Design Document - EPPIC · 2011. 12. 30. · Design Document January 17,1995 The Awards Marketing...

Design DocumentJanuary 17,1995

The AwardsMarketing and

Promotion Process

The EvaluatorSelection/Trainingand Certification

Process

Prepared by:SWI • Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1733 Park St., Suite 201, Naperville, IL 60563Voice 708.416.3323 Fax 708.416.9770

Management

Consulting

Services

SVENSON & WALLACE. INC. L~·rS. fa

lanuary 17, 1995

William C. CoscarelliProfessorCurriculum and InstructionSouthern Illinois UniversityCarbondale, IL 62901-4610

Dear Bill:

C Uc.. It'"'1'11, G·y.etn t

--t'/. U~i\c{C or-b.D. 5r", KC ~. W4.rrln~+O'lC, Ctl'rY

(t. &,..,~ i;CA.J:.. l;Jh~4ti(dt:G. Po \\c.rd~. 6,-e,-\how-e,Y'

Enclosed is the Design Document for the NSPI Awards System Redesign Projecr. Thisdocument is the output of the design meeting that was held earlier this month.

Background The two-day design meeting was held in the SWI offices on January 6 and 7.Team Members are

• GeorgePollardCarot'Valen

• Project Management Team (SWI)- Katen Wallace

Guy Wallace -.- Ray Svenson

Kelly Rennels• Joe Sener- Dottie Soelke

(Dale Brethower is a Design Team member, but was unable to attend therneeting.)

Please reference the Design Document itself-for a more complete backgroundon the project. .

1733 Park Street. Suite 201 Naperville. Illinois 60563 Voice 708.416.3323 Fax 708.416.9770

Issues/Concerns Please take a few moments to review the Design Document. The Team hasdevoted a great deal of time and effort designing a system that will enhance thevalidity of the NSPI Awards System and result in an increase of NSPI'sreputation and effectiveness in the HPT community. However, during thedesign meeting, it became clear that there are several issues on which we needinput from the NSPI Board.

• Conductl Farticipate in a Two-Phase Pilot - Time is running short, and it isunlikely that training for the awards evaluators will be developed in time tobe included in the project pilot (which will begin at the Atlanta conference).Carol Valen suggested (and the rest of the Team agreed) that we conduct!participate in a two-phase pilot. During the first phase, the evaluators willreceive an abbreviated version of what will become (in the second phase)the Evaluator Training Program. Before the second phase, formal evaluatortraining will be developed, and this element of the system will be pilotedbetween the Dallas and Anaheim conferences.

• Commit Resources - The Project Management Team feels the Board needs tocommit resources to the Awards System once it is in full operation. Thenewly designed system will greatly enhance the Society but will requiremuch more rigorous attention than did the old system.

• Sanction the Project or Scale Back - Because the redesigned system willrequire more work at the administrative level on a day-to-day basis, theNSPI Board needs to sanction completion of the project as planned, or givethe Project Management Team direction to scale back at some point.

Team Needs The Project Management Team feels very strongly that we need to walk theBoard through the complexities of the redesigned Awards System and discussthe critical issues in person. Before we continue to devote our resources, theTeam needs to be aware of the Board's level of commitment to the project inits redesigned state. Guy Wallace has volunteered to attend the next BoardMeeting (January 20 and 21), and it is our sincere hope that you can find a spoton the agenda for this presentation/briefing. With Guy in attendance, theissues!concems mentioned above could be addressed during the BoardMeeting, and the Team could be given direction on how to proceed.

Time is of the essence, so please contact Guy (or anyone else on the Project Management Team)as soon as possible, and let us know when and if the Board has found a spot for him on theagenda for the upcoming meeting. We can be reached here at our offices in Naperville by phone(708.416.3323) or fax (708.416.9770). If you have any questions, problems, or concerns, pleasefeel free to contact me at the numbers listed above. Thank you.

Dottie A. SoelkeSWI, Associate

NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN DESIGN DOCUMENT

I. Awards System Design Document

Introduction This NSPI Awards System Redesign Project Design Documentcontains the outputs created in the Design Phase. A generaldescription of each section is provided below.

Tab LA. - contains a project overview that includes high-leveldescriptions of the project purpose, background, approach,accomplishments, and roles.

Tab LB. - contains the Awards System overview that includes ahigh-level description of the key elements of the NSPI AwardsSystem, such as its mission, values, principles, processes, etc.

Tab II. - contains the detailed design specifications of each of theAwards System processes and its outputs.

Tab m. - contains the design specifications for the key elementsof the Awards System Infrastructure.

Tab IV. - contains a Process Map identifying key activitiesrequired for the development and pilot of the redesigned NSPIAwards System.

SWI • Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1117/95 Page 1


I.A. Project Overview

Project Purpose The purpose of this project is to redefine and restructure the NSPIAwards System to meet the needs of NSPI Awards Systemstakeholders. NSPI stakeholders are defined to include thefollowing:

• NSPI members• NSPI local chapters• NSPI Advocates, Sustainers, and Patrons• NSPI Treasured Members• NSPI Board• NSPI national office staff• Customers (internal/external) of NSPI members• Non-NSPI members working in the field (research,

application, or management)

Background In 1989, the NSPI Board decided to undertake a study to revampthe NSPI Awards System. Kathleen Whiteside was asked to heada task force to analyze, plan, design, and implement thesechanges. The project was seen as a multiyear effort. As a resultof the preliminary work

• Responsibility for the chapter awards was moved to thechapter vice presidents.

• Awards were established for- Contributions to the technology- Contributions to the Society

• The concept of criterion-referenced and norm-referencedawards was established.

In April 1992, Kathleen Whiteside asked Karen Wallace and GuyWallace to assist in the development and refinement of the NSPIAwards System in a project management capacity.

SWI- Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1117/95 Page 1


I.A. Project Overview, Continued

Scope The scope of this inherently complicated project includes

• Analysis of the needs/desires of all of the stakeholders- Defining award types, categories, and criteria- Defining all the processes within the Awards System

Architecture- Determining how historical awards data will be maintained- Ensuring that the processes are user friendly and efficient

• Establishment of benchmarks- The best-in-class products and processes (practices) to be

used as criteria for Human Performance Technologiesinterventions (both instructional and non instructional)

- Recognition of research and publications advancing thetechnology (Human Performance Technologies)

- Recognition/appreciation of volunteerism to the Society

• Design and development of a pilot-test version of the system- Design of a systems architecture for the NSPI Awards

System- Development of all component materials and practices to be

tested/evaluated prior to and in conjunction with the 1995conference

• Pilot testing (beginning approximately March 1995 andconcluding after the 1996 Conference's award ceremony) andextensive evaluation of all pilot-test versions of all systemcomponents and practices- Evaluations to be conducted with all stakeholder groups by

an independent group

• Revision of the system based on the evaluation data andplanning for its overall implementation

The scope of the project does not include

• Establishing NSPI strategy (long- or short-term) or values

continued on next page

SWI' Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1117/95 Page 2


LA. Project Overview, Continued

Scope,Continued

• Creating an official list of NSPI "Treasured Members" orproviding them with any special recognition

• Continuously improving the award criteria to reflect best-in-class- Product and process benchmarks- Research methods- Publications- Volunteerism

• Planning the details of how the Society will fund and managethis effort or other efforts over the long run

These issues, while not part of this project's scope, are seen asnecessary inputs required to direct the project's efforts properly.These inputs will be expected from either the NSPI Board orfrom the Project Steering Team, appointed by the Board.

