Jim Huggins and the Case for CBT: A Play in Four Acts
The Scene Hill Industries: Producer of manufacturing plant machinery New competitors have been able to develop high-quality products more quickly and for less cost Hill Industries has streamlined the PD process – Flatter organization – Fewer approval steps – Fewer prototypes – Early involvement of manufacturing/marketing – More reliance on design and engineering
The Players Jim Huggins: Instructional Design Consultant Bob Werner: Steering Committee Chair John Eggleston: Committee Member/Training Supervisor Committee Members
The Plot Jim has been asked to develop a training program Jim’s recommendation: Hypermedia CBT CBT has been implemented at Hill Industries, but less than 15% of the 15,000 employees have used it
Red Flag #2 Hill Industries has traditionally used classroom training Committee members know there are problems with classroom training, but they would rather have problems they understand than ones they don’t (CBT is too much of a mystery) Committee members don’t know whether CBT can be used to teach PD processes
Red Flag #2 Come with an example of how CBT has been used to teach processes (“Straw” – Rossett, 1999) Be prepared to discuss potential pitfalls of CBT – and how they can be avoided Apply change management techniques (Dormant, 1999) – Demonstrate advantages of change – Identify key peers that can influence others – Identify sponsors who can promote the change What could Jim do better?
Red Flag #3 Committee needs more data on how CBT has been used in their particular industry in order to be comfortable with the idea CBT supporters are making decisions based on opinions of others and a desire to embrace the latest technology
Red Flag #3 Select better examples – companies similar to Hill Industries Help the committee make a decision for CBT based on whether or not it is the best delivery option – not just because it is the “latest thing” Consider drivers & barriers (Rossett, 1999) What could Jim do better?
Red Flag #5 Committee appears to have made a decision based on lower cost and popularity of “new” technology, not real understanding of what the solution will be
Red Flag #5 A small, less complicated prototype could have been used to help visualize the CBT program Committee could make a decision based on what would be actually be delivered, not just on the basis of the dollar amount and the latest trends. What could Jim do better?
Red Flag #6 CBT is being implemented because of a top-down mandate from management; stakeholders are not involved early in the process. No one is made responsible for making sure that employees complete the CBT – only that they have access!
Red Flag #6 Press for earlier involvement with the training coordinators so that they understand the importance of the CBT (as part of a blended approach) and embrace the solution. Make someone accountable for ensuring that employees complete the CBT Change Management What could Jim have done better?
What Can Be Done at this Stage? Find out what the 15% who are using the program like about it Use their successes as examples, reward them Establish incentives for using the program or disincentives for not using it Consider a hybrid approach where trainers and those who have successfully used the program become mentors
Lessons Learned When making a change, make sure that benefits are clearly understood In any change effort, there must be buy-in from management and other stakeholders Be aware of drivers and barriers in the environment; they can make or break any type of new program
References Dormant, D. (1999). Implementing human performance technology in organizations. In H. D. Stolovitch & E. J. Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of human performance technology (2 nd ed., pp. 237-59). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer. Mager, R.F. and Pipe, P. (1997) Analyzing Performance Problems. (3rd Ed. P. 75-77)Atlanta, GA. The Center for Effective Performance. Rossett, A. (1999). First things fast. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass/Pfeiffer.