Professional Practice in Learning and Development: How to Design and Deliver Plans for the Workplace

Introduction The world is changing! It is volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous. As cliché as it may sound the evidence of such dynamism in the external environment is growing. Business-as-usual is more of the exception than the norm. Organizational change is the rule; be it to accommodate and adapt to change, or instigate and lead change. A constantly changing environment is a situation that all organizations have to live with. What makes some organizations however, able to thrive better than others? Many scholars and practitioners believe that this is due to the ability to learn. Therefore, this book on developing Learning and Development (L&D) professionals is timely as it explores and discusses trends and practices that impact organizations, the workforce and L&D professionals. Being able to learn and develop effectively is the cornerstone of motivation as it helps to address people’s need to be competent and to be autonomous (Deci & Ryan, 2002; Loon & Casimir, 2008; Ryan & Deci, 2000). L&D stimulates and empowers people to perform. Organizations that are better at learning at all levels; the individual, group and organizational level, will always have a better chance of surviving and performing. Given the new reality of a dynamic external environment and constant change, L&D professionals now play an even more important role in their organizations than ever before. However, L&D professionals themselves are not immune to the turbulent changes as their practices are also impacted. Therefore, the challenges that L&D professionals face are two-pronged. Firstly, in relation to helping and supporting their organization and its workforce in adapting to the change, whilst, secondly developing themselves effectively and efficiently so that they are able to be one-step ahead of the workforce that they are meant to help develop. These challenges are recognised by the CIPD, as they recently launched their new L&D qualification that has served as an inspiration for this book. L&D plays a crucial role at both strategic (e.g. organizational capability) and operational (e.g. delivery of training) levels. L&D professionals have moved from being reactive (e.g. following up action after performance appraisals) to being more proactive (e.g. shaping capability). L&D is increasingly viewed as a driver for organizational performance. The CIPD (2014) suggest that L&D is increasingly expected to not only take more responsibility but also accountability for building both individual and organizational knowledge and capability, and to nurture an organizational culture that prizes learning and development. This book is for L&D professionals. Nonetheless, it is also suited for those studying Human Resource Development HRD at intermediate level. The term ‘Human Resource Development’ (HRD) is more common in academia, and is largely synonymous with L&D (Stewart & Sambrook, 2012) Stewart (1998) defined HRD as ‘the practice of HRD is constituted by the deliberate, purposive and active interventions in the natural learning process. Such interventions can take many forms, most capable of categorising as education or training or development’ (p. 9). In fact, many parts of this book (e.g. Chapters 5 and 7) are appropriate for anyone who is involved in training and development. This may include a variety of individuals within the L&D community, such as line managers, professional trainers, training solutions vendors, instructional designers, external consultants and mentors (Mayo, 2004). The CIPD (2014) goes further as they argue that the role of L&D is broad and plays a significant role in Organizational Development (OD) and Talent Management (TM), as well as in Human Resource Management (HRM) in general. OD, TM, HRM and L&D are symbiotic in enabling the ‘people management function’ to provide organizations with the capabilities that they need.

Counselling Psychology in the United Kingdom

Counselling psychology within the UK has grown over the last three decades, adapting to many changes in the field of applied psychology, whilst remaining true to its core values and humanistic origins. The identity of counselling psychology is strongly rooted in a relational stance and applied psychology, where attention to psychological formulation is given to improve psychological functioning and well-being. This article outlines a brief history of counselling psychology in the UK, the training process, credentialing and looks at some important challenges and future directions for counselling psychology in the UK. A proportion of the members from the British Psychological Society’s division of counselling psychology (DCoP, N = 148) took part in the study. Participants provided demographic, training, employment, workplace and career pathway information obtained through an online questionnaire distributed to all DCoP members. On the whole, DCoP members are working in a variety of areas within the UK and the findings of this article contribute to the international study comparing counselling psychology across the globe.

