Assessing And Testing Training Effectiveness

There is no question about it. Training and development is gaining attention in Corporate America. The industry is growing and changing to achieve a variety of goals, from satisfying immediate employment skills shortages to meeting organizations' long-term strategic needs. According to a survey conducted by Chief Learning Officer magazine and Fairfield Research Inc., enterprise firms in the United States spend, on average, $3.7 million every year on learning and training. Total spending on corporate learning by enterprise companies is forecast to increase to $11.8 billion—a projected 4.3 percent increase in 2003.

Although many CEOs value training because they believe it strengthens the organization and serves as a retention tool, not many are clear on how to measure the return on the investment (ROI). With increased pressure to justify expenses, CLOs are looking for ways to show improved bottom-line results.
"We are seeing more and more CLOs link the development of a training program to the strategic direction of the company," said Linda Gookin, senior consultant at the Hay Group, a professional services firm that helps companies worldwide develop their employees. "To maximize the effectiveness of a training program, an organization needs to use ongoing assessment to establish learning outcomes, link them to a performance plan, define measures and finally evaluate learning—and this must be an integral part of the corporate strategic plan."

There is a huge gap between the learning programs that produce results and many of those being implemented today. Certainly, there are many reasons this gap exists, including failure to link training to core business strategies, uncertain business and economic conditions, lack of acknowledgement or reward for training accomplishments and failure to make training an integral part of an employee's job. These and many other factors can hinder the development of a learning program that produces results.

However, one of the main reasons CLOs have a difficult time proving the value of a corporate training program is that testing and assessment are not fully integrated into the program. All too often, testing and assessment are viewed as separate from the learning process and as afterthoughts to the development and implementation of the learning program. But without ongoing integration of testing and assessment into a learning program, there is no reliable way to know how much learning has taken place, if any at all. A renewed focus on testing and assessment is necessary to improve the quality of instruction, the effectiveness of the curriculum, and the validity of the outcomes.

When testing and assessment are held completely tangential to learning, the entire organization is affected by the negative impact on the learning process, the learning outcomes and the ability to measure ROI. Only when we hold learners and the learning process accountable to themselves will we see verifiable proof that learning has taken place. When you are able to fully integrate testing and assessment into the development, management and evaluation of your organization's learning system, you will be able to spend your training dollars knowing—not hoping, not guessing, not assuming, but knowing—that you are getting something in return.

Certainly, an organization's advertising team would not set aside money for a print ad campaign without knowing something about the publications in which the advertisements will appear. The team would want to know about the audience that reads the publication. Creative ideas would be tested using a variety of techniques such as focus groups, image studies and positioning research. Copytesting would be done to diagnose the effectiveness of the proposed ad. All of this would take place before the publication hits the newsstand. Once the advertisement is printed, market-tracking evaluations would be conducted to assess the impact on sales. Changes in customer attitudes and behaviors would be measured. The advertising team wouldn't dream of ignoring this information because it understands the value and usefulness in determining how to allocate resources.

Imagine that you have been asked to implement a new enterprise-wide training program to ensure that each employee masters a new skill and can successfully demonstrate competency within a month. Maybe you have five employees, maybe you have 50,000, but the idea is that all employees have to master the skill. Would you ignore data that told you which employees knew the information already? What about data that told you how your employees learned most efficiently? How about data that told you what to change about your current learning programs to make them more effective? Of course you wouldn't, you would welcome this information with open arms. Without this information, your training program will never achieve its full value.

No organization can afford to take a hit-or-miss approach to training. And no organization can afford training that doesn't pay off for the business.
Oracle Corp., the world's largest enterprise software company, was searching for a way to enhance the reach of its certification program and increase the value of the curriculum offered at its 125 Oracle University Training Centers located around the world. Oracle sought to analyze options and develop a customized, technology-enabled testing solution.

"We were able to more broadly link our certification training with Internet-based testing solutions to measure the impact of the training and to expand the value and reach of our certification programs," said John Hall, senior vice president, Oracle University. "We wanted to maximize the learning experience for Oracle candidates, and in order to qualify and quantify the effectiveness of a learning strategy, effective assessment must be in place."

Because of the implementation of the new testing solution, Oracle University's learning system has unparalleled efficiency and scalability. Assessment results are instantly available to the instructor and give the learner immediate feedback, verifying knowledge and competency levels or pinpointing additional training and development needs.

Testing and assessment are keys to providing the information needed to build and sustain learning initiatives. Testing and assessment are absolutely integral to the learning process—just as content development, instructional design and methods of delivery are integral. The proper use of testing and assessment vehicles—prior to learning, throughout learning and after learning takes place—will give you the means to provide standards of consistency, achieve accountability and ensure that your organization gains value from training investments.

Well-designed and well-integrated testing and assessment strategies provide very real benefits to the learner, the instructor and the sponsoring organization. Training empowers workers. Testing and assessment empower training. It is a fundamental law of learning: People want to know that they have accomplished a task, that they have achieved the objective of the training. Every person needs to know what is expected of him, what abilities are needed to be successful on the job. And employees must know that they will be held accountable to these expectations. Good tests, based on consistent standards, provide one objective measurement of the skills and knowledge of the individuals who take them. Employees can return to their jobs with the added skills, increased morale and the knowledge that their employers value them enough to invest in their development.

An integrated assessment program also provides insight and development goals for the instructor and course design. Assessment is a diagnostic tool that ultimately helps the learners confirm what they have learned and helps the instructor plan for future learning or remediation. A well-built test is a quick and objective way to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the delivery of the learning program.

Some of the most profound benefits integrated testing and assessment programs can provide are to the organization. Think about the four levels of evaluation: participant reaction, participant learning, behavior change and impact on the business. By incorporating these systematic evaluations consistently into a training program, you can prove that learning within the program has a significant impact on the driving concerns of the business—revenue, profits, employee retention, market share and, ultimately, customer satisfaction. Testing and assessment as part of the learning process is efficient and reliable and provides immediate results.

You may argue that you do not have the time, money or incentive to implement an integrated testing and assessment program into your learning system. If you take training seriously, you need to take the evaluation of training seriously by asking whether the training works. If you want employees to walk away from a training program with actual job skills that can translate to benefits for the employee and the organization—not just a certificate and a fancy binder—you need to provide proof of effectiveness.

It is time to require staff and vendors to embed testing and assessment into each curriculum and learning opportunity. You should be asking your e-learning providers how they do this, and you should be evaluating them based on their answer. It is time to encourage employees to embrace testing and assessment as a tool that promotes and demonstrates continued learning and performance improvement.

So, where do you begin? It is important to remember that an assessment instrument is most effective when used as part of the total training system, but it is likely to be very counterproductive when used inappropriately. Often inappropriate use comes from not having a clear understanding of what is being measured and why. You can begin integrating testing and assessment into your learning programs by identifying what it is you want to accomplish with the assessment program in order to select the appropriate tools to achieve your mission. Just as you wouldn't use a knife to eat tomato soup, you would find a certification test quite useless in measuring the effectiveness of the instructor. It is absolutely critical to have a clear understanding of what needs to be measured and for what purpose.

Sun Microsystems Inc., a leading provider of hardware, software and services for network computing solutions, has also developed a worldwide corporate learning system. In July 2000, Sun began the implementation of Sun Sigma, the company's adaptation of a worldwide business phenomenon called Six Sigma—a comprehensive program for building and sustaining business performance, success and leadership. The company used the Sun Enterprise Learning Platform to manage the training of 39,000 globally dispersed employees on Sun Sigma concepts.

To date, more than 24,000 employees have been trained on the fundamentals of Sun Sigma. More than 1,000 executives have been trained as Sun Sigma "Champions" through online learning and classroom experiences. And more than 100 employees are Sun Sigma "Black Belts," signifying the highest level of leading Sun Sigma projects.

To effectively deploy a global learning program for thousands of employees, the company needed to integrate testing and assessment tools throughout the learning process. Program coordinators began by identifying the desired skills for a successful outcome and then identified where the gaps needed to be filled. They measured the performance of employees as they completed learning segments. They rigorously tracked results of on-the-job improvements through verifiable cost reduction, product improvement and customer satisfaction.

