vrijdag, januari 05, 2007
2007: the year of ...
Everyone is making lists these days, so I couldn't resist. This is the list of topics I would like the learning professionals and the learning industry take to heart in 2007:
1- Architecture
Architecture is not just about IT systems. It's a combination of people, processes and systems. I would like to see more focus on the design of the learning function.
Architecture comes to mind when you think of buildings. Buildings need architecture because they are complex systems with many components (foundations, walls, electricity, heating,...), because you want to be able to redo it later on, and because you want to be able to change it later on. Without a blueprint that would be close to impossible. We need more architecture in learning for the same reasons: it is complex, we want to be able to redo it and we want to be able to change/maintain it. So we need a blueprint of how the people, processes and systems in the learning function deliver their goals.
2- Reuse of content
It has been a promise of the learning industry for years: reuse of content. It is one of the main reasons that make organisations standardize on SCORM or AICC. It is one of the main reasons why we design our learning products as a combination of small 'reusable' learning objects.
But it doesn't happen. Why?
There are dozens of LMS vendors out there, but end of this quarter we will have one single dominant worldwide player for content: SkillSoft. (And a bunch of small, local players.) There is just no competitive and efficient market place for content. I would like so see more focus on sharing/selling content. What stops us from doing it?
3- Localisation
Another wet dream of the learning industry is to one day be able to assemble a course 'just in time', adapted to the unique needs, delivery capabilities and style of the learner. It will not happen in 2007, but we can already progress halfway between this dream and the one-size-fits-all approach we still take too often. We can start localising our learning products better. With localising I mean not just translating (which is important on its own), but also making the examples and exercises relevant to the learner, the learner's organisation and the learner's work context.
So what does it take to be better at localising content?
So that's my proposal for the learning agenda this year. I'm even too realistic in my dreams: I did not dare include measuring the impact of learning, but some day we need to get our act together on that one too. Hypes last for years, but when they are over you need to be able to prove your value. Maybe in 2008...
1- Architecture
Architecture is not just about IT systems. It's a combination of people, processes and systems. I would like to see more focus on the design of the learning function.
Architecture comes to mind when you think of buildings. Buildings need architecture because they are complex systems with many components (foundations, walls, electricity, heating,...), because you want to be able to redo it later on, and because you want to be able to change it later on. Without a blueprint that would be close to impossible. We need more architecture in learning for the same reasons: it is complex, we want to be able to redo it and we want to be able to change/maintain it. So we need a blueprint of how the people, processes and systems in the learning function deliver their goals.
2- Reuse of content
It has been a promise of the learning industry for years: reuse of content. It is one of the main reasons that make organisations standardize on SCORM or AICC. It is one of the main reasons why we design our learning products as a combination of small 'reusable' learning objects.
But it doesn't happen. Why?
There are dozens of LMS vendors out there, but end of this quarter we will have one single dominant worldwide player for content: SkillSoft. (And a bunch of small, local players.) There is just no competitive and efficient market place for content. I would like so see more focus on sharing/selling content. What stops us from doing it?
3- Localisation
Another wet dream of the learning industry is to one day be able to assemble a course 'just in time', adapted to the unique needs, delivery capabilities and style of the learner. It will not happen in 2007, but we can already progress halfway between this dream and the one-size-fits-all approach we still take too often. We can start localising our learning products better. With localising I mean not just translating (which is important on its own), but also making the examples and exercises relevant to the learner, the learner's organisation and the learner's work context.
So what does it take to be better at localising content?
So that's my proposal for the learning agenda this year. I'm even too realistic in my dreams: I did not dare include measuring the impact of learning, but some day we need to get our act together on that one too. Hypes last for years, but when they are over you need to be able to prove your value. Maybe in 2008...
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
Comment on comment from Janet (Brandon Hall Social Network)
Thanks Janet for your remarks.
On the complex topic of architecture...
I like your analogy with the house in the middle of the ocean. To continue the building example, the first thing architects do is to have a look at the environment for the future building, and its functions. The house design should reflect those. If the learning culture is 'learning is luxury' as in some companies, that is a clear message for the architect... So if the environment is the ocean, build a house boat or an island . Come to think of it, we should NOT keep building separate houses, or 'islands', but integrate with the rest of the organisation and align the learning function with the strategy and priorities of the business. That is also a part of the architecture.
