PerformanceXpress

International Society of Performance Improvement Newsletter
January 2003

Happy New Year!

Since this is the beginning of a new year and the first anniversary of PerformanceXpress, we want to take a moment to thank everyone who helped to make this publication a successful vehicle for spreading the message of performance improvement. We look forward to a continuing collaboration in the development and exchange of innovative performance ideas and the latest tools and techniques. And, for those of you who have not completed your list of New Year’s resolutions, here are a few suggestions:

• Become a member of ISPI, or renew your existing membership.
• Register with a colleague for the 2003 Annual Conference in Boston before February 10, 2003.
• Submit a proposal to speak at the September 2003 ISD Conference in Chicago.
• Apply to become a Certified Performance Technologist (CPT).
• Contribute an article to Performance Improvement journal, Performance Improvement Quarterly, or PerformanceXpress.

Deciphering the Hidden Meaning Behind “Fuzzy Goals”
by Robert F. Mager

People are often expected to perform in ways that are not reflected in clear and observable tasks. In addition to performing specific skills, they are expected to “demonstrate responsibility” or “take pride in their work.” Since these expectations are vague or fuzzy, how will you proceed? What will you do to help people achieve the desired state?

One way is through goal analysis. Goal analysis is appropriate any time these two conditions exist:

1. Someone describes an intent in abstract or fuzzy terms, and
2. The intent is important to achieve.

The function of goal analysis is to define the indefinable, to help you say what you mean by your important or abstract goals. Using goal analysis, it is possible to describe the essential elements of abstract states—to identify the main performances that constitute the meaning of the goal. Once you know the performances that collectively define the goal, you will be in a better position to decide which of these performances need to be taught and which need to be managed. Then, you can select the most appropriate teaching or management procedures and arrange to measure your progress toward success.

Breaking Through the Fuzzies
To turn abstractions into a list of performances, write down everything people would have to say or do for you to agree they are achieving the goal. Without editing or judging, jot down everything that can possibly represent the meaning of the goal. The reason you must complete this exercise without being judgmental is that it is often very difficult for people to think through the cloud of fuzzies to the specifics you are searching for. Usually, when we ask ourselves the meaning of an abstraction, we answer ourselves in yet another abstraction. It just takes a little time to get used to the process of listing performances.

Here are five strategies for getting things down that may help you describe the meaning of your goal. Use whichever is most productive for you.

1. Answer the question, “What will I take as evidence that my goal has been achieved?” If you want someone to demonstrate responsibility, for example, what would it take to make you agree that he or she is achieving this goal? Some possible responses include:
   • Carries out assigned tasks on time
   • Carries out tasks regardless of the time required
   • Carries out tasks regardless of whether others have completed their own tasks
   • Offers solutions to problems outside the immediate job
     
     
2. Answer the question, “Given a room full of people, what is the basis on which I would separate them into two piles—those who had achieved my goal and those who had not?” After all, you do make judgments about whether your trainees are acceptable in skill or attitude; you do make statements about their understanding or motivation or feeling. Now is the time to lay on the table the basis for those statements.
   
   
3. Imagine that someone else will be charged with the responsibility for deciding which of your trainees have or have not achieved your goal, and that you are going to tell Person X how to proceed. What will your instructions be? What should he or she look for? How will the person know a goal achiever when he or she sees one? Suppose you want people who are conscientious. Think about how you would tell someone how to recognize this state. Should Person X look for people who:
• Work neatly?
• Finish their work on time?
• Ask for extra assignments?
• Stay until their work is completed?
  
  
4. Think of people who have already achieved your goal, people who represent your goal, and write down the things they say and do that make them goal achievers. If you cannot think of anyone who has achieved your goal, you have a problem. Perhaps your expectations are unreasonable. Perhaps the goal (as you perceive it) is unattainable. If so, then a change in expectation is in order.
   
   
5. If all else fails, here is a sure-fire way to get started. Just write down all the reasons you would never point to someone and say, “This person represents the goal.” What behaviors, or absence of behaviors, would cause you to say, “This is not someone who has achieved this goal, and this is why.” Once you have listed the negatives, it is easy to turn them around into positive statements.

