Week 13 - IT & HPT Professions: Careers and Professional Development

This weeks reading material presented itself as having a focus on IST/HPT careers AND professional development, but I felt there was a considerable amount more emphasis placed on professional development in the general sense. Which isn't a bad thing, I was just expecting to gain more of an understanding as to what the jobs in the field of IST/HPT looked like and what was currently available from the readings themselves. Having completed those, along with searching through the professional links provided, I've reflected on how this information relates to my career now and looking to the future.

To summarize this weeks material, I did browse through many of the links to IST/HPT professional organizations to get a better idea of what they were about and what information/resources they have to offer. After reading the week 9 material, where we were introduced to the field of Human Performance Technology, I signed up for membership with the International Society for Performance Improvement. The field and science behind this field is very interesting to me and I believe that access to these resources in particular will help with my own professional development moving forward. I'm also very interested to hear if others have input on the annual ISPI Conference? I almost feel like I'm meant to go this year, since it's being held so close - Indianapolis, IN! I found many of the other links pretty interesting as well-looks like there are many resources out there for both fields and it's nice to now have bookmarks to them all for potential future reference. I continue to browse the careers section for many of the resources and am finding many different job listings in the IST/HPT fields - reading these listings is giving me more of an idea as to what is desired by companies, and I think it would also be helpful to network with those currently working in the field (like going to the ISPI annual conference?).

I also read all but the optional article on "The Strength of Weak Ties" by Granovetter. That one was just not written in layman's terms enough to allow me to even get the jist of the topic. The article by Paradise was encouraging - noting that it was written in 2009, they talked about how organizations are not outsourcing as much for training and learning but are instead "relying on internal resources for their workplace learning and performance initiatives." If my studies in this field continue to interest me and I enjoy the work, maybe I can really make a difference where I'm at, instead of looking elsewhere for a particular position. The article by Christensen was inspiring to slow down and take a good look at where you are, what you truly value in life, and what direction you want to be heading. I felt this would be a great speech to share for any high school/college graduation actually. If you don't have an active and conscious strategy for your life, life is going to happen anyways and I hope you're satisfied with it. The article on Job Sculpting by Butler and Waldroop was intriguing. They talked about how people leave organizations because upper management doesn't understand the psychology of work satisfaction - "they assume that people who excel at their work are necessarily happy in their jobs." I can see how it can be misleading and disheartening (for the manager and the employee) to hear that someone isn't satisfied or is unhappy when they're really good at what they do! The more I read about professional development, motivation, happiness, etc...the more it seems to come down to just really being about people. People working side by side, people talking, people taking the time to stop and really see what's going on around them (I love the old saying that one needs to stop and smell the roses!). This, along with having a good grasp on your own values, is where the work really comes in - not trying to minimize anyones job, but it's all stuff that we do, and that in itself is not usually satisfying enough (to stay in one place for too long at least).


References

Butler, T., & Waldroop, J. (1999). Job sculpting: The art of retaining your best people. Harvard Business Review, 77(5), 144-152.

This article explains on what makes people happy at work and stay longer in the organization.

Paradise, A. (2009, November). 2009 ASTD state of the industry report. T+D, 44-49.

Christensen, C. M. (2010). How will you measure your life? Harvard Business Review, 88(7/8), 46-51.

Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.

Week 11 - IT and HPT Professions: Performance Standards & Ethics

As the introduction stated for this weeks material, two very different standards, ethics and performance standards, were covered in regards to the world of performance technology.Ethics for this field was defined and different inputs from different organizations for these ethical standards were presented. Why do we care about ethics? Ethics can be tricky (to put it mildly) and is most often dependent on a particular perception as to whether or not something is or isn't "ethical." By better defining our expectations of what ethical means to the field (values and morals = ethics), we have a much greater chance of adding value to those we're trying to assist through our expertise. Talking about ethical standards/codes, what they mean, examples of situations, needs to be discussed within an organization to help ensure these expectations are understood. Even though performance standards are a totally different animal, they help lead to the same goal of adding value to our customers, provide clear expectations that also helps the performance technologist know they're doing their job, and helps create that set of baseline expectation  s for everyone to be compared against. Sure, someone might be quicker at obtaining results, developing instructions, or have a better knack with particular issues; but they're all meeting the same basic expectations for their field.

