What contributes to Job Satisfaction:
By, John Errigo, MS
Abstract: A focus on how a lack of employee engagement correlates to the organizational problem The primary organizational problem of employee engagement highlights a specific focus on how evaluating the theory of self-efficacy though academic literature shows a clear empirical correlation in how employee engagement is tied intimately together with job satisfaction.
Mulki, Lassk & Jaramillo (2008) give a good perspective in how self-efficacy theory is explored within an organization and how this organizational theory would serve both the employee and the company well with implication that within a salesperson’s job the theory can be applied to solve the problem. It was noted in the article how the theory of self-efficacy can serve as a fundamental organizational theory to enhance job satisfaction and solve the issue of job satisfaction.
“There are individual factors that may explain the way salespeople perceive and welcome the challenge how they respond to their job roles and workloads. This research note and suggests that one such factor is self-efficacy. For instance, two salespeople might receive an identical request from engagement: “complete ten sales calls in a week.” Although the request (objective workload) is identical, a salesperson with low self-efficacy may find the task unbearable and highly stressful, whereas a self-efficacious salesperson may perceive it as reasonable and not stressful, and he or she may even welcome the challenge” (Mulki, Lassk & Jaramillo,
2008, p. 226).
Bandura (1994) defines self-efficacy as an individual’s belief in his or her ability to produce designated levels of performance. Mulki, Lassk & Jaramillo (2008) further research how Self-efficacy is also a measure of an employee’s confidence in his or her abilities to produce personal resources and deploy an appropriate response strategy to address job situations within their locus of control. If a salesperson is given the same job as their co-worker, why does one feel as though they can accomplish the job without any problem, while the other is struggling and having difficulties? The theory of self-efficacy can solve the problem, however an organization through their structure, training and ultimately their leadership help an employee reach designated levels of performance. An organization which does not realize the importance of self-efficacy will not totally engage the employee since they have not allowed the employee to reach their full potential, therefore not engaging the employee and leading to less job satisfaction. This theory complimented with the other three in relation are the best source of clearly identifying the organizational problem and are appropriate for exploration since it gets to the heart of the problem. Without a clear discovery of the problem and organizational solution cannot be found. These theories help address adequately and define the organizational problem.
Focusing on motivational theories alone may not address the organizational problem
The researcher has observed when a company demonstrates a lack of commitment, however even though the company pay their employees above average there is more than just pay for commitment, and even if an employer engages in the theory of self-efficacy it may not address the challenge of having an engaged and satisfied workforce. “However, researchers sometimes encounter difficulties when attempting to distinguish among different forms of commitment. For example, some forms (e.g., affective and normative commitment) share similar relationships with criteria, while the dimensionality of others (e.g., continuance commitment) is debated” (Johnson, Chang, & Yang, 2010). Self-efficacy may not address the problem since if an employee is not committed to an organization there is nothing else which can be done within the theory of self-efficacy, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Need and the Motivation-hygiene factor. These are limited, although they may break open the problem, they are not sufficient alone to address the organizational problem.
As mentioned a strong correlation between the theories of motivation and an organizational development may have a combinational effect which would get to the heart of the organizational problem. The biggest challenge is the leadership and their obstante force on the negative focus on the one-percent. This mindset has to be addressed at the top level. If the CEO is blinded by the depth of the organizational problem and he cannot see clearly there is a problem everyone else too will be in denial. This is where the theories and the proposed OD intervention will not address the organizational problem. Without a paradigm shift in leadership’s perception as well as attitude and focus on the negative one-percent, the organizational problem will never be addressed and it proves the theories presented as null and void as a solution and a shift focus on positive employee engagement.
Employee engagement is not a panacea to job satisfaction
The researchers of , Masson, R. C., Royal, M. A., Agnew, T., & Fine, S. (2008), Both, J., & Mann, S. (2005), Babcock-Roberson, M. E., & Strickland, O. (2010), reach a consensus of leadership in an organization does have an impact on the characteristics of job satisfaction and employee engagement. Those employees that are engaged compared to those who are not reveal a direct correlation to their job performance. The correlation between unengaged and engaged workers has a direct impact on an organization. Employee engagement is not a panacea to job satisfaction. They also conclude there are other factors which are out of an organizations control which is seen as a hindrance in promoting job satisfaction. An employee’s emotional state or lack of engagement resulting in a poor attitude regarding any job is out of an organizations control and therefore employee engagement is not a panacea to job satisfaction.
