A Process Assessment & Design Tool: T&D Systems View

I believe that you have the following 47 Processes happening in your organization. Some are in more control than others, as appropriate to your situation/context. From chapter 4 of my 2001 book: T&D Systems View...

...Scan these to quickly assess whether these are OK or not - and/or IF improving any one or collection of them might produce significant RETURNS making it worthy of doing...

Where might "improvement" INVESTMENTS generate a siginificant RETURN? Focus there!


12 O’clock: T&D Governance and Advisory System
1. T&D Governance Process
2. T&D Advisory Process

1 O’clock: T&D Strategic Planning System
1. Enterprise Strategic Plans Surveillance Process
2. T&D Strategic Planning Process


2 O’clock: T&D Operations Planning and Management System
1. Annual Operations Planning and Budgeting Process
2. Quarterly Operations Planning and Budgeting Updates Process
3. Forecasting and Accounting Process

3 O’clock: T&D Cost/Benefits Measurement System
1. Cost/Benefits Measurement System Design and Deployment Process
2. Ongoing Cost/Benefits Measurement and Feedback Receiving Process
3. T&D Project Lessons Learned Process
4. Results Reporting and Archiving Process

4 O’clock: T&D Process Improvement System
1. T&D Issues Generation and Assessment Process
2. T&D Improvement Project Planning and Management Process

5 O’clock: T&D Product and Service Line Design System
1. T&D Product and Service Line Program Management Process
2. T&D Product Line Design Process
3. T&D Service Line Design Process

6 O’clock: T&D Product and Service Line Development/Acquisition System
1. T&D Product and Service Line Development and Acquisition Program Management Process
2. T&D Custom Development Process
3. T&D Purchased Product Acquisition Process
4. T&D Purchased Product Modification Process
5. Existing T&D Maintenance Process

7 O’clock: T&D Product and Service Line Deployment System
1. T&D Master Materials Storage and Retrieval Process
2. T&D Master Materials Change Management Process
3. T&D Scheduling Process
4. T&D Facilitator and Coach Development and Certification Process
5. Facilitator-led T&D Deployment Process
6. Self-paced T&D Deployment Process
7. Coached/Mentored T&D Deployment Process

8 O’clock: T&D Marketing and Communications System
1. T&D Stakeholder Communications Process
2. Individual T&D Planning Process
3. T&D Ordering and Registration Process

9 O’clock: T&D Financial Asset Management System
1. Organizational T&D Plans and Budget Roll-up and Adjustment Process
2. T&D Physical Property Management Process

10 O’clock: T&D Human and Environmental Asset Management System
1. T&D Staff Recruiting and Selection/Succession Process
2. T&D Staff Training and Development Process
3. T&D Staff Assessment Process
4. T&D Staff Compensation and Benefits Process
5. T&D Staff Rewards and Recognition Process
6. T&D Organization Structural Design Process
7. T&D Facilities Development and Deployment Process
8. T&D Equipment and Tools Development and Deployment Process
9. T&D Materials and Supplies Acquisition and Deployment Process
10. T&D Information Systems Development and Deployment Process
11. T&D Methods Deployment Process

11 O’clock: T&D Research and Development System
1. T&D Methodology and Technology Surveillance Process
2. T&D Internal and External Benchmarking Process
3. T&D Methodology and Technology Pilot-Testing Process

We know it’s a long list. We know it’s a lot to think about.

We know you wish this T&D world were much simpler.

It isn’t, so let’s get on with the business of managing it and producing worthy T&D better, faster, and cheaper. And by worthy we mean with return on investment for economic value add. T&D for the shareholders.

Are there any IMPROVEMENT TARGETS in your mind now?

Do these systems and processes exist in your current situation? We bet that they do in one way or another, either formally or informally, in control or not in control. And, we don’t believe that every one of them should be equally controlled or equally formal.

As always, it depends.

More on that later in Chapters 8 through 28 - in T&D Systems View - a 2001 book by Guy W. Wallace - available as a hardbound and Kindle at http://www.amazon.com/ - and as a free PDF at http://www.eppic.biz/


























# # #

What Would We See If We Were Outside Looking Inside?

If we were "Outside looking Inside" - and see ourselves and our products and processes as our Customers and Stakeholders see us and experience us – what would we see? What would our assessment be?

Is it even important to consider this?
















