What
is PT?
According to Diane Gayeski, performance
technology is the systemic and systematic application of
behavioral and physical science concepts and other knowledge
to the solution of a problem.
According to Allison Rossett, performance
technology is "improving human performance by taking a hard
and fresh look at how the organization and individual work
together to achieve business results. An attempt to achieve
business and organization results through strategies that
improve and align organizational performance".
These two definitions support my description
in that it holistically pulls the study of behavior during
an action and the procedures supporting that behavior (both
systematically and systemically) together.
The PT philosophy does not view performance
as equating to behavior but rather views behavior as a component
of performance. According to Gilbert, “For the performance
engineer, behavior is only one of the conditions for human
competence – not the focal subject matter itself”. Gilbert
advises that, “In performance, behavior is a means; its
consequence is the end”.
Performance Technology Field
I see the goals of the performance technology
field are to define ways to assist others in improving publicize
advances within the knowledge base of performance improvement,
offer information to those interested in learning about
performance improvement, and discover and offer opportunities
to study enhancements to the field.
I see the historical foundations initially
as being research of behavior and manipulation of that behavior
to create desired results. Then, performance as a term came
into play and we wanted to define how to improve workforce
performance - hence performance portion of the field. World
War II caused a huge enhancement in the way we defined intervention
to improve performance. During WWII in the 1940s there was
a need for training a large number of people in a short
time and audiovisual devices were used including motion
pictures, filmstrip projectors, 16 mm projectors, photographs,
audio recordings, and transparencies. Also the emergence
of the role of the instructional technologist was conceived
during this time due to the result of the heavy employment
of mediated instruction. Then, I believe, there was the
faction that threw training into the mix. The workers need
training. Well, what kind of training and why? These questions
spurred additional research and analysis. Then, we as an
industry looked to what we learned from World War II and
became more systematic in the research and began to apply
ADDIE. Then, we discovered technological ways to document
and enhance performance research.
Donald Kirkpatrick,
1959, presented his four levels of evaluating training programs
in his book, Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels.
Kirkpatrick's model can be used during the evaluation phase
to guide evaluation. This can also occur outside of the
evaluation phase.
Level One is an internal evaluation
of reaction of the student in how they felt about the
training.
Level Two is another internal
evaluation where the student demonstrates that learning
took place, typically during or immediately after the
learning event.
Level Three is an external evaluation
where an observer decides whether the behavior prompted
within the training is a behavior being shown by the student.
Level Four is another external
evaluation where the results of the behavior are reviewed
to determine if the behavior prompted during training
is present after training.
Kirkpatrick, Donald. (January, 1996).
Great Ideas Revisited. Training and Development.
In 1962 Robert Mager wrote
Preparing Instructional Objectives. However, a more useful
tool I found was a book he wrote in 1983 and has since revised
called Analyzing Performance Problems: or You Really Oughta
Wanna with Peter Pipe. On the cover of the book are the
words "How to figure out why people aren't doing what
they should be, and what to do about it. This book offers
a process for analyzing performance issues and assisting
you in solving a large number of performance problems. This
book is not Mager's only contribution. Mager has gone on
to create more and more text to support learning of performance
improvement. For example, he has written about preparing
instructional objectives, analyzing goals, designing and
developing instruction, and measuring instructional intent.
He has also researched criterion-referenced instruction
(CRI) training methodology.
Mager, Robert F. & Peter Pipe.
(1997). Analyzing Performance Problems: or You Really Oughta
Wanna. 3rd ed. Atlanta: The Center for Effective Performance,
Inc.
In what contexts or settings is PT
practiced?
Anywhere people perform a task within
an environment, PT practitioners can work.
What are the typical deliverables associated
with PT?
The deliverable would be an overview of
the information studied during the analysis. Referencing
the systemic view of PT, we would need to use Stolovich
and Keeps' Conceptual Model for a Human Performance System
reviewing the individual, the external environment, the
organizational environment, and the influences of each on
the other. This document would answer lots of questions:
What are the organizational and business objectives? If
both are present, do they align with each other? What are
the individual and departmental objectives? Do they align
with the business and organizational objectives? Where are
the gaps? Can any perceived gap be solved in adjusting any
of these criteria? If not, move on. Is the current performance
outlined in detail for both management and individual to
recognize correct performance as the same thing? Can any
perceived gap be solved in adjusting anything here? Are
there any influences (see Gilbert's BEM) that need to be
addressed? In addition, there is the post-issue of continued
improvement. Are there ways that the organization can immediately
solve the situation and prevent it from happening again?
Are there checkpoints that can be placed to allow the company
to review things systematically preventing the need for
a PT practitioner's expertise? Should a PT practitioner
be on staff to assist with these things over time?
How would you describe the work of
a PT practitioner?
I believe that a PT practitioner can work
anywhere and in any industry. Every industry that comes
to mind needs to have in place a process for determining
success. If there are gaps in the perception of success
and what is really happening, a PT practitioner comes to
work. Again, the HPT models we have discussed come into
ply depending on the situation. Does a manager scream that
training is needed? Well, start asking questions. Why do
you think training is needed? What accomplishments are you
not seeing? What results are you not seeing? What do you
think is preventing this from occurring?
I see practitioners in a lot of meetings
- meeting with upper management getting their perceptions,
middle management and then the individual contributors.
I see the practitioner reviewing HR policies and procedures,
operations and mechanical floor procedures, reviewing benefit
packages, and even researching corporate level objectives
statements compared to what the company has actually done
in the last stated time period. This would be the analysis.
Then, there would be the report writing, using statistical
information found from the review and research to offer
a set of solutions to management along with a recommendation
of one or two of those solutions, defining the risks, conditions,
and consequences of each.
What is the status of research in the
field?
There is not too much "research"
to be found with the specific heading Human Performance
Technology, but what is out there includes case studies,
analysis, and different intervention successes. One journal
is dedicated to research in the broader Human Performance
Technology arena - ISPI's Performance Improvement Quarterly
(PIQ). But, many of these articles simply present case studies,
but may not have the rigor we expect of research.
What standards exist in the field?
What is becoming a standard is the information
offered by the International Society of Performance Improvement
and supported by the American Society for Training and Development.
Just recently, within the last two years, ISPI is certifying
people in regard to Performance Technology, and awarding
Certificate to those who meet the defined standards.
The standards include focusing on results,
being systematic in reviewing situations, adding value,
partnering with the clients and stakeholders, and systematically
using ADDIE. The application itself requires you to understand
and apply the standards, identify three large scope projects
on which these standards were applied and results found,
and have people available who will testify to this model
use and the results stated.
What important models are used in the
field?
Gilbert's Behavior Engineering Model separates
a person's behavior and the person's environment into a
behavioral model that allows us to review different aspects
of performance in an attempt to diagnose performance problems.
This model reviews a person's knowledge, capacity for performance
and motives to perform, while also referencing the data,
instruments, and incentives offered to the person from within
the environment. This model can be used in the diagnosis
stage of performance improvement. I would use this model
when trying to determine if an instructional versus non-instructional
intervention was necessary.
Rosenberg's Human Performance Technology Model includes
Performance Analysis, Cause Analysis, Intervention selection,
and incorporates Implementation and Evaluation. This model
represents the systematic and systemic approach of HPT,
drawing leverage on HPT's roots in other fields (specially
in the Performance Analysis and Intervention selection steps).
The model emphasizes Performance in relation to the Organization's
goals. It uses technology such as the application of scientific
knowledge in practical situations, and proceeds to evaluate
the soundness of these applications, focusing on results.
