In 1981 I Saw The Ishikawa Diagram
From Professor Ishikawa from Japan in the 1950s.
This diagram embedded in the graphic above – spoke to me to a much greater extent than Gilbert’s BEM. Gilbert’s BEM provided some details about those 4 variables.
And as I’ve written before, Gilbert’s graphic on the page BEFORE the BEM in his 1978 book, Human Competence, resonated with me to an even greater extent as a preface to the BEM.
Instructional Analysis By Any Name Is a Sub-Set of Performance Analysis
TNA, etc. Training Needs Analysis all too often leads the ISD Analysis effort.
Fine of the TNA is 1) for new hires, or 2) job tasks and processes have changed, or 3) there is a Regulatory Requirement.
And all too often the TNA is done by survey. I call those efforts Training Wants Analysis vs Training Needs Analysis.
My adaptation of the Ishikawa Diagram is based on both the Ishikawa Diagram and probably the BEM – although I don’t think it was deliberate.
Is use the term Competence rather than Capability (same diff) as a reminder of that possibility – and it was Darlene Van Tiem who brought that to my attention.
Which caused me to reflect on that possibility – when all along I thought I was taking the Ishikawa and my own evolved Enabler Analysis methods and incorporating that. But then – those had evolved from Gilbert (and Rummler’s) Knowledge Map which had morphed into my Knowledge/Skills Matrices (with 17 categories that had started as 8 categories in 1982) in the early 1980s … and my EPPI Methods (my version of HPT or PI) in the early 1990s.
Addressing the Gaps Happens Upstream – Some of the Time
The solution-set for a Performance Issue (problem and/or Opportunity) will address gaps in the outputs and processes of Enabler Provisioning Systems upstream…
I believe that the 4W framework is attributable to Roger Addison.
That was a set of partial listings. If you want more you’ll need to check out this…
Key concept – “Outputs are Inputs” … or as I sometimes frame them – “Outputs As Inputs” – and Worthy Outputs meet all of the Stakeholder Requirements.
The Customer Is King – Not! – 15 page PDF – the original version of the article published in the Journal for Quality and Participation in March 1995 – address Balancing Conflicting Stakeholder Requirements, and suggests that the Customer is Not the King of Stakeholders (despite the unfortunate slogans from the Quality movement despite Deming’s admonitions about slogans). Balancing Conflicting Stakeholder Requirements – Wallace – March 1995 AQP
And the version in ISPI’s November 2011 Performance Express: performancexpress.org-Stakeholders Beyond the Customers The Customer Is King Not
A Short Video
For too long those promoting Performance Consulting by that or other names – have all too often focused on Knowledge & Skills. THAT is a huge mistake IMO.
Unless it is seen as an intermediate step to true Performance Consulting.
Go For Performance – address whatever levers are at the root of gaps from the Current State to the Ideal State – by addressing the gaps in the Process itself and/or the gaps, in what I call, the Enabler Provisioning Systems.
# # #