Determining your customers is probably relatively easy – even in complex situations. Look at the Org Chart and look at your Enterprise Process Architecture.

Determining the Stakeholders may not be as easy. Then determining all of their Requirements for YOU is where the real work begins. Because they may not be able to articulate that for you, easily.



They may just have a gut feel about it. Teasing out what they want and what they require is work and they have to want to cooperate with you to get that done well. Otherwise you are just guessing.


















Once we know who we are serving and how they are keeping score on us, where do we start? A T&D or L&D function is inherently complex itself. How can we view ourselves – our own processes - and can that view be used to view our Customers and their Processes?

















Yes. This is the T&D Systems View, used to structure 47 distinct processes into 12 buckets/systems that are organized into 3 groupings: Leadership and Core and Support.


















This can be converted easily and applied to your Customers’ and their Processes as well. See the “Management Areas of Performance” book (free PDF at http://www.eppic.biz/), articles and Blog Postings by Guy.


And after we assess our T&D Systems, using the T&D Systems View book (free PDF at http://www.eppic.biz/) we can determine the need for “Process Maturity” and formality and measurement/inspection on a process-by-process basis – as all are not equal in their critical ranking overall due to their impact to the Enterprise - regarding Risks and Rewards.


















Where are your critical ISD/T&D/L&D function’s processes? And where would you target improvements at what Investment costs and for what Impact and Financial Returns?

How good are we at being process-focused as well as Learning focused? Do we see Learning as an enabler of process performance and see that that is how it should be primarily measured?

How have we aligned our offerings to the processes of our Customers? How do we frame and capture our views of the processes that need to be performed by our Learners/Performers?


How do we organize our content – or is that too passé in today’s world of Web 2.0? Can we organize it at the “product level” for better access?

















Can we organize it at the “product modular/component/object levels” to speed reuse in new development? Can we organize it all to reduce our life cycle costs associated with inventorying it, administration of it, deployment/access of it, and maintenance of it all?
















How can we deliberately address our critical PUSH target audiences and yet serve many, but not all, of the needs for less critical PULL target audiences? And increase the R for very little additional I – as in ROI?

How can we avoid the popular fads and separate wheat from chaff? For ROI and good stewardship and all of that?
















How should we measure ourselves? And what should we share with our Customers and Stakeholders?
















How should we work-with our Customers and Stakeholders to do a better job of meeting their priority needs and staying current with the dynamics of their situational contexts, and be more proactive than reactive? Should it be informal or formal – and then how formal, how structured?

If we were Outside looking Inside- as our Customers and Stakeholders see us – what would we see? What would our assessment be? Is it even important to consider this?

Should we be proactive and show them all how they should see us, measure us and assess us?

Or should we wait and let them each tell us on their own, one at a time?

# # #

The 3 Levers of Enterprise Process Performance Improvement

EPPI - Enterprise Process Performance Improvement















My model for Enterprise Process Performance Improvement - EPPI - has three levers to improve performance at every departmental level, rolled up to a functional level and additional levels as needed to eventually roll up to the Enterprise level.

Those levers are:

• The PROCESSES themselves
• The enabling HUMAN ASSETS
• The enabling ENVIRONMENTAL ASSETS

The PROCESS and PROCESSES must be designed to meet all Stakeholder Requirements - and balance those out for those in conflict.
















The HUMAN ASSETS must have the awareness, knowledge, skills, physical attributes, psychological attributes, the intellectual attributes and personal values as required by the Processes within the similar and varies Contexts that exist.
















The ENVIRONMENTAL ASSETS must provide the humans exactly what is required to perform to Stakeholder Requirements in each of the Processes that they are part of.
















Does your analysis approach for instruction and/or performance improvement enable you to organize your collective understanding of Process Improvement requirements diagnosis results?
Does it enable you to look upstream and find those Provisioning Systems that provide the PROCESS with the HUMAN ASSETS and the ENVIRONMENTAL ASSETS - as required?

Can you use this to determine "when it's not" a knowledge/skill - TRAINING ISSUE?

I've been writing about EPPI since the mid 1990s - it was always intended to be the umbrella methodology that my ISD methodology - The PACT Processes for T&D/ Learning/ Knowledge Management - would fit within. It is.

Moving from Training to Performance Improvement is the path any T&D/ L&D organization is on - or should be. You've got to be able to do both - and help your client and their stakeholders to learn by discovery with your approach to either.

