A response to the supposed "Death of the LMS" question

It seems very trendy to ask this question currently, but in my view the debate is not very objective. Market pundits often link the discussion of potential demise of LMS to the growth in interest in informal and social learning, defining the LMS as a tool that's relevant only to formal. Other big advocates of the "no LMS" world are often vendors whose vested interests lie in alternative solutions. Neither of these is to my mind a convincing argument.

So what's the reality? We do a lot of research in FTSE100 companies and similar organisations. The reality is that the major business drivers for an LMS within these companies are not just intact, they are increasing. Regulatory and compliance pressure has increased not decreased. Pressure on efficient operational processes has increased not decreased. The importance of talent and capability has increased not decreased. All of these drivers reinforce the need for coherent and automated management processes for learning, and therefore the need for an LMS.

The pressure in most corporates is actually to consolidate their LMSs, as most of them have multiple solutions in different units and geographies, and to better align the processes of the LMS to a 21st century learning model. That means more than just classroom training and click-and-turn e-learning content. The majority of our clients want to adopt informal learning, but this is an add-on, not a replacement for their formal learning. Of course some existing formal courses can get replaced by more efficient and effective informal approaches, but the majority cannot and will not.

The other argument that gets raised against the LMS is that of "tracking". The view seems to be that when a course was formal we wanted to track and report it, but if its informal we don't. If we don't want to track it, we don't need an LMS. Or at least that's the argument. Personally, I think this is rubbish. The entire Internet is tracked. Doesn't matter whether its a PDF, a youtube video, a page of html or an entry in a discussion forum, its always tracked.

The question is not one of tracking at all - its really about purpose of tracking. It is right to say that the purpose of tracking is different between an informal learning resource and a formal course. But it was different anyway between a classroom event and an e-learning module. With informal learning, the purpose of tracking is to ensure relevance, to rate its value, and to sometimes to pay for it if its someone else's IP. These patterns of relevance and value help connect informal and formal learning. After all, this a continuum or ecosystem of learning, not completely separate worlds. All of these approaches have a place together, and ultimately LMS's have to adapt to this new reality, just as they had to adapt to e-learning and virtual classrooms.

Organisations will still need their LMS and the LMS vendors aren't going away - in fact despite the mergers and acquisitions, there are still probably more LMS companies now that ever. The needs of an LMS are changing though to reflect the change nature of learning. Whilst certain vendors may want you to think otherwise, the reality is different.

We've just announced some new research focusing on e-learning authoring strategies and tools, including the first of a series of three research papers. The first paper, titled E-learning Authoring: The Shifting Landscape analyses the the key forces driving changes to the way corporates are approaching the creation of bespoke e-learning, together with a high-level perspective of the new strategies for content authoring and new types of authoring tools. The next two papers, to be published in Q2 2010 will focus more specifically on a deeper analysis of the strategies and the tools.

http://tinyurl.com/ycjzk2p

Key learning trends 2010 - A quick response

The following was my short response to a recent question on the the key trends in learning in 2010. Any thoughts?

- - -

Overall, Elearnity sees 2010 as a transformational year where lots of changes in 2009 become more formalised.

The biggest trend will be the reevaluation of the role and value of learning to the business. Training budgets were under a lot of pressure in 2009, with precedence given to mandatory learning that manages compliance risk but does not add real value or enhance performance. In 2010, companies will seek easier ways to automate their compliance agenda, and increasingly focus discretionary spend on enhancing the performance of the business, and building core capabilities.

Both agendas will see increased adoption of learning technology to better manage, focus, personalise and deliver key elements of the learning. Constraints on travel and subsistence budgets will continue to make virtual learning and e-learning attractive options. For many companies, these are now standard channels for learning, but many learners and trainers still lack the skills to use them effectively. More focus will need to be placed on the skills for effective virtual learning to support the growth in these channels.

SAP, Sharepoint or specialist LMS?

