ASTD HPI Process Model

ASTD HPI Process Model

Introduction

Many organizations can identify that there is a need for performance improvement in one or more units of the organization, however it is often difficult to pinpoint the cause of the performance malady and the remedy it needs. Training is many times turned to as the fix, but this one size fits all approach is only appropriate when a lack of knowledge is the problem. To develop and apply an effective solution to the performance problem, organizations need an objective and systematic approach. This approach is human performance improvement (HPI).

The Association for Talent Development (ATD), formerly known as the American Society for Talent Development (ASTD), exists as a society of “professionals who help others achieve their full potential by improving their knowledge, skills, and abilities in the workplace” (www.td.org). The ASTD developed the HPI Process Model (pictured below), a six-step performance improvement model aimed at diagnosing the performance problem, identifying and implementing the appropriate solution for the problem, and determining if the solution met the needs of the organization. The six steps include:

1. Performance Analysis

2. Cause Analysis

3. Intervention Selection

4. Intervention Implementation

5. Change Management

6. Evaluation of Results

Step 1: Performance Analysis

The purpose of the performance analysis, sometimes referred to as the ‘performance gap analysis’ or ‘up-front analysis,’ is to identify the performance gap, which is the difference between the actual and desired performance. Any variety of methods, such as interviews and focus groups, to collect information that helps to identify the question: What is the performance gap? In addition to simply identifying the performance gap, the information should make evident when the performance gap or its symptoms/consequences first occurred, who is affected by it, and what its cost is to the organization. At the end of a performance analysis there should be a well-defined problem or opportunity for improvement.

Step 2: Cause Analysis

Once the performance gap has been identified, a cause analysis can be performed to determine the root cause of the gap. The cause analysis should aim questions towards Rummler’s three levels of performance: the organization, the process, and the individual. According to Rummler, it is at the intersection of these three levels that accomplishment is made. If something is hindering accomplishment, it can be found in one or more of these levels. According to Dent and Anderson (2000), “these questions should include the following issues:

· Incentives

· Flow of information

· Equipment

· Employee abilities

· Motivation

· Work environment

· Knowledge and skills” (p. 7-9).

The outcome of the cause analysis should be a list of causes or a clearly defined cause that can be used as a jumping board for selecting appropriate performance intervention(s).

Step 3: Intervention Selection

In this step of the HPI Process Model, it is time to choose the most appropriate interventions that will address the root cause(s) the performance gap. An appropriate intervention will have success without its cost and obstacles outweighing the benefits. After all interventions have been reviewed, considering its potential success, cost, and obstacles, which include concerns of the stakeholders, the best fit should be documented in detail in a design document to be shared with the stakeholders.

Step 4: Intervention Implementation

As the analyst it is not your responsibility to implement the intervention. It is however the analyst’s responsibility to determine how and when the intervention is ready to be implemented and whether the organization, leadership, and targeted individuals are ready for the implementation. Make sure that the intervention fits the culture and needs of the organization. Select a sponsor for the intervention who is well respected, has time to support the effort, and can validate change in the organization. Think about the individuals who will be affected by the intervention; by getting to know these individuals, the analyst can form a more successful strategy for interventional implementation.

Step 5: Change Management

When implementing an intervention, change and its associated pains are inevitable. Change management becomes a crucial element to the intervention to combat the discomfort of change. Though it is not addressed outright during earlier steps of the model, it is important for the analyst to begin to anticipate the pains of change and the change management steps to be taken. It is important to remain positive about the change and provide a valid reason for it. Open and honest communication combined with reliable information about the intervention and the changes it brings can bring a sense of trust that can help to overcome the discomfort among affected individuals.

Step 6: Evaluation of Results

In this last phase of the HPI process it is critical to determine how well the intervention met its goal. Though this evaluation takes place at the end of the process, it is important to think of evaluation strategy earlier in the process. Identifying desired business outcomes and optimal performance are vital considerations to make for the evaluation process. By measuring the results of the intervention, the analyst should be able to determine the changes that occurred in the organization, particularly the benefits reaped from the HPI process.

References

Dent, J., Anderson, P. (2000). Fundamentals of HPI. Info-line, 9811, 1-18.

IAEA Wiki. (2015). Retrieved April 4, 2018 from the IAEA NKM Wiki: http://wikinkm.iaea.org/wiki/index.php/

Human_performance_improvement