The performance architect's essential guide to the performance technology landscape

38Performance Improvement, vol. 45, no. 10, Nov/Dec 2006© 2006 International Society for Performance ImprovementPublished online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) • DOI:10.1002/pfi.029

The first two editions of the Handbook of Human Performance Technology helped define the rapidly growing andvibrant field of human performance technology—a systematic approach to improving individual and organiza-tional performance. Exhaustively researched and edited by Dr. James A. Pershing, CPT, this third edition not onlyupdates key foundational chapters on organizational change, evaluation, instructional design, and motivation, butfeatures breakthrough chapters on “performance technology in action” and addresses many new topics in thefield, such as certification, Six Sigma, and communities of practice.

In this chapter, reprinted with permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (copyright 2006), Roger Addison and CarolHaig take you on a journey through the key elements of a full performance process with its pitfalls and how toavoid them.

Some years ago, a company had a team of high-performing data-entry clerks thatwas known for consistently rapid production with very low error rates. These wereskilled, dependable employees who had worked together for some time. Whentheir company moved to a new and much larger building, the clerks were delighted

with their workspace. They loved their spacious office, large wraparound windows, andrestful views of lush lawns and shady trees.

When they moved, they brought along all their existing office furniture, state-of-the-artcomputers, and other equipment. They settled into their wonderful new space and con-tinued with their work. After a week or two, their manager reviewed the productionreports and was surprised to see that the team’s error rates had noticeably increased. Hesearched in vain for an obvious reason and could only conclude that the move had some-how disrupted the clerks’ usual accuracy.

When this alarming trend continued through several reporting cycles, the managerdecided the best course of action would be to retrain this group of skilled high perform-ers because they obviously had forgotten how to do their jobs. So all the data-entry clerkswere retrained. And, as you may have guessed, their substandard performance contin-ued, with subsequent reports showing no reduction in error rates.

In desperation, the manager asked the Performance Consulting department for help, anda consultant paid him a visit. After the manager brought her up to date on events, the con-sultant asked to see all the reports from after the move and several sets from before tocompare the clerks’ performance.

The PerformanceArchitect’s EssentialGuide to the PerformanceTechnology Landscapeby Roger M. Addison and Carol Haig

After reviewing the reports, the consultant shared her findingswith the manager. In the reports generated since the move to thenew building she noticed a definite pattern of increased errorsin the late afternoons. The manager could not immediately pro-vide an explanation for this, so the consultant asked if she couldspend a few days on the floor to observe the clerks and learnmore about their jobs.

When her observations were complete, the consultant metwith the manager to again share her findings. Those large,bright windows really let in lots of light. In the late after-noons, as the sun began to set, it created glare on the clerks’computer screens. Even though they knew their software well,it was easy to make mistakes and not see them; hence, theincreased error rates.

The manager was somewhat embarrassed to have missed thisobvious reason for poor performance, but the consultanthelped him see the value of another pair of eyes when tryingto diagnose a problem from inside the situation. She pointedout the power of observation in analyzing performance prob-lems and confided that she never fully believed anything herclients told her until she went to see for herself. The managerforgave himself his oversight and was pleased to discover thatwindow coverings were a relatively quick and inexpensivesolution to a critical performance obstacle.

Introduction

In this chapter we welcome you to the territory of the seasonedperformance-improvement professional. Join us as we journeyacross the region to explore the features of the “Performance Tech-nology Landscape.” In preparation for our travels, we will providea packing list of helpful tools for the trip. We have selected thembased on their usefulness to us in our combined sixty years of per-formance-improvement practice, coupled with the valuable workof such notables as Dale Brethower, Judith Hale, Paul Harmon,Lloyd Homme, Tom Gilbert, Robert Mager, Margo Murray, GearyRummler, Harold Stolovitch, Don Tosti, and others. These practi-tioners are among those responsible for building the foundation ofhuman performance technology (HPT); they have contributed tothe principles of performance technology through their work anddocumented it in publications.

So get out your backpack and your walking shoes as we beginto chart our course and study the map of the PerformanceTechnology Landscape.

The Performance Technology Landscape

Experienced travelers prepare carefully for a new journeyby collecting maps and resource materials to plan theirtrip. Our map for this tour is the Performance TechnologyLandscape (Figure 1). It provides a framework for the workof HPT, an integrated-systems approach to performanceimprovement. Our resource materials include two key con-cepts that will prepare us for discoveries along the way:performance and human performance technology.

