This one goes out to all the trolls.
Categories: compliance, motivation
Tags: compliance, corporate, instructional design, legislation, meaning, motivation, PCI, regulation, regulatory, risk management, Sussex Safer Roads, training
Why do we wear seat belts?
To avoid the fine… right?
I really wish I embedded this video into Take the law out of compliance training, but I didn’t.
So here it is now.
Categories: instructional design
Tags: authenticity, context, engagement, instructional design, learning, multimedia, relevance, scenarios, sense making, training, transfer, video
There’s no shortage of theories as to why a scenario works so well as an educational device. But for me, it boils down to context.
An authentic and relevant context facilitates two important processes.
1. Sense making
The authenticity and relevance of the scenario contextualises the content so that it becomes more meaningful for the learner. It approximates a real life situation with which she is familiar so that she can make better sense of it.
When the learner finds herself in a similar situation in real life, she will associate the current context with the scenario and thus apply her experience from it more readily.
When we combine these two affordances with the engagement power of video, we create a triple threat which dramatically increases our probability of success.
Categories: instructional design, motivation, multimedia
Tags: authentic, barriers, challenges, Chris Bessell-Browne, compliance, DIY, e-learning, elearning, engagement, fear, instructional design, motivation, multimedia, relevance, scenarios, training, video
One of the best conference sessions I have ever attended was presented by Chris Bessell-Browne from Qantas College.
E-Learning at an airline is challenging because a relatively high proportion of the workforce does not have ready access to a computer. This poses a problem when, for example, you need to roll out compliance training to each and every individual.
One way in which Qantas solves this problem is by showing a series of video scenarios to large groups of their employees. The scenarios involve real employees as well as paid actors, and they recreate scenes that have actually happened at the organisation – eg a young woman receiving unwanted attention from a colleague at the Christmas party, a baggage handler being bullied by a peer in his team, a manager reprimanding one of his team members for her dishevelled appearance, etc. Each video is then followed by a slide featuring several discussion questions, asking if so-and-so was in the wrong, that kind of thing.
According to Chris, the discussions get quite animated as people argue their case for or against. Because there is often no clear “correct” or “incorrect” answer, the interaction represents a melting pot of views and perspectives – carefully facilitated by the L&D pro. It makes the learning experience engaging, relevant and authentic. In other words, nothing like typical compliance training.
As Chris proceeded with her presentation at the conference, everyone in the audience was on the edge of their seat as they eagerly anticipated the next instalment.
When was the last time anyone reacted like that to your training?
Video breathes life into content.
For example, while reading about how to provide effective feedback and perhaps downloading a 6-step job aid may be enough to improve your feedback giving skills, suppose you could also watch a video of a manager providing feedback to her direct report. Now you have a role model to follow, and a real-world example to make sense of.
So why doesn’t everyone do this? We have the tools at our disposal – from the camera on our smartphones to a plethora of free editing software downloadable from the internet.
I suspect one of the barriers is fear. We look at the slick productions such as those commissioned by Qantas, and we’re afraid our own efforts will appear amateurish in comparison. And you know what: they will!
When professional production houses shoot a video, they do so beautifully. The picture is rich and sharp. The audio is crisp and clear. The lighting is perfect. That is, after all, what you are paying them for. And it ain’t cheap.
When we record a video on our smartphone, the picture might be somewhat dull, the audio tinny, the lighting dodgy. But I put to you that if the quality of your production is good enough to see and hear, then it’s good enough to learn from.
And if the content is relevant, you’ll find your target audience surprisingly forgiving. You needn’t be Francis Ford Coppola because what really matters is the learning outcome.
So my advice is simply to give it a go. Test a few home-made clips on a pilot group to see how they fare. Incorporate constructive feedback, build on your success and scale it up. Your videography skills will improve over time, and you might even consider buying better equipment and software.
Sure, a beautifully crafted production will always be preferable, but it’s not always attainable or even necessary. You have the power right now to provide your audience with a learning experience that’s engaging, relevant and authentic.
So make them an offer they can’t refuse.
