For Organizational Effectiveness, Look to HPI

Author: Valentina Paronetto

Image created by the author

In the 1980s, Motorola Inc. was threatened by Japanese competition, and customers were unhappy with the low quality of products. This pressure led the company to take action to improve processes. In 1986, Bill Smith, an engineer at Motorola Inc., developed a data-driven quality-control method called Six Sigma which relies on five phases: define, measure, analyze, improve, and control. The company’s desired efficiency level was to produce less than 3.4 defective products per million units, and Six Sigma was the mechanism to achieve this performance goal. After implementing Six Sigma, Motorola improved its quality and has saved more than $16 billion in twelve years, and its success encouraged thousands of organizations worldwide to move in this direction. 

Motorola was one of the first companies to drive performance improvement through a systematic approach, which led the company to produce the cultural and operative change needed to achieve its goals and beat competition.

Motorola defines its continuous improvement system as "the roadmap we use to execute against our strategies, ensure fact-based business decisions, align our resources, and drive continuous improvement, which drives customers satisfaction and profitability" (Motorola, 2002).

This is what the Human Performance Improvement (HPI) process is: a systematic and structured method that shows you the route for continuous and strategic performance improvement. In this article, the expert in this field will be referred to as the intervention designer or ID. In an HPI process, the intervention designer does not rely on predetermined solutions to solve issues or reach new opportunities but tailors the intervention to the company's specific needs. An intervention designer's HPI toolbox contains systematic and systemic methods, models, and tools that work together to achieve performance outcomes. The ID will propose the most suitable and sustainable solutions that best address the organization's needs through the phases of analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation, while looking at the organizational system.

Many companies, assuming that training is the best and only solution to all performance problems, skip the analysis and evaluation phases. It is a commonly accepted approach by corporate decision-makers. However, suppose a surgeon assumes that the surgery he performed for a patient applies to another patient without considering and assessing the patient's general health conditions (e.g., current diseases, past health history, risk factors, age). What is the likelihood of success of the surgery? Low. The same can be applied to an organization. 

If decision-makers see training as the only solution to solve performance issues without conducting a data-driven analysis of the system to investigate the situation, the risk of wasting money, time, and other resources will increase. A key issue that Motorola faced was that customers were unhappy with the product defects and customer service. What if Motorola assumed that training was the only possible solution to their problem. Do you think that the company would have had the same success? The answer is no. 

The HPI process should start with a comprehensive analysis to identify a performance gap that measures the current and desired performance levels. This will help HPI practitioners to identify a viable intervention and measure its value and effectiveness.

Having an instructional designer on your team who is specialized in developing effective training solutions is a terrific asset. However, an intervention designer can make a difference in the organization by:

• measuring the training success towards the company's overall strategy
• examining the work environment to increase the company's effectiveness 
• identifying the organization's trends and issues
• allocating the appropriate resources to drive constant improvement
• selecting the most appropriate interventions to address issues 

Every year, the Boise State OPWL program trains new professionals in the workplace learning and performance improvement field who help organizations to achieve desired performance levels. Embracing performance improvement within your company may require a significant change effort, but the long-lasting and continuous improvement you will obtain will be priceless. 

References:

Chevalier, R. D. (2011). When did ADDIE become addie? Performance Improvement, 50(6), 10-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.20221

Dilmegani C. (2021, January 21). Six Sigma: What it is & how it works [2021]. Retrieved May 5, 2021, from https://research.aimultiple.com/6-sigma/#how-does-it-work

Motorola (2002, May 30). CGISS 2002 Malcolm Baldrige Application Summary. https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2017/10/11/MotorolaCGISS_Application_Summary.pdf

Tahiri, H. (2017, November 17). Six Sigma: A Case Study in Motorola. Retrieved April 5, 2021, from https://pecb.com/article/six-sigma-a-case-study-in-motorola

___________________________

About the author:

Valentina Paronetto is a student of the Boise State University's Organizational Performance and Workplace learning (OPWL) Master's Degree Program. She sees change as an opportunity for continuous improvement and believes people can achieve excellent outcomes if they are provided with the means to improve their effectiveness. She is committed to studying HPI to acquire the skills and knowledge to become a performance improvement specialist. You can learn more about Valentina by viewing her LinkedIn profile or send her an email at valentinaparonet@u.boisestate.edu.