Odin Westgaard Performance Checklists PDF

Odin Westgaard – Performance Checklists
Performance Checklists
By Odin Westgaard, Ed.D.

Originally published in the CADDI Newsletter as a 4‐part series
in the Summer, Fall and Winter 2001 and Spring 2002 issues.

This is the first in a four‐part series on performance checklists.

Checklists are, perhaps, the most common and the most ancient devices used to promote
learning. As such, I suspect many people in our profession tend to snub them and look for more
esoteric and/or technical ways to help clients. Understand I’m not against technology. Far from
it, I believe it should be used to design, develop, and implement (guess what) performance
checklists and a plethora of other types of interventions. Technology can make this old reliable
tool even more valuable. But right now, the central issue is a working definition. What is a
performance checklist?

On the surface of things it seems simple. A checklist is a series of steps or phases presented in
one way or another that one can use to document whether or not something is as it should (or
should not) be.

My dictionary says, “A list in which items can be compared, scheduled, verified, or identified.”

I like that definition. It provides insight into the flexibleness and variability of this tool. Whether
it’s a performance checklist or some other kind, any checklist has these attributes. They can be
used to compare one thing with another as in “this is how it should be, how is it?”. They can be
used to schedule things. An itinerary for a trip is a sort of checklist. They can be used to verify.
Preflight checklists used by airlines verify that the machine is ready to fly. They can be used to
identify. “Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, must be a duck.”

Although many applications don’t fit our preconceived notions of what checklists look like, they
are, indeed, checklists.

Consider the duck example. In a formal document it might look like the table in Figure 1.

Odin Westgaard ‐ Performance Checklists (2001) ‐ Originally published in the CADDI Newsletter 1

Element Description Check Mark Comments
A. Duck‐like appearance
B. Sounds ducky
C. Waddles as it walks
Figure 1: Checklist Example

A check mark for each element would allow the conclusion that it is, indeed, a duck.

The point is that we must often reconsider a training package or set of instructions. They may
be checklists in disguise. The fact that something may not look like a traditional checklist
doesn’t belie its nature. It often makes sense to use a different format. However, in my mind, it
doesn’t make sense to pretend a checklist is something else. Consider, again, the duck example.
The reason this is important? If something happens to be a checklist, it will have the attributes
of a checklist and can be used to compare, schedule, identify, and verify. Not only can it do
those things, let me add two more. It can be used to promote learning and to assess
competence.

Checklists promote learning and assess competence. Look at the duck checklist again. There are
three elements. Each one can be considered a learning opportunity. What does a duck look
like? Having asked the question, we are put in the position of providing a way to learn the
answer. We could be trivial and say, “depends on the duck,” or we can begin a serious
discussion of how different kinds of ducks are the same in some ways and different in others.
More important, by using the checklist with a respondent or candidate or learner of some sort,
we have set up a psychological requirement. That requirement has all three Magerian
elements: conditions, performance, and criteria. What conditions will generate an adequate
response? What performance is required for success? Most important, what are the criteria,
the standards, to be met? Must the respondent be able to locate and identify a duck from a
distance of, say, 100 yards? Must the respondent be able to name the parts of a duck with
scientific accuracy? Will correctly identifying seven out of ten examples of ducks be enough?

This discussion has progressed into the realm of performance. Adding the requirements of
conditions, performance, and criteria will, perforce, elevate a simple checklist to performance
status. Consider the attributes of performance checklists.

First, a performance checklist is dedicated to comparing and assessing a performance. So a
performance checklist must be based on performances and use criteria to assess adequacy of
performance.


Second, a performance checklist must have a built‐in incentive. People who use a performance
checklist to learn to do tasks should have a reason for doing so. People who are judged
according to the criteria should be rewarded if they do well. In other words, a performance
checklist is a dynamic instrument used to promote or assess learning. Otherwise it’s an exercise
in futility.

Third, a performance checklist should provide a foundation for four things.

• Definition and articulation of the performance in question

• A (perhaps step‐by‐step) description of the performance and criteria used to judge adequacy

• A program for learning how to perform to the standards spelled out by the criteria and
suggestions for remediation for those who fall short

• An assessment vehicle for the performance itself

In addition, most performance checklists provide documentation of the success or failure of
people whose performances are being evaluated.

I will discuss these four elements of a performance checklist in the next three installments of
this discussion. Oh, by the way, I hope to provide some fun as well as food for thought (some
ginkgo biloba is good for that).

Comparing Performances to a Checklist
By Odin Westgaard

This is the second in a four‐part series on performance checklists.

