The Problem Economic inequality and wage stagnation challenge employee well-being and organizational sustainability. HRD scholarship has given minimal attention to living wages as a strategic and developmental issue. Organizations lack conceptual guidance on integrating living wage practices into HRD frameworks, leaving practitioners without a foundation for aligning compensation with development goals. The Solution This paper positions the living wage as a developmental imperative aligned with HRD’s core domains: Training and Development, Organizational Development, and Career Development, grounded in Human Capability Theory, Organizational Justice Theory, and Strategic HRD Theory. Using illustrative examples from Costco, JPMorgan Chase, and Unilever, it theorizes that adequate wages enable employees to engage in training, contribute to organizational change, and pursue career advancement; it offers a conceptual framework to guide future empirical investigation. Stakeholders HRD professionals, educators, organizational leaders, policymakers, and researchers interested in advancing empirical inquiry on living wage as a strategic HRD mechanism.
Problem Organisations in Malta face growing pressure to implement diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI) aligned with global and European standards. However, translating these norms into meaningful, context-sensitive practices within a small island state presents challenges. Tensions arise between formal compliance requirements and genuine inclusion when addressing intersectional inequalities related to gender, disability, nationality, and LGBTIQ + identities. Solution Using a qualitative approach based on interviews with HRD practitioners and black-letter analysis, this study shows how HRD actors include DEI into organisational development. Beyond formal policies on recruitment and pay equity, practitioners advance inclusive leadership development, mentoring, employee networks, and culture-building initiatives. Guided by institutional and paradox perspectives, these strategies balance regulatory compliance with transformative inclusion. Stakeholders Key stakeholders include HRD practitioners, organisational leaders, employees from diverse backgrounds, and policymakers shaping national and European equality frameworks.
Background Career development needs among doctoral students in human resource development (HRD) may vary according to career aspirations, professional experiences, social identities, financial circumstances, and institutional contexts. Yet limited research has examined how HRD doctoral students subjectively prioritize different forms of career development support. Purpose This study explored HRD doctoral students’ subjective perspectives on their career development needs and the factors associated with variations in those needs. Research Design A mixed-methods design combining Q methodology with focus group interviews (FGIs) was employed to identify shared and contrasting perspectives on career development support. Study Sample Seventeen doctoral students from six U.S. HRD programs completed Q-sorts, and 13 participated in follow-up FGIs. Data Collection and/or Analysis Participants sorted 70 career development statements derived from the literature, pilot interviews, and researcher discussions. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was used to identify shared viewpoints. Factor arrays were interpreted using the crib-sheet method and supplemented with open-ended responses and FGI data. Results Three career development perspectives emerged: (1) support for academic appointments, (2) support for well-being, and (3) support for visibility and networking. Bipolar patterns further distinguished structural versus financial well-being needs and academic versus industry-oriented visibility and networking needs. Participants’ identities, positionalities, career aspirations, financial circumstances, and institutional and sociopolitical contexts shaped how they prioritized career development support. Conclusions HRD doctoral students do not experience career development needs uniformly. HRD programs should move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches by providing differentiated, identity-responsive, and career-path-specific support that addresses students’ academic preparation, well-being, and access to professional networks and visibility.
Problem Few HRD scholars explicitly integrate a community-based lens to address the workforce development needs of marginalized and vulnerable communities. Even though the workforce development literature within HRD highlights localized initiatives that emphasize job creation and new investments in employment-related skills, it overlooks the place-based needs of underserved communities. Solution We introduce placemaking to an HRD audience, emphasizing community values and identity and highlighting the strengths and resilience of underserved communities in urban contexts. This conceptual grounding integrates the exploration of workforce and community development within HRD to address inequities in education, employment, and the wellbeing of communities at or below the poverty threshold. Stakeholders Our study focuses on urbanV environments in the U.S. to better capture context-sensitive implications for Human Resource Development (HRD). Key stakeholders include small businesses, workforce development boards, adult education programs, state and federal labor policymakers, and HRD practitioners.
