by Darlene M. Van Tiem

Training and Performance Technology work appears to be very similar and so the differences may not be noticable at first.

by Sheila E. Murphy

Over the past decade, partnering among organizations has emerged as a primary expectation for effective service delivery. Organizations as diverse as municipal governments; small, medium and large private-sector firms; universities; school districts; and more are linking with other entities to deliver an enhanced product or service. Partnership embodies valuable principles, by providing a means of:

• Meshing diverse interests and representing different sectors of the community
• Deploying resources creatively
• Redefining each partnering agency toward a sharper and more precise service delivery

The performance consultant has a major role to play in adding value to the partnering process. In particular, the performance consultant can facilitate the process of designing a partnership, even one of relatively short duration, to achieve a particular purpose by mapping and tracking the partnership. This can be accomplished by posing and answering several key questions:

Structuring the Partnership

• What is the specific community and/or business need that inspired the partnership?
• To what extent are the partnering agencies in alignment regarding project goals and objectives?
• What fiscal, human, or physical resources does each entity propose to contribute?
• What specific financial arrangements need to be made to uphold the partnership? Who will pay for what? Who will monitor revenues and expenses?
• What gaps still appear to exist in the service deliverable, even given the projected resource expansion that results from partnering?
• What, if any, additional agencies should be added to the partnership to fill these gaps?

Implementing the Partnership

• How do partnering agencies propose to establish and maintain clear and open lines of communication before, during, and after the service delivery that they will jointly provide?
• What measures for course correction will be used to ensure that agencies deliver their services on time, according to quality standards agreed upon, and in a cost-effective manner?
• What will be done to ensure that the service being provided to clients is transparent, given the different sources of contribution and activity from partnering providers?

Assessing the Partnership

• How does partnering impact each of the participating organizational entities?
• How does partnering impact the quality of the deliverables that clients receive? Is it better, the same, or worse?
• What adjustments need to be made along the way and following service delivery to clients, to ensure value both for clients and for partnering agencies?

An effective partnership is capable of providing enhanced value to clients and participating organizations alike. The wise use of resources and the alteration of organizational definition ultimately comprise a creative act that is potentially transformative to partnering organizations. Calculating the risks and participating in a value-producing partnership can create worth, even wealth, through mapping and tracking shared commitments and activity.

Sheila E. Murphy, PhD is President of Sheila Murphy Associates, a consulting firm specializing in organizational analysis and performance and program evaluation. She may be reached at shemurph@cox.net.

by David Creelman

David (Daud) Creelman is a Knowledge Manager at HR.com. He has 10 years of experience working for major international consultancies both in North America and Asia. He is a regular speaker at HR conferences and has published many articles on management issues. Prior to working in HR, David worked in Finance and IT. He has an MBA and an Hons BSc in Biochemistry and Chemistry. David may be reached at dcreelman@hr.com.

by Timm J. Esque

I know what you’re thinking—hasn’t someone already done that? Yes, I’m well aware of Robert Gagne’s classic, The Conditions of Learning, first published in 1965 (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.). That book, and a number of other classics on learning theory and instructional development, taught me most of what I knew about instruction as I began my training career around 1981. Some of the key principles from those works are no doubt so etched into my gray matter that I apply them, as needed, without even thinking about them.

In the early 1990s, after wrestling with a number of barriers, I transitioned from a focus on learning and training to a focus on individual and organizational performance. Since then I’ve focused mostly on a different set of issues and principles. However, I think I’ve also learned a few things about learning that I didn’t understand before. If I were to summarize today what I think are the conditions for learning, I’d have to say the three most important conditions or principles are:

• respecting the learner’s commitment,
• tapping into the learner’s self-management system, and
• recognizing that successful performers are hungry learners.

Making an Impact (CEP Press in cooperation with ISPI, 2001) was recently awarded the 2002 ISPI Award of Excellence for Outstanding Instructional Communication and is Timm Esque’s third book. Timm was an internal performance consultant at Intel Corp. for five years before becoming an independent performance consultant in 1998. He is very interested in generating reliable feedback about his new book. Timm may be reached at Tjesque@yahoo.com.