See more about PACT and EPPI at http://www.eppic.biz/

# # #

Won't Get Fooled Again: Meet the New Boss - Same as the Old Boss

I've not turned my Twitter/ Facebook/ Blog picture-icon "Green" - as some have been doing to show their support for the Iranian election protesters.

I am reminded of The Who song: "Won't get fooled again." You know - meet the new boss - same as the old boss....

When I was back at KU (Kansas University) after my stint in the US Navy (1972-1975) - I happened to be on campus during an Iranian student protest - and being a Journalism/Radio/TV/Film major - I had my 35mm camera on me.

I cannot remember if this was in 1977 or 1978 - I cannot find a web reference to this event.
















The issue being protested was that there was a supposed SAVAK agent on campus - SAVAK being the Secret Police for the Shah of Iran.

SAVAK was not held in high regard by Iranian students at KU.
















I knew some Iranian students back in the late 1970s - and I knew about their view about their homeland and their view about our CIA's involvement in the coup that re-installed the Shah in 1953.

Having just gotten out of the US Navy where I had spent considerable time in The Philippine Islands (The PI) - where another one of our installed leader/friends ran roughshod over the people - Ferdinand Marcos (remember Emelda and all her shoes?) I have a particular dislike for dictator allies of the US.

So this protest march was of interest to me - beyond the photo opp.
















This was a long time ago. Before the US Hostage Crisis. Just before that.

















So given the real politics of Iran right now - and who runs in their elections and who does not - I cannot get myself all Green with excitement - I won't get fooled again.

# # #

What "Other Things" Can a Learning Business Successfully Sell to Internal or External Customers?

From Tony Karrer - in a LinkedIn message from him asking that I forward a message to someone who until very recently worked for me, now elsewhere in the Enterprise due to a merger's realignment of people to business functions.

He also asked for me to write a Blog Post on his question (below). So here it is - and here is his explanation...

I'm organizing an online event on July 23 that will address the question:

While training as a publisher of courses and courseware faces an increasingly challenging market, what other things can learning businesses successfully sell to internal or external customers?

This is discussed in greater detail in my post - Business of Learning: http://elearningtech.blogspot.com/2009/06/business-of-learning.html

The July session will consist of roughly three different panels (CLOs/VPs Learning, CEOs of Training Companies, CxOs of Software/Services Vendors) discussing what they see as the opportunities. I may have an analyst / consultant group as well.

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****

My (Guy's) response/thoughts...

As always, it depends.

Not all Learning Businesses have strength in every sub-discipline to ISD: analysis, design, development of technology-based solutions for on-demand access and/or scheduled deployment.

And as Learning is but one of many "levers" to pull on to improve process performance of individuals and/or teams - and the real goal if PERFORMANCE COMPETENCE of the individuals, processes, organizations, and Society as a whole, then expand your service offerings into others that help select and/or enable the human variable in processes.

Those with really strong backgrounds and bench strength in analysis might think of offering, besides courses and courseware:

• Process mapping efforts


• Process streamlining or "lean" efforts


• Process variability reduction/Six Sigma efforts


• Business Process Architecture mapping


• Human Attributes & Values Needs analysis


• Environmental Supports Needs analysis

You could offer these additional service because you either have most of the analysis data gathering tools and techniques - to enable you to "also do" these, or it's a small step to segue to that desired capability.

Those with really strong backgrounds and bench strength in analysis and in design might think of offering, besides courses and courseware:

• Business Process Architecture design


• Organization & Job design


• Staffing & Succession Systems design


• Recruiting & Selection Systems design


• Training & Learning Systems design


• Performance Appraisal & Management Systems design


• Compensation & Benefits Systems design


• Reward & Recognition Systems design


• Information Systems Architectural design


• Materials & Supplies System design


• Tools & Equipment System design


• Facilities & Grounds System design


• Budget & Headcount Planning System design


• Culture & Consequences System design

You could offer these additional service because you either have most of the analysis data gathering and design data generating tools and techniques - to enable you to "also do" these, or it's a small step to segue to that new capability.

