DIF Analysis
Previously, I had mentioned DIF (difficulty, importance, frequency) Analysis as a tool that I used in the military to determine if job tasks required training. I finally got around to creating the expanded model in a digital format, so here it is.
In making these tools available online some people ask if I’m giving away some secrets to the trade. I don’t think so, because these are pretty basic tools which I’ve been using for over a decade and many others use as well. Also, the world of work is getting to a point where performance improvement may not be the best approach. In knowledge-intensive workplaces, procedures and tasks can’t be easily quantified. Tools like DIF analysis only work when there are similar jobs done by several people. They won’t help in a creative work environment like a design shop.
My own interest is to develop new tools and methods, beyond human performance technology and instructional design. Methods like online personal knowledge management are of current interest.
Filed under: Performance Improvement
This is a good, common sense model, Harold, and I guess it would benefit many people to organise their thoughts like this when prioritising learning under pressure.
It’s a good tool when you have hundreds or thousands of tasks to analyse, as we did in the military.
Is it intentional that difficult important infrequent things are a higher training priority than frequent things – maybe self discovery or peer training might happen for frequent, but formal training is needed for infrequent?
The rationale is that if they are difficult & important, the training is necessary. You probably need to couple this with re-certification or annual checks.
That part I get. What about the frequent/infrequent part?
If the task is performed on the job infrequently then it will likely be forgotten over time. Therefore, training is necessary to develop this difficult skill, and some type of reinforcement activity should be scheduled at regular intervals. A military example is shooting your rifle. For people in support trades who do not shoot frequently, there is annual refresher training, because this is an important skill.
I agree that DIF is an excellent algorithm for complex task analysis.
One bright spark in the Training Development Team I worked for in the UK Military, set it up in Excel so that as the results of the questionnaires came in, we could download the scanned data straight into the spreadsheet and generate the training category in an instant.
I only wish I had lifted the spreadsheet before I promoted out!
It shouldn’t take that much effort to replicate it, Clive. Maybe someone will open source or Creative Commons license it
[...] you a quick & dirty way that this can be done. This is the simple diagram, and there is also a more detailed version that we used, which I can post if there is any [...]
We use DIF ratings to decide: No training, initial training only, initial and continuing (refresher). We then started added “refresher every 3 {or 4 or 5} years. Unfortunately it has no empirical basis. Do you know of any way to empirically prove that a certain type of task needs to be refreshed every X period of time?
I don’t think that the diversity of human learning and “empirical” go together. I would suggest internal studies to see what works as well as looking at current practices in specific fields for refresher training.