Wouldn’t it be ideal if every trainee were personally and fully committed to the training objectives at hand?

by Ann W. Parkman

In order to do a good job of evaluation at the end, it’s important to lay the right groundwork from the beginning. Conducting up-front analysis before engaging in a training or performance improvement solution offers a number of benefits:

• It ensures that the projects you undertake will have real value.
• It forces you to clarify your goals in terms of the business results you want to impact and the job performance changes you need to make.
• It ensures that the solutions you implement are based on data, not intuition.
• It helps to secure needed buy-in from key stakeholders, who will be instrumental in helping you complete your analysis.
• It provides meaningful data for use in comparing pre- and post-intervention performance.
• It enhances the credibility of your results.

Linking Analysis with Evaluation
There are five generally accepted levels of evaluation. These include Kirkpatrick’s four evaluation levels—reaction, learning, job application, and business impact—and Jack J. Phillips’ fifth level—ROI. Similarly, there are five levels of analysis that link directly to each level of evaluation.

1. Feasibility Analysis
A feasibility analysis answers the critical question: Are the benefits of the solution likely to outweigh the costs? It is particularly useful when: a) a lack of consensus exists over whether or not to undertake a performance improvement effort, or b) a project is likely to be very expensive. Calculating the anticipated ROI can help you justify moving forward with a proposed solution. It also provides a measuring stick to help you determine whether actual ROI meets expectations (Level 5 evaluation).

2. Business Needs Analysis
Before proceeding with a performance improvement solution, determine what unmet business needs your solution is designed to impact (such as reducing cycle time or increasing service levels). Quantifying these business needs upfront will give you a solid baseline upon which to conduct Level 4 evaluation of the post-intervention business impact.

3. Job Performance Analysis
Job performance analysis measures actual job performance to specific performance standards. Recording the performance gaps upfront will give you a tangible way to determine whether post-intervention performance has improved, and to what degree (Level 3 evaluation).

4. Learning Needs Analysis
Assuming the performance problem is due to a skill or knowledge deficiency, learning needs analysis will help you determine precisely what people need to learn in order to perform their jobs proficiently. These findings form the basis for specific learning objectives. This, in turn, allows you to determine if learners have successfully mastered what you set out to teach them (thereby satisfying the criteria for Level 2 evaluation).

5. Preferences Analysis
While preferences should not drive any solution, being sensitive to the needs of both performers and managers is an important part of designing a program that will fit your target audience’s work environment and management’s time/resource constraints. While it isn’t essential to perform this type of analysis in order to conduct Level 1 evaluation, considering and accommodating preferences can improve learner reactions to the training program overall.

Some training professionals may be reluctant, even afraid, to conduct comprehensive evaluation, particularly at Levels 3-5, because of what the results may or may not show. But by starting off with comprehensive analysis, you can maximize your chances of achieving positive and credible bottom-line results.

Ann W. Parkman is Executive Vice President, Managing Partner, and co-founder of The Center for Effective Performance. She is also past president of ISPI. Ann may be reached at aparkman@cepworldwide.com.

My coffee gone, I bundled my books and headed out the door toward London’s underground—its subway called the Tube—and, ultimately, the offices in Soho near Piccadilly Circus. They will probably expect me to come up with a Big, Bold, Wild Idea at the meeting today, I thought, which was why I carried these two books. Gilbert’s process helps me engineer solutions; Kerouac’s soulful fluidity sparks my creative side.

As I walked down the stairs of the Bond St. Station, I thought that what life needed was a store where we could call up and order one Big, Bold, Wild Idea. A store where we could talk to someone who understood what we were going through and who could give some objective review of how we were doing and maybe point out what we were missing.