Those with really strong backgrounds and bench strength in analysis and design and in development of technology tools might think of offering, besides courses and courseware:

• Process mapping tools


• Process streamlining or "lean" project tools


• Process variability reduction/Six Sigma project tools


• Business Process Architecture mapping project tools


• Human Attributes & Values Needs project tools


• Environmental Supports Needs project tools


• Business Process Architecture project tools


• Organization & Job project tools


• Staffing & Succession Systems project tools


• Recruiting & Selection Systems project tools


• Training & Learning Systems project tools


• Performance Appraisal & Management Systems project tools


• Compensation & Benefits Systems project tools


• Reward & Recognition Systems project tools


• Information Systems Architectural project tools


• Materials & Supplies System project tools


• Tools & Equipment System project tools


• Facilities & Grounds System project tools


• Budget & Headcount Planning System project tools


• Culture & Consequences System project tools

You could offer these additional service because you either have most of the analysis data gathering and design data generating tools and techniques and the development of technology solutions - to enable you to "also do" these, or it's a small step to segue to that new capability.

But

But - as always, it depends.

If the Learning Business was originally focused on instruction using a wider look at Performance and Instructional needs within that - then they might be able to pull these other offerings off.

But if they do not, and they've been producing instructional one-offs with a narrow view of the entirety of Enterprise processes, developing them one at a time or in larger groups of Modules, then they probably cannot make the transitions to these other new, more sophisticated offerings.

But maybe they can do it.

And perhaps they should have a strategy that has them partnering with one or many other groups - who each have both the experiences and bench strengths in these potential offerings - and then cooperate together versus compete together.

Whatever.

Because - as always, it depends.

It depends on where you are starting from and what's quickest and easiest to "get to." Where you can be "most successful most quickly" to produce profits to fund additional expansion of your product/service offerings.

And then it's on the other 3 in the "4 P's of Marketing."

# # #

Investing in Enterprise Learning Should Produce Significant Returns. Do the Math!

In an Enterprise Context

Whether you are a fan of mostly Formal Learning or mostly Informal Learning - and/or the blends of each - you need to understand the total life cycle Investment Costs for implementing them - and understand the probable life cycle Returns as well - financial and other - when you make your pitch to management at your Enterprise.

You can't just be a Learning Proponent. You've got to be a "business proponent" a "business champion" first and last - and a Learning Champion in the middle.

When I would propose investment cost and returns to my Clients I always liked to start with the Costs of Doing Nothing At All. That always got everyones' attention.

If you did nothing - what is that problem or opportunity worth? What does it cost us, what are we losing out on, by doing nothing. Leaving the status quo "as is."

That often causes a desire for change. But you've got to do your homework and you've got to do the math!

Now, not every investment opportunity is worth pursuing - relative to all of the other opportunities to invest for returns.




















Just because you could do something - doesn't mean you should.

In an Enterprise there are many opportunities for investments. With significant returns. Everything is relative to all other opportunities/problems that require money time and attention. How does your "business case" compare to all of those?

And can you even be trusted to not squander the opportunity, the investment funds?

How "mature" is your Enterprise's approach to Training/ Learning/ Knowledge Management? Investing in a mature set of process is smarter than investing in a set of immature processes. For those immature processes are likely to spill resources, waste resources, rather than produce significant returns.




















The IT world discovered that decades ago. The ISD world, the Learning world, needs to reflect on that - and where they are - and if they should be seen as a wise investment or a potential wasted investment. And they may need to get their house in order, their act together, etc. First. Before requesting additional funding to do cool, hip and happenin' stuff.




















Do your homework. Tighten up your internal processes for deploying Learning systems and content and connections that matters to the Enterprise and it's mission and systems and processes. That "really" matters. That has a real potential for significant returns on those investments. Otherwise, why should leadership even bother?

# # #

SLQOTD: How does SL change the learner's accountability to learn? How can an organization encourage learner accountability?

First what do we mean by Accountability? I’m skipping over what do we mean by “Social Learning” as that is a bag I won’t stomp on. Some say all learning is Social. I disagree. So there. Variability & Diversity.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accountability:

Accountability is a concept in ethics with several meanings. It is often used synonymously with such concepts as responsibility, answerability, enforcement, blameworthiness, liability and other terms associated with the expectation of account-giving. As an aspect of governance, it has been central to discussions related to problems in both the public and private (corporation) worlds.

Accountability is defined as "A is accountable to B when A is obliged to inform B about A’s (past or future) actions and decisions, to justify them, and to suffer punishment in the case of eventual misconduct."

In leadership roles, accountability is the acknowledgment and assumption of responsibility for actions, products, decisions, and policies including the administration, governance and implementation within the scope of the role or employment position and encompassing the obligation to report, explain and be answerable for resulting consequences.

