David Wilson, Managing Director, Elearnity
There are many loose ends in our knowledge of how effective and efficient different models of rapid e-learning are in producing “rapid” content. Rapid e-learning is a relatively recent phenomenon and numerous organisations have adopted different practices in achieving rapid goals. Is the outsourced model of rapid e-learning favoured by some companies more or less effective than the devolved development practices of others? Is it possible to adopt a single tool as your primary standard for rapid e-learning? Are custom content vendors really able to support these tools?
The comparative effectiveness of these techniques is still too immature in most instances to be put under the microscope and analysed with any rigour. This leaves us with some tantalising questions about the genuine effectiveness of different methodologies. How do you know that the model of production is really going to produce the cost, speed and impact that you desire?
Do the tools wag the strategy?
The extent of this general vacuum in experience and constructive dialogue is no more clearly illustrated than in the way in which tools appear to drive the production model in many companies. In an ideal world, the learning outcome would drive the production strategy, which in turn would drive the selection of tools. In our current world – tool selections seems to come first, so the tail is very much wagging the dog. All too often there appears to be a myopia that traps enterprise and global-scale organisations with desktop solutions that have neither the scalability, workflow nor asset management that would enable them to harness the power of the development community they aim to muster. The real issue here, as with most desktop solutions, is that assets are not reusable at any level. And this shows a fatal flaw in the strategic planning of how rapid e-learning practices integrate and complement traditional production. This means waste, inefficiency, duplication and repetition.
Learning some rapid lessons
So if the evidence is lacking, what can we say about rapid e-learning strategies? Firstly, there are many models of how to do it, and most of these are showing at least some tactical success. Rapid is clearly affecting traditional e-learning processes, and many corporates are moving towards rapid e-learning as a major part of their learning technology approach.
Whether Subject-Matter Expert (SME) production proves to be sustainable in the longer term is debatable. Pressures on SME time are even greater than those on the L&D function, so shifting the effort of producing content to SMEs alone may prove short-lived.
The jury is also still out on whether an insourced or outsourced bias to rapid development is the more efficient or effective approach. More mature organisations are tending to shy away from an over-reliance on internal devolved production, without collaboration in-built to the tools, and some kind of managed facilitation/support. The use of third parties in this model is often significant, and a number of vendors have focused on providing these kinds of supporting services, with some market success.
This article is extracted from the forthcoming Elearnity research paper:
Rapid e-Learning – The Strategic Impacts.Email David Wilson at
davidw@elearnity.com or see www.elearnity.com for more information.