Post on 26-Jun-2020
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 1
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
Blended Solutions, Part 1:A Systemic Approach
John B. Lazar & Daniela RobuOPWL 560
April 7, 2020
© Copyright 2020. John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
John B. Lazar, MA, MCC
CEO ‐ John B. Lazar & Associates
John is CEO, John B. Lazar & Associates, Inc. John has been an NSPI/ISPI member since 1981 and currently serves on its Board of Directors. A performance consultant and coach since 1983, he consults to companies about performance improvement, leadership and management practices, communications, and organizational change.
As a leadership/executive coach certified as a Master Coach by ICF since 1999, he works with leaders and their teams, altering their perspectives, engagement, and performance. He received his Masters in Clinical Psychology from University of Illinois at Chicago. John is a lifelong Chicago Cubs fan.
Daniela Robu, MSc, CPT, CRP, CHE
Director, Knowledge Management Technology, System Innovation and Programs ‐ Alberta Health Services
Daniela is a Certified Health Executive, has a Master’s of Science in Biomedical Engineering (U of Calgary), Certification in e‐Learning, Adult Learning (U of Calgary), Performance Technology (ISPI, USA), Return on Investment (ROI Institute, USA) and Executive Leadership Education (U of Calgary, U of Alberta and AHS).
Daniela integrates innovative approaches in her work that aim to solve the current business challenges to increase efficiency and efficacy of core business processes, where knowledge is central to organizational performance.
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 2
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
01 02 03 04
LORUM IPSUM. HERE IS A GOOD PLACE FOR YOUR EXTRA OR ALTERNATE TEXT. EXAMPLE TEXT HERE.
Setting the Context
YOUR DESIGN
LORUM IPSUM. HERE IS A GOOD PLACE FOR YOUR EXTRA OR ALTERNATE TEXT. EXAMPLE TEXT HERE.
Key ConceptsLORUM IPSUM. HERE IS A GOOD PLACE FOR YOUR EXTRA OR ALTERNATE TEXT. EXAMPLE TEXT HERE.
Blended Solution Approach LORUM IPSUM. HERE IS A
GOOD PLACE FOR YOUR EXTRA OR ALTERNATE TEXT. EXAMPLE TEXT HERE.
Lessons Learned
Agenda
Participants learn to
Map root cause classes to interventions
Formulate blended solution (integrated
set of interventions) for client problem
with rationale for selection
Identify when a team approach makes
sense for your intervention
Identify issues to address when selling
your performance improvement proposal
Objectives
Photo by Daria Nepriakhina on Unsplash
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 3
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
My Winter Vacation & Your Work Situation
Setting the Context01
Setting the Context – My Winter Vacation & Your Work Situation
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 4
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
Human Performance Technology (HPT) Model
Erika Gilmore’s Research
Root Cause Class/Intervention Pairing
Interventions & Blended Solutions
Key Concepts02
Human Performance Technology (HPT) Model
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 5
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
Erika Gilmore’s Research
“… on average, for every three categories identified as issues (root causes) in a performance improvement situation, there are interventions developed in at least four different categories to effect the desired changes.”
Gilmore (2008, pp. 61‐62)
Key Finding
Gilbert (2013); adapted from Gilmore (2008)
Root Cause Class/Intervention Pairing
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 6
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
Individual Interventions (Is) can be holistically and synergistically integrated
into a Blended Solution (BS)
Lazar, Greenblatt, & Robu (2017)
A set of Individual Interventions (Is), whether Blended (BI), Simple (SI) or a combination of both types, when holistically and synergistically integrated and implemented form a Blended Solution (BS)
A Blended Solution (BS) is distinctive in that it will likely 1) Include two or more simultaneous, integrated, interdependent, synergistic Interventions
2) Address the same root cause(s) redundantly
3) Align multiple stakeholders4) Require both qualitative and quantitative measures to design and measure effectiveness
5) Require faith, courage and stretch
Blended Solution Approach03
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 7
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
Ledge Walking – Effort Benefit Matrix
Lazar, Gillum, & Mortenson (2016); Langdon (1992, p. 203)
“When HP technologists use a variety of interventions to meet a performance need, they must logically integrate the interventions.
Integration is required for maximum effectiveness and efficiency on behalf of performers and their organizations.”
If you don’t have expertise or interest in designing/delivering variety of interventions, consider forming a teamto do the work.
Stakeholders, Care and Implications
Photo by Campaign Creators on Unsplash
Stakeholder: “Anybody who can affect or is affected by an organization, strategy or project. They can be internal or external and they can be at senior or junior levels… (Bryson’s definition) extends to all stakeholders who are affected by a change.”
Stakeholder care: Soliciting opinions and perspectives from them about what matters to them, why it’s important, what success would look like as a result of an intervention or change, and including that in the design of intervention and its evaluation.
www.stakeholdermap.com
Implications for project: Some stakeholders decide what matters most and must be included in proposed project. They are your customers.
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 8
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
‐ Compares results with expectations.Finds drivers and barriers to expected performance.
Evaluation‐ “Produces action plans for improving the programs and solutions being evaluated so that expected performance is achieved or maintained and organizational objectives and contributions can be realized.”
Evaluation‐ “Can provide a systematic framework that aligns stakeholders, evaluation purposes, desired results and consequences, and all evaluation activities, so that the evaluation product is a responsive and clear recipe for improving performance.”
Evaluation
Stakeholder (Customer) Satisfaction
EASY TITLEEvaluation and Satisfaction
Guerra‐Lopez (2007; 2008)
‐ Meets/exceeds conditions of satisfaction and value for designated stakeholders (customers) for process and outcome.