"Accountability" stems from late Latin accomptare (to account), a prefixed form of computare (to calculate), which in turn derived from putare (to reckon). The word is an extension of the terminology used in the money lending systems that first developed in Ancient Greece and later, Rome. One would borrow money from a money lender, be that a local Temple or Merchant, and would then be held responsible to their account with that party.

Responsibility is also a close synonym.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

1- So is someone using Social Learning more or less accountable for their own Learning occurring?

Depends on their context.

And - Yes - the Learner is ultimately accountable. But there may be others accountable too.

The Drill Instructor in Boot Camp, “Sorry sir, Wallace just didn’t want to learn so I made him run three hours last night with his rifle over his head - along with his 74 closest buddies.” That DI knew who was going to be held accountable when all was said and done. And he was going to fix that himself in a very unsocial manner – and/or Socially – using peer pressure – by punishing everyone for the mistakes/attitude of one.

We’ll all learn together. It's part of what team building used to be like in the USN (1972 style that is).

The supervisor in a Nuclear Power Plant responsible for operator training and performance. Borrowing from an SNL skit decades ago: We trained them to not spill their Pepsi on the control board – but spills happen – and now we’re facing a China Syndrome. You know that supervisor is going to be held accountable. The learner/Performer too. Perhaps even the Plant Manager. They are accountable for the learner/Performers' learnings and performance. Or for keeping someone in the job who didn't master either.

The 17 year old buying beer at the local convenience store knows better, has learned better; and the clerk too. But who will be held accountable after the bust? Both of them - and the Store Owner with the Permit to sell such. And parents will be climbing that learning curve too - as they hand out bail money, court fees and lawyers fees.

When will they ever learn? The parents that is.

Some things, perhaps many things, have to be learned the hard way.

I used to tell my teenagers that it would be pretty cool if they could learn from the mistakes of their peers. Instead of having to do each of those mistakes themselves.

But alas, it’s most often not to be. To each their own. Learning that is. And parents learn too as they hand out bail, court and lawyers fees. For they are accountable still – until that magic day.
















In an Enterprise Learning Context – it’s usually management down to the individual learner. Not just the learner. Either Wallace learns to do the job right - or he's outta here!

In an Educational Learning Context – it’s usually the learner. Unless it’s K-12 where we hold teachers accountable for students unwilling or unable to learn. Not just the learner. If enough Wallaces and non-Wallaces fail we fire the teachers and the principal. And maybe vote out the School Board too.

In a Personal Learning Context – it’s usually the learner – who hold themselves accountable to themselves, or not. Or their families are accountable for not instilling that desire.

But while there may be others accountable/responsible - it's always up to the learner.

Motivation for Learning is THE Key
If they are motivated - stand back or you'll get hurt.

If they are not motivated - then you'll need a bulldozer to push them along.


2- How can an organization encourage learner accountability?

Measure. Provide feedback and consequences - a "balance of consequences."

Test knowledge and test performance – on those things that are high risk and/or high reward. Two sides of the same coin I think – “risk and reward” that is.
















Reward success and eventually punish failure. With plenty of fair warning beforehand - about the risks and rewards of Learning. In an Enterprise Learning Context.

Point out what doing well in school might mean (although don't share actual facts about correlations) to their future. Cars. Houses. Lifestyles. In an Educational Learning Context.

In a Personal Learning Context - they either really want to - or they are just fooling you and themselves if they talk about it - but don't walk that talk. Then they are truly on their own baby!

# # #

SMEs or MPs - Subject Matter Experts or Master Performers?

Who do you really want to interview/observe for your Instructional Analysis efforts?

Someone who understands/knows the "subject matter" - or - a "performance master" - ???

Someone who knows stuff - or someone who can do stuff?

As always - it depends.

What are your goals in Instruction/ Training/ Learning/ Knowledge Management/ EPSS/ Mobile Learning, etc., etc.? At whatever cost/investment your Enterprise incurs.

Is it to provide subject matter - or performance guidance or instruction? For people to know stuff or be able to do stuff?

I know, I know. As a colleague back in the early 1990s once quoted another colleague, "It's not just semantics, it's always semantics." So true.

But I had been saddled with SMEs back in my early years in the biz, 1979-1982 - when I decided that a corporate SME often took me down the wrong path (not intentionally of course) so many times. Their knowledge was always out-of-date. By days, months or years. They didn't understand the nuances OF TODAY. And I'd too often find that out in my Pilot-Session. Which of course - is WAY TOO LATE!!!