It is a simple process. Please don’t overcomplicate it. Comparison requires three things:
observation, rigor, and judgment. Watch somebody do something, check off the criteria as they
are met, and decide whether the performance meets the criteria. When the performance is
directly observable, these three requirements are fairly easily met. Of course, there is a very
important set of caveats. To assess well, you must observe well. This is not difficult if the
checklist is fairly detailed. It will tell you what to look for; what to see, feel, smell, hear, or
otherwise sense. You must be rigorous. Make sure the performance measures up to all the
requirements on the checklist. In addition, you must decide whether the performance does,
indeed, meet the criteria. Otherwise, the exercise will probably either be a waste of time or
provide incomplete or erroneous results.


Observation: The Kiss
Note: Assessor should maintain discrete distance. There must be two candidates for this
assessment.

Step Description Check Comments
1. Approach slowly. Go directly toward
partner.
2. (Optional) Hug gently. Maintain six
inches of clearance face to face.
3. (Else) Place hands lightly on or about
partner’s shoulders.
4. Look into partner’s eyes without blinking.
5. Smile slightly; show anticipation.
6. Touch lips at a slight angle.
7. Close eyes so focus is only on kiss.
8. Apply slight pressure.
9. Nip gently.
10. Pull back slowly.
11. Smile in appreciation.
12. Thank your partner.

The criteria are embedded in the descriptions. Both the folks being assessed and the assessor
know what the latter will be judging. This brings up a very important point. The person using
the checklist to make the comparison must be trained. Consider the criteria above. Unless the
evaluator has training, he must rely on his own judgment about what is adequate. For example,
how does one decide if this is a gentle, inviting smile or a leer? Without training it is moot—
arguable, to say the least. What is slowly? And what if a wife is greeting her husband as he
returns from a business trip? Is slowly appropriate then? Maybe. The point is, train the
assessor.


The kiss checklist illustrates an important aspect of performance checklists that often go
without comment. Any performance involves the entire person. Assessing overt behavior isn’t
enough. This may go against the grain for some purists from 20 years ago, but our
understanding of behavior has grown a great deal since then. Most psychologists these days
readily admit that covert behavior is often more important than overt behavior. What people
are thinking and feeling when they kiss is usually more important than the physical activity
involved. Unless, of course, the kiss is for a movie or play. Even then . . .

I must repeat. If you use a performance checklist to assess performances, you must be trained
to use that particular checklist. The training should ensure consistency. What was a good kiss
for Joe is also a good one when performed by Moe. Training defines the criteria. Is a slight angle
5 degrees or can it be as much as 15?

Finally, training puts the assessor in the position of taking an objective stance. There is little
need to justify one’s judgment if you’ve learned how to exercise that judgment. An umpire’s
call at a baseball game provides another example. Is the pitch a ball or a strike? It’s a strike if it
meets the criteria. But deciding whether it meets the criteria requires training and practice by
the umpire. No one can step up behind the plate and call balls and strikes at a major league
game unless they have trained and practiced for many years. It doesn’t matter how smart they
are or even if they invented the game. Abner Doubleday himself would have to undergo years
of training and practice.

Now let’s take a look at the kiss as it may have been used by an assessor.


Assessment: The Kiss

1. Approach slowly. Go directly toward __

partner.
2. (Optional) Hug gently. Maintain six N/A Used Step 3.

3. (Else) Place hands lightly on or about __

4. Look into partner’s eyes without blinking. No She blinked five times.
5. Smile slightly; show anticipation. No He looked like a wolf.
6. Touch lips at a slight angle. __
7. Close eyes so focus is only on kiss. __
8. Apply slight pressure. __
9. Nip gently. No He’s too aggressive; she didn’t.
10. Pull back slowly. __
11. Smile in appreciation. __
12. Thank your partner. __

When the assessor shares his results with the participants, they will know exactly what they did
well and what they should work on. In fact, I suspect, they will already be making adjustments
so their next try will be more appropriate.

The example underscores the requirement for training the assessor. It’s easy to count the
number of blinks (if you know to do it), but what about wolfishness or being aggressive? Since
this assessor has had training and practice, the participants won’t quarrel with his judgment. If
he had simply picked up the checklist for the first time and used it, they would have ample
grounds for complaints. “What do you mean aggressive?”


Remember the three requirements for adequate assessment: observe well, use rigor, and use
good judgment. With these qualities you can apply performance checklists to full advantage.

The Critical Attributes of a
Performance Checklist
By Odin Westgaard

This is the third in a four‐part series on performance checklists.

There are four aspects of a performance checklist that must be at least assumable if it is,
indeed, a performance checklist. These are the characteristics that separate this instrument
from any other.

