Online Learning content strategy & support

[Obuone]

Hello,

I was wondering if people would be keen to share their online learning content strategy used with SF LMS.

I'm talking here about the "build" strategy for content (i.e. build internally all content, work with preferred vendors, let each business group decide how they build content as long as they test it before pushing it to users, ...) but also the support strategy for online content (i.e. have a central team with eLearning content diagnosis knowledge, let the business owners of content deal with content related issues, defer to third party vendors if preferred vendors list exist, ...)

We are currently struggling with proper handling of content-related issues and it has a negtive impact on the perception of the platform.

Our point of view was that business owners should be accountable to diagnose and remediate content-related issues, but it has an adverse impact on how the LMS is percieved (the system is not working well) even though the system itself works, it's the content that is failing.

I would be very grateful if you could share your own experience around this and how you managed to take control over the content related issues.

Cheers,

[ScottVinkemulde]

Hi Obuone,

I find that a lot of companies struggle with this issue. When I was in charge of eLearning at a large Corporate University, we created multiple design and development standards documents along with process documents that detailed who was responsible for what process.

Standard documents were comprised of:

• Instructional design standards
• Technical design standards
• Process documentation 
• Publishing standards
• Style guides
• Archival processes
• Design and development file storage standards that control access to all assets.

While the SuccessFactors LMS is a powerful tool, many find it hard to achieve it's true potential because a large percentage of the effort was put into the technical implementation of the system and not enough into designing and documenting who does what when and how they do it.

Since leaving my corporate position, and moving into consulting, I have enjoyed many collaborative sessions with clients creating the design, development and process documents that make the actual work of content creation a better experience...and that includes either creating content in-house or outsourcing content creation. It is especially important when spending budget on outsourcing content creation, as you don't want to waste dollars on technical considerations, but rather on performance based instructional design within the established technical requirements of authoring tools and publishing standards that you know will work with your LMS!

Documentation can start out small, such as technical design standards and publishing process. Then as internal expertice grows, the organization can decide on the level of documentation, etc.

Time spent early in the process avoids costly issues downstream.

Kind Regards,

Scott

[Obuone]

Hi Scott,

Thanks for your answer.

We actually do have a set of documents and standards that we share with our business or outside organizations when they are engaged to create eLearning material.

However, we still struggle with finding the right balance between standardizing / controlling more the content that gets published (i.e. Creating and enforcing templates for everything) or leaving some space for the business to use the technology the best way they see fit.

And also, we never built a dedicated "technical proficient" team dedicated to eLearning build / diagnosis / remediation, as the accountability is within the business. However, the challenges are reported at IT level ... so maybe this is some GAP we have to fill.

Is this something you have seen with other customers as well (building dedicated eLearning tech teams) ?

[ScottVinkemulde]

I think it is critical to have a team that is technically proficient in what your current LMS can do using eLearning technology. As I'm sure you are aware, individual Learning Management Systems "interpret" standards differently. So understanding and more importantly, being able to have a dialog on what is possible, what is difficult and what is impossible within the LMS is of paramount importance.
This is something that I've seen handled within IT and from within business. I personally thing it is managed by business better if using standard AMCC/SCORM protocols. Business and better yet, a Learning Organization understand the needs and wants better than IT ever can.

Knowing what the LMS can do is so important. Keeping costs down requires discipline within the authoring environment. Knowing the difference between what is possible and what is practical and I think it is critical to have a team that is technically proficient in what your current LMS can do using eLearning technology. As I'm sure you are aware, individual Learning Management Systems "interpret" standards differently. So understanding and more importantly, being able to transfer what is possible, what is difficult and what is impossible within the LMS is of paramount importance.
This is something that I've seen handled within IT and from within business. I personally thing it is managed by business better if using standard AMCC/SCORM protocols. Business and better yet, a Learning Organization understand the needs and wants better than IT.

Knowing what the LMS can do is so important. Keeping costs down requires discipline within the authoring environment. You need internal experts that can explain when something is possible, but perhaps not practical.

Some learning interventions may require a costly solution, while others can be done more efficiently. Knowing the ROI of a solution (both short term in development and long term in maintenance) can only be handled by a knowledgeable and dedicated internal team. The ROI of that team should be based on that they can save a company in. This team should own:

• Approved authoring tools
  • Corporate licensing opportunities
  • Maintaining standards
• Standard publishing processes
  • Helping business decide on correct publishing standard for each course
  • Including archival processes for all digital assets using in the authoring process
  • End of life process
  • Transfer of business owner process as people move within your organization
• Assessment processes
  • Using the internal LMS tools
  • Using external author tools
  • Using vendors
• Partnering with Sourcing on vendor relationships 

• Sign-off rights on SOW’s with external authors
  • This can be just a technical sign-off
  • Or in can include instructional design if you have an in house learning staff
• Control of publishing process within the LMS
  • Less training of administrators
  • Control of quality assurance process for each item
  • Control of revision process

I’ve found that learning organizations that develop a solid ROI for their existence are much more successful. You need to sell your worth, using real world examples, some of which I’ve listed above. Your internal processes have to walk the line between being a useful flow in the training process against an impediment to efficient content creation.

Explain how a small (or not so small) team can increase the ROI for the company and the effectiveness of training. Not every SME has a training background, so develop processes that help them create content but don’t allow those processes to stifle those organizations that have the internal talent to develop their own.

I’ve seen and been part of different organizations that have done all of the above. Each is different based on needs, but all successful ones have a clear line of sight to their ROI and can speak and demonstrate that ROI on demand. Hopefully, the above thought starters will help.

Kind Regards,

Scott