Human Performance Technology
To provide a foundation, let's first look at two definitions of human performance technology (HPT). The first a very complex definition generated by the International Society of Performance Improvement (ISPI) and the second a much simpler definition provided by Dr. James Pershing, an expert and highly regarded figure in the fields of HPT and IT.
ISPI defines HPT as “a systematic approach to improving productivity and competence, using a set of methods and procedures -- and a strategy for solving problems -- for realizing opportunities related to the performance of people. More specifically, it is a process of selection, analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation of programs to most cost-effectively influence human behavior and accomplishment. It is a systematic combination of three fundamental processes: performance analysis, cause analysis, and intervention selection, and can be applied to individuals, small groups, and large organizations (ISPI, 2012).”
In simpler terms, "The study and ethical practice of improving productivity in organizations by designing and developing effective interventions that are results-oriented, comprehensive, and systematic (Pershing, 2006)."
To more closely examine each term:
Human = people in organizations
Performance = accomplishment of work, attainment of results
Technology = the scientific study of practical matters
Similar to instructional technology, the field has been referred to by many names historically and in current context. Depending on the organization, you may hear any of the below terms, just understand that they all encompass the conceptual aspects and processes of HPT. The most current "buzzword" used to refer to the field is "performance improvement."
PT = Performance Technology
HPI = Human Performance Improvement
PI = Performance Improvement
PE = Performance Engineering
PE = Performance Enhancement
#1 Historical Roots
Human performance technology has been derived from several fields, applying principles from behavioral and cognitive psychology, sociology, anthropology, communications, business management, and systems theory (Chyung, 2008).
Although some consider IT a subset of HPT because of the broad scope and focus on many performance intervention strategies, HPT actually emerged from the field of IT during the late 1950's into the 1960's.
Practitioners recognized that instruction was just one of the possible solutions to performance problems and began to explore alternative solutions outside of the instructional realm.
The field experienced increased growth and recognition during the late 1960's and 1970's, when many of the practitioners began collaborating and developing consulting practices.
Additionally, some of the first published works began to emerge during this period, bringing relevance to the field. Of particular merit:
-
Analyzing Performance Problems written by Dr. Robert Mager and Dr. Peter Pipe
-
Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance written by Dr. Thomas Gilbert
#2 Leaders
Dr. Thomas Gilbert:
-
Considered by many the founder of Performance Technology field
-
Instrumental in founding of ISPI
-
Coined and used the term “Performance Engineering”
-
Best known for book Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance (1978)
-
Performance tied to worthy and valued accomplishment
Dr. Joe Harless:
-
Father of Front-End Analysis
-
Developed concept while working as training consultant
-
Brought awareness of financial ramifications of training solutions when other means more effective
-
Focused on analyzing root cause of performance issues
-
Viable solutions and interventions outside of instruction and training
Dr. Robert Mager:
-
Moved HPT field towards human performance objectives with three components:
-
Performance
-
Condition
-
Criterion
-
-
Influential book Analyzing Performance Problems published in 1970
-
Developed flowchart for analyzing performance problems
-
-
One of the founders of ISPI
-
Thomas F. Gilbert Distinguished Professional Achievement Award (1994)
-
ASTD award for distinguished contribution to human resource development
Dr. Geary Rummler:
-
Created University of Michigan’s Center of Programmed Learning for business
-
Led workshops in performance analysis and a three-level framework (organization, process, and job/performer)
-
Published influential book Improving Performance
#3 Big Ideas
HPT principles:
-
Focus on results
-
Measured performance
-
Valued accomplishments versus behavior
-
Performance gaps
-
Systemic and systematic analytical approaches
Chyung (2008) identifies several characteristics of HPT. She notes that HPT focuses on achieving results: a measurable impact on the performance of individuals and their organizations. HPT is interdisciplinary, adopting concepts from a variety of fields including cognitive psychology, systems theory, business management, and engineering. HPT claims to be empirical, encouraging practice based on empirically derived evidence and, when feasible, experiments. HPT uses systematic approaches—structured processes that direct professionals to look at a variety of issues across a variety of levels within the organization—to achieve systemic changes, ones that make the organization more effective and efficient.
Untapped Potential:
Addison and Tosti (2012) describe the future potential of HPT. It can be argued that Steve Jobs of Apple was not so much an information technologist as an intuitive human performance technologist. He realized that all technology ultimately deals with people, and its widespread acceptance and usage must enhance some aspects of human nature. Jobs was most successful when he focused on systems that maximized the experience and performance of the users.
Through our knowledge of people, performance, and presentations factors, HPT can also provide that kind of help. Our work in performance-based culture change, value enhancement, motivation, employee engagement, evidence-based and result-focused management, more effective collaboration, feedback, and instruction and performance aids are just a few of the things that can be of value to other technologies.
One advantage that HPT has over other fields is that we focus on results, take a full-system view, add value through an evidence-based approach, and partner with our clients and other performance professionals. The future for us is building integrated performance systems and becoming architects of performance.
HPT Models
#4 Beneficial Studies
The future of human performance technology (HPT) will be bright or dismal depending on how well HPT practitioners focus on careful and practical answers to three pivotal questions: What is good practice in human performance technology? What are the differences between good practice and bad? What are the connections between good research and exemplary practice?
Good research is about answering good questions well. There is a saying that “a fool can ask more questions than a wise man (or woman) can answer.” Answering bad questions is foolish research. Answering good questions foolishly sustains ignorance. Both foolish research and foolish answers abound in the human performance technology arena (Brethower, 2012).
Additionally, Kaufman and Bernardez (2012) discuss the future of the field.
Expanding the conventional scope of HPT to include all organizational and societal partners would contribute to the future validity, ethics, and usefulness of our field, according to the organizational elements model. HPT has a choice: change or die. Its history is dynamic and continually improving. We suggest that it expand its current boundaries and formally link and align individuals, organizations, external clients, and society. Otherwise, it will stay comfortable and wither.