At the store, I’d want to find a place where I could just come in out of the cold and talk to someone about what I was doing out there. Maybe a superficial conversation about something new or a deeper conversation about older things that I’ve let rust. I want these conversations to be passionate Kerouac conversations that stream through the work I’m doing, free from the need to prove my own brilliance, free from evaluation, sparked by the desire to learn more about my work and clarify my own thoughts. I want a store where I can do that.

I want a store that’s available around the world, where I could take my team away from the day-to-day to simply walk about the wilderness of alternatives that could free us from having to do things that same old, same old way. I want that store here in London where I could take these clients, and back in Seattle where I could take those clients. I want a place where I could recharge in Detroit and trade stories in Chicago.

I boarded the subway train, heading for Piccadilly. I work for a software company and the store idea sounds good, but limited. I’d want the store to have online accessibility. I need a site where I can come inside to chat with peers, find something that will trigger a Big, Bold, Wild Idea. I want to hear how other organizations surfaced their issues, how they solved them, how they knew that they were solved. I want a store where I can say easily, “I hadn’t thought of that” and come away with a basket of hope.

Maybe I could walk the online aisles and find training that would turn my partners into educated partners, turn me into something great, or generate a path that takes me somewhere I cannot foresee today. Two aisles over, they might house job opportunities around the world where the store’s clients could push their careers in a bold manner.

In this virtual store, there would be articles and debates and book reviews where I could come in from the cold and warm myself in radiant energy.

Each year, the store would hold its Annual Giveaway. They would put up a tent and give away those Big, Bold, Wild Ideas to whoever came by. All you could grab and cart away, there for the taking. This year in Dallas, next year in Boston, people would come and invigorate themselves in waters of renewal and leave with ideas buzzing so thickly that they would have to wipe their eyes just to see.

The Annual Giveaway would be so well known for its Big, Bold, Wild Ideas that it would come to be viewed as something of an intellectual spa. People would know that good ideas, well executed, positively impact organizations, and they would come to the store not to hide away from terrorists and recessions and competition, but to strengthen themselves against such influences.

The train slowed, stopped, and the doors burst open to the Piccadilly Station. I thought about the store and realized that I was singing the praises of ISPI, its chapters, its online components, and its upcoming International Performance Improvement Conference & Expo in Dallas. I turned away from the Circus and its statues toward the back streets of Soho and thought only of the warming morning halls of the Annual Conference in April and the Big, Bold, Wild Ideas being given away therein.

by Barbara Gough, 2002 Conference Program Chair

• Give you the opportunity to meet others
• Share your experiences
• Host a table to learn from others about a topic you want to talk-about
• Learn what has worked or not worked in other organizations
• Interact with your peers
• Develop a professional network

It’s very simple to host a talk-about table. Unlike the concurrent sessions, you do not have to apply to host a talk-about table. Nor are you expected to provide any materials or make a formal presentation. ISPI will provide a sign-up board and a special section in the Exposition Hall for talk-about conversations to take place. And the really neat thing is that the talk-about’s can be held at any time during the conference.

Here’s how it will work. Let’s say you want to host a talk-about session. All you would have to do is pick the time you would like to meet with others, pick your topic, put your name, topic, and time you would like to meet on the sign-up board and show up at the talk-about conversation area at that time. When you arrive, find a table, write the topic you want to discuss on the place cards you’ll find conveniently located on each table, and encourage others to join you for lively conversation. You can also check the sign-up board for messages that others have left you about the talk-about session.

Remember, the idea is to share what you have done, what you would like to do, lessons learned, things you would do differently, or whatever you want to talk about. The key here is sharing information, not presentation.

And just to give you a preview, Carl Binder, Richard Clark, Judy Hale, and Jim Hill will be hosting talk-about tables. This is your opportunity to sit and talk to some influential people in our industry and share what you have been doing. So plan on joining us at a talk-about session at this year’s ISPI conference. Register today!

by Benson Smith and Tony Rutigliano

After a recent presentation to sales professionals, a national sales trainer for a very large organization questioned us about our comments on sales training. “I was surprised that you appear so negative on training,” he said, “and I’m puzzled about your attitude. What gives?”

