Determining US workers' training: history and constructivist paradigm

Purpose The aim of this paper is to review two accounts of the history of workplace learning and training in the USA that emphasize issues of power and control in the determination of what training occurs, and place these issues at the center of their analyses. Design/methodology/approach The two texts are reviewed and a constructivist paradigm is considered to address issues raised in the texts. Findings It is suggested that a constructivist view by managers and workers can foster a positive approach to determining what training workers receive, allowing for worker training that meets the needs of managers as well as workers. Research limitations/implications While these two works were the only ones identified through a literature search that focuses on the history of who determined worker training in the USA, and they prove insightful on this topic, this paper is limited in that these works are now respectively approximately one and three decades old. Practical implications Implementation of a constructivist view of determining training for workers can meet the needs of managers as well as workers, avoiding a zero‐sum game view. Originality/value By reviewing these two texts, and considering a constructivist paradigm in addressing issues raised by the authors, a vision of a constructivist approach to determining training is presented, with advantages to workers and managers.