"In today's corporate world, most learning takes place outside of a managed learning environment, and the ROI for learning is universally overlooked," said Mike Wenger, senior director, Center for Learning Innovation and Effectiveness at Sun Microsystems. "Companies need to design an overall plan for bringing learning systems into the corporate vision. Testing and assessment is a key component to building accountability into the system. Organizations need a clearly developed assessment strategy with measured results to achieve this desired accountability."

How effectively organizations can measure the results of their training objectives has caught the attention of the financial community. What a company knows—what its employees know—and what those employees do with that knowledge has real value. Yes, knowledge is intangible, but much of today's corporate value is associated with intangible factors. The more effectively you can measure and prove knowledge, the more likely you can turn learning into a tangible corporate benefit.

Consider this: A four-year study by the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD) shows that firms that invest $1,500 per employee in training compared to those that spend $125 experience on average 24 percent higher gross profit margins and 218 percent higher income per employee.

In today's economy, all expenses require justification. You are faced with a daunting challenge. You need to implement a learning program that will successfully educate employees on key objectives, provide course designers and facilitators with timely feedback to improve quality and offer senior management bottom-line justification. Furthermore, you must implement twice as many programs with half as many resources as you had last year. It seems an insurmountable task. Consider that the complete integration of testing and assessment tools and programs can give you the data and feedback you need to prove not only that your program is meeting its objectives of training employees effectively, but also that the organization is receiving some real, tangible benefits because of its existence.

Optimizing The Value of The Human Side of Organizations: The FACES Model

Introduction
Managing human capital in an environment characterized by down-sizing, right-sizing, reengineering, technological innovation, and global competition is increasingly challenging for organizations. An effective strategy for managing the internal attributes of an organization must rely heavily on the capabilities of people to provide a competitive edge. Barney (1995) describes four internal attributes important to an organization’s ability to develop, manage and deliver products and services: physical, financial, organizational, and human. Of these, the human element is the cornerstone of the internal resources of an organization, and effective management of this element can make or break a business or other entity.

Enhancing the effectiveness of people in organizations requires consideration of a number of factors. The purpose of this article is to summarize relevant recent literature related to these dimensions, and present a conceptual model for effective management of the human element of the organization. The dimensions are summarized into five categories: fit, attitudes, compensation, empowerment, and selection (FACES). Components of the FACES model are:

1. Fit - matching an employee’s attributes to an appropriate employment climate, often

known as person-organization fit.
2. Attitudes - recognizing the importance of employee attitudes and satisfaction with the employment environment.
3 Compensation - considerations of effective compensation and performance management systems.
4. Empowerment - elements of employee success, development and wellness.
5. Selection - effective methods for selecting appropriate employees.

Fit
Matching people with appropriate organizations has a number of positive benefits. Perhaps the most important effects derived from matching individuals to the organization’s environment were determined through a study by Bretz and Judge (1994). Their study found that person-organization fit accounted for statistically significant increases in both tenure (up to 11 percent of the variance) and job satisfaction (up to 32 percent of the variance).

Rynes and Gerhart (1990) found that interviewers rate applicants differently on general versus firm-specific criteria. Interrater reliability was higher for firm-specific criteria than for general employability criteria, suggesting that interviewers in the same organization share common ideas about applicant-organization fit. This research was confirmed by Adkins, Russell and Werbel (1994), who also found that recruiters perceptions of person-organization fit are distinct from those of general employability. Adkins, et al. (1994) noted that higher person-organization fit ratings were associated with similarities in work values between recruiter and applicant.
Barrett (1995) examined person-environment congruence as measured by the Performance Priority Survey (PPS). This survey requires supervisors and subordinates to indicate priorities for behaviors important to the subordinate’s job. Correlations between scale values are assigned to assess the degree of congruence between supervisor and subordinate scores in two areas: applicant-supervisor pairs and applicant-organization congruence.

The author hypothesized that significant agreement between subordinate and supervisor would predict the supervisor’s satisfaction with the employee. Also, “high agreement between the applicant and organizational climate would lead to the prediction that the applicant would fit the organization” (p.658).

Barrett (1995) analyzed three studies which utilized the PPS to determine correlations of agreement scores and applicant-supervisor and applicant-organization fit. Analysis of the agreement ratings through various jobs and organizations revealed a moderate positive correlation between agreement scores and supervisor ratings of subordinates, and to a lesser degree subordinates’ rankings of supervisors.

Correlations between agreement scores of subordinates with averaged supervisor scores, postulated to be representative of organizational climate, indicated that agreement scores correlated with supervisor performance ratings. This correlation showed predictive validity for organizations with which the employee had no prior contact and for organizations with which the employee was familiar.

Employers should note that recruiters apparently distinguish between general employability of an applicant and an applicant’s suitability for a particular organizational environment. Given the associations between person-organization fit and tenure and satisfaction, employers should consider congruence between applicant and organization.

Attitudes
A recent survey by Hewitt Associates, LLC, found that, of 46,500 employees from 38 companies, 74 percent reported general satisfaction with their work, (“How satisfied”, 1997). The work itself and people/coworkers received the highest satisfaction ratings, with advancement opportunities, recognition and pay issues ranked the lowest.
Issues related to employee attitudes and satisfaction are important to the assessment of how human resources management and planning contribute to performance objectives (Morris, 1995). Morris (1995) recognizes seven elements related to employee satisfaction.

1. The job itself - including content, variety, training.
2. Supervisor relationships - related to respect, recognition, feedback and fairness in evaluation.
3. Management beliefs - related to trust, information sharing, and valuing employees.
4. Opportunity - for career advancement and job security.
5. Work environment - physical facilities, availability of resources.
6. Pay, benefits, rewards - compensation and rewards.
7. Co-worker relationships - cooperation, teamwork, communications.

These categories are evidenced in the Hewitt Associates survey results. Lieber (1998)summarizes the components needed for high levels of satisfaction into only three categories: inspiring leadership, great facilities, and a sense of purpose for employees.
Chase (1996) claims that even reengineering, done properly, can result in improvement in employee attitudes and satisfaction. Chase (1996) indicates that reengineering efforts related to processes benefit from employee input, and that input can be encouraged in a non-threatening (e.g. no job reductions) manner.

Further, involvement of people in studying processes can result in increased levels of trust.
Discussion of person-environment fit indicated possible connections between a match between employee and organization and job satisfaction. This relationship was explored by research conducted by Sims and Kroeck (1994)in terms of the ethical climate of a firm. They found that employees choose to work for companies that have ethical climates similar to that expressed by their preferences, that this similarity was negatively associated with turnover intentions, and that similarity increased organizational commitment. The relationship between ethical climate and job satisfaction was not statistically significant. However, both organizational commitment and negative turnover intentions imply some degree of satisfaction.

A study of the impact of leadership styles on employee attitudes was conducted by Savery (1993). This research investigated the connection between closeness of fit between perceived and desired leadership styles and job satisfaction. Additionally, it was hypothesized that perceived democratic leadership would have a positive impact on job satisfaction. This study confirmed that smaller differences (or dissonance) between perceived and desired leadership styles correlated with greater job satisfaction. However, perceptions of democratic leadership style did not necessarily lead to increased job satisfaction. In sum, the actual leadership style is less important to job satisfaction than the congruence between perceived and preferred styles (Savery, 1993).

The practical upshot of job satisfaction and positive employee attitudes is that in addition to the benefits realized by employees, organizations benefit from higher perceptions of customer service. Schmit & Allscheid (1995) simultaneously studied samples of both employee attitudes and the company’s customers’ perceptions of quality service. The results indicated that there was a relationship between positive employee attitudes and perceptions of customer service.

Compensation
Although workers generally report that having an interesting and meaningful job is the main key to job satisfaction, good compensation and rewards systems and meaningful performance management processes can enhance employer-employee relationships. Accordingly, inequitable or ineffective systems can result in reduced levels of satisfaction.
Compensation and Rewards.

