Posted by Musings.
Over the past few months, I’ve been testing different types of posts, zeroing in on multiple subjects that I find interesting, or that could be of interest, and that are definitely of value to the blog’s readers.
Some I see as strong, others clearly have reached the dud level.
I’ve always been a risk taker when it comes to training, learning, and its integration with online learning.
E-Learning started out as an umbrella term covering everything from learning systems to authoring tools and content.
Today?
Vendors refer to it as ‘courses and content,’ and when it comes to videos, they list them as content, not under the e-learning term, but just video.
It’s definitely frustrating because any type of content online, using the now-e-learning as content/courses moniker, is, uh, e-learning.
I spoke to a dear friend of mine, Juliette Denny, yesterday, and we both said the same thing about learning.
These days, it feels like we have to go back and teach L&D, Training, and HR teams—especially those new to learning—about the different types of learning and training methods that actually matter.
We seem to have lost the art of training and understanding e-learning, as well as the different models of learning and training.
I am one of the people (a large group) who know what Kirkpatrick is.
Honestly, I think it’s time to move on from it.
While it’s a decent approach, especially for e-learning, it was originally meant for instructor-led training.
Let me say that again: instructor-led training.
ADDIE is another method designed for instructor-led training, but many instructional designers and e-learning developers still use it when building content.
Vendors with built-in content creators, whether acquired or built in-house, lack even the basics of effective instructional design, so they don’t need someone to research outdated throwbacks to ILT methods.
I think Adobe Studio is partly to blame, since they kicked off the PowerPoint-style approach.
Terms like ‘slides’ replaced the old chapter, page, and scenario structure—what some used to call ‘lessons.’
After Studio, Rapid Content Authoring Tools (RCAT) really took off.
There was a funny moment when Studio claimed their tool couldn’t do something, but someone from Articulate made a website showing exactly how to do it.
I always liked that.
Back to learning methods: I’ve seen vendors promote Kirkpatrick or Bloom as part of their learning experience, but they often forget that most people in L&D, Training, or HR today probably don’t even know what those are.
If a vendor doesn’t realize that someone running L&D—like a CLO—might come from an Organizational Development background, why would they assume that person is an expert in Bloom or Kirkpatrick?
In my opinion, Gagne is by far the best learning methodology out there.
It’s easy to follow and understand, and it works much better for content development and learning strategy than any other method I’ve seen.
Vendors should understand learning methods.
Even though many were designed for instructor-led training, Gagne, for example, fits better with online learning than the rest.
Vendors need to take the time to learn about effective, up-to-date learning methods.
Many vendors don’t have this knowledge, and that’s a big problem in the market right now.
Case in Point
I saw Opus the other day.
They focus on the services industry, which is a smart choice.
I hope they stick with it instead of branching out too soon.
While I was quite intrigued about Opus – it is a mobile app on the learner side, which can be accessed today, whether you have an Apple or Android device. For some reason, on my Android, when I entered my number to gain access, it sent me to the iPhone store.
Highly likely, this is a bug.
I see a lot of potential with this app, but it’s missing an on/off sync feature.
I get the concerns about phone cache, but after watching and downloading lots of videos, I’ve never had to clear it.
A quick search or typing ‘clean cache’ into your phone takes about 30 seconds, and it’s done.
If cache is a big concern, Opus could simply show users how to clear it instead of holding back on an on/off sync feature.
One of the Opus founders comes from the restaurant industry, so they really understand their market and the challenges frontline workers face.
If the store has awful internet connectivity, or a bar or restaurant, or whatever, an hourly employee isn’t going to be able to do what is asked of them.
I’ll admit, we ran out of time before I could see the back-end, but I’m looking forward to checking it out.
One thing that really surprised me was how much engagement Opus gets from learners.
Even though they say they don’t have gamification, they actually do have an element -a leaderboard.
Don’t get me wrong—Opus is a vendor to watch, especially since they’re in a niche like services, which includes places like amusement parks that many vendors overlook because they don’t see the revenue potential.
Shifting Gears
Docebo, which I really like, is moving more into the L&D segment than before—at least in their messaging.
Despite their audience being 60% in customer training and partner enablement, I always saw the system leaning toward L&D.
They are not the only Combos systems that do it.
I saw the latest version (with what is out today, what will be released and announced at their show, and what is rolling out later this year).
A lot is Embargo – which means I can’t tell you – something any analyst worth their weight should always do, regardless of whether the vendor is public or not.
Still, what I did hear—and Docebo isn’t the only vendor to mention this—is that they’re talking to people like the head of HR about their system.
There’s a saying—and I’m not the only one who says it: Training doesn’t like working with L&D, L&D doesn’t like working with Training, and nobody likes working with HR.
Too many companies put L&D under HR, but it’s a terrible fit.
I think companies that keep L&D separate from HR do a better job for their employees.
That’s because someone leading L&D is expected to know much more about learning approaches—especially e-learning—than someone in HR.
HR is helpful for sending files or data to L&D, especially if the learning system isn’t connected to the HRIS or HCM.
Toss in IT, and things often go wrong.
IT often sees a learning system as another ERP nightmare.
Then you have IT wanting to manage everything, HR wanting control, and L&D getting blamed if anything goes wrong.
Career Management
There’s a new term out there—though it’s really an old one—called career development.
When I see ‘career management’ listed as a feature in a learning system, it clearly points to L&D, with a bit of HR influence.
This basically turns the system into a Talent Development platform, especially if it offers opportunities, goal management, and similar features—whether as add-ons or built-in.
There’s nothing wrong with Talent Development.
I still see it as a growing market—Degreed, for example, now calls itself a Talent Development System or Platform.
Cypher Learning, which serves both markets and has about 80% of its audience in L&D, now wants to focus more on customer training and partner enablement.
But when you add career management, it doesn’t exactly make someone say, ‘Wow, I need this platform for my clients.’
B2C
Now, there are combo systems that focus heavily on customer training and partner enablement, especially those that see growth potential in the B2C segment.
Think about all the influencers who not only sell products—like infomercial 2.0—but also sell their content to anyone interested.
What platform are they using to do it?
Vendors need to think creatively.
The industry is fragmented, and you can be strong in niche segments if you are willing to make changes and tweaks, for example, in B2C.
These clients don’t care about skills or career management.
They care about making money, so vendors need to provide insights about their buyers.
One vendor I see as a player here is Eurekos.
They are IMO, the #1 learning system for customer training/partner enablement – because that is their only focus.
The system is built for this, with the right features and data points for customer training and partner enablement.
Expect to see a few more vendors go after the B2C market for influencers—not just training consultants or instructors, since there are already vendors for that.
Bottom Line
When it comes to AI Assistants – aka Knowledge Management, you want to have it include SCORM Parsing.
KnovaLearn, Metalark.AI, and Talvi.ai already provide it, with the latter also supporting xAPI.
In my view, instructor-led training isn’t the most effective learning method overall.
Web-Based Training (WBT), also known as e-learning or online learning, gives you insight into what learners or customers know and provides metrics to back it up.
People are not robots, thankfully.
You can’t expect to remember everything from just one instructor-led training session.
You won’t reach true understanding, go at your own pace, or access the content whenever and wherever you want in a traditional classroom setting.
You can make mistakes without the fear of being called out.
That’s the power of online learning and training.
It’s not about AI (a tool, not a universal replacement for an LMS or any other learning system).
It’s about the learner themselves.
What do they know and don’t know?
What can you do to enable them to retain and synthesize the information?
What data is relevant, what content is of value?
And what does it all mean?
E-Learning 24/7