1

Points Description Notes

5/5 Who’s Doing What? Clear

10/10 Project Overview Looks good. Condenses a fair amount of info efficiently & it
makes this project sound exciting (if not daunting).
10/10 Why training? Very much liking that you’ve added citations to this section.
9/10 Organizational and learner Organizational goals = excellent.
goals Your learner goals are more like objectives. You also have
some learning activities and resources embedded in the
goals.
Here’s another way to structure your learner goals:
Learners… will move in this direction… to create (or
improve) these results for their organization.
Employees will be able and willing to deliver … to their
supervisors to further the organization’s goal for …
Supervisors will be able to …
10/10 Learners described: Prior K & Excellent. You’ve done a good job of pointing out what
MOT their prior knowledge is likely to be & also their motivation.
5/5 Logistical info: length, media Give a range of how long you’re thinking this learning
& delivery system decisions solution will take.
It’s early for this, but in the design doc…I’m hoping that the
facilitator’s guide (can be short) will include objectives and
at least one rationale… plus suggestions for giving feedback
to the learners. As usual, I’ll be looking for some activities
with feedback to the learners in the instructor-led pieces of
this.
Great to include the timeline.
It’s great that you’ve scheduled days for your Dr. Carey
meetings. Efficient… also, effective. There’s nothing worse
than having to wait a week for a meeting because your client
isn’t available when you need her.
10/10 Basic grammar, usage, prof Well done.
appearance
59/60 Overall… excellent. I can tell why this is important, and I can tell what you are planning to
build. I like the creativity & flexibility of the learning solution, too. The DoD will be able to
use this program in different ways, tailoring it to the needs of their learners.
 2

Project Definition: Delivering Upward Feedback

Client

Dr. Clare Elizabeth Carey

Director, Workforce Development
Department of Defense

MIST Team Roles

Project Manager: Ana Padilla, anpadilla@csumb.edu

Editor: Anne Keller
Participants: Tyler Costa, Richie Cobb, Lisa Emanuelson, Luay Askar, Kalsoom Shah

Project Overview
In 2018, a new performance appraisal system will take effect at the Department of
Defense (DoD) in Texas. This change will help encourage a new corporate culture of caring to
promote stronger manager/ employee engagement. In the current DoD culture, top-down
performance appraisal is the norm. The new system includes a two-way feedback component,
where employees will have the opportunity to advise their supervisors of their interests,
concerns, and observations of behaviors, and to offer feasible suggestions. (C.Carey, personal
communication, May 27, 2018)
Delivering candid upward feedback is likely to be uncomfortable for some direct reports. Commented [JF1]: So true.
Our evidence-based training interventions will provide an opportunity for DoD-Texas employees
to develop their skills and strategies in the art of upward feedback.
The desired outcome of our training interventions will be confident employees who are
prepared and willing to engage with their supervisors and managers honestly, respectfully and
constructively.

Why Training?
While DoD-Texas desires to remain mission-focused, a cultural shift has begun that
welcomes and encourages two-way feedback (feedback to superiors from subordinates, as well
as to subordinates from superiors). Feedback from superiors to subordinates is commonly
accepted and has been standard practice for decades. Upward feedback, feedback to superiors, is Commented [JF2]: Really scary for some people.
less familiar within a joint civilian/military setting, although it is becoming more acceptable due
to a culture shift occurring within the DoD-Texas to become more people-focused. Additionally,
two-way feedback will be required as part of the new performance appraisal system.
Currently, DoD employees have access to multiple resources on how to deliver and
receive feedback, yet some employees may resist changing their mission-centric focus to a
people-centric one. Despite access to upward feedback resources, Kudisch et al. (2006) found
that upward feedback programs should be accompanied by training strategies that improve
knowledge of the upward feedback program, and strategies that develop a subordinate’s “self-
efficacy” (p. 523). New hires to the DoD may have more experience with two-way feedback
work environments, however, adapting to an organization experiencing significant cultural Commented [JF3]: You need a semi-colon here.
 3

change may be daunting. Training in upward feedback will provide a common language for
communication between supervisors and subordinates while also establishing a culture that
accepts and welcomes upward feedback (Kudisch et al., 2006).

Learners
The primary target audience for this training will be DoD-Texas civilian employees
reporting to civilian or military supervisors. The employees work in various occupations within
DoD-Texas and have diverse backgrounds. In addition to civilian employees, learners will also
be military employees who report to civilian supervisors. The military employees are primarily
enlisted service members and also have a variety of occupations. All learners are familiar with
working in a mission-focused environment.
The secondary audience for this training will be the supervisors working in various Commented [JF4]: Really good to point these folks out as a
departments within DoD-Texas. The supervisors should be knowledgeable about the upward secondary audience. I’d train them first.
feedback training that their employees are receiving because they will be the recipients of the Commented [JF5]: Right… let’s not surprise them with
upward feedback that they did not see coming. :)
feedback. The training will provide supervisors with a job aid on how to receive feedback openly
and effectively from their employees.
The learners may have some familiarity with upward feedback because upward feedback
has been implemented in some DoD-Texas departments, but not all. All employees will have
completed and have access to training about giving and receiving feedback. Our training will
emphasize the implementation of upward feedback and will be considered at the application
level for the learners. The training will not be mandatory for learners although the workforce
currently expresses significant interest. The employees’ motivation to participate in the training
may be increased because two-way feedback is required as part of DoD-Texas’ new performance
appraisal system (C.Carey, personal communication, May 27, 2018).

