Standardized training and development programs offer consultants and training staffs an alternative to "custom-made" efforts. However, such "ready-to-use" programs vary greatly in costs and benefits. Agreement on minimum requirements would improve the quality of these programs and help prospective users to assess and select them.
Seven standards are proposed: (1) preliminary review of research literature about the behavioral changes involved in the program; (2) effective identification of the dimensions of behavioral change; (3) rapid and meaningful feedback processes; (4) reliable, valid, and relevant measures of change; (5) stable outcomes according to follow-ups; (6) analyses of the relations among the dimensions of change and their relation to external data; and (7) normative results on selected populations.
As examples, six programs-PROFILE, the COMMUNICA TION AUDIT, PROCESS, PROSPECTS, PROSPER, and PROFAIR are examined and assessed on the basis of these standards.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, S. B. et al. Encyclopedia of educational evaluation: Concepts and techniques for evaluating education and training programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1975.
2.
Bass, B. M.PROFAIR-an affirmative action program for women employees. Scottsville, N.Y.: Transnational Programs Corporation, 1971.
3.
Bass, B. M.Self-managing systems, Z.E.G. and other unthinkables. Symposium. Humanizing the organization. American Psychological Association meeting, New Orleans, August, 1974.
4.
Bass, B. M.A systems survey research and feedback procedure for management and organizational development. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1976, 12 (2), 215-229.
5.
Bass, B. M., & Barrett, G. V.Man, work and organization: An introduction to industrial and organizational psychology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1972.
6.
Bass, B. M., Cascio, W. F., & McPherson, j. W.PROSPER-an affirmative action for black employees. Scottsville, N.Y.: Transnational Programs Corporation, 1972.
7.
Bass, B. M., Cascio, W. F., McPherson, J. W., & Tragash, H. J.PROSPER-Training and research for increasing management awareness about affirmative action in race relations. Academy of Management Journal, 1976, 19 (3), 353-369.
8.
Bass, B. M., & Klauss, R.COMMUNICATION AUDIT. Scottsville, N.Y.: Transnational Programs Corporation, 1975a.
9.
Bass, B. M. & Klauss, R.Communication styles, credibility and their consequences. Personnel Administrator, 1975b.
10.
Bass, B. M., Krusell, J., & Alexander, R. A.Male managers' attitudes toward working women. American Behavioral Scientist, 1971, 15 (2), 221-236.
11.
Bass, B. M., & Valenzi, E. R.PROFILE. Scottsville, N.Y.: Transnational Programs Corporation, 1973.
12.
Bass, B. M. & Valenzi, E. R.Contingent aspects of effective management styles. In J. G. Hunt & L. L. Larson (Eds.) Contingency approaches to leadership. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1974, 130-157.
13.
Bass, B. M., Valenzi, E. R., Farrow, D. L., & Solomon, R. J.Management styles associated with organizational, task, personal, and interpersonal contingencies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 720-729.
14.
Bass, B. M., & Vaughan, J. A.Training in industry: The management of learning. Belmont, California: Brooks-Cole, 1966.
15.
Bowers, D. G.O.D. techniques and their results in 23 organizations: The Michigan ICL study. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1973, 9 (1), 21-43.
16.
Cascio, W. F., & Bass, B. M.The effects of role play in a program to modify attitudes toward black employees. Journal of Social Psychology, 1976, 92, 261-266.
17.
Division of Industrial-Organizational Psychology. Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1975.
18.
Farrow, D. & Bass, B. M. A phoenix emerges: The importance of manager and subordinate personality in contingency leadership analyses. Technical Report 77-1, Grant DAHC-19-76-G-008, University of Rochester, 1977.
19.
Filbeck, R.Systems in teaching and learning. Lincoln, Nebraska: Professional Educators Publications, 1974.
20.
Gay, R. M. & Nelson, G. R.Cost and efficiency in military specialty training. Paper No. P-5160. 8th Department of Defense Cost Research Symposium, Warrenton, Virginia, 1973.
21.
Gilbert, T. F.The high cost of knowledge. Personnel, 1976, (March), 11-23.
22.
Harmes, H. M.A trilogy: 3. Given a program: a new model of instructional research. Educational Technology, 1973, 13 (10), 23-25.
23.
Hinkle, D. E.Measurement for the purpose of evaluation. Southeastern Invitational Conference on Measurement in Education. Athens, Georgia, 1972.
24.
Klauss, R. Dimensions of managerial interpersonal communication behavior and their relation to measures of satisfaction and performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester, 1975.
25.
Klawuhn, R. E., & Basso, A. J.Adapting and testing business management development programs for educational administrators. New York: American Management Association, 1972.
26.
Krusell, J., Vicino, F. L., Bass, B. M., Deci, E. L., & Landy, D. A.PROCESS-a program of self-administered exercises for personal and interpersonal development. Scottsville, N.Y.: Transnational Programs Corporation, 1971.
27.
Middleton, M. G. et al. Computer managed instruction in Navy training. NAVTADQUIPCEN-TAEG-14, Orlando, Florida, 1974.
28.
Miller, J. A.Concepts and processes in career development: The professional development research program. Technical Report 47, University of Rochester, March, 1972.
29.
Miller, J. A., Haas, J. A., Bass, B. M., & Ryterband, E. C.EXERCISE FUTURE. Scottsville, N.Y.: Transnational Programs Corporation, 1968.
30.
Nee, J. G.The development and experimental analysis of a self-instructional program in graphical kinematics. AERA Meeting, New Orleans, 1973.
31.
Popham, W. J., & Husek, T. R.Implications of criterion-referenced measurement. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1969, 6 (1), 1-9.
32.
Richardson, W., & McFadden, J.Follow-up studies: Factors to consider in planning and implementation. Journal of the American Association of Teacher Education in Agriculture, 1975, 16 (3), 13-16.
33.
Solomon, R. J. The impact of manager-subordinate perceptual discrepancies on a contingent analysis of leadership. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Rochester, 1975.
34.
Speagle, R. E.Cognitive criteria for effective audio-visual production. Educational Technology, 1975, 15 (3), 18-22.
35.
Tallmadge, G. K. & Horst, P.A procedural guide for validation achievement gains in educational projects. (Revised) RMC Report No. UR-240, RMC Research Corporation, Los Altos, California, 1974.
36.
Tennyson, R. D. & Bontwell, R. D.A quality control design for validating hierarchical sequencing of programmed instruction. Report No. WP-12. Department of Communications, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, 1970.
37.
Tuckman, B. W.The differentiated outcome hypotheses or when will we stop using conventional achievement as the sole criterion for evaluating unconventional instruction. AERA Meeting, Chicago, 1974.
38.
Vicino, F. L., Krusell, J., Deci, E. L., & Landy, D. A.The impact of PROCESS: Self-administered exercises for personal and interpersonal development. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1973, 9, 737-757.
39.
Vicino, F. L., & Miller, J. A.PROSPECTS-career planning for professional employees. Scottsville, N.Y.: Transnational Programs Corporation, 1971.