Compensation is affected by both external and internal factors (Sherman & Bohlander, 1992). External factors include labor market conditions, local wage rates, collective bargaining efforts and governmental regulation. Internal factors include the employer’s ability to pay, worth of the job, and the value of an employee’s relative contribution. Also important to compensation systems are fringe benefits. Fringe benefits often add 25 to 30 percent to compensation costs, over and above base salaries (Penson, 1995).

Compensation plans traditionally have been formal plans rooted in job hierarchy and individual performance, controlled by a bureaucratic human resources function. Recent trends indicate a shift, to more flexible models focusing on team and organizational performance, with control of compensation decisions fixed more with line managers and even workers (Risher, 1997). Risher (1997) notes that the structure of organizations is becoming more team oriented, resulting in the need to compensate individuals to some extent based upon their contributions to achieving team and organizational goals.

Compensation systems have not kept pace with organizational structures that utilize more work teams. In a recent survey, 87 percent of responding companies reported use of work teams, but only 41 percent offered some form of team-based compensation (“Paying for teamwork”, 1997). While few advocate dropping all considerations of individual employee performance in compensation decisions, the importance of team achievements should not be overlooked. It is also important to assure that emphasis on team performance is not undermined by the rewards system. For example, it would be difficult to focus employee efforts on team achievements if a piece-work incentive is in place (“Paying for teamwork”, 1997).

As reengineering efforts have revised work processes, organization structure has become flatter and more work teams are utilized (Flynn, 1996). Compensation and rewards systems need to be reviewed in light of these developments. Broadbanding is an attempt to increase flexibility in compensation plans in order to deal with compensation issues based upon team and productivity issues. Broadbanding is an infrastructure concept which allows compensation schemes to incorporate elements other than pay grades or ranges in determining pay and bonuses (Schuster & Zingheim, 1996). Essentially, broadbanding allows pay ranges to vary more so that compensation can include incentives other than those related strictly to individual performance. Advantages include reducing the hierarchical pay grade focus, providing more flexibility in determining employee rewards, and giving managers more power and latitude in compensation-related decisions (Flynn, 1996).

Contributions to productivity by individuals and teams are recognized through gainsharing (Jackson & Roper, 1996). Gainsharing provides compensation based on operational, financial or team performance (Masternak, 1997). Masternak (1997) studied 17 facilities involved in gainsharing plans. He suggests several elements that contribute to an effective gainsharing plan:

1. Each organization should customize gainsharing plans according to the nature of individual plants, locations, or business units.

2. Structured employee participation is necessary, particularly in developing fair and achievable performance baselines and goals.
3. Regular communication of performance goals and gainsharing results.
4. Provide individual, team and organizational recognition to promote the gainsharing plan and maintain employee focus.
5. Support the gainsharing plan by providing employees the resources for success, including training.
6. Payments related to productivity should become significant over time, and distributed frequently in order to sustain momentum.
7. Maintain organization-wide commitment to the plan.

Changes in the nature of relationships between suppliers and customers have provided the basis for other trends in compensation, especially in sales. Many customers have shifted their purchasing strategy from one of low initial cost to one that considers the total value (including quality and service issues in addition to costs) of the product to the customer (O’Connell & Marchese, 1995).

This trend has resulted in many firms reducing their number of supplier relationships drastically, which has resulted in pressures to reward salespersons appropriately for retaining customers, not just acquiring new business. This has led firms to develop life cycle compensation systems to help retain sales representatives (and their established client bases) throughout their entire careers. These new plans include awarding bonuses for accounts retained and contracts renewed, and recurring payments in consideration of multi-year sales results.
Another recent trend involves increased flexibility in employee benefit choices and administration. Owens-Corning, for example, has reduced the fixed level of guaranteed benefits in favor of employee credits. These credits can be used to purchase traditional fringe benefits, as well as other rewards such as time off or even additional money (McCafferty, 1996).

Performance Management
In order for employees to be accountable and rewarded for performance it is necessary to develop individual and team performance objectives, determine reward structures, and provide clear feedback of performance results (Jones, 1996). According to Sherman and Bohlander (1992), a performance management system has four objectives:

1.To allow employees to discuss performance issues and standards with supervisors on a regular basis.
2.To allow supervisors to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of employee performance.
3.To provide a mechanism for developing individual performance improvement programs.
4.To provide a basis for compensation decisions.
Additionally, regular performance appraisal serves as a means of documenting performance which can serve as a basis for disciplinary decisions, thereby providing notice to employees as part of due process. One positive result of good performance measurement is that it can provide insight into training needs to support an organizational development plan.
The predominant trends in compensation, rewards and performance management relate to individual and team incentives. Many organizations have flatter structures due to reduction in organizational layers and other elements of bureaucracy (Flynn, 1996). Compensation based upon individual, team, and organizational performance is gaining acceptance. Managers have assumed more responsibility for compensation administration and pay decisions (Flynn, 1996). Elements of employee responsibility for the success or failure of their employers is becoming a focus of compensation, rewards and performance management.

Empowerment
Recent trends toward flatter organizational structures and use of work teams have resulted in increased pressures on employees in terms of both performance and decision making. In order to succeed in this environment, employees must have the knowledge and resources, and organizations must empower employees through training, development and concern for their wellness.

Training
Training is a particularly important component of the development and learning process. Nadler and Nadler (1994) have developed the Critical Events Model (CEM), an open systems model designed for the systematic implementation of training and learning programs. Implementation of the CEM is a sequential process which includes the following components:

1.Identifying the needs of the organization. This involves discussions with managers and other diagnostic efforts to determine the goals and objectives of the training. The diagnosis is followed by evaluation and feedback.
2.Specify job performance. Discussions with first line supervisors and employees helps determine job performance in terms of quality and quantity.
3.Identify learner needs. This involves analysis of the gap in knowledge, skills or abilities to be addresses by the training in order to achieve the desired level of performance.
4.Determine objectives. The specific measurable objectives are derived from analysis up to this point in the process.
5.Build curriculum and select instructional strategies. This involves determining the content of the training and the methods of delivery. Choices for delivery techniques include general to specific, specific to general, and concrete to abstract concept techniques.
6.Obtain instructional resources. This includes development of reference materials, physical space and scheduling considerations.
7.Conduct the training. An opening meeting is conducted, reference materials are distributed, and the training schedule is begun.
8.Evaluation and feedback. Both during training, to correct for any weaknesses determined in the process, and at the conclusion of training, to determine its effectiveness.
Organizational Development.

In addition to training efforts, which generally provide process-related instruction, organizational development interventions are used to improve the social functioning of organizations, using behavioral science techniques applied to organizational processes. They focus on interactions among people within organization, with the goal of increasing organizational effectiveness and health (Hodge, et al., 1996).
Organizational development can target both the structural and process dimensions of an organization (Theodore, 1996). The support for planned organizational change must come from top management, but in order to be effective, change has to affect all employees involved. The components of organizational development may include gathering information from workers and providing feedback, study of organizational processes, team building, and various types of training (Hodge, et al., 1996).

Neuman, Edwards and Raju (1989) conducted a meta-analysis of organizational development interventions to determine their effects on satisfaction and attitudes. This analysis divided organizational development interventions into three categories: human processes, techno-structural, and multi-faceted interventions.
Human processes organizational development interventions include laboratory training, participation in decision making, goal setting, team building, grid OD, survey feedback techniques, and management by objectives. Techno-structural interventions include job redesign, job enlargement, job enrichment, and flextime. Multi-faceted interventions use combinations of intervention techniques.

Multi-faceted interventions proved to have greater impact in modifying satisfaction and attitudes than any single technique. Of the individual interventions, team building and lab training had the greatest impact on changing attitudes and satisfaction. Overall, the authors concluded that organizational development appears to affect attitudes more than satisfaction (Neuman, et al., 1989).

Management development is another key element of the empowerment and development process. The development of management competencies required for implementing strategic change and enhancing the understanding of competition is the focus of Holistic management (Wilson, 1994). According to Wilson (1994), this is accomplished by emphasizing “functional relationships between the organization’s parts and the whole” (p. 12).

