How To Prepare The Next Generation Of HRD Professionals

Thank you for listening to HRD Masterclass. It's a unique resource featuring over 130 HRD experts across 55 episodes. As a fan of the series, you can help make season six happen. AHRD is crowdsourcing funding for the season and you can donate today at givebutter.com forward slash HRD Masterclass. With your help, the season can bring you 11 new episodes focused on major HRD research articles, their practical implications, the need for further research.

and how researchers and practitioners can help each other to advance research and practice on the topic. It would be amazing to continue the series and I hope you'll consider donating today at givebutter.com forward slash HRD Masterclass. Right, let's dive into the episode. Short professionals are using ChatGPT to write job descriptions. They're using Google Gemini that's to write learning and development strategies. They're using Microsoft Copilot.

If we're taking a human out of HR, what are we actually doing? Welcome to the The podcast series from the Academy of Human Resource Development, the organisation that leads HRD through research. I'm your host, Darren Short, and here in our fifth season we're exploring some of our listeners' top how-to questions, with the help of leading authors, researchers and scholars.

In this eighth episode of the season, we're focusing on the question of how to prepare the next generation of HRD professionals. And you'll hear a conversation recorded in August of twenty twenty five. To explore this important question, I'm joined today by three experts. My first guest is Dr Brian Vivona, Associate Professor of Human Resource Development at Northeastern Illinois University.

Brian's research interests include how humour functions in the workplace and specialty nursing certification. As a research affiliate at the University of Wisconsin Center for Research on College Workforce Transitions, he's co authored several studies on internships and utilizing community based participatory action research.

My second guest is Dr. Stephanie Sisko, Assistant Professor at the University of Minnesota, where she teaches business and marketing education, human resource development and adult education. Stephanie's areas of expertise include diversity management, critical human resource development, and participatory learning strategies. My third guest is doctor Ronan Carberry, Professor of HRM at University College Cork in Ireland, where he is director of the Executive MBA program.

Ronan's research interests include platform work, algorithmic management, and learning and development. Ronan's contributions to HRD have been recognized by the Academy of Humorous Orse Development with the twenty twenty four Outstanding HRD Scholar Award. Just visit allbypodcast.com forward slash developing to learn more about the bios of our three guests and also to connect with our episode sponsors.

Today's episode is brought to you by the Programme Excellence Network of the Academy of Human Resource Development. Are you committed to advancing excellence in HRD education? Discover the Program Excellence Network or PEN. An exclusive initiative from the Academy that connects institutions and educators dedicated to building top-tier HRD academic programs.

Penn offers a powerful annual meeting for networking, online searchable directory, case competitions, best practice sharing and professional development. All aimed at strengthening graduate and undergraduate HRD teaching. With an individual membership in AHRD, the Penn Community membership is just$99 per year per institution. Unlocking access to a vibrant community where faculty collaborate, innovate and champion student success.

Whether you're faculty members looking to expand your network or an institution seeking program recognition and continuous improvement, Penn is your gateway to excellence. Find out more and join Penn by visiting ahrd.org Right, let's dive into the episode.

Hey well, I'm delighted to be joined today by Ronan, Brian and Stephanie. Um thank you all three of you for being with me today for such an important conversation. I was thinking about a good place to start, knowing that we're going to talk about preparing the next generation of HR D professionals And and I'm thinking may maybe the maybe the right place to start is by considering how we see the work of those HR D professionals changing over the next

ten, fifteen years. So Ronan, would you be willing to kick start that conversation by sharing how you see the work of HID professionals changing over that period? Sure. Thanks, Darren. And I suppose I think I think we need to start with maybe an uncomfortable reality that a lot a lot of people aren't addressing when it comes to looking at the next ten, fifteen years for H or D professionals. And that's like how much specialised expertise

is really needed when AI can produce so much relevant learning materials on demand. I think this isn't something that's idle speculation. It's actually happening right now. And it's driven by An economic logic that's quite straightforward. So if we look at content creation, that was a specialized skill that required instructional design expertise. That can now be generated pretty much instantaneously by AI systems with minimal human importance.

AI powered platforms. They're automatically personalizing content for individuals, analyzing skill gaps, recommending development paths. And these are tasks that were previously done by HumanX. So as organizations face economic pressures, the question becomes in I suppose increasingly pragmatic. Why would you maintain a full training and development or HRD department when AI tools can deliver personalized learning experiences at a fraction of the cost?

