Abstract
National Human Resource Development (NHRD) has received much attention from scholars since the concept was first introduced in the 1980s. Although the concept of NHRD is still under academic debate with regard to its definition and scope, the number of case studies presenting NHRD policies in various countries has been growing. The purpose of this article was to present a case study comparison of NHRD in Brazil and South Korea. We examined features and aspects of NHRD in both countries, taking into account their historical, economic, political, and social contexts. In addition, we examined the role played by the state in creating and promoting NHRD policies toward economic and social transformation in South Korea and Brazil. Findings in this article provide implications not only for countries that adopt NHRD strategies but also for countries that may need to utilize HRD for their sustainable national development.
Keywords
National Human Resource Development (NHRD) is no longer a new term in HRD. There has been both shared understanding and constructive critique (McLean, Lynham, Azevedo, Lawrence, & Nafukho, 2008; G. G. Wang & Swanson, 2008) about its core concepts, approaches, and applications within academia, requiring more theoretical and empirical research (Alagaraja & Wang, 2012; E. Cho & McLean, 2004; McLean, 2012; G. G. Wang, 2008). This ongoing discussion seems to have had no negative impact on the demand for NHRD, especially in developing countries. Its role in emerging economies has been emphasized (Lynham, Paprock, & Cunningham, 2006). The purpose of NHRD has been expanded by Cunningham, Lynham, and Weatherly (2006) to include the elimination of national poverty and expand literacy, human resource and leadership capacity, income distribution, education, and various labor aspects.
Many countries have adopted and implemented NHRD programs and policies, including India, China, Kenya, Singapore, and South Africa (see a complete list in Akdere & McLean, 2013). NHRD policies in developed countries have been introduced and shared in developing countries (Cunningham et al., 2006; Hasler, Thompson, & Schuler, 2006). However, it is inappropriate to assume that NHRD practices can be easily transferred. Each country has its own perspective and approach. One nation’s development model cannot be readily transplanted to another nation with different social, political, historical, cultural, and institutional environments (E. Cho & McLean, 2004; C. K. Kim, 2005; McLean, 2010; G. G. Wang, 2008). Nevertheless, understanding NHRD in one country through the lens of another country may be meaningful as the development experiences in one country may present lessons for other countries (C. K. Kim, 2005; G. G. Wang, 2008). As McLean stated, “As countries see other countries succeeding in applying NHRD principles, increasingly they will feel the need to follow suit” (Byrd & Demps, 2006, p. 555).
Purpose
The purpose of this article was to present a case study comparison of NHRD in Brazil and South Korea (referred to hereafter as Korea). Korea is viewed as a successful case of supportive NHRD. During the past four decades, the Korean government has aggressively applied NHRD programs and policies (although not always under this label) with the primary goal of economic, social, and political development. Brazil, the world’s seventh largest economy (World Bank, 2010), has adopted NHRD and implemented policies based on the concept of NHRD with the intent of promoting the growth of its economy, human capital, and social system (Hasler et al., 2006). Brazil pursues a policy of aggressive economic development, while striving for political stability and social harmony. For decades, Asian societies’ models of economic development have been compared with those of Latin American recent industrialized countries, with Asian narratives often serving as a benchmark of success stories, particularly when referring to the role played by the state in creating policies for the advancement of society (Evans, 1995; Fishlow, 1989; Gereffi & Wyman, 1987; Jenkins, 1991). Brazil and Korea, in spite of differences in population, cultural diversity, history, and industrial development, have been previously explored as examples of late industrialization societies, with significant differences in outcome results in terms of GDP growth, industrial production, and income distribution (Evans, 1995; Fishlow, 1989; Gereffi & Wyman, 1987). Whereas studies have explored the similarities of economic development in these two nations, there is still a gap of knowledge in terms of NHRD policies existing in both countries. This article addressed this gap.
There is also no intention in this study to suggest that Korea’s NHRD policies are superior or fully applicable or easily transferred to Brazil, or even that Korea’s NHRD policies have been always successful. This article explored one model of NHRD development as shaped by the values, peculiar characteristics, needs, and demands of one particular society that might possibly offer insights to other countries seeking successful NHRD practices and ideas. In addition, this article explored proposed NHRD models to determine whether they are applicable to late industrialized economies, in particular the case of Brazil.
Theoretical Background
In this article, we utilized as theoretical background both NHRD theories and theories related to the functioning and the role played by the state in organizing and structuring society. Primarily, we utilized the theories posited by E. Cho and McLean (2004), Lynham and Cunningham (2006), and Evans (1995).
HRD as an academic discipline has its roots in the United States and in the United Kingdom (McLean, 2010; Paprock, 2006). Most HRD theories and practices have thus been strongly influenced by its Western social and corporate context (McLean, 2010; J. Wang, Tolson, Chiang, & Huang, 2010). In recent years, many authors have suggested the need for a more extensive definition of the concept of HRD (E. Cho & McLean, 2004; M. Lee, 2001; Swanson, 2007; G. G. Wang & Sun, 2009) to combine elements beyond the corporate work environment. McLean and McLean (2001) proposed an integrative definition of HRD that combines the need for improved performance and sustainability of organizations with the development and well-being of the individual, family, community, organization, nation, and humanity. McLean (2004) contended that NHRD should involve aspects of culture, human development, and social development, not solely dealing with manpower planning or human capital. In addition, other authors have suggested that political, economic, social, and educational systems are crucial in identifying and developing needs and goals of HRD as national policy (Lynham & Cunningham, 2006; G. G. Wang, 2008).