Both ethical and performance (also referred to as competency) standards are things that need to be defined for an organization, and like I mentioned above, there needs to be discussion of them for understanding. And then there needs to be regular reviews to make sure people are still adhering to those standards. Many situations can be handled through routine processes and procedures ('if this, than this' route). A few things of particular interest that stood out to me in this weeks material were:

• The entire article from Banaji, Bazerman, & Chugh (2003)! The article reviewed four related sources of "unintentional ethical decision making" (implicit prejudice that comes from unconscious beliefs, in-group favoritism, over claiming credit, and conflicts of interest). I was just talking to one of my teammates the other day about the extent I would go out of my way for one person versus another - depending on what we were talking about, this could be seen as pretty unethical of myself (our topic was in regards to how much we would go above and beyond to help someone out at work, regarding usual daily tasks - some people you do the bare minimum for, others, you'd bend over backwards for - I don't think this discussion was about ethics, but I'm open for other opinions). I think everyone is biased to some extent - but when do you just call them personal preferences and when do they draw questions of ethics into play? I think this is where the ethical standards for the organization come in to play.
• I couldn't help myself, I went to implicit.harvard.edu and took a few of the IATs (Implicit Association Tests). Not sure if I'm sold on the tests but the idea is very interesting. I wasn't super surprised by my results, but it's thinking about those unconscious biases and how they might affect my decisions in daily life.
• The fact that 6 of the 10 HPT standards from ISPI started with "Be systematic in all aspects of the process." I take it this is a very important standard from their perspective.

The synthesis question for this week asked us to consider the material we've been introduced to thus far in this foundations course, and think about how it might apply to us now and in the future. First, this course has introduced me to a field I had NO idea existed. I've contemplated some of our organizations issues over the years, and I think one of them could be that we don't utilize ISD professionals to assist us in developing our training programs (we rely solely on subject matter experts to develop processes, procedures, and the training for these documents). I am a systematically minded person - many of the models that have been introduced make sense in the concept but have also raised more questions for me; I would like to review more examples of how they're applied in real situations. The field of HPT (again, no idea it existed) struck a chord with me - these are issues (performance issues) I've been trying to better understand the last 2 years in my role as Group Leader for our team at work. The focus is performance, but it's made me question what we're really asking people to do and how we can best define those expectations, how to get these expectations across to each individual on the team, and how to measure these expectations in action. In summary, this course (that has come after months to years of my own learning through our organizational development training's and reading various other material in my spare time) has made me slow down and really contemplate what is happening around me at work. I want to make our team and our organization be the best it can be (effective and efficient) AND have satisfied employees that can go home at the end of the day and know they did their job. I think it's possible and worth the effort.

References

Banaji, M. R., Bazerman, M. H., & Chugh, D. (2003). How (Un) ethical are you? Harvard Business Review, 81(12), 56-64.

Guerra, J. A. (2006). Standards and ethics in human performance technology. In J. A. Pershing (Ed.) (2006), Handbook of human performance technology (3^rd ed.) (pp. 1024-1046). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Napper, V., Hadley, K., & Yeaman, A. R. J. (2010). Is Janet viewing porn in class!?!! TechTrends, 54(2), 22-23.

Week 10 - HPT Concepts and Process ModelsSummary

This weeks material focused on concepts and process models related to Human Performance Technology (HPT). The presentations and readings proposed several major HPT processes and gave explanations as to how they were each important in addressing performance issues.

The Wilmoth, F.S., Prigmore, C., & Bray, M. (2010) material presented background work of some of the early HPT pioneers, describing how "the work of these early pioneers in making a distinction between a training gap and a performance gap laid the groundwork for future practitioners to construct and test new models [and] their establishment of the link between individual performance and organizational performance helped to cement the acceptance and credibility of HPT solutions."