What Is Performance?

While many of us might think of performance as simply anactivity on the Performance Technology Landscape, seasonedperformance-improvement professionals add a critical com-ponent: a result. So performance equals activity plus result,as in reading a map, activity, and using it to find your desti-nation, result. We further stipulate that the result must be ofvalue. For example, reaching your destination enables a wed-ding to take place in which you are the groom. The value isin the importance of the wedding to all involved stakehold-ers: bride, groom, families, guests, and others.

In 2003 the International Society for Performance Improve-ment (ISPI) convened a Presidential Initiative Task Force toaddress critical issues in HPT. One of this group’s manyachievements was the further refinement of the definition ofperformance to include “those valued results produced bypeople working within a system” (International Society forPerformance Improvement, 2004, p. 9).

39Performance Improvement • Volume 45 • Number 10 • DOI:10.1002/pfi

Figure 1. Performance Technology Landscape.

What Is Performance Technology?

We define a technology as a set of empirical and scientificprinciples and their application. Performance technology (PT)is the technology that comprises all of the variables that affecthuman performance. We use PT in the workplace to identifythe factors that enable workers to perform their jobs and to pro-duce the desired results. Performance technology providestools and processes to identify opportunities for improved per-formance, valued solutions, and return on investment, as wellas the building blocks to construct new performance environ-ments and systems. The HPT task force also suggested thefollowing definition (International Society for PerformanceImprovement, 2004, p. 4) for HPT:1. Focuses on valuable, measured results2. Considers the larger system context of people’s perfor-

mance3. Provides measurement tools that can be used repeatedly

and will consistently show the same outcome4. Describes programs and solutions clearly enough to be

duplicated by others

Mapping the Performance-Improvement Journey

The Performance Technology Landscape is a topographical mapfor performance technologists, providing a multidimensional rep-resentation of the routes we can travel in pursuit of improvedhuman performance and increased value to the client organiza-tion. A closer look at the Performance Technology Landscapecalls out four noted landmarks to guide us on our journey: Prin-ciples of Performance Technology, Work Environment, System(s)Viewpoint, and Systematic Approach.

Principles of Performance Technology. Performance improve-ment professionals adhere to these principles in our work. We• Focus on results, using our knowledge of the business we

are supporting to link performance-improvement initia-tives to business needs and goals and add value for thestakeholders

• Take a systems viewpoint that encourages consideration ofall aspects of the organization’s total performance system

• Add value to the organization or business by producingresults that make a difference

• Establish partnerships with clients and other performance-improvement professionals to share skills, knowledge, cre-ativity, and successes

By thinking systemically, we are able to identify and workwith all the linkages in organizations as we strive to improveperformance.

Work Environment. In organizations work is performed atthree, and sometimes four, levels:• Individual or teams: the worker level• Operations: the work level• Organization: the entire enterprise• Society: the communities served, the world

We ensure that we correctly identify the level affected by theperformance issue or opportunity so that our investigationsare complete and our recommendations have a high probabil-ity of success.

Many organizations today acknowledge society as a fourth levelin which they, as good corporate citizens, can make valuablecontributions to the environment, the economy, and the com-munities they serve. This service may involve encouragingemployees to contribute their efforts to local charities, such asthe Volunteer Day program or the 78 Community InvolvementTeams at Levi Strauss worldwide (Levi Strauss & Co., 2005).Another example is through active support of humanitarianissues, as with Hewlett Packard’s Design-for-Environment pro-gram (HP Invent, n.d.) that provides environmentally sustain-able products through recycling services, or the Siemens ArtsProgram (Siemens, 2005) that supports and advances local artsand culture in company locations around the world.

Performance-improvement professionals also work at the soci-etal level, using HPT tools and techniques to address broad areasof need in the developing world (Haig and Addison, 2002).

Whenever possible, performance-improvement practitionersexpand their work to the next highest organizational level toincrease the impact of improved performance and add valuefor the organization. Many practitioners are accustomed toworking with individuals or teams to improve performance.However, organizations realize broader, longer-lasting gainsin performance improvement when changes are made in pro-cesses or across the enterprise, because these levels directlyaffect the customer.