Holistic management involves both quality systems and human resources; both the way individuals work and the way they are trained (Hoare, 1995). Successful implementation of strategies through the holistic approach requires a shared vision communicated throughout the organization, communicated through a strategic plan which has been endorsed by top management (Wilson, 1994).

Employee Health and Wellness
The American Institute of Stress estimates that illnesses related to stress cost the American economy $150 billion per year in terms of lost productivity and health costs (Minter, 1991). A recent survey by Harris Research found that of 5,400 adults in 16 countries, 54 percent reported that the leading cause of stress was work (Romano, 1995). Job and career path uncertainty is the top cause of workplace stress, but other factors such as poor communications and perceptions of workload inequity contribute as well (Minter, 1991).

Holmes and Rahe (1967) defined “stress” or “stressor” as any environmental, social, or internal demand which requires the individual to readjust his or her usual behavior patterns. Stressors related to organizations include factors intrinsic to the job, organizational structure and control, reward systems, and leader relationships (Ivancevich & Matteson, 1987).

Research over the past few decades has linked personality to stress-related illnesses, especially coronary heart disease. The “Type A” behaviors associated with susceptibility to stress-related illnesses include hard-driving, competitive, aggressive, hostile, and time-urgent behaviors (Ivancevich & Matteson, 1987).

Addressing the problems of workplace stress, including those exacerbated by Type A personality factors requires a concerted effort. Dewe (1994) suggests that many stress interventions fail because they offer only a partial solution or place the burden for change on the individual. Dewe (1994) suggests a three-level approach to the problem:

1. Primary interventions - reduce organizational-level stressors such as poor communications, role ambiguity, poor leader relationships, and red tape.
2. Secondary interventions - equip individuals to better cope with stress through relaxation training, meditation, biofeedback, cognitive restructuring, and exercise.
3. Tertiary interventions - assist individuals who have stress-related illnesses through Employee Assistance Programs and wellness programs.
Maintaining the health and well-being of employees is critical to productivity and employee satisfaction. Given the costs associated with this problem, both in terms of financial and human capital, employers must be pro-active in dealing with these issues.

Selection
Managing human capital involves a great deal of emphasis on selecting the right employees for the organization and for specific jobs. Effective employee selection is important, as the cost of replacing an employee is estimated by the U.S. Department of Labor to cost an employer one-third of an employee’s salary to acquire a replacement (White, 1995). Employee selection methods include employment interviews, assessment centers, realistic job previews, and the use of a variety of test instruments.

Employment interviews are the most widely used method of assessment, but their reliability is suspect, as they rarely show correlations with performance greater than .20 (Lane, 1992). However, Pulakos and Schmidt (1995) found that experience-based interviews derived from thorough job analysis found correlations with supervisory ratings as high as .32, indicating that this type interview can be a good predictor of performance.

Assessment centers utilize a variety of methods to judge performance, including in-basket exercises, leaderless group sessions, often complemented by cognitive ability and personality tests. According to Dulewicz (1991), assessment centers are the best predictors of future performance of all generally researched assessment tools, and can provide correlations with performance as high as .43 (Lane, 1992). Although considered rather costly, assessment centers have the advantage of showing little adverse impact on any protected group (Lane, 1992). Determining key competencies through job analysis and thorough training of assessors improves the validity of assessment center ratings (Dulewicz, 1991).

Realistic job previews are used by organizations to provide potential employees a balanced picture of the positive and negative aspects of the jobs they are seeking. The use of realistic job previews has been demonstrated to have a positive impact on job satisfaction and to be negatively correlated with turnover (Collari & Stumpf, 1995).

One author estimates that 5,000 to 6,000 employers use personality tests as part of their hiring processes (O’Meara, 1994). Research suggests that personality tests can be better predictors of job performance if the factors that comprise effective performance in a specific job are clearly understood, and even then, should be used to complement other methods and not as a stand-alone selection tool (Adler, 1994).

Barrick and Mount (1991) classified results from 117 criterion-related personality studies into personality dimensions according to Norman’s “big five” taxonomy. The “big five” personality dimensions are Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Openness to Experience.

Analysis across occupational categories revealed that Extraversion was positively correlated with performance in management and sales jobs, ones which involve good interpersonal skills. Agreeableness was expected to be positively correlated with performance in management and sales, but very little support was found for this hypothesis.

The Emotional Stability dimension was expected to predict success across all occupational groups, but actual correlations were, in fact, mixed (even negative for management jobs). The most consistent predictor of performance across occupational types was the Conscientiousness dimension. The authors found that the Openness to Experience and Extraversion dimensions were associated with training proficiency.

In order to use personality factors in the selection process to predict performance, it is necessary to choose an instrument. Employers must be concerned whether an ostensibly neutral employment practice such as personality testing can be shown to have an adverse impact on a protected group or invade privacy, (O’Meara, 1994).

Conclusions
The FACES model provides a framework for enhancing the effectiveness of people in organizations. Employee-organization fit, employee attitudes, effective compensation and performance management systems, employee empowerment, and effective selection methods are components of the internal organizational environment which, if optimized, contribute to achieving this goal.

References
Adler, S. (1994). Personality tests for sales force selection: Worth a fresh look. Review of Business, 16, 27 - 31.
Barney, J. B. (1995). Looking inside for competitive advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 9, 49 - 61.
Barrett, R. S. (1995). Employee selection with the performance priority survey. Personnel Psychology, 48, 653 - 662.
Barrick, M. R. & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 78, 111 - 118.
Bretz, R. D. & Judge, T. A. (1994). Person-organization fit and the theory of work adjustment: Implications for satisfaction, tenure, and career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 44, 32 - 54.
Chase, N. (1996). The new face of reengineering: Process design grows up. Quality, 35, 43 - 48.
Collarri, S. M. & Stumpf, S. A. (1995). Compatibility and conflict among outcomes of organizational entry strategies: Mechanistic and social systems perspectives. Behavioral Science, 35, 1 - 10.
Dewe, P. (1994). EAP’s and stress management: From theory to practice to comprehensiveness. Management Review, 23, 21 - 32.
Dulewicz, V. (1991). Improving assessment centres. Personnel Management, 18, 4 - 6.
Flynn, G. (1996). Compare traditional pay with broadbanding. Personnel Journal, 75, 20, 26.
Hoare, C. (1995). A holistic management system. TQM Magazine, 7, 57 - 61.
Hodge, B. J., Anthony, W. P., & Gales, L. M. (1996). Organizational Theory: A Strategic Approach, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentiss-Hall.
Holmes, T. H. & Rahe, R. H. (1967). The social adjustment rating scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 11, 213 - 218.
How satisfied are your employees? (1997, Sept.) HR Focus, 12.
Ivancevich, J. M. & Matteson, M. T. (1987). Controlling work stress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jackson, III, J. & Roper, K. (1996). In any field, gainsharing can boost business. Triangle Business Journal, 12, 14Q.
Jones, D. D. (1996). Repositioning human resources: A case study. Human Resource Planning, 19, 51 - 53.
Lane, J. (1992). Methods of assessment. Health Manpower Management, 18, 4 - 6.
Masternak, R. (1997). How to make gainsharing successful: The collective experience of 17 facilities. Compensation and Benefits Review, 29, 43 - 53.
McCafferty, J. (1996). Rewards and resources in the pink. CFO, 12, 11.
Minter, S. G. (1991). Relieving workplace stress. Occupational Hazards, 53, 38 - 42.
Morris, T. (1995). Employee satisfaction: Managing the return on human capital. CMA Magazine, 69, 15 - 17.
Nadler, L. & Nadler, Z. (1994). Designing Training Programs, 2nd ed., Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.
O’Connell, B. & Marchese, L. (1995). Paying for the relationship, not just the sale. Journal of Compensation and Benefits, 11, 32 - 39.
O’Meara, D. P. (1994). Personality tests raise issues of legality and effectiveness. HR Magazine, 39, 97 - 100.
Neuman, G. A., Edwards, J. E., & Raju, N. S. (1989). Organizational development interventions: A meta-analysis of their effects on satisfaction and other attitudes. Personnel Psychology, 42, 461 - 483.
Paying for teamwork: Winning compensation strategies. (1997). Getting Results…From the Hands-On Manager, 42, 6 - 8.
Pulakos, E. D. & Schmidt, N. (1995). Experience-based and situational interview questions: Studies of validity. Personnel Psychology, 48, 289 - 308.
Risher, H. (1997). The end of jobs: Planning and managing rewards in the new work paradigm. Compensation and Benefits Review, 29, 13 - 19.
Romano, C. (1995). Too much work causes stress. Management Review, 84, 6.
Rynes, S. L. & Gerhart, B. (1990). Interviewer assessments of applicant fit: An exploratory investigation. Personnel Psychology, 43, 13 - 35.
Savery, L. K. 91993). Difference between perceived and desired leadership styles: The effect on employee attitudes. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 8, 28 - 32.
Schmidt, M. J. & Allscheid, S. P. (1995). Employee attitudes and customer satisfaction: making theoretical and empirical connections. Personnel Psychology: 48, 521 - 536.
Schuster, J. R. & Zingheim, P. K. (1996). The network discusses: Broadbanding, merit pay, and team participation. Compensation and Benefits Review, 28, 21 - 22.
Sherman, A. W. & Bohlander, G. W. (1992). Managing Human Resources, 9th ed., (pp. 303 - 338).
Sims, R. L. & Kroeck, K. G. (1994). The influence of ethical fit on employee satisfaction, commitment and turnover. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 939 - 947.
Theodore, J. D. (1996). Organizational Development. Unpublished paper. JDT Management Consultants, Lakeland, FL.
White, G. L. (1995). Employee turnover: The hidden drain on profits. HR Focus, 72,
15 - 18.
Wilson, J. G. (1994). Holistic management systems. Management Services, 38, 12 - 14.

