One More Thing to Add - Big Question #LCBQ

Before the month of May ends I want to add one more thing to my response to the May Big Question -#LCBQ.

If you read my last post you may remember I am currently in a situation where training must be provided on very short notice and I listed how I am attempting to get this done. Something I touched upon was communication, but because communication and marketing training is very important in this type of situation I wanted to expand a bit more on the topic. I have written about marketing courses before, but the last minute nature of on-demand situations makes marketing even more crucial for the audience to know it's available in addition to generating interest and motivation.

So, in an "on-demand" scenario also be prepared to:

• Get the e-mail blasts ready with direct links to the learning resources you are offering - make it easy for them to access immediately.


• Announce the course, job aids, blog etc. on the LMS and/or intranet - again providing direct links.


• Give the heads up to supervisors to gain their support and get a buzz going. In fact, getting announcements in their meetings is big plus. Getting face time in their meetings yourself is good too. Encourage SMEs and stakeholders to talk it up also.

Remember, always include a good description of what is being offered and the benefits of participating - if it is relevant, they will attend.

An On-Demand Scenario #LCBQ

In my prior post, The Other Stakeholder Wants It Now Too, I had focused on the learners' need for "on-demand" learning. This month's Big Question at Learning Circuits is "How do we need to change in what we do in order to address learning/performance needs that are on-demand?"

At this moment I happen to be in a situation where a major software system upgrade is going to occur in a matter of weeks. Staff do not have the luxury of waiting for me to design, develop and implement a thorough set of learning events. Here is one real life example of what is done in an "on demand" situation.

• An immediate sit down with the SMEs to identify the audience and the changes to the system (luckily, I have worked with this audience and system before) and to gain access to the new system.


• Use the new system myself to further identify learning needs and challenges the audience may encounter, while grabbing screenshots and creating job aids for the tasks the audience will need to learn in the upgraded system. If you are a fan of the ADDIE model, this would be like trying one's best to lump the analysis, design and development phases together into a very, very short period of time... It is not pretty, but it is what happens in an "on-demand" situation.


• Get a blog on the Intranet where I can provide ongoing support, additional learning materials, tips and tricks and a place for staff to share their knowledge of using the new system.


• Communicate details about the upgrade including its features, benefits and motivate learners to master the new system. Oh yeah, get them the job aids they need.


• If time allows, I will build some impromptu simulations in addition to the job aids.

None of this is pretty, but this is what I have had to scratch together to address on-demand learning needs in this particular situation. Luckily, job aids and on-going support via the blog should get the learners up to speed for this upgrade... Wish me luck.

FYI: This post may not directly address the question of how we need to change but rather be an example of what is done in one particular "on-demand" scenario. I will say we cannot completely skip analysis and design phases, but need to be able to think on our feet and do our best to conduct very quick, informal analyses and design on the fly in these situations.

The Other Stakeholder Wants It Now Too #LCBQ

I recently posted my response to the Learning Circuits Big Question (LCBQ). It occurred to me there is another stakeholder who may also demand, "I want it now." They probably have a more legitimate reason for making this demand simply because they are the people that actually use the knowledge and/or skills the training teaches... They are the audience. In my opinion, the most important stakeholder. They do not ask for low quality, quickly developed training. They want quality, effective courses when and where they needed it, but I am sure they also want the instructional designers to be given the time needed to design and develop such a thing.

So, as the "other stakeholder," what do they mean when they say "I want it now!"

• No short notice (time to take training on their schedule and time to review, if necessary).


• Ease of access (e.g., mobile, social media, off the LMS (at least painless access to what resides on the LMS), etc.)


• Quality courses that keeps their attention, focuses on their learning needs and is relevant to their job.


• Ongoing access to the course and it still is relevant when they take it a year later even when job or skills have changed. In other words, appropriately updated content.


• Ongoing support. Social media, blogs, etc. are good in many cases to provide ongoing support for the course's audience.

