1

Instructional Designer as OrganizationalChange Agents Part II

JOY JACKSON GREENINSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNER & PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT SPECIALIST, DFAS; CO-CHAIR GLTS PROGRAMMING, MEMBERSHIP ENGAGEMENT, FGDLA BOD

2W

hat

does

a G

ov. I

nstr

ucti

onal

D

esig

ner

do?

INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEMS

SPECIALIST

Program Coordinator

Lead or ManagerCollaborator

Project ManagerMaster in the Art of Briefing

Techno-Nerd

Archivist

OPM – Classification & Qualifications for GS-1750 (and then some)

Wielder of theMAGIC WAND

to Improve Performance

Learning Theory, Psychology of Learning“Guru” on how people learn

1

Instructional Design PracticesEducational strategist

2

Instructional Product DevelopmentTraining and curriculum Engineer

3

Educational EvaluationProblem solver and sleuth

4

Computers in Education and TrainingTechnical expert in interactive multimedia instruction

5

3In

stru

ctio

nal D

esig

ner

– O

ur

Curr

ent

Role

TO RECAP, HERE’S WHAT WE DO: Use a systems approach to design, develop, and

revise instructional design and development materials

Produce resident instruction and/or e-learning materials

Support key staff development programs which provide frequent opportunities for staff to keep abreast of emerging technologies

Assist in planning and conducting evaluation projects to review curricula and performance supports

So how can we be Change Agents…

4In

stru

ctio

nal D

esig

ner

+ C

hang

e Ag

ent

Start with the end in mind.Work from a broader perspective and from the

outside in (1) Organizational support (2) Job input/output (3) performer

Solutions become “interventions” that go beyond KSA’s to bridge the performance gap

Create change by addressing overarching organizational and job supports – giving the performer a foundation to then build solid KSAs

5Th

e H

uman

Per

form

ance

Mod

el CASE STUDY: Division chief requested training and additional resources to manage increased workload

An example of a successful project using Human Performance Technology (HPT) methodology

6H

uman

Per

form

ance

Tec

hnol

ogy

(HPT

) M

OD

EL

Van Tiem, Moseley, and Dessinger (2012) http://www.ispi.org/images/ISPI/About%20ISPI%20Images/HPT-Model-2012.jpg

7P

erf

orm

an

ce I

mp

rove

me

nt

Pla

n

8An

atom

y of

Per

form

ance

– A

n Ex

ampl

e

Geary Rummler http://www.performancedesignlab.com/products-and-services/the-science-behind/the-anatomy-of-performance

9O

rg L

evel

– T

arge

t G

roup

Sur

vey

Resp

onse

ID Question AvgResp

II.1

Is the Org strategy clearly articulated and communicated? (Mission, Vision, Values, Goals, Strategic Plan)

4.00

II.2

Is the Sub-org strategy clearly articulated and communicated? (Mission, Vision, Values, Goals, Strategic Plan)

4.00

II.3

Is the Division strategy clearly articulated and communicated and/or aligned to the Sub-org / Org strategy? (Mission, Vision, Values, Goals, Strategic Plan)

3.75

II.4

Do you know the overall performance targets for your organization? For example, what your org hopes to accomplish over a given fiscal year.

3.75

II.5

Do you know the overall performance targets for your sub-org? For example, what your sub-org hopes to accomplish over a given fiscal year.

4.00

II.6

Do you know the overall performance targets for your division? For example, what your division hopes to accomplish over a given fiscal year.

4.25

II.7

Does the organizational structure for your branch within the Division enhance efficiency and effectiveness? (Are the right positions in place and is the branch structure appropriate?)

4.50

II.1 II.2 II.3 II.4 II.5 II.6 II.7Strongly

Agree 1 1 1 1 1 2 2

Agree 2 2 1 1 2 1 2

Neutral 1 1 2 2 1 1 0

Disagree 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Strongly Disagree 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Branch

All branches within a division were surveyed about their understanding of management, design, and goals from the org, process, and performer levels

Division Survey ResultsTotal

Respondents5 of 10 total

Section Organizational Level

10Fa

ctor

s Aff

ecti

ng H

uman

Pe

rfor

man

ce

Rummler, https://www.rummlerbrache.com/

11P

erf

orm

an

ce I

mp

rove

me

nt

Pla

n

12G

ap A

naly

sis

– Ex

ampl

es o

f Id

enti

fied

Gap

s

Inability to measure

performance for several key

processes and positions

Inconsistent project tracking /

lack of coordination

Random work inputs and

prioritization

Insufficient performance

incentives

Vague position descriptions

(one size fits all)

Improper resource

allocation / scarce resources

1

4

2

5

3

6

Six gaps were identified once the assessments were completed and reviewed.The analysis shows how performance gaps can extend beyond knowledge / skill / ability of the performerThese are then quantified so targeted action can be taken

13Pe

rfor

man

ce Im

prov

emen

t -

Inte

rven

tion

s

Define Mission, Vision, Goals, and Strategic Plan for Division1

Perform a Job Analysis for each Position Type within the Division2

Define Performance Metrics for Processes & Positions3

Streamline Coordination and Consistency in Project Tracking4

Develop Clearly Defined Performance Based Incentive Program5

Resource Allocation & Assistance with Hiring6

Recommendations are custom tailored to fit the performance gaps

Once organizational supports are addressed, a second analysis is conducted to (1) quantify success and (2) identify additional performance gaps

After the first assessment cycle is completed and recommendations are implemented, this overall process should be repeated annually with the target audience

14P

erf

orm

an

ce I

mp

rove

me

nt

Pla

n

15Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

All interventions were reviewed with the stakeholders We developed a project plan and timeline together

16Pe

rfor

man

ce Im

prov

emen

t -

Eval

uati

on

Create KPIs• Top five key

performance indicators

Measure Baseline• Measure before

establishing other interventions

Measure Regularly• Measure KPIs

every six months

Modify Accordingly• Adjust

interventions and follow on plan as needed

HOW SUCCESS IS MEASURED

17P

erf

orm

an

ce I

mp

rove

me

nt

Pla

n

18M

anag

ing

Ch

ang

e -

Ph

ases

19P

roje

ct O

utc

omes

Started an organization-wide discussion about collaboration and change

Enabled a division to get the resources they needed Cast a strong light into the areas that the agency and

sub-org (division) needed to improve before individualized learning could take place

I received a promotion!!

20

For more information about the HPT project:Joy Jackson Green – joy.l.Jackson-green.civ@mail.mil

LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/joyjacksongreen