Lean or HPT - Which model is best for business?

In the PBET Workshops and in conference presentations, I have always presented training as one of many solutions for improving (or changing) human performance. Yes, training is my specialty area as it is for many of my readers at this blog, but it is never an end in itself.  It is (or should be) part of a larger system or model for getting every one on the same page in meeting the business objectives.

PBET is solidly based on the precept that performance analysis dictates the best intervention for a performance gap.

Hey! I don’t live in a vacuum.  I know that PBET is not the only way of looking at improving business performance.

The question is what model best helps companies get the improvements they need to obtain the business success they want?

My understanding for “getting there” was derived from the “human performance technology” (HPT) model that I learned from Bob Mager – from his writings and from the Criterion Referenced Instruction Workshop.  He is a genius in his ability to simply explain the performance process in the context of the organization’s requirements.   Carl Binder, who recently was awarded lifetime membership in the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI), explains human performance technology in terms of six boxes, the idea of which came from Tom Gilbert’s book Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance.  He has posted resources that provide a good understanding of the performance model.

I have no background in kaizen or six sigma, but I have been aware for years of the value provided by these other models for looking at improving performance. I have never taken the time to try and put the two together, but such efforts intrigue me.  And I think there is exceptional value in combining what has been learned from both “traditions.”

Lately, I have come across some people who have tried to figure it out. I have not delved into this material yet, but just wanted to let you know about it.  If you can inform me of other individuals or resources, I would be most appreciative.

As with so many belief-systems, it isn’t long before you encounter a practitioner who, in describing performance from her own point of view, sounds like a religious zealot.  The topics on the websites of some lean practitioners remind me of the medieval question: “How many angels can stand on the head of a pin?”  Likewise, the mind-numbing terminology distinctions utilized by some HPT practitioners can drive many to become performance theory infidels.  Such is not a world that is open to collaboration, let alone marriage.

So it takes some bravery, perhaps, on the part of those that try to look at both systems of thinking.

You can read about one effort in Developing and Measuring Training the Six Sigma Way: A Business Approach to Training and Development by Kaliym A. Islam and Edward A. Trolley.  I have not read it yet but I am planning to do so.

I thought it was interesting that Kirkpatrick documents a case where Toyota, the source of the kaizen doctrine and TPS, utilizes HPT to solve a performance gap in the way dealerships handled the financial aspects of a sales transaction.  (Donald L. Kirkpatrick and James D. Kirkpatrick in Transferring Learning to Behavior, pp. 104-109.)

How about you?  Is one of these world-views of  performance better than the other?  Can the two be brought together?  Your views are requested!  Please comment.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.