A Performance Checklist must

1. Define the performance in question.
2. Provide a description of the performance.
3. Provide a way to learn and/or remediate the performance.
4. Provide a mechanism for assessing the adequacy of the performance.

If it doesn’t do all of these four things, then it is not a performance checklist. However, these
characteristics aren’t difficult to include or ascertain. This can probably be shown best through
the use of an illustration. In the checklist we use to identify a duck (see Figure 1), the first
attribute is in the nature of the checklist. Its purpose is to define the performance. The
description (look, walk, etc.) is in the steps. The checklist is, in and of itself, a learning tool. And
assessment is easy, because all the assessor has to do is point to an example and ask the
respondent if it is a duck.

A. Duck‐like appearance
B. Sounds ducky
C. Waddles as it walks
Figure 1: Example of a Checklist—Duck


Now let’s look at a checklist for a kiss.

1. Approach slowly. Go directly toward
partner.
2. (Optional) Hug gently. Maintain six
3. (Else) Place hands lightly on or about
4. Look into partner’s eyes without blinking.
5. Smile slightly; show anticipation.
6. Touch lips at a slight angle.
7. Close eyes so focus is only on kiss.
8. Apply slight pressure.
9. Nip gently.
10. Pull back slowly.
11. Smile in appreciation.
12. Thank your partner.
Figure 2: Example of a Checklist—Kiss

Again, the definition of the performance, the description, and learning are embedded in the
steps. Assessment is a matter of simple observation using the steps because the criteria for
judgment are built in. For example, the observer will be able to decide if the angle is
appropriate.

The critical reader is probably saying, “Enough of this foolishness about ducks and kissing, what
about a real job?” Well, accepting the fact that kissing is more fun than many jobs, try the
example in Figure 3.


1. Make sure PC is up.
2. Select Juno.
3. Select “World Wide Web.”
4. Close advertisements.
5. Wait for return to normal operation.
6. Select Web search window.
7. Enter.
8. Go.
Figure 3: Finding a Web Site on Internet Explorer with Juno as Provider

In this sort of checklist, it is more difficult to include the criteria. A second document is in order.
This document would include the criteria and ways to remediate when a respondent doesn’t
perform correctly. It can take many forms, but the most usual is a paraphrased copy of the
checklist with criteria added to the steps and remediation in the comments section.


Step Description Check Criteria (and Remediation)
1. PC is up? Green light is on, no blinking Show where indicator lights are

lights. on tower. Get rid of other
programs that might interfere,
such as AOL.
2. Click on Juno icon. Juno icon is large green “J” on

world globe. Should come up
quickly. If there is no Juno icon,
go to “Start,” “Programs,”
“Juno.”
3. Click on “close” for each advertisement as Close is usually on bottom far

they come up. right or far left in small letters.
Sometimes it is obscured, but it
must be there.
4. Click on “World Wide Web” button. Bottom center. Do not click on

E‐mail.
5. Wait until cursor returns to normal. Assumes “finger” shape.
6. Move cursor to Web search area. Top of window in center.
7. Type keyword or words in window. Be sure of spelling and make as

specific as possible.
8. Left click on “Search” button. Oblong red with word “Search”

on it.
Figure 4: Criteria Document for Finding a Web Site on Internet Explorer with Juno as Provider

All four attributes are in place. This is a performance checklist.

In the next issue, we’ll wrap up our discussion of performance checklists by describing their
critical elements.


Critical Elements
By Odin Westgaard

This is the fourth in a four‐part series on performance checklists.

The Performance Checklist provides a real opportunity to support the work of the organization
without having to spend a lot of time and money on more esoteric interventions. It is almost
universally applicable whether the goal is to identify ducks or introduce new sophisticated
computer software The keys to success in implementation are two: 1) Access to a source of
valid reliable information about the job 2) Confidence in your ability to evaluate the instrument,
its application, and the results.
Content is always crucial The steps or elements on the checklist must mirror the actual task or
thing as closely as possible And, for the most part, this is not an academic exercise No matter
how good a thinker you are, you can’t truly represent something you have yet to experience
directly To get the content, go to the source You may have to invent the source, for example, if
you wish to develop a checklist for a job that has yet to be defined So do it Set up a pilot and try
it out When you have it right develop the checklist Please don’t develop the checklist first.
Try to be as specific as possible Our foolish little checklist about the duck is foolish because it
doesn’t tell us what a duck sounds like, or how it should look, or how it walks It leaves those
things up to the observer so, for those who have never seen a duck, just about any living thing
would qualify Specificity requires criteria Ah, the crux of the matter A Performance Checklist
must spell out the criteria The content, to be appropriate, will contain criteria that define the
task or thing in question beyond doubt.
Given correct content you can have confidence in your ability to evaluate. Without good
content you should have doubts about any conclusions you make It is that simple.
Outcomes
Now think about outcomes. What will you have when you have developed and used a good
Performance Checklist? It depends, of course, on what you intend. If you want the checklist to
serve as a learning tool, then learning should be an outcome. If you want to use it to discover