The context in which a nation exists is also critical to NHRD. Each nation require a different NHRD agenda, plans, and processes that are influenced by its culture, history, economy, population, politics, education systems, social security, natural resources, and technologies (E. Cho & McLean, 2004; Paprock, 2006). Having explored multiple case studies of NHRD, E. Cho and McLean (2004) identified five models of NHRD based on practices in different countries. The models provide a theoretical framework for identifying different types of NHRD, although countries often mix and mingle different styles and do not always fully adopt only one type of NHRD policy (E. Cho & McLean, 2004; Lynham & Cunningham, 2006).
Developing countries also have different issues and challenges regarding NHRD that cannot be understood and addressed by perspectives of developed countries (Paprock, 2006). E. Cho and McLean (2004) provided a framework to enable developing countries to develop policies to deal with various issues: illiteracy, child labor, improving education, and creating a responsive labor market.
Evans (1995) posited that economic transformation has become one of the central roles of modern states. In Brazil and South Korea, state intervention and policies have undeniably helped with the transformation of traditionally agrarian societies into newly industrialized countries (Evans, 1995). Evans posited, however, that the way states are structured and how they relate to society creates “different capacities of action [and] define the range of roles the state is capable of playing” (p. 11). In the case of Korea, the state works as a classical example of a developmental state intertwined and embedded “in a concrete set of social ties that binds the state to society and provides the channels for the continual negotiation and renegotiation of goals and policies” (Evans, 1995, p. 12). In the case of Brazil, the state only partially works as a developmental state, being characterized thus as an intermediate state. This results from peculiarities of the Brazilian state: a bureaucrat sector that recruits people less for competency, as in Korea, and more for clientelism (patronage) and personal favors; lack of coherence of the state apparatus and poor coordination of efforts within its many agencies and sectors; and lack of modernization of the state apparatus that in Brazil is formed and controlled by descendants of the traditional landowner rural elites (Evans, 1995).
Therefore, NHRD policies implemented in Korea and Brazil reflect the manner in which the state operates in each society. The successes, effectiveness, and long-term outcomes of these policies are impacted by this reality.
Research Question
To contribute NHRD in Korea and Brazil, with a focus on the particular characteristics of the needs and demands in these two countries and on the role played by the state in creating and implementing policies, we use the following as a research question:
To answer this question, we took a close look at each case study of NHRD in Korea and Brazil, followed by a discussion of similarities and differences and made recommendation for research and practice.
Korea
From a national point of view, human resources refer to the personnel available for a nation’s economic and social development. Korea considers NHRD “a critical strategy to secure an engine of economic growth and to realize an active and productive society” (J. H. Kim, 2005, p. 3). Since the 1960s, NHRD in Korea has focused on a sufficient supply of science and technology personnel for sustainable economic development (Paik & Kim, 2005). As the national economy has developed, Korean NHRD began to embrace people’s well-being, supporting diverse social activities.
Historical and Cultural Background
Korea existed as an independent country for more than two millennia. Japan occupied Korea during the first half of the 20th century, but the country regained its independent sovereignty in 1945. As the Second World War ended, however, the actions of Russia and the United States led to the division of the country into two parts. A period of turmoil followed with the Korean Conflict (1950-1953), which devastated the country economically and led to political instability.
In the last 50 years, Korea has transformed itself from one of the poorest nations to a major player in the world economy. Following the Korean Conflict, the per capita income was less than US$80; Korea’s industrial and social infrastructures were meager (J. H. Kim, 2005). However, since 1961, Korea has achieved an average 7.8% annual growth in the GNP, joined the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) in 1996, and entered the trillion-dollar club of the world’s economies in 2005. Meanwhile, democracy was established in the 1990s after successive military regimes and dictatorships. Korea ranks 12th in Human Development Index (HDI) (United Nations Development Programme [UNDP], 2013) and has the world’s 13th largest economy (Central Intelligence Agency [CIA], 2010).
This success results from several factors. First, the government successfully implemented targeted industrial policies for several decades (C. K. Kim, 2005). It has emphasized an export policy since the 1960s and invested in industries with a high global demand, for example, fiber, chemicals, and information technology. Korea has a system of close government and business ties (CIA, 2010). Second, a stable political and social environment has contributed to rapid development. Despite successive military regimes for 30 years, and two military coups, Korea’s political environment remained unruffled. Moreover, the homogeneous ethnicity and absence of religious and regional conflicts led to social stability (C. K. Kim, 2005). Third is the deep commitment of leaders and citizens to development (C. K. Kim, 2005). The new community movement was nationally implemented to eradicate poverty and build a rural infrastructure, and the gold gathering movement paid off the national debt following the 1997 Asian financial crisis, showing how eager Koreans are for development of their nation. Fourth, qualified human resources have been appropriately supplied to industries (Jin, 2009). The government has encouraged job-skill development and higher education to provide an adequate workforce. Although the very strong emphasis on education has created social issues, that is, unemployment or underemployment of highly educated people and financial burdens, the large number of high-quality human resources has enabled Korean organizations to achieve and maintain global competitiveness.
In terms of the role played by the state, Korea is a classic case of successful development through a state acting on economic transformation and national growth (Amsden, 1989; Evans, 1995; Evans & Rauch, 1999). Korea has established since the 1970s successful national policies with the aim of economic transformation; its model of good governance and reliance on a well-established bureaucratic apparatus has helped facilitate economic growth and national development (Evans & Rauch, 1999). Korea’s state apparatus is an example of very effective bureaucracy, with employees hired through meritocracy recruitment and experiencing a predictable and rewarding career ladder. This has helped Korea launch and provide continuity to economic plans established over the decades (Evans, 1995; Evans & Rauch, 1999).