Shining a Light on the Dark Side: How the Global Financial Crisis Exposed the Dark Side of Leadership

The global financial crisis has had innumerate outcomes around the globe. Whilst most of these are generally perceived to be negative, there are outcomes which could be considered positive for society. One such outcome is the spotlight that the financial crisis has shone on corruption within organisations and in particular, the role that destructive leaders play in the promotion of negative behaviours within organisations. This interest in identifying so-called ‘dark-side’ traits in leaders is a positive step both academically and practically. Academically, there is a limited research examining individuals with ‘dark-traits’ within organisations (Mahmut, Homewood & Stevenson, 2008). Practically, most leader derailment can be attributed to ‘dark-side’ traits and leaders with such traits are implicated in a host of issues for organisations including poor staff morale and satisfaction, bullying, poor levels of productivity, high staff turnover, unethical behaviour and even white collar crime (e.g. Boddy,2010; 2011; Lesha & Lesha, 2012; O’Boyle, Forsyth, Banks & McDaniel, 2012; Sanecka, 2013). This paper focuses on one of the ‘dark-side’ traits; psychopathy. Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterised by guiltlessness, incapacity to experience love, impulsivity, shallow emotions, superficial charm and an inability to learn from experience (Cleckley, 1941, 1982). Research has found that individuals with high levels of psychopathy can be found working within organisations and experiencing some degree of career success (e.g. Babiak, Neumann & Hare, 2010; Board & Fritzon, 2005; Boddy, 2010; Lilienfeld, Latzman, Watts, Smith & Dutton, 2014). These individuals are theoretically thought to be attracted to careers which offer power, status and monetary rewards. In particular, the finance industry has been suggested as an ideal work place for the organisational psychopath. Some authors go as far as attribute organisational psychopaths a key role in the financial crisis (Boddy, 2011). However, little research has been conducted to explore whether levels of psychopathy in employees differ across industries and what careers might be most attractive to individuals with high levels of psychopathy. This paper presents the results of a large scale survey of 265 alumni of universities in the Central England region of the UK. The survey was conducted to assess the link between levels of three factors of psychopathy (Egotism, Callousness and Antisocialism) with occupation as defined by Holland’s RIASEC model. Participants completed Brinkley, Diamond, Magaletta & Heigel’s (2008) revision of Levenson’s Self-Report Psychopathy Scale and responded to questions regarding their current occupation. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess whether levels of Egotism, Callousness and Antisocialism were predictive of occupation. The results showed that when compared to individuals who occupy job roles within the Social sector of Holland’s model, individuals with higher levels of psychopathy were more likely to be employed within Realistic, Investigative, Enterprising and Conventional roles. When comparing Social and Realistic roles, more Egotistical individuals were likely to be employed within Realistic roles. When comparing those employed in Social roles to Investigative, Enterprising and Conventional roles, individuals with higher levels of Antisocialism were more likely to be employed within the latter three occupations than within Social roles. This suggests that individuals with psychopathy do gravitate towards certain career paths. Social roles where job incumbents are required to be caring and interact with others to a large extent appear to be unattractive to individuals with high levels of psychopathy. Social roles are also associated with lower monetary rewards and are generally less prestigious (Henley, 2001). These individuals instead seek out occupations where there are higher levels of risk, power and reward. Roles in the Realistic category include those which include high levels of risk e.g. fighter pilot, fireman etc., (Cohen, Meir, Segal & Amar, 2003). Investigative careers hold the highest level of prestige and ranking. Enterprising roles include management positions where power is wielded over subordinates and sales roles, where customers can be manipulated (ACT, 2009). Conventional roles include those within the finance industry, which include some of the most financially lucrative positive available (Babiak & Hare, 2006). The above suggests that individuals with higher levels of psychopathy may be seeking to satisfy their self-centred natures by selecting careers which provide them with high levels of reward in one way or another. Alternatively, these individuals may select roles where their traits can be accepted. The importance of Antisocialism in predicting occupation may be testament to the importance of finding a career which ‘fits’ such traits. Antisocialism is generally associated with negative outcomes in the workplace (Ettner, MacLean & French, 2010). Therefore, finding environments tolerant of antisocial tendencies may be a priority for individuals with high levels of these traits. The results suggest that Enterprising, Investigative and Conventional work environments may be tolerant of Antisocialism in employees and Realistic environments tolerant of Egotism. Academically, the results show that there is value in studying ‘dark-side’ characteristics in organisations. Individuals with higher levels of psychopathic traits, do not appear to randomly enter employment. Instead, they appear to gravitate to careers which meet their needs and/or tolerate their traits. It is important to further explore what industries and positions are particularly attractive to individuals with higher levels of psychopathy and what makes them attractive to these individuals. Such knowledge is important for practitioners to be able to advise organisations as to the likely level of risk they face of employing organisational psychopaths and to enable organisations which are particularly attractive to highly psychopathic employees to design selection systems which detect undesirable traits in candidates. Furthermore, organisations can examine their culture to assess whether traits such as antisocialism are tolerated (or even rewarded) and what the implications of this are.