In the practitioner literature for human resource and training professionals, you will find practical information that you can apply in your organization or practice. In the academic literature for human resource and training professionals, you will find the theories and theoretical frameworks that support the development of practical application. Is there a middle ground? Or, are the professions divided into distinct groups of thinkers and do-ers?
There is a reason for the great divide. The academic literature is not written in a style that encourages optional reading. The practice literature, while immediately applicable, does not require thinking. The human resources and learning professions cannot continue in this vein. Real performance improvement requires both theory and application. Practitioners are not only responsible for driving change, but also for understanding (and contributing to) the supporting theories. The absence of a marriage between theory and practice makes practitioners re-active rather than proactive. The absence of a marriage between theory and practice leaves academics voiceless and contributes to a dumb-ing down of the human resources and training practices. What are your thoughts?
Lorretta J