Culturally, Korea is marked by severe hierarchical power structures and strong cohesiveness in groups (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010). In Korean culture, individuals usually respect seniority and those in higher positions and provide deep loyalty to their group or organization. Unlike other collectivist cultures, Korea emphasizes emotional relationships, which means that people focus on other people’s good feelings and satisfaction through respect or by saving face (Y. Cho & Yoon, 2001). Confucianism, which has been prevalent for hundreds of years (Y. S. Sung & Tinkham, 2005), strongly influences Korean culture to be future oriented, thrifty, and focused on education (Hofstede et al., 2010).
NHRD Policies in Korea
The transition of Korean NHRD was linked to abolishing the national 5-year economic development plans in 1996 (Kim, 2003). Through these plans, the Korean government had identified the core industry areas for the nation’s future sustainability. The first national human resources plan was established in the 1970s by the Ministry of Science and Technology as part of the national economic development program (Y. T. Kim, 2002) and has since been expanded and developed (J. P. Lee & Jung, 2005). This effort has generated both human talent for technology innovation and a qualified workforce to serve Korea’s growing national industries. In the 1990s, the plan changed from a focus on manufacturing to a focus on developing a high-end science and technology workforce with the objective of developing new national industries, that is, semi-conductors, electronic screens, automobiles, and shipbuilding. Recently, the focus has changed to industries that require creativity for high value-added production, such as information technology, biotechnology, and environmental technology (Chang, 2013).
For a decade from the late 1990s, the Korean government had planned for and implemented specific HRD policies in a systematic manner. The Ministry of Education and HRD (2001-2008) was empowered to oversee and coordinate all major HRD-related policies (Paik & Kim, 2005). The NHRD Strategies for Korea and the Human Resources Development Act were enacted as long-term strategic plans for developing human resources at the national level. In this period, 5-year National HRD Plans coordinated the approach to education and training in a knowledge-based economy, and education polices were focused as key to HRD strategy (Bae, 2007). The strategic plan set policy objectives, implementation strategies, and outcome evaluations regarding the development and utilization of human resources, subject, by law, to renewal every 5 years (Paik & Kim, 2005). After 2008, the functions regarding NHRD policies were de-centralized to several government agencies to respond quickly to environmental changes and to reflect better various issues related to HRD (e.g., regional and diverse workforce, unemployment, and needs for creative talent in Science Technology Engineering Math (STEM) ) with the specific expertise of each agency (N. Lee, 2014).
Education has played an important role in providing the country with an appropriate workforce on demand according to the changing national human resource strategy (Oh, 2005). Through primary and secondary public education, basic knowledge and attitudes have been taught so that youngsters could become qualified human resources in the future. Equal educational opportunities are provided for everyone’s benefit with the expectation that children would reach a specified level of academic performance (Paik & Kim, 2005). The government also expanded higher education opportunities. Consequently, college education became widespread, and the general educational level of the population increased rapidly (Oh, 2005). According to the Human Development Report 2013 (UNDP, 2013), between 2001 and 2009, enrollments in primary, secondary, and tertiary levels were 98.6%, 96.4%, and 96.1%, respectively. The highly educated workforce contributed to maintaining a sufficient pool of personnel for businesses in Korea.
Vocational education and training have been specialized and diversified to meet the needs of national economic development (J. H. Kim, 2005; Ko & Park, 2013). Various types of vocational education and training institutes were established (e.g., vocational high schools, technical colleges, open universities, polytechnic universities, and corporate, and technical universities). The Korean government supported the close association among industries, universities, and R&D institutes through favorable policies and regulations, funds, and benefit programs, including tax reduction (J. H. Kim, 2005). As a result, the strategy of tripartite cooperative arrangements reinforced efficient development of personnel (Paik & Kim, 2005).
National policies for developing human resources have enhanced not only national competitiveness but also the “quality of life” (J. H. Kim, 2005, p. 39). In the past, Korean NHRD policies had focused mainly on the needs of the economy and industry. However, since 2000, they have embraced social development for social integration. Policies have included reducing knowledge and information gaps among various groups, alleviating social polarization, and supporting marginal groups in the society (Paik & Kim, 2005). The government has proposed various productive welfare policies offering vocational training for disadvantaged people, including women, the disabled, youth without higher education, the unemployed, the old, and the poor, so they could have more employment opportunities and be more self-reliant (Ko & Park, 2013; Paik & Kim, 2005). Recently, the government has stressed reducing gender inequality and developing human resources for women. Paid leave and training programs funded by the government have been encouraged for female workers to allow them more work opportunities.
Roles of the Private Sector
The private sector made a significant contribution to Korean HRD. The total economic scale of Korean HRD activities, not including formal and non-formal education, in the private sector was estimated at US$10 billion in 2009 (C. S. Park, 2010). Corporations and educational institutes have provided most private HRD programs (Ko & Park, 2013).
According to J. R. Kim, Chang, Lee, and Haam (2011), the model of the relationship between the government and corporations in Korea is neo-mercantilism, in which exports are emphasized, monetary decisions are centralized, and capital flows and economic activities are controlled by the government. Thus, the Korean government has deeply intervened in the industrial structure and activities of corporations. This is yet another feature of the state model for development existing in Korea, where the state is embedded in society through strong social ties that help with constant negotiation and renegotiation of goals and policies (Evans, 1995). Corporate workforce development has been closely linked to governmental HRD plans (Y. T. Kim, 2002; Ko & Park, 2013). Corporate HRD activities in Korea account for 52% of the national total (C. S. Park, 2010). One of the typical governmental actions to encourage private workforce development is supporting an employment insurance fund to offset part of the training and development costs (Yoo, 2011).
