Rothwell W.J. - Beyond Training and Development[c] The Groundbreaking Classic on Human Performance Enhancement (2004)(2-e)(en)

from the gap from the costs associated with it. The remainder should equal the benefits of action.

Question 4: How Do the Costs and Benefits Compare?

Compare the costs and benefits estimated for taking action to those for taking no action. How do they compare? Which ratio yields the higher present advantage? The higher ratio over time? Why?

Question 5: What Nonfinancial Measures May Be Important?

Avoid making decisions based solely on financial, or hard, measures. Consider also the soft measures. What intangible issues are at stake? Will taking action to close a performance gap produce intangible costs or benefits? If so, what are they? Will inaction yield intangible costs or benefits? If so, what are they?

Question 6: What Is the Importance of the Performance Gap?

How advantageous is it to take action? Not to take action? The gap is important only if the benefits of taking action exceed those of inaction or if nonfinancial measures of taking action are likely to outweigh the costs. In those cases, the gap should be regarded as a human performance enhancement priority. On the other hand, consider the gap unimportant if the benefits of taking action are less than those of not taking action or if the nonfinancial benefits of inaction are apparent.

The Competencies of the HPE Facilitator

Applying the new HPE model described in Chapter 2 calls for trainers-turned- HPE specialists to display competencies linked to determining the importance of performance gaps. These competencies, listed in Appendix I and described briefly here, are associated with the role of HPE facilitator.

1.Ability to determine the importance of gaps between what is and what should be in the organization’s interactions with the external environment.

HPE specialists must possess the ability to detect, or to lead others to detect, mismatches between what is and what should be happening in the organization’s interactions with the external environment. This means

Exhibit 7-4. A grid for uncovering human performance enhancement opportunities.

Directions: For each sector or issue area listed in column 1, describe in column 2 important trends that you feel are likely to change the external environment in which the organization is functioning. Then, in column 3, describe what changes are most likely to result from the trends over the next one to three years. In column 4, identify human performance enhancement opportunities that may present themselves because of the trends. Be creative. There are no right or wrong answers. In the spirit of employee empowerment and involvement, you may wish to involve organizational stakeholders, decision makers, and employees in this creative activity.

Product/service cycle time

Work methods

Customer needs/preferences

Social trends

Workforce trends

Supplier trends

Distributor trends

Other (please specify):

The consequences that stem from existing gaps between what is and what should be happening in work flow

The importance of those consequences

4.Ability to determine the importance of gaps between what workers can do and what they should be able to do. HPE specialists can lead, coordinate, or participate in matching work requirements to worker competencies. They can discover answers to questions such as these:

What competencies are available among workers to function effectively in the organization’s internal and external environment and to deal with the work processing requirements?

What competencies should be available among workers to function effectively in the organization’s internal and external environment and to deal with the work processing requirements?

What gaps exist between worker competencies required now and those available now?

What gaps exist between worker competencies required in the future and those available now?

How important are the gaps in worker competencies?

What consequences stem from—or are expected to stem from—these competency gaps?

The HPE Consultant’s Role in Determining the Importance of Performance Gaps

The HPE consultant’s role is key to the process of determining the importance of performance gaps. HPE consultants enacting the role of management consultants will tend to draw their own conclusions about what is important. They will then seek to persuade clients of that importance by discovering appropriate financial and nonfinancial measures. But HPE consultants enacting the role of process consultants will tend to involve their clients in discovering how important a particular performance gap is. Indeed, process consultants are keenly aware that perceptions of importance can vary, depending on who draws the conclusion. What is important to top managers may not be important to front-line employees, and what is important to customers may not be perceived as important to some members of the organization. Hence, a challenge of HPE consultants who enact the process consultant role is to encourage people to feel importance from the perspective of others.