Approach The original overall goal was to engage as many members of theSociety as possible in the project in an effort to achieve deployedimperfection rather than deferred perfection. Volunteerparticipants were to be organized into well-defined teams to worktoward Integrated Product Development (IPD), which is aneffective method of completing tasks within a shorter period ofcalendar time.

A new approach was deemed necessary due to the lack ofvolunteers (making the original team approach to system designimpossible). Without the use of teams, the amount of calendartime required to complete the project in its current state increasesremarkably.

Consequently, it was necessary to take a new approach. Thefollowing sections include our accomplishments to date and theproject's next steps.




Accomplishmentsto Date

The project is being conducted in six phases.

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6

Project

~ ~B~~B~Revision.

~Planning and Analysis Development Release, and

Klck...,1f ImplementationPlannlng

(This model is an adaptation of the SWI· Svenson & Wallace, Inc. PACTs.! Process, usedfor project planning andmanagement purposes for Custom Course Development projects. It is used with permission.)

Phase 1: Project Planning and Kick-off - The following areachievements of Phase 1:

• The Project Plan was reviewed/revised phase-by-phase by theSteering Team and approved.

Dick Lincoln drafted a preliminary values statement for theproject.

The National Society for Performance and Instruction (NSP!)is committed to identifying and rewarding exemplaryperformance in all aspects of Society activity-leadership,technology enhancement, and service. Recognition ofexemplary performance is extended to all Society membersregardless of their work-setting, membership status, orpersonal characteristics.

The primary means of accomplishing such recognition is theNSPI Awards System. By means of this System, the Societywill set standards for excellence, create models forpractitioners of the technology, provide reinforcement toexemplary performers, and define for its members and otherstakeholders what the Society values in the field ofperformance improvement.


PACT Process is a service mark of SWI· Svenson & Wallace, Inc.




Accomplishmentsto Date,Continued

• Miki Lane developed a communication plan that suggests theuse of- The current NSPI publications

- News & Notes - "NSPI Redesigns Its Awards System"was published in the July 1993 issue

- Performance & Instruction Journal- Performance Improvement QuarterlyThe monthly communication from national to chapterpresidentsThe national convention

• Kathleen Whiteside appointed Mark Greene as the AnalysisTeam leader, and he accepted the assignment.

• 1993 Conference activities relating to the Awards SystemRedesign were as follows:- Awards System Redesign posters were displayed.

Solicitation packages for volunteer team leaders and teammembers were distributed, as was an article on the redesignproject.A cracker-barrel table was conducted.Displays were set up in the NSPI booth and the SWI booth.A meeting of Lifetime Members/past presidents was held atwhich the project activities were discussed, questions wereanswered, and feedback and future assistance weresolicited.

Once the 1993 conference was over, Phase 1 - Project Planningand Kick-off was complete.

Phase 2: Analysis - The following are achievements of Phase 2:

• Mark Greene, in his role as Analysis Team leader, developed apreliminary list of core values to be celebrated by theimplementation of the redesigned NSPI Awards System.

• Phone interviews were conducted by the Project ManagementTeam with NSPI key sources.

• The collected data was organized and forwarded to MarkGreene and Kathleen Whiteside as a progress report.





Accomplishmentsto Date,Continued

• The Project Management Team analyzed the Round 1 analysisdata.

• From the Round 1 analysis data, the Round 2 data collectionsheet was sent with instructions to 116 NSPI members.

• The results were collected and analyzed by the ProjectManagement Team. The output of the analysis was the refinedlist of four core values.

• Benchmarking efforts were conducted by Joe Sener, a memberof the Project Management Team and a Malcolm BaldrigeNational Quality Award Examiner. American Society forQuality Control's (ASQC's) award system, including awardcategories, criteria, etc., was benchmarked.

• The Analysis Phase data and the straw model of the AwardsSystem Macrodesign were compiled into an Analysis Reportand distributed for review by phase participants.

Phase 3: Design - The following tasks are achievements of theDesign Phase:

• The Awards System Macrodesign that was created by theProject Management Team during the Analysis Phase wasreviewed and approved via conference call by- George Pollard- Carol Valen

• The Project Management Team conducted the design meetingon January 6 and 7. The outputs of the meeting included- The development of microdesign details- The design of system metrics

• The outputs of the Design Phase were compiled into thisDesign Document and distributed for review by- NSPI Board during the January 20-21 meeting- Dale Brethower- George Pollard- Carol Valen- Kathleen Whiteside




Next Steps Phac;e4: Development - The following tasks are included in theDevelopment Phase:

• Develop the new NSPI Awards System forms, materials,training, etc. as necessary for each of the following detailedprocesses:- Awards Marketing and Promotion Process- Nomination Process- Awards Governance Process- Screening and Evaluation Process- Evaluator Selection, Training, and Certification Process- Awards Presentation Process

Phase 5: Pilot Test - The following tasks are included in thePilot Phase:

• Create pilot plan.• Conduct pilot Awards System (post-1995 Conference).• Provide feedback on pilot.

Phac;e6: Revision, Release, and Implementation Planning - Thefollowing tasks are included in the Revision, Release, andImplementation Planning Phase:

• Revise pilot Awards System based on feedback from pilot.• Implement redesigned NSPI Awards System.

Next Steps ProcessMap

The following Process Map details the tasks, responsibilities, andtiming elements of this new approach.


) ) )NSPI AW ARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN DESIGN DOCUMENT

Time I I I I1/20/95 4/95 4/96 6/96

••SWI· Svenson & Wallace,Inc. 1117/95 Page 8



Project Teams The following are the teams, roles, and participants in thisproject.

Steering Team - The Steering Team's primary responsibility is toreview and approve all project outputs prepared by the projectteams.

Kathleen Whiteside is the chairperson of this team. Other teammembers are identified below.