System(s) Viewpoint. One way that we in HPT differentiateourselves from other disciplines is with our systems view-point. HPT professionals consider that every organization is,by definition, a system, and that all components of that sys-tem are related. Therefore, when performance improvementis needed in one component we consider all of them in ourinvestigation. This is often referred to as thinking systemi-cally. Remember, we make the greatest impact on performancewhen we address the whole system.

As the Systems Model illustrates (see Figure 2) performancebegins with inputs into a system, which are processed untilthe results reach the receiver; hence performance occurs fromleft to right. Performance-improvement specialists, however,work from right to left, beginning by clearly identifying thedesired results of an initiative and then working backwardthrough the model to inputs.

By thinking systemically we are able to view the enterprise asa complete system comprising the following components(adapted with permission from International Society for Per-formance Improvement, 2004):• Receivers: The system stakeholders who receive or are

directly affected by the result.

40 www.ispi.org • DOI:10.1002/pfi • NOV/DEC 2006

• Results: The accomplishment, or that which is producedor created by a process, including products and services.

• Process: The sequence of actions in the value chain thatproduces the desired results.

The organizational or workplace level focuses on those processesconcerned with the governance of the organization. The opera-tional or work level includes all the processes in the value chainas well as those that maintain them. The variables here take intoaccount the specific activities and tasks and their sequence andflow. At this level we often look for broken connections and mis-alignments such as bottlenecks and disconnects.

The performer or worker level is focused on the actions of theindividual. It therefore seems best to put the performer in theProcess box in Figure 2. The variables to be considered arethose internal to the performer that are relevant to the execu-tion of the task. These include• Skill or knowledge• Motivation• Other variables such as confidence, preferences, and

practices

It may be useful to think of two types of processes. Some,such as sales or service, touch the customer. Others, such asemployee payroll or recruitment, enable the organization tofunction. Ultimately, organizations require both types of pro-cesses to be effective.

Inputs. What initiates or directs an action or process, includ-ing customer requests, stakeholder demands, information, thestrategic plan, tools and equipment, work schedules, assign-ments, and support.

Conditions. The surroundings or environment within whichperformance occurs, such as economic and market trends;industry norms; and the physical, business, and social envi-ronments.

Performance Feedback. Information about the quantity orquality of outputs that is fed back to a performer, operationalunit, or organization from within the system, and that can beused to make adjustments that will improve the results.

Value Feedback. The same type of information as providedby performance feedback, but originating from outside the sys-tem. Sources may include end users, stockholders, the sur-rounding community, the media, and so forth.

Remember that performance feedback comes from within thesystem and value feedback from outside. A colleagueexplains the difference this way: when the chef tastes thesoup, that is performance feedback; when the customer tastesthe soup, that is value feedback (personal communication,Lynn Kearny, April 21, 2004).

Systems thinking is scalable and can be applied at any of thethree organizational levels: worker, work, or workplace.

Systematic Approach. Performance-improvement profession-als use a systematic approach to organize projects. They fol-low sequential steps and create a replicable process to identifyneeds and recommend solutions. The steps include• Need: identify and review the problem or opportunity

with the client• Results: assess current performance against expected

results and identify requirements for success• What: identify sources of current performance and recom-

mend solutions• How: design and develop selected solution• Do: implement approved solutions and put change-man-

agement processes in place• Evaluate: monitor performance against the expected results

defined initially

Finally, performance-improvement specialists take care tonurture and enhance the business partnerships they haveestablished with their clients.

What is Performance Architecture?

It seems that a large organization had a sizable population ofoperations managers in desperate need of training. While theywere mostly experienced employees, their work performancewas deteriorating. They were consistently working extendedhours, they were challenged to find the time to train newhires, and quite a few were on stress-related leaves of absence.

In response to the situation, a senior manager requested exten-sive additional training. Fortunately, the performance consul-tants assigned to the project had considerable performancetechnology experience. They were able to gather pertinent data,make observations, and diagnose critical alignment and prior-ity issues that were having a negative impact on the operationsmanagers’ effectiveness.

The performance consultants found that the priorities ofsenior management were not consistent, and the operationsmanagers receiving their directives were understandably con-fused about how to focus their work. With many staff vacan-cies to fill, and no efficient tools for teaching rudimentary


Figure 2. Systems Model.

tasks, many operations managers were simply doing low-levelwork themselves because it was faster than taking the time toteach a new employee.