Organizational Goals
Workforce Development (WD) is working to establish a culture of sharing and trust
through upward feedback, where the employees engage with their supervisors and managers
honestly, respectfully, and constructively, to increase productivity (Dr. Carey, DoD Delivering
Upward Feedback).

Learner Goals
Employees will identify and demonstrate the steps of giving upward feedback effectively.
Additionally, they will analyze a given scenario in which upward feedback should be given and
select the best response. Further, employees will use job-aids to outline a plan to incorporate
upward feedback into their workplace (C. Carey, personal communication, June 3, 2018).
Using a checklist, supervisors will be able to establish and maintain a receptive climate
for upward feedback. Supervisors will also draft an action plan with specific timeframes for
incorporating upward feedback into their departments. When given a scenario in which
employees provide feedback, supervisors will select the best response (C. Carey, personal
communication, June 3, 2018).
 4

Deliverables
The deliverables for this project consist of a variety of different instructional
interventions. A face-to-face, facilitator-led, PowerPoint presentation detailing how to give
effective upward feedback utilizing the proper techniques for intervention will be the initial part
of this course. Two job aids will be created; one on how to deliver upward feedback for
employees, and the other on how to receive it for supervisors. Due to the hierarchical structure of
DoD-Texas’ workforce, some supervisors may not be receptive to feedback. Therefore, a guide
will be created in parallel with the job aid so that supervisors both understand the value of
feedback and can absorb feedback effectively. Though this may seem redundant, it will reinforce
the ideas put forth in the job aid. Posters that outline the value of two-way feedback, directed at Commented [JF6]: Yes… essential.
both supervisors and employees, will assist in this process. Additionally, a survey will be
created for employees and supervisors as a practice activity, and will double as a way to gauge Commented [JF7]: and it will
learner confidence. Finally, a facilitator’s guide for the instructor-led component of this training
will ensure that initial and future instructors understand how to implement the standards set forth
by this course.

Project Resources
Dr. Clare E. Carey, Director of Workforce Development, is our Subject Matter Expert
and point of contact. Dr. Carey provided the designing team with project particulars: information
about the audience, topics to include in the proposed training, and possible deliverables. Also,
Dr. Carey suggested modes of training delivery to avoid any break in the project implementation. Commented [JF8]: This sounds cool, but I’m not sure what
The team may use other resources that could be accessed via internet or personal contact (C. it means exactly.
Carey, personal communication, June 3, 2018).

Logistical Considerations
Because of the open nature of the project topic, the designers must be cognizant of time
limitations, focusing on the deliverable list and project objectives without straying.
As a secure government site, the DoD has strict limitations on technology use in the
workplace. Access to the Google Suite of applications (Docs, Slides, Sheets) and common online
delivery platforms are strictly prohibited. Commonly used evaluation tools like SurveyMonkey
and Google Forms are also not allowed. Therefore, the training must be delivered in ways that do
not rely on internet access. Computer workstations are available to access PowerPoint and Word
documents, and other deliverables for this training, but gathering the workstations necessary to
conduct training may be inconvenient for some departments. Printed forms of media, including
posters and performance support tools/On-the-Job (OTJ) aids, can also be utilized to supplement
the training process. Instructors from the DoD-Texas’ WD department are available to teach the
facilitator-led portion of this training, which will be appropriate for the broad variety of learners
within different departments.

Timeline
June 3: Team Meeting with Dr. Carey
 5

June 3-5: Edit Project Definition

June 5: Project Definition Due
June 6-15: Work on Design Document
June 17: Team Meeting with Dr. Carey
June 17-19: Edit Design Document
June 19: Design Document Due
June 17-23: Create training materials
June 24: Team Meeting with Dr. Carey
June 24-26: Edit Training Materials
June 26: Draft Material Due- storyboards, samples
June 26-July 24: Write Design Project Report and continue development of training materials
(PPT slides, job aids, survey)
June 26-July 6: Content review for PPT slides and job aids
July 8: Team Meeting with Dr. Carey
July 15: Team Meeting with Dr. Carey
July 15-24: Finalize project deliverables (PPT, job aids, facilitator’s guide)
July 24: Final Project Due

Budget
The total cost of this project is estimated to be zero dollars. All participants on this
project are volunteering time or meeting academic course requirements. There are no licensing
requirements or production costs associated with project development or the production of
deliverables. Should we incur significant costs as the project progresses, this section will be
updated.

Critical Success Factors

Teamwork is the cornerstone that will make this project successful. This work will
require scaffolding and support of Dr. Carey (client and subject matter expert) and the advice of Commented [JF9]: from? You probably don’t want to
Dr. Farrington. Some critical factors that may affect the success of the project remain outside of scaffold Dr. C. :)
the team’s control, e.g., the readiness of both the supervisors and the employees to achieve the
main project objectives during the implementation phase. Discussion with the client clarified that
the facilitators conducting the training will be designated by the client, and the evaluation
process and measures of success will be limited to level 1 (reaction) and level 2 (learning) of
Kirkpatrick's four level model(C. Carey, personal communication, June 3, 2018).

References

Kudisch, J. D., Fortunato, V. J., & Smith, A. F. R. (2006). Contextual and Individual Difference
Factors Predicting Individuals’ Desire to Provide Upward Feedback. Group and Organizational
Management, 31(4), 503-529.