2. Developing adaptability: A theory for the design of integrated-embedded training systems

Abstract

The nature of work and organizations is changing. Over three decades ago, Terreberry (1968) observed that future organizational environments would evolve to become increasingly turbulent and unpredictable. As we prepare to enter the next millennium, that future is upon us. The dynamics and uncertainty associated with the constellation of external forces that impact organizations create pressures for innovation, flexibility, and adaptability. Adaptability as an individual, team, and organizational capability is increasingly critical to effectiveness.The increasing rate of technological innovation, and the penetration of technology into all aspects of organizational operations, is changing the nature of work (Howell & Cooke, 1989). Work is increasingly complex, placing a high emphasis on cognitive skills and specialized expertise. It is increasingly mediated by computerized systems that link distributed experts together. From air travel, to medical diagnostics, emergency response, engineering design, and command and control, among many others, organizational functions that range from the mundane to esoteric are all dependent on teams of distributed experts operating via complex systems. Although teams are often co-located in time and space, the increasing connectivity of technology systems facilitates the creation of far-flung virtual teams that interact dynamically, but never actually meet face to face (Bell & Kozlowski, 1998).There are economic pressures for improved efficiency, cost-control, and effectiveness. Traditional training is typically conducted off-site. A substantial portion of training costs --upwards of 80% --is devoted to simply getting trainees to the site, maintaining them while there, and absorbing their lost productivity. Because off-site training is often decontextualized --that is, abstracted from the work setting --it also incurs potential problems of skill transfer that impede effectiveness.This convergence of forces --environmental, technological, and economic --is driving a reconceptualization of the nature of training systems. Training is shifting from an inefficient, time consuming, and expensive enterprise to one that can be delivered efficiently, as needed, and just-in-time. It is shifting from an off-site single episode to a systematic series of learning experiences that are integrated in the workplace and embedded in work technology. It is shifting from a primary emphasis on retention and reproduction to a broader emphasis that also includes the development of adaptive knowledge and skills (Kozlowski, 1998). Training will not be a separate activity, but a continuous activity that is an integral part of the workplace and its systems. This reconceptualization of training systems is highlighted by three key terms in our title which constitute the theoretical and application focus of this chapter:$ Integrate --to form, coordinate, or blend into a functioning or unified whole; $ Embed --to enclose closely; to make something an integral part of; $ Adapt --to make fit; implies a modificati...

Work Groups and Teams in Organizations

“…However, it is important to remember that these new tools are merely delivery media. How to use these advanced tools to good instructional effect is the critical research issue (Kozlowski, Toney, Mullins, Weissbein, Brown, & Bell, 2001). A final issue concerns the level at which training should be delivered-individuals or intact teams?…”

Current issues and future directions in simulation-based training in North America

“…Indeed, estimates suggest that a substantial portion of training costs -upwards of 80% -is devoted to simply getting trainees to the training site, maintaining them while there, and absorbing their lost productivity (Kozlowski, Toney, Mullins, Weissbein, Brown, & Bell, 2001). …”

Disentangling achievement orientation and goal setting: Effects on self-regulatory processes.

“…Although this work has advanced training design for complex skill acquisition (Kozlowski, Toney, Mullins, Brown, Weissbein, & Bell, 2001), it has also tended to blend conceptions across the two domains. Investigators have developed a variety of interventions that work, but the distinct source of effects is often unclear.…”

“…This line of work generally manipulates goal content to set either learning and skill goals or performance goals (e.g., Barron & Harackiewicz, 2001; Harackiewicz, Baron, Carter, Lehto, & Elliott, 1997;Winters & Latham, 1996). Another aspect of this work has focused on whether such goals are presented as a more proximal sequence or as a distal terminal goal, the notion being that proximal goals are better standards of progress and thus facilitate selfregulation (e.g., Bandura & Schunk, 1981;Kozlowski, Gully, Brown, Salas, Smith, & Nason, 2001;Latham & Seijts, 1999;Manderlink & Harackiewicz, 1984;Winters & Latham, 1996).Although this work has advanced training design for complex skill acquisition (Kozlowski, Toney, Mullins, Brown, Weissbein, & Bell, 2001), it has also tended to blend conceptions across the two domains. Investigators have developed a variety of interventions that work, but the distinct source of effects is often unclear.…”