My thoughts on Job/Task Analysis

I've been thinking a lot lately about Job/Task Analysis. My first encounter with the subject was in my undergrad. While studying Human Resources we learned to develop job descriptions which required a thorough Job Analysis. Pre-Graduate School I combined that knowledge with what I could gather from blogs and other resources. In Graduate School we studied Job/Task Analysis as part of the Instructional Design course. Since then I've spent quite a bit of time reading the works of Guy Wallace, Dick Clark, and David Jonassen. From reflecting on these experiences over time I have I have evolved my own understanding and use of these two Analysis types. Disclaimer: as always, there are many ways to do this.

Ideally, when collecting data for analysis you triangulate information from Extant Data, Master Performers, Accomplished Performers, and Stakeholders.

Job Analysis

Conducting a Job Analysis is the process of figuring out exactly what a person holding a specific job should be able to accomplish... or, "What are their required performance outcomes?" (Of course, outcomes are the products or results of their work, not the actual process) This analysis is used to create job descriptions and learning objectives, among other things.

Example: As an Instructional Designer, one outcome I am expected to produce is a Job Analysis.

Ideally when you are doing a Job Analysis you also collect information on Standards (how you know when you've achieved the desired outcome) for each outcome.

Example:

• Outcome: Job Analysis
• Standard: Analysis Team agrees the input is complete.
• Outcome: Task Analysis
• Standard: Analysis Team agrees the input is complete.

I usually continue collecting data until the Analysis Team agrees it is complete, or until I run out of time. Getting the Analysis Team to agree is an important part of gaining buy-in on the content (getting the team to agree could be a whole blog topic by itself).


Task Analysis

With the Job Analysis complete it's time to move on to the Task Analysis. A Task Analysis is essentially an inventory of the Tasks required to produce the Outcomes. I typically use two types of Task Analysis; Procedural, and Cognitive. A Procedural Task Analysis is done when the actions to be performed can be observed. Cognitive Task Analysis is done when the actions to be performed can not be observed (mental). Either way, it's important that you do not get pulled into the details of the tasks at this point (this is where Analysis Paralysis usually sets in).

Example:

• Outcome: Job Analysis
• Task: Interview Master Performers
• Task: Interview Accomplished Performers
• Task: Conduct Review
• Task: Finalize Analysis

These Outcomes and Tasks are weeded down to become objectives for the course. Later, during the Development Phase, a Content Analysis will be done to categorize each task. Waiting until after the Objectives are complete allows you to skip all the "weeded out" tasks. If you have a lot of time, you can conduct the Content Analysis before developing objectives, but in my experience, time for analysis is usually limited. What's important here is that we focus on important business outcomes, and on the tasks necessary to produce those outcomes.

Favorite Job/Task Analysis Resource:

Blog: Guy Wallace

Using HPT to Plan a Virtual Support Network Part 1: Project Kickoff

A few months back I was having a conversation with Guy Wallace about starting a professional chapter. The purpose was to collect data for an organization I belong to that was looking to start a virtual chapter. I was interested in hearing his story about starting up the Charlotte, NC chapter of ISPI. During the conversation the topic of a Virtual ISPI chapter for Capella came up and I began thinking that this concept could possibly fill the needs of some of my colleagues and Alumni at Boise State. I decided to put together an Exploratory Committee to look into the possibility of forming a chapter.

The Exploratory Committee consists of members from each category of potential stakeholders I had identified: 3 Students (2 online, 1 on campus), 1 Alumni, and 1 Faculty member. With our committee formed, we discussed some of the potential services a Virtual Support Network could provide to our Stakeholders. We decided that a Performance Analysis would be appropriate to determine what problems and opportunities exist within our groups of stakeholders, and which could be supported by a Virtual Support Network.

To begin, we developed a list of services the Network could provide, based on our own experiences. A few of the services included; ways for Alumni to give back to the program; affordable/quality programs/professional development; networking opportunities; professional resources and literature; pre-qualified course projects for students; and employment services. We also discussed the possibility of aligning our network with an international organization such as ISPI or ASTD. Of course, in keeping with good practices we wanted to analyze our target audience to ensure these needs were widespread. This brings us to the Analysis Phase.


Over the next two months we will be conducting interviews and surveys to determine how comprehensive and accurate our assumptions are. We will look to determine the needs of our potential stakeholders, and determine the best ways to support those needs.

Five Virtual Team Guidelines

I'm not the leading expert on virtual collaboration, but I did complete my Undergrad and am completing my Masters degree virtually. In that time I've worked on numerous virtual teams. Here are a few guidelines I've learned on how to form successful virtual teams.

Guideline 1 - Pick your teammates wisely!