• Bonnie Abney• Ruth Ashley• Lani Fukazawa• Dick Lincoln• George Pollard• Guy Wallace• Kathleen Whiteside

• Roger Addison• Dale Brethower• Miki Lane• Anne Mercer• Donald Tosti• Karen Wallace

Project Management Team - The Project Management Team'sprimary charge is to plan and manage the project and publish allfindings and results.

Project Management Team members are listed below.

• Ray Svenson• Karen Wallace• Guy Wallace

• Joe Sener• Dottie Soelke• Kelly Rennels





Project Teams,Continued

Analysis Team - The Analysis Team conducted all AnalysisPhase tasks described previously.

The Analysis Team chair is Mark Greene. Analysis Phaseparticipants are identified below.

• Roger Addison• Barbara Bichelmeyer• Bill Coscarelli• Diane Dormant• Shelly Garrigus• Tom Gilbert• Judith Hale• P. Kenneth Komoski• Daniel Kuhn• Seth Liebler• Robert Mager• Hanna Mayer• Rich Pearlstein• Carol Robinson• Allison Rossett• Harold Stolovitch• Carol Valen• Joseph Yaney

• Jay Alden• Barry Boothe• Rosalind Cowie• Robert Gagne• George Geis• Joe Harless• Susan Holly• Erica Keeps• Danny Langdon• Dick Lincoln• Susan Markle• Margo Murray• Bob Powers• Marc Rosenberg• Nick Sanders• Deborah Stone• Kathleen Whiteside

Award Conversion Team - The Analysis Conversion Team,headed by Carol Valen, is responsible for conducting theconversion of the Awards System to criterion referenced.

Design Team - The Design Team consisted of the members ofthe Project Management Team with additional input from

• Carol Valen• George Pollard

SWI· Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1117/95 Page 10


I.B. Awards System Overview

Introduction The Awards System Macrodesign was created by the ProjectManagement Team during the Analysis Phase and was used as astraw dog for the Design Team to review, embellish, and finalizeduring the design meeting held January 6-7, 1995 in the SWIoffices.

The Awards System Microdesign, including the detailed designof the processes within the NSPI Awards System, is presented inTab III of this document.

A wards SystemPurpose/Mission

The following values statement, drafted by Dick Lincoln, statesthe purpose/mission of the Awards System.

The National Society for Performance and Instruction (NSPI)is committed to identifying and rewarding exemplaryperformance in all aspects of Society activity-leadership,technology enhancement, and service. Recognition ofexemplary performance is extended to all Society membersregardless of their work-setting, membership status, orpersonal characteristics.

The primary means of accomplishing such recognition is theNSPI Awards System. By means of this System, the Societywill set standards for excellence, create models forpractitioners of the technology, provide reinforcement toexemplary performers, and define for its members and otherstakeholders what the Society values in the field ofperformance improvement.

SWI· Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1117/95 Page I


I.B. Awards System Overview, Continued

Awards SystemCore Values

The Analysis Phase of this project resulted in four core values forNSPI. These values include

• Effective application of Human Performance Technologies inthe workplace that will enhance productivity and benefitsociety

• Advancement of Human Performance Technologies throughscholarship, innovation, and practices

• Consistent application of professional and ethical standards inthe work we do

• Continuous professional development of members

Awards SystemPrinciples

The Project Management Team created the Awards SystemDesign in alignment with the following principles:

• Fairness (independent, valid, and reliable rating, nonpolitical)• Accessible to applicants (time and cost)• Aligned with all NSPI values• Balance of performance and instruction• Nonbureaucratic process (cost and cycle time)• Defined processes that are in control, stable, and maintained• Criteria-referenced awards that reflect best-in-class• Norm-referenced awards that reflect top performers

NSPI AwardsSystemArchitecture

The NSPI Awards System Architecture is presented below.

The AwardsGoycnumcr Precess

+The Nomination Process

Tbe Scrttning aod The Awards,---.. r--- Enluatioo Process r---- P'rewntatioo Precess

fThe Awards Marketing

the t.;va uator Setecncn,

and Promotion ProcessTMlIlni~.nd

Certification Precess

r

SWI' Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1I17/95 Page 2



NSPI AwardsSystemMacroprocess Map

The Macroprocess Map below identifies the processes within theAwards System. The intent of the three-tier Macroprocess Map,used by SWI when doing a preliminary sort of the processeswithin an organization, is to systematically map a top-down viewof processes, instead of the typical bottom-up view, which oftenleaves gaps and overlaps.

This method of organization separates processes into threecategories.

• Leadership Processes - drive all processes.

• Products/Services Processes - consist of the mainstreamprocesses of the organization.

• Support Processes - serve and support the mainline processes.




Revised AwardsCategoriesOverview

Prior to beginning the detailed design effort, Carol Valen gavethe Design Team "carte blanche" in recommending new awardcategories where it seemed appropriate (in meeting stakeholder"requirements and/or embracing the recently articulated NSPIAwards System core values). These four core values are

• Effective application of Human Performance Technologies inthe workplace that will enhance productivity and benefitsociety



• Continuous professional development of members

Existing AwardsCategories

The Design Team reviewed the 1994 awards categories, assessedthem against the stakeholder requirements (see page 8 of thissection) and decided to retain all nine.

• Chapter of Merit• Outstanding P&I article• Outstanding PIQ article• Outstanding Student Research• Outstanding (Noninstructional) HPT System• Outstanding New Systematic Application• Outstanding Performance Aid• Outstanding Instructional ProductlIntervention

One 1994 category has been revised; "Outstanding InstructionalCommunication" is being proposed to be revised to "OutstandingHPT Communication."



I.B. A wards System Overview, Continued

New AwardsCategories

Proposed AwardsCategories

In order to better meet the requirements and values of NSPI, fiveadditional award categories are proposed by the Design Team.The five enhancements put more emphasis on recognizing andrewarding institutional efforts as the current awards categoriesgenerally reward individual efforts.

• Outstanding Organizational Internal Deployment of HPT

• Outstanding Technology Transfer

• Outstanding Academic (Degreed Program) CurriculumAddressing HPT

• Outstanding Public Offering of HPT Curricula

• Outstanding Research Project

To meet the stakeholder requirements and core values, theawards categories need to recognize and reward the processes aswell as final products, the extension (advancement) of thetechnology, and the appropriate applications (approach!deployment/results) of the performance and instructiontechnologies.

The proposed awards categories meet the first two valuestatements:

~ffective application of Human Performance Technologies in~e workplace that will enhance productivity and benefit

society


The awards criteria themselves (yet to be established/finalized)will embrace the last two value statements:


-- •••••""'·Oontinuous professionaldevelopmentof members



NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN DESiGN DOCUMENT


Proposed AwardsCategories,Continued

Proposed A wardsCategories DataChart

The seven groupings of the 14 proposed award categories wouldrequire the establishment of seven award committees to facilitatethe evaluations (based on type of evaluator expertise required).