Finally, many customer-service and problem-resolution tasksformerly handled by the operations managers had beenmoved into processing centers. A number of the operationsmanagers had found it more expedient, and better for theircustomers, to continue to handle these issues personallyrather than trust them to the processing centers, whereresponse time was slow and accuracy not dependable.

With these and additional findings, the performance consul-tants were able to show that the operations managers had theskills and knowledge to do their jobs, thus ruling out trainingas a viable solution. They then recommended a cascading suiteof solutions that included aligned priorities from senior man-agement, delegation tools for the operations managers, and ser-vice-level agreements with the processing centers. Thesolutions were packaged into an offsite meeting exclusively foroperations managers that showcased their concerns and gavethem a prominent voice in the organization.

In addition to the improved performance of the opera-tions managers, an unprecedented reorganization inthe processing centers, and a significant shuffling ofroles and responsibilities among senior management,results showed a decrease in the number of operationsmanagers on leave and a considerable increase in cus-tomer satisfaction. Let us take a look behind the scenesand examine the tools that the performance consul-tants used.

Performance Systems

The performance-improvement professionals used perfor-mance-architecture tools to repair an existing performancesystem. They used two of our favorites, the PerformanceMap and the Iceberg Model, which we will introduce aswe explore performance systems in more depth.

Let us begin with the notion of human performance asbeing those valued results produced by people work-ing within a system. Many performance-improvementprofessionals have their roots in training. They havebroadened their approach from delivering training toimproving performance systems. Performance systemdesign is not solution-driven and gives the practitionerthe space to engage all relevant aspects of the total per-formance system in the development of the solution.

We frequently find ourselves in the business of repair-ing existing performance systems, as did the perfor-mance consultants in the operations managers’ case.In some situations we may construct new performancesystems. According to Tosti (2004), this is very mucha back-to-the-future situation. He observes that the ear-

liest practitioners of HPT were focused on building rather thanrepairing as a way to create new performance-improvementalternatives. As our discipline evolved, we became more con-cerned with identifying performance problems and fixing them,and moved away from inventing new performance systems. Wewould like to see among our HPT colleagues once again anincreased emphasis on the building of performance systems.

Once, a team of performance-improvement specialists was askedto support a job redesign project. The position, “Manager of theService Department,” was renamed “Customer Service Man-ager,” and refocused from a repair operation to emphasize theselling of customer services. This meant added managementresponsibilities for the incumbents, new customer service skillsand knowledge for them to acquire, and a progressive shift inwhat had been a very traditional repair shop role. Wisely, theexecutive responsible for the job change initiative realized thatthe revamped position required a new performance system tosupport those in the job and enable them to be successful, andhe asked the performance-improvement team to design it. Oneof the tools they used was the Performance Map.


Figure 3. Performance Map.

Performance Map

Whether to solve a problem or to respond to an opportunity,the Performance Map’s simple grid format is a useful tool fordiagnosing performance-related issues (Figure 3). It is easy toexplain to managers, who often pick up a pen and activelyengage with the map.

The four key quadrants are• Structure: the foundation of the organization• Motivation: the emotions, desires, and psychological

needs that incite action• Environment: the external and internal conditions that

affect the growth and development of the organization• Learning: the increase of employee proficiency in a given

area

The north-south axis looks at employee competence on a scaleof 0 (low) to 10 (high). The east-west axis addresses theemployee’s confidence in her or his ability to do the job, alsoon a scale of 0 (low) to 10 (high).

As an example, when you and a manager have identified spe-cific employees who have performance issues, you would fol-low these specific steps:• Help the manager determine the identified employees’ job

competence by asking a question such as, What skills doemployees need to complete the job? Ask the manager torate the identified employees from 0 (no skills or knowl-edge) to 10 (highly skilled and knowledgeable).

• Next, ascertain the employees’ level of confidence byprobing for examples of accomplishments, behavior, atti-tudes, commitment, and contributions. You might say,“Tell me about the general attitude of employees towardthis job.” Again, ask the manager to rate the performers.Zero means your client has no confidence in the perform-ers and 10, that he or she has total confidence in the per-formers. You may also want to ask the performers thesesame questions. In our experience we often get conflictingresponses. This is a signal to you to clearly specify the gapbetween manager and performer.