I started asking for Master Performers who were doing the job at a level of mastery the day before they worked with me.

That phrase doesn't need any explanation with my clients - only rationale as to why they should want to "cough one up" (a distasteful phrase itself that may not translate appropriately - sorry).

Why? Give me a Master performers and I'll give you a top tier product. Give me a second tier player and I'll give you something less than ideal. Give me someone you can afford to have gone for a day or three - and I'll give you a POS. (A technical term). R for the I.

Sorry. That's just the way it works. GIGO. Garbage IN - Garbage Out. Good-stuff In - Good-stuff Out. A law of nature. ROI.

Give me the best performer - actually a bunch of them, for me to facilitate in a benchmarking exercise if you will - that produces a behavioral analysis and a cognitive analysis - for instructional means - and/or other means of the processes - the applications. For as the research shows- an SME/MP will miss 70-80% of what a novice really needs to perform - so you have to be very careful about just talking to one or a few. That can be dangerous. And you can't observe a 6 month to 3 year process to nail that down before developing instruction and information to enable it. That's just too long. Poor ROI.

Beware the SME Interview. Even the observation - for YOU the observer can only observe behavior - not cognition. And when you ask - they'll miss that 70-80%. Poor Return on that Investment.

But if you bring a group of them together and successfully facilitate/manipulate them - for the good of them and the Enterprise - they self-correct each other all day long - or three days long in the case of my "standard meeting length" for getting an entire job/performance analysis and enabling K/S analysis task completed. And it is very synergistic. And hard work. With much ROI potential.

For more on this - see my many writings on analysis for instruction (PACT) and performance improvement (EPPI) - and my free book (PDF): lean-ISD - about the 3 levels of ISD and a common performance analysis and project planning/management approaches - at http://www.eppic.biz/.

Email me with any questions.

# # #

"Management Areas of Performance" Book - Organizes a Framework for Assessment and Development Planning

My book "Management Areas of Performance" (2007) looks at assessment and development of management skills and leadership skills within the context of a specific Enterprise and Function - Sales, Finance, Purchasing, HR, etc. It uses a "framework of Performance" to do its diagnosis/assessment.

It divides that assessment of Leadership/Managerial knowledge/skills and Performance capability and importance (for prioritization) into 3 categories and a 4th for "when Managers/Leaders act as Individual Contributors - because that happens too! -

• Leadership
• Core
• Support
• Individual Contributor

Leadership Areas of Performance - Does the manager:

• Meet with Customers and other stakeholders to assess how well they, their team and Enterprise are doing in meeting current requirements and desires? As well as the perception of how well they will be able to meet near term and long term requirements and desires? And to determine the real difference between requirements and desires? To understand the ROI and bottom-line impact to those stakeholders including customer?
• Conduct Strategic Planning with all of those stakeholder requirements and desires in mind? And cascade those Strategies outward and downward (and sometimes upward) to insure linkage between strategies and priorities across the board, as well as criss-cross/ up and down and sideways throughout the Enterprise?
• Conduct Operational Planning and Budgeting to make sure the current priority efforts are properly resourced AND that building for the future is occurring too? And that lower priorities are not seeing the "light of day?"
• Put measurement systems in place to gather metrics on progress, or lack thereof?
• Direct Improvement Initiatives to address Problems and Opportunities that link back to priority operations and strategies?
• Address formal and informal routine and on-demand needs for Communications with all constituencies?

Core Areas of Performance - Does the manager:

• Plan Work, annually, quarterly, monthly, weekly, daily, hourly, and /or minute by minute?
• Assign work?
• Monitor work progress and quality performance?
• Troubleshoot all opportunities/problems?

Support Areas of Performance - Does the manager:

• Design workflow processes, or redesign them?
• Handle all people needs/issues from how work is organized by job and organization design (to support the processes and their volumes/timing requirements), recruiting/selection, training/development, performance appraisal and management, compensation/benefits, and rewards/recognition?
• Handle all non-people needs to enable people to perform the processes, such as data/information, materials/supplies, tools/equipment, facilities/grounds, budget/headcount, culture/consequences?
• Participate in Special Assignments such as task forces, committees, etc.?