The following is a response I recently posted to a question on the LSG discussion site concerning the use of SAP or Sharepoint as an LMS versus "well-known" LMS products (in the case of the question, he cited Moodle and Kallidus). Thought the response might be of interest to a broader community ...

The short answer is "depends on what you want to do with your LMS"! Or "horses for courses" as the saying goes.

In our experience, the selection of an ERP LMS solution (SAP, Oracle, PeopleSoft) tends to be driven by strategic IT issues rather than functional fit or the needs of learners or L&D. Whilst the SAP Enterprise Learning platform continues to improve in functionality, there is still a functional gap vs best of breed platforms. There is also a tendancy for ERP platforms to be positioned as "effectively free" as the organisation has already committed to the HR platform. This is highly misleading as there is typically an incremental license for the LMS (e.g. for SAP EL over and above SAP HR), and the implementation costs for the ERP LMS are typically larger than best of breed alternatives.

There is a lot of interest in portal-led learning solutions currently, and the integration of LMS functionality into Sharepoint is becoming a common question. Currently we would not consider either the SLK or Sharepoint LMS as an enterprise class option. That doesn't mean you shouldn't consider them, just that you need to be very clear they will meet your specific tactical requirements as they are unlikely to meet the common requirements of a corporate standard LMS platform. Our concern currently is that a corporates will get sucked into creating custom LMS solutions in Sharepoint; a strategy we certainly wouldn't recommend (with any portal platform).

Interestingly you then refer to well-known LMSs such as Moodle or Kallidus. Kallidus is clearly a corporate LMS that has historically been successful in mid-tier companies, and is increasingly winning business in larger enterprises as well.

Moodle is not however really an LMS. It is (in academic speak) a Virtual Learning Environment or Course Management System. We have recently completed specific research on the relevance of Moodle to the corporate market (results to hopefully be published in the new year). Whilst Moodle can provide an effective e-learning launch and track platform, it needs significant customisation or add-on functionality to fulfil the role of a corporate LMS. A number of companies (e.g. Aardpress, Kineo, Remote Learner etc.) have developed extensions to do this, but in our research through corporate Moodle adopters, we really struggled to find good examples of companies using Moodle as an enterprise LMS.

Hope this is helpful. Happy to discuss further offline if you want to email me (davidw@elearnity.com).

Regards, David.

The E-learning Debate - An Inside View

On the 30th September 2009, David was a main speaker in the E-learning Debate at the Oxford Union, alongside Professor Diana Laurillard, Marc Rosenberg and others. The motion: “This house believes that the elearning of today is essential for the important skills of tomorrow”.

It's already clear from many conversations after the event, and in the days since, that this event
has really captured the imagination of many people in the UK e-learning industry. And the result on the day was very interesting: 90 for the motion, 144 against.

Here are David's thoughts on the debate itself and its implications.

SaaS Webinar - Link to Archive

Here is a link to the archived webinar featuring David's discussion of the impact of SaaS on learning & talent systems research:

http://www.cornerstoneondemand.co.uk/landing/on24/files/lobby.html

(updated link)

SaaS Core Insights paper announcement

Elearnity examines Software-as-a-Service impact on Learning & Talent Systems
Elearnity | Cirencester, UK

14-May-2009 » Training Press Releases » Elearnity, Europe's leading Corporate Learning Analyst, today announced its latest research on the impact of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) on the Learning & Talent Systems market.

Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), the provision of software applications as an Internet service, has become a major force in the business applications market. This Elearnity Core Insights paper explores the growing impact of SaaS on applications for managing and delivering learning and talent processes within a corporate environment.

"Software-as-a-Service is a very relevant approach for Learning & Talent Systems and we are seeing rapid growth in its adoption in both the Enterprise and Mid-tier markets.", said David Wilson, Managing Director of Elearnity. "Our research highlights the benefits and barriers of SaaS for corporates, and explores these specifically in the context of Learning & Talent Systems."

