DACUM by S L King

8/14/2019 DACUM by S L King

1/4

The DACUM Process and its Usefulness inTask Analysis for Instruc tional Developers

by Shir ley L. King, 1999

Introduction

Unless an accurate, detailed job analysis is undertaken prior to developing a trainingprogram, companies may discover after investment of considerable resources that tasks trainedfor were not essential and not required. This paper discusses the Develop A Curriculum(DACUM) as an approach to task analysis that may be quite useful for instructional developersinterested in competency-based learning and training. This paper first discusses the origin,methodology, and underlying assumptions of DACUM. Next, advantages and limitations of theprocess are explored. The final section of the paper discusses ways of promoting the successof a DACUM process. In addition to references to the literature, comments andrecommendations from an instructional designer experienced in DACUM facilitation, who wasinterviewed for this paper, are presented.

Background

The DACUM approach to job analysis originated in Canada in the 1960's as a quick,effective, low-cost way to develop competency lists drawing on the expertise of a committee ofcontent experts or experienced workers (Coffin, 1993). Post-secondary institutions in Canadaand, more recently, the United States use DACUM as an approach to competency-basedlearning "because of its success in developing high-quality content analysis in a short period oftime compared with other commonly used curriculum analysis techniques" (University of IllinoisCurriculum Centre, 1997). The DACUM approach makes it possible to develop a complete jobprofile, with duties and tasks identified and prioritized, usually in only two days. The profile canthen be validated by a larger sample (Jones, 1998).

DACUM Method

A group of six to twelve experts who are competently performing the job are recruited toform the DACUM committee. Because of their current occupational expertise, committeeparticipants do not need to make advance preparations other than freeing time to be available.

A DACUM facilitator guides the committee to collectively develop the DACUM chart over aperiod of two to three days. Steps in this process include (Coffin, 1993; Stammen & Vetter,1994):

1. Orientation to the process2. Review of job description3. Identification of general areas of competence (GAC's)4. Identification of tasks and skills

5. Duties and related tasks are written in observable and measurable terms.6. Organize and sequence task statements in relation to GAC's and complexity7. Identification of behavior, attitudes, traits, general skills and knowledge, tools, and

equipment required to perform the duties and tasks8. Other options, as desired (e.g., leveling of tasks, addition of a rating scale)

The DACUM chart is a detailed and graphic portrayal of the skills or competenciesinvolved that represents the collective expertise and consensus of the DACUM Committee. Anaverage DACUM chart contains between 10 to 14 GAC's and 180 to 200 tasks (Coffin, 1993).


2/4

GAC's are listed in the first column and are consecutively labeled with a letter, starting with A.Tasks are listed in columns to the right of the related GAC and labeled with the GAC letter and atask position number, i.e., A1, A2, A3, etc. Each task is further rated numerically to indicatehow frequently it is performed, how important it is to perform it correctly, and how difficult it is tolearn. These three ratings are totaled for each task to indicate its importance to the overallfunction of the job (Coffin, 1993; Jones, 1998). To view samples of DACUM charts, the reader is

referred to http://www.interlynx.net/archway/Fig1.htmorhttp://www.waukesha.tec.wi.us/homepage/dacsamp1.htm.

Once the DACUM chart is completed, an additional step of validation by a large sampleof job performers and stakeholders may be undertaken (Coffin, 1993). Schwartz (personalinterview, 1999) suggests a sample of 200 is usually desirable for this purpose. Validation maytake two or more weeks. The DACUM panel is then recalled, along with first line supervision, toconsider every submitted comment and to decide, by consensus, if any changes are required tothe DACUM charts (Jones, 1998).

DACUM is based on these assumptions:

expert workers can describe and define their job more accurately than anyone else any job or outcome can be described in terms of the tasks expert workers perform

all tasks, in order to be performed correctly, require certain knowledge, skills, tools, andattitudes

experts are able to identify valid, reliable outcomes and competencies(Coffin & Morin, 1998; University of Illinois Curriculum Centre, 1997).

Advantages and Limitations

In comparison with other job analysis techniques, DACUM has a number of advantages.DACUM has been successfully used to analyze a diverse range of occupations at all skill levels

(Coffin & Morin, 1998; Stammen & Vetter,1994). It can be accomplished in a short time frameof less than three days. It is relatively inexpensive to develop, requiring minimal resources of ameeting room, facilitator, supplies, postage, telephone, and meals (University of IllinoisCurriculum Centre, 1997). Because those performing the competencies are involved in theprocess, its accuracy and likelihood of acceptance by those who implement and receive thesubsequent training is increased. It provides a detailed task analysis, a tool for performanceappraisal, a basis for the development of competency-based learning and evaluation, and ameans of identifying individual training needs (Coffin, 1993; Coffin & Morin, 1998).

Despite its many advantages, DACUM is not without limitations. The process has beencriticized as "very task oriented and is not concerned with the larger humanistic issues ofmaturation, self-actualization, and democracy" (Waukesha County Technical College,1996).

