HPT+Systems+Approach

=HPT - A systems approach to solving Organizational Problems=

// What is Human Performance Technology (HPT)? Need for FIVE phases in the HPT systems approach. //

Compare Van Tiem et al’s (2004) HPT model (ref 1) with that of Pershing’s Performance Improvement Process (Figure 1.1, p.15 in reference 2). Read relevant parts of references 1 and 2 to understand the phases. You may also consult the five HPT models given in Reference 4, pp.11 – 21.
 * Task ** (Wiki Posts + comments):

Week 3:

 * Post 1 ** : Write a post explaining and comparing an aspect from the first two phases (Performance Analysis **//__or__//** Cause Analysis) in the two models. Provide examples from your own experience or those given in the reference 2. (3 marks)
 * Post 2 ** : For a post other than your own, write a comment/suggestion/question. (2 marks)

Week 4:
( please remember to include your own name with each post or part )
 * Post 3 ** : Write a post explaining and comparing an aspect from one of the last three phases (Intervention design and development **//__or__//** Implementation **//__or__//** evaluation) in the two models. Provide examples from your own experience or those given in the reference 2. (3 marks)
 * Post 4 **: For a post and phase other than your own, write a comment/suggestion/question. (2 marks)

Feedback on Posts 1 and 2: Good efforts on trying to understand both models! Here is my feedback.
==== Pershing (Fig.1.1) derives his stages after a thorough study of available models combined with practical organizational experience. Although Van Tiem (2004) puts the words Need or Opportunity in brackets, Pershing feels that it is necessary to identify the source, i.e. who has raised the alarm for performance improvement. He therefore uses the word "perception", as the reality of the perception as well as its alignment with the goals and vision of the organization needs to be tested. To implement any sort of "change", who owns the "perception" needs to be identified as a "buy-in" or transfer of "ownership" to those who need to be involved in the actual "change-process" needs to be affected. To facilitate identification of who raised the alarm and transfer of ownership to the right people, Pershing breaks down the "need" or "perception" into a stage where analysis needs to start, i.e. is it a productivity problem, is it a quality improvement initiative or is it a business opportunity? Once this is decided, it is easier to detect the key players involved as well as those who need to be involved in the "change-process". ====

Thanks for your feedback. I am more clear about both model. I prefer Pershing's model because I too feel it is important to identify the source of the problem before providing a solution. I have posted Task for the following week earlier as I will be very busy next week. Hope this is OK. (Enna)

That's great explanation Prof. I understand the models better. I also agree with Enna on Pershing's model, to identify the source of challenge is essential so that correct decisions and solutions can take place. In addition, the example given by Prof on who is responsible for the performance management is important in all types of organisation, to know who are actual capable and will be able to affect the change. (Jesvin)

When reading the explanation I agree with Enna and Jesvin that things are more clear now with regards to the two models. Thank you for the explanation Prof. (Wynand)

Dear Prof., Thank you for the feedback. I am late in responding because last week was quite hectic and I was not very strong. Your explanation actually threw light on the inter-relatedness of the two models. Thank you (Olubiyi).

Feedback:
==== Pershing (Fig 1.1, ref 2) moves Performance Analysis to the third stage whereas Van Tiem (2004, ref 1) classifies the same thing as "Environmental Analysis" in the first stage. Both models suggest FOUR areas which need to be analysed in which gaps may exist. According to Pershing, however, it is only after the gap is known that the "Cause" or causes of the Gap can be identified in the various systems, i.e. Organisational, Management, Physical & Technical and/or Human and Social Systems. Interventions must therefore be identified as needed in all, in one or more than one systems. As such, it may be easier to design Interventions separately in each of the four systems. ====

==== Van Tiem (Ref 1) lumps Intervention Selection, Design and Development together while suggesting six areas of Performance Support. Pershing (Fig.1.1, Ref 2) on the other hand suggests that the feasibility of each intervention must first be evaluated before embarking on Design, Development and Implementation of the Interventions. Feasibility Analysis forces an Evaluation of the Intervention before the expensive and time consuming processes of Design, Development and Implementation. Van Tiem (Ref 1) places and categorises Evaluation in a separate box suggesting the types of Evaluation. Both models suggest the importance of Evaluation and Feedback in all stages. ====