And what I find particularly concerning for the future of HOD is what I see as almost like a form of entry-level elimination effect. So we know the companies are posting fifteen percent fewer internships. this year than they were two years ago, with CEOs explicitly stating that they're reluctant to hire junior staff whose work AI can replicate. And then this kind of creates a pipeline crisis that I see because your traditional entry points into the professional

whether that it's a learning coordinator or a junior instructional designer, they're disappearing. So I think we're not just losing current jobs, but we're also losing the pathway for developing future HOR professionals too. And then At a higher level there's also a strategic isolation risk that I think many practitioners don't really fully appreciate yet.

So as AI is automating the day-to-day operational tasks that I mentioned, like content creation, tracking maybe tracking learner progress, recommending those developmental paths. H O D professionals will often respond by emphasising their strategic business partnership roles. But without a clear foundation in that specialized learning experience that AI cannot replicate, I think H O D risks maybe becoming untethered from its core purpose and value proposition.

And this kind of connects to what I see as a real measurement paradox. AI provides more granular learning data than ever before. But proving causation between learning activities and business outcome still remains exceptionally difficult. And I think this leaves H or D vulnerable to critical questioning about return on investment. because AI learning platforms, they often promise direct business impact without the overhead of a full L and D function or a full H or D function.

So and the reality is that sophisticated AI systems may eventually demonstrate more convincing return on and investment models than human led L and D or H or D initiatives potentially. But I do see a kind of a troubling quality metrics type of disconnect emerging.

So we know so if we look at some corporate learning analysts, the likes of some reports, recent reports from Deloitte and LinkedIn Workplace Learning Survey, they suggest that while AI powered platforms increase content consumption metrics, they often fail then to deliver meaningful skill transfer or behavioural change.

which are often some of the core measures of learning effectiveness that HOD professionals would be uh quite adept at. And then this kind of creates a scenario where organizations Maybe celebrate increased learning engagement metrics while actual performance improvements stagnate. And so so what does this mean for the profession? I think then that the Those H O D professionals who remain will have to be far more senior and influential than today's practitioners.

They need to be strategic partners who understand maybe both human psychology and AI capabilities. They're focused on kind of the uniquely human aspects of development that AI can't replicate. And I think maybe without a serious self-examination of HRD's purpose and value. Many HRD functions kind of risk finding themselves increasingly marginalized or Worst case scenario eliminated entirely as AI continues its encroachment into various forms of knowledge work domain.

And the organizations that honestly address these challenges, rather than just maybe assuming HRD's continuous relevance, is going to be really important. And they'll be best positioned to kind of redefine what a HRD function will look like. In ten fifteen years. But that does require us to actually reflect on those fundamental questions.

What aspects of learning facilitation genuinely require human expertise that can't be replicated by sophisticated AI systems? And how can HRD then develop capabilities that complement rather than competing with AI systems?

Uh so that's just some of the kind of pressing issues that I kinda see today. Uh but I'm happy to hand over to Stephanie and Brian to see what they think. Uh thank you for for that. Um you mentioned a lot

Um I I think with AI, you know, there's definitely a an appreciation for it. There's, you know, obviously there's uh a convincing use for it, but as learning specialists, as those um grounded in development, you know, we know that learning is a socialization pro And so, I mean, there's the individualized attention you can get from AI, but

We know development doesn't come without the you know, us coming together and and learning from one another. Um and you know, whether that's through uh, the sharing of stories, testimonies, getting feedback direct live on the spot feedback from your colleagues, um just the reinforcement uh that we look for um just naturally as humans. And so although we may get direction

from uh AI. Um, you know, we're we're always seeking that, but it there's still a lot of gaps that um it just can't compete with, being that it isn't a human entity. And so we we still need our coaches, we still need our trainers, we still need our evaluators, um, because that's critical to learning and development. And so, you know, when I think of something like

for example, leadership development, you know, that's that's not going to be effective through AI. That comes with um again that personable um on demand type of of facilitation of learning. Thank you, Stephanie. You you and I are thinking kind of in a similar manner. Darren, I'll I'll I'll refresh your memory from your conversation with Toby Egan on or organization development. uh in this podcast series and he talked about the diagnostic and the dialogue

Right. So the, so AI does a can do a great job at the diagnostic, right? It can go out there and find all sorts of really great information, best practices, all those kinds of things, but we still need to hear the voices of the stakeholders. And so I'll I'll I'll I'll try and provide an example, and hopefully this makes sense. Let's say we're doing a job in task analysis.