• Thomas Gilbert's Behavior Engineering Model (BEM) - one of the first diagnostic models that was based on his belief that "improving the performance of people must begin with identifying and resolving the environmental barriers, thus enabling the people (performers) to achieve maximum performance."
• Joe Harless continued with Gilbert's diagnostic approach and developed the process of front-end analysis, based on his belief that "understanding the cause of a problem should drive any solution."
• Robert Mager's work on instructional objectives "revolutionized instructional design and performance improvement and is considered to be the standard for the instructional design profession." He believed that instead of focusing on what to teach, instructors should focus on what they wanted to the learners to be able to do as a result of this instruction. This shift in focus helped to "shift analysis away form the instruction process itself and toward the results of instruction that lead to a change in learner performance."
• Geary Rummler developed a "nine performance variable model" that showed the relationships across an organization and how every level is interrelated and linked, and as such, should be accounted for in analyses.

This chapter went on to describe the difference between 3 different HPT models; the diagnostic model (model that informs the performance analyst where HPT can be applied), the process model (model that instructs the performance analyst on how HPT can be applied), and the holistic model (model with features of the diagnostic and process, but that have a "nonlinear form and unique modeling characteristics"). I was particularly interested in the three-dimensional holistic HPT model that was presented, with the addition of this third dimension considering "the emotional intelligence of the individual when assessing the factors influencing human performance." I haven't read much regarding emotional intelligence but am interested in pursuing. This book was written in 2010 and I wonder what, if any, advances have been made in factoring this attribute into HPT modeling? I thought it also important to note the summary of this chapter stressed the importance of the performance analyst having a lot of experience and "a wide range of talents" to be able to draw from regarding knowledge of HPT models- which is why many projects aren't led by a single individual but usually by a team of performance analysts.  

The reading material by Brethower (1999), kicked off with a statement that resonated with me, saying, "A major irony of the Information Age is that ignorance grows more rapidly than knowledge. Collectively, more is known than ever before; at the same time, people individually are falling farther behind the knowledge curve." And here I was thinking it was just me that felt that way! Brethower continued to explain that HPT grew from a foundation in general systems theory and behavioral psychology and the HP technologist that understands general systems theory, can help those described in the statement above. He went on to describe general systems theory and the seven principles this theory is based upon. I found the seventh principle of subsystem maximization, particularly intriguing - if I'm understanding it correctly, it seemed to describe issues I feel are present in my current organization, and why "priority setting is essential, and why internal competition can be extremely harmful." Everything is an emergency and everything is priority one! This constant tug of war on peoples focus at work (with no apparent driving force, other than a variety of people being able to decide "something" needs taken care of "right now!) is draining, to say the very least. 

This chapter continued to explain how behavioral psychology is an important source of knowledge base of HPT, with "its focus on improving the specific performance of specific individuals in specific situations, [...] no other approach can match the breadth and depth of the behaviorist approach." For example, the law of effect in behavioral psychology is very important in the "design of systems for motivation, recognition, supervision, and compensation, [by contributing] specific principles about the interaction of individual and environment."Linking general systems theory and behavioral psychology provides an even firmer foundation for HPT since "the only real test [to know which behaviors are good or bad in an organization] is to look and see what the behaviors are accomplishing in a larger system." The same behavior can produce great results in one organization but be completely detrimental in another which makes the point that " whether a behavior is functional or dysfunctional is determined by the results or consequences of the behavior within a larger system, not by the behavior per se." This chapter went on to compare general systems theory and behavioral psychology, individually, against other approaches and the importance of taking into account the value added to the organization through performance. 

I've really enjoyed taking, what I consider, this broader view of the performance of the organization by looking at the performance of the individuals within it. Many books have been referenced in Pershings' presentations these last few weeks that look very interesting (does anyone know if Gilberts book, Human Competence, covers his PROBE model and ACORN test? I really wanted to read more about these) and have gone on my ever-growing wish list:)

References:

Brethower, D. M. (1999). General systems theory and behavioral psychology. In H. D. Stolovitch & E. J. Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of Human Performance Technology (2nd ed.) (pp. 67-81). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer. 