So, let's not forget the learner is also a stakeholder and they want training when needed, but do not want hastily made courses that do not address their learning needs. Please feel free to use the comments section to add what I may have missed in regards to what our audience mean when they say "I want it now." Also feel free to add your comments in Twitter with the #LCBQ hash tag.

A Priest, A Rabbi and an Instructional Designer Are in a Bar and Identify a Training Need: A response to the #LCBQ

The Learning Circuits Big Question is how do we address the "I want it now" demand from stakeholders. Of course stakeholders come to training departments all the time demanding training and we need to look at the problem first as Jay Cross was quick to point out. So, assuming a training need actually does exist, how do we approach the I want it now demands?

It is important to note that I am writing from the perspective of an e-learning designer in a corporate training department. This is important because we typically have numerous advantages in dealing with stakeholders that consultants do not always have:

• Corporate training departments have a greater ability of push-back on projects. For the most part our stakeholders are internal customers and we do not have the same risks of losing contracts when we push-back.


• We have had the time to "condition" the stakeholders over time to bring us to the table as early as possible. We have also educated them on the design and development process, and the time required, within the organization.


• We more likely have the experience of working with the stakeholder, audience, SMEs, the organization's LMS, specific applications or technology, etc. so we can hit the ground running.

Now with all that out of the way, if the stakeholder has the "I want it now" attitude here are some tips to delivering a course sooner than later (never with out risk to the quality of the training):

• Shorten the process - Here is an outline of the e-Learning Process from Inception to Evaluation, which I used for a team presentation back in 2005. If you follow the ADDIE model it is still pertinent and as you can see there are corners to be cut that will shorten the timeline required. I make it a point to inform stakeholders of the process involved, provide a timeline and project management form that helps give them an idea of when deliverables occur and what their roles and responsibilities are in the process. Note: My first cuts in the timeline are to their deliverables. Plenty of time can be shaved off by reducing their review time alone. I still expect thorough reviews, but to be done in only several days not weeks. Other shortcuts may include the needs analysis, which may have to be very informal, less investment in testing, etc. Remember, risks come with these shortcuts.


• Reduce the amount of interactivity and/or media use. Usually audio is off the table first, which I always add last anyway and do not see it as adding much instructional value to most courses anyway. It is as we say "a nice to do."

And if they still insist with "I want it now" here are some more things that can be done even if reluctantly.

• Up front "just in time" training materials (e.g., job aids, guides, manuals) until you can provide a course. FYI: There are occasions where these actually may be more effective than a course, but that is usually identified during the design phase.


• Captivate demos, Screenr videos, podcasts, webinars, and/or other quick to develop online materials. Note: Although they may be quick to develop, invest as much time into design as you are afforded even if a minimal amount.


• Learning labs - not necessarily a classroom training, but as a facilitator (maybe bring in the SMEs too) have an informal introduction to the subject, or if it is systems training provide a chance to use the system and experiment with what it will/can do.


• Provide a course that has EVEN less interactive elements, media use, fewer graphics with revisions and more instructionally sound content to be added at later time. However, be very careful not to make this the norm and get stuck in the "rapid e-learning" rut of producing dreck and calling it training.


• Be sure to provide an addendum to any course design plan that outlines what will be done within the limited timeline requested and the consequences of cutting corners. This does not solve the problem, but reiterates the need for a more effective development timeline and approach. A bit of C.Y.A. too.

It is important to note that if you do manage to develop something in a unreasonably short period of time, but sacrifice quality it will have negative consequences to learning in your organization and to your department's reputation.

There will be no shortage of stakeholders demanding training on very short notice. It is something we need to reduce by managing expectations and being brought to the table as early as possible. If you do need to make big compromises, remember those same stakeholders that say they want it now may also be quick to come back at you with something like, "Your training was ineffective. What happened?"

Oh, the priest, rabbi and instructional designer identified a training need, collaborated on designing an effective learning program which was not implemented until it was damn well ready to be implemented.