So obviously AI can grab large amounts of data to tell us about the particular job that we're looking at. So let's say it's a maintenance employee. We're looking at a maintenance employee. Let's do a job and task analysis of that. Well, the diagnostic part will be great, but AI will not include the unique.

contextual influences of different organizations where those maintenance employees are working. So let's say you're looking at a maintenance employee working in a pickle factory in Green Bay with versus a maintenance employee working at Abbott Laboratories in North Chicago, Wino. Those contexts are very different. And so we're going to need, we're still going to need HRD professionals to be able to talk to those stakeholders and have the voices of those stakeholders be heard.

Um I know Stephanie and I are are kind of on the same page when we talk about uh participative and collaborative inquiry. So we wanna think about um the the there's complex dynamics going on with these organizations that we can't understand without the participation of the actors within those organizations.

And so while I agree with everything that Ronan is saying, I'm I'm gonna be an optimist, which is hopefully uh hopefully most of us are gonna be optimists, that there's still gonna be need for the HRD professional, whether it's a practitioner or a scholar, to be there to hear the voices and include the voices of the stakeholders. when we're trying to diagnose and solve organization.

Yeah, yeah, and I just want to uh follow up on on that. You said some something that um hit a nerf there uh in terms of maintenance and in and context. You know, AI still needs maintenance, it still needs monitoring, it still needs evaluation, which means that HRD still needs to be very much in tune with organizational culture. And and you know, our our positionality has always been in sort of a a unique place where we're the middlemen in in terms of

having a good sense of its organizational members and also responding to the needs of of the organizational leaders. And so we have a good vantage point to be able to deliver on on the the maintenance and monitoring and evaluation of AI. And so we're like like Brian, um I I'm optimistic that we still will play a role Um we maybe still need to tease that out. Um, but I you know, I I don't see us being fully replaced um by a

Yeah, and I suppose I I don't want to come across as overly overly pessimistic here. Um, but I think what kind of has underpinned some of my ideas that I had lined is that So this was a report published last year, for example, that found that chief financial officers were more likely to invest in AI software.

rather than employees, because software is an asset that can depreciate it or paid off over time. Whereas learning and development or other investments in employees, they're deemed to be kind of current expenses that must be paid off completely in the year that they're that they're utilized. one of the largest social media uh platforms in the world was recently found five hundred and thirty million

Euro by the Irish Data Protection Commission. And what they did in response to that was that they have laid off the entirety of their learning and development team in Europe Middle East. Another company that employs over I think it's about a hundred and ten thousand people worldwide, they have completely reorganized the structure of their HR function to the extent that they now only have eight HR business.

globally uh across multiple countries. And it just seems to me that with the advent of AI, the first thing that's on the chopping block when it comes to budget is seem to me Learning and development or HRD activities. So I am, I suppose that's what's driving a lot of my concerns rather than pessimism. Each of you have talked there about where AI can essentially do the more basic stuff and can do it probably faster

cheaper. But it's that basic stuff where most HID professionals come into the profession and learn the foundations. I suppose if we follow that logic, HRD professionals are starting to come into the profession at a higher position in the ladder. And when they come in at that higher position, they presumably Don't have to do that.

the foundational experience that people at that point in the ladder currently have. Am I am I thinking about that right based on what the three of you are have been saying? No, that sounds completely on point. And you when we think about AI, we we naturally think about these high earning enterprises. And, you know, AI does seem like highly accessible, but will everyone have the access to software that would be able to do the work that I guess is more uh efficient and individualized?

Or will there be these these mid level organizations, these non profit organizations where there'll be a huge disparity will where you know they won't have access to And I'm I'm thinking, is you know, is that an opportunity for HRD to find itself in in new spaces dealing with new clientele, time will tell of of of who will fully embrace uh AI. That is is something um that does seem quite problematic. From my context, I uh we teach we have an undergraduate HRD program.