Other criticisms are that it stifles creativity and there is no evidencethat competency based education serves students better than traditional approaches (Coffin,1993). Jones (1998) notes that the two-day process can be very draining for committeemembers and facilitator as each item will be discussed, debated, written, rewritten, revised andrevisited.
http://www.interlynx.net/archway/Fig1.htmhttp://www.waukesha.tec.wi.us/homepage/dacsamp1.htmhttp://www.waukesha.tec.wi.us/homepage/dacsamp1.htmhttp://www.interlynx.net/archway/Fig1.htm


3/4

Promoting a Successful DACUM Process

The literature suggests that the selection of facilitator and committee members is key toa successful DACUM. A skilled facilitator who can maintain rapport and guide the group toconsensus on every item efficiently and without prejudice is needed (Coffin, 1993; Jones, 1998).Jones (1998) states that a facilitator with little knowledge of the job to be analyzed will produce

a better DACUM than a facilitator with detailed job knowledge.While authors agree that the success of a DACUM is especially dependent on how well

the DACUM committee is selected, they disagree on what constitutes a well-selectedcommittee. Coffin (1993) advocates a mix of workers and their supervisors, with the workershaving greater representation and at least ten years of experience on the job. Jones (1998)states that no supervisors or instructors of the job should be included, as they are likely toinfluence worker input and the results. Schwartz (personal interview, 1999) concurs thatmanagers and teachers are not the best people and further suggests that the ideal membersare people who are doing the job full time, preferably for four to five years. She says thisexperience level is desirable because they still need to think about the tasks they are performingwhereas long-term workers tend to perform the job without attention to specific tasks, thus havemore difficulty identifying them. All agree that currency in the field is essential.

Coffin (1993) suggests that a DACUM is more successful when members are teamplayers, confident, articulate, and open-minded. He also suggests they should be viewed asleaders by their peers.

Consistent attendance is also considered essential for DACUM success. In regard toattendance, Schwartz recommends a committee size of twelve to fourteen to enable fourmembers at a time to rotate out for short periods for reflection and to avoid entrenchment, whilemaintaining a minimum of eight on task. This would also help to address the problem of fatiguethat Jones (1998) identified as a limitation.

Software to easily enter, manage and print DACUM chart information is now availableand may contribute to the success of a DACUM process. DACUM Information System (DIS) isa windows program that will allow up to 23 duty rows for each DACUM. Each duty row cancontain up to 90 tasks, allowing for a total of 2070 tasks per DACUM (DACUM Information

System Software, 1999).

Summary

The DACUM process is effective for detailed task analysis, identification of individualtraining needs, performance appraisal, and development of competency-based learning. Thecareful selection of facilitator and committee members is important to a successful DACUM. Adetailed, accurate DACUM chart can be created quickly at relatively low-cost. It can then beused by instructional developers as a basis for developing a training program, in which the taskstrained for are not only required for job performance, but can be addressed in order of priority.


4/4

References

Coffin, L. (1993). DACUM Facilitator Manual. Canadian Vocational AssociationDACUM Training Program. ***

Coffin, L., & Morin, P. (1998). Module II: Competency-based program development andimplementation. Canadian Vocational Association DACUM Training Program. ***

DACUM Information System Software (1999). Retrieved February 16, 1999 from theWorld Wide Web: http://www.interlynx.net/archway/Home.htm

Jones, M. (1998). DACUM approach to job analysis. Retrieved February 12, 1999 fromthe World Wide Web: http://www.interlynx.net/archway/Dacum.htm ***

Neaves, J. R. (1997). DACUM Process. J. R. Neaves Consulting. Retrieved February

12, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.jrneaves.com/dacum.html

Schwartz, K. (Personal interview, March 8,1999). DACUM process: A facilitator's view.

Stammen, R.M., & Vetter, R. (1994, December) Project title: Collaboratively createdmultimedia modules for teachers. US West Foundation Grant Application. Fargo: North DakotaState University. Retrieved February 12, 1999 from the World Wide Web:http://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/stammen/uswest/about_grant/html/dacum.htm

University of Illinois Curriculum Centre. (1997). DACUM. Retrieved February 12, 1999from the World Wide Web: http://www.uis.edu/~iscc/background.html

Waukesha County Technical College. (1996). DACUM: Occupational Analysis forElectromechanical Technician. Retrieved March 8, 1999 from the World Wide Web:http://www.waukesha.tec.wi.us/homepage/dacsamp1.htm.

Note: Asterisks (***) indicate resources the writer found most useful.

Please E-mail comments to me at [email protected]
http://www.interlynx.net/archway/Home.htmhttp://www.interlynx.net/archway/Dacum.htmhttp://www.jrneaves.com/dacum.htmlhttp://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/stammen/uswest/about_grant/html/dacum.htmhttp://www.uis.edu/~iscc/background.htmlhttp://www.waukesha.tec.wi.us/homepage/dacsamp1.htmmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.waukesha.tec.wi.us/homepage/dacsamp1.htmhttp://www.uis.edu/~iscc/background.htmlhttp://www.ndsu.nodak.edu/instruct/stammen/uswest/about_grant/html/dacum.htmhttp://www.jrneaves.com/dacum.htmlhttp://www.interlynx.net/archway/Dacum.htmhttp://www.interlynx.net/archway/Home.htm

Documents

DACUM by S L King