Once you have jotted down the things you think might cause you to agree your goal has been achieved, you will need to go back over your list and do some tidying up and sorting out. Why? Because you are almost certain to find items that are at least as broad and abstract as the one you started with. You may also find redundancies and duplications, things you have said in more than one way. You may occasionally find items that describe procedure rather than outcomes, or means rather than ends. These are to be deleted, for the object of the analysis is to figure out how to know an outcome when you see one, not how to make one happen.

If a goal is important to achieve, then it is important to do more about that achievement than to simply talk about it in abstract terms. To achieve it, you need purposeful activity, activity that will get you where you want to go.

Dr. Robert F. Mager is a world-renowned expert on training and performance improvement. He is credited with revolutionizing the industry by creating the movement toward a performance-based approach to improving human performance. One of his most significant contributions is his development (with Peter Pipe) of the Criterion-Referenced Instruction (CRI) methodology. Currently, he is completing work on his new book, Life in the Pinball Machine (CEP Press, Feb. 2003), which offers an introspective look at the events, people, and lessons that shaped his career in learning and human performance. He may be reached at slawlor@cepworldwide.com.

NOTE: Reprinted with permission of CEP Press. Excerpted from Robert F. Mager’s Goal Analysis: How to Clarify Your Goals so You Can Actually Achieve Them, 3rd Edition (CEP Press, 1997).

Advertisement

Would you like to advertise in this space? Contact marketing@ispi.org

Trendspotters: Snapshots from the Field, Featuring Diane Gayeski
by Carol Haig, CPT and Roger Addison, CPT

This month, we had a conversation with Diane Gayeski, principal of Gayeski Analytics and Ithaca College professor. She may be reached at diane@dgayeski.com. Diane is called in to help clients when the usual “fixes” do not work. As a specialist in communication and technology, she identified three trends for discussion.

Significant Trends
Diane pointed to the trend of blurring of work roles among HPTers and those in other professions such as communications and information technology. She also identified increased performer accountability for learning as a trend to watch because it alters the familiar structures practitioners are accustomed to building. Finally, Diane described the technological mediation of work as the capability of technology to enable imbedded training, support, feedback, and user performance tracking into the work itself, with exciting possibilities for the future.

Impact of These Trends
As work roles become blurred and competition for survival in our unstable work environment increases, we find significant effects on our organizations. These days, we are challenged to sort out overlapping roles and skills, and to identify the duplication of effort expended in training, HR, communications, and information technology, for example. The perpetuation of stereotypes that various functional groups have about each other, and the disdain for perceived rival functions, point to a lack of internal communication—competing departments know neither the skills available in the enemy camp nor the projects in which they are engaged.

At the same time, organizations are becoming operationally more collaborative, at least within functional groups, paving the way for increased performer accountability for learning. Influential factors include an increase in both formal and informal communities of practice, more joint learning opportunities, a focus on partnering, and the popularity of coaching as an intervention. Organizations are less interested in the return on investment of a specific intervention because so many are ongoing these days, with no finite endings. For example, if an organization implements an online matchmaking system for mentors and protégés, the system itself is the intervention. The specific mentoring activities are the performers’ responsibility and the process is expected to perpetuate itself.

In response, the role of HPT is shifting away from delivering performance improvement to setting up and managing the infrastructures for it, with the actual improvement/learning the responsibility of the performers.

Finally, technology is pervasive in most industries, heralding the increased importance of tools for the technological mediation of work. Today, as organizations increase the number of results they measure, they search out tools to expedite the measurement process. We are seeing a convergence of all the wireless conveniences we tote around: telephone, PDA, pager, computer, into one multi-purpose tool. Some day soon, especially with advances in apparel fabrics, training and performance will be hooked up to all workers all the time.

Reasons for Selecting These Trends
Diane’s college students provide her with observations of how bright young people work today. Formal learning in schools is increasingly structured for teamwork, group projects, collaboration, and partnering. Communication is always on, always available 24/7, with Instant Messaging a new frame of performance for its users. When they come into the workplace, these new employees will have very different expectations about work, and how it is accomplished.

Influence of These Trends on Performance Improvement
As HPT practitioners, we must become more flexible about how we define our profession and where we deploy our skills within our organizations. The changing business climate will encourage us to embody one of ISPI’s tenets—the sharing of our technology—with managers and performers across our organizations that can benefit from and use HPT to improve their results. In reality, it is not who, in the organization provides the right tool or intervention; it is the rightness of the response and the results that matter.