And so what we've been um encouraging our students to also take management classes to become a little bit more broader based in experience. So when we talk about the term HR generalist, right, you if you look at some of the the the the postings for an HR generalist, they want people that can do benefits and

um insurance, but also maybe do a little bit of a training and a little bit of evaluation. And so what we've been trying to do for at least our undergrads and our our master's level students is encourage them to Um, take classes in these different areas so they can develop a broader set of skills so they can slot into a role.

and and fill a lot of different functions for an organization. And I agree with you a hundred percent, Stephanie, there's an equity issue when we call when we're talking about small to medium sized uh enterprises and whether or not they have the the financial wherewithal to be able to afford these higher level AI systems. And um, you know, my father was a uh was an entrepreneur, had his own independent business, a two or three person organization. If he were to open his business today.

I don't think he would be able to have the ability to afford some of these AI systems that other organizations have. And would he be at a competitive disadvantage because of that?

I wonder if this is a good point to start thinking about what all of this means in terms of knowledge and skill. So if this is the sort of the the landscape of how the profession is starting to change over the next ten, fifteen years, um I'm wondering what this means in terms of the skills and knowledge that HRD professionals will need to be successful. in that landscape. Brian, what what are your thoughts about what this means in terms of skills and knowledge?

I think we're heading towards a a greater emphasis on interdisciplinary knowledge. Skills. One of the things that I've always really loved about HRD is it can mean a lot of different things to different people. we could have different sources of emphasis, right? We have different scholars in our organization that look at one particular part of of HRD. And I I I see that we can now have greater opportunities to explore

Other areas that are in connection to HRD. So one of the things I've really been excited about. with your podcast series, Darren, is that you've been connecting HRD to areas that maybe we wouldn't have thought about a connection five or ten years ago. So Um you know, you've had episodes on spirituality and politics and psychology and philosophy. Let's think about that. Would we have really thought about spirituality and HRD 10 years ago? I I don't know if we would have.

And and and so I I'll I'll I'll bring it back to you, Darren. You and I and and Gene Roth. started talking about HRD and humor many years ago and everyone kind of looked at us with kind of a raised eyebrow like what does the humor have to do with HRD? And so Today, I don't think we would have that kind of same um level of circumspect. And so I think that.

HRD scholars and practitioners are now going to have greater opportunity to look at a wide range of the work-life experience and how it connects to HRD. So one of the things that I again, you know, I I'm very interested in humor, but I've really b uh after listening to your podcast on HRD and spirituality, I really started thinking about that. And I I started thinking about religious and civic pluralism.

And and you know, uh, I've done some research on the experience of Muslims who wear the hijab in organizations. And, you know, that's a very over-expression of their faith. And with that comes challenges in various organizations. And so I see religious pluralism as a way to overcome some of those challenges and make connections with others.

that have different religious and political and social identities. And so I think what HRD scholars now are gonna have this great opportunity to look at things that maybe have been in the back of their head and and have been afraid to, but now are going to have the the freedom to do that because um of the fact that we can now look at the entirety of of the work experience.

So I might come in there just on that. I love the idea of the kind of interdisciplinary expansion that that Brian spoke about. Uh but I'm gonna come at it from maybe a a a different angle. So I've spent a lot been researching platform labor and gig work for the last number of years. And about a third of US workers are engaged in some form of gig work. Uh but as of the time of recording

Journals like H4D Ore, H R D Q have never published anything on gigwork. They've never published anything on platform labor. There's a recent paper in H or D Ore on algorithmic management earlier this year. And these workers are subject to what I call a c a form of algorithmic precarity. So this is a really distinct form of labour control that extends beyond employment insecurity.

To encompass real technological dependence and psychological vulnerability and social fragmentation. And then I think In this particular form of work, where H or D professionals are providing services to these large platforms, they're operating in contexts where traditional frameworks are really structurally inadequate. And we're seeing this isn't just a new field to explore, but it I think it really fundamentally changes how work is controlled and how work is organized.

