Colleagues: "humperf" and LO:
and
Fred Nickols: thoughtful questions as usual - thank you.
and
Carolyn Hohne: re human performance improvement (HPI): helpful
"contents" list and citations for "...methods, techniques, technologies,
approaches, strategies..." - thank you.
Mark Cloutier and I, in a book we are working on, use the word "tools" for
your "...methods, techniques, technologies, approaches, strategies and
what have you..." "Tools" definition below; we welcome colleagues'
criticism of it. We have some 600 "tools" on our list, with "how-to,
when-to" references for each.
HPI (human performance improvement) vs. PI (performance improvement):
One other BIG reason (beside's Fred's point, below) to prefer "performance
improvement" (PI), to HPI, is, as the late Dr. Deming pointed out (often
and forcefully as he was wont to do) that more than 90% of all problems he
encountered were NOT human performance problems, rather they were process
and system problems--under the control of management. His view of
management, much less charitable than yours Carolyn, is that "they,"
managers and leaders, are almost never willing to have mere mortal
workers, "them what's doing the work," meddle with processes and systems.
This in spite of two truths that Dr. Deming also enunciated: (1) every
process and system can be improved. (2) The people doing the work know
how, needing only permission, encouragement, recognition and reward to do
so.
These two truths, on-the-way toward the paradigm shift, are two BIG STRONG
reasons for moving to a learning model. A learning model, for openers,
ASKS members of the company "What is it you would like the company to help
you learn to be even more effective at your work?" This is VERY different
from the "training" practice of "needs assessment" and its outcome:
TELLING people what "training" they need. Needs assessment is, almost
always, done by "training professionals" without benefit of detailed
advice from work group leaders and members--"them what's doing the work."
Moving from "training" to "learning" is, indeed, a paradigm shift, one
that scares the pants off "trainers" with their budgets ($60 billion per
year in the U.S. says Training magazine, 80% of it spent on supervisors
and above, with no one, to my knowledge, ever claiming even as much as one
third of "training" expenditures can be shown to result in performance
improvement on-the-job), their control of "what gets done to whom," and
their "professional preparation" in such arcane arts as "needs assessment"
and "instructional systems design" (ISD).
MUCH better to help "trainers" turn into Performance Improvement
Consultants (PICS) that can pass the PEACE test for positive change:
Proactive, Entrepreneurial, Assertive, Creative--therefore Effective.
PICs, as members of problem-solving teams, can help forward such
modalities as work-based learning (WBL-Raelin, 2000), Action Learning
(AL-Revan's model, circa 1945), Quick and Easy Kaizen (Tazawa & Bodek, PCS
Press, 2001). Let me know if annotated references will be helpful.
To all a "Happy new year" (filled with learning). Have a great weekend,
best to all - Dick Webster
Richard S. Webster, Ph.D. - President
Personal Resources Management Institute (PRMI)
709 Wesley Court - The Village Green - Worthington, OH 43085-3558
eMail <webster.1@osu.edu>, tel 614-433-7144, fax 614-433-71-88
P.S. - I placed an asterisk (*) next to the modalities in Carolyn's list,
below, that address the process and systems improvements EVERY company can
make IF and WHEN they authentically involve their members in work-based
learning as a key resource for identifying and solving real and pressing
business problems. Others' opinions on these choices is welcome.
*** on 1/9/01 via [humperf] digest #29- Message: #2 <humperf@yahoogroups.com>
From: "Carolyn Hohne"
Subject: Re: The Scope of Human Performance Improvement (HPI)
Interesting questions, Fred. Below are my responses:
(1) What kinds of methods, techniques, technologies, approaches,
strategies and what have you do you think are legitimately included
in the scope of human performance improvement efforts?