Integrating Critical Thinking in Teaching

Introduction
The integration of critical thinking skills into the online curriculum is an essential to (image placeholder)providing intellectually challenging and relevant learning experiences for students. The paper will offer a basic description of critical thinking and discuss how to engage students in higher order thinking skills.

Nature of Critical Thinking
Distance education literature contains frequent references to the importance of critical thinking and teachers are encouraged to cultivate reflective thought in their students. Yet, even veteran teachers will admit that integrating critical thinking instruction into their classes is one of their most difficult tasks. Teachers who want to enhance the teaching and learning process realize that fostering critical thinking skills will require extra work to effectively communicate complex ideas to their students. Bullen’s research (1998) reveals that a student’s ability to demonstrate critical thinking skills during online discussions is influenced by four major factors:

1. cognitive maturity


2. teaching style of instructor


3. student’s prior learning experiences


4. degree of understanding the critical thinking process

The list of factors reveals that students will vary in their understanding of critical thinking skills and cognitive abilities. Therefore, teachers will need to develop a set of strategies that will help them to meet a diversity of student needs. A good starting point is to examine the literature on critical thinking to create an educational philosophy that reflects the latest research studies and teaching ideas.

Teaching to Enhance Critical Thinking
A review of critical thinking research can be somewhat confusing at times due to writers discussing various aspects of thinking. Sormunen and Chalupa (1994) bring some clarity to this problem by stressing that educational models classify critical thinking as both a product and process that combines psychological (i.e metacognition) and philosophical (i.e constructivist reasoning) elements. The good news is that there are a growing number of research studies that highlight how teachers can help their students improve their thinking skills.
Contemporary teachers face the reality that most of their instruction tends to focus on content knowledge and not on the process of learning transferable reflective skills Halpern (1998) relates, “despite all of the gains that cognitive psychologists have made in understanding what happens when people learn, most teachers do not apply their knowledge of cognitive psychology (paragraph 11).” In contrast to this report, the author has been encouraged by his observations of veteran teachers at the University of Phoenix. The author conducts peer reviews of faculty members and has noted that distance educators are devoting more instructional time to cultivating critical thinking skills.
Halpern (1998) stresses the dispositional aspect of thinking refers to whether individuals have developed reflective habits. Critical thinking requires mental effort and the personal discipline to work with complex problems. Individuals with a critical spirit are often inquisitive about the mysteries of life and strive to find the most reliable information. Facione (1998) notes, “critical thinking is about how you approach problems, questions, issues. It is the best way we know to get to the truth (paragraph 26).”

Teaching Strategies
Teachers will need to develop a class structure and online teaching style that encourages creativity, reflective thinking, and self-directed learning. It is important that teachers enable students to have the freedom to ask questions and take intellectual risks in their written assignments and discussion groups. Teachers can provide valuable guidance by keeping dialogues focused, relevant and probing deeper into issues. This will require moderating discussions and creating a list of key ideas, references and student contributions. Distance educators can pose a diversity of questions to foster reflective comments. Collision, Elbaum, Havvind & Tinker (2000) have created five types of questions to encourage richer student responses that are called full-spectrum questions:

• Questions that probe the “so what!” response- relevance, interest level, urgency and context?
• Questions that clarify meaning or conceptual vocabulary- ambiguity or vagueness and common concepts?
• Questions that explore assumptions, sources and rationale- qualities assumed and study evidence?
• Questions that seek to identify causes and effects or outcomes-primary or secondary and causes, internal or external factors?
• Questions that consider appropriate action- weigh different courses of action ?

Teachers should view the full-spectrum questions as tool for enhancing dialog. The choice of questions can be used to guide the discussion and help energize online interaction. It is wise not to overuse a question approach because students will the discussion become too predictable. Therefore, try to use pictures, cartoons, simulations or graphics instead of questions at different times during the course. Currently, the University of Phoenix is using more computer simulations in their business courses to promote realistic decision-making scenarios. Students enjoy learning activities that bring a slice of reality into the class that relates to their professional work environment.

According to Brookfield (1987), a major problem in our society has involved placing a placed a greater value on action oriented activities. He states “thinking is not seen as action, despite the fact that thinking is one of the most tiring activities in which we engage on a daily basis (p. 229).” Distance educators need to create relevant assignments that help students practice their critical thinking skills. The author teaches an online doctoral class on the philosophy of knowledge. Lectures are designed to help students to creatively apply philosophical ideas to contemporary social issues. The following brief mini-lecture will reveal how teachers can use popular culture to teach critical thinking skills. Students will learn some of the ways that a philosopher or historian of intellectual history might look at the television world and specifically at portion of the Star Trek television series.

Using Star Trek to Cultivate Critical Thinking Skills (Muirhead
The television industry is continually promoting its own views of reality that need to be challenged and examined by the American public. Reflective thinking enables people to be thoughtful citizens who resist simplistic answers to complex social problems.
Guiness (1994) notes that television shows contain four major kinds bias that influence it messages:
1. It has bias against understanding because it stresses images and emotions but it often lacks context and meaning that creates an illusion of knowledge.
2. Television conversations have a bias against responsibility by having a rapid approach that packages news into segments of intense images of dramatic events.
3. Programs have a bias against historical events because news reports are focused on today as being far more important than the past.
4. Television shows have a bias against rationality because attention is on performance by high profile individuals who prefer drama over reflective thought.
The popular Star Trek television series can be viewed as an interesting slice of American intellectual history. The following notes on Star Trek will highlight how various cast members from several different shows represent a certain perspective on understanding knowledge and truth.

Star Trek
Spock- completely rational solves problems with reasoning skills and represents the ideal Enlightenment man. Often, he resolves difficult problems for the crew members of the Enterprise.
Mission Goal- objective knowledge of the entire universe "the final frontier" and humans pursue the goal alone.