where workers are remiss or in error, the results should include suggestions for remediation. If
your intent is to pass judgment on the adequacy of a worker’s efforts then evaluation is the
goal.
In any case the outcomes will include: 1). Documentation of the respondents’ efforts. 2). Data
that can be treated formally through statistical techniques.
A completed Performance Checklist may look like this:
Find a Web Site on Internet Explorer with Juno as Provider

Step Description Chk Comments

1. Make sure PC is up. _

2. Select Juno. No Didn’t recognize icon.

3. Select “world wide web.” _

4. Close advertisements. No. Chose to open two ads. Fooled by
the way they were presented.

4. Wait for return to normal operation. N/A Almost instantaneous.

5. Select web search window. _

6. Enter. No. Had to suggest key word.

7. Go. _

Administered by: __John Jacob____________________ Date:__12‐3‐99__________________
Respondent:__Jerry Sloan________________________ Date:__12‐3‐99__________________


Jerry’s errors are documented along with the reasons they were errors. He accepted John’s
judgment by signing and dating the form. In addition, one might assume, he could correct his
behavior on the spot without formal training or other intervention. Although this is a very
simple illustration the outcomes are the same as they would be for a far more complex and
detailed checklist. My own experience includes a checklist with more than 240 separate steps.
It included all aspects of a very complex operation. Still the outcomes were the same and the
efforts of the respondents were as well documented.
But how about that claim that these results can be treated statistically? No problem. Simply
convert the checks, nos, and n/as to numbers. For example _ is 1, No is 2, and N/A is 3.

Step Description Chk Comments

1. Make sure PC is up. 1

2. Select Juno. 2

3. Select “world wide web.” 1

4. Close advertisements. 2

4. Wait for return to normal operation. 3

5. Select web search window. 1

6. Enter. 2

7. Go. 1

You can use a Chi Square Goodness of Fit procedure to compare these results with what is
expected, what others have done, or what this particular person has done (whether there has
been improvement). If and when a set of results is shown to be significant the comments made
by the assessor should provide enough information for you to take action.


One final caveat. I could have written a book about Performance Checklists and how to use
them. So, please, don’t consider these articles to be all there is to know about this intervention.
But, at the same time, feel confident that if you follow the advice given here, you will have an
intervention you can use with confidence and in many situation.
From 2001…
Odin Westgaard, Ed.D.

Odin Westgaard is one of the most active professionals in our field. He teaches adjunct courses
at the university level, sets quality standards, and consults with management on the design,
development, delivery, and evaluation of HPT interventions. He has written five books for the
field and more than 30 professional articles on topics such as assessment, professional conduct,
and basic performance improvement strategies and tactics. Odin is considered an expert in
needs assessment, measurement, and evaluation. He has 30 years’ experience serving clients
such as Abbott, ASI, Coca‐Cola, Rust‐Oleum, and Walgreens.

# # #

PDFs of the quarterly CADDI Newsletter – Pursuing Performance – may be found at:

http://eppic.biz/resources/newsletter-pdfs-from-swi-caddi-and-eppic-inc/


Odin Westgaard Performance Checklists PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Odin Westgaard Performance Checklists PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Odin Westgaard – Performance Checklists

1. Approach slowly. Go directly toward __

2. (Optional) Hug gently. Maintain six N/A Used Step 3.

3. (Else) Place hands lightly on or about __

4. Look into partner’s eyes without blinking. No She blinked five times.

5. Smile slightly; show anticipation. No He looked like a wolf.

6. Touch lips at a slight angle. __

7. Close eyes so focus is only on kiss. __

8. Apply slight pressure. __

9. Nip gently. No He’s too aggressive; she didn’t.

10. Pull back slowly. __

11. Smile in appreciation. __

12. Thank your partner. __

1. PC is up? Green light is on, no blinking Show where indicator lights are

2. Click on Juno icon. Juno icon is large green “J” on

3. Click on “close” for each advertisement as Close is usually on bottom far

4. Click on “World Wide Web” button. Bottom center. Do not click on

5. Wait until cursor returns to normal. Assumes “finger” shape.

6. Move cursor to Web search area. Top of window in center.

7. Type keyword or words in window. Be sure of spelling and make as

8. Left click on “Search” button. Oblong red with word “Search”

You might also like