Part 2: Unit 2
Performance Matrix
Functional Assessment
1
Skip to SO16
Performance Matrix



Only SO13 is for the exam
I am not going to cover that in lecture - unless
someone has a question about it
But remember anything I skip in lecture is still
fair game for the exam as long as there is a
study objective on it!
2
3
SO16: Performance Matrix Daniels1

Generated from Felix & Riggs



Abernathy


Balanced Scorecard
Created as a measurement tool
Performance Scorecard
Unique feature: performance indexing
(weighting/prioritizing)
1
Performance Matrix power point slides:
© 2006 AUBREY DANIELS INTERNATIONAL, INC. FOR USE EXCLUSIVELY BY EDUCATORS IN ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS.
4
Why 4-12 for columns,
with 5=baseline and 10=goal?
Sample Matrix
Behaviors or
Results
4
5
Below Baseline
Above goal
6
Raw
Score
7
8
9
10 11 12
Points
100
Sub-goals
Baseline
(not current)
Performance
Weight
Total Pts.
Goal
© 2006 AUBREY DANIELS INTERNATIONAL, INC. FOR USE EXCLUSIVELY BY EDUCATORS IN ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS.
5
Sample Matrix: Postal Worker
Behaviors or
Results
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 Weight
Appropriate
Greeting
Number of
Bins Sorted
59% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 98%
Till Correct
91% 92% 93% 96%
Number of
Complaints1
3
6
4
5
5
6
4
7
8
9
Raw
Score
Points
10 12
97% 98% 99%100%
3
2
1
0
100
Sub-goals
Baseline
Performance
1Note:
Total Pts.
Goal
number of complaints, less is better
6
Sample Matrix
Distribution=100
Behaviors or
Results
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 Weight
Appropriate
Greeting
Number of
Bins Sorted
59% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 98%
Till Correct
91% 92% 93% 96%
Number of
Complaints
3
6
4
5
5
4
6
7
8
9
10 12
97% 98% 99%100%
3
2
1
0
Raw
Score
Points
35
25
30
10
100
Sub-goals
Baseline
Performance
Total Pts.
Goal
© 2006 AUBREY DANIELS INTERNATIONAL, INC. FOR USE EXCLUSIVELY BY EDUCATORS IN ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS.
7
Sample Matrix: What would the points be?
Actual
performance/Data
Behaviors or
Results
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12 Weight
Appropriate
Greeting
Number of
Bins Sorted
59% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 98%
Till Correct
91% 92% 93% 96%
Number of
Complaints
3
6
4
5
5
4
6
7
8
9
10 12
97% 98% 99%100%
3
2
1
0
Raw
Score
35
70%
25
9
30
95%
10
1
Points
100
What would
Sub-goals
Baseline
Performance
Total Pts.
Goal
© 2006 AUBREY DANIELS INTERNATIONAL, INC. FOR USE EXCLUSIVELY BY EDUCATORS IN ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS.
8
Link to rewards: Use points to
determine level of reward
Points
Reward
700-799 Borders Café gift card, Blockbuster rental
800-899 extra 1/2 hour for lunch
900-999 gift certificate for favorite store or restaurant
1000-1200 1/2 day off on Friday
*Group contingency: If everyone reaches 750, the
whole office goes to lunch on the boss
© 2006 AUBREY DANIELS INTERNATIONAL, INC. FOR USE EXCLUSIVELY BY EDUCATORS IN ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS.
9
Skipping to SOs 18&19:
Lecture study objectives, intro



The Pampino et al. article used a functional assessment
(the Performance Diagnostic Checklist by Austin) to
determine what interventions were needed
Functional assessments have received more attention
lately, although most practitioners and, many researchers
have used some type of assessment to determine what
their interventions should be
The term “functional assessment” comes from Iwata’s
work in DD and autism - determination of what is
controlling self-injurious behavior
10
Functional Assessment, intro

In OBM, the term has become more transparent due to Austin’s PDC
and Wilder’s recent publications, but these type of analyses have
existed for many years in both OBM and I/O - just not called
“functional assessment”



An “ABC” analysis is a functional assessment
Mager & Pipe, 1970, flowchart to determine whether a performance
problem was a training problem or a consequence problem
Petrock, 1978, balance of consequences



Brown, 1982, included balance of consequences in his book
Daniels & Rosen, 1982, modified it into “PIC/NIC”
These all focused on the consequences of behavior, without
expanding the analysis to management and organizational level
systems analysis

Brethower was the first to do that in his 1972 systems analysis book with
his Total Performance System diagram and concept - but it “didn’t catch
on
11
SO18: Three types of
functional assessment

Informant


Descriptive


Direct observation of the employees: generally considered to be
more reliable than informant
Functional analysis