Individual Contributor Areas of Performance - Does the manager:

• Roll up their sleeves and perform in place of a subordinate routinely or on-demand?

If so then the free PDF book at http://www.eppic.biz/ might be just the guidance that you might be looking for!

One Early Reviewers Comments:

I like the model. It will help organizations on several levels:

• Clarity of what should be the responsibility of each level of management in the organization. The recognition that different individuals will be better at some of these AoP's than at others -- and that is not only OK but that diversity adds strength to the organization.
• A detailed description of the skills required of each role at the individual contributor line as well as an assay of those skills at the organizational level.
• A recognition of the time required at the Management Support level which is seldom, if ever budgeted for by the organization but is just assumed that we will find the time for it. (I believe that upwards of 40% of my time is spent just managing Human Assets)

As I look at my own role probably 60% of my time is in the role of process design/redesign, but that is what my organization does so it is actually part of L3 as well as S1.

As for the Baldrige model, Category 1.0 -- Leadership expects a systematic approach to organizational governance and performance review.

Item 2.2 --Strategy Deployment seeks to understand how you will allocate resources to ensure accomplishment of your strategic action plans and ensure that the changes are sustained as well as what are your key human resource plans that derive from your strategic objectives and action plans. Obviously a need to understand your strengths and weaknesses, including human assets.

Item 5.2 -- Employee learning and Motivation expects the organization to determine how to motivate employees (including through senior executives) to develop and utilize their full potential.

Providing a clear methodology and model to lay out this foundation is critical to the success of the organization. Left to their own devices,most organizations will do a less than adequate job and not know the minefield they have left in their rear.

# # #

Self-Directed Learning & Development Systems - or Directed? A Key Strategy For Sure!

In my EPPI - Enterprise Process Performance Improvement model - of which my PACT Processes for T&D/ Learning/ Knowledge Management is a subset - I look at the BIG PICTURE of Individual & Process & Enterprise Performance Competence as a function of 3 major sets of things:

The Processes - are they really designed to "deliver" outputs where both the processes themselves and their outputs meet Stakeholder requirements? If so: OK. If not start there with your Quality Function Deployment and lean and six sigma methods and tools.

The Human Assets Management Systems that "provision" the people and support the people part of the equation. Do they bring on board and then support people so that they have the right awareness/ knowledge/ skill and intellectual attributes, physical attributes and psychological attributes and personal values demanded by those processes? What are the business systems - such as L&D - in place to make that happen? Are they up to their tasks?

The Environmental Assets Management Systems that "provision" all of the rest of the non-human stuff required by those people to make the process happen? By design? Are they up to their tasks?

Back to L&D System - beyond ADDIE/ISD/Web 2.0/ Social Learning/ etc. - or as I wrote about it many years ago - the T&D System - is but one component in the mix - or blend.

How "mature" or "immature" are your systems in place right now? Maturity as assessed by a Process Maturity Model as the version shown in the following diagram (click to enlarge/copy)...
















There are 5 levels of maturity. Of each process.

I don't know about you but my model for the complexity of a typical T&D/L&D function/system has 47 moving parts (processes). That's a lot so I organized them into 12 systems and organized those into three-sets: Leadership, Core and Support.

That enables one to go through that complexity systematically. And yes, your view could be different from mine. The key question is - does yours/mine cover all the bases?


















Here is the starter list of definitions for each of the 12 "systems."
















At 12 O'Clock high is the most important "system" of them all - in my mind. 6 O'Clock is where ADDIE resides. A means to the ends. At 12 O'Clock the ends are determined and the means directed and resources. 12 = heads. 6 = tails. As in who wags whom.

At 12 O'Clock you'll find a two way street - a 2-way set of communications. Between Top of the House executives who distribute goals and resources to get their strategies and tactical plans implemented and sustained.

The following graphic is but one of many ways to structure such a "system" - where a system is a bundle of processes.














Either your strategy is/has been to let the water seek it's lowest level on it's own or you employ pumps and towers and piping to get it to where you want it to be.

Same with Learning. Formal where? Informal where? Training where? Social Learning via Social Networks where and enabled how? Where is the ROI positive and where is it negative?

What's in your strategy?

In tough times it is even more important to get this right - in good times it was always just as important - just less risky to not be right. Until that cycle turns as it always does.

My book "T&D Systems View" is available as a free PDF at www.eppic.biz - or as a hardbound/Kindle at Amazon.com.

# # #