I'll cite the list from the Intervention Resource Guide, edited by Danny
Langdon, Kathleen Whiteside & Monica McKenna and published by Jossey-Bass
Pfeiffer, 1999:
- 360-degree feedback
- Accelerated learning
- Action learning [Revan's model, circa 1945]*
- Assessment centers
- Automated resume tracking system
- Challenge education
- Change style preference models
- Cognitive ergonomics
- Communication
- Compensation systems
- Competency modeling
- Conflict management
- Critical thinking systems
- Cultural change*
- Customer feedback
- Electronic performance support systems*
- Employee orientation
- Expert systems*
- Flowcharts*
- Fluency development
- Human resource information systems
- Job aids*
- Leadership development programs
- Learner-controlled instruction, [e.g. Revans' Action Learning]*
- Leveraging diversity
- Mentoring/coaching
- Motivation systems
- Needs assessment
- On-the-job training
- Organizational development, [or, is it "OrganizaTION Development" as
OD New uses?]
- Organizational scan
- Outplacement
- Partnering agreements
- Performance analysis
- Performance appraisals
- Performance management
- Policies and procedures [and processes and systems]*
- Process mapping*
- Recognition programs
- Reengineering*
- Results-based management
- Safety management
- Simulation
- Strategic planning and visioning
- Structured writing
- Team Performance
- Teaming
- Training
- Usability assessments
- Work group alignment
Believe it or not, there is an even more extensive list in a Performance &
Instruction (ISPI) article, 1996, by Hutchinson, Stein and Carleton.
"Potential Strategies and Tactics for Organizational Performance
Improvement". Their list includes Management Science interventions.
These, I believe, go beyond where I'm comfortable going.
This list is included, in its entirety, in my book, _Human Performance
Improvement: Building Practitioner Competence_. Rothwell, Hohne & King,
Butterworth-Heineman, 2000.
(2) Is there something inherently limiting in the label "human
performance improvement"? Alternately, should we be looking at or for a
different label; for example, just plain performance improvement?
Until I obtain my MBA, or have the opportunity to have a senior executive
of operations become my mentor, I have no desire to go beyond the limits
of "Human" performance improvement. Sure, there are many factors that can
lead to an improvement in the business's overall performance, including
capital investment, business strategy, etc., but I don't feel qualified,
nor desire to be, to make recommendations in these areas. The great
business leaders of our society can continue to do what they do best, and
I'll continue to apply my expertise on the workforce performance side of
life to help them become even more successful.
I've often considered going to Wharton for my MBA. But I know what
would happen. I
would no longer be satisfied in my current role. I'd want to be the CEO
of some large
struggling corporation. I enjoy what I do now, and respect those in
leadership roles to
do what they do well. (We all can cite cases where that may not
necessarily be the case,
but I'm giving most of our business leaders the benefit of the doubt,
just as I'd hope
they'd give to me.)
Carolyn Hohne
Hohne Consulting, LLC
(609)265-7700
www.hohneconsulting.com
"TOOLS" - Tool comes from a Germanic word for to make, to prepare, or to
do. It still carries that meaning: tools are what you make, prepare, or
do with (Peter Senge, in Senge 1994, page 29). Tools, therefore, are
"assessments, directions, guidelines, instructions, or other learning
resources (content and process, print or electronic) for approaches,
methods, strategies, techniques, or technologies that help leaders and
other company members, individually and in their formal and informal work
groups, to acquire or improve their KSAOs# for making changes they want to
make on-the-job, including problem-solving and continual improvement of
members learning, involvement, ideas, performance, and productivity;
resources for continual improvement of the enterprise's leadership,
quality, processes and systems, cost-reduction, profits, and other desired
results; with facilitation or other outside help as requested by the
company members involved. (M. Cloutier, R. Webster, revised 1/02)
#KSAOs are "Knowledge, Skills, Abilities, and Other
performance-related attributes, including 'capabilities, competencies,
expertise, and proficiencies;" also the many non-learning / non-training
impediments to continual improvement of performance by work group leaders
and other members of the company, including climate and culture,
environment, the company's ownership of systems and processes, lack of
permission, absence of rewards (even punishments) for proposing changes.
KSAO's are improved by active learning, including use and mastery of
tools, dialogue, conversation, participation in communities of practice
(COPs) and other practices for organizational learning and building
learning organizations and communities within and across enterprises,
OL/BLOC for short. (M. Cloutier, R. Webster, revised 1/02)
--Richard Webster <webster.1@osu.edu>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.