Roles of Labor Relations
Labor relations in Korea have been dramatically transformed over the last four decades as a result of rapid economic growth. Following the export-led, labor-intensive, and growth-centered focus of industrialization of the 1960s to 1970s, employee interests and the state dominated labor relations (Lee & Lee, 2004). Long-suppressed conflicts between labor and management rose to the surface in the 1980s (Lee & Lee, 2004). After skilled, male workers entered the labor movement, the number of local enterprise unions steadily increased, and union membership has become diverse (Katz, Lee, & Lee, 2004).
With respect to NHRD, the roles of the labor unions were insignificant due to government-driven workforce development, but their potential contributions have recently been recognized (Y. Kim, Kim, Jung, & In, 2007). As the internal labor market become more flexible, many corporations chose outsourcing or hiring non-regular workers, decreasing the investment in employee development. As vocational education is closely related to the wage system and job security, the influence of labor unions on workforce development has been on providing adequate training and development opportunities for regular and non-regular workers (Y. Kim et al., 2007).
Roles of NGOs
NGOs in Korea are limited in number and often lack expertise. A few include the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy and the Free Citizens’ Alliance of Korea. Korea’s NGOs often play a critical counterpoint to most of the government’s policies—in particular, its economy-focused NHRD approach. Korea’s NGOs question the consequences of the approach with respect to generating inequality, discrimination against underprivileged people, unfair redistribution of wealth, and imbalanced social development (Ko & Park, 2013). They also disagree with the uniform educational system designed by the government, warning that the current approach may impede students’ autonomy, diversity, and creativity (Ko & Park, 2013). Although their voice is barely heard, Korean NGOs attempt to shed light on the blind side of the government or market (S. P. Park, 2002).
Challenges
Despite contributions to national development, Korean NHRD faces several challenges. First, the professional workforce in science and technology necessary for the new pivotal industries is shrinking. Korean education has focused on K-12 as preparation for college, which is beneficial for the massive development of an average workforce, but not for the development of quality higher education or professional development (Jin, 2009). In spite of the need in industry, the number of college students in science and engineering has decreased from 45.7% in 1994 to 26.9% in 2003 (Oh, 2005).
Second, too much emphasis on a large number of college graduates is now causing high unemployment among youth. Although a highly educated population was one of the main driving forces for Korea’s economic growth, the demand for college graduates is smaller than the supply in the current Korean job market (Oh, 2005). To make matters worse, the recent global recession has exacerbated this imbalance. The jobs that college graduates prefer have become scarce, but the graduates do not consider finding a job below their educational level.
Third, government-initiated NHRD plans can cause imbalanced development in education. Government funds are often geared to certain fields, because of its potential economic impact, while neglecting others, for example, humanities and pure science, which are now experiencing a major decline in Korea. Moreover, when the government changes its support for an industry, students and professionals who followed governmental HR policies may find themselves neglected or in a disadvantaged position (Kim, 2003).
Fourth, female employment is still problematic in Korea, despite recent efforts to change. Although the employment rate for women has increased since the 1960s, most managerial positions are still occupied by men, and women still experience a strong glass ceiling environment in the workplace (T. Kim, 2013; Lim, 2011; Oh, 2005). Also, working women face the challenges of a limited social infrastructure for child care and the Confucian culture that expects them to put family ahead of a career (Lim, 2011; S. Sung, 2003).
Finally, the aging population and low birth rate have become major concerns of Korean NHRD (Bae, 2007; Jang, 2006). Over recent decades, the birth rate has remarkably decreased, resulting in the shrinking of the adult workforce, while the number of elderly has increased (Korea National Statistical Office, 2013). Major issues regarding this challenge include policies to encourage birth rates, incentives to attract foreign labor, and vocational education for the elderly (Bae, 2007; Lim, 2011).
Brazil
In this section, we present the historical and cultural background of Brazil, as well as its economic, political, social context and relate it to ways NHRD policies are proposed.
Brazil: Historical and Cultural Background
Brazil is the 7th largest global economy; in 2010, it reached a record national economic growth index of 7.5% (IBGE, 2010), although in the past years, economic growth has severely slowed down. Nonetheless, Brazil’s economy is highly diversified with solid investments in agriculture, industry, and services. Brazil is a major exporter of both natural goods and manufactured products, with large production (and export) of airplanes, machinery, autos, and automotive parts (CIA, 2010). Brazil is the 5th most populous country with 195 million inhabitants (CIA, 2010). The country is, however, plagued by severe social inequalities and educational deficiencies, resulting from years of ill-structured and inefficient social development.
Until the late 1800s, Brazil was largely an agrarian society intensively worked by Black slaves. Brazil was the last country in the Americas to abolish slavery in 1888. The integration of the Black population was only modest; education and economic opportunities were scarce for this segment (Basbaum, 1981). Education opportunities existed primarily in the private sector, including tuition-free colleges serving mostly the local elite. Professional training schools were few, and geared mostly to the children of the White working class (Silva & Araújo, 2005). Race and social class strongly marked access to educational opportunities in Brazil and resulted in severe stratification and inequality of opportunities (Hasler et al., 2006).
Brazil’s industrial sector expanded in the late 1800s with the shift of investments from the declining coffee production sector to urban textile manufacturing. Traditional rural oligarchic resources migrated to urban centers and to new industrial ventures. This characteristic of Brazilian society arose from a long-term survival of rural oligarchy marked by various aspects of state formation (Evans, 1995). Brazilian industrialization was vulnerable to the lack of skilled labor. In 1900, the annual census recorded that 75% of Brazilians were illiterate (Santos & Abreu, 2006). By the 1910s, the majority of manufacturing workers in Brazil were immigrants. Racial theories popular in Brazil at the time advocated the importing of White immigrants and affirmed the inferiority of the Brazilian population, mostly composed of either mixed race or African descendants (Silva & Araújo, 2005).