His comment and question touched on a controversial point. After all, how can training be bad? Of course, the real question is not whether training is bad or good, but whether it is effective. Do salespeople get better at selling because of additional training? Do companies get their money’s worth when they invest in training programs? In many instances where we have observed training efforts, the results have been disappointing.

When we say “results,” we’re talking about improved performance rather than verbal endorsements from those who have been trained. It’s not unusual to have people leave a training program and express very positive reactions to the session. But will their performance get any better as result?

Up-close Observations
In many occupations, training is an essential ingredient. You wouldn’t want to have your house designed by an “intuitive” architect who has no training. Nor would you entrust your medical care to a “natural-born” surgeon with a flair for operating, but no medical schooling. We take assurance in well-trained pilots, carpenters, computer specialists, accountants, and dozens of other occupations. Shouldn’t training be just as important for sales professionals? Well, according to our research, “it ain’t necessarily so.”

A few years ago we observed a direct sales organization. Every newly hired salesperson attended an extensive training program to learn about the company’s products. These new hires were also put through a course on how to sell. The course focused on crucial parts of the sales presentation, especially a section that involved asking the prospect some very pointed questions. These questions essentially asked prospective customers if they would make a decision one way or the other at the conclusion of the presentation. During the training program, the sales representatives rehearsed this section again and again until they knew it word for word.

Yet once they were out on sales calls, almost eight out of 10 representatives were unable to ask these questions in front of a real, live customer. Yes, the training was effective for 20 percent of the sales force, but for the remaining 80 percent, it was a waste of time, energy, and money. Teaching people how to sell only seems effective when people have the talent to sell in the first place.

What about advanced training for more experienced sales forces? Have we seen better results in those cases? Not much!

From our vantage point, we’ve observed a great many training programs as they were instituted in a number of different companies. These training programs tended to focus on selling skills, such as probing, prospecting, or closing. In some instances the programs presented a completely new approach to selling, such as consultative selling, or some other fad-of-the-month program.

From our observations, we’ve concluded that the individuals who benefit most from training are those who already excel at their job. As performance levels rise, so do the benefits we see from training. And as performance levels go down, the positive impact of training diminishes.

When we have evaluated post-training productivity, we find that half of the people who were trained—the bottom half—showed no performance improvement. The money spent to train low-end performers was completely wasted. Yet many companies pour a majority of their limited resources into training the poorest performers. The initial response to these programs may be quite enthusiastic, and often times there is a spike in improvement. But this spike is usually short-lived, and before long, old performance patterns re-establish themselves.

Perhaps you may think these examples are just from poorly designed training programs. Some of them probably are. However, we have seen the same pattern over and over. The better the salesperson performs, the more likely he or she is to benefit from training. The worse he or she performs, the lower the benefit is from training.

Explanation
Why is this true? Our observation is that training programs often try to teach the wrong things, or they try to teach the right things to the wrong people.

In many cases, companies design training programs by studying what the best employees do and how they do it. Companies then build training that attempts to get everyone else to do exactly the same thing. While this seems logical, the problem is that the people at the bottom of the heap will never attain the same level of success as the best employees because they do not have the necessary talents. For salespeople in particular, success in generating sales and developing customer loyalty does not come from training them to read the right script exactly the same way on every sales call.

The best salespeople gained the most from training, because their existing and constructive patterns of dealing with customers were reinforced. They were encouraged to do more of what they already did well. But most training programs are not designed around the needs of the best performers. Best performers need individual coaching that is built around their talents and strengths. What are the talents they have to influence customers, build relationships, and solve customer problems? How can they enhance their selling style by using their talents more effectively?

On the other hand, poor performers usually don’t benefit substantially from additional training. Yet in many organizations, poor performance is what qualifies a person to receive additional training.