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or referenced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
Showing posts with label Organizational Development. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Organizational Development. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Thursday, September 16, 2010
"Change," Planning, Planning, Action!
How does any organization change and more importantly thrive during change? Planning, Planning, Action.
by John Errigo, M.S.
I am going to write about how to make real change sustainable and grow the most precious asset of any organization, the human relations aspect of an organization. Action research is a term used by many in the Training and Organizational Development field to get to the root of what needs to change and how to bring it about in an organization. I am going to write about how to make change happen as a result of good sequential action research methodology.
The exact way change happens cannot be controlled, however the planning that helps induce change can be controlled and this is what I value most about Action Research. During the pre-launch phase, planning is crucial for any amount of change to transpire. “It establishes the foundation for a successful change effort (Rothwell, Sullivan).” Change happens first by understanding what needs to be changed: “What is the business case for change? Why is change warranted to address current crises or seize future opportunities (Rothwell, Sullivan)?”
In order to begin a new course of turning around the ship, planning cannot be a major element missing, the self-reflection piece. I am certain any leader who wants to bring about change must first reflect on how change will impact staff and how this change will bring about a positive contribution to the operations and the overall vision or direction the company is going.
When I make a decision as a manager, I think of how this decision will impact the staff member and how this decision will contribute to the vision of the company. The reflection-time during this pre-launch is critical.
In the Launch phase of Action planning, it is the beginning of the change effort. This is where staff will understand the vision, help motivate them to accept the vision and allow room for them to understand how this change will be of benefit, and how? The who, what why and how of change and what it will mean to them, how it will effect their lives. All of these aforementioned items create a sense of buy-in.
Change is also about communicating the reality of a situation, being authentic, giving a reason for change, communicating the vision of what will happen and how staff are valued as part of the “big picture.”
“Post-Launch phase involves a sustaining change effort over time (Rothwell and Sullivan).” If there is adequate planning, preparation, executing of the vision, and a staff buy-in, a good long-term change effort could be produced. The fruits of the post-launch phase is determined by how well the pre-launch and launch phase were executed. The pre-launch and launch phase are like the initial investment and the post-launch phase is where the dividends and capital is gained and or accrued.
Action research does in fact contain a high level of planning, and action research is the process guide to change. The launch phase does involve a high level of staff buy-in and the result of the change in post-launch involves a high level of ambiguity since the change in staff as a result of the action research cannot be scripted or always defined.
The benefits of action research are within a continuous change effort. Patience is important since the pace in which change occurs may be ambiguous, however the positive results of the efforts of action research helps define change as a positive continuum in the organization.
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or referenced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
by John Errigo, M.S.
I am going to write about how to make real change sustainable and grow the most precious asset of any organization, the human relations aspect of an organization. Action research is a term used by many in the Training and Organizational Development field to get to the root of what needs to change and how to bring it about in an organization. I am going to write about how to make change happen as a result of good sequential action research methodology.
The exact way change happens cannot be controlled, however the planning that helps induce change can be controlled and this is what I value most about Action Research. During the pre-launch phase, planning is crucial for any amount of change to transpire. “It establishes the foundation for a successful change effort (Rothwell, Sullivan).” Change happens first by understanding what needs to be changed: “What is the business case for change? Why is change warranted to address current crises or seize future opportunities (Rothwell, Sullivan)?”
In order to begin a new course of turning around the ship, planning cannot be a major element missing, the self-reflection piece. I am certain any leader who wants to bring about change must first reflect on how change will impact staff and how this change will bring about a positive contribution to the operations and the overall vision or direction the company is going.
When I make a decision as a manager, I think of how this decision will impact the staff member and how this decision will contribute to the vision of the company. The reflection-time during this pre-launch is critical.
In the Launch phase of Action planning, it is the beginning of the change effort. This is where staff will understand the vision, help motivate them to accept the vision and allow room for them to understand how this change will be of benefit, and how? The who, what why and how of change and what it will mean to them, how it will effect their lives. All of these aforementioned items create a sense of buy-in.
Change is also about communicating the reality of a situation, being authentic, giving a reason for change, communicating the vision of what will happen and how staff are valued as part of the “big picture.”
