One of the unique features of my Learning to Performance System is that it integrates work process and tools redesign into instructional design and course development.
Before I discuss the specifics, let’s talk about a real case where this was applied. One of my clients had five task teams operating inconsistently with respect to Project Management (PM). While these teams were tightly aligned to the company’s overall business strategy, they were each operating in a vacuum, with no commonality. The company needed to implement basic project management across all teams, striving to institutionalize common PM processes, methods and templates.
The client and I discussed that implementing project management training without redesigning the project management process, tools, and templates would result in little transfer. Therefore, simultaneously with instructional design and development, I created the firm’s new standard project management process, developed five standard PM templates, and identified the on-line PM system the company would use. These were approved by the executive team and the training was designed to totally support the project management initiative.
This shows the potential power of integrating process/tool redesign with instruction design. See below on the steps I use in this phase.
While there are many process redesign models, I prefer to use this simple model:
Step 1: As part of my instructional needs analysis and environmental scan I identify any process, tools, or systems that may be possible redesign candidates and present them to the client for consideration and move forward with redesign. Note: at times, the reward and recognition practices need to be examined to ensure use of new training skills is supported. The client may say no to redesign but should know the consequences to post-training transfer and performance.
Step 2: If the client chooses redesign, then the processes are mapped as-is. Note: if you are not qualified for this effort, then engage a process-mappingexpert on content and exercises that the instructional design will need to address.The first step is to identify roles within the process.
- Identify process steps needed to complete the work.
- Identify information passed from step to step within the process.
- Identify decision points within the process that could change direction or require additional steps.
- Document the process flow by creating a diagram showing each step, the role that performs the step, and information flowing from step to step.
Step 3: Using the as-is process and the Impact Map, you next design the to-be process all along noting content and tasks that training will need to address. I use an iterative adaptation of the fishbone or Ishikawa diagram commonly used for root cause analysis. Essentially the use of the fishbone is expanded to not only determine root cause, but also to identify improvement opportunities.
The iterative adaptation is described below.
Primary Users
- Are job descriptions correct? Do they need updating?
- How are the skills, knowledge, and beliefs from the Impact Map addressed with the users? How will training aid in the new process?
- Are the business decisions assigned to users at the appropriate organization level?
- Is the primary user inhibited due to the work environment?
Management Control
- What levels of management control are used within the new process?
Workflow Tasks
- What tasks are needed to perform the process?
- How are they different?
- What is the work process flow?
System Interaction
- What systems will the users employ to do the work?
- Does a system currently exist that is sufficient?
- What system changes will be needed?
Information Flow
- What information is needed to accomplish each task?
- Is information stored appropriately per company requirements?
- Are there opportunities to gain efficiencies by automating?
- Are there possibilities of implementing new or enhanced tools to the primary user?
- Are adequate leading metrics established within the process to allow the process owner to investigate task performance in order to affect final results?
- Are adequate lagging metrics established at the end of the process to allow for trend analysis of the final result?
Business Decisions
- Are the current business decisions based on valid business rules?
- Can business rules be changed to allow opportunities for efficiencies?
Step 4: While the course is being defined, the new/enhanced process and/or tools are tested and implemented.
By doing this activity you greatly enhance the likelihood of what you train being successfully transfer to the job.
As always, I look forward to your thoughts on this approach.