And in terms of the skills then that are required for that, they're the so what's what's what I see as fundamental is digital literacy, not just technological competence, but the ability to understand and critique the sociopolitical dimensions of algorithmic control. So HOD professionals need to be fluent in data literacy while also maintaining their expertise in human psychology and organizational dynamics. And that kind of inter interdisciplinary knowledge that Brian touched on.

uh I think is also really important in addressing power structures at work. So when we look at this kind of platform mediated labor, Our traditional H O D employability frameworks, they collapse when It's algorithmic systems that are determining employment outcomes through opaque criteria. So I think K T professionals need to understand how economic systems change work, how power operates in these organizations, and how management control has really evolved.

in digital context. They also need to understand why workers might resist certain technological implementations and how maybe collective action or resistance emerges in response to algorithmic management. And I don't come off as overly pessimistic now on this podcast, but I think many traditional H O D competencies are

at a risk of becoming commoditized. And those who survive or those who thrive over the next ten years or so, they need capabilities that are genuinely irreplaceable. So complex stakeholders. And I love the idea that Brian said they're teaching their H or D undergrads management classes as well. So ethical decision making in technological context and the ability to facilitate democratic kind of participation in shaping the systems, the technological systems.

Yeah, I I agree with, you know, all that's been said. And um, you know, I when when we think about these these new interests, you know, I I think it it it it comes from who we are as a community. uh at least when we are in person, uh on the ground, uh, you know, at a conference, we are looking different. And so, you know, there's there's more students becoming aware of what HRD is um in in education in general, you know, there's more first generation students.

And so, you know, they're not just invested in, you know, the traditional knowledge work. They're looking at things like the gig economy, um as you know, people who are in their direct network might be more inclined to work in those, you know, type of industries. And so um they're looking to to solve problems that can help them and their people. And so, you know, when we think about things like like spirituality, those things um when when we think of people of color, first generation students,

you know, they're they're thinking from their lived experience, their background, how they've been taught. And so to me there it's no surprise that these things are making their way into our our focus. And so um And in terms of spirituality, I think things like um what was all what was mentioned already, I think I heard some some civic stuff. And so like civic development and and workplace learning.

You know, that's us getting back to our roots uh when we think about adult education. Um and so I I appreciate this this shift that we're experiencing in the the humanistic aspects that are needed to drive some of um these new directions um as it relates to you know things like public policy and in community development and so I think Those are the things that we are, we can anticipate seeing as we continue to be more diverse in who we are, the social identities that we represent.

um in the the interests that come along with uh being a community of of diverse people.

It's fascinating to think think about this. Like I I um w one of the benefits I have of like facilitating the conversation is I get a chance to sort of sit back and and and listen and and reflect as the three of you talk and it's um It it it takes me to a place of thinking about how much of what HRD professionals have typically learned early in their career and learned in depth because they needed to be able to go and do it.

transfers to something that they need to possibly learn in less depth because they need to know it because they need to know basically what AI is doing in the background. Which frees up the space for them to then learn in the areas that you're talking about. It which feels like it's a challenge for how we design programmes that prepare HRD professionals. What do you think all of this means then for the folks who are designing and running?

Um educational programs for HRD professionals, like degree programs being an example of this. As in, how do you see degree programs for HRD changing over the next five, ten years to reflect the direction you've just been talking about. Ste Stephanie, what what's your thinking on that? As I think about what HRD programs should be doing to respond to these things.

You know, as Brian was was mentioning about us being so interdisciplinary, you know, that's always gonna work in our favor. Because I think that is the space to find your fit. But that also puts responsibility on the program, on the department, on the college, on the advisors to have a greater awareness of what the individual needs are, the different needs are. We can't just rely on the traditional buckets of org development, career development, T and D. People are bringing in their own

spin on those things. And that's okay. I mean, we're already in a place where the the parameters are just they're not there. You know, we're expansive in in our reach, which is also a good thing. But we also need to have a better handle on who's doing what? Like what is the landscape of HRD? Are we growing in our representation in terms of our programs or our programs closing? Like who who knows

you know, there's still a lot of ground to cover, even though we cover so much in terms of of subject matter. Um, you know, we we still are disguised as other things, you know, organizational psychology, talent development. We still are in the process of trying to be more distinct in who we are.

And I feel like that will, you know, address some of the things that we've talked about earlier about us um dealing with our placement, our positionality, our responsibility as it relates to things like AI. And so we just need to have a better grasp on on who we are, where we what we wanna be. And so I think with that comes a greater responsibility in the evaluation of ourself. Yeah, I I agree with uh much of what Stephanie has to say, but I'm gonna I'm gonna add a little bit of a twist.