In the 1930s, a nationwide system of education and industrial training was launched, mainly as a response to a spike in industrialization. The number of primary and secondary schools multiplied throughout the country, and the first Brazilian university was created. The number of industrial schools grew (Freitas, 1984). During the following decade, new legislation created a dual system for industrial training; federal and state high schools provided industrial training and industry-supported training centers.
During the 1950s, Brazil introduced its first plan of action (5-year plan), which emphasized import-substitution industrialization with the intention of creating a strong industrial base and investing in infrastructure. Brazil’s 5-year plan, however, did not include strategies for education and development. Only about 3.4% of GDP was geared toward education and training. The plan focused solely on economic development, assuming that education would follow economic progress (Schwartzman, 2005). This was noticeably different from other broad range 5-year economic development plans attempted by Korea and other countries (K. W. Lee, 2010), which emphasized both economic advancement and education and development.
Political unrest marked the subsequent decades in Brazil. A military dictatorship was in place between 1964 and 1985. This time was marked by relative economic growth but with severe political repression. Some educational reforms took place during those years, that is, extension of compulsory education from 4 to 8 years, modernization of administrative structures at public universities, failed attempts to merge high-school education and professional training, and expansion of enrollment of students in K-12 and college (Cunha, 2000). These changes, however, failed to produce positive long-lasting effects. At the end of the military years, student enrollment had increased in K-12 and college levels, but investment in education and training had not followed suit, thereby severely compromising the quality of those programs. Major changes began to take place in the 1990s when Brazil launched a nationwide project for education and training. NHRD activities in Brazil began to take place in the 1990s.
With regard to cultural influences, Brazilian culture is marked by a shared heritage of Eastern and Western values resulting from years of European (Portuguese) colonization and from absorbing African and Native Indian values. Brazil is regarded as a borderland culture, where both Eastern (collectivist) and Western (individualistic) values operate simultaneously, thus creating a double-edged ethic not easily understood (Hess & Da Matta, 1995). Nevertheless, some typical aspects of Brazilian culture are relatively high power distance, strong value of personal relationships in the workplace, and the establishment of a friendly and cheerful work environment, which is often seen as an extension of one’s family home (Giraldi & Ikeda, 2008).
NHRD in Brazil Since the 1990s
The 1990s was a decade of major political, economic, and social change in Brazil, initiated by the end of the military dictatorship in the mid-1980s. In the HRD context, a more serious focus was placed on major investments in basic schooling, vocational training, and professional development, as well as national policies to eradicate poverty and increase quality of life.
Political context
Political stability was achieved in Brazil in 1985 when democratically elected governments replaced the military appointed presidents who had governed the country since the military coup of 1964. The first elected governments since (of Jose Sarney, 1985-1990, and Collor de Mello/Itamar Franco, 1990-1994) still dealt with major economic problems, including hyperinflation. Plano Real, an effort to stabilize Brazil’s economy, was launched in 1994, and two subsequent two-term presidencies (Fernando Henrique Cardoso, 1995-2002, and Luís Inácio Lula da Silva, 2003-2010) managed to provide both political and economic stability to the country.
Economic context
The 1990s marked the entry of Brazil into the market economy. During this decade, trade and financial liberalization policies were initiated and major privatization efforts took place. From 1990 to 2002, revenue resulting from privatization policies reached US$105.3 billion (BNDES, 2011). Capital inflow to Brazil rose significantly from US$2.6 billion in 1994 to more than US$18.7 billion in 1997 (BNDES, 2011). Spiked competitiveness exposed the inadequacy of many Brazilian companies to operate in a non-regulated business environment. Various local companies either disappeared or were incorporated into foreign competitors (Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, 2010). This new reality also exposed deficiencies in the Brazilian workforce.
Educational context
Brazil’s educational and labor force index was significantly below both other Latin American countries and OECD marks. In 1990, fewer than 40% of school-age children completed primary school (Grades 1-8), only 38% were enrolled in high school (Grades 9-11), and the average school attainment of the labor force was 3.8 years (World Bank, 2010). These indicators put the country behind most OECD countries, as well as many Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries. For instance, for the year 1990, OECD and LAC marks for primary school completion were 95% and 70%, respectively. Within the OECD, Argentina and Chile secondary school enrollments were 91% and 70%, respectively; Argentina’s and Chile’s school attainment of the labor force were twice those registered in Brazil (World Bank, 2010).
Social context
In the early 1990s, Brazil displayed one of the lowest HDIs among developing countries, 0.590 in 1990 (UNDP, 2013). Its GINI coefficient, a measure of the inequality of distribution of wealth, was one of the highest among developing countries, 0.63 in 1990 (CIA, 2011). Major investments in education and human development took place beginning in 1995.
Initial NHRD efforts in Brazil
The initial effort of Brazil’s HRD was to address the state of low human development and wealth inequality in the country. Since the mid-1990s, government policies have focused on improving various areas of need—health care, nutrition, housing, welfare, and public sanitation. Investment in social policies rose 146% between 1995 and 2009, a percentage rise of 11.2% of its GDP in 1995 to 15. 8% in 2009 (IPEA, 2011).
Bolsa Família, a conditional cash transfer program to encourage poor families to keep their children in school, is possibly the best known of such social policies initiated in the 1990s. Families living below the poverty line receive a supplementary benefit per child with the commitment of keeping them at school and participating in the government’s vaccination program. This program has reached 11 million families at a relatively low cost (0.8% of Brazil’s GDP) and is heralded as a successful mechanism of human capital improvement (“Brazil: Happy Families,” 2008).
Investments in education and training
GDP investment in education and training has significantly risen during these years: public expenditure rose from 3.5% in 1980, to 4.5% in the mid-1990s, to 5.08% and 5.55% in 2008 and 2009, respectively (OECD, 2012; World Bank, 2010). Government centralized programs and policies have attempted to improve Brazil’s human capital and develop a more effective educational policy and program.