Wilmoth, F. S., Prigmore, C., & Bray, M. (2010). HPT models In R. Watkins & D. Leigh (Eds.), Handbook of improving performance in the workplace, vol. 2: Selecting and implementing performance interventions (pp. 5-26). Silver Spring, MD: International Soceity for Performance Improvement. 

Week 9: Human Performance Technology History & Overview

This weeks materials zoomed out from our focus on IT and ISD, looking instead at a broader perspective that is Human Performance Technology (HPT). Pershing (2006) defined HPT as "the study and ethical practice of improving productivity in organizations by designing and developing effective interventions that are results-oriented, comprehensive, and systemic." He also goes on to describe reasons why these interventions might be seen as necessary; basically when an organization senses a void or gap between where they are and where they think they ought to be, regarding, for example, their belief in a performance problem, a challenge for quality improvement, or a new possible business opportunity.  

From Stolovich (2007), some of the main ideas and historical roots of HPT, were born from the realization that training alone could not solve many workplace performance problems. He explains that HPT has adopted, at its core, the maximization of human capital achievements due to issues such as the growth in organizational complexity and a subsequent focus on performance. Key events that stood out to me as particularly influential to the development of HPT, start with the belief that Thomas Gilbert is generally recognized as the father of HPT (in most of the readings and presentations). Gilbert was a graduate student of B.F. Skinner and went on to create "The Journal of Mathetics." This publication attracted like-minded individuals who all got together and formed the National Society for Programmed Instruction (NSPI). Gilbert and a fellow named Geary Rummler (who had an intriguing article on the history and development of HPT given from his perspective as having lived through this period) created the Behavior Engineering Model  (BEM) in the mid 1970s. At the same time, Joe Harless (a former student of Gilbert's) was developing his own performance improvement plan (PIP) and published "an Ounce of Analysis is Worth a Pound of Objectives" which introduced the front-end analysis methodology (Rummler (2007) explained this as happening "presumably as a counter to Mager's Analyzing Performance Problems and his own company, Praxis', development of the Performance Audit - Stolovich did mention Mager's release, but not Rummlers'). All of these models helped effect two fundamental shifts in thinking:

1. Opened the minds of training and Human Resource Development (HRD) professionals to the fact that many human performance problems could be solved via means other than training (that there are an infinite array of possible interventions to improve human performance).
2. The growing awareness that the HRD/training community could now offer stronger, more convincing arguments to senior management that what they were engaged in should be viewed as an organizational investment rather than a cost.

While another important milestone mentioned in this article was the publication of "Improving Performance: How to manage the white space on the organization chart by Rummler, Rummler (2007) himself mentioned that about 5 years earlier than this publication, he was working with Motorola with process improvement work that ,this "subsequently combined with statistical analysis work at Motorola [was asserted] to be the genesis of Six Sigma (I didn't see that mentioned in the other readings and thought it pertinent). 

Backing up to when the NSPI was formed in 1962 (and continuing from Stolovichs' article), this organization flourished through most of the 1960s into the 1970s until the "golden glow of PI began to fade as flaws in the effectiveness of the learning outcomes became increasingly apparent. Foremost among the issues were lack of transfer to the job and impact on business results." In 1973, the name for the organization changed to the National Society for Performance and Instruction. Key influencers at this time (some were already mentioned above) were Robert Mager, Thomas Gilbert, Joe Harless, Geary Runnler, William Deterline, and Roger Kaufman. At this time, the emphasis was also being focused on performance expansion and the attention to instruction declined somewhat. Jumping to 1995, this organization became the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI) and ultimately transformed its mission from learning to performance. This natural evolution has been "toward a systemic alignment of human capital management with organizational requirements to meet tough and competitive demands." 