Look around your own organization, and you may find that the worst speakers are the ones who have been sent to speaking classes. The worst closers in your organization have been sent to a program on closing techniques. Or more typically, everyone in the sales organization has been put through the same training program, while management assumes they will all benefit equally.

Of course, training and development are important aspects of improving job performance. We put on many training and development programs each year ourselves. If you are the manager in charge of this important function in your organization, here are some questions you should ask yourself:

• Are you spending more to train your best people, or do you train everybody equally?
• Are you reinforcing good performance with training, or using training to prop up poor performers?
• Are you tracking the results of your training efforts, or are you satisfied as long as people tell you how good it was and how much they liked it?
• Are you building on an individual’s strengths, or are you training to create cookie-cutter images of what you think successful performance looks like?

The answers to these questions can help you assess how much your training efforts will contribute to the bottom line. When approached correctly, training should be an investment that produces measurable and tangible results, not simply an expense that makes people feel good for a while.

Benson Smith is a consultant, speaker, and author for The Gallup Organization and an expert in the area of sales force effectiveness. Smith consults with sales executives on ways to improve the performance of their organization and increase the productivity and retention of their sales force. He joined Gallup after a 25-year career with a Fortune 500 corporation specializing in medical devices, where he served as President and Chief Operating Officer.

Tony Rutigliano is a Senior Managing Consultant, speaker, and author for The Gallup Organization. He is an expert in the areas of sales force effectiveness, organizational effectiveness, and talent assessment. Before joining Gallup, Rutigliano was Publisher and Editor in Chief of Sales & Marketing Management magazine and an executive at the American Management Association.

NOTE: Copyright © 2002 The Gallup Organization, Princeton, NJ. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission. Visit The Gallup Management Journal at www.gallupjournal.com or www.gallup.com.

by Steven W. Villachica

To determine how experts organize their knowledge of Human Performance Technology (HPT), the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI) and DLS Group supported a study conducted by the HPT Research Group. Of the 73 people that provided complete data sets, 21 individuals were identified as experts. Their responses were averaged together for subsequent analysis. Using the Pathfinder software, the HPT Research Group created a concept map depicting a statistically derived, “averaged expert’s” cognitive organization of HPT.

The key concept in the map is represented by results, which is linked to four other branches (sets) of concepts: ISD, HPT, Business Case, and Workplace Organization/Human Capital.

• ISD: The first branch of concepts contains the terms learning theory, ISD, needs analysis, job and task analysis, systematic, measurement, evaluation, and feedback. The organization of these concepts indicates that experts employ ISD and its related components to obtain results.
• HPT: The second branch of concepts related to results contains the terms goals, change management, motivation, performance barriers, cause analysis, performance support, and interventions. These terms form the basis of HPT theory and reflect its behavioral roots. The organization of these concepts indicates that experts employ HPT theory to obtain results.
• Business Case: A third branch of concepts related to results contains the terms Return on Investment, business case, and requirements analysis. Experts use requirements analysis to build business cases from which they can predict a return on investment that quantifies obtained results. The organization of these items indicates that experts employ business-related measures to obtain results.
• Workplace Organization/Human Capital: A fourth branch of concepts related to results is more complex and consists of two separate subsets. The first subset consists of the terms outputs, inputs, conditions, work organization, and systemic. Systemically accounting for workplace organization, experts assess the conditions of performance, their inputs, and their outputs in determining performance results. It is also important to note that workplace organization is also linked to business case, indicating that experts use the context of the workplace to create such cases. The second subset consists of the terms information, resources, human capital, competencies, individual and team workers, and collaboration. The organization of these terms indicates that collaboration among individual and team workers builds human capital, which can be described in terms of competencies. Human capital is linked to resources. Information about resources allows resources to be used as inputs to performance, which ultimately leads to outputs and results.

HPT practitioners can use this concept map in a variety of ways:

• As an informational tool introducing HPT to new practitioners at ISPI conferences, students in universities, and readers of the HPT literature.
• As a learning activity in which learners would write their own descriptions of the links that relate concepts.
• As an assessment tool supplementing the results of multiple-choice tests, essay tests, and performance tests.
• As a research tool for investigating the link between the organization of experts’ knowledge of HPT and the performance of HPT itself.