Since the 1990s, major restructuring in Brazil’s education policy has taken place. The Ministry of Education began to centralize funds for key areas of education and training and took charge of student assessment. Some of the programs in place are (a) Fundo de Manutenção e Desenvolvimento do Ensino Fundamental e Valorização do Magistério(FUNDEF) [Program for Development of Primary Schooling and Teaching] in charge of determining budget spending per student, having managed to raise the expenditure ceiling to 2% of GDP for primary school; (b)
Sistema de Avaliação da Escola Básica (SAEB) [Evaluation System for Middle School Education] and Exame Nacional de Ensino Médio(ENEM) [Evaluation System for High School Education] federal administered exams to assess student performance in Grades 4 to 8 and 9 to 11, respectively; (c) (Exame Nacional de Desempenho de Estudantes) (ENADE) [National Evaluation of College Students]: college level exit exam to assess graduates’ performance in key disciplines; (d) ProUni: program to provide subsidies for private college tuition for low-income high-performing students; (e) [Programa de Expansão da Educação Profissional] (PROEP) [Program for Expansion of Professional Education]: program to reform and update technical and vocational education across the country to meet industry needs; and (f) Programa Nacional de Acesso ao Ensino Técnico e Emprego (PRONATEC) [National Program for Access to Technical Training and Employement]: program to expand and democratize access to professional education courses for high-school students and workers (The EFA 2000 Assessment).
Professional and vocational education also became the focus of much of Brazil’s HRD approach. In the early 2000s, a branch of the Ministry of Education was created to initiate professional programs throughout the country (Secretaria de Educação Professional e Tecnológica) [Department of Professional Education and Technology]; professional schools and training agencies were reformed, revitalized, and expanded. Serviço Nacional de Aprendizagem Industrial (SENAI) [National Service for Industrial Instruction] and Serviço Nacional de Aprendizagem Comercial (SENAC) [National Service for Commercial Instruction], both private–public partnership agencies dating from the 1940s, became in charge of industrial and commercial training, respectively. Both have been reformed and now increasingly seek partnerships with the private sector to deliver professional education training in areas of identified need (Cunha, 2000).
Brazil has also re-structured its original federally funded technical institutes, whose origins, in some cases, date back to 1909. In 2008, the technical institutes were centralized under the Professional and Technical Education Network (Rede Federal de Educação Profissional e Tecnológica). They are now in charge of delivering instruction leading to both undergraduate and graduate diplomas in critical areas, that is, engineering, math, and chemistry. Massive investments have been made during the last decade, having risen from US$385 million in 2003 to US$3.8 billion in 2011. The number of training institutes almost tripled from 140 in 2003 to 401 in 2011 (Downie, 2011).
HRD in Brazil is a joint effort of government institutions, the private sector, and non-government organizations (Hasler et al., 2006). The private sector has also boosted workforce training in past years. This training is geared toward addressing the acute deficiencies of Brazil’s workers and improving the knowledge and skills of the workforce. A survey of Brazilian companies identified that 76% of companies invest in professional training (Mamona, 2010). The number of corporate universities has also increased since 1999, from only 10 institutions to 250 institutions in 2009 (Eboli, 2011). Nevertheless, for the most part, the private sector still modestly invests in research and development activities. It lacks a culture of innovation, in part because of years of existing in an environment of protected markets (Mamona, 2010).
Non-government organizations play an important role in human development and workforce training in Brazil. Many of these organizations provide training at no cost, relying, in particular, on government funding, as well as on private funding. NGOs have an extensive network throughout the country. The NGO model that exists in Brazil is different from the North American model. Brazilian NGOs are often associated with trade unions and religious centers and provide job-skill training, community development, and literacy training (Hasler et al., 2006). NGOs also provide training in critical areas, often operating in remote regions of the country lacking qualified governmental institutions to provide needed services. In the last decade, the number of these organizations multiplied in Brazil. In 2011, 338,000 NGOs existed throughout the country (ABONG, 2011). As of late, many NGOS providing training have been charged with corruption. Although NGOs play a major role in Brazil’s HRD strategy, no clear criteria have been developed to select, certify, and evaluate the performance and delivery of services of Brazil’s NGOs, which is the reason for corruption and misuse of resources (Castro, 2011).
Major strides have been undertaken since the mid-1990s. Brazil’s human development index rose significantly in the last few years: from 0.59 in 1990 to 0.73 in 2012, a 24% increase in the past two decades (UNDP, 2013). Its GINI coefficient index also significantly decreased from .52 in 1993 to .45 in 2008 (World Bank, 2010). Social mobility has improved during the past few years, and many Brazilians have risen above the poverty line. It is estimated that, since 2003, more than 20 million people have risen above the poverty line, and another 32 million have entered the middle class (Neri, 2011).
Significant strides have been made in education and training. Education reforms have allowed for more access to formal education opportunities and more effective instruction delivered to all (World Bank, 2010). Universal school coverage increased from 86% in 1991 to 94% in 2003 (The EFA 2000 Assessment).
Nevertheless, much still needs to be done. Brazil still ranks below most South American countries in regard to education attainment, with an average of 7.2 years of schooling of the labor force (UNDP, 2013). Furthermore, as economic growth often correlates with years of schooling and the quality of education and training, performance of youth in international benchmark testing (i.e. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)) provides an indication of the quality of human capital. In Brazil, it has improved, but it still lags behind most OECD and LAC countries. As an example, the results of PISA 2009 mathematics tests identified that 60% of Brazilian students in ninth grade scored below basic levels, thus lacking a minimum set of numeracy skills. The reported scores for math literacy among Brazilian students shows that the gap of knowledge among “the average student in Shanghai [highest performing region in the world] and the average Brazilian student is equivalent to about five school years” (World Bank, 2010, p. 25).