Matthew Hora up at the University of Wisconsin has been working on teaching transferable skills in college courses. So what are some of the universal skills that employers want? So how do we integrate subject matter expertise, but also teaching these transferable skills that are that are universal? So uh the National Association of Colleges and Employers. uh defines eight core competencies that most employers uh really value. So career and self-development, communication, critical thinking.

Equity and inclusion, leadership, professionalism, teamwork, and technology. And I'm gonna add two more. I'm gonna add self-directed and lifelong learning. So so we can think about embedding these kinds of things in our classes. So so there's a couple of ways we can we can do this. And so Um, you know, many of us that teach, we have our students uh in group or team projects, which is always a a good thing, but instead of assigning um these students at random.

maybe take a survey at the beginning of the class and think about which Topics. within that particular class that students are interested in. And then putting those students that have a common interest together and putting them in a team so they can explore that topic together. We can think about uh a lot of self-assessment. How can we have students self-assess themselves, such as like how how how good a note taker have I been? How

much of an active participation uh have I uh displayed. Um and then at the semester's end they can think about talking about their where they've struggled and then where they can improve upon. I also think about connecting uh course learning objectives to career competencies, right? So Have students

try and clearly articulate what they've learned and and what competencies have they developed as a result of that learning. Because then they can explain that to their to and they can put that in their resume, they can talk about that in their job interview as opposed to, well, I learned this. You can now say, I can do this, right? There's a difference between I learned this, but can I do it? And then I also think about assignments.

Where it's not only developed just demonstrating subject matter expertise, but it's also thinking about maybe have them develop a skill in addition to that. So one of the assignments I give my undergrads all the time is an infographic. Right. So now all of us so now all of a sudden they're they're demonstrating what they know about the particular topic, but they're also using some sort of technology.

um, you know, whether it's you know Canva or any kind of other graphic design technology. So now they're integrating subject matter expertise into some and and and practicing it using a different skill. So I think about all these kinds of things, how we can we can develop these transferable and very welcome skills in our curriculum in addition to developing subject matter.

I might just take what Stephanie and Brian have said, uh I fully agree with what they've said, but I'm just gonna maybe add just one more thing. Um in addition to like I've kind of outlined how I think this profession is undergoing fundamental transformation. Um and just and this is it this is an element of recency bias here because it's a paper that I'm working on with some colleagues and we've been doing some meta-analytical research on training effectiveness.

Which kind of I think reveals some important insights about actually what works when it comes to H or D. But it also exposes the maybe shaky foundations of traditional business case arguments, which claim that training investments deliver significant long term value to organisms. So when we examined the evidence, now we could only find thirteen studies that provided plausible evidence regarding the long-term impact of organizational training on performance.

And I suppose what's concerning about that the majority of those studies had quite significant methodological problems and most only investigated static relationships without con considering past performance levels. Um and then when other researchers have control for past performance, the positive effects of training on future performance either reduced dramatically or disappeared entirely. So the evidence base that underpins billions of dollars been invested in training.

Is probably far weaker than most people realize. One of the things that we did find was that quality of training matters more than quantity. And there's a specific sequential relationship between ability and motivation that's fundamental for organizational performance. So I think really we need to be teaching students this kind of rigorous, evidence-based, foundational concepts first.

And they need theoretical frameworks then that help them understand structural challenges uh regarding was it the dig increased digitalization of work that I spoke about when work has been mediated by technological systems. I think programmes maybe need to integrate more critical theoretical perspectives alongside traditional approaches to learning design and so on. And in the context of how AI is encroaching on H or D.

teach them to be critical evaluators of technology while grounding them in solid evidence about human development. Because I think ultimately they need to understand what the empirical evidence about what works in human development and then maybe the structural conditions that make

the traditional approaches that we've been teaching for ten, twenty years, that makes those obsolete. I think that will allow them to be both evidence-based practitioners and also critical analysts of the systems that they will be working with.

It makes me think a little about um now what people get out of degree programs and and what then transl transfers into the job. And I I suppose traditionally people have got now the knowledge of the core literature of the um of of HR D. Um and an attitude. They've gained an attitude about the importance of understanding what what works, what doesn't work, what theory what theories and research tell us. What I'm not sure folks have got much in the past has been experience.