Star Trek: The Next Generation
Data - replaces Spock and he is an android who works with other crew members to find solutions to their problems.
Counselor Troy - uses her intuition to perceive human feelings and truthfulness.
Q - a divine being who is all knowing but morally ambiguous who displays a combination of cynicism, benevolence and self-gratification.
Mission Goal - to go where no man has gone before. Man needs the help of androids and other life forms to discover knowledge. Life is more complicated for people because appearances can be deceiving and truth is considered relative and incomplete.
Observation - the Star Trek series portray an optimistic technological future, but one filled with constant conflicts as the crew travels on their odyssey through space. The show sometimes diminishes the role of human reason and the possibility of objective knowledge. The Voyager series includes a first officer who is a Native American. He is a spirit guide that utilizes a combination of science and mysticism to help manage crisis situations. Ironically, the greatest threat is not being lost in some distant quadrant of space, but it is the loss of personal inner stability.

After sharing highlights from the Star Trek programs, teachers can discuss how the television series reflects different perspectives on truth, knowledge, ethics and intellectual trends. Students might notice that human reason is less important and there greater emphasis on relativism. What is a basic definition of the term? Barzun (2000) relates “it means flexible, adaptable, a sliding scale that gives a different reading in similar situations (p. 761).” Relativism appears to make few distinctions between moral codes, cultures and religions. They each reside in a certain time and place in history that should be respected and tolerated. Yet, Barzun argues that a civilized society often utilizes relative standards for applying the law to individual criminal cases. He maintains that the anti-relativists who embrace moral absolutes cannot effectively answer the question “Whose Absolute are we to adopt and impose? (Barzun 2000, p. 762).” This brief example reveals that popular culture can offer numerous instructional opportunities to help students refine their thinking skills through reading and reflective dialog.

Evaluating Critical Thinking Skills
Contemporary testing methods often fail to provide teachers with information on how students arrive at their responses to test items. Quantitative and qualitative assessment procedures can be useful but it is vital that “….the assessment must be sensitive enough to identify changes that have occurred in students’ thinking skills (paragraph 14).” Critical thinking assessment instruments can include commercially designed tests, teacher made tests, check lists, open-ended questions, problem-solving scenarios or simulations. For instance, check lists can be used to evaluate a variety of student work such as gathering information on student online comments or portfolios. Check lists are useful tools to document evidence of student problem solving and decision making skills (Sormunen & Chalupa, 1994).

Teachers can integrate critical thinking into their classes by presenting information from a diversity of perspectives that involve both the cognitive and affective learning domains. The author has found that students really enjoy reading nonfiction short stories about individuals and their personal learning adventures. Teachers can share interesting and informative stories that offer insights into concepts such as perseverance in problem solving. Short stories can be included in lectures and handouts that stress descriptive information on critical thinking. Stories bring a human element into the online class environment that makes learning new ideas much more meaningful. Also, students should be given examples of creative thinking such as published journal and magazine articles. The following chart is an effective way to help students understand the multidimensional aspects of critical thinking.

Essential Critical Thinking Skills (Woolfolk, 1990, p. 278)

• Defining and Clarifying the Problem
• Identify central issues or problems.
• Compare similarities and differences.
• Determine which information is relevant.
• Formulate appropriate questions.
• Judge Information Related to the Problem.
• Distinguish between fact, opinion and reasoned judgment.
• Check consistency.
• Identify unstated assumptions.
• Recognize stereotypes and clichés.
• Recognize bias, emotional factors, propaganda and semantic slanting.
• Recognize different value systems and ideologies.
• Solving Problems/Drawing Conclusions.
• Recognize the adequacy of data.
• Predict probable consequences.

Online Instructional Challenges
The affective and psychological dimensions of distance education are important aspects of the teaching and learning process. Distance educators face the dilemma of how to foster critical thinking with students who vary in their need for academic guidance. Often, this problem is portrayed as teacher-directed versus student self-directed learning models. In reality, the online teacher will have to adapt his/her teaching style to meet the needs of their students. Berge (1999) relates that interaction in education “involves a continuum from teacher-centered to student-centered approaches”

Distance educators are challenged by using a text-driven form of education. Today’s online classes rely heavily on printed materials and teacher created lectures and handouts. Therefore, the use of language becomes a focal point for teachers and students because the entire communication process is closely linked to thinking. Kirby & Goodpaster (2002) note “language works intimately with all aspects of our thinking …sensing, feeling, remembering, creating, organizing, reasoning, evaluating, deciding, persuading, and acting. As we become more aware of the strengths and weaknesses of language, and as we increase and refine our own language, we will think better

Conclusion
A major adult education goal is helping students become self-directed learners who learn to monitor and improve their thinking skills. Distance educators need to integrate meaningful instructional activities into their classes that promote internalization of critical thinking skills and knowledge. It is one of the unique challenges of teaching online but it is essential to fostering classes and degree programs that prepare students for leadership roles in our society.

References
Barzun, J. (2000). From dawn to decadence: 500 years of Western cultural life. New York: HarperCollins.
Berge, Z. L. (1999). Interaction in post-secondary web-based learning. Educational Technology, 39 (1), 5-11.
Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing Critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bullen, M. (1998). Participation and critical thinking in online university distance education. Journal of Distance Education. 13 (2).Available: http://cade.icaap.org/vol13.2/bullen.html
Collison, G. Elbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating online learning: Effective strategies for moderators. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
Facione, P. A. (1998). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Available: http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/what&why98.pdf
Grenz, S. J. (1995). Star Trek and the Next Generation: Postmodernism and the future of evangelical theology. In D. S. Dockery (Ed. ). The challenge of postmodernism (pp. 89-103). Wheaton, ILL: Victor Books.
Guiness, O. (1994). Fit bodies Fat minds. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologists. 53(4), 449-455.
Kirby, G. R. & Goodpaster, J. R. (2002). Thinking (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Muirhead, B. (2000).Using Star Trek to Enhance Critical Thinking Skills. ASKERIC Lesson Plan. Available: http://ericir.syr.edu/cgi-bin/printlessons.cgi/Virtual/Lessons/Language_Arts/Writing/WCP0074.html
Richards, T. (1997). The meaning of Star Trek. New York, NY: DoubleDay
Sormunen, C. & Chalupa, M. (1994). Critical thinking skills research: Developing evaluation techniques. Journal of Education for Business. 69 (3), 172-178. Retrieved from EBSCOhost from the online library at the University of Phoenix Online.

Why Six Sigma: Concept & Mastery Levels

For Motorola, the originator of Six Sigma, the answer to the question "Why Six Sigma?" was simple: survival. Motorola came to Six Sigma because it was being consistently beaten in the competitive marketplace by foreign firms that were able to produce higher quality products at a lower cost. When a Japanese firm took over a Motorola factory that manufactured Quasar television sets in the United States in the 1970s, they promptly set about making drastic changes in the way the factory operated. Under Japanese management, the factory was soon producing TV sets with 1/20th the number of defects they had produced under Motorola management. They did this using the same workforce, technology, and designs, making it clear that the problem was Motorola's management. Eventually, even Motorola's own executives had to admit "our quality stinks,".

Finally, in the mid 1980s, Motorola decided to take quality seriously. Motorola's CEO at the time, Bob Galvin, started the company on the quality path known as Six Sigma and became a business icon largely as a result of what he accomplished in quality at Motorola. Today, Motorola is known worldwide as a quality leader and a profit leader. After Motorola won the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award in 1988 the secret of their success became public knowledge and the Six Sigma revolution was on. Today it's hotter than ever.

It would be a mistake to think that Six Sigma is about quality in the traditional sense. Quality, defined traditionally as conformance to internal requirements, has little to do with Six Sigma. Six Sigma is about helping the organization make more money. To link this objective of Six Sigma with quality requires a new definition of quality. For Six Sigma purposes I define quality as the value added by a productive endeavor. Quality comes in two flavors: potential quality and actual quality. Potential quality is the known maximum possible value added per unit of input. Actual quality is the current value added per unit of input. The difference between potential and actual quality is waste. Six Sigma focuses on improving quality (i.e., reducing waste) by helping organizations produce products and services better, faster and cheaper. In more traditional terms, Six Sigma focuses on defect prevention, cycle time reduction, and cost savings. Unlike mindless cost-cutting programs which reduce value and quality, Six Sigma identifies and eliminates costs which provide no value to customers: waste costs.