Finally, if we focus on the ends, not the means, as Roger Kaufman reminds us, we are ultimately tasked with using information to improve performance. All information exists on a continuum. It is our responsibility to determine where we are at any point in time.

If you have any suggestions about trends driving performance in today’s business environment that you feel would be of interest to the PerformanceXpress readership, please contact Carol Haig, CPT, at carolhaig@earthlink.net or Roger Addison, CPT, at roger@ispi.org.

Be Skeptical of Cited Sources
by Will Thalheimer, PhD

In the November 2002 issue of PerformanceXpress, Roger Chevalier advocated that authors cite the original source when using or modifying ideas and models. This is a good idea for the reasons he cited, and also because citations enable others to evaluate sources for accuracy, methodological rigor, and their relevance to specific situations. But asking authors (and vendors and consultants) to police themselves is not enough. We need to take responsibility as consumers of our field’s ideas.

Have you ever heard, “People remember 10% of what they read, 20% of what they see, 30% of what they hear…”? These numbers have been widely disseminated in our field and have found their way into analyst reports, vendor materials, and scores of PowerPoint presentations. In their most recent incarnation, they are attached to a graph (see www.work-learning.com/chigraph.htm) that cites Michelene Chi of the University of Pittsburgh. Unfortunately, the cited article does not include the graph or the numbers. When I asked Dr. Chi about the discrepancy, she told me that she had never seen the graph and that her research had nothing to do with those numbers.

I recently found that more than 40% of the subscribers to the Work-Learning Research Newsletter had seen the graph and that many had actually made instructional design or purchasing decisions based on it. But the graph is only the latest use of the numbers given above. In 1946, Edgar Dale developed the Cone of Experience, an intuitive model of the concreteness of various audiovisual media. Although Dale included no numbers on his model—in fact, he warned his readers not to take it too literally—others merged the Cone and numbers. Now, most people believe that Dale’s Cone is derived from research that produced those infamous numbers.

Unfortunately, no one seems to check the citations. The numbers above were probably generated by an employee of Mobil Oil Company, writing in the magazine Film and Audio-Visual Communications in 1967, without any research backing whatsoever. D.G. Treichler didn’t cite any research, but our field has accepted those numbers ever since. Dr. J.C. Kinnamon of Midi, Inc., searched the web and found dozens of references to those dubious numbers in college courses, research reports, and in vendor and consultant promotional materials.

Yes, our authors clearly need to take more care in checking their references, but we—the consumers of the information—must also be more skeptical of the claims that we encounter. Without our vigilance, the performance improvement field will continue to propagate dubious remedies. We ought to apply our own methodologies to the way we work and learn. Aren’t we the ones who tell our clients that real-world consequences matter? Our authors, vendors, and consultants would stop selling us snake oil if we were more actively skeptical.

References
Chevalier, R. (2002, November). Referencing the original source. PerformanceXpress.

Chi, M.T.H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M.W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.

Dale, E. (1946, 1954, 1969). Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York: Dryden.

Treichler, D.G. (1967). Are you missing the boat in training ads? Film and Audio-Visual Communication, 1, 14-16, 28-30, 48.

Will Thalheimer, PhD, of Work-Learning Research, is a learning-and-performance researcher and an instructional design consultant. He may be reached at will.thalheimer@work-learning.com.

Advertisement

Would you like to advertise in this space? Contact marketing@ispi.org

Annual Conference Crossword Puzzle

Our readers enjoyed December’s crossword puzzle so much that we asked Thiagi to create a new one this month. Are you ready for ISPI’s 41st Annual International Performance Improvement Conference & Exposition? This month’s crossword puzzle tests your mastery of conference-related information.

How to Solve the Interactive Crossword
To get started, click http://www.thiagi.com/cp-ispi-conference-2003.html. Then, move your mouse and click on any box. The clue to that word will be highlighted in red. Check whether the word across or the word down is selected. If you want to choose the other alignment, click the mouse button again. If you know the answer, type it in. If you are unsure of your answer, click the “Check” button on the left. All the incorrect letters on the crossword grid will disappear. When you have solved the entire puzzle, click the “Solution” button. Have fun, and remember to send in your conference registration before the February 10, 2003 early bird deadline.