In terms of GDP investment in education, Brazil still invests below OECD average at 5.55% of GDP as opposed to OECD’s average of 6.23% (OECD, 2012). This investment is geared mostly toward primary and secondary education (4.23%) rather than tertiary education (0.8%) and research and development (0.04%). Tertiary education attainment in Brazil (11%) is still far below OECD average (31%), as recorded for the year 2009 (OECD, 2012).
Challenges for Brazil’s HRD
Although major strides have been undertaken since the 1990s, Brazil’s HRD still faces challenges. Federal and state investments in education have increased in the past few years, but the country needs to equalize the distribution of resources across different sectors and regions. Higher education in Brazil is still underfunded and has limited coverage. It does not manage to graduate enough professionals to supply the growing needs of various industries. The shortage of qualified labor in Brazil is a significant hindrance to economic advancement. A 2012 survey carried out by Manpower identified that 57% of Brazilian employers are not able to hire skilled workers for their companies (Anderson, Baldwin, Lovallo, & Pumariega, 2012). This problem is more acute in engineering and science-related fields, particularly in oil field exploration. In recent years, the number of qualified foreign workers entering Brazil to supply the growing needs of various industries has greatly increased. In 2012, 67,220 work visas were granted to foreign workers to enter Brazil, with a majority of applicants being of U.S. American citizenship (Alvarenga, 2013). Another attempt to curb the shortage of qualified labor was launched by the federal government in 2011—an ambitious project to send abroad 101.000 undergraduate and graduate students in the field of science and technology to study at various universities across the world (Programa Ciência Sem Fronteiras [Science Without Borders Program]).
Teacher training is also an area in need of revitalization. Teachers are often ill prepared and poorly paid. As stated by the World Bank, “teaching [in Brazil] has become a low status profession [that] does not manage to attract the best qualified graduates” (World Bank, 2010, p. 8), which is a contrast to countries such as Singapore, Korea, and Finland.
Although large Brazilian companies increasingly invest in training and development, a majority of companies still have not adopted a culture of innovation and training. To achieve sustained competitiveness, this has to become a norm among Brazilian organizations.
NGOs deliver much training in Brazil but still exist in an environment lacking clear criteria for performance evaluation. This is an urgent necessity for Brazil’s HRD as these organizations fill an important gap in delivering needed training and instruction and have received in recent years large sums of resources to do so.
Discussion
Comparing HRD policies and practices in Brazil and Korea is a difficult challenge. Both countries are different in various aspects, for example, Korea is highly ethnic-culturally homogeneous, while Brazil is a melting pot of races and cultures. Korea is characterized by a market-focused educational philosophy and policy, while Brazil’s educational system is marked by a strong humanist approach to education (Saviani, 2007) in which schools serve the double purpose of assimilating different cultures and molding citizens, as well as generating qualified personnel. Nevertheless, this comparison may prove instructive if we keep in mind the differences between the two countries while answering the research question.
Korea’s HRD already has a solid history, being initiated in the 1970s when the first human resource policies were introduced. Since 2001, with the renaming of the Ministry of Education to the Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development, Korea has clearly embraced and articulated the concept of NHRD for social, economic, and human development. This cannot be said for Brazil, where the concept of HRD is neither clearly defined nor articulated. Policies with the intent of developing human capital and the workforce have been designed and implemented recently, but a full-fledged HRD policy is yet to be determined.
In addition, HRD efforts are not centralized in Brazil. Various sectors deliver HRD programs (government, private sector, NGOs) in an apparently uncoordinated manner. Even within sectors, HRD efforts are not coordinated or jointly executed. Different ministries and secretaries within the federal government design and execute HRD policies. This results from the manner the state operates in Brazil, only partially or intermediately acting as an agent of economic and social transformation (Evans, 1995). The state apparatus is not efficient and lean but, rather, is plagued by clientelism resulting from the still strong presence of traditional oligarchic features in the modern state. Korea’s integrated national HRD plan has achieved sustained positive results, in part because of the role of the state in designing and implementing coherent and well-coordinated policies over the years (Evans, 1995).
HRD policies in Brazil and Korea have diverse motives and characteristics. NHRD in Korea was initially articulated as a plan for economic development. From its onset, investments in education and workforce training were perceived as fundamental for economic development. Educational policies took center stage in Korea from early on, with the reforming of K-12 schools, vocational training, and higher education. Investment in specific disciplines training was geared toward economic dominance in particular industries. This results from a coherence of policies for economic development that were broad and well-coordinated and elected education and workforce training as an important path to achieve the goal of economic dominance (Evans, 1995; Jenkins, 1991).
In Brazil, however, HRD has both an economic and social motive. Particularly since the 1990s, concerns with human development have been on the forefront of Brazil’s HRD. Those policies took center stage initially with a country marked by severe social and racial inequalities. A decade later, Brazil’s HRD is moving toward more focused economic concerns. The policies implemented are still tentative and geared toward providing a solution for the acute deficiencies in education and training throughout the country. For years to come, Brazil’s HRD is likely to blend economic and social concerns; this is a particular feature of Brazil’s HRD and a long-lasting effect of Brazil’s humanist philosophical approach to education. In addition, it is also resulting from the inability of the state to play the role of coordinating agent in designing broad policies that integrate both efforts under the ultimate goal of long-term economic transformation.