“Post-Launch phase involves a sustaining change effort over time (Rothwell and Sullivan).” If there is adequate planning, preparation, executing of the vision, and a staff buy-in, a good long-term change effort could be produced. The fruits of the post-launch phase is determined by how well the pre-launch and launch phase were executed. The pre-launch and launch phase are like the initial investment and the post-launch phase is where the dividends and capital is gained and or accrued.
Action research does in fact contain a high level of planning, and action research is the process guide to change. The launch phase does involve a high level of staff buy-in and the result of the change in post-launch involves a high level of ambiguity since the change in staff as a result of the action research cannot be scripted or always defined.
The benefits of action research are within a continuous change effort. Patience is important since the pace in which change occurs may be ambiguous, however the positive results of the efforts of action research helps define change as a positive continuum in the organization.
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or referenced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
Friday, July 30, 2010
The Who, What Why of Performance Consulting, Part 3 of 3
The bottom line of what is important in Performance Consulting
By, John Errigo, MS
Understanding managers’ needs is essential to a consultant, after all, it is the manager who will be able to help the consultant understand the business need by provide access to staff, and who will be the one who will ultimately have the authority to implement any recommendations as an agent of change. Without cultivating this important relationship from the beginning, developing a collaborative process, the consulting project does not have any room to grow and thrive. The relationship building aspect of a consultant is one of the paramount aspects of the consulting process. I agree with Robinson since the “how” is not something everyone can answer, we can always find out the “what” through a model or process, but the “how” is more ambiguous and not easily defined, hence why in certain respects, performance consulting is indeed art. Not everyone can define the how and when to define it, not everyone is capable of making “art.”
I am not taking an elitist approach here when I compare performance consulting liking it to art, I am merely distinguishing how fragile some aspects of the performance consulting are than others. The relationship building including when to push when defining the “how” are among those fragile aspects. Getting to the how is more than asking questions, however “performance consultants influence more by what they ask than by what they tell” Robinson and Robinson (2006, p. 6). The performance consultant must know what appropriate questions to ask as well as how each question will paint a bigger picture of the company and understanding “how” things work. More importantly the consultant must be able to get to the bottom of the “how” by asking tougher questions and knowing when and in what tone to ask them. The “when to ask the tough questions” and the “tone in how you ask them” is where the art of performance consulting comes into the picture. You may ask all the questions you want, but if you don’t know when and how to ask them, you won’t get the answers you would need to understand the big picture of what is going on –what needs to be addressed –and how certain aspects should be addressed. ‘Questions asked should use language and terms that directly connect to the client’s business needs” (Robinson and Robinson, 2006, p. 7).
The questions asked however should also able to define the business need, if they do not help define the business need, they why ask them? “To evidence that art of HPT, you need to develop a partnership with the client based on credibility and trust, you also need to approach the situation from the clients perspective” (Robinson and Robinson, 2006, p. 7). The partnership developed the relationship built is where the “art” of performance consulting comes into play, and knowing what questions to ask is also based upon this same principle. As a consultant you will know what type of questions to ask, because hopefully at this phase you have developed such a relationship you have already have the framework of the “big picture” and then you are able to ask more questions that will not distance you from the client, but will be able to help build the trust and confidence of the client even more.
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or refernced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
By, John Errigo, MS
Understanding managers’ needs is essential to a consultant, after all, it is the manager who will be able to help the consultant understand the business need by provide access to staff, and who will be the one who will ultimately have the authority to implement any recommendations as an agent of change. Without cultivating this important relationship from the beginning, developing a collaborative process, the consulting project does not have any room to grow and thrive. The relationship building aspect of a consultant is one of the paramount aspects of the consulting process. I agree with Robinson since the “how” is not something everyone can answer, we can always find out the “what” through a model or process, but the “how” is more ambiguous and not easily defined, hence why in certain respects, performance consulting is indeed art. Not everyone can define the how and when to define it, not everyone is capable of making “art.”
I am not taking an elitist approach here when I compare performance consulting liking it to art, I am merely distinguishing how fragile some aspects of the performance consulting are than others. The relationship building including when to push when defining the “how” are among those fragile aspects. Getting to the how is more than asking questions, however “performance consultants influence more by what they ask than by what they tell” Robinson and Robinson (2006, p. 6). The performance consultant must know what appropriate questions to ask as well as how each question will paint a bigger picture of the company and understanding “how” things work. More importantly the consultant must be able to get to the bottom of the “how” by asking tougher questions and knowing when and in what tone to ask them. The “when to ask the tough questions” and the “tone in how you ask them” is where the art of performance consulting comes into the picture. You may ask all the questions you want, but if you don’t know when and how to ask them, you won’t get the answers you would need to understand the big picture of what is going on –what needs to be addressed –and how certain aspects should be addressed. ‘Questions asked should use language and terms that directly connect to the client’s business needs” (Robinson and Robinson, 2006, p. 7).