Feedback on your examples:
==== Successful HPT interventions require ownership or "buy-in" of the Intervention as well as Evaluation by the stakeholders. The stakeholders must be motivated and involved as a team to achieve the desired results. The HPT technologist must work with the stakeholders to achieve the results. ====

Pls add your comments to the feedback in the space below: Dear Prof, Your feedback confirms my thinking, that Pershing's Performance Analysis and Van Tiem's "Environment Analysis" are both referring to the same thing. However, any design you particularly prefer to use? (Enna).

Enna, thank you for your comments and question. Pershing's Model provides a step-by-step approach and a more specific taxonomy. In practice, with experience one can safely skip certain parts given the nature of business. I will share successful HPT studies in the Case Studies section as we move along. Yousuf.

Hi Prof, your explanation is much more clear and simple to understand. I agree that stakeholders need to be motivated and involved. As an example, my school currently launched a "Leader In Me" program by Sean Covey Foundation (7 Habits) and I was selected to be the coordinator of the program. I noticed that stakeholders also play a big role in making the program a success such as parents, students, directors, management staffs, ministry of education. Even though, they are people who are not directly involved with doing the work but they will be affected by the changes and do influence the program. They too need to be motivated so that we can achieve the desired results to met the objective of this program. In the same way, when a new technology is established in school the stakeholders need to look at it as a positive input and that's when the results are fully achieved.

I do agree with Prof on Pershing's Model, on the other hand I also support Van Tiem's Model on feasibility analysis. I believe that before spending money and time without knowing the benefits can affect a company's performance. Thus, I believe feasibility analysis is a good idea that forces an evaluation before time, effort and money is spent on design, development and implementation. (Jesvin)

=the Models= || =Examples from= =Own Experience= || =Comment/= =Suggestion/= =Question= || =Comment/= =Suggestion/= =Question= || =Analysis= || One of the major differences between Tiem's HPT model and Pershing's performance improvement model is that Pershing's model begins with what he termed 'Perception Analysis'. According to Pershing (2006), performance improvement process has its beginning in perception analysis because "individuals or a group in an organization move forward with one or three types of perceptions. They believe there are performance problems, they believe there is a challenge for quality, or they believe that new or emerging business opportunities have arisen" (p. 15). It is from this perception analysis that the need or gap emerges because the desired performance and the actual performance are compared based on the perception analysis. Another significant difference is that Pershing feels the need that has been perceived has to be aligned strategically with the organizational missions, goals and objectives to determine if the need would enhance the organizational value or not. Performance analysis would then be done if there is a strategic alignment between the need and the organizational values.
 * =Phase= || =Comparison of=
 * =Performance=

For Tiem, performance analysis begins with organizational analysis. Through the use of organizational analysis, the technologist would arrive at the desired workforce performance because the data to be used for the organizational analysis are the vision, the mission, the values, goals and strategies of the organization. This fact makes strategic alignment irrelevant here because the alignment would have taken place through organizational analysis. After arriving at the desired workforce performance, the actual state of workforce performance is also determined through environmental analysis. In environmental analysis, the vital aspects of the environment are analyzed: organizational environment, work environment, work and the worker. At this point, the desired workforce performance and the actual state of workforce performance would be compared to reveal the gap that would eventually lead to the gap analysis.

It is important to note that the data used by Tiem's model for environmental analysis would be similar to Pershing's four items on performance analysis: organizational system, management system, physical and technical system and human and social system. For example, an analysis of the 'worker' would reveal the same thing as 'human and social system' (Olubiyi).

