Instructional Design
Foundation – Systems Theory
Tasks are statements of what people do. This blog post is going to narrow in on how
to rate tasks based on Task-to-Duty relationships and applying a numerical
rating system.
Application: Tasks
are at the heart of most behaviorally-based systematic approach models. These models are used extensively by government
agencies and the power producing industries.
Context
Once the decision has been made in the Analysis Process that
training is a viable solution to a performance problem (or future performance
need), it’s all about determining the relevant task, and then deciding which tasks to train on. In a
job analysis process investigative techniques are utilized to determine what
tasks are completed in the performance of a duty. Refer to graphic below for a typical work
breakdown structure.
The task statement is considered the single most important
element of the task analysis process because it provides a standardized,
concise format to describe worker actions.
Decision Continuum
There is a continuum of ways to choose which task should be
trained on; running in degrees of subjectivity to objectivity. The method you choose will probably be driven
by your customer’s demands or your work processes and procedures. You can apply a “graded approach” to aid in
determining which method to use. (Refer
to my blog post on Applying
a Graded Approach)
One of the classic methods for an objective base decision process
to determine what tasks to train on is using numerical averaging criteria. This process has subject matter experts (the
more the merrier) rate tasks in relationship to its corresponding duty. The average rating of the task is applied to
established criteria. Depending on its
rating, a task may: not be trained on, trained
on, or trained on and require periodic retraining. See the graphic below for a typical process.
Task –to-Duty
Relationships
Not all tasks were created equal. Tasks have varied relationships to its duty
and each relationship has a relative affiliation to its duty that can be
defined and quantified. For example how
“important” are the consequences if the task was performed incorrectly; it may
not really matter or it may be catastrophic.
Following is an example of a rating scale for the importance
of a task. Note: There is a numerical value assigned to each level. For example:
Serious = 3.
Rate task importance using the following guidelines:
1 = NEGLIGIBLE—Improper task
performance does not result in exposure to a hazard nor does it make any
difference in plant operation (no lost production). Neither does it pose any
personnel or environmental safety consequences.
2 = UNDESIRABLE—Improper task
performance may result in hazards exposure or cause some undesirable
consequences to plant operation (reduced production capability or some
potential environmental impact).
3 = SERIOUS—Improper task
performance may result in exceeding plant or equipment operating limits, which
may require moderate corrective action.
4 = SEVERE—Improper task
performance may result in equipment damage or personnel injury requiring
extensive corrective action.
Selecting
Task-to-Duty Relationships
The nature of the duty will dictate which relationships are relevant.
You can use the relationships on a Spider
Map I created to help guide you. In
addition, here is a list of NumericalRating Scales you can use for the relationships on the Spider Map.
These scales are meant to be a starting point and probably
will and should be modified to your specific needs. Consider this my permission to use them
freely.
Setting Criterion
Setting the criteria requires reasoned judgment and integration
of the rating values. For example: A task that is rated high in “difficulty” and performed “frequently”
may be designate for initial training but not included in periodic refresher
training.
The criterion may be relatively simple; all tasks with a “safety
hazard severity” rating of 3 or greater will be included in the training
intervention. The more relationships used
in the decision process, the more complicated the decision process. For an example see a Decision
Tree used by the Department of Energy (1).
You just have to find what works for you.
Tasks are at the heart of most behaviorally-based systematic
approach models. I hope you find it a
little easier to apply an objective – numerical rating system if and when the
need arises.
Regards,
Cj
Resources:
(1)
Department of Energy Handbook 1078-94, Training
Program Handbook: A Systematic Approach to Training. U.S. Department of Energy, Washington D. C.
20585 Available on line @ www.hss.doe.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/docs/handbook/hdbk1078.pdf