The research paper looks at the evolution and specific drivers/barriers for SaaS Learning & Talent Systems. It also provides guidance and key questions for corporates to ask internally when considering SaaS Learning & Talent solutions, as well as a checklist of questions to ask to potential suppliers.

"The benefits of SaaS are particularly attractive in the current economic climate, but not all SaaS solutions are suitable for large complex organisations." said Wilson. "Overall, Elearnity expects SaaS to grow significantly as a proportion of the market, and pressure on vendors to offer more scalable Enterprise-class SaaS solutions."

The SaaS paper is available immediately for download from Elearnity's Knowledge Centre at www.elearnity.com along with other Elearnity research papers and presentations

Link: http://www.elearnity.com/EKCLoad.htm?load=ByKey/DWIN7RZCUJ

E-learning anarchy

The following is a response to a question raised about how to deal with the problem of fragmented and uncontrolled procurement of e-learning within a distributed organisation. Thought it was worth adding here to ... DAVID

This has historically been a common problem, and often leads to the appointment of a central resource to support and coordinate e-learning related purchases, as well as to own the associated technical standards and sometimes the platform (e.g. LMS) they will be run on. In terms of resolving your issues - you probably need to think about it at three different levels.

1) Technical Standards - Nearly every major corporate we work with has had to put in place a technical standards document that is enforced via the procurement process. This includes: e-learning standards for compatibility with your LMS or deployment platform (AICC, SCORM 1.2, 2004 etc), technical standards for your IT environment - browser/script/java/plugin restrictions etc and network and other restictions (e.g. bandwidth), other integration requirements and so on. Will also probably include requirements for new suppliers in terms of provision of sample test content to prove LMS compatibility, as well as any associated release or delivery requirements for the content - i.e. the rules of engagement for the vendor.

2) E-learning Project Process - a standard process to be used by all parts of the organisation to facilitate e-learning projects. The aim of this is to better qualify projects and investments in e-learning, and to take them through some standard steps to help ensure the success of the projects. This could include which suppliers have already been vetted - some guidelines on procurement, guidelines on project planning and initiation etc, and (very importantly) guidelines on assurance, testing and deployment. This will help ensure projects are managed more effectively. Frequently the implementation of such a process will involve advisory support from a central e-learning advisor or team depending on the scale of the organisation. Whilst responsibility for e-learning may be devolved into the fragmented L&D operation - e-learning expertise is generally not unless an organisation becomes very e-centric and even then it still needs to rest with a few people (in reality).

3) Governance - as you have highlighted, a decentralised procurement of e-learning solutions leads to failed projects as the expertise is absent to make them successful, and basic issues of suitability, design, and deployability go out the window. Centralising all responsibility for e-learning can be a good strategy in the short term, but is frequently a bad answer long term as it fundamentally keeps it in the ivory tower. Delegating responsibility for e-learning without some form of governance and process leads to anarchy. As a minimum, you need to have some standards for projects and potential suppliers (see above), and also cross-visibility of existing solutions and suppliers across the business. Over time, this ideally would lead some form of governance network to maximise the value of what you already have and to stop reinventing the wheel 15 times in different parts of the business. Governance should also foster and facilitate innovation on a coordinated basis - innovation in terms of approach and of suppliers etc.

Software-as-a-Service (SaaS): the Impact on Learning & Talent Systems

A Webinar featuring David Wilson, of Elearnity, will explore how investing in Software-as-a-Service (SaaS)-based talent management solutions is helping organisations increase productivity and ensure high performers are engaged, developed, connected and retained – while also lowering costs. The complimentary session, sponsored by Cornerstone OnDemand, is entitled “Software-as-a-Service (SaaS): the Impact on Learning & Talent Systems” and is scheduled for Thursday, 14th May from 3pm to 4pm GMT.