Categories: mobile, technology
Tags: e-learning, m-learning, mobile, mlearning, organizational development, organisational development, elearning, corporate, policy, business, governance, technology, BYOD, tablets, smartphones, apps, BYOT, shadow IT, IT, Evernote, Dropbox
“What apps do you recommend?”
With the proliferation of smartphones and tablets in the workplace, this is a question I am being asked with increasing frequency.
And I don’t really like answering it. I mean, I have my faves, but they are my faves. What I find useful might prove useless for you. It all depends on the nature of your role and what you are endeavouring to do with your device.
So to better inform my answer to this question, I am crowdsourcing a list of favorite business apps. I can now point to a dynamically curated selection of apps that a range of other people find useful. The weight of numbers lends credibility to my recommendations.
While it’s early days yet, I’m not surprised to see Evernote streaking ahead. In just about every conversation I have with my peers about apps, the peppermint pachyderm rates a mention. It seems everyone is talking about the elephant in the room!
However, I am surprised by the listing currently in second place: Dropbox. I’m not surprised by the fact it’s listed as a favourite app – Dropbox is excellent! – but rather that it’s listed as a favourite business app.
You see, while Dropbox offers wonderful affordances in terms of cloud-based storage and retrieval, it’s (apparently?) not very secure. Despite its Help Center’s claim to the contrary, the internet is littered with warnings such as this one and IT departments tend to frown upon its use.
Nonetheless, people use it. A lot. For business.
I see this as a sign of the times. Employees are circumventing their company’s restrictive and frustrating IT policies with their own technology.
Now I must stress that I am neither an IT manager nor a security expert. I am not arguing one way or the other on whether this is right or wrong. What I am saying is that this is happening. Shadow IT is casting itself over the corporate landscape.
Consider the implications for the e-learning professional:
- Your employees expect to access information and resources on their own device – whatever make, model or operating system it may be.
- Your employees are watching YouTube videos and engaging in social media, even if those sites are blocked by the company.
- Your employees are participating in MOOCs, even if you disagree with their pedagogy.
- Your employees are playing games when they get bored or they need a break.
- Your employees are familiar with apps and they are using them.
The list goes on… You can try to suppress it – or embrace it.
Isn’t it time for your organisation’s e-learning to come out of the shadows?
Tags: analysis, business, center, centre, consultant, L&D, learning & development, needs, performance, Performance Needs Analysis, PNA, problems, RCA, role, roles, solutions, TNA, training, Training Needs Analysis
One of the more exciting ideas to emerge from the corporate learning space, which I hasten to add is yet to be realised, is to transform the Learning & Development department into a performance centre.
Rather than charging L&D Consultants with marketing the team’s lovingly crafted interventions, or reacting to random solution-first requests from the business – We need a team building workshop! – the Performance Consultant analyses the real needs of the business and identifies the relevant solutions.
This is not a novel idea. For example, I am aware of an Australian bank that established a performance centre over a decade ago, while Helen Blunden recently shared the following via an OzLearn chat:
Helen Blunden (@ActivateLearn) January 17, 2014
On the face of it, this makes sense to me. I subscribe to the notion that the point of learning in the workplace is to improve performance, and the raison d’être of the performance centre is to shift our focus to its namesake.
However, I do have a caveat: If the performance centre is populated with L&D types, then the solutions they devise are probably going to be L&D oriented.
This won’t appear to pose a problem unless you appreciate that not all performance ailments are due to an L&D deficiency. On the contrary, poor performance may be caused by myriad factors such as:
• A flawed process
• Obsolete technology
• Inadequate resourcing
• Noise or other disturbances
• Office politics
• Interpersonal conflict
…or any number of human conditions:
…not to mention one of my favourites offered by Joyce Seitzinger in the aforementioned Ozlearn chat:
Joyce Seitzinger (@catspyjamasnz) January 17, 2014
Of course! Recruiting the right person for the role in the first place!
My point is, while poor performance may well be due to a lack of capability, it might not be either. An effective Performance Consultant must determine the root causes of the problems – whatever they may be – and respond accordingly. Do former L&D Consultants have that skillset?
