You mention the need for evaluation, but what would be the other
components of the quality managent system for the interventions?
Comments from Judge Les Moller:
I was impressed with the clarity of the report, especially the needs
assessment. This was a realistic and professional report which was written
in a clear and succinct manner offering examples or behaviors where
appropriate. I also liked their proactive stance towards the solution (OPSS
instead of EPSS). The dual goals reflected a realistic and comprehensive
understanding of the problem.
Comments from Judge Karen Peters:
Great job! The response indicated both micro and macro interventions
including:
- Sociotechnical systems design interventions affecting
technology and performance management;
- Structural design interventions affecting DAI's structure and
technology;
- Rewards system interventions affecting performance management and
feedback systems; and
- High involvement organizational interventions affecting all design
components including culture.
This was very well thought out and written in a clear, understandable
style. There was evidence of continuous evaluation and assessment. I
particularly liked the approach to process analysis with an assigned
process analysis team.
Excellent.
Comments from Judge Donn Ritchie:
You've done a nice job structuring recommendations for the problems presented to Jason.
I thought your ideas presented for the EPSS were very comprehensive. Providing for a variety
of help systems, tutorials, procedures, and the other components would provide for a very
comprehensive system. I was a bit confused, however, as to who would be creating this.
Yes, many of the components exist, but it still will be a lot of work pulling in all the components
and structuring more. Might the animators be able to contribute during the down time between
productions? The more people you could bring in to its creation, but better the buy in (which I
see you identified later as being important).
The design of the partnering program is well done. It was nice to see your explanation as to why
you didn't create a "mentoring" program. And providing "credit" for their voluntary participation,
to be noted during their performance appraisals, should help get members to participate. Potential
team members may be identifiable through the skills survey you suggest, which would also be
helpful in building the EPSS.
I concur with your description for the evaluation component. It's easy to get caught up in providing
recommendations and forget that continual evaluation is needed to help ensure that the interventions
are helping.
Although I believe you've designed a solid needs assessment and set of recommendation, a little
more on the theoretical background for your solutions would have strengthened your answer.
Comments from Judge Annette Sherry:
Jason (this team) offers a well-developed, potentially workable performance
solution directly related to the needs analysis he conducted. The report
recognizes the employees' desire to "do the job" and the obstacles they
face in regard to not knowing how to do certain aspects of their jobs, as
well as having insufficient resources to perform their jobs.
Jason builds upon the T&D Units plan for implementing EPSS by expanding it
to encompass OPSS. Such an approach will maximize managerial acceptance
from a new hire. He clearly describes how the EPSS Nucleus can be
organized by suggesting titles for various components of the Nucleus that
are self-explanatory, such as I Can Do That! This technique mirrors
Mager's (1992) style of clarifying key concepts through simple, memorable
phrases.
His plan for PAT, is reflects the Deming philosophy of Total Quality
Management through its call for those involved in the process to plan and
implement improvement. Furthermore, the training team itself, which
currently has 3 members with similar backgrounds, will receive instruction
in principles of instructional design so they may more effectively
contribute to assessing and addressing needs.
A very visible, immediate solution is offered in suggesting the
recruitment of an animator with technical expertise to assist Glen
Michener. A powerful message that the DAI is serious about addressing
employee concerns would be sent to the Pipeline employees if this
suggestion were implemented.
Specific Comments on the Rating Scale:
1 --Need for ongoing assessment strengthens solution
2-- Acknowledges Jason's knowledge of EPSS, among other issues
6--Providing alternative solutions would strengthen the proposal.
9--Personnel were clearly identified in relation to solutions.
14--Good acknowledgment for the need to "buy in".
15--Recognition of the need for ongoing evaluation is yet another
reflection of a solution for quality management.
Comments from Judge Scott Switzer:
Truly an excellent and insightful response. I was most impressed with
your overall tone and treatment of the problem.
Among your many strong points were:
- An excellent treatment of analysis and clear goal statement
- Backing up your assertions in Key Issues with direct quotes helped to
understand the significance of the particular issues
- Reminding yourself to proceed carefully shows a good understanding of
your environment. On one hand, you can be a strong presence because you
are the expert. On the other hand, you understand the role of the "new
hire" and being cognizant of the connotations of that role shows a great
deal of maturity.
- You used the words "buy-in" several times which I believe are critical
to the success of the overall solution. Understanding that buy-in and
ascertaining specific employee motivation to benefit from the system
are really critical mass.
- You provided positive, insightful "next steps." Determining if an
upgrade to a system is really needed is something that few companies do,
but most of them should. Upgrades do not always contribute to overall
increased productivity or capability. Looking at this closely is a
smart step in the overall process.
- Your answers posed solutions with follow up as to why the solutions
are relevant. You’ve successfully answered most of the "So What?"
questions that would have likely been asked of you.
- You’ve identified areas where your expertise could be helpful, careful
not to treat any one idea or solution as a panacea.
- You proposed creating positive opportunities for employee and
management buy-in, again a critical component in the success of your
solution.
Overall, your solution had:
- A very positive and respectful tone
- Thorough analysis and insightful solutions
- Support for your assertions
- A clever treatment of the EPSS concept, which I believe was
consistent with DAI’s personality
- Excellent insight into the company’s true personality. Your
treatment of the solution was based very much on my own perceived
company expectations.
Excellent job that your team can be very proud of!! I wish each of you
the best of luck in your future endeavors.
|
Judges' Ratings
Note: These item ratings have been averaged across all six Judges.
|
|
Item # |
Item
|
Average Rating
|
| 1 |
The team *identified* the important issues in the case. |
4.0 |
| 2 |
The team effectively *addressed* the important issues in the case. |
4.0 |
| 3 |
The team defined the perspectives of all the relevant stakeholders
in this case. (e.g., artists, technicians, supervisors,
administration, trainers, organization.) |
4.0 |
| 4 |
The team effectively responded to all of the relevant perspectives
in this case. |
3.8 |
| 5 |
The team effectively analyzed the needs identified. |
3.8 |
| 6 |
The team identified appropriate alternative solutions for each
need. |
3.2 |
| 7 |
The team developed an instructional goal that was appropriate
for the case. |
3.7 |
| 8 |
The team recommended an appropriate overall solution. |
4.0 |
| 9 |
The team's specifications for personnel to be involved in the
solution were appropriate. |
3.8 |
| 10 |
The team effectively integrated relevant professional knowledge
(theories and practices) into their response. |
3.5 |
| 11 |
Overall, the team's Needs Assessment and Preliminary Design were
appropriate for the case. |
4.0 |
| 12 |
Overall, the team's Needs Assessment and Preliminary Design
demonstrated excellence. |
3.7 |
| 13 |
The team was proactive in making recommendations and/or
modifying the environment, as opposed to being only reactive
and giving the client what they said they wanted. |
3.8 |
| Additional Practice Items |
| 14 |
The team identified all major project risks and developed plans
to manage them. |
3.5 |
| 15 |
The team presented an appropriate quality management plan. |
3.2 |
| |
| Overall Average |
3.73 |
Read the Case Response for this Team
Read the Provocateur Questions and Responses
for this Team
