Context is King
A critical part of an Instructional Design (ID) project is understanding the context in which the desired performance or behavior change must occur. Without exploring and understanding the factors that may influence and impact the target audience’s learning transfer and application of new knowledge, it is likely that a given ID project will not succeed. As depicted in the LeaPS model (see Figure 1), concentric bands are included to show that, as IDs, we must consider what effect contextual factors related to the organization, the individual, society, or culture may have on the performance and learners we are focusing on.
Luckily, the ID toolbox contains a variety of tools that support these types of front-end analyses: Statements of Work, Training Requirements Analysis, Learner Analysis, and Task Analysis. Let’s take a look at each to see how they support ID project work, especially around providing context for the ID and relevant stakeholders.
A Statement of Work (SOW) is a critical document prepared by the ID and approved by the client that outlines the scope of the work, deliverables, expectations for both the project team and the client’s team, and timeframe for the project. The SOW sets the context of the work ahead for both parties, so that all are aligned on what is in scope and out of scope for a given project. I’ve done work both as an internal consultant and an external consultant to an organization; in both settings, I frequently referred back to the SOW throughout my project engagements. The SOW has helped me navigate tricky conversations with stakeholders so that I was able to use my time wisely and effectively towards the right tasks. If something came up that was not previously agreed to, but was clearly a need for the organization and/or the work, I would collaborate with the client to develop a Change Order (CO) outlining the change in scope and append the CO to the SOW.
A Training Requirements Analysis (TRA) is conducted once it has been confirmed (via needs assessment for example) that some type of training intervention is needed to achieve the desired behavior or performance change (OPWL 537 Course Instructors, 2020, p.61). Specifically the TRA outlines the performance gap to be addressed, information and evidence to support the value of closing the performance gap, and describes which training solutions or options will drive the desired performance change, for example job aids or introductory training (OPWL 537 Course Instructors, 2020, p.63-64). Essentially, the TRA provides the context for what the training configurations should address and the specific environment in which the interventions will be expected to succeed.
IDs use a Learner Analysis (LA) to understand the baseline knowledge of the target audience. Results from an LA “specify what the learners already know and what they need to learn to perform their tasks” (OPWL 537 Course Instructors, 2020, p.17). It provides contextual factors related to existing knowledge that an ID should consider and could potentially leverage to design effective training solutions to achieve the desired performance.
A Task Analysis (TA), on the other hand, hones in on the specific procedures or activities that are being targeted for desired performance. The TA specifically outlines “the exemplary OTJ performance that the training will address” (OPWL 537 Course Instructors, 2020, p.17). This type of evaluation allows the ID to focus on the context of how the task should be performed, i.e., are there certain nuances or guidelines that an exemplary performer uses to achieve his/her high level of performance?
With my background in Human Factors Engineering (HFE), the LA and TA methods feel familiar to me, though I’ve used TA a bit differently in the HFE field. In HFE, it’s critical to understand and consider the human in any given system - how they think, how they make decisions, how they perform their task within the system. HFEs apply that understanding to design and/or improve the system to achieve a desired performance level. In HFE, the TA method is used not only to investigate exemplary performance but average and substandard performance as well.
I consider all of these front-end tools as a means to providing the necessary information for an ID to consider when engaging in an ID project. From organizational and culture factors to baseline knowledge and task performance characteristics, these contextual pieces of the puzzle are critical for the ID to explore so that he/she can design, develop, and implement the right training solutions for a given client.
OPWL 537 Course Instructors. (2020). Instructional Design Course Handbook. Boise, ID: Boise State Department of Organizational Performance and Workplace Learning.