The HPT Research Group will describes this study and its results at the 2002 International Performance Improvement Conference & Expo in Dallas, Texas: “Picturing Expertise: Results of a Cognitive Study of HPT” on Tuesday, April 23, from 1:30-3:00 pm. Register today!

Steven W. Villachica and Linda L. Lohr are principal co-investigators at the HPT Research Group. Steve is Chief Learning Officer of DLS Group, Inc. In addition to serving on a number of ISPI committees, he is a frequent author and presenter on issues related to HPT, PSS, and cognitive task analysis. Steve may be reached at SVillachica@dls.com. Linda Lohr is an Assistant Professor in the Educational Technology department of the University of Northern Colorado. She is currently writing a textbook for Prentice-Hall entitled Designing Graphics for Learning and Performance: Lessons in Visual Literacy. Linda may be reached at Linda.Lohr@unco.edu.

 

The International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI) is always looking for new and better ways to provide valuable services to our members. One of these services is the annual ISPI Job Fair. Last year we made the transition from a simple on-site job board to recruiters manning tables inside the fair, making connections with candidates. In this employment market, you need all the connections you can get. Use your best career connection, the ISPI Job Fair at the 2002 International Performance Improvement Conference & Expo.

Last year, we had a dozen companies recruiting on site at the Job Fair, meeting candidates, and accepting resumes. This year, we look forward to increased participation among companies, as well as offering more options for employers and candidates. New amenities will include access to an interview room (available on a first come, first serve basis for participating employers), pre-conference promotion of your company in the conference program, and an on-site resume collection service. In addition to these amenities, table space will be available for rent inside the Job Fair. The Job Fair will be conveniently located inside the Exposition Hall at the ISPI 2002 International Performance Improvement Conference & Expo, April 21-25 in Dallas, Texas.

For more information on participating in the ISPI Job Fair contact ISPI by telephone at 301.587.8570 or by email at elizabeth@ispi.org.

Performance Improvement Quarterly (PIQ), one of the most highly respected journals in the field of Human Performance Technology (HPT), proudly announces the selection of new co-editors Michael F. Cassidy and Karen L. Medsker. Beginning in the spring, they will continue the tradition of excellence established by Peter Dean, who has held the position for the past six years.

Michael F. Cassidy, PhD is a tenured Professor in the School of Business at Marymount University, Arlington, Virginia, where he teaches graduate courses in areas including performance analysis, research and evaluation, statistics, and group facilitation and problem solving. He is also Principal, Performance Improvement Services, which specializes in measurement and management consulting services.

He has more than 25 years professional experience in data collection and measurement with emphasis in survey research and statistical analysis; group design and facilitation; organizational diagnosis and performance improvement; and training design and delivery. He has worked with senior and middle management and workforce teams in strategic and program planning; process analysis and improvement; developing measurement and evaluation systems; statistical modeling; customer needs and satisfaction research; diagnosing and improving human resource systems; diversity; and group decision making.

Michael’s current research is focused on several areas, including the measurement of social capital in organizational settings and its impact on intra-organizational learning, productivity, and employee satisfaction; diversity, domestic violence, and ethics.

Michael holds a BA from Manhattan College; a BFA from California Institute of the Arts; an MS from the University of Southern California; and a PhD from Indiana University. He has published extensively and is a frequent presenter at professional conferences.

Karen L. Medsker, PhD is Professor and Chair of the Human Resources Department at Marymount University, where she teaches courses in performance analysis and improvement strategies, instructional design, instructional delivery systems, and evaluation. She is also President of Human Performance Systems, Inc., a consulting firm that specializes in design and development of human resources interventions and intelligent computer-based systems to enhance individual, group, and organizational performance.

Karen earned her PhD in instructional systems from Florida State University, then worked as an instructional technologist and course development supervisor for AT&T Bell Laboratories in New Jersey. Later she was Director of Instructional Development at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis. Since 1988, she has been a professor at Marymount and has consulted regularly with businesses and government agencies.

Dr. Medsker is the author of numerous articles and book chapters on training and performance improvement topics. Her most recent book, Models and Strategies for Training Design was co-authored with Kristina Holdsworth and published by the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI) in 2001. In 1996, she co-authored The Conditions of Learning: Training Applications with Robert M. Gagne. She is currently working with her co-editor Michael Cassidy on new model to diagnose organizational performance needs, using both performance technology and organization development concepts. She has held several leadership positions at the local and international levels in ISPI and is currently on the editorial board of PIQ. She is active in the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD), most recently as a member of the Research Committee.

Performance Improvement Quarterly is published by the Learning Systems Institute of Florida State University (FSU) in cooperation with ISPI and is currently in its 15th year of publication. The goal of this peer-reviewed journal is to stimulate professional discussion in and to advance the discipline of performance technology through the publication of scholarly works. PIQ emphasizes original work involving technologies such as analysis or evaluation as well as interventions such as motivation, personnel selection, instruction/training, performance aids, or performance guidance.

In celebration of PIQ’s “15 Years of Excellence,” ISPI is offering readers an opportunity to view an issue of PIQ, for FREE! You may access the table of contents and PDF files of the articles by clicking the following link: http://www.ispi.org/other/piq.htm. This will give you a chance to see for yourself why you can’t miss another issue of this publication. Order your copy today!

Over the past few months, U.S. Coast Guard Master Chief Petty Officer Vince W. Patton, III has been sighted at various events around the world. In November 2001, he traveled along with his counterparts from other military services to Bosnia to visit troops involved in the “Operation Enduring Freedom” campaign and appeared onstage with Wayne Newton during a performance that was part of the USO Tour. On December 21, 2001, as the Olympic Torch passed through the city of Washington, DC, he became one of the more than 11,000 individuals that were selected to carry the torch over its 65-day journey to Salt Lake City, Utah, for the 2002 Winter Games. Then, on January 1, 2002, Patton rode on a float that honored unsung heroes of the U.S. Coast Guard in the 2002 Rose Parade in Pasadena, California.

So, did you figure out his next destination? It’s the ISPI 2002 International Performance Improvement Conference & Expo in Dallas, Texas on April 21-25.

Patton will join his performance improvement colleagues, Frank T. Wydra, Managing Partner, IRI Consultants to Management; Charline A. Wells, Program Manager, Sandia National Laboratories; James M. Schultz, Divisional VP, Performance Development, Walgreen Co.; Kenneth H. Silber, PhD, Associate Professor, Educational Technology Research and Assessment, Northern Illinois University; Steven Hale, Boeing; and Todd Harriett, VP Marketing, Ondeo Nalco on Wednesday, April 24 and Thursday, April 25 to deliver the Masters Series presentations. The Masters Series is designed so that conference attendees are able to meet with leaders who have made significant contributions to the field of performance improvement and discuss provocative issues.

So, what are you waiting for? Click to Register for the 2002 International Performance Improvement Conference & Expo today! Don’t miss out on the opportunity to say, “I saw Patton on his travels through Dallas!”

Want to see around corners? Want the inside track on what’s up ahead? Want the scoop on your colleagues? Watch for TrendSpotters coming in the March 2002 edition of PerformanceXpress.

• Short “I wish I had thought of that” Articles
• Practical Application Articles
• The Application of HPT
• Success Stories

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.

Go to printer-friendly version of this issue.

Feel free to forward ISPI’s PerformanceXpress newsletter to your colleagues or anyone you think may benefit from the information. If you are reading someone else’s PerformanceXpress, send your complete contact information to april@ispi.org, and you will be added to the PerformanceXpress emailing list.

PerformanceXpress (formerly News & Notes and Quick Read) 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 Director of Periodicals, 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