Great Resource for Using Graphics in eLearning... The eLearning Coach

Recently I had the pleasure of attending a presentation by the eLearning Coach, Connie Malamed, at an ISD breakfast we have for our Johns Hopkins instructional designers. The presentation was titled "Your Brain on Graphics." As most instructional designers know, graphics used effectively can greatly increase the efficacy of a learning event. However, Connie took it a step further and introduced us to how are brains are wired for graphics and shared great advice and examples of uber-effective use of graphics.

Her site, www.theelearningcoach.com, is an invaluable resource for learning more about using graphics in elearning, along with many other great resources and advice on elearning and instructional design she shares there. She also has written a book, "Visual Language for Designers," which I am adding to my reading list.

So, thank you eLearning Coach for the fantastic presentation and for sharing your knowledge at theelearningcoach.com.

Informal learning... Maybe I Can Informally Assess Its Impact #LCBQ

This month's Big Question at Learning Circuits is regarding assessing the impact of informal learning. Or more specifically:

How do you assess whether your informal learning, social learning, continuous learning, performance support initiatives have the desired impact or achieve the desired results?

The extent of my experience in evaluation has focused on applying Kirkpatrick's model to classroom training and e-learning. Although there may be some elements of the model that lend itself to evaluating informal learning, I do not see the model as a whole working well for assessing the impact of informal learning.

I wish I could present a straight forward model that works well for assessing the impact of informal learning, but I do not have one to offer. What I do have are some off the cuff ideas on how to assess impact. Much of this will be anecdotal information collected, but none the less information that has value in assessing impact.

• Survey staff regarding what they have learned and how they applied it. It makes sense to use a social media tool to do this (e.g., use hash tags in Twitter). Please don't think smile sheet, instead think individual questions delivered via social media.


• Participate, participate, participate and see first hand what they are learning. They will probably also be talking about how they apply what they learned... That's some good anecdotal evidence of applying behavior.


• If you have identified specific things staff have learned and applied, look for how it has impacted the organization (results). Oops, easing into Kirkpatrick's model, but if you can, you can.


• Measure the "buzz." Are people talking about it and/or encouraging others to use social media and informal learning? What are they saying that is convincing others? Is it because it has made a difference in their abilities or lead to successes?


• Find the leaders. Who are leading discussions, being quoted, retweeted, yammed about, followed, liked, etc.? Recruit them to help you measure the impact. They have pull and can help you garner much of the fore-mentioned information.

Keep in mind, the above are ideas I "blue skied," but if you have additional ideas, I would love to hear them in the comments section. Don't forget to check the ever increasing posts and comments on the LCBQ blog and add your 2 cents there too.

Signs of Being in e-Learning Hell #eLearningHell

Signs you are in e-learning hell (as a designer/developer):

1. The Help Desk calls and tells you they are receiving too many calls regarding your course and the __________ (pop-up blocker, Flash Player and/or LMS sign-on).


2. Someone shows up at your office and says "I'm here for the online training."*


3. The stakeholder proposes that all staff take the online course in a computer lab where it can be proctored.*


4. People call you and ask, "How long does it take to convert their eight hour classroom training into an e-learning course" and you answer,"I don't know. How long will it take you to turn my phone into a '67 Dodge van?"


5. Your subject matter expert (SME) tells you the course looks great and has no edits. The LMS report shows the SME did not even launch the course.*

*Yes, this actually happened.

Signs you are in e-learning hell (as a participant):

1. The course starts with five pages on how to take an online course.


2. The quiz questions have absolutely nothing to do with the course you just took.


3. Every answer on the quiz is either "all of the above" or "none of the above."


4. The content is not exactly concise. In fact, it may have been written by Proust.


5. You scored 100% on the quiz but are not marked "complete" because you skipped page 42.


6. Next.


7. You toss your most snarky remarks at the people pictured in the course, but they still ignore you.


8. Back.

Of course the above is all in good fun and just a way for me to vent some frustrations of working in our field. Thankfully, the above are resolvable issues and are becoming less and less common. Do you have signs that tell you when you are in e-learning hell? Please feel free to share in the comments section. Thanks!