=
 By referring to Van Tiem, et al. (2004). Human Performance Technology Model. The performance analysis focuses on the organisational analysis. This aspect is an important area of analysis as I believe the vision, mission, values, goals, & strategies of an organisation are essential part of the whole organisation. Mission states the purpose of the organisation, it defines why an organisation is in business. Vision defines what the organisations business is to be or be known for. It provides the progress to where the organisation is heading too and what the organisation wants to achieve at some point in the future. Goals of an organisation give the organisation clarity, direction and focus. The goals need to measurable and realistic.Long-range goals set through strategic planning are translated into activities that will ensure reaching the goal. ===== ==== Five categories of marketing strategies that are available are advertising, direct marketing, events, public relations and word of mouth. The values uphold by the organisation to run a smooth and productive organisation is essential. Thus, to know an organisation is by understanding its vision, mission, values, goals, & strategies. After looking into the organisational analysis it then leads to environment analysis and the desired workforce. At the environment analysis knowing the organisational environment is important as to know who the organisation is influenced by. The most important stakeholders are shareholders who own the business, employees who work for the organisation, and clients or customers who purchase products and/or services from the organisation and also the competition faced by the organisation. The work environment looks in the resources and tools available and also human resources policies provided by the organisation. Next, analyse the work and workforce available in the orgnaisation such as the workflow, the knowledge and experience of the staffs. Through the environment analysis the actual state of workforce performance can be determined. In result, the gap analysis of the desired workforce and actual state of workforce is clarified. It simply words, it can be compared to where the organisation wants to head to and where is it heading to now. ====

=
 By referring to Pershing’s Performance Improvement Process (Figure 1.1, p.15 in reference 2). Compare to Van Tiem, et al. (2004). Human Performance Technology Model the Pershing’s Performance Improvement Process starts by analysing the perception of the organisation where the productivity problem, quality improvement initiative and business opportunity is analysed before moving on to performance analysis. Performance analyst can identify the different perceived levels of importance within an organisation that is found in the process of perception analysis. The organisational mission, goals, objectives, strategic alignment and desired performance versus actual performance is identified. If there is challenges faced at this level, it stops whereas if no challenges are faced the analysis continues to the performance analysis. In this model the performance analyst looks into the human and social system, physical and technical system, management system and organisational system. The performance analysis focuses on factors that drive individual, group, and organisational performance. The analyst will pose questions, collect data, analyse the data, and determine a response at the performance analysis level. Pershing also believes that the gap is often perceived as the difference between actual performance and desired future performance. Thus, analysis will only continue to performance analysis if the gaps are cleared. If we look into the environment analysis of Tiem Human Performance Technology Model it is the similar analysis that takes place in the performance analysis of Pershing’s Performance Improvement Process. As a whole the both models analysis similar aspects but the methods and ways used are different. ===== (Jesvin)

When we look at performance analysis we should first define it and the site []defines it as follow: “Performance analysis involves gathering formal and informal data to help customers and sponsors define and achieve their goals”. It further explains that it “uncovers several perspectives on a problem or opportunity, determining any and all drivers towards or barriers to successful performance, and proposing a solution system based on what is discovered”. Mueller (2006) defines “Human performance technology is the study and ethical practice of improving productivity in organizations by designing and developing effective interventions that are results-oriented, comprehensive, and systemic”.

Each of the two models approaches it from a different angle, but they have the same goal in mind and that is to improve a part of the organization (look for needs) or to fix a problem that someone has brought forth.