The NSPI Board must review and approve/revise the categoriesand awards committee structure prior to continuation of theproject.

The following chart identifies the 14 (nine existing and fiveproposed) award categories.

Information presented in the chart includes which of

• The awards recognizeslrewards individual or institutionalefforts

• The seven general areas/types of awards category applies

• The awards categories were existing, revised, or new

• The awards focus on a product or process

• The awards focus on the- Extension of performance or instruction- Approach/deployment/results of performance or instruction


) ) )NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN DESIGN DOCUMENT

Proposed Awards Categories Data ChartAW::Irr For-us

Approach!Areal Product/ Deployment/

Award Catesorv Title Tvne E/RIN Process Extension (PfI) Results (PfI)

Outstanding p&! Article I E 0 P/l -

Outstanding PIQ Article I E 0 P/l -

In HPT Communication I R 0 P/l -

di Outstanding (Non instructional) HPT System 3 E 0 - Pvi Outstanding New Systematic Application. 3 E 0 P/l -du Outstanding Instructional Productllntervention 4 E 0 I-aI

0s Outstanding Performance Aid 4 E - P

Outstanding Research Project 2 N 0 P/l -

Outstanding Student Research 2 E 0 P/I -

IOutstanding Organizational Internal Deployment of HPT 6 N • PII-n

s •t Outstanding Technology Transfer 6 N - P/Iit Outstanding Academic (Degreed Program) Curriculum Addressing HPT 5 N 0 - P/Iut Outstanding Public Offering of HPT Curricula 5 N 0 - plIi0 Chapter of Merit 7 E 0 P/I-ns

KEY: ArearrypeI = Communication2 = Research3 = Systematic Application

4 = Training/lntervention5 = Offerings6 = Deployment7 = Merit

E = ExistingR = RevisedN=New

o = Product (Results)• = Process (Approach/Deployment)

P = Performance InterventionI = Instructional Intervention




Awards SystemBusiness Drivers

SWI used a methodology to define Business Drivers as a meansof identifying requirements of Metrics and Processes. BusinessDrivers were segregated into three classifications.

• Assets and competencies• Stakeholder requirements• Marketplace and competitive factors

The following table presents a high-level view of the BusinessDrivers of NSPI that should impact the Awards System redesign.

Assets and Stakeholder Marketplace andCompetencies Requirements Competitive Factors

· Performance and ·NSPI members ·Other societies and theirinstructional technologies - International awards systems

- Domestic - ASTD

· Society infrastructure - ASQC- Headquarters staff ·Local chapters - Etc.- Volunteers

·NSPI committees ·Applications marketplace

·Membership expertise

·HPT community ·Research community- Standards bodies- University- Other societies- Etc.

·Press

·HPT customercommunity




Overview of NSPIProcesses

The Project Management Team's view of the NSPI processes ispresented in the following Macroprocess Map. The purpose forincluding this view is to show where in the overall view of thingsthe Awards System fits. Whether this view is subscribed to ornot, it will force the Design Team to deal with potential interfaceIssues.

The intent of the three-tier structure is to systematically map atop-down view of processes, instead of the typical bottom-upview, which often leaves gaps and overlaps.

This method of organization separates processes into threecategories.

• Leadership Processes - dri ve all processes.

• Product/Service Processes - consist of the mainstreamprocesses of the organization.

• Support Processes - serve and support the mainstreamprocesses.

Policy Operational Perfonnanceland 100- Planning - Results f- Continuous

Strategic and Measurement and ImprovementPlanning Budget Evaluation

Conferences

ChapterSupport

MemberSupport

TechnologySurveillance

andAssessment

Publications andHPT

Promotion

VolunteerRecruitment

andSupport

Production andInventoryof Staff

Staffingand

Elections

CommunicationPublic Relations!

Liaison

InformationManagement




Awards SystemInfrastructureOverview

In an effort to identify key requirement elements of the AwardsSystem infrastructure, SWI used its typical methodology ofsorting requirements into two categories.

• Human Resource Infrastructure Requirements• Environmental Resource Infrastructure Requirements

Human Resource Requirements - Human Resource requirementswithin an infrastructure include

• Knowledge• Skills• Attributes (physical, psychological)• Values

The human elements within the NSPI Awards System include

• Awards Team• Headquarters staff• Award finalists/winners• Evaluators• NSPI Board• Awards committee chair• Conference manager

Environmental Resource Requirements - The environmentalelements within the NSPI Awards System include

• Awards organization structure

• Information database- Results and feedback data- Submissions- Change records- Process Maps- Policies- Etc.

• Submissions resources sharing- Submissions materials- Evaluation records




LB. Awards System Overview, Continued

Awards SystemInfrastructureOverview,Continued

• Administrative manuals- Process Maps- Procedures- Policies- Etc.

• Instrument portfolio

• Forms

• News release and communication file

• Awards, certificates, plaques, etc.

ResultsMeasurementHierarchy

In order to determine the success of the Awards System, it isnecessary to establish a set of measures, determine thecomponent parts or dimensions of the measures, and establish themeans for obtaining the measures.

The following chart is the first draft of the Results MeasurementHierarchy that needs to be in place to measure the success of theAwards System.



)NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN

) )DESIGN DOCUMENT

Results Measurement Hierarchy (and Means)

Contribution to technology(Surveys and feedback forms) {

Process performance ~(Process measurement instruments~

HIT applicationHIT advancementProfessional and ethical standards applicationMembership development

NSPI MembersProcess rolesLocal chaptersNSPI committeesHIT communityPressHIT customer community

Awareness of awards processPerceived value to

• Winners • HIT• NSPI • Customers

Balance of categoriesAppropriateness and quality of criteriaLevel of cost and effort required

Stakeholder satisfaction(Surveys and feedback forms)

Financial performance(NSPI budget and accounting)

BenchmarkingProcess quality measuresProcess quantitative measuresCycle time

Revenue -[ Application fees

ObjectiveSale of materials

• Members• Evaluators and other roles

ExpenseBudget i

Awards processesEvaluator selection and trainingMarketing and publicityResults measurementAdministration




ResultsMeasurementHierarchy,Continued

We believe that the primary measures of the Award System'ssuccess are

• Contribution to Technology - this has four major dimensionsthat relate directly to the NSPI values and can be measuredthrough surveys and feedback forms.

• Stakeholder Satisfaction - this has five major dimensions andcan be measured by surveying and obtaining feedback fromthe appropriate stakeholders.

• Process Performance - this has four major dimensions thatmust be applied to each of the six processes within the AwardsSystem. The measurement instruments should be designed asa part of the detailed process design.