Traditional Views of Cause

Historically, theorists have focused on three possible causes of all human performance problems. Robert F. Mager and Peter Pipe, for example, distinguish among skill deficiencies, management deficiencies, and a combination of them.1 Thomas F. Gilbert distinguishes among deficiencies of knowledge, deficiencies of execution, and a combination.2 In a classic and still-relevant work, Geary A. Rummler and Alan P. Brache trace the causes of all human performance problems to three needs: training needs, management needs, and a combination of training and management needs.3

The terms share common meanings. Skills deficiencies, deficiencies of knowledge, and training needs are essentially synonymous. They refer to problems traceable to individual performers that prevent them from functioning properly and that stem directly from lack of the appropriate knowledge, skill, or attitude. They are thus addressed by performance enhancement strategies geared to individuals and intended to correct the deficiencies or meet the needs. Management deficiencies, deficiencies of execution, and management needs are also essentially synonymous. They refer to problems with the performance environment and with management, which is ultimately responsible for setting the tone for interactions with the organizational environment and for controlling the work environment, the work, and the workers.

Gilbert, Mager and Pipe, and Rummler and Brache reduce all performance problems to three causes to maintain analytical simplicity and economy. Their approaches make it easier to explain to decision makers that training is not a panacea. Only problems traceable to skills deficiencies, deficiencies of knowledge, and training needs lend themselves to training as a human performance enhancement strategy. Problems traceable to management deficiencies, deficiencies of execution, and management needs must be corrected by management action, such as reengineering job design, organizational design, rewards and incentives, feedback, or job and performance aids. Many other management actions are, of course, possible.

A Dissenting View

Although much can be said for simplicity, reducing all causes to just three may emphasize simplicity at the expense of reality. Many human performance problems simply cannot be traced to a single cause. Such problems may, in fact, stem from strategic mismatches (such as not doing what customers want), work

presented with evidence of a human performance problem, they list what they believe to be the causes of the problem. They then review the list, posing the following questions about each cause:

Is that the ultimate reason (root cause) for the problem, or is that only the consequence of another problem?

Would an effort to deal with the ‘‘cause’’ really improve the situation, or might it only change the situation without improving it?

Obviously, this approach is subjective. However, it can help assess root causes. Possible causes of human performance problems are summarized in the left column of Exhibit 8-1. For each cause, HPE specialists should describe its implications for performance in the remaining columns.

An Example of Distinguishing a Cause from a Symptom

Suppose you are an HPE specialist who has been approached by an operating manager whose department is experiencing a 10 percent annual turnover rate. The level of turnover answers the question ‘‘What is happening?’’ According to the manager, company turnover averages 5 percent, and other companies in the industry are averaging 4 percent annual turnover. That information answers the question ‘‘What should be happening?’’ To clarify the gap, consider that the difference amounts to 5 to 6 percent. The department’s annual turnover rate is twice the average for the company as a whole and even more than that for the overall industry. The cost of training a new employee is $2,300 annually. Twenty people were hired into the department last year, meaning that in fact ten ‘‘extra’’ people were hired by this department. The gap is thus important, since aboveaverage turnover is apparently costing the company about $203,000 annually. What is the cause of the turnover? List all the possible causes you can think of. Consult sources of information that may help isolate possible causes. Suppose, in this case, that company exit questionnaires reveal that terminating employees listed the following reasons for leaving: (1) the necessity of following a spouse to another geographical location for employment, and (2) salary and wage rates that are too low.

On their face, the reasons for leaving appear to be the causes of turnover. But are they? Or could it be that turnover is only a symptom of another, still hidden, problem?

The answer is that excessive turnover is thus only a presenting problem. It is

Exhibit 8-1. Possible causes of human performance problems.

Directions: For each general cause of human performance problems listed in the left column below, address what the cause can mean in each of the remaining columns. When you finish, review your list. Identify causes that lend themselves to training solutions.

Source: The characteristics listed in the left column are adapted from Ferdinand F. Fournies, Why Employees Don’t Do What They’re Supposed to Do and What to Do About It (Blue Ridge Summit, Penn.: Tab Books, 1988). Used by permission of F. F. Fournies & Associates, Inc., Tab Books, Inc., Blue Ridge Summit, Penn. 17294-0214.