In yesterday’s article, wediscussed the first four steps required to transform an organization’s learningparadigm from training to performance (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Five steps to transitioning atraining organization into a performance organization

In this spotlight, we will briefly outline a concept for the fifthstep, a methodology for design and development of performance support as thenorm, rather than as an afterthought. This methodology is one that the Fortune100 training organization we referred to in yesterday’s article (The Group) has adopted. We recommendthat readers of this article consider a similar approach to performance supportdesign and development.

Establishing a standard performance support design anddevelopment methodology

After enabling both the performancesupport (PS) organization and extended stakeholders in the first four steps, The Group found it advantageous toestablish a standard methodology for performance support design and development.Having a standard methodology drives consistency and rigor for projects whileserving as a guide for the extended team to comprehend and anticipate the nextphase of a project.

The Group explored, implemented and refined its methodology with eachperformance support project. As shown in Figure 2, in recent projects The Group has integrated the Nguyen & Woll (2006) model with Gottfredson & Mosher’s (2012) rapid task analysis approach. (See the References at the end of thisarticle.) The Group has found thatthese two PS design models complemented each other very well in differentstages of the PS design and development process.

Figure 2 is a schematic representationof the way The Group integrated theseinto a methodology. The Nguyen and Woll model (blue boxes, labelled “N&W”)provides high-level design, technical design, and system development of The Group’s PS projects. The Gottfredson& Mosher rapid task analysis approach (red boxes, labelled “G&M”)provides a framework for low-level performance support content structure,selection, and presentation design. Thus the complete methodology adopted by The Group comprises six stages in twopaths.

 

Figure 2: PSdesign and development methodology

The process begins in Stage 1a(top-right corner of Figure 2), as the systems engineer and PS designer worktogether to determine the scope of the project, the type of PS solution, andthe high-level design of the employee interface and technical architecture. Theworksheets in Sidebar 1 are useful tools that guide key parts of theirdiscussion. Phases 1 – 3 of the Nguyen & Woll PS model provide a robustframework for this activity.

The process flow then branches intotwo paths.

• Path G&M (stages 1b, 2b, 3a) focuses on the design and development ofcontent. This includes task analysis, content structure to content selection,and information mapping. Again, the Gottfredson and Mosher rapid task analysismethodology provides a robust framework for these activities.
• Meanwhile, Path N&W (stages 2a, 3b) focuses on PS system development,integration, and implementation. Phases 4 – 5 of the Nguyen & Woll PS modelprovide a robust framework for this activity.

Path G&M provides the content ofthe performance support (text, graphics, or other media), while Path N&Wguides the implementation, including integration with formal instruction,coordination with job and task design, and evaluation of the effectiveness ofthe project. In order to keep this discussion brief, we refer the reader to thereferences at the end of this article for details according to the reader’sneeds.

Conclusion

To change from a training paradigm to a performance-centric paradigminvolves a series of complex and coordinated efforts. The Group’s experience of this type of organizationaltransformation was conducted through the five steps illustrated in yesterday’sfeature and this article. The Group’sexperience demonstrates the importance of gaining support from senior businessleaders through advocating on-the-job learning as superior to before-the-jobtraining. Their experience has also demonstrated that building a dedicated performancesupport team and establishing a standard performance support methodology willaccelerate the pace of change and ensure that it is sustainable and scalableacross the enterprise. We recommend consideration and adoption or adaptation oftheir approach.

 

From the Editor

To go further in your exploration of performance support inthe real-time workflow through structure, coaching, and documentation, join usat The eLearning Guild’s Performance Support Symposium, coming up June 10 – 12 in Austin, Texas! The PerformanceSupport Symposium is the only conference dedicated to the topic of performancesupport and the goal of delivering small amounts of information directly intoworkflows when and where it is needed to enhance on-the-job performance.

When you register for Performance Support Symposium 2015,you will also receive admission to all sessions at mLearnCon 2015, co-locatedwith the symposium. mLearnCon 2015 is North America’s leading mobile learning conference and expo, focusedon applying mobile technologies in the context of learning and support, thestrategies for integrating these technologies into the training mix, and thebest practices for designing, developing, and delivering mobile content. 

Registration for Performance Support Symposium 2015 includes accessto the mLearnCon 2015 Expo, an outstanding opportunity to explore a highlyfocused collection of key vendors offering leading learning technologies,tools, products, and services for mobile applications!

References

Gottfredson,C. and Bob Mosher. Rapid Task Analysis forPerformance Support Design. 2012.

Nguyen, Frank, and Craig Woll. “A Practitioner’s Guide for DesigningPerformance Support Systems.” PerformanceImprovement, 45(9). 2006.

(A pre-print version isavailable at https://frankn.net/Publications/PI2006-EpssModel.pdf)