• Financial Performance - the revenues and costs associatedwith the Awards System should be tracked and evaluated.This can be done through the current NSPI budgeting andaccounting system.

An overall index of 100 points should be established, and each ofthe primary measures should be assigned a number of points thatreflect its relative value to the overall success of the system. Thisindex of points can be reviewed and changed annually as theAward System begins to achieve results.

This is, of course, only the framework for the ResultsMeasurement System. The final measures, means, and processesfor gathering and recording the data need to be developed indetail.



II. Awards System Processes

Introduction The detailed design of the Awards System processes was createdby the Project Management Team during a two-day designmeeting conducted January 6 and 7. These processes are listedbelow.

• Awards Marketing and Promotion Process• Nomination Process• Screening and Evaluation Process• Awards Governance Process• Awards Presentation Process• Evaluator Selection, Training, and Certification Process

Awards SystemProcess DesignOverview

The Awards System design includes, per process, detailed

• Process specifications• Process Maps• Output specifications

Process Specifications - the process specifications include thepurpose, inputs, outputs, and performance measures of theprocess.

Process Maps - the Process Map details the tasks, outputs, andresponsibilities involved in the process.

Output Specifications - the output specifications identify eachprocess output and its key content specifications and performancemeasures to which the output contributes.



II. Awards System Processes, Continued

Awards SystemRoles

The following matrix identifies the roles involved in each of theAwards System processes.

EvaluatorAwards Selection,

Marketing Screening Awards Awards Training,and Nomina- and Gover- Presenta- and

Promotion tion Evaluation nance tion Certifica-RoleslProcess Process Process Process Process Process tion

Process

NSPIBoard X - - X - -Awards Chair X - - X X -

Awards X - X X X XSubcommitteeChair

Headquarters Staff X X X X X X

Customers/ X - X - X -Winners

Nominee - X X - - -Nominator - X X - - -

Evaluator - - X - - X

Stakeholder - - - X - -



II.A. Awards Marketing and Promotion Process

ProcessSpecifications

Purpose - Provide awareness of the awards process, solicitnominations, provide recognition for winners, and supportgeneral marketing of NSPI.

Philosophies

• A stronger marketing and promotion process is required to- Promote NSPI.- Reinforce the values the Society places on the Awards

System.- Increase level of participation inside/outside the Society.- Increase return on investment for the applicants and their

organizations.

• A systematic continuous improvement process needs to beimplemented.

• There must be a focal point within the National Office (orsome other organization) to administer and continuouslyimprove the process.

• A process that delivers a consistent set of marketing andpromotional outputs year after year is needed.

Outputs

• Request for nominations/submissions

• Reprints of award-winning products (e.g., articles, etc.)

• Press releases to local papers, company communicationsdepartments, national magazines, and the press- Obligations of the winners for responding to requests for

information

• Articles in an annual publication dedicated to the awards andthe winners

• Articles about the award benchmarks




II.A. Awards Marketing and Promotion Process, Continued

ProcessSpecifications,Continued

Outputs, continued

• Articles about the winning products and project histories (howdid they do it, what was the situation, etc.)

• Publications used to promote the Society to executivemanagement of human resources and quality organizations

• Demonstrations and showcases (e.g., awards finalists track)

• Recognition for evaluators and their qualifications

• Awards system change notifications to stakeholders

• Award winners

• Award submissions

• Award categories and criteria

• Budget

• Stakeholders list and their requirements

• Feedback on the Awards System from the Awards GovernanceProcess

• Volunteers as assigned from the Awards Committee

Performance Measures

• Stakeholder awareness of system, processes, and criteria• Stakeholder - satisfaction with publicity• Awareness of access to Best Practices Resource Sharing• Recognition for NSPI Awards System process participants• Cost (dollars and time)• Cycle time• Number of nominations

Process Map The following Process Map describes the tasks, outputs, andresponsibilities in the Awards Marketing and Promotion Process.


) )

NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN

)

DESIGN DOCUMENT


Approvemarketing plan

.~";>;I"I~::';"""" "'>,,. ~';',.;.,,,,,111111111

.~1

J1

·1.-1

Inputmarketing

ideas11

. ·.)r.~. 1

. .. ··1

'...{:;F:~11

. ·11'..:1.,.".,,.,,.,.,,,., '.''-'-'-''''''''''''

Prepare and sendcall for

evaluatornominations

Prepare pressrelease for

awards nominationprocess

Prepare and sendcall for

nomination

Executemarketingactivities

1117/95 Page 3SWI • Svenson & Wallace. Inc.


ILA. Awards Marketing and Promotion Process, Continued

Process Outputs • Winner's track at conference*

• Press releases

• Human resources press invitations and interview/photoopportunities/press conference*

• Press kit*

• Expo display*

• Poster sessions

• Articles for Performance & Instruction *• Articles for News & Notes *

• Articles for sale

• Seminars for sale

• Letters to executives*

• Local chapter presentations*

• Articles for chapter newsletters

• Curriculum recommendations

* Indicates outputs recommended for use at the pilot of the redesignedAwards System.




OutputSpecifications

The output specifications below identify key contentspecifications of the Awards Marketing and Promotion Processoutputs and the measures to which the output contributes.

Output Name

Marketing Plan

Content Specifications

• Winner's track• Press conference

• Press kit• Expo display• Articles for P&! Journal• Articles for News & Notes• Letters to executives• Local chapter presentations

• Accountabilities- Time line

- Budget- Results tracking

Measures Contributed to• Contribution to technology• Stakeholder satisfaction

SWI· Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1117/95 PageS

---------------------------------------


II.B. Nomination Process


Purpose - Complete and forward nomination applications withdata sufficient for initial screening.

Philosophies

• The redesigned process needs to- Increase participation- Reduce the burden on the applicants

Outputs

• Completed Nomination Forms (per category)• Notice to nominees (if not nominator)• Agreement by nominees to compete (if not nominator)• Nomination statistics

• Publicity and requirements around nominating categories andNomination Process- Category definition- Criteria

• Nomination Forms per category



• Easy to use (cost and cycle time to nominator); easy tointerpret

• Enables objective, timely processing

Process Map The following Process Map describes the tasks, outputs, andresponsibilities in the Nomination Process.


) ) )


II.B. Nomination Process, ContinuedA = Completed application packageB = Nomination statistics

Sendrejection

:., .

Completeapplication

Package and sendapplications tosubcommittee

chairs

Preparenomination

statistics

®SWI • Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1/17/95 Page 2


II.B. Nomination Process, Continued


The output specifications below identify the key contentspecifications of the Nomination Process outputs and themeasures to which the output contributes.