So they come out of a programme with a lot of knowledge and a lot of attitude, but Not a bucket load of experience that uh an organisation would look at and say that seems relevant to us. As in the organisation's hiring them because of the knowledge, they're hiring them because maybe of the attitude.

And yeah, when I think about what the three of you were talking about earlier, and almost the removal of the lower l rungs of the ladder, which is where the people are gaining that experience at the moment, we're almost trying to develop people in degree programmes to come in at a much higher level, a much higher level of the ladder. D do you think there's anything that degree programs could be doing?

to replace some of the lost experience or any way that you that experience could be integrated more into degree programs to give HID professionals a way of practicing.

So that they can turn up at a job and say, I not only do I know it, I've also got evidence that I've been able to do Yeah, I I there are a a a number of schools that are are that are doing portfolios now as as kind of So I I I think that that's something that that we should really be emphasizing where a student can can take the feedback that

she or he have been given over the course of their their program, uh improve the various projects that they've done, whether it be in a a needs assessment or an evaluation or an instructional design document.

And then put that all together in a portfolio and be able to say, here, this is what I can this is what I can do. This is how I can do it. Uh I know that uh that's something that uh we're gonna be changing our capstone for our master's program from a comprehensive exam to a portfolio uh over the next year or so uh in order to do exactly what you said, Darren, to to be able to demonstrate this is what I can do. Uh and this is how I can help your organization.

I think given that that disappearance of the entry level roles we discussed, uh as educators that we can't focus on just preparing students for this traditional apprenticeship pathway that is no longer there. So How do you prepare graduates then who can immediately operate maybe at a more strategic level? So I think then that means rather than just maybe bringing in a single management module here and there, H O D programmes need to become more

interdisciplinary from the start. So rather than focusing primarily on just maybe learning theory and instructional design. Folks in developing graduates who could bridge different domains. So combining organizational psychology with data analysis, integrating change management skills with

critical evaluation of technological implementations. So'cause I think these as you've spoken about, these graduates that they're not gonna have the luxury of learning the business through junior roles. Ultimately they n will need to arrive some form of of or some form of knowledge of cross functional capabilities that will allow them to articulate the strategic value that they can add whilst they learn specific

H or D type methodologies as well. So ultimately I think we're looking at a like when I look at you know an Irish or European perspective, that would require completely rethinking our curriculum design. Yeah, yeah. Um Darren, I really do appreciate that that comment um about, you know, the experience. Where are you supposed to get this?

you know, there's always going to be a need for the the knowledge set that we have. Um and it may not um we may not always have access to the place where we wanna um you know share that knowledge, get paid to to uh utilize that. Uh but in our communities there's always a need to help our

our fellow um community members, um our people learn. Um you know there's a lot of community organizations, community-based organizations, NGOs, um Even just people doing policy work that could benefit from even what our undergraduates, you know, leave uh college with, you know, they they have this framework, this mindset, this perspective. um that they they learn through HRD.

And you know, when people come together, essentially they are organizing for, you know, a a shared uh mission, meaning, um objective. And so I you know, the skill set that we have um can grant them access um to those type of organizations which again are always in need of help, support. Um and and there are people in those uh situations where there's a lot of history and experience. that you know uh social movement leaders, community leaders are willing to share.

um with people who are willing to uh provide some sort of um uh participation uh to to help things move along and so you know, w we I d I d I don't know if it makes sense to stay in this place of being h so high end all the time when again there is a human need for the skills that that we have. And when I think of uh you know things like internships and and so forth. You know, we we should allow our students to um participate in those things as

if they choose to as opposed to always thinking about for profit um enterprises. And so uh I I just I I feel uh again I'll I'll repeat what I said before as we see more people of color, more first generation um students uh going through our educational programs, whether that's in the school of education, technology, business management, wherever they find themselves, we're in all these different places.