According to analyst firm Gartner, the global enterprise market for SaaS will rise by nearly 22 percent in 2009, as companies turn to Web-based applications as a way to reduce costs during the economic downturn. This includes increased adoption of on-demand human capital management applications by organisations seeking economical yet effective ways for managing and developing employees.

David Wilson, Elearnity’s founder and Managing Director, commented, “SaaS is having a significant impact on the learning and talent systems market, both for enterprise customers, as well as the mid-tier market. We also see it as being particularly attractive in the current economic climate.”

Learning and human resources (HR) leaders participating in Thursday’s Webinar will:

• Discover why leading organisations are turning to SaaS to accelerate change and deliver more value for the business from their learning and talent systems
  
  
• Explore specific HR business drivers – including cost/time savings, scalability and flexibility – that make SaaS a superior technology option
  
  
• Learn the key questions to ask when considering potential SaaS-based learning and talent solutions

During the session, Wilson will preview analysis and recommendations from Elearnity’s latest research. Elearnity’s research and analysis focuses on the key innovations challenging corporate learning organisations, including e-learning and blended learning, learning management strategy and systems, the impact of learning and increasing value-add, and integrating learning with human capital and performance. Elearnity’s research process is designed to develop deeper insights into corporate realities and best practice, and an independent understanding of vendor capabilities and performance.

To register for the Webinar, visit: https://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=registration.jsp&eventid=127366&sessionid=1&key=CCF502FDC19380DB30AA8825ED3B21B8&sourcepage=register

Impact of SaaS on Learning & Talent Systems

On 14th May, David will be previewing a new Elearnity research paper on the impact of Software-as-a-Service on Learning & Talent Systems at a Webinar hosted by Cornerstone OnDemand.

Click here for more information and to register for the event. The paper will be made available after the webinar.

Learning 2.0 - Video

Here is an online version of the learning 2.0 video I showed at the Learning Technologies conference at the end of January.

Its originally based on the slides created by Daniel Siddle content but with some additions and then rendered via Animoto. I showed the better quality MPEG4 version at the conference - email me if you want a link to it.

DAVID

Learning Technologies on the Rise

The Learning Technologies conference and exhibition still continues to be the best learning technology and e-learning event to attend in the UK. Hosted at Olympia in London last week, the conference was the largest yet, and the exhibition was sold out and seemed pretty consistently busy (at least whenever I was on the floor).

Here is a link to trainingzone's view of the conference, and Training Journal's view of the show overall.

LT is always a busy event for us and this year was no exception with a number of meetings and vendor briefing updates, plus the usual time hunting out new companies and products. Overall, I think it was a good show and it was heartening (especially for the vendors) to see the level of activity and interest despite the current economic doom and gloom!

My session in the conference on LMS 2.0 subtitled "Does the LMS have a place in a web 2.0 world?" seemed to be received positively, and I have already had a few requests for our animoto remix of Daniel Siddle's "Meet Charlotte". The slides have just been uploaded onto our knowledge centre.

PS. The LMS 2.0 topic is an area of ongoing research for us and happy to receive any thoughts or ideas, or links to relevant research or product information. Please email us at our incoming news feed news@elearnity.com.

Your Massive Visual Memory!

Research recently published by Tim Brady and his colleagues, indicates that the storage capacity of your long term visual memory may be on an astonishingly higher scale than previously thought.

"One of the major lessons of memory research has been that human memory is fallible, imprecise, and subject to interference. Thus, although observers can remember thousands of images, it is widely assumed that these memories lack detail."

What is exciting about this research is that contrary to this assumption, they are able to show that long-term memory is capable of storing a massive number of objects including the details.

Their research indicates a "massive capacity-memory system, in terms of both the quantity and fidelity of the visual information that can be remembered," the researchers said.

Whilst, the full implications of their research has yet to filter into both the academic and corporate worlds, it is interesting to think about the importance of visuals in learning, and the power of an image to convey a thousand words. Visualisation, diagrammatics and information design have often been neglected in training circles, but perhaps this research will give it some much needed focus, because actually seeing the process (for example) may have a greater importance than we originally thought.