Output NamePreliminary Nomination Form


• Nominee identification• Award category

• Work nominated- Description of work- Date of completion/publication

- For whom work was completed• Nominator identification• Award criteria• Nominator's assessment against criteria

Measures Contributed to• Number of nominations• Submissions on time (percentage)





OutputSpecifications,Continued

Output Name

Awards Application (for prescreening)


• Nominee identification• Award category

• Award criteria• Self-screening instrument• Application item inventory

- Verify availability of- Results data- Process data- Output data

• Time and cost to prepare

• Criteria-driven indications to which- A systematic process was used- Customer involvement occurred- Results were targeted (goals) and measured

Measures Contributed to

• Cost (to nominee)• Cycle time (nomination process)

• Number of submissions (by category)• Submission source percentage by source category (e.g., industry,

university, consultants, etc.)

Output Name

Nominee Notification

Content Specifications•,.Nomination form attached• Agreement conditions

• Rejection/acceptance check boxes• Reasons for not competing

Measures Contributed to• Number and percentage of rejections






Output Name

Nomination Statistics


• Number of nominations -- By award category

- By source category• Number of submissions and percentage of nominations

- By award category

- By source category• Application cost distribution (nominee and headquarters staff)

- By award category

- By source category• Percentage nominations and submissions on time

• Nomination process cycle time


(See content)

1117/95SWI· Svenson & Wallace, Inc. Page 5


II.C. Screening and Evaluation Process


Purpose - Select the winners of awards.

Philosophies

• The process needs to be consistent, clear, and efficient andneeds to include the continuous improvement of criteria andmeasurement technology.

• A clear statement of policy around norm- versus criteria-referenced assessment is needed.

Outputs

• Initial screening results

• Identified candidates who meet criteria (criterion referenced)

• Identified norm-referenced and best-in-class best entry (ifappropriate)

• Notifications and feedback to all nominees

• Notification to Awards Marketing and Promotion Process andAwards Presentation Process

• Completed nomination forms• Assessment criteria for award categories• Trained, certified evaluators• Volunteers as assigned from the Awards Committee• Submission packages




II.C. Screening and Evaluation Process, Continued

ProcessSpecifications,Continued


• Reliability and validity of assessment to the criteria

• Stakeholder perception of fairness

• User (nominee, publicity, and presentation) satisfaction withinformation outputs

• Cycle time

• Cost

Process Map The following Process Map describes the tasks, outputs, andresponsibilities in the Screening and Evaluation Process.



d application package~ II.C. Screening and Evaluation Process, Continued er award category

·1arketing and Promotion Process and Awards Presentation

SWI • Svenson & Wallace, Jnc.Page 3


II C. Screening and Evaluation Process, Continued


The output specifications below identify the key contentspecifications of the Screening and Evaluation Process outputsand the measures to which the output contributes.

Output Name

Requestfor Submission/Submission Package


• Feedback on prescreening results• Submissions package

- Instructions- Forms

• Submission items inventory• Criteria self-check instrument• Form for

- Purpose, objectives, scope, constraints

- Process data- Output data

- Results data (benefits and cost)• Cost and time to prepare submission (estimated)

- Nominee

- Customers• Nominee feedback• Marketing/promotion opportunity checklist

- Conference presentation- Press releases

- Etc.• Liability waiver and itemization of proprietary information

Measures Contributed to• Cost (to nominee)• Cycle time (various components)

• Percentage of candidates completing submission• Percentage of applicants passing prescreen

• Nominee satisfaction


SWI • Svenson & Wallace, Inc. Page 41/17/95




Output Name

Prescreen Failure Feedback


• Score on each criterion• Reviewer comments

• Feedback form (nominee satisfaction)


• Nominee satisfaction

"~"

Output Name

Evaluation Feedback to Nominee


• Score against each criterion• Evaluator comments

• Winner, not winner• Instructions for winners• Feedback form to collect nominee satisfaction data

Measures Contributed to• Cycle time• Stakeholder satisfaction• Number and percentage of submissions that win






Output Name

Best-in-Class Assessment Data


·Description of distinguishing characteristics (to be used in writingthe citation)

·Recommendations for criteria upgrades

·Reasons if no best-in-class winners were chosen


Output NameScreening and Evaluation Statistics


• Number of submissions• Percentage of applicants passing prescreen

• Percentage of prescreen passes who complete submission• Number and percentage of submissions that win

• Cost- Submission- Screening- Evaluation

• Cycle times• Nominee satisfaction data ,




II.D. Awards Governance Process


Purpose - Provide strategic and tactical direction, measurement,stakeholder satisfaction; conduct results measurement; andprovide continuous improvement.

Philosophies

• Categories need to fully support the new Awards System corevalues and reflect more Human Performance Technologyinterventions besides instructional technology.

• The process is a demonstration of the technologies and shouldbe recognized directly; the product is one type of evidence ofHuman Performance Technology/quality processes.

• Need to clarify the role/use of criteria-referenced and norm-referenced metrics per award category (this has recently beenaddressed by the NSPI Board).

Outputs

• Category list and definitions

• Criteria for evaluation per category- Outputs- Process- Results

• Data on best-in-class practices

• Evaluator certification criteria per award category

• Change system

• System audit results

• Results and evaluation data from all stakeholder groups(continuous evaluation)

• Awards policies

• Revisions to purpose and principles




II.D. Awards Governance Process, Continued

ProcessSpecifications,Continued • Benchmark data on award processes (external to NSPI)

• Benchmark data on best Human Performance Technologypractices (process not product)

• Classification of Human Performance Technology servicesand products

• Awards System values

• Feedback from stakeholders

• Change request forms



• Stakeholder requirements met• Cost• Cycle time• Perception of fairness• Alignment with values• Perception of true representation of best-in-class• Balance of categories (P and I)• Change requests addressed in a timely fashion• Changes implemented in a timely fashion

Process Map The following Process Map describes the tasks, outputs, andresponsibilities in the Awards Governance Process.

SWI' Svenson & Wallace, Inc. lI17/95 Page 2

NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGNDESIGN DOCUMENT

II.D. Awards Governance Process, ContinuedAwards Governance Subprocesses

• Operational Management• Results Measurement• Change Management

E = Financial Report

Developchange plan

Managechanges

Prepare andrecommend

awards budget

Page 3SWI • Svenson & Wallace, Inc.


J.D. Awards Governance Process, Continued


The output specifications below identify the key contentspecifications of the Awards Governance Process outputs and themeasures to which the output contributes.