Um, we are going to continue to do the work of the people. And so we're we're we we need to be ready for. as people in the classroom, as educators, and also mentors as we are advising these people where we may not have that direct experience, but we need to grant permission for other people again to find their fit. It's in it's interesting to think of it that way. It it makes me think that

Uh w th there's always been a significant difference between what it looks like to be in a global multinational organization of like tens of thousands of employees versus let's say a small non profit. Um but It makes me feel as if the difference between those two things is are getting wider and wider as a result, for example, of AI. Which may mean for the next five, ten years we're trying to prepare

different types of HR D professionals, some of which may end up finding themselves in a global organisation where they are g they need to be multidisciplinary. They're gonna go in high a higher level. At the same time we also need to make sure that we're preparing some folks to go in working at smaller, you know, small medium enterprises.

where that isn't the reality. So I wonder whether we're actually going into a period where we need to make sure that we don't that that we're kind of trying to support everybody for whatever career path they are going in.

I think one of the things that probably hasn't been really fully realised when it comes to AI use at work, so the number of organis that report that they've officially incorporated may say for example enterprise AI solutions into their HR system is really low. It's about twenty five percent. Uh but the number of HOR and HRD professionals who are bringing their own AI tools to work on a daily basis suggests that the figure is much, much higher. So for example, you've got

This isn't just HRD specific, but some of the research that I've done shows that HR professionals are using Chat GPT to write job descriptions. They're using Google Gemini, their own profile uh Google Gemini accounts to write learning and development strategies. They're using Microsoft Copilot to screen C Vs without n without we'll say approval from the the organizations itself.

And then on the other f other side of the coin you've got job applicants also using AI extensively to write cover letters, Taylor C V to job descriptions. So we have a s we have this situation where job descriptions, person specifications have been crafted by I by AI and candidates are then using the same AI systems to write cover letters and C Vs to match these roles.

So um like we're almost at the point in in some aspects of H or that if we're taking the human out of H or uh what are we what are we actually left with?

Wow. I uh I love that whole interplay that you just described. That's bizarre. Wow. Ha ha. But it's it's it's happening. That's that's the reality. Yes. And it it's one of those questions that I think like you know, at this point I can see listeners pressing the pause button and thinking, I need to think about this a little.

Like I'm I'm conscious we've been talking now for an hour and I realize the more we talk, the more questions I've got. Um like I've I've got answers to some of the questions that I had when I came in and I I now have a whole new batch of questions. I I I feel as if um what Ronan just talked us through there is probably a good way of of wrapping up the episode and giving people stuff to think about.

Um and I also am hoping that the four of us are gonna be able to get back together again so that we can revisit all of this and just see how some of this is landing in practice and then revisit some of what we've what we've just said.

But I did want to thank all three of you for the your time today. Thank you so much for being willing to be a part of the episode and for feeding in your all of your thoughts and ideas and I really hope we have a chance to get back together and continue this conversation in a future season. Thank you. Thank you, Darren. Thank you, Stephanie. Thank you, Ronan. Yeah. Thanks everyone. Really enjoyed it. Yes, thank you so much for bringing us together. This was such a delight.

Thank you so much for joining me for this episode. It was wonderful spending time with Brian Vivona, Stephanie Sisko, and Ronan Carberry. If you enjoyed this episode, check out our other 50, which contain conversations with over 100 leading scholars from around the world. To learn more about the series check out HRD Masterclass. com and to learn about the Academy of HRD, check out ahrd.org. Also, please check out our episode sponsors.

The Programme Excellence Network, an exclusive initiative from the Academy of Human Resource Development, that connects institutions and educators dedicated to building top-tier HRD academic programs. To find out all about it, check out ahrd.org I'll be back next week with an episode focused on how HRD can respond to the current DEIB challenges. When I'll be joined by Nicole Dillard, Jeremy Bahonos, and Kira McFadden. Until then, stay safe. This is Darren Short, signing off from the HRG.

HRD Masterclass Podcast is brought to you by the Academy of Human Resource Development and is a production of all by podcast.com. Thank you for listening to HRD Masterclass. It's a unique resource featuring over 130 HRD experts across 55 episodes. As a fan of the series, you can help make season six happen. AHRD is crowdsourcing funding for the season and you can donate today at givebutter.com forward slash HRD Masterclass.

With your help, the season can bring you 11 new episodes focused on major HRD research articles, their practical implications, the need for further research. And how researchers and practitioners can help each other to advance research and practice on the topic. It would be amazing to continue the series and I hope you'll consider donating today at givbutter.com forward slash HRD-Masterclass