Everyone Knows What to Do

The Good Business Systems Squad shared a study with us that we found really thought provoking. Researchers Michael Byrne of Rice University and Elizabeth Davis of the University of Texas created controlled laboratory studies to examine the relative effectiveness of employee training methods on correcting post-completion errors. Published in Human Factors, their study, “Task Structure and Post-completion Error in the Execution of a Routine Procedure” compared the effectiveness of four common training practices for improving performance and reducing errors.

Sometimes referred to as “Blame and Train,”  the four training techniques were:

1.      Reprimand: When testers made errors they were reported for poor performance and advised to improve.
 

2.      Reinstruction: When testers made errors they were reported for poor performance and advised to re-read the manual and take a test to demonstrate proficiency.

 

3.      Praise: Testers were praised for good performance and advised to keep up the good work.

 

4.      Redesign: When testers made errors, they were trained on a different procedure and re-tested.

The results surprised even the researchers! They showed that none of the “motivational manipulations (reprimand, reinstruction, and praise) had a reliable effect on altering task performance (for either task completion time or task accuracy)." The only group that consistently outperformed the others was the one that followed the better procedure in the first place.

The system or step sequence the tester followed had a much greater impact on performance than any other factor!

Wow! This research has some significant implications for corporate training departments to reflect on. Are we investing our resources in the areas that can have the biggest impact on ROI? Before we invest in training, blaming, or even rewarding, do we start with clear, effective “procedures” that support good performance?

Is it the employee or the “system” that needs improvement?