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.