The Performance Modeling effort documents the requirements of the performers within the scope of the intended project and creates Performance Models. The Performance Model is the device used to capture ideal performance requirements; and it documents identified gaps from that ideal performance and their probable causes.
The Performance Model has two components:
1- AoPs (Areas of Performance) which are the “segments” of overall performance
Here is a set of Areas of Performance for a Management position…
Here is a set of Areas of Performance for a Sales Rep…
2 – Performance Model Charts capture the data details for each AoP segment.
Here is an example page for that Manager job…
Performance Models may be developed for an organization, a function, a job, a task, or a process.
The information in a Performance Model includes a segmentation of overall performance into “Areas of Performance/AoP” segments, plus AoP details regarding the expectations for outputs and their measures and standards, the tasks per output, and the roles and responsibilities per task, for all of the performers involved. That ideal, mastery performance is documented on the left side of the Performance Model chart.
It is then used to facilitate a structured and systematic gap analysis on the right side.
The entire Performance Model data-set, with the ideal and gap analysis data, is then used in the specification and analysis of both the human enablers, and the environmental enablers that are required to enable mastery performance.
Most Performance Models for “a job” – an entire job – might take 10-20 pages to describe.
A single Task-Set might only take a page. Think about how much you articulating and capturing your Analysis phase in your work might take.
Practice on that!
Neatness Does Not Count – Legibility Does
Here is what a page looks like after generating it with an Analysis Team – where they are facilitated to come to a consensus…
Here is what it looks like after being word processed…
I’ve been using this approach for Performance Analysis since 1979. Working with Master Performers to capture the data in a format like this (the format has changed slightly since 1979).
But I’ve been facilitating handpicked teams of Master Performers to generate the data since 1982. Handpicked by the Project Steering Team – the client and other key stakeholders.
Capture the performance data using the language of the Analysis Team – of Master Performers.
Hint: they don’t talk in Noun-Verb or Verb-Noun patterns.
Changing their language to that – is the start of a quick disconnect with your clients. Don’t do that!
The touch time that it takes to capture the Performance data is approximately 2/3rds of the total time to generate the data-set of both the Performance and the Enabling K/S (Knowledge/Skills) of a total job – which is most often 3 days. Sometimes two and sometimes 4. A Sub-set of the job tasks (and outputs, etc.) plus the enabling K/Ss might only take a couple of hours. As always, it depends. Then it needs to be documented – either after the fact – or in parallel with the generation.
It – the touch time required – to bring the Analysis Team to consensus – depends on how uniformly the performance is practiced among all of the Master Performers assembled, how controversial the Performance itself is, how well (or not) the Master Performers know each other (that goes to their trust levels), and whether the analysis is being done F2F or online.
I’ve been in many varied situations doing this analysis – for downstream Instructional design and then development efforts, for creating (design and development) of recruiting and selection tools and processes, for Performance Appraisal tools and processes, for Pay For Performance Capability systems using Qualification/Certification Performance Tests. And for other applications targeting human competence – and the competence of internal provisioning systems and process – that provide other, non-human things to Processes. See this next graphic.
Contact me if you are interested in this analysis service and/or more from me!
# # #