For non-Six Sigma companies, these costs are often extremely high. Companies operating at three or four sigma typically spend between 25 and 40 percent of their revenues fixing problems. This is known as the cost of quality, or more accurately the cost of poor quality. Companies operating at Six Sigma typically spend less than 5 percent of their revenues fixing problems (Figure 1). The dollar cost of this gap can be huge. General Electric estimates that the gap between three or four sigma and Six Sigma was costing them between $8 billion and $12 billion per year.

What is Six Sigma?
Six Sigma is a rigorous, focused and highly effective implementation of proven quality principles and techniques. Incorporating elements from the work of many quality pioneers, Six Sigma aims for virtually error free business performance. Sigma, ?, is a letter in the Greek alphabet used by statisticians to measure the variability in any process. A company's performance is measured by the sigma level of their business processes. Traditionally companies accepted three or four sigma performance levels as the norm, despite the fact that these processes created between 6,200 and 67,000 problems per million opportunities! The Six Sigma standard of 3.4 problems per million opportunities is a response to the increasing expectations of customers and the increased complexity of modern products and processes.

If you're looking for new techniques, don't bother. Six Sigma's magic isn't in statistical or high-tech razzle-dazzle. Six Sigma relies on tried and true methods that have been around for decades. In fact, Six Sigma discards a great deal of the complexity that characterized Total Quality Management (TQM). By one expert's count, there were over 400 TQM tools and techniques. Six Sigma takes a handful of proven methods and trains a small cadre of in-house technical leaders, known as Six Sigma Black Belts, to a high level of proficiency in the application of these techniques. To be sure, some of the methods used by Black Belts are highly advanced, including the use of up-to-date computer technology. But the tools are applied within a simple performance improvement model known as DMAIC, or Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control. DMAIC can be described as follows:

Infrastructure
A very powerful feature of Six Sigma is the creation of an infrastructure to ensure that performance improvement activities have the necessary resources. In this author's opinion, failure to provide this infrastructure is the #1 reason why 80% of all TQM implementations failed in the past. Six Sigma makes improvement and change the full-time job of a small but critical percentage of the organization's personnel. These full time change agents are the catalyst that institutionalizes change. Figure 2 illustrates the required human resource commitment required by Six Sigma.
Leadership .

Six Sigma involves changing major business value streams that cut across organizational barriers. It is the means by which the organization's strategic goals are to be achieved. This effort cannot be led by anyone other than the CEO, who is responsible for the performance of the organization as a whole. Six Sigma must be implemented from the top-down.

Champions and Sponsors
Six Sigma champions are high-level individuals who understand Six Sigma and are committed to its success. In larger organizations Six Sigma will be led by a full time, high level champion, such as an Executive Vice-President. In all organizations, champions also include informal leaders who use Six Sigma in their day-to-day work and communicate the Six Sigma message at every opportunity. Sponsors are owners of processes and systems who help initiate and coordinate Six Sigma improvement activities in their areas of responsibilities.

Master Black Belt
This is the highest level of technical and organizational proficiency. Master Black Belts provide technical leadership of the Six Sigma program. Thus, they must know everything the Black Belts know, as well as understand the mathematical theory on which the statistical methods are based. Master Black Belts must be able to assist Black Belts in applying the methods correctly in unusual situations. Whenever possible, statistical training should be conducted only by Master Black Belts. Otherwise the familiar "propagation of error" phenomenon will occur, i.e., Black Belts pass on errors to green belts, who pass on greater errors to team members. If it becomes necessary for Black Belts and Green Belts to provide training, they should do only so under the guidance of Master Black Belts. For example, Black Belts may be asked to provide assistance to the Master during class discussions and exercises. Because of the nature of the Master's duties, communications and teaching skills are as important as technical competence.

Black Belt
Candidates for Black Belt status are technically oriented individuals held in high regard by their peers. They should be actively involved in the process of organizational change and development. Candidates may come from a wide range of disciplines and need not be formally trained statisticians or engineers. However, because they are expected to master a wide variety of technical tools in a relatively short period of time, Black Belt candidates will probably possess a background including college-level mathematics and the basic tool of quantitative analysis. Coursework in statistical methods may be considered a strong plus or even a prerequisite. As part of their training, Black Belts receive 160 hours of classroom instruction, plus one-on-one project coaching from Master Black Belts or consultants.

Successful candidates will be comfortable with computers. At a minimum, they should understand one or more operating systems, spreadsheets, database managers, presentation programs, and word processors. As part of their training they will be required to become proficient in the use of one or more advanced statistical analysis software packages. Six Sigma Black Belts work to extract actionable knowledge from an organization's information warehouse. To ensure access to the needed information, Six Sigma activities should be closely integrated with the information systems (IS) of the organization. Obviously, the skills and training of Six Sigma Black Belts must be enabled by an investment in software and hardware. It makes no sense to hamstring these experts by saving a few dollars on computers or software.

Green Belt
Green Belts are Six Sigma project leaders capable of forming and facilitating Six Sigma teams and managing Six Sigma projects from concept to completion. Green Belt training consists of five days of classroom training and is conducted in conjunction with Six Sigma projects. Training covers project management, quality management tools, quality control tools, problem solving, and descriptive data analysis. Six Sigma champions should attend Green Belt training. Usually, Six Sigma Black Belts help Green Belts define their projects prior to the training, attend training with their Green Belts, and assist them with their projects after the training.

Staffing Levels and Expected Returns
As stated earlier in this article, the number of full time personnel devoted to Six Sigma is not large. Mature Six Sigma programs, such as those of Motorola, General Electric, Johnson & Johnson, AlliedSignal, and others average about one-percent of their workforce as Black Belts. There is usually about one Master Black Belts for every ten Black Belts, or about 1 Master Black Belt per 1,000 employees. A Black Belt will typically complete 5 to 7 projects per year. Project teams are led by Green Belts, who, unlike Black Belts and Master Black Belts, are not employed full time in the Six Sigma program. Black Belts are highly prized employees and are often recruited for key management positions elsewhere in the company. After Six Sigma has been in place for three or more years, the number of former Black Belts tends to be about the same as the number of active Black Belts.
Estimated savings per project varies from organization to organization. Reported results average about US$150,000 to US$243,000. Note that these are not the huge mega-projects pursued by Re-engineering. Yet, by completing 5 to 7 projects per year per Black Belt, the company will add in excess of US$1 million per year per Black Belt to its bottom line. For a company with 1,000 employees the numbers would look something like this:
Master Black Belts: 1
Black Belts: 10
Projects: = 50 to 70 (5 to 7 per Black Belt)
Estimated saving: US$9 million to US$14.6 million (US$14,580 per employee)
Do the math for your organization and see what Six Sigma could do for you. Because Six Sigma savings impact only non-value added costs, they flow directly to your company's bottom line.

Implementation of Six Sigma
After over two decades of experience with quality improvement, there is now a solid body of scientific research regarding the experience of thousands of companies implementing major programs such as Six Sigma. Researchers have found that successful deployment of Six Sigma involves focusing on a small number of high-leverage items. The steps required to successfully implement Six Sigma are well-documented.

1. Successful performance improvement must begin with senior leadership. Start by providing senior leadership with training in the principles and tools they need to prepare their organization for success. Using their newly acquired knowledge, senior leaders direct the development of a management infrastructure to support Six Sigma. Simultaneously, steps are taken to "soft-wire" the organization and to cultivate an environment for innovation and creativity. This involves reducing levels of organizational hierarchy, removing procedural barriers to experimentation and change, and a variety of other changes designed to make it easier to try new things without fear of reprisal.

2. Systems are developed for establishing close communication with customers, employees, and suppliers. This includes developing rigorous methods of obtaining and evaluating customer, employee and supplier input. Base line studies are conducted to determine the starting point and to identify cultural, policy, and procedural obstacles to success.

3. Training needs are rigorously assessed. Remedial skills education is provided to assure that adequate levels of literacy and numeracy are possessed by all employees. Top-to-bottom training is conducted in systems improvement tools, techniques, and philosophies.

4. A framework for continuous process improvement is developed, along with a system of indicators for monitoring progress and success. Six Sigma metrics focus on the organization's strategic goals, drivers, and key business processes.

