Goldberg is best known for a series of popular cartoons depicting complicated gadgets that perform simple tasks in indirect, convoluted ways, giving rise to the term Rube Goldberg machines for any similar gadget or process. Goldberg received many honors in his lifetime, including a Pulitzer Prize for his political cartooning in 1948 and the Banshees’ Silver Lady Award in 1959
The goal of most T&D is to improve the performance of people in one or more business processes.
Most likely your Enterprise has business metrics that they use to manage the business.
But when you read about Measurement in T&D/L&D/KM, etc., etc., it seems so non-straight-forward. It seems so convoluted.
Does it have to be?
Shouldn’t Measurement of T&D’s Impact be more of a straight line to the targeted performance?
I think so.
But why isn’t it?
I think it’s due to too many T&D programs (courses) being focused on Topics versus Tasks.
Task-sets that is. Tasks that lead to Outputs. Outputs that meet Stakeholder Requirements.
Which requires your Analysis efforts to focus on all 3 components of My Mantra.
World’s largest Rube Goldberg machine lights up Christmas tree…
Let’s simplify T&D Measurement by starting with the ends in mind.
The Stakeholder Requirements. What Outcomes do they demand?
In my view Outcomes are Outputs that help them meet their Requirements. Know what those are. Then define the Tasks that effectively and efficiently get those Outputs produced.
Then look at any gaps of incumbents. Or the gaps expected of new hires. Then look at the Performance and Gaps as a result of the System in place.
Here’s some of my frameworks (models) for doing so … and resources.
And then derive the enabling knowledge and skills required. If that is a source of the gaps.
# # #