Report - Government Executive

No training needs assessments have been identified and no documentation is available that
identifies what user groups actually need, a major omission. The plan simply outlines various
course topics that address different aspects of DCIPS processes and tools; it lacks any user
considerations. Had a training needs assessment been performed, OUSD(I) and the components
would have been well positioned to identify user requirements and skills gaps (particularly
related to soft skills training), support a more informed and thorough approach to training, and
address constraints on delivery (such as bandwidth limitations for web-based training and other
technical challenges). As written, the training is DCIPS centric, not requirements centric.
Specific training is also needed for rating consistency and fairness. Fed by reports of actual
behavior, there is a perception that ratings are being forced to conform to predetermined
distributions or specific quotas. There is the further perception, supported by actual NGA data,
that administrative support staff (who primarily reside in Pay Band 2) are consistently given
lower ratings overall since their work is less directly connected to the agency mission.
The use of performance ratings is new to most supervisors, and the guidance for ensuring
objectivity and fairness must be thorough and consistent. Few supervisors have previously used
a rating system tied to performance objectives; the concepts behind the system and the actual
practices must be communicated, trained, and reinforced.
Raters must be more fully trained on how to apply a consistent approach to rating against the
individual objectives and performance elements for each job, without bias against certain
functions or forcing a distribution of ratings to a pre-set quota. Data suggest that more thorough
training is needed across the DoD intelligence components to educate raters on how to prepare
fair ratings. 126
In addition, the DCIPS training evaluation approach relies on end-of-course evaluations.
Monthly reports indicate the number of people trained, ratings of satisfaction, and other
summary outputs. Missing is discussion of how the learning will be measured or applied in the
workplace—that is, the actual outcome of the training. Although end-of-course ratings generally
have been favorable (participants liked the training and thought it would be useful), online
dialogue and focus group input suggests that training sometimes has been ineffective,
particularly when the content or tools were subject to change.
Finding 4-8
Key planning documents, such as a training design document, are lacking and training courses
have focused on DCIPS’ technical features rather than the broader behavioral changes needed
to support the transformation.
Delivery
Delivery refers to how well a training strategy is implemented. Comprehensive in content,
contextually relevant, and tailored to a specific audience, effective training employs appropriate
126 Academy online dialogue and open forum data.
73