The questions asked however should also able to define the business need, if they do not help define the business need, they why ask them? “To evidence that art of HPT, you need to develop a partnership with the client based on credibility and trust, you also need to approach the situation from the clients perspective” (Robinson and Robinson, 2006, p. 7). The partnership developed the relationship built is where the “art” of performance consulting comes into play, and knowing what questions to ask is also based upon this same principle. As a consultant you will know what type of questions to ask, because hopefully at this phase you have developed such a relationship you have already have the framework of the “big picture” and then you are able to ask more questions that will not distance you from the client, but will be able to help build the trust and confidence of the client even more.
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or refernced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
The Who, What and Why of Performance Consulting Part 2 of 3
By John Errigo, M.S.
In Performance consulting it is a good idea to get those who have the authority to change involved at the beginning and if possible to work with them directly. If a gap was identified that would need to be closed which would affect more than her department, her boss, the Director, would have to be involved to be able to get the authority to implement change. Not that this is a bad thing, or uncommon in performance consulting to work with a middle manager, it is important however to be able to consult for those who could have considerable influence or power to address and implement change on behalf of closing the performance gap.
Gay and Labonte (2003) also identify other characteristics to look for which are subtle but often easy to spot. “The client generally: (1) is a good listener, (2) is known for being “employee sensitive” (3) is the leader of a high-functioning work team, (4) is considered a “results-oriented” leader, (5) asks important questions in meetings regarding people and the impact of strategies on the workforce, (6) won’t hesitate to commit resources on projects, (7) isn’t afraid to invest in workforce initiatives, (8) is a process thinker, (9) has an important itch to scratch –a perplexing performance problem.” All of these characteristics are important since it shows the dedication, commitment and determination of a client to resolve a performance issue. Of course they are subtle characteristics, since the foundation of any client-performance consultant “marriage” is relationship building, and without a having a good foundation of developing a rapport and relationship with your client, in the beginning, and subsequently throughout the project, you will not be able to pick-up on these subtle characteristics. It is always important to make sure the relationship is built within the spirit of collaboration. “Get the client involved, if the consultant is doing more than the client, the ownership isn’t where it should be” (Johnson, Hall, Swinney, & Vanhala, 2004, p. 14).
The Art and Science of Performance Consulting
Performance consulting is a process that follows a model, however the actions of the consultant and “how” they get to know and understand the process is an art form. In performance consulting there are fundamentally two distinct concepts, the “art” and “science” within the consulting process. When and how to use these two distinct concepts is the difference between a successful and mediocre consultant. Tom Gilbert asks readers to look at HPT as a science in his book entitled ‘Handbook of Human Performance Technology. “He describes the characteristics of a science, as it relates to HPT, in this manner a science is: (1) has clear subject matter, (2) simplifies focus, (3) is grounded in measurement, (4) is careful of its language, has consistent terminology that is understood by practitioners in the field” (Robinson & Robinson, 2006, p. 6). These methods of looking at consulting as a scientific process is helpful, since there has to be a fundamental process consultants refer to, since there are measurable outcomes and there has to be a process to be able to get to those measurable outcomes to be able to close a performance gap. ‘The techniques and practices of performance and cause analysis, intervention selection, and measurement are all based on scientific principles” (Robinson & Robinson, 2006, p. 6). The performance consultant then has a guide of principles to follow in order to “bring about sustained changes in human performance and result in achievement of business and organizational goals” (Robinson & Robinson, 2006, p. 6).
Performance consulting involves relationship building. Without having the ability to build relationships with senior management, company CEO’s, and those who have direct authority to make decisions which will help close the performance gap, the performance consultant can be the best “scientist,” but nothing will happen, nothing will be accomplished. Therefore the art of consulting is something that requires mastery of specific competencies, but it is also something to a small degree is innate in nature; you must have the gift of artistry to be able to grow and cultivate the artist within. “The art concept primarily refers to how consultants seek to understand manager’s needs and influence managers to support the use of HPT, The science is the what; the art is the how” Robinson and Robinson (2006, p. 6).