• Revenue targets- Application fees- Sales of materials

• Expense targets- Awards paraphernalia- Marketing and promotion- Data processing- Mail and shipping

- Headquarters staff

Output Name

A wards Budget

Measures Contributed to• Financial results




..r---.... II.D. Awards Governance Process, Continued


".r--.. -,

Output Name

Results Report


• Compiled summaries (by award category trends over time)- Technology

- Stakeholder- Process performance- Financial performance

- Change requests


• Contribution to technology• Stakeholder satisfaction

• Process performance• Financial performance

Output NameSurveys


·Stakeholder satisfaction survey instruments (by all stakeholdersatisfaction dimensions)

·Contribution to technology survey instruments- HPT applications- HPT advancement- Professional and ethical standards application- Membership development


• Stakeholder satisfaction• Contribution to technology




.~- II.D. Awards Governance Process, Continued


Output Name

Change Plan


• Intended changes to- Policies

- Award categories and criteria- Processes- Roles- Metrics- Infrastructure

• Accountability

• Resources• Priorities

• Dates and deliverables


Output NameChange Request Form


·Requester

·Recommended change description

·Rationale for recommendation- Probable improvements driven by change- Consequences of not initiating the change

- Probable cost




II.E. Awards Presentation Process


Purpose - Provide formal announcement and recognition ofaward recipients.

Philosophies

• If criterion-referenced evaluation is used, need to decide if allapplicants meeting the criteria will receive an award!recognition or just the norm-referenced "best."

• The presentation of awards needs to be rationalized with therest of the conference and banq uet agenda.- To truly showcase the finalists and winners- Limit the discomfort of the participants

Outputs

• Award (plaques, certificates, letters, etc.)• Public announcements at the conference

• Identified winners

• Information on submissions from the Screening andEvaluation Process


Perfonnance Measures

• Visibility to maximum number of conference participants• Conference time consumed• Percentage of recipients present for presentation• Ability to exploit results during the conference• Cost of awards paraphernalia

Process Map The following Process Map describes the tasks, outputs, andresponsibilities in the Awards Presentation Process.



) )DESIGN DOCUMENT

ILE. Awards Presentation Process, Continued

Presentawards

paraphernalia

Readbest -in-cl ass

citation

'""

Receiveawards

Orderparaphernalia

Verifywinner

attendance

Brief/preparewinners

SWI • Svenson & Wallace, Inc. Page 21117/95


II.E. Awards Presentation Process, Continued


The output specifications below identify the key contentspecifications of the Awards Presentation Process outputs and themeasures to which the output contributes.

Output name

Winner Paraphernalia


• Framed best-in-class citation (with distinguishing features) andshipping carton

• Winner plaques




II.F. Evaluator Selection, Training, and Certification Process


Purpose - Select, train, and certify evaluators.

Philosophies

• There needs to be a systematic process for selecting, training,and certifying evaluators based on appropriate criteria for eachaward category.

Outputs

• Certified evaluators• Selection instruments• Training materials• Certification instruments• Certification/selection records

• Awards criteria per category• Evaluator criteria per category• Volunteers to serve as evaluator


• Validity and reliability of process to criteria• Perception of validity and reliability (quality of the evaluators)• Feedback from evaluators and evaluator candidates• Cost• Cycle time

Process Map The following Process Map describes the tasks, outputs, andresponsibilities in the Evaluator Selection, Training, andCertification Process.

SWI· Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1117/95 Page I


)

DESIGN DOCUMENT

,r,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,, ,: •............ :'~,~, •• P,~pp,p",,~.,~,.J

II.F. Evaluator Selection, Training, and Certification Process, Continued

Screenapplications

Preparefeedback toapplicants

Selectevaluatorsfor training

Sendevaluatormanuals

,,,,,,,:- ,;":::.,

rr,,,

ReceiveTraining

Train/certifyevaluators

Select expert!senior evaluator(three-year term)

Issuecerti ficates

Issue seniorevaluator

certificates





The output specifications below identify the key contentspecifications of the Evaluator Selection, Training, andCertification Process outputs and the measures to which theoutput contributes.

Output Name

Evaluator Nomination Form


• Name• Award category

• Credentials• Experience• Selection criteria and self-rating against criteria

• References• List of available work samples• Commitment statement


• Number of candidates- By award category- By source category (consultant, education, industry, subsector)






/r--....."

Output Name

Evaluator Manuals


• Awards program overview• Evaluator Selection, Training, and Certification Process and rules

- Evaluator- Senior evaluator- Subcommittee Chair

• Evaluation process- Procedures, rules, philosophy- Award criteria and interpretive material

- Case example(s)- Blank forms

• Blank feedback forms- Time and cost- Opinion

• Change process- Procedures- Philosophy

- Forms


Output NameEvaluator Training Material


• Case study, centering exercise (to increase reliability of evaluatorscoring against award criteria)


• Evaluation reliability data






Output Name

Evaluator Certification Record


(Application content)• Reference data• Assessment against selection criteria• Centering scores on training case• Feedback from other evaluators

- Timeliness- Usability of comments

• Scoring statistics

• Evaluator status and dates- Candidate

- Evaluator- Senior evaluator- Chair

Measures Contributed to• Reliability data• Percentage of applicants who pass certification

1117/95 Page 5SWI' Svenson & Wallace, Inc.


III. Awards System Infrastructure Specifications

Introduction The following pages identify specifications for key requirementelements of the Awards System infrastructure, including

• Awards organizational structure• Information database• Information/resource sharing• Administrative manuals• Instrument portfolios

AwardsOrganizationStructure

The Awards Organization Structure is presented in the followinggraphic.



) )DESIGN DOCUMENT

III. Awards System Infrastructure Specifications, Continued

Awards Organization Structure

NSPI Board

Awards Chair HeadquartersStaff

SubcommitteeChair

SubcommitteeChair

Evaluators andSenior Evaluators


Subco mmi tteeChair

SubcommitteeChair

SubcommitteeChair

SubcommitteeChair

SubcommitteeChair






• P &1 article I • Research project I • HPT system I • Performance aid I • Academic I . Internal HPT I • Chapter of meritcurriculum deployment

• PIQ article I • Student research I • New systematic • Instructionalapplication product! I . Public I · Technology

·HPT I I intervention curriculum transfercommunication


NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN---------------------------------------DESIGN DOCUMENT


InformationDatabase

There is a great opportunity to keep an institutional history ofbest practices illustrated by the awards process as well ascontinuously improve the process and keep it germane to changeswithin our industry. A necessary element for capturing andproviding ready, timely access to this information is aninformation database.

This database will collect data on such operational issues as cycletimes of various parts of the process, qualification levels ofspecific evaluators, a pool of qualified evaluators, and changemanagement data, as well as nominees, winners, and best-in-classwinners for each award. This database should be kept up-to-dateand used as a process management tool for continuity in thefuture.

The design and maintenance of this database is critical to thecontinuity of and will reduce the overhead of managing theawards process. It should be created in a software medium that iseasily maintained, and it should be documented and managed toreduce the impact of future modification that might take place.