How do you outsource you elearning development?

There seems to be an emerging trend over the past couple of years for corporates to buy in specific expertise rather than purchase an entire elearning project. In part this has appears to have been driven by the growth of generic publishing tools. But there also seems to be much more significant re-evaluation of where vendors add value, almost on a project by project basis.

This fragmentation which coincided with the growth of Rapid elearning also suggests some interesting new potential. Will we see the growth of syndicates of development specialists dealing directly with corporates rather than operating through a standard elearning vendor? These hubs of expertise already work on a contract basis for many of the established vendors... so why have the middle man?

Socially Transmitted Education?

For those of you who haven't seen http://www.splashcast.net/ you may have been missing out on an interesting development in what they had considered calling Socially Transmitted Entertainment.

http://blog.splashcastmedia.com/2008/09/12/socially-transmitted-entertainment/

What is fascinating about this as you view the channels is how adaptable this medium would be for any organisation that was interested in Socially Transmitted Education.

Two thoughts occur to me.

If we think about LMS 2.0... is the viral sharing of learning content and embedding it in your "Corporate "FaceBook" an interesting way to develop an overt learning and knowledge sharing culture... You could see what your boss and his boss have been reading/learning and wants to share with you from your corporate education channels.

http://www.splashcast.net/web_watch/

But perhaps what is more exciting is the opportunity this has for reseller and value chain education programmes, where you want advocacy and community from people who don't work directly for you. The opportunity to provide training, updates, news, chats, and product competitions is immense...

Afterall - what you want is for people to share learning and this seems to be one way to reach and excite your audience... with a little creativity using http://www.animoto.com/ and some video expertise, even throw in some links to assessments, or Polls and.... you could have a lot of fun...

Konichiwa.

Are you a corporate Spielberg?

Whilst many corporate networks groan and wither, and IT network managers visibly turn green at the very slightest mention of video, the winds of change are definitely blowing. In a paper released this autumn by Wistia, there are some interesting trends in the way video is growing in organisations, especially in the field of training and communications. One of the most telling statistics is that 52% of all video used within corporates is produced by internal teams... and that figure is likely to grow; this is especially true when you consider the ambient availability of video devices and the increased simplicity of editing tools.

This trend will obviously give many network managers sleepless nights, but for organisations that want to capture the passion of their people, share ideas, learn and communicate, this is going to become as much a part of the daily routine as conference calls.

And as we become immersed in the media age, developing the skills that enable you to be impactful in front of and behind the camera are going really important, because these skills will be critical to the influence you can exert within an organisation.

How long it takes for corporate networks to fulfil this aspiration it's difficult to say, but for those who are ready.... what are you waiting for? Solutions are evolving at quite a pace.

http://wistia.com/documents/video_training_report.pdf

Google Video for Business - Revolutionising E-learning!

By announcing today that it is adding YouTube like video communications features through its business application suite, Google may well have instantly revolutionised what we think about collaboration and learning in organisations.

By making video-sharing among office workers as easy as trading e-mails or instant messages it may redefine our entire approach to internal communications and what it means to be a learning organisation.

In any democratic orientated organisation that relies on "The Power of We", this is certainly going to have a transformational, if not revolutionary effect in bring people and their knowledge closer together; and when combined with viewer ranking, comments, creativity and the search power within this Google App, it raises some very interesting questions about what LMS 2.0 may turn out to mean. And as content delivery formats converge the power of Google Video may be broader than they originally thought.



http://www.pcworld.com/article/150472/article.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSN0150543220080902?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews

http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/google/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=DYK24T50FSRFUQSNDLPCKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=210201551&pgno=2&queryText=&isPrev=

Is Your Manager Your Biggest Obstacle to Learning?