If you have the option to choose your teammates, try to find people that communicate the same ways you do. I typically try to find teammates that like to communicate via some kind of instant messenger. This gives us the ability to have synchronous conversations.

Also, find teammates that have the same work collaboration style. Some people like to work solo and then bring their work to the group. Others like to work collaboratively. It's really hard to mix the two without running into conflict at some point.

Guideline 2 - Immediately create a team charter!

A good team charter will set the standards for your team. They describe communication strategies; they set critical success factors; they describe what you will do as a team if you face conflict; among other things.

Guideline 3 - Determine what software you will use to communicate!

I have yet to find a software tool that does everything. It's important that virtual teams are operating on the same software to avoid duplicating work. I like to use Yahoo IM for chat, Google Docs for virtual collaboration (within a document), bubbl for mind mapping, email for asynchronous updates, getting everyone on the same page, and sending out meeting minutes, and skype for conference calls. It might also be important to have some kind of screen sharing software.

Guideline 4 - Someone needs to be in charge (Project Manager)!

Usually someone will step up, but when no one takes charge, meetings tend to be less productive.

Guideline 5 - Stay in constant contact!

Once the team has begun work, staying in constant contact will help the team go through the standard team forming phases (forming, storming, norming) faster. It also helps with brainstorming and improves collaboration.

I'm sure there are many more guidelines out there on the subject, but I always try to follow these guidelines when I begin, or join a virtual team.

What do training departments really do?

     What is the role of training and development? Many training departments exist to ensure that employees memorize a certain amount of knowledge and information required to operate functionally within their organization. I see the training and development as being responsible for improving organizational (not just employee) performance.

     Why expand to "organizational?" Because as Training and Development professionals, organizational issues come to us regularly in the form of requests for training. We are equipped with the tools necessary to make performance improvement recommendations. As we complete our Performance Analysis, we identify the root cause of the organizational issue. If it's a Knowledge and Skills issue, we are equipped to develop an intervention. However, many times the root cause has nothing to do with training. In that case, we can point the owner of the performance issue to the proper intervention. In this way we really serve as a strategic business partner within our organizations. Our efforts can lead to organizational performance improvement regardless of the issue or the cause of the problem.

I am a Performance Improvement Specialist!

Over the past seven months I've been through quite a bit professionally. I've learned about SCORM and even how to develop some in Flash. I took a course on Needs Assessment and am currently taking one on Evaluation Methodology. All this while continuing to work as a one-stop trainer. I've realized more and more that my job is really about improving performance. Whether my career takes me through HR or Training, I want to be a part of organizational performance improvement on a Macro scale. While I do enjoy training, I've really enjoyed analyzing situations and determining the best solutions. It's not just about performance analysis. I enjoy being a part of those solutions from start to finish.

I've been asked several times over the past few months "What are you going to do once you finish your Masters Degree?"

Well, one thing I've learned is that the learning never stops. If I stay in Training, a CPLP would be nice. If I end up in HR, maybe a PHR.

Here's what I can plan on for both:

(1) Change Management
(2) Project Management

Either way, Performance Improvement is in my future.

Review of Roger Kaufman's Organizational Elements Model

     Rodger Kaufman developed a holistic organizational analysis model that emphasizes differentiating between a company’s means (what it uses and does), and its’ ends (what it produces). By taking a holistic approach to analysis the company is aligned from top to bottom with their customers’ demands. There are five levels in the OEM; Inputs (human labor, equipment, budgets, etc), Processes (what you do to produce the product), Products (what work groups complete), Outputs (what the company completes as a whole), and Outcomes (the products effects on the customer and society. When using this model, you start by looking at the inputs and determining “what is” or how are things now? Once that is determined, you move on to the next level, processes, and do the same thing. Continue through the continuum until you get to outcomes. Then turn back around and ask “what should be?” at the outcomes level. Next, take a look at the outcomes and ask “what should be?” Once that’s determined, look at the outputs and ask “what do we have to do at the output level to achieve “what should be” at the outcomes level?” So it will look something like this:

 Rodger Kaufman’s Organizational Elements Model (OEM)

                                                                                                                                               

When you begin asking “What Should Be?”, compare it to “What Is?”. The differences are your performance gaps.

