top of page

Performance Based Lesson Mapping

  • Writer: Mary
    Mary
  • May 23
  • 5 min read

Author: Guy W. Wallace, Performance Analyst & Instructional Architect (retired)


A Performance & People-Centric Approach to Instructional Design for Enterprise Process Performance Improvement


In the realm of instructional systems design (ISD) and learning experience design (LXD) in an enterprise context, the Performance-Based Lesson Mapping design methodology, refined over decades of practical application beginning in 1990 with a contentious project on Labor Relations for Illinois Bell.


PB Lesson Mapping offers a systematic and highly efficient framework for developing instruction that directly drives workplace results with its focus on people’s performance within targeted enterprise processes and trying to ensure that sufficient practice with feedback (applications exercises) is provided formally to build the initial competence and confidence needed by learnes/performers to return to their performance contexts to apply what they’ve learned and continue learning via social and trial & error means. 



The use of the performance-based lesson mapping design methodology is best thought of as a means to the ends of the ‘10’ in a flipped 10-20-70 approach to people’s performance competency development.


At its core, Wallace’s Lesson Mapping is a visual and structured tool for collaboratively designing instructional content post Analysis efforts with the project’s stakeholders’ handpicked Master Performers, Other Subject Matter Experts, and sometimes Supervisors and target audience members who have more recently climbed the Performance and Learning curves and who are then used to provide insights and perspectives from their recent experiences of learning how to perform, that wizend Master Performers have long forgot or never experienced when they began their climbs. 


Lesson Mapping produces architectural renderings at three levels: Event Maps, Lesson Maps, and Activity Specifications. 


Lessons Maps are at the heart of design for Performance-Based Instruction.


The methodology’s power lies in its ability to translate detailed performance and knowledge/skill analysis data into a clear, actionable plan for learning. 


Unlike traditional, content-driven training that often fails to translate to on-the-job improvement, Lesson Mapping ensures that every instructional activity is directly aligned with tangible performance outcomes required, back on the job.


The foundational principle of Lesson Mapping is its unwavering focus on “performance competence” – the ability to perform tasks to produce outputs that meet stakeholder requirements. 



This is a critical distinction from merely “knowing” facts or concepts, but shifts to the ability to apply facts and concepts in the workflow. 


The Lesson Mapping process typically begins after a thorough analysis phase, but can be done concurrently with analysis efforts in smaller-scale projects. 


The pre-Lesson Mapping analysis effort involves:


  • Performance Modeling: Identifying the ideal performance, including outputs, tasks, and measures. This goes beyond a simple job description to truly understand what successful performance looks like and how it’s measured.

  • Performance Gap Analysis: Determining the discrepancies between current and ideal performance, and, crucially, identifying the probable causes of these gaps. Wallace emphasizes that not all performance gaps are training-related; some may stem from environmental enablers or individual attributes, and the Lesson Map helps to discern when training is, in fact, the appropriate solution.

  • Knowledge & Skills Analysis: Systematically deriving the enabling knowledge and skills required to perform the identified tasks and produce the desired outputs. This feeds directly into the content of the lessons.

    The Lesson Map itself is a detailed, modular blueprint for instruction. While its exact format can vary, it typically outlines:

  • Learning Objectives: Clearly stated, performance-based objectives that specify what learners will be able to do in terms of tasks producing outputs to stakeholder requirements.


  • Content Modules/Lessons: Breaking down the learning into manageable, logical units of INFO-DEMO-APPO:

    • Key Information required.

    • Performance applications Demonstrations.

    • Application Exercises: Crucially, the map specifies hands-on exercises that allow learners to practice the tasks and apply the knowledge in a realistic context. These exercises are designed to mirror actual workplace scenarios, facilitating the transfer of learning.


  • Measures of Success: Defining how the mastery of each learning objective and the overall lesson will be assessed (which is captured/reported in the Activity Specifications for each INFO-DEMO-APPO).


A key strength of Lesson Mapping is its emphasis on modularity. This allows for flexibility in delivery, enabling the reuse or modification of instructional components as needed. It also facilitates a rapid development process, as design and development teams can work in parallel, building out modules based on the established Maps.


The Lesson Mapping methodology is sometimes compared to concepts like Design Thinking and Agile in its iterative and user-centered nature. By engaging master performers and others in the design process, Lesson Mapping inherently incorporates user experience and ensures practical relevance. It also fosters a “backward-chaining” approach, starting with the desired performance and working backward to define the necessary learning experiences.


Lesson Mapping is a testament to the idea that effective learning design isn’t about covering content, but about enabling competence.


The Lesson Mapping methodology, plus the critical pre-Mapping Performance, Gap and Enabling Knowledge/SDkills analysis required to feed the mapping efforts, has been addressed in many of Guy W. Wallace’s books, articles, presentations, and videos going back to the early 1980s.



About the Author

Guy W. Wallace is a retired Performance Analyst and Instructional Architect (as of July 2023) and had been designing and developing performance-based Instruction - Performance Guides & Learning Experiences - for Enterprise Learning functions and their business-critical target audiences since 1979. 


Guy, an ISD consultant since 1982 and a partner/owner at three consulting firms, personally served over 80 clients, primarily in Fortune 500 firms in the USA and firms in Canada, Germany, and the Netherlands. 


In 2010, Guy received the Honorary Life Member Award from the International Society for Performance Improvement – its highest award, requiring unanimous approval by two successive boards - for his contributions to both the technology of Performance Improvement and the Society.


Guy's ISD work has won internal awards at General Motors and Siemens Building Technologies and external awards from ISPI and ATD for work done with AT&T, Chamberlin Edmonds – Emdeon, HP, and Imperial Oil.


Guy started as a Training Developer at Wickes Lumber in 1979 and then became a Training Project Supervisor at Motorola in 1981. Since 1982, he specialized in Curriculum Architecture Design via a Facilitated Group Process. In 1984, he co-authored two articles on these approaches: a Training Magazine article on Curriculum Architecture Design via a Group Process - and another on Creating Models and Matrices using a Group Process - for NSPI's Performance & Instruction Journal. Guy completed his 76th performance-based Curriculum Architecture Design consulting project - since 1982 - in 2019. 


He is experienced in facilitating teams for the Analysis, Design, and Development of Performance Guides & Learning Experiences - and has taught several his clients these methods. Guy typically facilitates Project Steering Teams in detailed Planning efforts, and then he facilitates their selected Master Performers to quickly conduct Analysis and Design for hand-off to Development teams for quick, parallel development/acquisition. 


In 2010 he was recruited as an inaugural member of ASQ's Influential Voices initiative to Raise the Voice of Quality and served until late 2015. Guy has published over 100 articles, 30+ books, and 5000+ Blog posts. He has presented professionally 160 times at conferences, chapters, and webinars.


See his Professional Archive website for his clients, descriptions of 250+ projects, publications, presentations, and hundreds of free ISD/LXD and Performance Improvement PDFs:


Want to learn more? Check out: https://guywwallace.wordpress.com.


1 Comment


Katie Ray
Katie Ray
Jun 08

What a deep and practical breakdown of performance-based lesson mapping—this really highlights the gap between training to know versus training to perform. I appreciate the focus on building initial competence and confidence, especially through real-world application and structured feedback loops. That’s where traditional content-heavy training so often falls short.


The modular structure also makes a lot of sense—scalable, flexible, and aligned with how learning actually works in high-stakes environments. It’s refreshing to see an approach that’s not just theoretical but forged in the reality of enterprise demands.


Curious for others here: Have you used a performance-first instructional model before, and what was the biggest shift compared to traditional course design?

Like
bottom of page