Coming Soon
For next month, Thiagi is creating an online focus group activity. Watch for this game, which will enable you to give valuable input about our online newsletter.

From the Board: Gaining Visibility Inside ISPI
by Brian Desautels, ISPI Director/Treasurer

Yesterday, I was reading about Complexity Theory. I wondered how Human Performance Technology (HPT) could be utilized to manage the chaos which Complexity Theorists say is the end-state of all organizations. I called a few long-time ISPI members, and we saw HPT falling into what Complexity Theorists would call Reductionism. Conversations with a few past Board members concluded that HPT could allow an organization to guide the flow of chaos rather than attempt to control it.

It was a series of interesting conversations that I can apply at Microsoft, as we struggle with increasingly complex products and organizations.

But this article is about gaining visibility; to me, the road to visibility is through relationships and relationships (visibility) yield the opportunity to pick up the phone and have spontaneous conversations such as the one above. Visibility is about making connections and building relationships.

Visibility within ISPI is about contributing to the effort. Members learn about each other as we make efforts to strengthen the organization itself. Or, we learn about each other as we make intellectual contributions to the technology.

A member can gain visibility within ISPI by joining a committee and committing to a deliverable. The good thinking and good work performed by committees gets recognized across ISPI. Those who make significant contributions are often made visible to the Board and are encouraged to lead a taskforce, become a committee chair, or contribute as the head of a different committee. Along the way, introductions are made, relationships begin to build, and visibility snowballs.

Frankly, the jump to committee work most often occurs after someone has been actively involved in his or her local chapter. They have been the chapter President or a Board member. They know HPT, and they know how to achieve results through a non-profit, volunteer-based professional association. They have gained, through their involvement in the local chapter, visibility within their own community. They have decided to broaden their community through contribution to the international scope of ISPI. Throughout each step, visibility expands.

As mentioned, visibility for members also occurs through intellectual contributions. ISPI opens its doors to good thinking about our technology because HPT is always evolving. We have not reached a state of full, final articulation of what HPT should be, and we are continually discovering new applications for the current model. Our members read Performance Improvement (PI) journal, attend conferences, have hallway conversations, and take phone calls looking for gems that might solve problems or expand thinking. Contributors to these avenues gain visibility by submitting proposals to present a session at a conference, writing an article for PI, or sharing their thinking in some other way.

Complexity Theory states that I can cross a river in one of two ways: damming it up (reducing the river to a stream) or by guiding a boat across the currents to the other side (but I might miss the exact landing spot). Visibility is gained across ISPI by both getting to know it from the inside and by guiding its future.

Measurement Counts! Graphin Results: Solution or Deeper Trouble?
by Carl Binder

Last month I ended the column by suggesting you look at as many different examples of results graphs as you could find—in your own work, in journals and magazines, or in client organizations. I raised a series of issues about telling the difference between actual jump-ups or jump-downs in results due to interventions or improvements versus perceived changes due to having sampled results at different points along an ongoing trend or at different points within the normal bounce or variability over time.

It is clear that I am going to have to take time in future issues to create some examples for this column of results graphs to illustrate my points. For now, though, let me begin to suggest some of the potentials and pitfalls of using graphs to monitor and display the results of our interventions and performance system improvements.

Do We Need Statistics?
One of the big obstacles I hear from practitioners’ evaluating the effects of their interventions is that they think it is necessary to use statistical evaluation designs. Beside the fact that one can distort results with statistics at least as easily as with words or pictures (e.g., by touting statistically significant but practically insignificant effects), it seems beyond the expertise and bandwidth of most practitioners to design and execute statistical evaluation designs. Moreover, there are methods for using graphic analysis and other non-statistical methods in ways that are as sensitive to real effects as statistics, for example an entire discipline called “exploratory data analysis” (Tukey, 1977).

Graphs are Better!
Far more importantly, the need for measuring results is not a one-time thing! If we are really going to use measurement to make decisions about performance, we know as performance engineers that continuous feedback will be much more effective in shaping our performance improvement efforts than episodic one-time feedback. So, an obvious conclusion is that we ought to use graphs of ongoing performance results to provide feedback and to support decision-making for ourselves and the performers. This is the recommendation of many noted performance technologists such as Timm Esque in Making an Impact or Aubrey Daniels in Bringing Out the Best in People. In fact, graphic feedback of results to performers has been shown in many studies to be a powerful performance improvement method all by itself.

