As an extension of Gilbert's BEM, Gayeski (2004) characterizes this model by saying that "I have not found another model that so explicitly leads us to state the desired state of performance" (p. 1). Langdon's model provides a framework for analyzing the gap between actual and desired performance at all levels of an organization. By defining performance as the more commonly understood term "work", the complexities of performance are presented within a more familiar context, improving communication and collaboration between HPT professionals and members of client organizations (Langdon, 1999).
Danny Langdon, founder of Performance International and developer of Language of Work ™ Model tells us that the model grew out his frustration at seeing Quality Groups try to discuss and solve problems. Without a common language, individuals jumped to solutions, believed they were talking about the same things at the same time and debated endlessly without satisfactory solution, or at a minimum with great inefficiency. Improvements were based on the loudest voice—not the best analysis. (Performance International, n.d., ¶ 2 )
Langdon applies a framework he calls the "Work Performance Proforma" to describe the various components of work. This 6:4:4 model represents the various elements, levels, and parts of performance that should be considered when attempting to analyze performance and develop appropriate interventions.
According to Langdon (1999), people often understand that they use certain "inputs" or resources to do their work and that their work creates certain products or "outcomes", but there is more to understanding work than these elements alone. The Language of Work TM model presents six interrelated elements of work:
Element |
Definition |
Items for Analysis |
|---|---|---|
Inputs |
What is needed to get work done |
|
Conditions |
Those factors that directly or indirectly influence the other elements of work |
|
Process |
The "steps" of work or how the work is done |
|
Outputs |
The end products of work |
|
Consequences |
The impact or effect of a work output |
|
Feedback |
A judgements of the adequacy of the other elements of work |
|
Performance occurs within and across organizations and the elements of work described above are present throughout organizations. In order to accurately identify a performance gap, the elements of current and desired performance must be described. The performance technologist must also consider the various levels at which performance occurs and how work at each level impacts performance at every other level. Langdon (1999) suggests the following sequence for systematic analysis and improvement of performance at all levels:
Level |
Definition |
Items for Analysis |
|---|---|---|
1. Business Unit |
The broadest level of the organization that defines the purpose of work at all other levels |
|
2. Processes |
The core activities that define work |
|
3. Individual |
The performers who do the work |
|
4. Work Group |
The administrative organization of work |
|
Once the current and desired elements of performance have been described at the sequentially appropriate level and the performance gap identified, the cause of a performance problem can be analyzed by examining the context of work. Langdon describes four interrelated parts to performance that make up the context of work: behaviors, standards, enablers/supports, and "noise"(barriers) (p. 270).
Part |
Definition |
Items for Analysis |
|---|---|---|
Behavior: |
"a series of internal and external events that cause a desired conclusion to be reached" (Langdon, 1999, p. 271) |
|
Standards: |
"define the costs, quantity or quality of work to be performed" (p. 271) |
|
Enablers/Supports: |
"what it takes...to make a 'healthy organization'...one that supports the work behavior it wants to see occurring at all four levels of performance" (p. 272) |
|
"Noise": |
negative "attitudes, opinions, and habits (that) affect the work of others" (p. 272) |
|
Consideration these factors at each level and within each element of performance help guide HPT professionals to through a complete, consise description of current and desired performance. It may be helpful to analyze those elements that represent behaviors first, as they are the "main part of work" (Langdon, 1999, p. 271), followed by a definition of the desired standards of performance. Identification of those elements that support or get in the way of desired performance complete the analysis process.
Following a performance analysis using the Language of Work TM Model, selection of interventions specifically targeted to the performance gap that has been identified should be as easy as 1-2-3:
Effective interventions should attempt to maximize desired behaviors that meet accepted standards and provide adequate support while eliminating the "noise" that impacts all parts of performance at all levels.
Go to the Intervention section of the toolkit for a more detailed discussion of how to select appropriate interventions, as well as samples of instructional and non-instructional performance interventions.
The website of Dr. Langdon's company, Performance International, provides additional information about the application of the Language of WorkTM Model.
Gayeski, D. (2004). IPT 560: Clarifying desired state of performance, 9/16/04. Lotus Notes database via Boise State University. Retrieved November 15, 2004.
Langdon, D. G. (1999). The language of work. In H. Stolovitch & E. Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of human performance technology (2nd ed.) (pp. 260-280). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.
Performance International. (n.d.) The process we use. Retrieved November 15, 2004 from http://www.performanceinternational.com/processframe.htm