Comments from Judge Rob Foshay:

The team did a great job identifying the needs and proposing appropriate solution strategies. Prioritizing of the proposed solution strategies seemed reasonable. Some specific issues to consider:

1. The whole EPSS will be a huge undertaking. Best to prioritize development based on an analysis of the specific causes of excessive numbers of takes in prior projects, plus any foreseeable technology risks in the Rocket Boy project. You can use Tom Gilbert's idea of the Performance Improvement Point (PIP) to do this prioritization.

2. Use of PIPs will also provide a feedback system which will improve motivation to build and use the EPSS & other interventions, and drive quality management.

3. A major risk is the competition for expertise resources between the Rocket Boy project and the EPSS & training. A risk management plan here is critical.

4. You identified the need to develop a retrieval system for the EPSS, but had no specific proposal for how to do this. This is a major risk, because the knowledge structure underlying the retrieval system is primarily visual, and verbal labels for the visual concepts tend to be idiosyncratic and team/project specific.

5. Quality management is another big issue in developing an EPSS, especially since this will be a new task and technology for the training department and those who contribute content. Management of quality processes is done through a combination of specific performance standards and feedback/performance monitoring. Both are largely missing from the proposals for the various interventions.

6. There is a very real risk that the proposed BBS system won't receive much use after the first few weeks, as people get busy on the project. Unless there is a feedback system to stimulate its use (see 2) above), this may well bomb.

Solutions seemed appropriate and a good balance between instructional and non-instructional issues. I was greatly impressed by the team's using the resources at the client's site rather than creating a totally new structure. Furthermore, the revised team approach would be an effective deferent to future problems.

It is however, disconcerting to see one compliment themselves, even if done in jest. I also would have like to see a more detailed implementation plan. The ideas are good and quite simple, but then again why aren't they doing them now. Perhaps other issues need to be identified which are barriers to performance.

Great job! The response provided a very good general picture of what was going on and interventions to help DAI succeed.

I liked the on-going assessment and the fact both soft skills and hard skills are addressed in the use of new technology. Great that you identified the EPSS as something that will always be a work-in-progress.

Some suggestions to make the proposal stronger would be to be more specific in suggested interventions and problem identification. For example how would I know if organizing the existing Intranet is enough? Process analysis should also be included to possible identify gaps or walls that could lead to inefficiency. How would the bulletin boards be organized? Would there be one or many since they are the foundation of the EPSS?

Although a great believer in analogies for learning, remember that an analogy, a metaphor, or a joke is only as powerful as it is understood :).

You've been thorough in conducting the needs assessment and structuring solutions. The creation of both short- and long-term recommendations for both organizational and performance support system was a good strategy.

The organizational approach that you suggest, if the employees buy-in to the idea, should help alleviate many of the problems the firm is facing. Replacing the pipeline with the more flexible structure should help reduce revision time and redundancy, and the mentoring program would help improve the skills of both the techno-phobic "old hands" and the newer artists to understand how real objects appear in space.

Establishing a better organized Intranet, and affording a place and time for the development of tips and discussions, should help improve skills and knowledge throughout the company. Providing options as to how the organization of the Intranet could be improved would have strengthened this recommendation.

Finally, you mention that the parent organization and staff at DAI see the world through different glasses. Many of your recommendations hit around this idea, but none directly touch on this gap and how it could be narrowed.

Overall, I thought you plan was well thought out and structured. Congratulations.

Jason's (this team's) response carefully took the style of the case study, using a narrative approach throughout. He is very direct in alerting his manager to his confidence in his solution through his reference to its ability to "blow away any studio in the industry". Addressing his specific task of providing *performance support* for the animators, his informs her that his Performance Solution is "not entirely electronic" up front.

The short term plans are not initially presented to move the unit forward quickly. During follow up, Jason's description of the electronic bulletin board on the Intranet clarifies that issue. Investigating CBT materials has potential to help users with complex software. Involving them in purchasing decisions is also critical. Reconfiguring physical space appears useful and may be able to be started on the short-term. Employee input--a key factor--is mentioned.

Like Mager (1992), he simplifies and clarifies his suggestions, such as his analogy of the proposed reorganization resembling the toy, a "slinky". It is not entirely clear if this reorganization is for the Pipeline only or for the entire company. If intended for DAI as a whole, implementation could be difficult to arrange, given the T&D Unit's third tier position on the current organizational chart.

Specific Comments on the Rating Scale:
8--Good range of performance solutions
9--vague
12 and 13--Major changes suggested, while offering potential for improvement, may be too much, too soon
15--It is hoped that "members will being to value", but will they? What strategies will be implemented to maximize this occurrence?

Overall fine treatment. I thought your solutions for the partnering / mentoring program and observations about the electronic bulletin board versus listserves were very insightful.

A few observations:

• Expectations of a Performance Support system integrated into any software package is a bit unrealistic. As Michener intimated, there is no substitute for being on a real set to see how shadows fall off objects, etc. This would be well outside the scope of any software package and not likely to happen, so it may require some additional research to provide a viable solution. Additionally, I don’t believe that selection of a software tool can be specifically based on built-in or integrated support. Animation tools by their nature are extremely complex, and probably not well represented by their PS integration or lack thereof.

• What type of support are you proposing from upper management? There is no question that it needs to be in place, but as a recommendation, what examples can you give of this support? Inclusion of this in your plan could help with management buy-in and give them a specific plan of action.

• Cooperation and exchange of information won’t always get to the "brass tacks" of the needs. What about the individual’s motivation? You’ve already seen Kenny Moyers keep information "up his sleeve." Buy-in will require more than a new metaphor, but rather a "what’s in it for me?" concept. This may prove to be a formidable challenge.

• Understanding the nature of the business and new technologies is critical, but how will you maintain this posture? What can you do to encourage people to become comfortable with change and adaptation? This could become a critical part of the success of your overall solution.

• You may want to be careful of your tone in certain areas. It may be a little condescending to say that “it takes someone from the outside to see things clearly and put them into perspective.” It actually takes someone with a design background to come in, do analysis and state things clearly, but don’t underestimate what your current training department and management already understand.