Stretch-to-fill Graphs?
So the question is, what type of graph? And that is where it can get really sticky. I’m sure you have at one time or another—maybe even hundreds of times—participated in meetings where someone presented graphs that were obviously intended to make the effects of some program or organizational effort appear as large as possible! This is a common tactic, and is highly rewarded in most organizations, but can actually lead to poor decisions.

What is worse, most software applications that produce graphs (e.g., Microsoft Excel) actually encourage distortion of results unintentionally by producing what some of my colleagues call “stretch-to-fill” or “fill-the-frame” graphs (e.g., Lindsley, 1999). In such graphs, the highest actual data point determines the top of the vertical axis and the lowest data point determines the bottom. This means that no matter how small or large your results, it usually just about fills the page. “Wow, what a result!” Unfortunately, stretch-to-fill graphs do not provide a visual means of deciding how big a result really is compared to any other result on another stretch-to-fill graph. Because all of the results look big!

If you page through the typical business magazine, academic journal, or consulting report that uses graphs to display results, you will usually see stretch-to-fill graphs. And it is very, very hard to put those data in perspective, to tell how the results compare with other efforts to improve similar performance, and so on. The point is that graphs can actually distort our understanding of results if we follow the usual stretch-to-fill method.

Next month I will talk about how graphs can mislead us about trends and bounce, as well, another distortion that can lead to poor decisions. As homework, think about why people refer to “learning curves” rather than “learning lines.” Might it have anything to do with the type of graph they typically use to display learning? We will find out in the next exciting episode of Measurement Counts!

References
Daniels, A.C. (1994). Bringing out the best in people: How to apply the astonishing power of positive reinforcement. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Esque, T.J. (2001). Making an impact: Building a top-performing organization from the bottom up. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.

Lindsley, O.R. (1999). From training evaluation to performance tracking. In H.D. Stolovitch and E. J. Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of Human Performance Technology (2^nd Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, 210-236.

Tukey. J.W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

Dr. Carl Binder is a Senior Partner at Binder Riha Associates, a consulting firm that helps clients improve processes, performance, and behavior to deliver valuable results. His easy-to-remember e-mail address is CarlBinder@aol.com and his company’s website is www.Binder-Riha.com

I-Spy: Websites of Interest
by Todd Packer

When he is not Internet trawling for ISPI, Todd Packer can be found improving business, non-profit, and individual performance through research, training, and innovation coaching as an independent practitioner based in Cleveland, Ohio. He may be reached at tp@toddpacker.com.

Discover the Advantages of Using RLOs
by Louise Delagran

Reusable Learning Objects (RLOs) are a hot topic in training today and many instructional designers are using them to reduce the cost and time needed to develop online learning.

Definition of an RLO
An RLO is a self-contained unit of instruction that covers one learning objective. These units can be reused in multiple courses or dynamically accessed via a Learning Content Management System (LCMS) to meet a specific learner’s immediate need for training on a particular skill.

Advantages of Using RLOs
Using RLOs when designing your e-learning initiatives offers many advantages, including:

• Consistency in course structure and navigation: All courses designed using RLOs follow the same structure and navigation, so learners know what to expect. In addition, this consistency reduces design time.
• Unit interchangeability: With an RLO approach, lessons and topics are self-contained and assume no sequence, so they can be used in any course, or may be accessed individually by learners.
• Just-in-time and just-enough training: RLOs “chunk” content into small units that do not intimidate the learner. This makes it easy to find specific information and offers the learner flexibility in scheduling training time.
• Consistency in instructional quality: Most RLOs are designed using effective instructional design strategies, so that anyone using them is sure to cover all the critical instructional components.
• Built-in checks and balances to ensure relevance of instruction: Because each RLO addresses a specific and stated learning objective, instructional designers or writers are likelier to ensure that all the content, practices, and assessment items are relevant to the objective. This ensures the relevance of the course to on-the-job performance improvement goals. It also ensures instruction and mastery of skills, as opposed to merely providing information.
• Simplification and acceleration of the design process: Most RLOs have built-in best practices for instructional designers (ID), so even relatively inexperienced IDs can create effective training simply by following a reusable model. In addition, pre-programmed RLO templates provide designers with a “head start” in the development cycle and save much development time.

