Marc My Words: Using ADDIE for Performance Support

The ADDIE model (Analysis, Design, Development,Implementation, Evaluation) has been with us for decades, and, for better orworse, it’s firmly embedded in instructional design practices. With sometweaks, ADDIE just might find a new use as an entry-level model for developing performancesupport solutions. Here’s how:

Figure 1 is a typical ADDIE model adjusted for buildingperformance support solutions. While the five labels remain the same, theactivities and the goals are different, reflecting the differing nature ofperformance support vs. instruction.

Figure1: ADDIE, modified forperformance support development 

Analyze work, not workers

For training solutions, our focus is on learners or, moreprecisely, on workers. While we do have to understand the work they do and howthey do it, the goal is to create instruction that meets their needs, hence theterms “learner analysis,” “learning needs assessment,” etc.

Performance support focuses directly on the work people do rather than on the peoplethemselves. We want to understand how the work gets done, the inputs, outputs,and triggering events for the work, and where and when decisions and actionstake place. We want to intervene in the work processes (the workflow) with toolsthat make the work easier, less prone to error, and more efficient. And whileit makes sense to understand how workers’ skills and knowledge fit into theprocess, for performance support that is often secondary, instead of primary asit is for training. Certainly, the difference here is subtle, but it sets us onthe right path for the steps that follow.

Design tools, not courses

In this phase, the differences between using ADDIE fortraining and ADDIE for performance support are more profound. In a trainingdevelopment mode we are designing courses, from classroom to eLearning, in alltheir variations. Our goal is to create programs that teach skill andknowledge.

In the performance support world, we are not interested incourseware per se, although it may be part of a broader solution. Here we arebuilding tools, from simple job aids to help systems and sophisticated decisionsupport. The requirements and specifications we develop for our performancesupport solutions are far different than those we set for training. A focus onsoftware design, human factors, and other technical areas is critical inbuilding electronic performancesupport, but even simple paper-based job aids require new capabilities inwritten communications, graphic design, portability, and more. Remember thatperformance support is almost always used without help from an expert like ateacher or SME, so its design must be extremely self-explanatory. Usability andefficiency become paramount.

Develop software, noteLearning

One of the biggest mistakes trainers make when transitioningfrom eLearning to performance support is taking too much of the eLearningdevelopment process with them. In building electronic performance support, weare developing software; and while you can argue that eLearning is software aswell, there are vast differences.

In the performance support world, we are buildingproductivity solutions, not learning solutions. The performance supportsoftware we develop is likely integrated directly into other business software,sits on top of it, or is accessed via links. The more integrated theperformance support software is to the actual work that’s being done, the moreefficient it can be (although there may be a cost associated with thisintegration that one must also consider). All the rules and protocols forsoftware development, testing, implementation, and support apply here. In boththis phase and in the design phase above, a solid partnership with the IT departmentis very important.

One function you might take from your eLearning experienceis the procurement process, so be sure it is sound, from industry analysisthrough RFP and selection. Like eLearning, you may make make/buy decisions thatwill involve engaging vendors and consultants. However, because the performancesupport business is different, they will probably not be the same companies youare used to, so be sure you have a firm understanding of this new marketplace.

Implement workflow, notcurriculum

As much as we’d like to, we cannot overlay courseware—curricula—directlyon top of work. To take a course, even an eLearning course, workers must stopworking (even briefly)—a productivity hit. And yes, there are times when thisis necessary, but even the most efficient courses are not as efficient asintegrating performance support directly into the workflow. That’s why we should do this first.

Workflow includes the steps, processes, sign-offs,interfaces, milestones, quality checks, input and output specifications, andmore, that define how work gets done from initiation to completion. Byintegrating tools, information, expertise, and procedures (performance support)directly into the workflow, task efficiency and the probability of success bothincrease. In the end, you have the added benefit of making the job easier toperform, reducing errors, and enhancing employee success and satisfaction.

Evaluate performance,not learning

With all due respect to Kirkpatrick’s Level 2 evaluation(learning gain), it is simply not appropriate here. For instructionalsolutions, we want to know how much was learned, but with performance support,learning is a byproduct. Performance is the name of the game. To ask someone torecall what was learned through performance support is counterproductive, sinceactual observed or measured performance is what matters, whether or not any“learning” took place in the process.

In keeping with the Kirkpatrick model, Level 4 (results)evaluation is much more important here. Measures of efficiency, waste, profit,growth, speed, etc., are all good ways to measure the impact of performancesupport. They may be more difficult to do, but the impact is almost alwaysworth it. In addition, don’t overlook Level 1 (reaction) measures of customer, client,sponsor, or worker satisfaction, managers’ observations of performance, andoverall quality of work life. Yes, good tools that make work easier and moreproductive can improve employees’ attitudes toward their work.

Remember that despite the literal positioning of evaluationat the end of the ADDIE model, it is important to set evaluation expectationsand goals with your client at the beginningof the process.

Easing in