• Mark the levels for both competence and confidence onthe grid and draw the appropriate horizontal and verticallines to connect the two variables.

• With such information, you can identify the quadrant inwhich the two variables intersect. This will help you todiagnose the most common areas of organizational prob-lems or opportunities and prescribe a series of effectivesolutions. For example, if you identify a structural defi-ciency, possible solutions might include revisiting themission statement or developing goals and objectives forthe individual or group. Other quadrants will suggestother solutions.

• Regardless of which quadrant houses the issue, you needto consider the other three as you work toward a solution.Remember that you are operating in a performance sys-tem, and actions taken in one area will have an impact on

the others. This is especially important if you have iden-tified the Learning quadrant as the source of the perfor-mance issue. If a manager has a confident employee, ahigh performer who has the necessary skills and knowl-edge, you would want to engineer the environment forsuccess so that the employee will continue to perform ata high level.

• Finally, consider the organization’s culture as you iden-tify solutions, to ensure that your prescription will do thejob without unwanted side effects. Few elements of orga-nizational life are as pervasive as culture; ignore thispowerful force at your peril. We know from experiencethat performance-improvement recommendations andimplementation plans must be culture-compatible, orthey will be destroyed. When strategy meets culture, cul-ture always wins.

Tip of the Iceberg

The Performance Map guides us to the probable source of ourperformance issue. Our second tool enables us to explore fur-ther and integrate performance-improvement solutions withall related components of the organization’s performance sys-tem. The iceberg is a metaphor for much that can go wrongwhen we start with an assumed solution, at the tip, and cre-ate an organizational disaster because we neglect to considerall the layers of the iceberg below the surface (Figure 2.4).

Organizational Level. The Iceberg Model encourages us tostart our work at the base organizational level with a culturalaudit, so that we get to know the operational norms (Carletonand Lineberry, 2004). With this perspective we can more effec-tively analyze, diagnose, and prescribe performance-improve-ment solutions that will address the identified concerns andmesh with the organization’s business practices. Understand-ing the environment avoids costly and time-consuming errors.The cultural audit is also a valuable precursor to using the Per-formance Map.


Figure 4. The Iceberg Model.

Structures and Goals. Moving up the model, we gather infor-mation about structures and goals—the organizational chart,for example—and such foundational elements as mission,vision, and values.

Management Practices. Next, we explore typical manage-ment practices. These are related to the culture, of course, andthey tell us about the organization’s customs and best prac-tices. This helps us understand what is valued in manage-ment’s performance and will inform how we interact with ourclient and present our findings.

Priorities, Standards, and Procedures. At this point, we nar-row our focus to the work level as we look at priorities, stan-dards, and procedures. Here we are interested in work processes,and the connections among work groups as tasks are performed.

Tools, Resources, and Work Environment. To be successful,workers require tools and resources. In addition, the workenvironment must support the processes to be completed. Wewant to learn about these elements to ensure that employeeshave what they need to do their jobs effectively.

Feedback and Consequences. Of course, workers need toknow how they are doing, so we look next at the systems inplace for feedback and consequences. Without these,employees are deprived of critical information about thequality and quantity of their work, and their motivation toperform is undermined.

Attitudes and Qualifications. We explore the attitudes and qual-ifications the organization looks for to select employees. Arethese in alignment with all the other aspects represented in theIceberg Model? If not, identifying the disconnects will yield valu-able clues to the sources of issues and their possible resolution.

Skills and Knowledge. And so we reach skills and knowl-edge at the tip of the iceberg, the place where many clientsbegin their request for help from performance-improvementspecialists. Learning and skill building live here and arevital solutions for situations in which employees do notknow how to perform. Organizations should provide activ-ities in this sector to orient new hires and introduce newproducts and services, systems, equipment, or other inno-vations. For all other circumstances, as the Iceberg Modelhas shown, the performance issue is at another level andthe solution will be found nearby.

Other Models and Tools

There are many models and tools available to performance-improvement practitioners; we offer these as samples fromamong those we have found useful over the years. These mod-els and tools are not meant to be all-inclusive. They allow us oneview of organizations. However, no matter how appropriate thetools are for the task, they are useless to us and to our clientswithout the all-important link to the organization’s business.