References:

Kaufman, R. (1981). Determining and Diagnosing Organizational Needs. Group and Organization Studies, 6(3). 312-322

Review of Joe Harless – Front End Analysis and the 13 Smart Questions

Front-End Analysis (FEA) is a tool used to determine interventions for performance problems. Harless (1973) says:

“Front-end analysis is about money, first and foremost. It’s about how to spend money in ways that will be most beneficial to the organization and the performers in that organization. It’s also about avoiding spending money on silly things like instruction when there is no instructional problem; or training everybody in everything when you can get by with training fewer people in a few things; or flying lots of trainees in for a course when a send-out checklist would do.” (Harless, 1973, p. 329)

There are six FEA goals:

1. Isolate performance problems that have potentially high “worth.”
2. Isolate the precise performance deficiencies within the problem area that account for the greatest loss.
3. Increase the probability that the solution to a given problem is effective by matching the cause of the problem to the appropriate type of remedy.
4. Increase the probability that the subclass of solution selected is the most cost effective.
5. Isolate the root cause of the performance problem rather than symptoms of effects of the problem.
6. Increase the probability that there is a match between the precise performance deficiency and the individuals who have the deficiency. (Harless, 1973, p. 332)

To make a long story short, Harless created a list of 13 Smart Questions that should be asked before making a decision on an intervention for an organizational problem. Here are his questions and elaborations from (Harless (1973), p. 340 – 344):

-->

Question	Expanded
1.      Do we have a problem?	Based on what evidence, can you say you have a problem?
2.      Do we have a performance problem?	A performance problem is: 1.      Someone is not doing something he/she is expected to do. 2.      Someone is doing something he/she should not be doing. 3.      A prediction of should or should-not in the future.
3.      How will we know when the problem is solved?	When indicators from the first question are the exception.
4.      What is the performance problem?
5.      Should we allocate resources to solve it?	Do the benefits of solving the problem outweigh the costs?
6.      What are the possible causes of the problem?	Lack of Data, Tools, Incentives, Knowledge, Capacity, Motives? (See Gilberts Third Leisurely Theorem)
7.      What evidence bears on each possibility?
8.      What is the probable Cause?	Based on Questions 6 and 7, what is the probable cause of the problem?
9.      What general solution type is indicated?
10.  What are the alternate subclasses of solution?	What else could you do to solve the problem?
11.  What are the costs, effects, and development times of each solution?	Research the costs of each solution
12.  What are the constraints?	Research the constraints of each solution
13.  What are the overall goals?	What goals would management like to adopt?

Now that we’ve discussed Gilberts Leisurely Theorems and Harless’ FEA, the two can be combined to create a more powerful Front-End Analysis tool.

-->

HPT Phase	FEA 'Smart questions'	Your Analysis
Gap Analysis	1. Do we have a problem? ·   Indicators & symptoms of problems ·   Description of tasks that may be deficient	Indicators and Symptoms: Description of deficient tasks: Final Outcome: Yes or No
	2. Do we have a (human) performance problem? ·   Observation of mastery performance ·   People aren’t doing what they are expected to do ·   People are doing what they shouldn’t be doing ·   A prediction of future should/shouldn’t performance	Final Outcome:  Yes or No
	3. How will we know when the problem is solved? ·   Description of mastery performance at a level of task specificity ·   Description of problem-level goals
	4. Exactly what is the performance problem?	Gap Analysis – Specify actual and desired performance. ·   Exemplary performer (Wex) = What our exemplary performers are doing now is… ·   Typical performer (Wt) = What our typical performers are doing now is… Use numbers so you can determine the PIP in the next step.
	5. Should we allocate resources to solve it?	Gap Analysis -- Determine the gap is worth closing ·     Gap (or PIP) = Wt/Wex Final Outcome: Yes or No
Cause Analysis	6. What are the possible causes of the problem?	Cause Analysis using the BEM – What questions would you ask to investigate the causes of the performance gap? Environmental support (1) Data (2) Instruments (3) Incentives Person’s repertoire of behavior (4) Knowledge (5) Capacity (6) Motives Given the data you possess at this time, what do you suspect is the root cause of the performance gap?
	7. What evidence bears on each possibility?
	8. What is the probable cause?	Outcome:
Intervention Selection, Design, and Development	9. What general solution type is indicated?
	10. What are the alternate subclasses of solution?
	11. What are the costs, effects, and development times of each solution?
	12. What are the constraints?	Outcome:
	13. What are the overall goals?	The goals we’ve adopted are:

Source: Villachica, S. (2010). Week 11: Front-End Analysis Meets Gilbert's PIP and BEM. Retrieved from IPT 536 4156/4157 course database.

As you can see in the table above, using Harless’ 13 Smart Questions in combination with Gilbert’s second and third leisurely theorems gives a platform to perform gap and cause analysis. Using that data you can then develop an intervention with more confidence that you are making the correct choice.

References

Harless, J.H. (1973). An analysis of front-end analysis. Improving Human Performance: A Research Quarterly, 4, 229-244.
Villachica, S. (2010). Week 11: Front-End Analysis Meets Gilbert's PIP and BEM. Retrieved from IPT 536 4156/4157 course database.