Van Tiem et al’s (2004) HPT model (ref 1) calls the model Human Performance Technology model and it starts with performance analysis. The Organizational Analysis which includes the organizations (Vision, Mission, Values, Goals, & Strategies) forms the starting point and from there the Desired Workforce Performance is linked to it. The desired work performance leads to another category called the gap analysis, which is then applied to determine the gap in performance. Environmental Analysis now forms a key part which includes [• Organizational Environment (Society, Stakeholders, & Competition) • Work Environment (Resources, Tools, Human Resources Policies) • Work (Work Flow, Procedure, Responsibilities, & Ergonomics) • Worker (Knowledge, Skill, Motivation, Expectations, & Capacity)]. An important aspect here and also the starting point are the vision, mission, values, goals, and strategies of the organization to which all performance is measured against.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 16px;">Pershing’s Performance Improvement Process (Figure 1.1, p.15 in reference 2) on the other hand calls his model the Pershing Performance Improvement Process and the model starts with perception analysis. Pershing starts with perception analysis and they first look at Productivity problem, Quality improvement initiative and Business Opportunity. Only in the second phase they look at Organisational mission, goals, and objectives, Strategic alignment and desired performance against Actual performance. They start strategic alignment and than they look at performance analysis. In their performance analysis they look at aspects such as Organisational systems, Management systems, Physical and technical systems as well as Human and social systems.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 16px;">Both models have a different starting point and both are analyzing aspects to improve performance and to determine the gap in performance. There are similarities in their analysis such as their organisational analysis (vision, mission, values, goals, and strategies of the organisation). Van Tiem grouped all aspects under environmental aspects while Pershing’s is flowing out from performance analysis. "A way to judge the importance of a perceived need is to ascertain its relationship to meeting the missions, goals, and objectives of the organization. This is strategic alignment" <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 16px;">Mueller (2006: 17). Another aspect in the Pershing Model is the alignment of the categories from left to right Mueller (2006) "The order of the elements in the model, from left to right, has meaning" .(p. 20) "Over time, I have also learned that the order, again from left to right, has meaning in terms of level of difficulty in problem identification and problem solving" (p. 20).

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 16px;"> One important aspect in performance analysis is to take a long term approach to ensure that the performance improvement initiative ties in with the organisation's vision, mission, and values. (Wynand) || rom my experience, performance analysis is usually a combination of both Pershing's and Tiem's approaches. For example, as a staff of my own university, I perceived that we have a performance problem (thus beginning with perception) but to situate the kind of problem, I needed to move on to the performance analysis by properly situating the performance problem by taking a look at the mission and the vision statement of the University and using that to determine the desired performance output and looking at what is on ground to look at the actual state of performance output (Olubiyi).

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">In my institution we are sitting with a performance situation and it is measured against the results at the end of each year. We need to do performance analysis to analyse what the gap is and from there try to solve the problem. we state in our mission that we will provide quality education using a variety of innovative open and distance learning methods, but we fail. It is normally poor tutor performance and lack of innovation. We use teachers that taught in the morning in the full time system and we employ them part-time in the afternoon. Maybe it is asking too much from a teacher, but they apply, because it is an extra income. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">(Wynand)

As what is shared by Wynand, my own experience in school is also similar. We also we do performance analysis to analyse the area that we can improve and how can the gap be closed. We revisit the school mission and vision to a line everyone's thought process. And goals and strategies are decided together and discussed time to time. And from there we dedicate towards our desired work to achieve our goals. On the other hand, we also need to look into the resources available to ensure is we are able to perform a specific task before actually working on it.

=
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 11pt;">Thus, our school's analyses the productivity problem, quality improvement initiative and opportunities available before moving on to performance analysis. ===== (Jesvin) || I would suggest therefore, the creation of a human performance technology model that would combine both perception and performance analysis in one stage (Olubiyi).

Both Jesvinder and Wynand take Pershing's perception analysis to include all the three sub-divisions listed: productivity problem, quality improvement initiative and business opportunity. It is important to note that this may not necessarily be the case as indicated by Pershing (200615) indicates, "individuals or a group in an organization move forward with **one of three** types of perceptions". However, I also believe that the type of perception may be more than one, but it can be one and not two or three (Olubiyi).

Hi Wynand, I have question on why the performance analysis is measured end of each year only? Don't you think it will be too late to overcome the gaps if we analysis at the end of the year only? I agree with that some staffs are not sincerely involved and at times the mission and vision of the organisation can't be achieved fully and this creates challenge to close the gaps. (Jesvin)

Hi Jesvin, I agree with you that to do performance measurement only at the end of the year is too late. This is how our system works that we only have one formal examination for secondary education (Grade 10 and 12). What I, however, should mention is that our distance learners submit 3 assignments that is graded for a continuous assessment mark. The continuous assessment is 35% and final examination 65%. (Wynand) || <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">Olubiyi, according to Pershing's model, **Perception Analysis** is one stage, and **Performance Analysis** is another stage, within the evaluation and Feedback stage, whereas Van Tiem's theory analyses the **Peformance** first, and then the **Cause Analysis**. (I think perception and cause is the same). However, combining both perception and performance in one stage could make the analyzing process rather heavy. (ENNA)

