Friday, May 25, 2018

HPI: Burning Questions and Takeaways


In one of my classes that dealt with HPI there were of course a thousand questions regarding the subject however you were only allowed to pick one and discuss what we learned that semester. This is an actual entry from that class, please add any questions or points you want to share to this blog post.


Part 1: Please post your "burning question" from the Module 1 group forum and the answers you found this semester. What aspects of the question are still unclear? How might you continue to learn and gain the knowledge you need after our semester ends?
Part 2: Next tell us your key take aways from our class and how you plan to apply what you have learned.

Part 1-The burning question from the Module one group was:
“One of the burning questions that I have about HPI that I hope to be able to answer is, how to gain or maintain sustainability after a successful intervention? Also another question I have, is how do you hold accountable a sponsor who is interested in a HPI one moment, then loses interests (and the HPI loses support) the next, only to be shocked when the HPI fails?”

I have not found in-depth answers for either of these questions, that I feel are valid and very important to the success of any intervention. Most of the material covered was about what is covered during the intervention, what types of tools used, how to get the sponsor to secure resources, etc., but did not go deep enough. I think that methods like RSVP, Capacity building and implementing for sustainability are great for discussion, but only answer a change in leadership as the most logical factor for a lack of sustainability, but not organizational culture as a deterrent. Even using Mosely and Hasting’s Model stage of institutionalizing it has been my experience does not work with sponsors or CEOs that have the interest in a momentary interest in a program. Even if you use standard evaluations either formative or summative, and have positive results if the sponsor is not interested in the details or wants to jump to another program altogether (that has been my experience) maintaining sustainability or making them accountable is very hard or even impossible.

One key takeaway I took from this class is from an issue I had early in the class with the differences between the Cause Analysis and Root cause analysis. As students we have the option to refer to textbooks and other students for answers. However, in a client’s case, and the advent of google if there is confusion about the difference of the tools the client might feel more empowered to research these terms themselves in order to bridge the gaps of their understanding of the process. This in turn could cause more problems for the professional than create solutions.

In fact, I would also include the issue of many individuals in management who confuse 360-degree feedback and 360 degree appraisals into this group. Knowing this I clearly need to be wary of individuals with this type of “initiative” and have ready clear definitions on hand in case of this possible scenario to set the record straight.

The other takeaway is that these interventions can definitely be used not as tool but as retaliatory options by those in management, against employees that they feel are not meeting a certain standard. Even in cases that the employee is meeting all organizational performance standards, if this employee is not meeting a certain organizational culture these positive interventions can be abused and it is up to professional to inform the sponsors in the organization to implement consequences on these individuals to ensure the success of the program’s implementation.

No comments:

Post a Comment