Lessons Learned04
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 9
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
Lessons Learned
1) Many performance issues, when analyzed, have multiple root causes and, therefore, the possibility of multiple interventions and even a blended solution
2) A blended solution will deliver superior results because the interventions are integrated and synergistic
3) Multiple interventions require selling to multiple stakeholders (customers), each of whom have their own conditions of satisfaction
4) Selling happens when you sell your proposal, when you implement your project, and when you develop ongoing, sustainable support
5) What role(s) do you want to play on the project? If not all of them, form a team.
Photo by Vita Marija Murenaite on Unsplash
Appendix: Example
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 10
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
Improve Rotman MBA Students Teams and MBA impact
Our Blended Interventions – Orientation, Modules, Coaching, Virtual Launch, World Dance1) Stakeholder conversations, interviews, participant observation,
collaboration 2) Student knowledge, staff faculty capacity, D-A-C, team
effectiveness skills/knowledge3) Dance, dyads, lecture, voicing, participant-observation, self
reflection, writing 4) Team mates, buddy teams, entire class, staff, DCIT, dean’s office,
MBA stakeholders5) Alignment within class, vulnerability across stakeholders, feelings
& body = data & tools6) Faith in the trust created. Courage to push. Everyone out on
‘skinny branches’
Our Blended Solution (BS)
Can be holistically and synergistically integrated into a Blended Solution (BS)
Individual Blended Interventions (BIs)
OUR Blended Solution (BS) was to Take the Lead and Primary Responsibility for TEAMS success
1) Changed culture, communication norms, curriculum, relationships, delivery methods
2) Multiple opportunities to learn, grow, think, practice, collaborate, problem solve, reflect, be safe
3) Interviews, rating reviews, contact hours, feelings of staff, student engagement, post-its
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 11
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
Updated HPT model
Adapted from Van Tiem, Moseley, & Dessinger (2012)
References (1 of 3)• Anderson, D., and Ackerman Anderson, D. (2001). Beyond change management. San
Francisco: Jossey‐Bass/Pfeiffer.
• Carucci, R.A., and Pasmore, W.A. (2002). Relationships that enable enterprise change. Gilbert, T.F. (1978). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance.New York: McGraw Hill.
• Gilbert, T. (2013). Human competence. (Tribute edition). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
• Gilmore, E.R. (2008). An evaluation of the efficacy of Wile’s taxonomy of human performance factors. Dissertation, Indiana University. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/304606414
• Green, A. (2013). Making it real: Sustaining knowledge management, adapting for success in the knowledge based economy. UK: Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited. Available from www.academic‐bookshop.com
• Guerra‐Lopez, I. (2007). Evaluating impact: Evaluation and continual improvement for performance improvement practitioners. Champaign, IL: Human Resources Development Press.
• Guerra‐Lopez, I.J. (2008). Performance evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass.
• Haines, S.G., Aller‐Stead, G., and McKinlay, J. (2005). Enterprise‐wide change. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Blended Solutions, Part 1A Systemic Approach
4/7/2020
john@jblacoaching.comDaniela.robu@ahs.ca 12
© Copyright 2020 John B. Lazar & Daniela Robu. All rights reserved worldwide.
References (2 of 3)• Hackman, J.R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances.
Boston: Harvard Business Press.
• Hubert, C., and Trees, L. (2016). Breaking barriers and influencing behaviours. Steps towards a knowledge sharing culture. KM Conference, American Productivity Quality Council, Houston, TX, USA.
• Kotter International (2015). 8 steps to accelerate change. E‐book. Retrieved from http://www.kotterinternational.com/ebook/eBook‐Final‐Copyright‐2015.pdf
• Langdon, D.G. (1992). Human performance technology in action: Application examples. In H.J. Stolovitch and E.J. Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of human performance technology. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass, 188‐207.
• Lazar, J.B., Gillum, T., and Mortenson, K. (2016, September). Changing the game. Game‐changing strategies that unleash performance improvement. Pre‐conference workshop presentation at ISPI EMEA conference, Bonn, Germany.
• Lazar, J.B., Greenblatt, E., and Robu, D. (2017, September). Multiple root causes and blended solutions: Two case studies and lessons learned. Pre‐conference workshop presentation at ISPI EMEA conference, Bologna, Italy.
• Lazar, J.B., and Robu, D. (2015). Accelerating the development of learning organizations: Shifting paradigms from current practice to human performance improvement. Theoretical and Applied Economics, XXII (1/602), 259‐274.
References (3 of 3)• Malopinsky, L.V., and Osman, G. (2006). Dimensions of organizational change. In
J.A. Pershing (Ed.), Handbook of human performance technology. (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 262‐286.
• McCauley, C., and Fick‐Cooper, L. (2015). Direction, alignment, commitment: Achieving better results through leadership. Greensboro, NC: CCL Press.
• Phillips, P.P., Phillips, J.J., Stone, R.D., and Burkett, H. (2007). The ROI field book. Burlington, MA: Butterworth‐Heinemann
• Robu, D., and Lazar, J.B. (2016, September). Innovative approach to a virtual collaboration platform. Presentation at ISPI EMEA conference, Bonn, Germany.
• Rosenberg, S., and Mosca, J. (2011). Breaking down the barriers to organizational change. International Journal of Management & Information Systems, 15(3).
• Trees, L. (2015). Choosing the right knowledge transfer approach. White paper. Houston, TX, USA, American Productivity Quality Council, USA. Retrieved from https://www.apqc.org/knowledge‐base/documents/choosing‐right‐knowledge‐transfer‐approach
• Van Tiem, D.M., Moseley, J.L., and Dessinger, J.C (2012). Fundamentals of performance improvement through people, processes, and organizations. San Francisco: ISPI Wiley.