Potentially yes!

A manager's own preconceptions about the power of nature over nurture appears to dictate how much training their people get.

Some research by Peter Heslin and Don VandeWalle shows that managers with preconceived ideas about people's attributes tend to be less likely to ensure they receive the training they need. Whilst another study found that managers who think people's attributes are fixed gave their staff less coaching.

Whilst this may not come as a big surprise to most L&D Business partners, perhaps the positive side of the research will be. The evidence also indicates that managers with these entrenched views can be persuaded of the error of their ways, through evidence and by encouraging reflection about why developing capability is important.

Helsin and VandeWalle suggest that in order to enhance workforce productivity, cues to help managers to believe that people can change could be built into performance evaluation systems.

"These cues might include written, verbal and video-based reminders to managers...that all employee skills tend to be developed over time with practice and helpful feedback."

So what could this mean for corporates. Overall it's great news. To some extent this research suggests that a culture of learning in an organisation can be grown if it is fed proactively.

But it could also has some consequences on how we view type and trait based diagnostic tools.

If they aren't handled properly they could well lock down managers' expectations - "She's an INTJ", "he's Low Detail Conscious, "their profile shows an inability to handle rapid change". If those labels re-inforce a percieved "limit" to your performance through a type or trait, then that may reduce your opportunity to develop the skills that would enable you to develop and change.


Spotted at: http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-08-13T07%3A49%3A00Z

Heslin, P.A., VandeWalle, D. (2008). Managers' Implicit Assumptions About Personnel. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(3), 219-223. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00578.x

SCORM 2004 or Let's See?

With the 4th version of SCORM 2004 due out later in the year just under 5 years after it was orginally released there seems to be less than a stanpede to adopt it as the defacto tracking mechanism.

Many large corporates still use AICC and SCORM 1.2 as their default?

With the benefits of navigation and sequencing through better support for branching, pre-test based learning paths, problem solving, optional learning paths, for example... is courseware and the complexity of tracking not important? Or are most courses still using very simple design models?

If you've moved on to 2004 as a relatively early adopter - what happened? And how is it making a difference? Or if you're laggardly following the majority... what's holding you back?

Or, are you waiting to see what LETSI start to deliver as they plan SCORM 2.0?

It's time to share your thinking....

Afterall - It's SCORM 2004 or lets see (if you can forgive the pun).


PS

Remember you only have until 15th August 2008 to make your LETSI whitepaper submission.

http://www.letsi.org/letsi/display/nextscorm/Home

How do we take Serious Games seriously?

There is something about the title Serious Games that always makes me feel uneasy. NOT because I have an issue with the intent behind them, but because they throw up too many layers of misinterpretation.

When I think about Serious Games I cannot suppress the peripheral thoughts of Super Mario, Sonic the Hedgehog and a mass shoot'em ups like Doom...

And this is precisely the sort of baggage that anyone not closely aligned to the Serious Game movement will also start to picture too. They will conjour up thoughts of immersive, thrill seeking, high-end graphics and "Hollywood" production values that are packaged for the High Street.

A laudable vision, but not necessarily that realistic to achieve for most organisations.

Without a shadow of a doubt CONTEXT is crucial to effective learning, and it doesn't require a Phd to appreciate that creating an accurate context for learning interventions that enables you to rehearse for "real life" will create a much more engaging and meangingful experince.

Without out a doubt learners want stimulating and enthralling learning experiences that are immersive and engaging. And those are goals we should all be striving to achieve.

I suppose my question to you is, would you talk to a senior business figure in your organisation and use the phrase - Serious Game? And my second question is would you expect to be taken seriously?

I think you might have struggled to get credibility and traction if you suggested that airline pilots were going to learn from a Serious Flying Game? Raised eyebrows and frowns but no nods....

So, does a rose by another other name smell so sweet...? Yes, but only if you let it near enough to smell it.... and the name in this case it may well be getting in the way.