On the areas that touch traditional learning...
"It seems the blueprint for 2007 will need to include knowledge management, talent management, performance management, and human capital management. So I’m envisioning a blueprint for learning that includes those components. Is that right or are you talking about content and how it relates to organizational goals?"
You are right. There are some areas out there (KM, HCM, but even Business Intelligence) that all at some point touch or overlap with what is traditionally considered learning. I think the differences in those fields will become more blurry and the difference will be more academic than practical. So yes, how can those fields integrate or build upon eachother at some level?
On content sharing/selling...
Sure, culture will be one of the obstacles. But can that alone be an obstacle that is so big it overshadows the business driver 'money/cost'? Another reason or excuse is propriatary information. But learning objects can be stripped of that if can generate revenue...
There is no real functioning market for learning content... Maybe we should do a survey among CLOs to see what their criteria or obstacles are. Cost? Copyright? Too general? No easy way to find it? Transaction costs too high? Not doing a make-or-buy analisis?
On localising...
You asked for a scenario. Well, let's assume there is a working content market where I can find something on ... let's say diversity training. I would love to be able to have a customisation tool with that package so I can easily:
- adjust the look and feel to that of my company, this includes logo, color pallette, fonts, etc
- replace pictures by pictures from my company picture library. Or for example insert pictures from my workplace or some people working for my company to make it more engaging/relate better
- have a list of examples that I can replace by examples relevant to my company
- customise/add the external links in the course to point to my intranet
- do small text changes
- have export/import for translation
It would be nice if you buy a package it comes with a customisation tool and guidelines and point to sections in the content and tips how to localise for your environment.
Hope all these ramblings make sense to you .
Een reactie plaatsen
Thanks Janet for your remarks.
On the complex topic of architecture...
I like your analogy with the house in the middle of the ocean. To continue the building example, the first thing architects do is to have a look at the environment for the future building, and its functions. The house design should reflect those. If the learning culture is 'learning is luxury' as in some companies, that is a clear message for the architect... So if the environment is the ocean, build a house boat or an island . Come to think of it, we should NOT keep building separate houses, or 'islands', but integrate with the rest of the organisation and align the learning function with the strategy and priorities of the business. That is also a part of the architecture.
On the areas that touch traditional learning...
"It seems the blueprint for 2007 will need to include knowledge management, talent management, performance management, and human capital management. So I’m envisioning a blueprint for learning that includes those components. Is that right or are you talking about content and how it relates to organizational goals?"
You are right. There are some areas out there (KM, HCM, but even Business Intelligence) that all at some point touch or overlap with what is traditionally considered learning. I think the differences in those fields will become more blurry and the difference will be more academic than practical. So yes, how can those fields integrate or build upon eachother at some level?
On content sharing/selling...
Sure, culture will be one of the obstacles. But can that alone be an obstacle that is so big it overshadows the business driver 'money/cost'? Another reason or excuse is propriatary information. But learning objects can be stripped of that if can generate revenue...
There is no real functioning market for learning content... Maybe we should do a survey among CLOs to see what their criteria or obstacles are. Cost? Copyright? Too general? No easy way to find it? Transaction costs too high? Not doing a make-or-buy analisis?
On localising...
You asked for a scenario. Well, let's assume there is a working content market where I can find something on ... let's say diversity training. I would love to be able to have a customisation tool with that package so I can easily:
- adjust the look and feel to that of my company, this includes logo, color pallette, fonts, etc
- replace pictures by pictures from my company picture library. Or for example insert pictures from my workplace or some people working for my company to make it more engaging/relate better
- have a list of examples that I can replace by examples relevant to my company
- customise/add the external links in the course to point to my intranet
- do small text changes
- have export/import for translation
It would be nice if you buy a package it comes with a customisation tool and guidelines and point to sections in the content and tips how to localise for your environment.
Hope all these ramblings make sense to you .
Links to this post:
<< Home
