In the past few weeks, my posts have covered:

• 2 Things To Avoid For Effective e-Learning
• 4 Ways To Improve Your e-Learning Strategies, and
• 5 Reasons To Declare War On e-Learning 

Introducing w/ x-Learning^TM And PowerSims^TM

At w/, we contend that e-learning is mired in old paradigms of instructor lead training and page-by-page, PowerPoint delivery. It's really better described as e‑reading. Learners are stuck with a boring cycle of click-read-yawn...click-read-yawn. And companies? They're stuck with ineffective results.

To win the war, it's time to break out of e-learning and into x-learning through what w/ calls PowerSims. PowerSims give learners:

• Options to eXplore content in the order, and at the pace, that they choose
• Critical eXplanations concerning features, benefits and customers
• Opportunities to eXperience new skills, within carefully designed simulations

With PowerSims, it's critical to understand that the design starts by identifying risk areas where learners are most likely to falter or fail in real life. This approach results in the most valuable training possible.

PowerSims eXplorations & eXplanations

The eXploration and eXplanation elements provide an interactive overview that incorporates brand, customer, category and product information. They give maximum control to learners, allowing them to soak up new knowledge in the order they prefer, and at whatever pace they choose.

This part of the PowerSim is designed to replicate how learners use the Internet to learn, every day. And it helps them discover the relationships between similar products and solutions, so that they can choose the right one for any situation. For powerful eXplanations, we use a friendly, knowledgeable avatar to demonstrate good sales techniques for each important feature, benefit, or application.

We collect all of this information through a detailed template that's specially designed for each client. The template allows subject matter experts to provide maximum value in minimum time, while screening out non-essential information. This approach helps us to rapidly complete very high-quality modules.

PowerSims eXperiences

Simulations are the fastest way for learners to improve sales results. Each scenario provides a safe environment for learners to practice, make mistakes, and get the right feedbackto become more successful. This learning-by-doing approach is both familiar and effective. And it's always been the most natural way of learning.

The number of different selling scenarios required to complete the PowerSim depends on how many different types of products and customers are involved. And again, scenarios are designed around the risk areas where salespeople are likely to falter or fail in real life. In fact, we believe that if learners don't have a chance to fail...they don't really have a chance to learn.

And you know one of the most satisfying results we've found with PowerSims? Even the busiest people will go through these practice scenarios more than once, so that they can learn by trying different approaches. This proves that, when the value is there, so is the time, effort...and the results.

Please take a look at the work on our site. If you'd like to find out more about what we might do for you, click here. 

In the past couple of weeks I've complained about some questionable e-learning practices. Now I realize I'm ready to declare war. Ready to declare war on ineffective e-learning. Not all elearning, mind you. Just the bad stuff.

In one recent post I spoke out against rapid e-learning being faster and cheaper, at the expense of being better. In another, I warned about turning out courses that don't have enough of a strategic foundation.

But here's the real problem: too many elearning professionals are working from a disadvantage. They're being held responsible for results, but they've either got too little time, too few resources, or too little e-learning experience to be as successful as the wish they could be.

So please, for the moment, allow me to continue to complain on behalf of all elearning professionals. And next week...I promise...we'll start talking about how to win the war against ineffective elearning.

Here's my top five complaints:

1. Missing out on better, by concentrating only on faster and cheaper (read)
   
2. Churning out tactical solutions, without the strategies for ROI (read)
   
3. Designing training without understanding the vision of your customer
4. Continuing to use the page as a measure of learning
5. Expecting learners to be successful, not through practice, but by reading
   

Now, you can check the posts on the first two declarations (click on the list above) but I owe you some explanation on the last three.

The Vision Of Your Customer

Our customers (internal and external) see the world through the prism of their own problems, for the most part. Okay...that's human nature. So why then, do we continue to design e-learning from our point of view, rather than theirs. Why do we put things in terms of what the company needs, or bury important buying information in techno-babble? We need to design and write from the other person's perspective.

The Page As A Measure Of e-Learning

Pages began with books and fliers and newspapers...all methods of communication, for the most part. PowerPoint borrows from that same linear progression of ideas. Why? Okay, for assembly of a complicated widget, sure. But for anything conceptual? Linear is too often an impediment to learning.