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Tags: apps, Bring Your Own Device, BYOD, BYOT, experience, experiential learning, iPad, iPhone, learning, m-learning, M-Learning’s dirty little secrets, mlearning, mobile, mobile learning, pull, push, responsive web design, RWD, smartphone, tablet, training
One of my most popular posts of last year was M-Learning’s dirty little secrets.
By “popular” I mean quantitatively: it attracted a relatively large number of hits and comments. Qualitatively, however, the situation was somewhat different: while many of the comments were concordant, others were not. For the record, I don’t believe those discordant comments were wrong – they just represented different points of view in different contexts.
Nonetheless, while I stand by what I wrote back then, there was always something niggling at the back of my mind. I felt that I had missed something. Those discordant comments prompted me to think about it deeper, and I’m glad they did because now I feel I can improve my position.
Mindset #1 – Push
Given the increasingly mobile workforce and the emergence of BYOD, increasing pressure is being placed on the organisation to distribute its content to multiple devices. In corporate e-learning, the most obvious example of such content is the online modules that the company distributes via its Learning Management System.
In M-Learning’s dirty little secrets I advocated the creation of “one course to rule them all”. I argued that if you must push out training, forget about smartphones. No one wants to use them for that, so they are an unnecessary complication.
Instead, concentrate your efforts on the one course that will fit onto desktops and laptops and tablets – ie what your target audience will use to consume it. If you base it on HTML so it will run across operating systems, you can make the course device agnostic.
Responsive web design may render my argument moot – but only when rapid authoring tools adopt the protocol, enabling Average Joe to implement it.
Mindset #2 – Pull
Having said that, in M-Learning’s dirty little secrets I also advocated pull learning.
Instead of pushing out yet another course, I’m more inclined to host content on a mobile-friendly platform like an intranet or a wiki that the learner can access, browse and search via their device of choice – including a smartphone.
This approach empowers the learner to pull the content at their discretion, wherever they are, at the time of need. It replaces the notion of training “in case” it will be required with performance support “when” it is required.
For many, this is the essence of m-learning: on demand, in the moment, in context, just in time, in the workflow.
And yet, while this deceptively simple mindset represents a tectonic shift in corporate pedagogy, it does not on its own fulfil the potential of m-learning. For that, we need a third mindset…
Mindset #3 – Experience
Experiential m-learning leverages the environment in which the learner exists.
This approach need not be hi-tech. For example, a tourist following the walking tour in a Lonely Planet is undertaking experiential m-learning. The book points out the specifics of the environment, and the tourist subsequently experiences them.
Of course, electronic technology facilitates experiential m-learning like never before. Handheld devices combined with the Internet, geolocation, and the likes of augmented reality make the learning experience engaging, timely and real.
It’s also important to note that this mindset applies to both push and pull learning. For example, an LMS-based architecture course may step the learner along a particular route through the city. Alternatively, an interactive map may empower the learner to select the points of interest at their discretion and convenience.
Which leads me to one of the commenters who took umbrage at M-Learning’s dirty little secrets. This fellow was developing a smartphone app for his students enrolled in a Diploma of Community Services. While I suspect his polemic stemmed from a misinterpretation of my argument (which no doubt related to my inability to articulate it sufficiently), he did indeed cause me to ask myself:
Why can’t an app push training on a smartphone?
And the answer, of course, is it can. But then I would add:
Why would you want to?
Given the speed and cost effectiveness of producing online courses in-house these days, combined with the availability of content repositories in most organisations, I would be inclined to save the time and expense of building an app – unless it exploited the mobility of the device.
So part of my lengthy response to this fellow was:
…I would suggest that the app enables the student to interact with the content *in the field*. Perhaps it encourages them to walk around the Cross (to be Sydney-centric, but you know what I mean) and prompts the student to describe their surroundings. If the app then simulates an interaction with a homeless person or with someone who is drug-affected, then it’s done in the context of the work and thus becomes infinitely more meaningful. And if the student could select the scenarios at their discretion rather than have to wade through them in a pre-defined linear manner, then that hands over to them some of the control that you want them to have.
In other words, I would bother with an app only if it offered something that “regular” push or pull content doesn’t. And that something is an authentic experience.
It is this mindset which urges us to realise the full potential of m-learning.