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">Enna, I disagree with you. Cause analysis cannot be equated with perception analysis because cause analysis is to unearth the reason behind the gap between the desired and the actual state of performance which requires data and careful analysis. If you look at Tiem's cause analysis, examples of cause given are lack of environmental support and lack of repertory behavior. Perception analysis can only lead to gap analysis and not be equated with cause analysis (Olubiyi) || <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 15px;">also based on Van Tiem et al’s (2004) HPT model (ref 1), <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;"> it stated that in HPT steps, in doing a **<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">Cause Analysis **<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">, the organisation will be looking at: <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">o Lack of environmental support <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">o Lack of repertory of behaviour
 * =Cause Analysis= || <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">Looking at the five HPT models given in Reference 4 (pp.11 – 21), which is

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">Whereas in another HPT theory, that is the <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 15px;">Pershing’s Performance Improvement Process (Figure 1.1, p.15 in reference 2), <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">The 2nd Step in Pershing's Performance Improvement Process is: <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">o **Evaluation and feedback process and it is a co-current, ongoing process,** until the gap of the desired performance and the actual performance is getting less and eventually close off. <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive; font-size: 16px;">(ENNA) || <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">From my own experience, by default I used the Van Tiem, et al.'d HPT model. After doing the analysis, it is found that the causes for performance problems when doing our elearning courses are <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">1. Quality control failure <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">2. Wastage of time and resources <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">3. Drop of employee's morale

<span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">It is found when doing a Cause Analysis, that the root of the problem is: <span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS',cursive;">1. The clients often asks for changes in content during the development phase and most often the changes are huge and requires a rewriting of the storyboards and hogs the content authoring process. (ENNA) || Enna,when you start with elearning do you have writers that start with the content writing first? If it is not the case I would suggest that you need to start there. I know it is time consuming if there is a lot of changes that needs to take place in the development phase. What we found works better is when we employ writers to write content packs. We train them by giving a workshop and show them how to write these content packs. We contact a content and language editor as well to work through the content packs before we start with the storyboards. We found that there is less changes and mistakes if we do it that way. At each stage we do quality assurance. (Wynand)

That is a good suggestion Wynand, but we are a small company (7 team members) and the management wants to keep it small because of budget constrains. Currently, The Subject Matter expert will hand in the content to us, and we will have to rewrite/ simplify based on what we read and understand. So we are also the content writer, storyboard writer, project manager, Quality Assurance, and now Developer. . . We had a content writer but he was let go as having him around was not impactful as he also does not have control of the content but the Subject Matter Expert or the Client. We implemented a change recently which we hope will be impactful. This year we decided to change our way of doing content authoring. We're using a new tool content authoring tool this year which is Smartbuilder, which we hope to close the performance gap. Since Smartbuilder is an online authoring tool and it enables sharing and editing of content, client will be able to change content but we have the control of the interface in the environment. To know more about Smartbuilder go to [|suddenlysmart.com/] (Enna)

Thanks for sharing the new tool. I will certainly try it out. You guys are doing a huge task of doing everything yourselves and I think in the process you are developing quite a lot of skills. Do you built any capacity with part-time staff, because when some of the developers moves to other institutions they are taking all their skills along with them and leaving the institution with another challenge. Why we also involve part-time staff is to transfer skills at the same time, because developing elearning is a challenge and it is good to bring new people on board from time to time. all the best. (Wynand)

Correct Wynad, I learn a lot more by working at elearningminds.com, then a multi-national company ACS Xerox. We have voiced this to our boss, because as you say, when knowledge worker leaves, the company will suffer if they don't take steps to protect themselves. (Enna)

I agree with you on this Enna. Protecting and keeping the staffs happy is important in an organisation. Moreover, when we don't want to lose the staff. I guess some organisation fail to understand this. (Jesvin) ||  || =Design & Development= || **<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">Intervention Selection ** <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">Mueller explains in the Pershing Model that “once the performance gap and its underlying causes, means, or opportunities are identified, interventions can be selected” (p. 21). These gaps that are identified can be performance problems, quality improvement initiatives, and business opportunities and therefore intervention is needed. Intervention is needed to improve performance and therefore the end result should be to produce results normally from what it is into what it should be (Mueller: 21).
 * =Intervention Selection,=