Reading, Not Practice

Why do we think reading about something should automatically make it clear. Why would knowledge suffice for experience? The natural way we learn from the time we're born is by doing things. Try. Fail. Try again, fail better. Bad e-learning does not incorporate learning by doing, or practice.

Okay...that's my war on ineffective e-learning. I could actually list a lot more complaints, but let's keep it simple for now, and next week we'll move on to a  solution that we call x-learning.

Please take a look at the work on our site. If you'd like to find out more about what we might do for you, click here.  

It's easy for our jobs to get in the way of what we do. There's so much work to be cranked out! But as always, work should be about quality, not just quantity...and ultimately it has to be about results. We can't afford to put as much time and money into e-learning as we do, if we don't get a good return on our investment.

ROI is the WHY behind strategy. So your first checkpoint on effective e-learning is: are your courses supporting a well articulated strategy? Unfortunately the usual answer is, at best, only a partial "yes".

Check your own experience: is 90% or more of your sales training just product information? Or is it focused on how to sell the right product to the right cusotmer? Too many times, that's not the case. And while sales training is an easy example, we could be talking about any course that's fat on what and lean on how, why and practice.

This post would be way too long if I were going to cover HOW to incorporate strategy. It's more about WHAT you can be doing strategically, to improve both quality and ROI. But I promise, week-after-week in the coming months we will be talking a lot about the HOW-TO of integrating strategy into your courses.

Let's return specifically to sales training as our example for implementing e-learning strategy, allow me to introduce these additional questions:

• Do you understand your customer's point of view and are you training from that direction?
• Are you reusing e-learning content to help customers sell themselves?
• Is part of your effort working to create word of mouth (WOM) in the marketplace?
• And finally, does your e-learning support brand preference that leads to repurchasing?

If it never occurred to you that these strategies should be driving your e-learning efforts, that's okay. But when you're measured on the results of your program, as more and more of us are, this might be just the improvement you've been looking for. See you next week!

Please take a look at the work on our site. If you'd like to find out more about what we might do for you, click here.  

Seems to me that faster and cheaper were the focus of much e-learning in 2009. But NEWS FLASH...faster and cheaper are NOT learning outcomes.

If you believe all the ads and emails, then webinars and converted PowerPoints are the pinnacle of e-learning. And I get it, there are a lot of managers out there who think the results they want are faster and cheaper. But they're taking a short-sighted approach to business outcomes, and while they may be getting communication results, they most certainly aren't getting the learning results that they're looking for.

Most communications are meant to inform employees. But it takes real learning to change behaviors and drive business results. So, in your company, are you just using up resources to inform people...or are you making the kind of investments that literally improve the organization?

Think about your own experience. Isn't this the improvement a webinar makes over instructor lead training? ...no one knows how many phone calls and emails you took care of during the presentation! And when you get online to read page by page in that converted PowerPoint, don't the drag and drop memory exercises make you feel a bit like a chimp in a learning experiment?

I thought e-learning was the next wave. I thought it was a giant improvement over classroom. If that's it, why does so much e-learning seem more like e-reading and e-listening?

In 2010, let's hold off a bit on faster and cheaper, and set our sights on BETTER. Let's take a look at how we can develop immersive simulations and game-like content that:

• Allows learners to explore well-organized content in the order and at the pace of their choosing, rather than being linear.
• Provides a chance to experience new information and concepts in a way that lets them practice, get feedback and learn in a safe environment.
• Focuses on changes in behavior and business results, rather than simply communicating.
  

Please take a look at the work on our site. If you'd like to find out more about what we might do for you, click here. 

Friday. What better day to turn your back on work and do some blogging, right? Besides, I just linked from LinkedIn to an e-learning blog post titled: Information or Knowledge...Which is it? where the author and commentors were pondering the difference between these two commodities and their meaning in e-learning.

I don't want to sound crude here, but that mentality is so 20th century...and it's so wrong. And it's wrong because business as usual isn't good enough anymore. We have to be better and smarter than that to put the American economy back on track. And for that matter, we have to continually improve what we do and how we do it...not stay stuck in what we did a decade ago.

What e-learning needs to focus on is exploration, practice, feedback...leading to competency. In other words, instructional and creative design that provides a natural way of learning by doing. And in the process e-learning changes behavior, creating new competencies that turn into company new revenues and company profits.

