(For several years following the receipt of my degree, I worked in a large institution for delinquent and neglected youth. The project described below was completed while I served as the director of one of that institution's divisions. For years I have felt that the simple process detailed below could be used to great advantage by organizations [corporations, institutions, etc.] interested in rapidly bringing their members (employees) to a more complete understanding of the organization, its workings, complexities and components. "Workplace Theater" grew out of my interest in the role the imagination might play in the world of everyday work.)

THE IDEA:

Recently, in San Francisco, I saw a play in which each member of the audience was given a Sony Walkman, and with it was led through a maze-like series of rooms during which they became involved with a crime as they interacted with the rooms' contents. No others were involved--you, as a member of the audience, were alone and were led-instructed throughout. The set was basic--almost crude--in its construction, like a kid's fort in a basement. Yet, as your attention is focused (through timed lights, etc.) to various points in these rooms, hallways, "streets," this crudeness became appealing.

The concept itself is what interested me. The plot was just basic. This Walkman idea, however, forces your audience to listen to you--almost concentrate even! You could even tailor the tapes for male/female, young/old, etc.

excerpt from a letter to D. Thomas
from John Bowden

Mr. Hardman's "Vacuum" was a striking satire on America's obsession with consumerism and the synergistic bond that exists between sellers and buyers. His "Artery" was a labyrinthian mystery tour undertaken by theatergoers plugged in Walkman headsets. In California, he has made related environmental forays into "found" sites such as an abandoned gas station and high school. By presenting live "location pieces" in public places, he perhaps bears some relationship to an artist such as Christo; Mr. Hardman "wraps" an environment with his theatrical imagination.

from "The theater's avant-garde branches out"
New York Times
Sunday, March 18, 1984

PROBLEM/OPPORTUNITY:

The Division of Program Evaluation exists to make the institution of which it is a part aware of itself. It is a central nervous system of sorts, collecting data from all parts of the institution, processing it into information and then distributing this information to decision-makers. Its more than thirty regularly distributed reports, along with its request and/or special-case reports, plus its regularly updated data display room are making available a new and ever-increasing level of organizational awareness.

One problem, however, is that this new level of organizational awareness is realized by only a few. Most employees remain unaware of the feedback and evaluation processes provided by Program Evaluation. Since these processes are central to an understanding of the treatment program, it is true to say that most employees have only a partial understanding of the treatment their organization is designed to offer. Thus, some mechanism that will make it possible for all employees to become aware of these processes is needed; some mechanism that will introduce to all employees, individually and as time permits, the processes that are helping their organization adhere to standards and, beyond that, evolve.

A second though related problem concerns the one group that particularly is vulnerable if unaware of Program Evaluation's feedback and evaluation processes. It is the group composed of newly hired house-parents, those individuals who provide direct care to the youths. This group is held accountable to specific standards of performance on several measures, measures that are the focus of Program Evaluation's reports. To introduce these measures (and reports) to newly-hired house-parents would be to help them more fully understand and define their job.

A final problem (or opportunity) concerns the fact that Program Evaluation's employees have little face-to-face contact with individuals from other parts of the organization. Located somewhat remotely, members of this division see the same people (themselves) day after day. To find a way to unobtrusively (and yet, more or less continuously) bring visitors into this division's workplace would be to enliven it considerably. To do so in a way that informed these visitors of the quality of this division's products and, in turn, to see these visitors respond with interest, would be to reinforce the members of this division, making it very difficult for them to forget--given the presence of these full-bodied reminders--the value of their everyday work.

GOALS & OBJECTIVES:

To make a gallery out of Program Evaluation's hallways exhibiting therein its many products;

To make a taped tour through this gallery explaining the exhibits and, in the process, the feedback and evaluation processes so integral to the organization as a whole;

To make this tour available to all employees, from the maintenance staff to the Director of the institution,with a special invitation to newly-hired house-parents;

To enrich the Division of Program Evaluation with the "human" factor--that is, to bring to Program Evaluation a stream of visitors who never otherwise would be contacted in the course of a workday.

IMPLEMENTATION:

The project developed as time permitted without special budgetary consideration. It grew gradually as an adjunct to regular duties and was completed in January of 1985.

The gallery consisted of thirty-two exhibits, twelve of which were the focus of the taped tour. The exhibits varied from simple displays of specific reports, to a (five foot by twelve foot) lattice of a health optimization program, to a room devoted to the display of over fifty graphs documenting the "health" of the Treatment Program.

