Assessing Internal Performance Improvement Programs and Initiatives

1. Assessing Internal Performance Improvement Programs and Initiatives

2. There are three essential realizations that guide the responsible pursuit of valid information in assessing the effectiveness of your internal performance improvement programs and initiatives.

3. Three Essential Realizations that Guide the Responsible Pursuit of Valid Information • The realization that our beliefs about what’s working, what’s not, and why or why not respectively are only as sound as the information and reasoning they are based on. • The realization of the inherent limitations of internally produced and interpreted performance information. (See slides that follow) • The realization (based on the prior two realizations) of the necessity for an outside, independent assessment of internal performance improvement programs and initiatives by a qualified Action Assessment and Design specialist.

4. Why the necessity for an outside, independent assessment to produce valid information?

5. Extensive Action Research over the past 50 years confirms the existence of the following “cognitive errors” that limit the validity and usefulness of internal performance program assessments and data:

6. “Cognitive Errors” that Limit the Validity and Usefulness of Internal Performance Program Assessments • The human tendency to look for and confirm the outcomes we want to find. (“Confirmation Bias”) • The human tendency to not look for (or ignore) those actions and behaviors that would disconfirm the desired state of affairs. (“Selective Inattention”) • The human tendency to regard as normal and/or acceptable (or unexceptional) those actions and behaviors we have been conditioned over time to regard as normal and acceptable. (“Conditioned Attentional Bias”) • The human tendency to ‘privilege’ self-serving or otherwise favored personal assumptions and beliefs as the basis for assessing performance or interpreting assessment data.

7. “Cognitive Errors” that Limit the Validity and Usefulness of Internal Performance Program Assessments, Con’t. • The tendency of internal assessors to mistakenly regard subjective internal information (i.e. feedback and anecdotal reports) as objective empirical data. • The tendency of internal assessors to mistakenly regard correlative performance data (e.g. operating and financial metrics) as causal performance data. • The tendency of internal assessors to mistakenly regard internal operating and financial metrics as sufficiently determinative of program actionability and effectiveness.

8. Following are several slides that present and describe the scope and nature of our 5-Step independent Performance Program Assessment Process.

9. Scope of AssessmentAny or all new, existing or prospective performance improvement programs or initiatives, whether internally designed and developed, or adopted and adapted from external vendors.

10. Five Step Action and Behavioral Assessment Process:

11. Step #1:Determine whether or not prescribed, specified and expected standards of action or behavior are specifically doable and observable-as-prescribed or described (i.e. actionable), as well as conceptually understood, theoretically embraced and intended for use by observed participants.

12. Step #2:Determine whether or not application gaps exist in the form of “cognitive and execution gaps,” (see next two slides), as well as what such gaps consist of in practice, and if participants are or were aware of such gaps before, during or after action was taken.

13. Expected Action and Behavior: Action and behavior prescribed and expected by Company program requirements COGNITIVE GAP Intended Action and Behavior: Actions and behavior intended and planned by persons-in-action The Cognitive Gap

14. Intended Action and Behavior: Actions and behavior intended and planned EXECUTION GAP Actual Action and Behavior: Actions and behavior actually used The Execution Gap

15. Step #3: Determine whether or not the “execution gap,” if present, will or might result in a “performance gap,” and if so, what such a gap might look like, and whether or not it is consequential to desired business results or outcomes.

16. Actual Actions and Behavior: Actions and behavior used to achieve an intended, desired outcomes PERFORMANCE GAP Projected Outcomes: Likely performance outcomes of actions and behavior actually used The Performance Gap

17. Possible Undesirable Performance Consequences of an “Execution Gap” 1. Recurring performance problems. 2. Inconsistent performance. 3. Lack of initiative and accountability. 4. Inverted customer focus, making management the primary customer. 5. “Mixed messages” to the workforce that cause confusion and inconsistency, and undermine adoption of specified action and behavior 6. Etc.

18. Step #4:Determine whether or not performance problems or opportunities actually addressed by observed participants are those that the participants intended and needed to address to avoid problem recurrence or improve performance-to-plan.

19. Step #5:Present findings and work with the client, if and as needed, to improve the actionability of assessed internal performance improvement programs and initiatives, and close discovered cognitive, execution and performance gaps, if any.

20. This 5-Step process produces valid information to determine if in fact your Company’s performance improvement programs and initiatives are… (a) actually “actionable” as believed (i.e. doable and observable as specified,described and expected), (b) actually understood, embraced and used as designed, expected and intended, and are(c) actually producing expected results. And if not in either case,(d) why not, and (e) what must be done to make them effective, or more effective?

21. Why Use Our Firm? • We are independent experts that specialize in the field of Action Assessment and Design. • We are an unbiased source of valid information in the assessment of both internal and external performance improvement programs and initiatives. • Our independent assessment findings are based entirely on real-time, empirical performance data obtained directly from your workplace. • We offer no competing or alternative program solutions that would bias our assessments. • The sole purpose of our involvement is to make your performance improvement programs and initiatives successful, and maximize their intended return on investment.

22. For More Information Regarding This Process and How it Works Please Contact: Thomas Riskas The Riskas Consulting Group 702-360-6797 tjriskas@riskasconsulting.com www.riskasconsulting.com