By Dr. Carl Binder
In ISPI’s efforts to define itself and connect with colleagues, “results” has always been central to our message. Yet there is a puzzling disconnect: I have seldom seen articles in our journals that report measurable results from projects or interventions.
Years ago, Timm Esque and I spent two years trying to identify ISPI colleagues willing and able to share data from projects demonstrating improved performance for conference presentations. Our goal was to make a poster session featuring documented results a regular part of ISPI conferences. After two years, however, we abandoned the effort because it proved extraordinarily difficult to find colleagues who could share such data.
To be candid, this experience undermined my confidence in ISPI’s claims about results. It also led me to review past issues of Performance Improvement Quarterly and Performance Improvement Journal to look for published reports of interventions with measurable outcomes. Unfortunately, I found very few.
My own background is in applied behavior science. I was a doctoral student of B.F. Skinner, who often said that his most important contributions were not the many discoveries that emerged from his work, but rather the discovery of his measure—rate of response (count per unit of time)—and the standard graphic display of such data. These methods made possible a highly sensitive form of measurement that could be extended beyond the laboratory to include counts of behavior, accomplishments, and business results (e.g., dollars) per hour, day, week, or year.
In Skinner’s approach to behavior science—which ISPI often cites as one of the foundations of performance improvement through the work of Gilbert, Brethower, Rummler, Tosti, and others—measurement is part of an inductive science. We measure what we do, collect data continuously, and look for patterns that reveal meaningful effects. Rather than primarily testing hypotheses, we identify important results case by case and draw conclusions from the repeated production of outcomes through specific interventions.
For that reason, we try to include data in articles that claim improvement. It is difficult for me to understand how ISPI can claim to focus on results if we do not routinely publish evidence of the results produced by our interventions. Over the past 35 years, I have published a number of articles in ISPI journals and have tried to include data in at least some of them. Our work at AT&T Wireless (https://bit.ly/BinderSweeney) and several banks (https://bit.ly/FluentProductKnowledge), for example, produced results worth sharing.
I would like to suggest that an important pillar of the proposed ISPI Renaissance be a return to our natural science roots: a stronger emphasis on measured results and the routine inclusion of data in our articles and presentations showing improvements in behavior, accomplishments, and organizational outcomes following the interventions we recommend. Without a substantial body of such evidence, it is difficult to credibly claim that ISPI is truly focused on results.
Dr. Carl Binder began as a doctoral student in Experimental Psychology, attending Harvard University at the invitation of B.F. Skinner, whose writings had inspired him deeply. With an interest in making a societal contribution, he rapidly shifted from basic research to real world application of behavior science, first developing innovative instructional methods and teacher training for educators, and later contributing to the emerging field of human performance technology in large organizations. With input from many extraordinary teachers and colleagues, Carl has spent over 50 years bringing his enthusiasm for behavior science into corporations, schools, and public organizations worldwide.
Founder of four consulting firms, recipient of career awards from the American Psychological Association, the International Society for Performance Improvement, and the Organizational Behavior Management Network, prolific author and speaker, Carl is committed to bringing application of behavior science to as many people on the planet as possible. His ability to synthesize information from multiple fields, communicate complex ideas in plain English to non-specialists, and build excitement about making a difference with behavior science brings thought leadership and a compelling voice to our work at The Performance Thinking Network.
Carl's LinkedIn profile provides more details about his background.