This selling game lets learners explore related digital home media products, then allows them to practice matching products to three different customers' needs. You can experience this game yourself at: http://bit.ly/4qeDcQ

In fact, it was years ago that we told our clients that sales training had to be more than product information. If the end result is to be more sales, then learners need to practice selling. Learners need to explore (not just read about) new products and then be able to apply what they've learned by practicing selling in a safe environment. Moreover, they must fail some of the time...because if they don't have a chance to fail and get feedback, and try again, their learning will be limited. 

If you'd like to learn more about why immersive simulations and serious games make compelling e-learning you might visit another post on this blog, Do games make compelling e-learning?: http://bit.ly/3ilXXG

Every day there's less time and more to do. It's easy to take shortcuts...easy to get in a rut...easy to not think things through. And every day it takes more to be successful, too, so there's a real need to see things in a different way, and not settle for just "good enough." It reminds you that: if we always do what we've always done, we'll always get what we've always gotten.

From the top of my head, here are some examples of what may be contrary...but more correct for the our needs...thinking:

• Good smile sheets as feedback on training may be a reverse indication of how much is learned
• The best instructional designers may be the ones without degrees
• Things like learning styles and multiple intelligences aren't solidly substantiated by research
• Faster and cheaper isn't necessarily the right business target

Now, maybe some of these already make sense to you. You're savvy. Good for you. But if some of them have you wondering, let me continue in more detail.

Feedback

It's good to know how you do when you're a trainer or how the program is going when you're a training manager. And we've all known that we need more than smile sheets for some time. Here's a Training Magazine article from a couple years back that illustrates how in one company, the two trainers with the worst smile sheets have the highest training gains. http://bit.ly/4CZbJ5

Even though it can be next to impossible to get real business results, post-training, you can ask learners about how they've changed because of training. And more importantly you can ask their managers and make a comparison between the two reports. An example of this kind of surveying is in a previous post from this blog.

Instructional Designers

We have way too much e-reading and e-listening out there that's being called e-learning. So we need good IDs, no question. Cammy Bean has a great blog post from a session she facilitated at DevLearn 09, talking about IDs: http://bit.ly/8u1Nnw

For our part, here at w/, the framework that we expect our IDs to work within is what we call Natural Learning, meaning that courses should be designed around exploration, practice and feedback...allowing people to learn like they do everywhere else in their lives (okay...other than when they sit in front of PowerPoint presentations). For more on natural learning, there's another post on this blog.

Learning Styles

These theories always sound good. It would be nice to have easy answers for everything. A formula to follow...but it doesn't always work that way, does it? At DevLearn 09, I listened to Ruth Clark talking about a study that disproves learning styles. Ellen Behr also has a great blog post, with numerous supporting citations to debunk learning styles: http://bit.ly/6zNu9B

Faster and Cheaper

One of the things I want to do here is take aim at rapid e-learning tools. Yes, they can be used well...but most of time they're part of a broader approach of faster and cheaper. And I have one challenge to this: return on investment! If cheaper and faster puts your car in the ditch...is that really the target you want to shoot for? I mean...hello! When you put your other products together (and e-learning is a product) do you cut corners and then expect quality results? Heck no!

I had a conversation with a global training manager just the other day, who explained that when his company went from all instructor led training to a focus on e-learning they "went from one ditch to the other." Now they have so much rapid e-reading that people can't get to all of it. It's not focused, and it's not quality training. So, what do you think the results will be on their sales and field services? And if a year or two has passed as they drove their training program from one ditch to the other, what damage have they done to customer satisfaction or the top line results they might have had? When it comes down to it...faster and cheaper can be frighteningly expensive!

Conclusion

I started this post by saying that there's less time and more to do than ever before. That's true, and it's only going to get worse. So, business as usual isn't good enough anymore. Get out of the box! Don't take less time to sort things out, take more. Be strategic before you get tactical.

This post is a real departure from my usual selection of topics, but I think it's really important to help clients manage technical contacts and conversations.

We know that we depend on our clients to survive, of course. But sometimes I think we forget how much our clients depend on us. Case in point: a phone conference I was on the other day where the topic was making two different LMS products communicate with each other. I represented w/ and our product: simpleLMS (www.simplelms.com) and there were two technical contacts from the other company who were trying to communicate what they needed from our joint client.