Some common themes, concepts and principles found across the definitions within HPT is that it's an offshoot of the general systems theory applied to organizations in ISD; HPT took form in the 1970s, was recognized in the 1980s, and really emerged in the 1990s. Again, it was that thought, that idea, that seemed to be at the back of many peoples mind, that workplace performance problems were not always a training issue. Stolovich (2007) described the field as something that instructional technologists draw from (rather than always assuming that the cause of poor performance is poor instruction) and they will sometimes recommend non-instructional solutions based on HPT models. HPT appears to me, to be a parent of IT or ISD, without having actually been consciously recognized first. Human Performance Improvement (HPI) can be used interchangeably with HPT, however, one could also look at the two terms as HPI being what we wish to achieve (regarding human performance) and HPT as the means we use to achieve that wish (Stolovich, 2007). HPI, HPT, HRD, Organizational Effectiveness (OE) and Organizational Development (OD) could all be said they spring from basically the same theme (performance improvement). 

I felt Rummler (2007) gave me something to keep in consideration regarding the history of this field when he explained "after the initial academic jump start provided by Skinner with the Harvard Teaching Machine Project, almost all the advances in instructional design and performance analysis methodology came from consulting practitioners solving client problems. The resulting reality is that these players were always trying to build a personal brand-trying to distinguish themselves from each other in the marketplace; performance analysis versus performance audit, versus front-end analysis; human performance system, behavioral engineering model, analyzing performance problems. These were different configurations of the same variables influencing behavior and performance. This makes it hard for the historians who were not there. The really dangerous thing is when the historian cannot tell the difference [between the fundamental, significant differences between models and methodology] and fills the air with distinctions that are not real or important."

The HPT field makes sense to me; I'm happy to hear there is an organization (ISPI) that is dedicated to viewing the people as some of the most important capital to an organization AND that throwing training at a problem is not always the best answer (if your goal is in fact, to actually solve the problem.....but that also means an accurate and agreed upon description of the "problem" is also very necessary....). Of course, I spent considerable time trying to relate the readings to my every day life and the impact HPT has on me in my organization - speaking of which, I just attended a training this very morning on developing behavioral based interviews: skills for the interviewer, led by a member of the Organizational Development (OD) department here at IU Bloomington. Great class by the way! Stolovich (2007) described OD as having "less of an engineering emphasis and is characterized more by its communication and facilitation style." The first half of this class focused on providing information on what was meant by behavioral style interviews and the last half was role-play between class members. I KNOW the supervisors series I recently completed through the OD department, helped me get to where I am today. Those facilitated trainings, combined with the fact I really wanted to succeed (and still do), kept my marbles together during that first year as Group Leader of my team. I think it was a combination of the material they provided, the environment in which the classes were held (I didn't know anyone, which was nice to meet new people and to offer up my particular circumstances at work in a "safe" place, without fear of repercussion), AND my motivation to improve. All of that being said, I found these trainings on my own. This is the part where I believe my organization (department) could really work on helping us (the people) and the organization as a whole, perform better and set us up for success. It's not just about getting stuff done (I heard today that many times the "urgent" gets in the way of the "important"), it's about getting the right stuff done. Taking time with your people takes TIME and they always say that it's the people that keeps our place running. I believe we have a gap in performance surrounding our continuing endeavors to become fully FDA compliant (with the repurposing of part of the facility from research to being a Medical Device Manufacturer). Throwing training alone at that shift, isn't cutting it. Let's make sure we're investing enough back into the people - I've already started the conversation with our HR manager to get his thoughts on the topic and have requested funding (starting with myself) for an annual ISPI membership.  

References:

Ferond, C. (2006). The origins and evolution of human performance technology. In Pershing, J. A. (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology (pp. 155-187). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Pershing, J. (2006). Human performance technology fundamentals. In J. A. Pershing (Ed.) (2006), Handbook of human performance technology (3rd ed.) (pp. 5-34). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Stolovitch, H. D. (2007). The development and evolution of human performance improvement In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 134-146). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Person Education.

Van Tiem, D. M., Mosely, J. L., & Dessinger, J. C. (2004). Performance technology – defined. Fundamentals of performance technology. (pp. 2-20). Washington, DC: ISPI.

Rummler, G. A. (2007). The past is prologue: An eyewitness account of HPT. Performance Improvement, 46(10), 5-9.