<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">**The design** **stage** includes identifying content and setting of clearly defined objectives to achieve a specific goal. Mueller explains it clearly by stating that “the means include identifying content and substance, and delineating outcomes” (p. 23). More strategies includes proposing cost-effective activities and actions and to achieve the objectives. All of this leads to a design plan. <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">**The development stage** “involves the actual production of the interventions, including a project-management plan. The interventions and the accompanying administrative support system must be validated through pre- and pilot testing. (p. 23) <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">**The implementation stage** involves the application of the tested interventions on a large scale. Each of these stages needs its own evaluation, approval, and feedback provisions (p. 23) Intervention, design and development
 * <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">Design, Development, and Implementation **

<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">The Pershing Model is divided into three stages called intervention selection, feasibility analysis and design development and implementation. Van Tiem (2004) on the other hand only has one group (Intervention, design and development) and does not have the other two aspects feasibility and implementation in this phase. Another interesting aspect is that the Pershing Model has evaluation and feedback at each stage. Van Tiems Model also includes aspects not mentioned and part of the Pershing Model. These include Performance Support (Instructional and Non Instructional), Job Analysis/Work Design, Personal Development, Human Resource Development, Organizational Communication, Organizational Design and Development Financial Systems.


 * <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">Feasibility Analysis **

<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">The feasibility analysis of the Pershing model is an aspect that is a separate category and not like Van Tiem (2004) part of the total package. Van Tiem calls it financial systems. Mueller (p. 23) explains it as this component of the model that “relates to identifying and assessing the probable or likely success of solution strategies or interventions”. These feasibility factors can be practical, political or cultural.

<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">Practical factors are administrative capacity, costs, workplace readiness, available technology, and timing.

<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">Political factors include benefits, leadership, stakeholder readiness, and organizational power structures.

<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">Cultural factors include employer and employee development, organizational culture, and readiness for change. (Wynand)

<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">In his model, Tiem placed the intervention selection, design and development in the third stage, that is, after the cause analysis stage. This is proper because the cause analysis would have revealed the cause of the gap analysis which would have helped to indicate the type of intervention needed. Unlike Pershing, Tiem grouped intervention selection along with the design and development while Pershing separated the intervention selection from the design and development (but added implementation) and separated the two stages with the feasibility analysis. I feel however that the feasibility analysis in Tiem's model would be subsumed in the other parts of the stage. This position is corroborated by Spitzer (1999) who developed the steps to be taken at the design and development stages. Accordign to Spitzer (1999), the design stage has 6 essential steps, as follow: <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">1. Review and Expand Analysis <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">2. Identification of Intervention Objectives <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">3. Identification and Prioritization of requirements <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">4. Selection of Intervention Components <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">5. Preparation of High Level Intervention Design, and <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">6. Complete detailed intervention plan.

<span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">The development stage comprises of 5 stages: <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">1. Selection of development team <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">2. Preparation of development plan <span style="font-family: 'Slimbach-Book','serif';">3. Development of test prototype 4.Revising the development plan, and 5. Production of the final intervention material.

As all these steps listed, a feasibility analysis would have taken place at the development stage. This notwithstanding, it has to be noted that the feasibility analysis of the Pershing model made the feasibility a unique stage and thus may look better than the feasibility being sandwiched in the steps of development (Olubiyi) || In my institution we are following the Pershing Model approach from the intervention selection stage. We call it the problem identification stage. After each formal examination the team of markers compile a report which highlights the problem areas. Areas that learners performed poorly and these reports are send to teachers to improve. We select those topics when we develop web-based lessons or any other multimedia. We select a few topics and recruit part-time writers to write content packs for multimedia. We do quality assurance at each stage to ensure content correctness and easy navigation, usability and to make interesting. In the pilot-phase we get good reviews, but we still struggle with the tutors to use it effectively in their teaching. We had training sessions last year in the regions and will follow up this year with an impact study to find out if the motivated training was successful. (Wynand)