Evaluation

As performance-improvement professionals, we position ourwork in the context of critical business goals, requirements,or initiatives, and clearly tie what we do to one or all of these.

Identify the Business Requirements. We begin by learningfrom the client what critical business, process, or individualissues are of concern and how improved performance canaffect what the client identifies as most important. This iswhat the client values, and to call out these elements at thebeginning of an engagement is a hallmark of success in per-formance improvement. Another colleague begins every pro-ject by identifying the related business requirements andposting them at his desk as a reminder throughout the engage-ment (personal communication, Miki Lane, April 18, 2004).

Evaluation Planning. With the business need clearly iden-tified, we move ahead with the performance-improvementproject and plan what and when we will evaluate. Thisadvance planning is key to successful evaluation. Legionsof practitioners wait until implementation to go hunting forbaseline information to compare with results. Then theyattempt to evaluate those results only to discover the nearimpossibility of doing so at the end of the project.

The best time to plan how you will evaluate a solution iswhen you and your client agree on it. Performance-improve-ment specialists design evaluation to• Show that the solution closes the identified performance

gap• Ensure that the solution relates to the business require-

ments• Ensure that the solution has value and meaning for all

groups that have a stake in the performance issue• Compare results with the baseline information collected

at project inception

Formative Evaluation. Successful performance-improvementinitiatives usually include formative evaluation in the projectplan. Because this type of evaluation occurs at each projectmilestone, wise performance consultants can take immediatecorrective action, a practice that keeps everyone on track.

Summative Evaluation. This is the evaluation that deter-mines whether or not a solution will be implemented, revised,or discontinued. It is usually conducted at the conclusion ofthe pilot or after a limited implementation.

Return on Investment (ROI). Finally, we want to provide ourclients with meaningful measures, from their own data, toshow that the investment the organization made to improveperformance has paid off. Rummler (2004) suggests that if weaccurately identify the critical business issue at the organiza-tional level, the critical process issue at the work or processlevel, and the critical job issue at the worker or individuallevel, we will have the necessary metrics to measure success.


The Savvy Performance ImprovementProfessional’s Guide to Successful PerformanceTechnology: A Deceptively Simple List

One universally enjoyable travel activity is shopping for trea-sures to bring back home for family and friends, or to keep anduse for one’s own. The Performance Technology Landscapeoffers a variety of terrains with much to see and do. While youwere busy absorbing new ideas and concepts we were quietlycollecting a few valuable mementos we think all seasoned per-formance-improvement professionals should have.

In particular, we searched out the factors that, in our experi-ence, will increase your chances of a successful implementa-tion. Keep in mind that implementation is the hill upon whichso many worthy solutions have met their untimely end.

Here is what we added to our travel bag (Addison and Lloyd,1999):• Mission and vision: What is the organization’s purpose?

Its goals? How does your performance-improvement pro-ject support and further the enterprise’s reason for exis-tence? Be sure these vital structures are in place beforeyou begin your work and that you and your client canclearly tie them to your project.

• Cultural audit: As we have discussed, culture is a power-ful driver in every organization. The performance-improvement professional assesses the internal climate atthe project’s inception to ensure that everything from dailyproject management to reports and recommendations arecompatible with the environment.

• Implementation team: Choose your team members withcare and ensure that you have several with a strong recordof successful implementations. You can build the best per-formance-improvement solution in the world, and it willfail if your team lacks the necessary navigational skills.

• Plans and contingencies: Be prepared for anything! Takethe time to envision everything that could possibly hap-pen during your project and plan your responses. Then,should the unexpected occur, you will have many goodideas to draw from in response as well as the confidenceto invent something on the spot if necessary.

• Communication: Do not keep your project a secret. Themost successful performance-improvement endeavors aremarked by consistent, clear communications to all stake-holders. Plan who should be informed, at what projectmilestones, and what communication vehicle you willuse. And it is never too early to market a new endeavor.

• Education: Show your client, your subject-matter experts,your team members, and your performance-improvementcolleagues how you are running your project. There is nomagic, and all can benefit from learning how it is done.

• Monitoring mechanisms: Set up two-way feedback andcommunication conduits so stakeholders can let youknow what is working and what should be fixed. Thenrespond promptly to maintain the project’s credibility andmomentum.

