It is believed that Leonard Naddler was the first management thinker who drafted the concept of Human Resource Development (HRD). He had introduced the concept through the research paper he presented in the American Society for Training and Development during 1969. He has defined Human Resource Development (HRD) as “those learning experiences which are organized, for a specific time, and designed to bring about the possibility of behavioral change”. This definition of Naddler is but a blank statement of an earlier interpreter of the colonial administration. Later this blank statement on management thought along with its after effects has been imposed on the global management community. Watch Video/Podcast
The concept of Human Resource Development (HRD) formulated by Naddler, has confronted many transitions later and finally entered the arena of innovative educational methods, sociological developments and observations of behavioral science. Spengler [1971, p. 74] summarizes Kautilya’s human resource management policies as follows: “His analysis, of course, was implicit, not explicit; it rested upon the assumption that individual behavior could be controlled in large measure through economic rewards and penalties, particularly when these were commensurate with the action to be encouraged or discouraged. Accordingly, while Kautilya looked at economic issues through the eyes of an economic administrator, he was aware that rules must fit man’s economic propensities and foster rather than repress useful economic activity.”
Kautilya understood the importance of virtue ethics and believed that they were sources of ‘joy and bliss’. He confined his discussion primarily to action-oriented ethical principles and vigorously advanced them as essential to the maintenance of law and order, and to the promotion of economic development. According to Kautilya, a king must set high ethical standards, be a person displaying the highest moral character and must ensure that his successor was equally ‘noble’.
The Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle also considered ethical values as virtues, emphasized the building of a person’s good character and believed that good conduct would naturally follow. (Post et al [2002, p. 129) notes: “Moral values acknowledged by Aristotle include courage, temperance, justice, and prudence. St. Thomas Aquinas added the Christian values of faith, hope, and charity to the list of morally desirable virtues. Additional virtues include honesty, compassion, generosity, fidelity, integrity, and self-control.”
While Aristotle addressed the principle of virtue ethics he did not discuss any action-oriented principles of ethics. Kautilya referred to both virtue ethics and action-oriented principles of ethics. But he elaborated only on the action-oriented ethical values, such as, the golden rule, rights, fairness, and servant leadership. He (Subramanian, p. 83) wrote: “Proper behavior is more important than being virtuous.” Kautilya was well educated in Vedas and philosophy but he thought that a discussion regarding personal character-building was beyond the scope of the Arthashastra. For example, he stated [p. 142] a prince “Should learn philosophy and the three Vedas from authoritative teachers, economics from the heads of [various government] departments, and the science of government from [not only] theoretical exponents of political science [but also] from practicing politicians.