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or refernced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
In Performance consulting it is a good idea to get those who have the authority to change involved at the beginning and if possible to work with them directly. If a gap was identified that would need to be closed which would affect more than her department, her boss, the Director, would have to be involved to be able to get the authority to implement change. Not that this is a bad thing, or uncommon in performance consulting to work with a middle manager, it is important however to be able to consult for those who could have considerable influence or power to address and implement change on behalf of closing the performance gap.
Gay and Labonte (2003) also identify other characteristics to look for which are subtle but often easy to spot. “The client generally: (1) is a good listener, (2) is known for being “employee sensitive” (3) is the leader of a high-functioning work team, (4) is considered a “results-oriented” leader, (5) asks important questions in meetings regarding people and the impact of strategies on the workforce, (6) won’t hesitate to commit resources on projects, (7) isn’t afraid to invest in workforce initiatives, (8) is a process thinker, (9) has an important itch to scratch –a perplexing performance problem.” All of these characteristics are important since it shows the dedication, commitment and determination of a client to resolve a performance issue. Of course they are subtle characteristics, since the foundation of any client-performance consultant “marriage” is relationship building, and without a having a good foundation of developing a rapport and relationship with your client, in the beginning, and subsequently throughout the project, you will not be able to pick-up on these subtle characteristics. It is always important to make sure the relationship is built within the spirit of collaboration. “Get the client involved, if the consultant is doing more than the client, the ownership isn’t where it should be” (Johnson, Hall, Swinney, & Vanhala, 2004, p. 14).
The Art and Science of Performance Consulting
Performance consulting is a process that follows a model, however the actions of the consultant and “how” they get to know and understand the process is an art form. In performance consulting there are fundamentally two distinct concepts, the “art” and “science” within the consulting process. When and how to use these two distinct concepts is the difference between a successful and mediocre consultant. Tom Gilbert asks readers to look at HPT as a science in his book entitled ‘Handbook of Human Performance Technology. “He describes the characteristics of a science, as it relates to HPT, in this manner a science is: (1) has clear subject matter, (2) simplifies focus, (3) is grounded in measurement, (4) is careful of its language, has consistent terminology that is understood by practitioners in the field” (Robinson & Robinson, 2006, p. 6). These methods of looking at consulting as a scientific process is helpful, since there has to be a fundamental process consultants refer to, since there are measurable outcomes and there has to be a process to be able to get to those measurable outcomes to be able to close a performance gap. ‘The techniques and practices of performance and cause analysis, intervention selection, and measurement are all based on scientific principles” (Robinson & Robinson, 2006, p. 6). The performance consultant then has a guide of principles to follow in order to “bring about sustained changes in human performance and result in achievement of business and organizational goals” (Robinson & Robinson, 2006, p. 6).
Performance consulting involves relationship building. Without having the ability to build relationships with senior management, company CEO’s, and those who have direct authority to make decisions which will help close the performance gap, the performance consultant can be the best “scientist,” but nothing will happen, nothing will be accomplished. Therefore the art of consulting is something that requires mastery of specific competencies, but it is also something to a small degree is innate in nature; you must have the gift of artistry to be able to grow and cultivate the artist within. “The art concept primarily refers to how consultants seek to understand manager’s needs and influence managers to support the use of HPT, The science is the what; the art is the how” Robinson and Robinson (2006, p. 6).
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or refernced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
Monday, July 19, 2010
The Who, What and Why in Performance Consulting Part 1 of 3
Performance Consulting 101
By John Errigo, M.S.
The business need of an organization should be the top priority of a performance consultant. Performance consulting may have different processes which analyze and identify the gap and how to close the gap, however there are many more fundamental principles present than to just merely “close the performance gap.” In this series I will explore the various fundamental methodology of performance consulting. I will explore how these fundamental methodologies should be applied and when, the what and the why.
One of the most important aspects of any organizational development in essence is how successful is the collboration and the significance of collaboration. I cannot stress it enough how many times I have worked within an organization and once I realized there was not a collaborative partner(s) at the table, the success of implementing change is in flux. It is so important to establish this in the beginning and to make clear and define what each person's role is at the first meeting. “Work to establish a collaborative relationship with the client; avoid working as a pair of hands, or expert unless absolutely required” (Johnson, Hall, Swinney, & Vanhala, 2004, p. 14).