• Lessons learned: A mistake is a powerful learning tool.While no one likes to make errors, leveraging learningfrom them is invaluable. Capture the project goofs andrepair them. Then store that information in a useful for-mat for the future.

• Rewards and fun: There are many small successes in awell-run project, and they should be acknowledged andcelebrated. Find ways to recognize both individual teammembers and the whole group for their contributions. Anddo laugh and enjoy your work.

Heading Home

All journeys must come to an end, and we are pleased to havebeen your guides as you took in the features of the Perfor-mance Technology Landscape. It is time for you to think aboutwhat you saw in your travels and how you plan to put yournew tools and models to good use as you work to improveperformance. Perhaps a bit of prompting from us will helpyou organize your impressions to take home.

Landscape Model

Initially, we used the Performance Technology Landscape toorient ourselves to the world of performance improvement,gaining a better understanding of performance, performancetechnology, and critical supporting landmarks. We identifiedthe four levels of organizations where we work and the valuethat performance-improvement professionals can add whenwe raise our efforts to the next-highest organizational level.

Systems Model

Because systems thinking is scalable and can be applied at anyorganizational level, we can expand or compress performance-improvement initiatives to meet business requirements. Weexplored the systematic approach to show the ways in whichwe, in performance improvement, distinguish ourselves fromcolleagues in related disciplines. And we saw that we alwaysbegin with the end in mind. That is, we identify the results tobe achieved and work backward to inputs.

Performance Architecture

As we learned about performance systems, we moved from atraining perspective to a performance-system perspective,bringing to light another way in which performance-improve-ment professionals differ from other practitioners.

We also discovered that although current practice appears tofocus on repairing existing performance systems, we have ahistory of building them so that they can be put to valuableuse for our clients today.

Performance Map and the Tip of the Iceberg

Next, we discovered the versatile Performance Map, a toolthat provides a quick diagnosis and has special appeal for


managers who find it easy to use. The organizational dimen-sions, particularly culture, are important to factor into anyperformance analysis.

The Iceberg Model illustrates, once again, that we think dif-ferently. By starting at the bottom with the culture factor, andworking our way up to the tip of the iceberg, we can gain avery accurate understanding of an organization’s performancesystem, and identify the critical linkages necessary toimprove performance.

Feedback and Evaluation

Performance-improvement professionals tie their work to theorganization’s requirements and plan a series of evaluations atcritical project milestones. We compile formative feedback toevaluate our progress during the project’s life cycle and solicitsummative feedback to determine the “go–no go” decision. Byplanning and conducting evaluations throughout the project,we are able to use the client’s metrics to compile the ROI datathat they expect to receive from us.

The List

Finally, of course, you have our recommended list of factors thatguide you through a successful implementation of your project.

Travelers’ Advisory

The savvy traveler distills the learnings from every journeyand employs them to make the next trip smoother and moreenjoyable. Following are our critical learnings from our manyyears of helping organizations improve performance. We sharethem as our final travel treasure for you:• Keep up to date in your profession• Surround yourself with smart people• Cultivate a large and varied professional network• Participate in a professional association• Never hire anyone you would not like to have lunch with

We have enjoyed your company on this introductory trip andhope to see you again somewhere on the Performance Tech-nology Landscape.

References

Addison, R.M. (2004). Performance architecture: A perfor-mance improvement model. Performance Improvement,43(6), 14–16.

Addison, R.M., & Johnson, M. (1997). The building blocks ofperformance. Business Executive, 11(68), 3–5.

Addison, R.M., & Lloyd, C.R. (1999). Implementation: Theglue of organizational change. Performance Improvement,38(6), 8–11.

Carleton, J.R., & Lineberry, C.S. (2004). Achieving post-merger success: A stakeholder’s guide to cultural duediligence, assessment, and integration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Haig, C., & Addison, R.M. (2002, October). Trendspotters:Snapshots from the field featuring Edgar Necochea and RickSullivan. PerformanceXpress. Retrieved January 25, 2006from http://www.performancexpress.org/0210/.

Harmon, P. (1984). A hierarchy of performance variables.Performance and Instruction, 23(10), 27–28.

HP Invent (n.d.). Design for environment. Retrieved April 30, 2005, from www.hp.com/hpinfo/globalcitizenship/environment/productdesign/design.html.

