It is with a sad note that I am the learning physician that has to declare that elearning (as it now exists) is dead. I am positive that many of you are going to say “WHAT”? eLearning has had a long illustrious life. As a baby, it was nothing more than a mail-order course delivered to interested individuals. As it grew up, the teenage years were expressed as computer-based-learning programs that were sent by disk. This was a huge expansion to the development of elearning as a youth. It created a distribution process that was previously unparallelled. It was a great youth experience.
As an adult, elearning showed its capabilities when it was delivered on the internet. With its capability to be available 24/7 and global delivery, it was just about everything that one could possibly hope for.
As it aged, it learned new tools to increase engagement. It successfully changed it self from paper reading to computer screen reading to browser based reading, but it still was nothing more than reading on a different platform. It did learn to add some fancy graphics as well as some novel java and flash tools to increase engagement, but it continued to suffer from a position of isolation. There was not much it could do that would to engage a collective of participants.
This isolation is what caused it’s unfortunate death. It reached millions of individuals, but could not find a way to assist them to learn as a group or community. eLearning is is mourned by its spouse Content Creation Tools and their children MOOC, edx, Coursera and udacity.
Copyright 2012 Bryant Nielson. All Rights Reserved.
Bryant Nielson – Managing Director of CapitalWave Inc.– offers 25+ years of training and talent management for executives, business owners, and top performing sales executives in taking the leap from the ordinary to extraordinary. Bryant is a entrepreneur, trainer, and strategic training adviser for many organizations. Bryant’s business career has been based on his results-oriented style of empowering the individual.
Learn more about Bryant at LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/bryantnielson
By Bryant Nielson, Managing Director On December 13, 2012 NO COMMENTS
There are many types of corporate training. People often ask what type of training is best. While on the surface, it may seem that there is a reasonable response, the program is more problematic. Each type of training has inherent strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes the question of which type of training is best is correctly answered by the identification with an assessment of the needs-based purpose for the training.
With each of the following training systems, I have provided a brief explanation and a summary of the pros and cons for each.
Manual (self-training): The presentation of material, hopefully organized, is generally given to a staff member to basically self train. A summary of this training system are:
- Cheap & Easy
- Inability to measure learning.
- Requires self-imposed focus
- Little interaction
On-the-Job Training (OJT): Generally used by many corporations for training. It is a mix of manual training, combined with direct oversight by a mix of management and experienced staff.
By Bryant Nielson, Managing Director On December 6, 2012 NO COMMENTS
This past month has been a busy one. I have found myself in discussions with a number of companies that are seeking a Chief Learning Officer (CLO), or the equivalent. Many of the discussions have originated with the company’s need to move their internal training; up from some ad hoc structure into a more highly systematized educational system.
What has surprised me is the hesitancy of the companies in taking the ‘step’ to a true training program, and hiring the CLO who would be responsible for it. It seems that many of these firms [and their management] look at training as a ‘cost center’ and has minor or irrelevant impact on the profitability of the firm. They could not be more mistaken.
It has been my response to point out the four main attributes to a high-end training program. These attributes are often overlooked and lost on management. The reasons for the short-sightedness may be many, but seem to cluster around:
1) Rapid ramp-up for new employees — getting them up-to speed in dramatically quick fashion. Far to many companies do not recognize or even tracking the value of taking new hires and fail to measure the value in reducing the time it takes to make them proficient and revenue creating. Far to many management teams treat this function as an HR program. Wrong, wrong, wrong. This is a sales and marketing matter. Improving the time it takes to making an employee a revenue generating component is not only measurable but valuable to the bottom line.