In NOUN a lot of intervention program has been undertaken and they have not been successful basically because most intervention program have usually been taught of at the Management level and carried out without carrying the general staff along. As a result, it is usually met with low enthusiasm from the staff that are supposed to become more productive. For example, though the university have been having problems running her examinations on MAPLE TA. At the first two exams, we used the 4th edition of MAPLE TA but we had serious problems of system timing out among others. By the third examinations, the university brought the 7th edition and because there was even no thorough training of the IT staff, we had greater problems. Though it was easy for the university to blame MAPLE TA and condemn it, I feel that there was no try out period to know if it was going to work wholesale or if there would be the need for modifications. Intervention programs must be carefully planned and executed if success is to be recorded (Olubiyi). || Hi Wynand, I would like to understand why does your institute use team of makers to mark, don't the teachers who prepare the papers also carry out the marking? Do your teachers prepare the exam papers? (Jesvin)

Hi Jesvin, this is a national exam and the tutors of the institution does not set or mark the exams. All exams are marked at a venue where markers are appointed. They only set their own tests and then mark it. We accommodate all students that fail in the formal system and once they pass they can go back into the formal system. (Wynand)

Hi Wynand, So far have you any hiccups in implementing the change other than the apprehension you get from your writers? (Enna)

Hi Enna, not at the moment seeing that we involve the team in the quality assurance sessions as we are developing. (Wynand)

Hi Olubiyi,

What is MAPLE TA. Is it your university's Learning Management System (LMS) system or a type of tool to run assessment? (Enna)

MAPLE TA is an e-examination software developed by a company called MAPLE in Canada. We started using the software for our e-examinations since 2010. Though we have issues with it, I still believe that it is a good software (Olubiyi) ||  || =Change= || <span style="display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt; text-align: justify;">In Pershing Performance Improvement Process Model once the intervention selection is done, the feasibility analysis takes place. Here the success of interventions is identified as individual or set as a whole. Next, he looks into design, development and implementation as a whole. The initiative goes through these stages if it worth carry through the given performance. The design stage will propose the objectives and strategies for achieving the objectives. The development stage involves the actual production of the interventions; it is validated through pilot testing. The development phase draws upon the information collected in the analysis phase and the decisions made in the design phase. The implementation stage involves is to test the interventions. Testing is done to check if the interventions are feasible. Pilot testing is used to conduct feasibility analysis. Each of these stages needs its own evaluation, approval, and feedback provisions (adapted from Romiszowski, 1981).
 * =Intervention Implementation &=

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt; text-align: justify;">Van Tiem, Human Performance Technology Model (2004), intervention implementation and change takes place after intervention selection, design, and development is done. At the intervention implementation and change stage, the change management becomes a consideration through the entire process and serves as a foundation element. The process consulting is done to ensure process runs smoothly, it involves process planning to prepare for the new and improved environment, produce detailed project and consider all of the stakeholders who will be involved. Thus employee development to run this process is also done at this stage. Communication is important at this stage and needs several media to create excitement about the positive changes. On the other hand, performance improvement professionals rely on networks and alliances to provide ideas and feedback to enable their efforts to achieve success. In this way feedback and ideas are produce/received fast and change can immediately take place. <span style="display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt; text-align: justify;">(Jesvin) || In my school, when are new system is designing to set our exam papers or a new system is designed for the management staffs. Consultation is done to ensure the new system is comfortable to the users and runs smoothly. In addition, employee development is conducted to ensure everyone are familiar with the new design and communication among everyone is carried out to motivate the use of the new design. Feedback is provided and accepted from everyone. (Jesvin) || Hello Jesvin, though your submission is actually good, it is more or less a summary of the process but you have overlooked something important. This is because according to Tiem, the intervention implementation and change is still subjected to an evaluation which would be taking place formatively (that is during the implementation for the purposes of making corrections in the implementation processes) and also summatively as well as confirmatively (Olubiyi).