International Society for Performance Improvement. (2004,March). ISPI Presidential Initiative Task Force Final Report.Silver Spring, MD: Author.

Levi Strauss and Co. (2005). Social responsibility/Our commitment. Retrieved April 30, 2005, from www.levistrauss.com/responsibility.

Rummler, G.A. (2004). Serious performance consulting:According to Rummler. Silver Spring, MD: InternationalSociety for Performance Improvement.

Siemens. (2005). Corporate citizenship. Retrieved April 30,2005, from www.siemens. com/index.jsp?sdc.

Tosti, D.T. (2004). Build or repair, or why I hate cause analysis(sometimes). Working Paper. San Rafael, CA: Tosti and Associates.

Additional Resources

Addison, R. M., and Haig, C. (1999). Performance technol-ogy in action. In H. D. Stolovitch and E. J. Keeps (Eds.), The handbook of human performance technology: Improv-ing individual and organizational performance worldwide(2nd ed.) (pp. 298–320). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Addison, R. M., and Wittkuhn, K. D. (2001). HPT: The culture factor. Performance Improvement, 40(3), 14–19.

Conner, D. R. (1994). Managing at the speed of change: How resilient managers succeed and prosper where othersfail. New York: Villard.

Gilbert, T. F. (1996). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance (ISPI tribute edition). Washington, DC,and Amherst, MA: ISPI and HRD Press.

Hale, J. (1998). The performance consultant’s fieldbook:Tools and techniques for improving organizations and people. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Harmon, P. (2002). Business process change. San Francisco:Morgan Kaufman.

Kaplan, R. S., and Norton, D. P. (2004). Strategy maps. Cam-bridge, MA: Harvard Business School.

Kotter, J. P. (1992). Corporate culture and performance.New York City: Free Press.


If you would like to order your copy of the Handbook for Human PerformanceTechnology, please visit ISPI’s online bookstore: www.ispi.org/bookstore.ISPI members receive a 15% discount on purchases.

Rummler, G. A., and Brache, A. P. (1995).Improving performance: How to manage thewhite space on the organization chart (2nded.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross,R., and Smith, B. (1994). The fifth disciplinefieldbook: Strategies and tools for building alearning organization. New York: Doubleday.

Stolovitch, H. D., and Keeps, E. J. (2004). Train-ing ain’t performance. Washington, DC: Amer-ican Society for Training and Development.

Trompenaars, F., and Turner, H. (1997). Riding the waves of culture: Understandingcultural diversity in business. Yarmouth,ME: Brealey.

Van Tiem, D., Moseley, J. L., and Dessinger, J.C. (2001). Performance improvement inter-ventions: Enhancing people, processes, andorganizations through performance technol-ogy. Silver Spring, MD: International Societyfor Performance Improvement.

Roger M. Addison, CPT, EdD, is an internationallyrespected practitioner of human performance technologyand performance consulting. He is the senior director ofhuman performance technology for ISPI. Roger was vicepresident and manager at Wells Fargo Bank. His responsi-bilities included executive coaching and education, changemanagement, and partnering with line managers to improveperformance. He earned his doctorate in educational psy-chology from Baylor University. Roger is a past president ofISPI, and in 1998 he received ISPI’s highest award, mem-ber for life. As an international delegate to the InternationalFederation of Training and Development Organizations(IFTDO) and ISPI conferences, Roger has worked and pre-sented in North America, South America, Asia, Europe,Africa, and the Middle East. He currently serves as presidentfor IFTDO and may be reached at [email protected].

Carol Haig, CPT, has more than 25 years of multi-indus-try experience partnering with organizations to improveemployees’ performance. She is known for her skills inproject management, analysis, problem and opportunitydiagnosis, instructional design, and facilitation. She cur-rently leads Carol Haig and Associates, a consulting firmshe founded in 1998. Carol is a past director of ISPI andthe recipient of ISPI’s awards for outstanding organization,outstanding instructional product, and distinguished ser-vice (1996, 2006). She holds an MS degree in secondaryEnglish education from the State University College of NewYork at Buffalo and a BS degree in the same discipline fromthe State University College of New York at Plattsburg.Carol may be reached at [email protected].


Documents

The performance architect's essential guide to the performance technology landscape