Training professionals have long acknowledged the necessity of conducting behavior-based (Level 3) and results-based (Level 4) evaluations, yet organizations do not frequently conduct such evaluations. This research examined training professionals' perceptions of the utility of Level 3 and Level 4 evaluations and the factors that facilitate or obstruct their attempts to perform them. The research was conducted using Brinkerhoff's Success Case Method and Gilbert's BehaviorEngineering Model as its frameworks. The three key factors identified by study participants as having an impact upon their ability to conduct Level 3 and Level 4 evaluations were the availability of resources such as time and personnel, managerial support (organizational) and expertise in evaluative methodology (individual). The research findings indicated a need to further explore how training professionals interpret Level 3 and Level 4 and how they can better develop their evaluative expertise, which in turn may increase effectiveness in gaining organizational support for evaluation efforts.

Tertiary labour is the fastest growing form of work in the West. Additionally, computer and telecommunication mediation of labour is increasingly prevalent. However, little research focuses on subjectivity in technology-mediated tertiary labour. Taking a Foucaultian orientation, this paper describes how desires of subjects and organisations are rendered into power/knowledge and affect subjectivity in one variant of technology-mediated tertiary labour.

It is almost impossible to imagine Gilbert\u27s behavior engineering model as other than a fundamental component of the field of performance improvement as we know it. The behavior engineering model has been freely used, reused, and reconfigured for various purposes by individuals in the field. This is so common that sometimes it is difficult to determine what is new or what is just being copied between versions. Here, three variants of the behavior engineering model are briefly compared. Unique features are identified and studied and elements that may make each well suited to certain uses are identified

In postindustrial society, paid labor is increasingly characterized as tertiary labor rather than primary or secondary labor and commonly mediated by computer and telecommunication technologies. However, there are few ethnographic studies on the production of the subject and subjectivity in postindustrial workplaces. This article reports a poststructurally informed ethnographic research in four telephone call centers, focusing on how technological and managerial practices are deployed and continuously oriented to in subjectification processes. The result, although “rational” and “real,” is shown to be a construction of concerted compliance and secondary adjustments through strategic processes named shadowboxing with data. Implications for the study of subjectivity and subjectification are discussed.

The expert witness in legal proceedings is both a historically necessary part of modern legal proceedings in a society increasingly influenced by science and technology, and a much maligned figure often accused of purporting 'junk science' and of acting as an ethically empty mercenary. While much of the social action that attempts these various subjectifications is done outside of courtrooms, this article takes as its object verbal interaction in actual court proceedings that involve an expert witness. The study takes a combined conversation analytic (specifically, non-sequential, or membership categorization analyses) and discourse analytic (specifically post-structural) perspective. Findings focus on the particular use of categorizations by lawyers, judges and the expert witness in terms of rules of the law and of relevant science in the process of court proceedings and the way those categorizations are then used in subsequent court activities and decisions.