Though the exhibits, for the most part, displayed graphs, tables, and lattices, the overall impact of thirty-two such exhibits was quite dramatic. The visitor was offered an "insider's" view, a view of the "inner corridors" wherein he or she found displayed the cybernetic linkages and performance outcomes of a large and complex organization. That was one level of impact. Another level, available to those with an eye for the process itself, is depicted best by the cartoon in the Postscript.

One exhibit, entitled the Memo Game, requires special mention. It consisted of five overly large memos which, in sum, were intended to help define and encourage creative work. Proposed by these memos were changes which, if implemented, might serve to increase the creative work of the institution's employees. Since the concept of creative work is difficult to grasp, the Memo Game attempted to convey it--both in form and content. Memo three, for example, illustrated the vision that makes creative work possible with 3D photographs (i.e., "with the eye you look at the world, with the imagination you look into"--Owen Barfield) while Memos four and five offered specific examples of creative work (i.e., work that both was novel and capable of bringing a new awareness and/or advantage to the organization). Overall, the attempt with this exhibit was to provide an example of the very thing the exhibit itself was intended to promote.

Special mention must be made of Sally Downey who assisted in the construction of some of the exhibits; Guy Cornwell, who offered many thoughts and much support for "the Memo Game"; Helen Soiref, who typed innumerable drafts of the tour script; and Bonita Kesting, who regularly produced updated graphs for the data-display room.

RESULTS:

A quiz was administered before and after the tour. The overall average "pre-tour" score (for the 159 who took the quiz) was 30% correct, while the overall average "post-tour" score (for the same 159) was 87%.

When pre-post scores were considered by group, the results were essentially the same. Administrators (37 took the tour) had an average "pre" score of 43%, and an average "post" score of 94%. An analysis of pre-post scores by tenure revealed that Administrators, regardless of their length of time on the job, scored a minimum of 30% higher on the "post" quiz than they did on the "pre" quiz.

The average "pre" score for House-Parents (87 took the tour) was 27% while their average "post" score was 86%. The longer their job tenure, the higher their "pre" score, but the average "pre" score never exceeded 60%.

Newly hired House-Parents (67 took the tour) scored an average of 22% on the "pre" quiz, and 84% on the "post" quiz.

One outcome of the House-Parent results was that Program Evaluation's tour became a regularly scheduled part of the pre-service training for newly-hired House-Parents. Further, any House-Parent who took the tour, regardless of how long he or she had been at the institution, received credit for in-service training.

The pre-post scores for the other employee groups to whom the tour was made available are: School Personnel(6) 42% to 78%; Secretarial Staff (20) 20% to 83%; Technical Staff(4) 20% to 85%; and Maintenance Staff (5) 14% to 86%.

It's important to note that traditional employee orientation programs would have excluded the groups just listed. But the tour format, the come-when-you-can, move-at-your-own-rate format, included them, permitting janitors, secretaries, teachers and computer programmers alike to learn about the processes integral to the organization of which they are a part.

In the twelve months prior to the completion of the tour, Program Evaluation had eight visitors who came for a personally guided tour of its products and processes. Most of these visitors were from outside organizations and each required approximately one hour of staff time. In the twelve months following the completion of the tour, Program Evaluation had one hundred and seventy-three visitors, only fourteen of whom where from outside organizations, the rest being from within the institution itself. On the tour, these visitors moved independently and at their own rate at no expense to Program Evaluation's staff.

CONCLUSION:

Evaluation divisions have onerous reputations. They are, after all, the means by which organizations monitor performance and impose accountability. For this reason many employees view "evaluation" with anxiety and suspicion. A review of participant comments suggests that this tour helped counter these concerns by making visible and understandable the role played by Program Evaluation. To the extent that the evaluation processes seemed reasonable and fair, then to that extent employees were free to replace their anxiety and suspicion with pride and support, realizing that such processes exist to insure responsible performance and organizational success.

 

POSTSCRIPT:

(A cartoon was to have gone here. However, I found out that it costs $250./month to post a G. Wilson cartoon on your website. The one for which I was seeking permission appeared in the "New Yorker" some fifteen or so years ago. It depicted five suited, aging gentlemen, all wearing headphones and carrying tape recorders, looking at a wall covered with graphs. You will have to use your imagination.)

 

One afternoon, as this project was nearing completion, I sat explaining it to a friend. Midway through the explanation he asked if I had seen "that" cartoon from the "New Yorker." When I said I didn't know what he was referring to, he went to his office and returned with the above cartoon. It depicts the theater we brought into our everyday workplace.

 

APPENDIX - SAMPLE EXHIBITS: