ASTD Excellence in Research to Practice Awards

Academy of Human Resource Development

Excellence in Scholarly Practice Award

Submission Packet: 2011

The AHRD Excellence in Scholarly Practice Award breaks new ground by recognizing those who use HRD research and theory to guide their practice. This is a key part of the AHRD vision to improve HRD through research. There is a significant and expanding body of literature on HRD, and an increasing number of people are using this to improve the design, development, implementation and evaluation of their HRD practice. This award is for those people. It also benefits researchers by increasing the flow of information about how their research is used and what further research is needed.
This document contains all of the information you need to submit to the AHRD Excellence in Scholarly Practice Award including a checklist, timetable, criteria, and contact details.
On behalf of all at the Academy of Human Resource Development, thank you for your interest in this Award, and for joining us in improving HRD through research.
The awards are given for excellence in applying scholarly HRD theory and research to practice in a manner that brings measurable improvement to an organization and/or has the potential to advance the field of HRD. This is the first year of the awards.
The awards recognize HRD projects or interventions that exceed a total of 50 people days of work effort, and that have been completed within the last two calendar years or are still underway. The 2011 awards will not recognize work that finished before January 1, 2009.
Submissions must come from named individuals (i.e. not a whole organization). A submission can name one or more people, but each must have had a substantial contribution to the project or intervention. In addition, a submission must contain the name of at least one AHRD Full Member with an active membership status at both the time of submission and at the time when the award winners are announced. (Note: non-members can join at No individual can be named in more than three submissions per calendar year.
Organizations described in the submission must be named (i.e. cannot be anonymous). However, those submitting to the Award control how much organizational information is shared outside of the review process by drafting an abstract that AHRD uses on its website if the submission is selected as an “Award Winner” or “Award Finalist” (see details below).

May 13, 2011 (5pm Pacific Time): Submissions deadline
July 31, 2011: Decisions announced to those who submitted
August 31, 2011: Decisions announced to AHRD membership and placed on AHRD website
February 2012: Award winners are recognized at an awards ceremony at the AHRD International Research Conference in the Americas, to be held in Denver

Email your complete submission to AHRD at using the subject title of “Excellence in Scholarly Practice Submission”. Your submission must be received by May 13, 2011 at 5pm Pacific Time.
If you have questions about the award or the submission process, please email them to AHRD
Submissions are blind-reviewed by a panel of leading AHRD scholars. All submissions are reviewed by three academics and three scholar-practitioners. All reviewers have been published in refereed HRD journals and have been a member of AHRD for at least three years. For a list of reviewers, please refer to the AHRD website (
The review process consists of two stages, both of which are blind (i.e. the reviewers are not given any information about the organization or the names of those who submitted):

Stage 1 – every submission is assessed by six reviewers to identify those who meet or exceed the required standard. Those selected are “Award Finalists”.
Stage 2 – all “Award Finalists” are reviewed by a panel of six reviewers (three academics and three scholar-practitioners) to determine the top three, which become the “Award Winners”.

Award outcomes

Award Winners are recognized at the following year’s AHRD International Research Conference in the Americas, receive a plaque, and are listed on the AHRD website together with an abstract of their submission.
Award Finalists are recognized at the following year’s AHRD International Research Conference in the Americas, receive a certificate, and are listed on the AHRD website together with an abstract of their submission.

Before entering your submission, please review the following checklist and ensure that you can check off each item.
You have read and understood the declarations section /
Your submission describes an HRD intervention/project that exceeded 50 person days of work effort /
Your submission describes an HRD intervention/project that finished on or after January 1, 2009 /
At least one of the individuals named in the submission is a current member of AHRD /
None of the individuals named in the submission have been named in more than 3 submissions for this round of the Award /
You have answered every question /
You have included an abstract of up to 300 words that AHRD can use on its website /
Your responses to sections 3-6 do not include any references to the names of those submitting or the name of the organization. /
By submitting to the Award:
You are certifying that the contents of the submission are accurate, and that those named in the submission had a significant contribution to the project/initiative design, development and implementation.
You are also acknowledging that any inaccuracies found in the submission could lead to the submission being disqualified or any award being withdrawn.
You are granting AHRD the right to store the submission and share it with reviewers through electronic or other means.
You are granting AHRD the right to publicly recognize those selected as Award Finalists and Award Winners by using their name andthe abstract they provide in this submission.
1.1. Provide a name for your submission that AHRD can use when announcing Award Finalists and Award Winners. Please use no more than 20 words, and only mention the organization’s name if it approves of being named publicly in relation to the Award.
1.2. Provide the name and contact details of each person being considered for the award through this submission. Include: name, address, email, phone, and employing organization. Note: each person must have had a significant involvement in the project/initiative.
Person 1
Person 2
Person 3
(add more rows if needed)
1.3. Of those listed in 1.2, which are AHRD members - note: at least one must be a member of AHRD at the time of submission AND at the time of award decisions (July 31, 2011)? Non-members can join at
1.4. In which organization did the project/initiative take place? Include: the organization’s name, business units involved, address. This information is used for reference only and is not part of the review process nor is it publicized.
1.5. Provide the name and contact details of two people who can validate the descriptions you provide in this submission. At least one of these two must be a senior manager who oversees a department or unit affected by the intervention/project described in the submission. Both refereesmust have had visibility to the organizational need, the nature of the project/initiative implemented, and the outcome.
These individuals may be approached by the Award review panel to seek confirmation that your submission descriptions are accurate.
Referee 1
Referee 2

NOTE: Your response to this section is not shared with reviewers.
2.1. Provide a summary of no more than 300 words capturing the organizational need, how research influenced the design and implementation, the nature of the HRD project/initiative, and the results and impact.
If your submission is selected as an Award Winner or Award Finalist, AHRD will use this on its website, so only include information that should be in the public domain.
Introduction
This section covers the organizational context, need and impact. In providing responses, ensure that you do not name the organization nor provide information that allows reviewers to easily determine the organization. If this happens, the submission will be disqualified.
The total word count for all responses within Section 3 should not exceed 2000 words. Any responses you provide that exceed 2000 words will be deleted prior to your submission being sent for review.
For this section, reviewers are looking for submissions where:

Authors demonstrate a clear organizational need for the intervention in the context of other initiatives in the organization
Authors describe a rigorous process that determined there was a need for the intervention
Authors provide clear descriptions of the roles played by key stakeholders
Authors describe how the intervention ultimately impacted the organization (supported by metrics).

3.1. Without revealing the name of the organization, provide a description of the organization (e.g. industry, geography, demographics, culture, market) and, if applicable, the part of the organization where the HRD project/intervention took place.
3.2. Describe the process(es) used to determine the organizational need.
3.3. Describe the organizational need.
3.4. Describe the organization’s history with HRD projects/interventions, placing particular emphasis on any that were relevant to the specific organizational need described in 3.3.
3.5. Without using names of individuals, describe the key stakeholders involved in the HRD project/intervention and include a summary of their roles and responsibilities relative to the HRD project/intervention.
In doing this, include a separate description of the role played by each person named in section 1.2 (again, without using their names).
3.6. Describe the impact that the HRD project/intervention had on the organization, the extent to which it addressed the organizational need, and how the impact was assessed (including metrics where available).
Introduction
This section covers how research and theory were used to guide the design, development and implementation of the HRD project/intervention. In providing responses, ensure that you do not name the organization nor provide information that allows reviewers to easily determine the organization. If this happens, the submission will be disqualified.
The total word count for all responses within Section 4 should not exceed 2000 words. Any responses you provide that exceed 2000 words will be deleted prior to your submission being sent for review.
For this section, reviewers are looking for submissions where:

Authors describe in a clear and succinct manner how the intervention was designed based on the understanding of theory and research.
Appropriate research and other evidence were used to guide design and development, with clear links between this usage and the eventual HRD outcome.

4.1. Provide a description of how information obtained from within the organization was used to inform the design, development and implementation of the HRD response.
4.2. Provide a description of how published research and theory was accessed, reviewed and analyzed.
4.3. Provide a description of the specific research and theories that were used to determine the HRD response, and to guide the design, development and implementation of that response.
4.4. For each of the specific research and theories listed in 4.3, describe how it impacted the design, development and implementation of the HRD project/intervention.
Introduction
This section covers how the HRD practice was designed, implemented and evaluated. In providing responses, ensure that you do not name the organization nor provide information that allows reviewers to easily determine the organization. If this happens, the submission will be disqualified.
The total word count for all responses within Section 5 should not exceed 2000 words. Any responses you provide that exceed 2000 words will be deleted prior to your submission being sent for review.
For this section, reviewers are looking for submissions where:

The authors demonstrate that the intervention was methodologically soundand appropriate for the situation, given the purpose of the intervention.
The intervention was implemented with a high degree of quality.
The intervention was evaluated in an appropriate manner.

5.1. Provide a description of the goals and objectives of the HRD project/intervention, and how those were aligned to the organizational need.
5.2. Provide a description of the specific design of the HRD project/intervention, and how that design was aligned to the project/intervention goals and objectives.
5.3. Provide a description of how the project/intervention was implemented, including the resources committed, timing, and methods of deployment.
5.4. Provide a description of how the HRD project/intervention was evaluated, including the sources of data, metrics used, and how evaluation results were used.
Introduction
This section covers how the HRD practice was designed, implemented and evaluated. In providing responses, ensure that you do not name the organization nor provide information that allows reviewers to easily determine the organization. If this happens, the submission will be disqualified.
The total word count for all responses within Section 6 should not exceed 2000 words. Any responses you provide that exceed 2000 words will be deleted prior to your submission being sent for review.
For this section, reviewers are looking for submissions where:

Conclusions represent strong contributions to the research and theory-building of HRD.
Practical implications represent strong contributions to the practice of HRD.
Authors have taken specific actions to share the implications with practitioners inside and outside the authors’ organization.

6.1. Provide a description of the implications for HRD research, theory and researchers. Include a description of how the intervention challenged or validated existing theories and published research.
6.2. Provide a description of implications for HRD practice and practitioners, and how these were discerned. Include a description of how the intervention challenged or validated common practice or perceived “best practice”.
6.3. Provide a description of the lessons learned during and as a result of the HRD project/intervention. Include a description of what the applicants would do differently if faced with the same situation in the future.
6.4. Provide a description of how the implications for HRD practice and research have been shared with HRD practitioners and researchers, or specific plans for that to happen.
Before emailing your submission, please refer to the checklist earlier in this document and ensure that you can check each box.
Email your complete submission to AHRD at using the subject title of “Excellence in Scholarly Practice Submission”. Your submission must be received by May 13, 2011 at 5pm Pacific Time.
If you have questions about the award or the submission process, please email them to AHRD at