Information!Resource Sharing

Using the awards process, NSPI has the opportunity to advanceHuman Performance Technologies (HPT) and help in theprofessional development of our members by facilitating thesharing of best practices in the award categories. Truly, one ofthe awards process opportunities is to facilitate communicationand sharing of "best practices" information among and withinorganizations of all types based upon a common understanding ofHPT. The award nomination and recognition process will collectdata on specific successful processes, interventions, andtechniques used by the winners. By sharing the informationcollected and focused by the process, NSPI contributes toimprovement of all its members.

Each winner will have an opportunity to share their winningtechniques with members of the Society. Suggestedopportunities would include a winner's track at the nationalconference, press releases and publication of the actual awardpresentations, and reprints of articles available through NSPIheadquarters. This resource sharing, in addition to helpingreward the winners, will publicize current "best practices" usedin HPT throughout the Society.





Information!Resource Sharing,Continued

The coordination of the resource sharing should be performed bythe headquarters staff. While much of the sharing will take placeduring the conference, winners are likely to be approached by themembership to help them understand the application in themembers' own environment. The availability of reprintedmaterial could also be a revenue-generating device for NSPI.

AdministrativeManuals

Five roles within the Awards System require administrativemanuals.

• NSPI Board• Awards chair• Subcommittee chair• Evaluator• Headquarters staff

Headquarters StaffEvaluator

Subcommittee ChairAwards ChairNSPl Board

Adrninistrati veManuals

The manuals will include appropriate content for their respectiverole, such as

• Awards System overview- Awards System purpose- Awards System values- Award categories- The context of the Awards System in NSPI processes





AdministrativeManuals,Continued

• Awards System overview, continued- Award System architecture

Business drivers- Performance measures

ProcessesInfrastructure

• Process Maps

• Procedures (linked to Process Maps and roles)

• Forms and job aids

Manual Structure - Not all roles (e.g., nominee) require all of thesame information, but many roles share information needs. Themanuals should be designed with a modular structure so thatchanges are easy to manage.

InstrumentPortfolio

An instrument portfolio will be developed for each award toinclude the documents needed for evaluation of the nominationsby the evaluators. This portfolio will include such items as

• Qualification and analysis criteria for each award

• Checklists to be used by the evaluators during the review andsconng process

• Data collection instruments for the evaluator's portion of theanalysis for capturing of cycle time and process improvementdata

While the types of instruments in each portfolio may be similar,there will be a separate portfolio for each specific award. A copyof this portfolio will be sent to each evaluator for eachapplication to be scored.



IV. Awards System Development and Pilot Plan

Awards SystemDevelopment andPilot Plan ProcessMap

The Process Map on the following page identifies thedevelopment and pilot activities for Phase 5 and Phase 6 of theNSPI Awards System Redesign Project.



IV. Awards System Development and Pilot Plan, Continued

Process OutputsDevelopmentChart

The following charts identify the key outputs to be developed andused in the redesigned NSPI Awards System. The charts includekey information required for the development of each of theoutputs, including

• Development priority• Type of document• Skills required for development• Potential development sources


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---

NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN

IV. Awards System Development and Pilot Plan, Continued

Prepareprepublicity

Developevaluatorselection

instruments

Develop awardevaluationinstruments

Develop resultsmeasurementinstruments

Developevaluatortraining

Developadministrative

manuals

SWI • Svenson & Wallace, Inc. 1117/95

DESIGN DOCUMENT

·····················1

Recruit andselect

evaluators

Call fornominations

Plan 1996.••. conference events

and materials

Trainevaluators

Evaluatesubmissions

Page 2

1996conferenceactivities


IV. Process Outputs Development, Continued

PotentialDev. Development Development

Priority Outputs Type Skills Required Sources Notes

0 • Preliminary nomination form • Form • Form design • SWI (GWW)

0 • Awards application • Form • Form design • SWI (GWW)

0 • Nominee notification • Form letter • SWI (KMW)

• Nomination statistics • Information • Information • SWI (JPS)system output system

• Statistics • SWI (MEP)

0 • Request for submissions/submission · Form • Form design • SWI (GWW)package

0 • Prescreen failure feedback • Form letter • SWI (KMW)

0 • Evaluation feedback to nominee • Form letter • SWI (KMW)- Win/not

• Best-in-class assessment data • Form • Form design • SWI (GWW)

• Screening and evaluation statistics • Information • Information • SWI (JPS)system output system

• Statistics • SWI (MEP)

KeyDeyelopment Priorityo = Development is required before 1996 conference*: = Development is required before 1995 conference

SWI • Svenson & Wallace. Inc. 1117/95 Page 4





• Award ceremony paraphernalia • Graphic design • SWI (MNQ)- Certificates/citations/plaques/etc.

0 • Evaluator nomination form • Form • Form design • SWI (GWW)

0 • Evaluator manual (Training • Self-paced • Training • TBD • Carol Valeri's teamModules) training and development • SWI (SME)

information

0 • Evaluator (group-paced) training ·Group-paced • Training • TBDtraining development • SWl (SME)

0 • Evaluator certification record • Form • Form design • SWl (GWW)

0 • Evaluator certificate • Graphic design • SWI (MNQ)

"* • Awards budget • Financial • SWI (KMW/DGP)

• Surveys • Survey design • TBD

0 • Results report • Forms (templated) • SWI

• Change plan • Report • SWl

• Change request form · Form • Form design • SWI

KeyDeyelopment Priorityo = Development is required before 1996 conference"* = Development is required before 1995 conference

SWI • Svenson & Wallace.Tnc. 1117/95 Page 5

) )NSPI AWARDS SYSTEM REDESIGN DESIGN DOCUMENT




0 • Administrative manual • Training and • Training • TED- Headquarters staff information

0 • Administrative manual ·Training and • Training • TED- Awards System chair, information

0 • Administrative manual • Training and • Training • TED- Awards subcommittee chair information

(Category)

• Market plan · Report ·Marketing/ • TEDpromotion

• List of marketing/promotional ·Miscellaneous ·Ma,,\i:el!ing/ , e. TEn,outputs promotional items promotion ,- Winner's track at conference- Press kit- Press conference- Expo display- Articles for P&!- Articles for News & Notes- Letters to executives- Local chapter presentations

* • Award criteria . Carol Valen' sTeam

KeyDeyelopment Priorityo ::;Development is required before 1996 conference"* ::;.Development is required before 1995 conference

-..•... "-' - ~.... .. . -.~

1117/95 Pag~6'

Design Document - EPPIC · 2011. 12. 30. · Design Document January 17,1995 The Awards Marketing...

Documents

Transcript of Design Document - EPPIC · 2011. 12. 30. · Design Document January 17,1995 The Awards Marketing...