2003 IMTA Proceedings - International Military Testing Association

666
Productivity
According to Table 2, almost everyone felt that a frequency format would most
effectively measure productivity, because frequency allows one to count specific actions.
If the number of occurrences of an activity is important, participants felt frequency was
the best technique to use. D&D and rating formats were also chosen as possible
techniques. Participants said these techniques would be appropriate when measuring
productivity in comparison to a standard.
As shown in Table 3, over half of participants chose checklist as a second choice,
and another one-third chose the rating scale format second. D&D was a popular third
choice.
Efficiency
Table 2 illustrates the most common first choice for measuring efficiency: D&D.
Participants felt this technique allowed for the most direct measure of efficiency,
including ratio measures in comparison to a specified goal. Frequency and rating format
techniques were also chosen. Participants’ commented that frequency allows for
counting the number of resources expended, whereas the rating format allows for more
flexibility and judgment.
Table 3 demonstrates that well over half chose the rating scale format as their
second choice. Finally, frequency and checklist formats were the most common third
choices.
Safety
Table 2 reveals that frequency and rating scales were the top first choices for
measuring safety. Part of the choice may depend on how safety is measured. According
to several participants, frequency allowed for concrete information to be gathered on the
number of observable occurrences, such as the number of accidents. On the other hand,
rating scales allowed for scoring unsafe behaviors that may be precursors to accidents
and determined the extent to which a goal is met. D&D could also be used, according to
participants.
Table 3 shows that checklist was the second choice for most participants. Finally,
rating scale was third for several participants.
Effects
Table 2 shows that slightly over half of participants chose rating scales as the best
way to measure effects because they can measure the extent to which a goal was met.
The checklist technique was also a popular first choice because it showed whether the
effect was achieved and allowed for a yes or no format.
45 th Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association
Pensacola, Florida, 3-6 November 2003