While its precise etymology is not known, "ABCD" has become a mnemonic most often associated with Robert Mager's work. The memory aid serves to remind us of the necessary components of a behavioral objective: an indication of the Audience (or "who" is expected to perform), the Behavior (or "action") they are expected to carry out, the Conditions (or "givens") under which they are to do this, and the Data (or "measures") that will gauge their success.

This approach has become near-ubiquitous in the realm of workplace learning. However, it is less helpful when one is seeking to develop objectives that specific results to be accomplished rather than actions to be undertaken ... so long as we are clear about what we mean by the distinction. As Watkins alludes to in his post concerning the language of performance, many interpret "performance" as "behavior" – the actions, processes and work that people engage in within organizations with the intention of accomplishing useful results (Watkins and Leigh, 2001). From this perspective, it is natural to focus on improving workplace efficiency and productivity with the belief that it will lead to desirable results. In common practice, performance improvement is typically not distinct from process improvement in that its purpose is to make better, faster or cheaper the activities, interventions, and practices that make up work.

Step outside of the context of work for a moment, and consider the field of performing arts. What does it mean to have (or witness) a “performance?” For some, it may be a musician playing a concert, an actor delivering their lines, or a dancer engaged in ballet. What all of these alternatives share in common is their grounding in action … in performing. This is reasonable for the performing arts, but it is useful to distinguish performance as something different within the context of work.

When defining results to be accomplished, we are defining not learning objectives nor behavior objectives; we are defining performance objectives. Whereas ABCD serves instructional designers well in crafting objectives that satisfy "Level 2" of Kirkpatrick's framework (e.g., learning) , if we seek to develop objectives consistent with the measurement of results, we must work from a new schema, one in which to-be performance is clearly and unambiguously stated as performance objectives.

A simple mnemonic device for developing performance objectives is denoted by the acronym PQRS (Leigh, 2003). First, requirements should specify the Performer or performers who are expected to achieve the desired result. Next, relevant Qualifying criteria should be laid out, typically indicating the time frame over which a result should be accomplished. Lastly, the Results to be accomplished should be stated, along with the Standards against which the value of a performance will be judged. A hypothetical example from a construction company seeking to reduce the amount of scrap (waste) generated by employees cutting electrical conduit, with PQRS components indicated in parentheses, could be: "Construction workers (P) will reduce the amount of scrap conduit (R) produced this month by 10% less than the prior month (Q), as demonstrated by the ordering of no more than 11 feet of conduit per 10 feet of wiring required (S)."

That performance objectives follow the P-then-Q-then-R-then-S format is not critical. However, addressing each component is necessary if we are to develop  meaningful statements of expectation.

For further reading, see Watkins, R. and Leigh, D. (2001). Performance improvement: More than just bettering the here-and-now. Performance Improvement. 40 (8), pp. 10-15.