Always with Master Performers
Also known as: Exemplary Performers, Star Performers, etc. Whatever. They’re the ones who are the best of the best. People to emulate. People to leverage.
They’re not perfect – but who else would you ask? Or interview/observe?
Yes – Experts can miss up to 70% of what a Novice needs – per the Research – but there are methods to employ to reduce those gaps.
There’s Cognitive Task Analysis. And there’s my Facilitated Group Process employed in Analysis and Design – and also in Development, Pilot Testing and Revision & Release.
The Team Approach
I first used a team approach – in design/development – way back in 1979 – and wrote about it in 1999 – here.
I was developing a Script for a Video Based Series of Training for Inside Sales Personnel on Product Knowledge. I used the vendors for the product – Windows – who were paying to have the generic Product – as my SMEs – and after 7 iterations of the script – I’d write it after interviewing the Vendor’s people and they’d individually send back conflicting edits.
And I’d go around that merry-go-round again And again.
At the 7th go-round – I’d had enough. I went to my management and suggested that we get all of the SMEs into a room and hammer it out once-and-for-all.
And so it happened.
Then in 1981 – I got severely burned in a Pilot Test after listening to the Corporate SME in Purchasing at Motorola. He’s been the Corporate SME for 7 years – and therefore his knowledge was lagging by about 7 years.
After that I asked for and got a Team of Master Performers from each site and went from there – developing my methods via trial and error. Learning after Burning – as I’ve written – for the past 30 years.
I’ve found that sometimes Other SMEs were also needed. And sometimes Management was needed. And in Design efforts – sometimes sharp Novice Performers were more than helpful.
And … that no new people should be added to the team effort after starting with Analysis – as they’d second guess all of the analysis data previously generated – and bring the Group Process to a slow march – one step forward and then two steps back – or to a complete halt.
These are the Lessons Learned I share with new clients and the PSTs – Project Steering Teams – whom I ask to handpick said Master Performers – for political acceptability for the data that the PST will review and approve before its used in the next steps.
Facilitating Master Performers Is Tough Duty
Yes. But well worth the pain – as in pain for gain. I’ve got guidelines for those comfortable with facilitation – or a lack of fear.
See this Blog Post that overviews the 12 – and provides links to 12 Blog Posts covering them further – here.
Your Facilitated Outputs May Differ
Mine are proscribed by my ISD Processes.
I’ve conducted 250+ Group Processes since 1979. To conduct Analysis. To design Learning Paths. To design Learning Content. To develop Learning Content.
I have trained others – over 500 ISDers – on these methods, and have been doing so since 1983.
Two 1984 Articles
Models and Matrices- NSPI PIJ -1984 – 5 page PDF – the first publication of the performance and enabler analysis methods for ISD, from NSPI’s (ISPI’s) Performance & Instruction Journal, November 1984.
CAD – Training Mag – 1984 – 6 page PDF – the first publication about Curriculum Architecture Design via a Group Process – published in Training Magazine in September 1984. Original manuscript (30 pages) – How to Build a Training Structure That Won’t Keep Burning Down.
My ISD Methods: PACT
You can search this site for additional Free PACT Resources – there are hundreds. And a few For Sale (Books and Consulting Services).
# # #
Pingback: T&D: Best ISD Practice: Benchmark Your Master Performers | EPPIC - Pursuing Performance