With all the advantages RLOs offer, do not be afraid of them—embrace them! Get off the sidelines. Jump in! Go ahead and shape the future of learning!

As a former Senior Instructional Designer for LogicBay Corporation, Louise has used the RLO model and concepts to design and develop courseware for various Fortune 500 clients. Currently, she works as an Education Specialist in the Academic Health Center at the University of Minnesota, developing online courses for medical and nursing students and recently designed an Online Resource Center on complementary therapies. Louise may be reached at delag002@umn.edu.

How Can I Get a Colleague or Client into the 2003 ISPI Annual Conference for Just $200?

We are glad that you asked! In 2003, we would like to introduce, and re-introduce, more of your colleagues to our annual meeting, the 41st Annual International Performance Improvement Conference and Exposition. That is why we are making this generous special offer. When you register for the full conference at the member or delegate rate before February 10, 2003, a colleague of yours may register for only $200—provided your colleague has not attended an ISPI Annual Conference in the past three years.

This is your chance to be a hero. When you register, think of a colleague from your organization, a client organization, your ISPI, ASTD, or other professional organization chapter, or an acquaintance in the field who may not have experienced a recent ISPI conference. Offer that person an opportunity to save hundreds of dollars while benefiting from the premier educational event in workplace performance improvement. Your thoughtfulness will build trust, partnership, and appreciation.

What If I Have Not Attended Recently?
If you have not attended an ISPI Annual Conference and Exposition in the past three years, then you will want to register with a colleague. Find someone you know who plans to attend, and register together. You may register for only $200.

How Do We Register?
Click here to register online, or call 301.587.8570 to register by telephone. We ask that you try to register together, or at least on the same day. There is a line on the registration form where the person registering at the discounted rate can name the other person with whom they are registering.

What Is My Deadline to Take Advantage of This Offer?
You and your colleague must register for the Conference and Exposition by February 10, 2003 to qualify for the savings, so we suggest you begin discussing this with your colleagues now. For more information, visit www.ispi.org/ac2003.

GOT RESULTS? Display Them in Boston

Last year’s GOT RESULTS? exhibitors were identified through word of mouth, and there were 25 quality displays. This year, participation is through open enrollment, and we anticipate receiving 40-50 displays, but we need your help. To participate, simply click here, and email in the one-page submission form and your example data.

Whether your best data set is from two months ago or two decades ago, 2003 Annual Conference goers will benefit from seeing your positive example. You can review several submissions from 2002 by clicking here. At least one exhibitor has reported receiving client leads from potential customers searching the web for specific performance solutions.

Your email submission must be received by January 31, 2003. The GOT RESULTS? team will let you know if your submission meets the simple criteria by February 15. ISPI is all about results, so how about showing off yours!

Research Funds Available through Two Grant Programs

International Society for Performance Improvement: 2003 Research Grant Program
Question authority. Investigate. Discover. Sound intriguing? Of course! As HPT’ers we have inquiring minds. We are drawn to solving problems, to improving performance, and to making a difference. To accomplish all of these, we rely upon the inquiries and discoveries of research. Some research yields findings that we can apply today, while other investigations have more long-term returns. To be successful, we need both types of research. We need applied research to help us solve today’s problems. We need theoretical research to discover future practices.

Through our Annual Research Grant Program, the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI) continues to show a commitment to investing in the future of the field and in the research that is pivotal to realizing the return on that investment.

Normally, the research program officially launches with ISPI’s annual spring conference. To better serve the membership, the Research Committee accelerated its efforts to post the Request for Proposals (RFP), thereby giving you more time to hone your research ideas and to prepare great and wonderful research proposals.

Visit www.ispi.org to download the 2003 Research Grant Program Request for Proposals. The deadline for submissions is June 6, 2003.

