Exploring perspectives on Human Resource Development: an introduction.

The problem and the solution. This issue overview presents a brief justification for adopting a multiperspectival approach to theory and practice in human resource development (HRD). It is argued that such an approach has the potential to add theoretical depth and breadth to HRD discourse as well as contributing to reflective HRD practice.The contributions are then briefly introduced.

It's not interaction, it's make believe.

A principal, but largely unexplored, use of our cognition when using interacting technology involves pretending. To pretend is to believe that which is not the case, for example, when we use the desktop on our personal computer we are pretending, that is, we are pretending that the screen is a desktop upon which windows reside. But, of course, the screen really isn't a desktop. Similarly when we engage in scenario- or persona-based design we are pretending about the settings, narrative, contexts and agents involved. Although there are exceptions, the overwhelming majority of the contents of these different kinds of stories are not the case. We also often pretend when we engage in the evaluation of these technologies (e.g. in the Wizard of Oz technique we "ignore the man behind the curtain"). We are pretending when we ascribe human-like qualities to digital technology. In each we temporarily believe something to be the case which is not. If we add the experience of tele- and social-presence to this, and the diverse experiences which can arise from using digital technology which too are predicted on pretending, then we are prompted to propose that human computer interaction and cognitive ergonomics are largely built on pretending and make believe. If this premise is accepted (and if not, please pretend for a moment), there are a number of interesting consequences.

Strength grading of sawn timber in Europe: an explanation for engineers and researchers.

This paper is a concise explanation of the normative background to strength grading in Europe, addressing important aspects that are commonly misunderstood by structural engineers and timber researchers. It also highlights changes that are being made to the standards to: incorporate requirements of the construction products regulations; add improvements to the system to accommodate the latest knowledge and technology; and widen the application of the standards. Where designs need to be optimised, there is an opportunity to use the system more intelligently, in combination with the latest technology, to better fit design values to the true properties of the timber resource. This can bring a design enhancement equivalent to effort improving other aspects of the structure, such as connectors and reinforcement. Parallel to this, researchers working on other aspects of structural improvement need to understand what grades really mean in respect of the properties of the timber, in order to correctly analyse the results of testing. It is also useful to know how techniques used in grading can assist with material properties characterisation for research. The amount of destructive testing involved in establishing machine grading settings and visual grading assignments presents a barrier to greater use of local timber, and diversification of commercial species, so it is important that any researcher assessing the properties of such species should consider, from the outset, doing the research in a way that can contribute to a grading dataset at a later date. This paper provides an overview of what is required for this.