nder this perspective of boundaries# $enger introduced the
concept of ;bro,ers<& .he concept refers to groups of individuals who introduce and
transfer different ob+ects of a certain practice to other practices&
.he third concept in the article is: *dentities shaped by participation in social learning
systems& *dentities are indicators of how individuals obtain their current ,nowledge&
$enger summari)ed the importance of identities in social learning systems in three
reasons& He wrote in this conte/t: ;,irst, our identities combine competence and
e#perience into a way of knowing. -econd, our ability to deal productively with
boundaries depends on our ability to engage and suspend our identities. Third, our
identities are the living vessels in which communities and boundaries become reali.ed
as an e#perience of the world<& ($enger# 2"&
.he third article titled: Self3Efficacy: An Essential (otive to 'earn# written by:
9arry A& %immerman& 9ased on the original research conducted by 7andura (!BCCa#
!BBC" the author has defined self3efficacy as: ;personal !udgments of one/s
capabilities to organi.e and e#ecute courses of action to attain designated goals<&
(%immerman# 2"& Self3efficacy dimensions are: level (the degree of tas,
difficulty"# strength (a measurement of certainty of capability"# generality (refers to
transferability among tas,s"& .he author e/plained that the measurement of self3
efficacy could be predictive of students4 choice of activities and rate of performance&
High self3efficacious students tend to ta,e more challenge# counter difficulties# and be
more productive& 9y directly e/plaining the significant role of self3efficacy on
motivation# %immerman wrote that self efficacy influence the following in students:
-elf-monitoring: monitoring wor,ing time# achieving tas,s batter&
-elf-evaluation: +udging the outcome of performance&
0earning strategies: motivation to use different strategies to achieve better
outcomes&
1et on the other hand# self3efficacy can be influenced by e/ternal environmental
factors# such as ;performance conte/ts# or domains of academic functioning<&
%immerman also in his research sought to distinguish self3efficacy from other parallel
concepts# such as# self3concept# perceived control# and outcome e/pectancies in order
to avoid confusion between concepts&
4
2omparing the three previously mentioned articles together# it is noticed that
both Engestr0m and $enger built their perspectives of learning on group or
organi)ational levels& 9oth thought of learning as a shared interactive process between
different elements of communities (individuals# artifacts# rules# ob+ects @ etc&"&
However# there was a touch point in their researches& -ne of the principles in
Engestr0m4s article is the multi-voicedness of activity system& *n other words this
means that a community consists of multiple interests and element of ,nowledge&
However# these elements can be shared among different practices& *n his study setting
at .he 2hildren4s Health 2are in Helsin,i# he noticed how practitioners from different
medical practices# specialists from other related communities and concerned parents
came together combining their different ,nowledge bac,grounds# e/pertise and other
tools to reach a common ground& .heir shared goal was to improve the level of health
care provided by them and establish an effective communication method among
different units involved in the same matter& .he same point was mentioned under
$enger4s article at the boundaries section& Each of those communities was bombarded
by fluid boundaries because of their different ,nowledge bac,grounds#
communications approaches and many other elements& $hen a problem occurred
there was a need of active action that should combine all units together& A ;boundary3
crossing< had happened through interaction between units& 7eople ;bro,ers< had to
present special elements from their practices in a way that members of other
communities could understand and approve& .his action was introduced in $enger4s
article under: 2ross3disciplinary 7ro+ects& ;1n most organi.ations, members of
communities of practice contribute their competence by participating in cross-
functional pro!ects and teams that combine the knowledge of multiple practices to get
something done<& ($enger# 2"&
-n the other hand# %immerman4s perspective on learning was based on the level of
individuals& .here was also a touch point between %immerman and $enger4s article&
%immerman discussed self3efficacy# how people +udge themselves and perceive their
abilities# while $enger mentioned identities in his article# which is about how people
obtain their ,nowledge and engage in their communities& *n order to insure a healthy
identity# $enger mentioned three ?ualities (connectedness# e/pansiveness# and
effectiveness"& ($enger# 2"& All those ?ualities re?uire a significant level of self3
efficacy&
:ow how does the three learning perspectives apply in Human Resource
(anagementD Engestr0m4s article of E/pansive 'earning contributes to the wor,
place by introducing meaningful forms of practice (i&e& :egotiation patterns# policies#
communication channels# problem solving processes# etc"& (oreover# $enger4s article
underlines the importance for organi)ational to adapt informal learning systems and
develop internal social learning systems (i&e& conversations# brainstorming# and
pursuing ideas @ etc"& Also organi)ations must learn to participate in broader
learning systems and e/plore different practices from different industries to ma/imi)e
the outcome of learning& .he final article is %immerman4s on self3efficacy& Self3
efficacy can be a mediating variable in learning and development& .hrough assessing
self3efficacy dimensions among employees and use them as predictive of outcome
e/pectancies in training&
5
.o conclude# my opinion is that all three learning perspectives are essential and
beneficial in human resource management and development& However# * believe that
$enger4s article is the most significant is this area& $enger sought to assess learning
on both levels# individual and organi)ational& Although he believes that learning is a
shared process# yet he did not undermine the role of individuals through the
e/pression of their identities in communities of practice and different capabilities
through the concept of boundaries& Deeper insights into $enger4s article by
management teams in organi)ations can revolutioni)e current human resource
practices and articulate the role of training and adult education&
6
References:
- EngestrEom# 1& 2!& E/pansive learning at wor,: .oward an activity
theoretical reconceptuali)ation& 2ournal of education and work# !F(!": !==33
!GH&
- 6aptelinin# 5& 2!=& The 3ncyclopedia of *uman-4omputer 1nteraction (2nd
ed&": 2hapter !H& Aarhus# Denmar,: .he *nteraction Design Ioundation&
- $enger# E& 2& 2ommunities of practice and social learning systems&
5rgani.ation# C(2": 22G332FH&
- %immerman# 9& 2& Self3efficacy: An essential motive to learn&
4ontemporary educational psychology# 2G(!": J233B!&
7