Interviews, questionnaires, rating scales or some other “indirect”
(verbal) method: a bit suspect as are all verbal reports
Experimental analysis - the systematic manipulation of specific
antecedents and consequences that may affect the target
behavior: most reliable, but often difficult in organizational
settings
 Good example, Pampino, Wilder, & Binder (2005) to determine
why foremen were entering wrong job codes
In OBM, most common is to combine informant and
descriptive
12
SO19: Three popular functional
assessment procedures in OBM

Gilbert’s Behavioral Engineering Model, 1978



Binder’s Six Boxes (very nice ABA presentation, 2006)


Directly derived from Gilbert, but copyrighted
Austin’s Performance Diagnostic Checklist


Earliest one that “caught on” and is still very popular
The next two are based on his
Based on Gilbert but also expert consultant analyses of
case studies (his dissertation)
NFE Rummler’s Human Performance System

Very similar to Gilbert’s BEM
13
(all systems oriented, that is they don’t just target the antecedents and consequences of behavior, but also look at systems variables)
Binder’s
Six(NFE)Boxes
Gilbert’s
BEM
Information
Environmental Data
Relevant
& frequent
Expectations
Supports
feedback
&
Descriptions of what
Feedback
is expected
Instrumentation
Motivation
Resources
Incentives
 Adequate
and
Tools
Consequences
contingent $$
materials designed
&
&
incentives
to match human
Resources
Incentives
factors
 Nonmonetary
Tools
Clear
and relevant
guides
1
Person’s
Repertory of
Behavior
2
incentives
 Career
3
development
Knowledge
Capacity
Motives
for
Skills
exemplary
&
performance
Knowledge
Placement
Work
Selection
scheduling
&
for peak
Assignment
performance
“Capacity”
Prosthesis
Assessment
Training
Selection
4
5
Motives &of
motives
to work
Preferences
Recruitment of
“Attitudes”
people
to match
job
6
14
(click for binder)
Austin’s Performance
Diagnostic Checklist (NFE)

Four areas that are assessed




Antecedents and Information
Equipment and processes
Knowledge and skills - training
Consequences
(A lot of overlap among all of these)
15
SO22B What influences the
effectiveness of lotteries?



Pampino et al. used a monthly lottery where each of the 5
employees had an opportunity to win $20.00 based on
the number of lottery tickets they earned for each shift
Iwata et al. used a weekly lottery where staff who met
performance criteria had an opportunity to
schedule/reschedule the two days they wanted off the
following week.
What factors could influence how effective a lottery is?
(lotteries have been used in a number of studies; appear effective; benefit? Cost effective Which certainly has advantages in human service settings - note Iwata used something that did not cost anything.)
16
Iwata et al.

Setting


Residential setting for multiply-handicapped
retarded
Purpose

Compare staff assignments to staff assignments
plus a performance lottery to increase staff
performance
(in hss, staff scheduling and assignment popular intervention - antecedent vs. consequences)
17
SO24: Why PM is needed in
human service settings

Percentage of time staff spend in training clients or
socially playing with them?
Less than 1% in some cases!

Percentage of time staff spend in off-task leisure
activity such as reading newspapers, watching TV?
20% to 40%!
(might believe things have changed for the better - old data)
18
NFE, but more data why PM is
needed in human service settings



Percentage of time residents were found to be off-task
by Parsons et al. (1989)?
67%
Percentage of time staff spent in stimulation training in
Iwata’s study in the four units?
1%-5%
Percentage of time staff was off-task in Iwata’s study - 4
units?
24%-30%
(data the same as in the early studies from the 1970s! Any similar data in gerontology?)
19
SO26: Staff and resident
behavior


Some aspects of the behaviors of residents
were measured as well as the behavior of the
staff (which was the primary DV)
Why?
20
(hint: Gilbert; same issue as in Quilitch last unit)
SO30: Custodial care


The intervention did not affect either indirect
or direct custodial work.
Why do you think this is the case?
(last slide; mention Green & Reid study - structural analysis to determine times to conduct training)
21
Questions?

Exercise time!
22
Gilbert’s BEM (NFE)
Information
Instrumentation
Motivation
Resources
Incentives
Tools

Knowledge
Capacity
Motives
Training
Work
Assessment
Environmental Data
Relevant & frequent
Supports
feedback
Descriptions
of what
is expected
Clear and relevant
guides
Person’s
Repertory of
Behavior
for
exemplary
performance
Placement
and
materials designed
to match human
factors
scheduling
for peak
performance
Prosthesis
Selection
Adequate
contingent $$
incentives
 Nonmonetary
incentives
 Career
development
of
motives to work
Recruitment of
people to match
job
23