Volume 16, Number 4/2003 3

What Distinguishes HPT?

Michael CassidyKaren MedskerCo-Editors, PIQ

On November 17-19, 2003, approx-imately 20 members of ISPI, including both PIQ editors, attended a Presiden-tial “Think Tank.” Both old-timers and relative newcomers to the fi eld of Hu-man Performance Technology (HPT) participated. The task force began its work together in Las Vegas but will continue via smaller work groups. The task force’s goals are these:

• Distinguish HPT from other fi elds devoted to performance improve-ment

• Describe a generic approach that characterizes HPT

• Identify technology domains used by HPT

• Identify sciences that underlie HPT technologies

Potentially, the results of the task force’s work could be used by ISPI to defi ne content areas for conference tracks, publications, institutes, and awards of excellence. The content areas could help organize communi-ties of practice both within ISPI and in the real world. The distinguishing features of HPT would help identify ISPI’s value proposition. The value proposition should provide a compel-ling argument as to why people should join ISPI, read its publications, or at-tend its events; and how employers and clients should view HPT services, as distinguished from those of other professionals (e.g., quality, organiza-tion development, management sci-

ences). ISPI is perceived by some to have an “identity crisis” in the arena we call “non-instructional interventions.” What non-instructional interventions are fi rmly in HPT? Are any interven-tions out? The task force’s work may help answer these questions.

The task force used as a basis for its work a recent Performance Im-provement article (Wallace & Rum-mler, 2002), in which the authors proposed that technologies form the basis of ISPI’s value proposition. Rummler (1983) proposed that tech-nologies be the Society’s driving force, and he suggested a framework simi-lar to that used by the current task force: sciences support technologies, which in turn support the perfor-mance improvement process.

While the task force is still at work, we can report that some of the early discussions focused on criteria for assessing HPT projects. Tentative agreement was reached that HPT projects should:

• Focus on valued, measured re-sults

• Deal with the (primarily work-re-lated?) performance of people

• Take a systemic view of the perfor-mance and its context

• Be reliable (replicable, consistent)• Avoid interventions shown to lack

validity

These criteria are consistent with our own views, which we have ex-

Performance Improvement Quarterly, 16(4) pp. 3-4

4 Performance Im prove ment Quarterly

pressed in previous editorials about what constitutes publishable HPT work. We support the notions that HPT research and practice should be science and technology driven and methodologically sound, rather than market (or fad) driven, and that HPT efforts generally should be both systematic and systemic. We look for-ward to the task force’s identifi cation of the technologies and underlying sciences that are to be considered part of HPT, and we expect a rather inclusive list to be the result.

Some task force members com-mented that HPT should be a “big tent” that brings together research results from a variety of disciplines and makes them available, through integration and interpretation, to HPT practitioners. This appears to be a reasonable role for HPT, though not a distinguishing characteristic, since other fi elds (e.g., organization development and human resource management) consider themselves to be big tents as well. This worthy goal of the big tent places a large burden on HPT researchers and practitioners—that of keeping up with research fi ndings in a variety of fi elds, summarizing, interpreting and integrating these fi ndings to inform practice and further research.

What does all this mean for PIQ? We propose the following two implica-tions and invite your feedback.

More Non-instructional Topics

To help defi ne what non-instruc-tional interventions are claimed by HPT, we would like to expand the range of topics dealt with in PIQ. For example, we invite the submission of manuscripts related to ergonomics and workplace design, performance ap-

praisal, incentive systems, job design, organization design, strategic plan-ning, change management, compensa-tion systems, and team performance. We encourage you and your colleagues to submit manuscripts representing any science or technology/intervention that relates to the performance of peo-ple, particularly at work.

More Review ArticlesTo develop as a fi eld, HPT must

• Identify key research (both sci-ence- and technology-related) questions that would, if answered, inform practice signifi cantly

• Summarize, integrate, and inter-pret existing research evidence related to these questions

• Derive implications for practice of research fi ndings

• Identify questions or sub-questions as yet unanswered by research

• Outline thoughtful agendas to guide future research

We encourage more review ar-ticles, which fulfi ll these functions. In the short term, well-constructed review articles serve the immediate needs of both researchers and practi-tioners, the two PIQ audiences. Over time, an accumulation of review articles will help HPT establish its identity as an interdisciplinary, tech-nology-driven fi eld.

ReferencesRummler, G.A. (1983). Technology do-

mains and NSPI: A proposed frame-work for organizing the professional content of NSPI. Performance and Instruction, 22(8), 32-36.

Rummler, G.A., & Wallace, G.W. (2002). What is ISPI’s value proposition: Looking back and forward. Perfor-mance Improvement, 41(6), 8-13.