Getting from information to change.

...by measuring proficiency.

Simply gaining knowledge does not bring change.

However, the majority of training, coaching, and change programs are measured in terms of knowledge, so it is not surprising that they fail to deliver change.

In my two decades of instructional design experience, the majority of learning is designed purely based on Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy, with the presumption that the higher you go in the taxonomy, the more mastery you have achieved.

Hrm.

Bloom’s original intent was to help faculty devise measurable ways to to assess academic growth.

In academia, the only goal is to increase knowledge sophistication, so that’s all Bloom measures. Skills, behavior, and results are not the point in academia, and as such, are not measured. But then, we used Bloom’s taxonomy to guide change in a business context, where all that matters are skills, behaviors, and results.

So surrounded by rumblings and grumblings that blamed the lack of change on everything from bad training to bad employees, I was struck by an insight.

We need a taxonomy that measures the development of proficiency.

Gloria Gery introduced 6 stages of proficiency:

1. Familiarity,

2. Comprehension,

3. Conscious Effort,

4. Conscious Action,

5. Proficient, and

6. Unconscious Competency.

Unfortunately, she did not define, describe, or extend these stages, which is what I have endeavored to do in training design these past years.

Change initiatives that actually alter behavior?

That is a different ball game. That is change that sticks.