Yes I do understand what you mean. But, if we look at the model Tiem categorised it as an implementation stage. I understand that evaluation takes place after the implementation is done. At this stage, I was just describing the implementation stage. Yes change is still subject to change when evaluation is conduct to ensure the objective is met. (Jesvin)

Hi Jesvin, the way you explain it looks like the way you approach the implementation of a new system works well. Am I right in assuming that it is time consuming, but worth it? (Wynand) ||  || 1. Formative 2. Summative, and 3. Confirmative
 * =Evaluation= || **In Van Tiem et al's Model**, in the Evaluation process, The data collected from the Cause Analysis, Intervention Selection, Design and Development and Intervention Implementation and Change is compiled into 3 catagories that is:

1. **Formative** In formative stage, Performance Analysis, Cause Analysis and the selected/design of interventions required is evaluated

2. **Summative** In the Summative stage, the data collected from the Performance Analysis Stage is evaluated and further categorized into 2, those are which that needed (1) Immediate Reaction and which of those which needed (2) Immediate Competence.

3. **Confirmative** In the Confirmative stage, the data collected from the Performance Analysis Stage is evaluated and further categorized into 3, that is (1) Continuing Competence that means if employee affedted need to be transfered, (2) Continuing Effectiveness, meaning does the change which will be made have organizational Impact and (3) Return on Investment- that is does the change brings back return (in form of monetary) to the company.

ALL OF THE DATA in the Formative, Summative and Confirmative stage will need to be validated by another party who requested change/implement change to confirm the process and/or to confirm products, as well as to formalize lesson learned from the HPT process.


 * In Pershing's model,** unlike Van Tiem et al, Evaluation process is done co-currently with other processes and is named as the Evaluation and Feedback stage. For revaluation for each stage that is the organizational mission, goals and objectives to be sure it is aligned with startegic alignment and the desired performance, Performance Analysis, Intervention Selection and Design, Development and Implemention. The data is evaluated and feedback is given and then the data is again evaluated as much as possible to close the Gap between the actual performance and the desired performance. (ENNA)

|| In the evaluation process perhaps my company's approach is that of Pershing's model. That is evaluation and feedback is done co-currently with re-evaluation of the company's goal and mission and realigning it with it's goals. In closing the gaps of performance, recently we attempt to change our authoring tools to rapid elearning development. using this method, content creation and editing stage can be done co-currently so that changes can be made easily and painstakingly as an employee need not have knowledge in programming/authoring in order to use the tool. We also educate our clients in using the tools as well so they can implement the change as and when. The tool we used is Smartbuilder, (ENNA)

ENNA, thank you for sharing that. I think we should try the tool and as you have explained the content creation and editing can be done co-currently. That saves time and seeing that changes can be made by the developers at the same time. We will have a challenge in training the content writers and editors to use the tool. When you educate the clients, do you have a formal training session in how to use the software? Give me some ideas on how to educate a writer with little computer skills. Some of our older writers prefer to submit the old fashioned way, print. (Wynand)

Dear Wynand, we are changing the way of doing things this year, bec we find that when we develop the materials on our own, it is time consuming and costly. That is why we decide to explore using Smartbuilder. We hope we are successful in implementing this change which we hope is the solution for our own Human Peformance Problem.

We have several sessions of training from using several elearning tools for our clients or whoever is interested to register into our workshop, We have several training set up each year. For writers who are apprehensive in using the computer, if they still refuse to change after the management has tried to help them to adapt with the change by giving them training and coaching, perhaps they need to realize if they think they are good writers, someone else is always better and more willing to use technology. So they need to realize that they may lose their jobs if they do not want to change and move with technology. The people who are able to stay in the industry are those who are open to change because what is new in elearning today, is old news within a few months. (Enna)

Yes I strongly agree with you Enna that educating your clients in using the tools so they can implement the change is a great idea that your company is doing. But, do you guide them on the change they make? At times, the change that they make may not be right as some of them may not have the proper knowledge. (Jesvin)

We will guide them in using the tools, as we provide consulting service we also help them to form and strengthen their own learning and development team. (Enna) ||  ||   ||