The presence of the private sector in Korea’s HRD is significant. Local companies perform frequent training and development of employees, and various organizations have initiated corporate universities. Government incentives and coordination have assisted organizations in launching these projects. The strong social ties existing between the state and society in Korea allowed for continual negotiation of goals and policies toward the ultimate goal of economic transformation (Evans, 1995). In Brazil, however, the participation of the private sector in HRD is still modest. Although major corporate investments in education have been noted in the last decade, the majority of Brazilian companies still do not have a culture of training and innovation, in part because of having operated for years in an environment of protected markets. Training is mostly geared toward addressing the deficiencies in the workforce. Coordination between the government and the private sector is still modest. Again, the state in Brazil does not play the role of coordinating agent in society in launching broad range economic and social projects for economic transformation (Evans, 1995). The Korea model could assist Brazil’s HRD, taking into consideration, however, the stage of development of Brazilian companies with regard to investment in those initiatives and the role of the Brazilian state in coordinating economic activities throughout the country.
Last, the participation of NGOs is an important feature of Brazil’s HRD. An extensive network of non-government organizations performs different types of HRD activities, in both social development and workforce training. The delivery of services by NGOs fills a significant gap left by an uncoordinated government structure and a limited presence of the private sector. In recent years, the number of NGOs in Brazil has increased exponentially. However, government control and legislation of NGOs in Brazil is yet to be fully implemented. Tentative measures have been initiated since 2006 but are mostly geared toward identifying the number of NGOs operating in the country. NGOs operate in an environment marked by a lack of government control and evaluation in which assessment protocols have yet to be fully designed and currently exist only in an ad hoc manner, often put together as a necessary response to corruption scandals involving these organizations.
Both Korea’s and Brazil’s HRD policies differ somewhat from any national HRD model identified by E. Cho and McLean (2004). Both Korea and Brazil, in slightly different ways, rely on NGOs for the successful implementation of their NHRD.
The NHRD model in Brazil resembles the transitional model existing in countries such as Korea and Singapore, although it significantly lacks the coordination emphasis existing in these countries. This results from the characteristics of the Brazilian modern state and its inability to play more of a decisive role because of its particular features—that is, survival of traditional rural landowner values, inefficiency of the bureaucrat sector, and lack of coherence of efforts and policies from the state apparatus (Evans, 1995; Evans & Rauch, 1999). The participation of NGOs is also an important feature of Brazil’s HRD, but, again, the lack of coordination between the role of NGOs and the strategy for economic and social development is a discrepancy from the transitional HRD model adopted by some countries.
Although NHRD policies are not easily transferred between countries, the challenges and solutions proposed in Korea have the potential to provide insights for Brazil’s attempt to design its NHRD strategy. Korea’s HRD policies have benefitted from a clear focus on sustainable economic and social development, much as a consequence of the role the state plays as the organizing and coordinating force for economic development. Brazil’s HRD policy is rather recent. Its nature has been somewhat reactive, with policies and plans put together in past years as a consequence of Brazil’s economic needs. Its focus, as of yet, is not on designing a long-term plan for workforce readiness toward sustained economic development, as in Korea. Rather, it has focused on designing a reactive set of measures to compensate for the country’s social inequalities and acute deficiencies in education and training of its population.
A strategy for sustainable economic and social development is yet to be fully designed in Brazil. This strategy should identify key areas of need for social and educational improvement and delineate a well-integrated national effort, similar to the one adopted in Korea, where sectors and agencies in society in charge of delivering HRD activities are clearly identified, and their efforts well-coordinated to achieve best results. National development plans are not a novelty in Brazil. Some form of these plans has existed since the 1950s. However, most plans often fail to propose a coordinated effort between different sectors, often resulting in the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing. Efforts often are duplicated by different government agencies, while other programs are not designed or implemented. Thus, an important lesson to be learned from Korea’s HRD is the coordination of efforts adopting a long-term strategy for sustained development and enhanced economic competitiveness.
Implications for NHRD Research
Comparisons of successful NHRD practices may provide developing countries with guidelines for establishing national human resource systems and strategies. However, it is always risky to fall into the trap of using case studies like this, highlighting practices that have worked in one national/cultural context and transferring them to another. Thus, more single and comparative studies in NHRD are necessary to continue identifying additional patterns. With that in mind, a more extensive case study of Brazil NHRD would be helpful. In addition, more longitudinal studies on NHRD policies are needed to determine how countries modify their approaches over time. National policies are always vulnerable to political environments and often change as governments change or alter their philosophy and focus.
As additional research on NHRD is carried out, it is likely that the preliminary model offered by E. Cho and McLean (2004) will expand and change. As these models evolve, we will be in a better position to create and test theories related to NHRD, presumably accommodating the flexibility necessary to account for the differences that exist across countries.
Studies exploring regional differences are also necessary, especially in large countries such as Brazil. Even in Korea, there are regional differences and unique characteristics that may need to be acknowledged. As NHRD theories emerge, it will be necessary to focus on both internal and external regional differences that may well require different theories from NHRD.
Implications for NHRD Practice
Cross-national HRD comparisons may help developing countries identify successful examples that may address similar issues in their own countries. Other countries, however, need to be carefully scrutinized prior to transferring practices and policies to different cultural, political, economic, and social environments. Ideas may be borrowed, but modification or customization may be necessary. To make NHRD policies effective, various academic and policy-making areas need to collaborate to create a holistic and systematic NRHD policy.
Conclusion
Both Brazil and Korea are examples of countries that have found some success in applying NHRD practices, principles, and processes. As with all aspects of HRD, there is a need for continuous improvement in NHRD as used in both countries. Any country desiring to use NHRD for its development must accept the fact that there is no perfect approach and no approach that will produce perfect outcomes all the time. Nevertheless, it is always helpful to have examples to study in attempting to find such improvement. We hope that the examples of NHRD in these two countries will prove to be beneficial to other countries using or planning on using NHRD.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.