The MASIE Center and the e-Learning CONSORTIUM: Research Grant
This year, The MASIE Center and the e-Learning CONSORTIUM will be making a donation to a new project focused on supporting practical research in our field. The Center has allocated $35,000 for several graduate or doctoral student grants. The research conducted will be on key topics in our field and presented at the TechLearn 2003 Conference in October in Orlando, Florida. In addition, published reports will be placed in the public domain.

With the help of The MASIE Center’s e-Learning CONSORTIUM, we have selected six key topics of focus. Grants will only be awarded to candidates who submit proposals that align to one of these topics:

• Blended Learning: The Value to the Learner
• Departure, Abandonment and Non-Complete of e-Learning Activities
• Globalization and Localization
• Side-by-Side Comparison: Classroom to e-Learning
• Virtual Communities (Communities of Practice or Learning)
• e-Learning and Learning Styles

The deadline to submit a proposal is January 15, 2003. For more information, contact Kristin Barton McNary, General Manager, The MASIE Center at 518.350.2228 or kristin@masie.com.

Future Speaking Opportunities

2003 Performance-Based Instructional Systems Design and Measurement Conference
The International Society for Performance Improvement is please to announce that we are currently accepting Proposals for Speakers for the 2003 Conference on Instructional Systems Design and Measurement, September 18-20, in Chicago, IL. Speaker submissions must be received at the ISPI headquarters no later than February 10, 2003. Click here for additional information or to download the RFP.

14th Annual International Conference on Work Teams
The Center for the Study of Work Teams invites you to submit a proposal to present at the 14th Annual International Conference on Work Teams: Beyond Teams: The Collaborative Enterprise, September 22-24, 2003 in Dallas, Texas. The conference committee will be looking for sessions that address the following learning tracks:

• Creating the Collaborative Organization
• Leading Change for Business Results
• Achieving Excellence in Teaming Skills
• Collaborating Across Organizational Boundaries

For complete details, click here or contact Kathy Belcher at belcher@unt.edu. The deadline for submissions is February 1, 2003.

Join the Growing List of CPTs: Apply Today

The International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI) would like to congratulate the list of professionals below who have taken advantage of the exemptions available during the grandparenting period and received the designation of Certified Performance Technologist (CPT) last month. Click here for a full list of CPTs. Visit www.certifiedpt.org, and apply today to receive your designation.

• Raymond Reid, North Carolina, USA
• Raymond Gill, Virginia, USA
• Michael Solby, Ontario, Canada
• Michael Deaver, Florida, USA
• Coen Toebosch, The Netherlands
• Jolanda Botke, The Netherlands
• Shelly Hornback, Ohio, USA
• George Earles, Florida, USA
• John Dowell, Florida, USA
• Monica Moore, Florida, USA
• Susan Smith, Florida, USA
• Richard Gerson, Florida, USA
• Jerry Pile, Kentucky, USA
• E. Lisette Gerald-Yamasaki, California, USA
• Jerold Gasche, Illinois, USA
• Harold Jarche, New Brunswick, Canada
• Michael Barkley, Washington, USA
• Steve Gendreau, Washington, USA
• David Chase, South Africa
• Barry Coltham, South Africa
• Paul Lange, South Africa
• Geoffrey Amyot, South Africa
• Richard Swain, Washington, USA
• Robert Kalisz, Kentucky, USA
• Camille Ferond, Monferrato, Italy
• Theodore Apking, Michigan, USA

Newsletter Submission Guidelines

ISPI is looking for Human Performance Technology (HPT) articles (approximately 500 words and not previously published) for PerformanceXpress that bridge the gap from research to practice (please, no product or service promotion is permitted). Below are a few examples of the article formats that can be used:

In addition to the article, please include a short bio (2-3 lines) and a contact email address. All submissions should be sent to april@ispi.org. Each article will be reviewed by one of ISPI’s on-staff HPT experts, and the author will be contacted if it is accepted for publication. If you have any further questions, please contact april@ispi.org.

PerformanceXpress is an ISPI member benefit designed to build community, stimulate discussion, and keep you informed of the Society’s activities and events. This newsletter is published monthly and will be emailed to you at the beginning of each month.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact April Davis, ISPI’s Senior Director of Publications, at april@ispi.org.

ISPI
1400 Spring Street, Suite 260
Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA
Phone: 1.301.587.8570
Fax: 1.301.587.8573
info@ispi.org
http://www.ispi.org