I think because its a question of the authority of knowledge, dear Debi!

I think people in different parts of the world are just more comfortable with loose umbrella terms without thinking about what they truly imply or encompass. Experts like yourself can help spread the word that the terms 'development' or 'management' mean different things and shouldn't be used interchangeably. 

Because Human Development/HRD index is comparatively less in countries of developing/Asian countries, so priority may be HRD. Otherwise, HRM.

Dear Subhash, what about the micro level? Are most managements concerned about the HRD index? They seek cooperation of employees for enhancing performance and profitability. Of course,  the HRM discourse as it has been talked about in the Western world involves all issues involved in this dynamics.

I fully agree with Monica. Most of us do not think appropriately before using a term. Rather we go by what is the  usual term in usage. We uncritically keep on using that. Yes, serious scholars need to bring in this misnomer to the attention of the students as well as  industry.

HRM emphasizes the aspect of "resource" with a firm integration of human resource politics, systems and activities in the organization’s strategy as crucial. An employee is resource who holds the necessary skills and is available for an appropriate price, instead of being perceived as a source of creative energy; personnel recruitment, assessment, development and rewarding is done for the purpose of establishing the organization’s performance, and the actions towards human resource development are subordinated to strategic goals of the whole organization.

Dear All, I feel first we have to develop some thing than only it could be managed. That is why more emphasis on HR development than its Management.

 Thanks

I have not studied this topic, so take my response in that vein...but I believe Sarwan hit the nail on the head.  In fact, look at the original question and you will find the answer.  The question was  "Why is it that in the developing world HRD (human resource development) is talked about by researchers & practitioners rather than HRM?" (My emphasis). 

Having said that I also believe that Monica made a great point.

Be careful because there is a growing interest on the topic within the divisions of strategic human resource management bot in Academy of Management and in Strategic Management Society.

There seems to be a historical element to the focus on HRD rather than HRM (as partially indicated by Sarwan's answer above).  Before and after Independence, nearly all developing countries did not have the educated workforce needed to function as more modern nations.  In government, the replacement of educated and experienced colonial administrators was a challenge.  In the private sector, in both business and agriculture, a knowledgeable and skilled workforce was lacking in order for each country to flourish and raise its standard of living (ex., via increased agricultural productivity, manufacturing, imports/exports) in a competitive world.

And so, great effort was put into HRD -- and this effort and priority is reflected in the language of today used in those countries.  And don't forget, effective HRM requires a great deal of learning (i.e., human development), and so HRD is also relevant to HRM and overlaps with that concept to a large extent.

Dear Richard, what you are saying is understandable when we use the term HRD at the macro level, as there are issues of developing the human resource so as to enhance economic growth. But when we talk of handling people at the organizational level, then a number of   issues related to managing the human resource come into picture. Will it be appropriate to use the term HRD in that case? Will it not convey a wrong sense?

Dear Debi, I was just trying to answer your question "why is this so happening" by putting the use of HRD in an historical context -- i.e., that things that happened years ago still have effects today, such as the use of "HRD" to refer to a range of management areas in Asian and other developing countries.  Although HRD and HRM overlap, to be precise when talking about strictly HRM matters, the term "HRM" can be used, as you indicate, so that a "wrong sense" is not conveyed when speaking precisely -- but don't forget that "a rose by any other name is still a rose" -- and the same holds for HRM and the management of human resources, even when HRM issues are included under the rubric of HRD.

The integration between business strategy and human resource management, is helpful to some issues pertaining to strategic management in general and particularly the process of strategy-making. Today, HR is linked to business in developing countries and the "Human" Resource is utilized like any other "non-living" resource as a (ON-OFF) switched contributor. All development interventions to HR is business dependent (client /customer "wanted" parameter; and not for future or individual oriented).

Exploitation and Blind eye approach

In developed countries the approach is radically different for they see the humane content for development (for their people); however the business leaders outsource the costlier/ voluminous/ tedious/ hazardous work content to the developing countries and keep their eyes closed on HR issues. They enjoy all benefits at the cost of poor HR, through transfer pricing and tax evasions; even unmindful or closures and M&As. 

My guess is that there is an element of perception: Having worked in community development, the focus is working with unskilled and uneducated individuals, hence development is the focus. In developed environments, basic education is expected or higher, and therefore managing talent becomes the issue. Is it prejudicial? Yes it can be.

I broader view, there is no difference between HRM and HRD. Both includes all HR sub systems. However in micro view, experts may differ.

taking the question one step further, I prefer not to use the term HRM anymore, as rescues, in an economic sense are used or transformed in the production process. When we see people as leased capital goods, the term covers the load better, as the people are not 'owned' by the organization, the ad value to the production process, without beings used up, and for instance periodic maintenance (called training and development) ads value to the goods, and vice versa not doing so, decreases their value over time. What word to use, HRM or HRD, might be a matter of taste, when not, as I understand your wording, content. In the middle east a lot is spoken on HR, whereas the depth of HR is shallow, e.g. personal administration is still the flag that covers the load best. I indeed think it is a matter of taste, and a matter of 'polishing up' the content to make it look more innovative than it actually is in the region.

Proper HRM is the outcome of HRD. In developing countries HRD is a question and controversy. Without good HRD there can not have effective HRM. Academics and researchers in developing countries fond of HRD only due to historical context what happened in past, but always lacking of  innovation. As HRD is all about learning and it HRD professionals want to dominate the corporate world. In developing country HRD is a way for corruption. A large amount of money and time invested may become a waste only, may be beneficial to many who promotes HRD.