5. Business processes to be improved are chosen by management, and by people with intimate process knowledge at all levels of the organization. Six Sigma projects are conducted to improve business performance linked to measurable financial results. This requires knowledge of the organization's constraints.

6. Six Sigma projects are conducted by individual employees and teams led by Green Belts and assisted by Black Belts.

Although the approach is simple, it is by no means easy. But the results justify the effort expended. Research has shown that firms that successfully implement Six Sigma perform better in virtually every business category, including return on sales, return on investment, employment growth, and share price increase. When will you be ready to join the Six Sigma revolution?

Secrets of Successful Sales

Being fascinated by success stories, I cherished a classical book that was reprinted recently. It is an autobiography by Frank Bettger who was one of the highest paid salesmen in the U.S. the book is titled: How I Raised Myself From Failure to Success in Selling.

Bettger tells about his field experience in sales, the secrets of his strength, and how he turned failure into unparalleled success, customers’ respect, and fame. His proven success formula is based on his keen insights on:

· The power of enthusiasm in sales and how it boosts any salesman’s salesmanship skills and convinces the clients of how much the salesperson ‘believes’ in the products he is selling.
· Conquering fear and building up self-confidence through product knowledge and rehearsing the sales initial presentation.
· Preparing for the sales interviews through advance meticulous research on the client and his needs.
· Selling the sales interview which precedes the actual product’s sale. It is the sale before the sale’ and unless you do it right the first time there is no way you can proceed and eventually close the sale.

Applying Bettger’s views on effective sales behavior, invites an in-depth examination of five areas that any good salesperson should totally master in their related knowledge. In my opinion they are all vital to the success of any salesperson, or what I call the ‘Six Ks’ areas. These are:

1. Knowing yourself which has to do with the individual’s personal qualities. Each person should be sincere in acknowledging his weakness and draw plans to overcome them, while knowing his strengths and consistently building on them.
2. Knowing your company. It is important to feel proud of the company you represent when selling. Knowing your company’s history, achievements, and track record, would help you sell its image first. Consequently, selling its products becomes a lot easier.
3. Knowing your product. Knowledge of your product is essential as the clients would always expect a salesperson to tell them how the product is going to satisfy their needs and how it is different from the competition. They would even respect the product’s limitations if they were candidly told about them.
4. Knowing your competition. Awareness of the competitors and their range of products and their qualities, is a wealth of knowledge that would guarantee your clients respect for you when your objectively compare your product and their within the context of ‘value for money.’
5. Knowing your customers. Constant contact, vigilance, and research to define your customers would save both time and cost before launching your product. This will also help you focus your activities as far as customer service requirements are concerned.
6. Knowing your global opportunities. Businesses of today are becoming more and more global rather than local. With the revolution of the communication technology, crossing regional borders to reach other markets is now becoming easier and more accessible. E-commerce is rapidly escalating and developing into a lifestyle, and the process of ordering goods and services and paying for them is becoming faster and more efficient.

However, the platinum rule of successful sales, regardless of what you are selling, will remain ‘excelling customer expectations’. Bettger sums it up in one sentence that eloquently says it all: ‘Sell the people the way they like to be sold.’

Old New Ways to Motivate Emploees

Over the last quarter century, I have studied and taught the theories on motivation of Taylor, Maslow, Herzberg, McGregor, Argyris, and McLland. Although each of those management and behavioral scientists has tackled the topic from a different point of view, defending his opinion with both theoretical research, observation, I find Herzberg’s theory the most practical and easy to implement in the workplace. Naturally, the work of all those scientists complements the whole approach to the very important topic of motivation, but herzberg’s points more clearly at the satisfiers and dissatisfiers in the workplace. His focus on the job content as a lasting motivator qualifies for more analysis and serious consideration.

Although Abraham Maslow had discussed the highly complicated task of reaching a concrete definition of the basic human needs, it naturally follows that there are no easy assumptions concerning what employees really want from their organizations. In fact, the various types of their human needs will be eventually converted into specific ‘wants.’ Consequently, an in-depth look at typical employees wants and how organizations may satisfy them, will reveal some relatedness to Maslow’s ‘Pyramid of Needs’ as follows:

A Meaningful Job:
A very difficult want to supply in today’s world of constant change and demands, particularly in large organizations with division of work culture. A meaningful job is the core to job satisfaction. It has got to do with the job content and how challenging it is. We are talking here about not only the employee’s skills and ability to do his/her job, but his talents to apply creative and innovative ways to do it. Individual’s need for both recognition and drive for self-actualization can be integrated in job enrichment to comply with individual wants. Therefore, the ability of the organization to maintain a good caliber of loyal employees who believe in the value of their jobs in the success of the organization is considered crucial in enhancing organizational competitiveness.

Fair Pay: could be considered the most important of all the basic needs as it should be secured in order for the individual to be able to satisfy any of his basic needs. In other words, a fair pay helps satisfying multiple physiological, security, and egoistic needs, even if it cannot alone motivate the whole person. The problem lies in how an organization ensures that their pay will be perceived by its employees as fair and competitive. From experience, I can safely say that pay is the most argued aspect of any organization.

Job Security: A want which is high on the list due to the constant internal and external environmental threats such as the fast pace technological change, fierce competition, unstable economies, mergers, and downsizing. They all result in escalating sense of insecurity on the part of employees. In fact, unless any pay level is paired with job security employees will still feel insecure of losing their jobs any time and with them the pay they were getting. Organizational ruthlessness in this area poses the toughest challenge to business leaders to formulate plans and strategies that ensure a good market share and growth in order to be able to at least maintain their organizations existing employment levels.

Congenial Associates:
The want emanates from the social need of gregariousness and social acceptance. Here, management can assist the process through careful planning of orientation programs and socialization through rest periods and recreational activities, as well as promoting the formation of work teams. Human related work procedures can also be designed in such a way to make all this possible. Teamwork and team spirit can only be nurtured if the work place becomes a place of functional, interrelated homogeneous teams working together.

Credit for Excelling:
This want stems from the individuals egoistic needs and can be supplied by management through verbal praise of excellent work, monetary rewards for suggestions, as well as public recognition through awards or interviews in employees’ magazines, newsletters and bulletin boards. Recharging employees’ batteries is key to loyalty, increased productivity, and superior quality. It is a sure ticket to escalating net profit.

Opportunity to Advance:
Not all employees want primarily to advance their careers. A strange discovery but true though. Some feel the social needs more strongly than the egoistic ones, but most employees certainly want to be assured that the opportunity is there. They are reluctant to take new responsibility and feel more comfortable with a stable job that requires a ‘good doer’. Such a feeling is influenced by a complicated cultural tradition mix of freedom and opportunity. As a general rule career advancement and development pose a great challenge to the organizations of today.

Attractive Work Conditions:
Working in a safe, comfortable work environment is a strong want. It is driven by multiple needs. People spend at work more than they spend at home with their families, relatives, and friends. A good quality of work life is therefore very important to their well being at the workplace. It also helps in reducing the medication bill, and reduces personal conflicts, and condition employees to tolerate more work pressures.

Competent Leadership:
The want for competent, fair leadership who are human needs oriented and are qualified to inspire and lead by example is becoming a strong demand in the modern workplace scene. Competent leaders satisfy both psychological and physiological needs of the employees. They ensure organizational competitiveness and growth which mean both status and job security for the employees. They also set directions, transparency, and inject new ideas and vision into the organization culture and the workplace dynamics.

A Socially Relevant Organization
This want ensues from a self-esteem need, and levies a highly challenging responsibility upon organizational leaders. Sensitivity to the social responsibility of today’s organizations is an important factor in gaining social acceptance for both the organization and its employees. It could be considered as a ‘social investment’ that yields a high return for the shareholders and stakeholders alike. Helping the community develop is in fact helping employees have a sense of ‘belonging’ to the organization as part of their community and not an alienated body with a dominating goal of making money. This kind of interaction between the organization and the community would eventually develop into a customer driven win/win organizational culture.