This foundational element of developing a collaborative relationship is most important. It is most important when developing the contract and choosing to work with a client, since if there is not a significant chance a collaborative relationship can be formed with the initial contract meeting; the performance contract is really not worth pursing. This can be further developed of course throughout the contract, but if there is resistance to the concept initially it may not be a role the client is willing to accept throughout all phases of the project. Success then may be limited and perhaps this may not be the best partnership from the beginning.
“As with marriage, picking the right partner is pretty darned important. For an HPI professional, as with this like comparison in consulting, if the project does not fit or would be designed to be proven organizational successful and effective, if there is not a desire to address a performance issue from the clients perspective, then why pursue a dead-end project?
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or refernced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
By John Errigo, M.S.
The business need of an organization should be the top priority of a performance consultant. Performance consulting may have different processes which analyze and identify the gap and how to close the gap, however there are many more fundamental principles present than to just merely “close the performance gap.” In this series I will explore the various fundamental methodology of performance consulting. I will explore how these fundamental methodologies should be applied and when, the what and the why.
One of the most important aspects of any organizational development in essence is how successful is the collboration and the significance of collaboration. I cannot stress it enough how many times I have worked within an organization and once I realized there was not a collaborative partner(s) at the table, the success of implementing change is in flux. It is so important to establish this in the beginning and to make clear and define what each person's role is at the first meeting. “Work to establish a collaborative relationship with the client; avoid working as a pair of hands, or expert unless absolutely required” (Johnson, Hall, Swinney, & Vanhala, 2004, p. 14).
This foundational element of developing a collaborative relationship is most important. It is most important when developing the contract and choosing to work with a client, since if there is not a significant chance a collaborative relationship can be formed with the initial contract meeting; the performance contract is really not worth pursing. This can be further developed of course throughout the contract, but if there is resistance to the concept initially it may not be a role the client is willing to accept throughout all phases of the project. Success then may be limited and perhaps this may not be the best partnership from the beginning.
“As with marriage, picking the right partner is pretty darned important. For an HPI professional, as with this like comparison in consulting, if the project does not fit or would be designed to be proven organizational successful and effective, if there is not a desire to address a performance issue from the clients perspective, then why pursue a dead-end project?
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or refernced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Problem Solving: Effective Needs Assessment
Problem solving is an art as well as a science. Directing your attention to a good resource "Thinkertoys" a book which helps engage your creative and mind attention to attract good solutions to everyday and complex problems.
The book is also a tool which helps you creatively attract good ideas along the way. Along with effective problem solving, it can be as easy as asking probing questions to get to the appropriate answers. It can be as complex as an organizational development performance gap, which will need a thoughtful and probing needs assessment to get to the root issue.
A good resource to help effectively map a good needs assessment is "A practical guide to needs assessment" by Kavita Gupta.
A good needs assessment requires the practitioner to ask questions to close the gap to arrive at a solution. A 10 or 12 question survey would be sufficient as well as thoughtful interviews with 4-6 people. The interview questions would be different from the needs assessment survey. Together, combined with these thoughtful questions would allow the practitioner to collect "data" to analyze the problem and solve and close the gap. Therefore: problem solving is based around asking the right questions and a needs assessment analysis can help you get you from point A to point C and find out what is going on by finding out point B.
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or refernced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
The book is also a tool which helps you creatively attract good ideas along the way. Along with effective problem solving, it can be as easy as asking probing questions to get to the appropriate answers. It can be as complex as an organizational development performance gap, which will need a thoughtful and probing needs assessment to get to the root issue.
A good resource to help effectively map a good needs assessment is "A practical guide to needs assessment" by Kavita Gupta.
A good needs assessment requires the practitioner to ask questions to close the gap to arrive at a solution. A 10 or 12 question survey would be sufficient as well as thoughtful interviews with 4-6 people. The interview questions would be different from the needs assessment survey. Together, combined with these thoughtful questions would allow the practitioner to collect "data" to analyze the problem and solve and close the gap. Therefore: problem solving is based around asking the right questions and a needs assessment analysis can help you get you from point A to point C and find out what is going on by finding out point B.
All rights reserved (2010) and my not be duplicated or refernced without written permission of author: John Errigo, M.S., by corporate authorization, HODT, Inc. (synergy@hodtinc.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
