Contemporary human performance programs that support the warfighter are more prevalent than ever. As leaders struggle to prioritize their limited funding across a growing list of requirements, it’s more important than ever that HP programs demonstrate a clear return on investment. But how should we evaluate the return on investment from DoD HP programs? Read more here: https://lnkd.in/ggYjGJwZ and let us know your thoughts below! ??
MBA, CSM, CSCS, RSCC D | Human Performance | Business Development
3 周Maximizing the return on investment (ROI) in military human performance (HP) programs is more important than ever. At T3i, we’ve thought a lot about measuring their impact, but we’re curious how the broader community defines success. Are we measuring it in a way that justifies the cost? HP programs aim to enhance readiness, extend careers, and improve post-service quality of life. But what metrics prove their value? Should we track standardized data like injury rates and performance gains, or does each job specialty need a tailored approach? Beyond individuals, what about the big picture? If HP reduces injuries, does it cut long-term costs? If warfighters stay in the fight longer, does it offset recruitment and training expenses? At what point do the savings justify making HP a permanent investment? And what about the intangibles: resilience, decision-making, and mental endurance? Can we quantify the ability to stay sharp in high-stakes moments? Should ROI be purely financial, or do we need a broader definition? At T3i, we believe in HP’s power to sustain careers—thoughts on how we validate that these programs are essential? What’s working, what’s not, and how do we make the case for continued investment? Let’s discuss.