The details on this project are a bit deep for most clients...but what do they need to know, really? They need to know the end result of how the two products will share information, how much it costs, and how long it will take. That's it.

The mistake the technical contacts made was thinking that the client needed to understand how their database was designed and how many variables were allowed, at which different levels of the product. In other words, they were getting the client involved in the design of the solution...and that's not the client's job. All the tech guys needed to know is what information from the learners' profiles needed to be shared between products and why (login, password, course completions and prerequisites). From that, they could come back with a simple proposal to make things work, without getting the client in way over her head.

Now, you clients out there...applause for how hard you work, but don't let the techies take over the show and drag you into more work, or more information, than you need to be involved in...

• In a preliminary conversation, tell your supplier what you want to accomplish
• Make sure they ask you enough questions, so that they really understand what you need
• Make sure they clearly explain what they will need from you, in order to be successful with your project
• Ask your supplier to create a scope document that outlines all of the above parameters, and have them include at least a preliminary budget and time table
• Now, review the document with support from other people who may be able to spot problems or additional opportunities and go to a final version of the scoping document with your supplier

That describes every popular video game on the market today. In fact, it describes every game ever made or played. And it's no accident, because it also describes life, and we design games as a reflection of how we experience life. That's why good games make for such compelling e-learning.

But as soon as I say that, it seems to me that I'm under-selling the product. I mean, game? It's not just a game. What we're talking about, really, is a mini-life experience!

More than that, we're providing the opportunity for people to experiment and make mistakes in a safe environment, so that they learn both obvious and very subtle ways to be more successful. You see? Game...just doesn't say all that!

Now...is it any wonder why people don't retain what they learn when we stand at the front of the room and talk though PowerPoint slides? Is it any wonder why reading, clicking next, and reading some more, is just short of fingernails on a blackboard, when it comes to learning? 

From day one, we've all interacted with our environment and learned...naturally, not by PowerPoint. And in a nutshell, that's why w/ continues to develop e-learning that more closely represents our natural habits of learning. Sometimes that means simple exploration, sometimes it's practicing skills within a simulation, and sometimes it means developing a game, er, I mean...mini-life experience. So, how do we go about that?

Well, to start, it's important to throw out two elements of the popular learning paradigm: pages and linearity. Throw them out. We can always go back and get them if we find they fit somewhere, but they're not a natural construct for learning. Certainly they offer a very incomplete construct for learning, do they? And while we're at it, throw out games like Concentration and Jeopardy, when used to simply develop a rote memorization of facts. Popular game shows aren't necessarily good models for e-learning.

Now, let's lay down some pretty obvious and sound guidelines: In general, learning is most successful when it's:

• Fun, challenging but not stressful, and relevant to other things that are important in our lives
• Purposeful (interpret this to mean driven by specific business expectations or desired outcomes
• Reflective of the skills we how we behave in real life, which includes having rules and being able to experiment, practice and make mistakes

There are a couple of other things that make learning more like real life: interacting within a group and being on the go. The first leads us to avatars, and social tools (blogs, wikis, online collaboration) while the second speaks to mobile learning. To be sure, there barriers to adoption for these tools, but because they imitate real life, they're destined to become part of real e-learning.

So what's the wrap-up here? The short answer is that your e-learning probably isn't compelling; probably has less impact than you want. But the great thing about that is, you don't have to be stuck there. You can start re-making your e-learning in a way that mimics life. Not linear, but exploratory...not reading, but practicing...not in isolation, but as part of a group.

After just a day of DevLearn 09, I've come away with some awesome new knowledge, contacts and ideas. But I've also developed an irritation. An irritation connected to some peoples' over-exuberance with what they call 3D learning.

There are a number of 3D solutions out there with little people running around little offices, conference rooms and events. And like all tools, I've seen them used effectively...and effectively misused. Sometimes all they amount to is 3D wrapping paper around simple, expository content.

At that point, the best you can say is the process is more exploratory and the user has more control. But you could also say that the 3D environment is so contrived that it's a distraction to learning.

Designers should always ask themselves what delivery method best contributes to their objective, which is different that starting out by saying, "Wouldn't it be cool if...?" For me, if you're going to incorporate 3D into your solution, you'd also better include one or more of the following:

• Appropriate practice of the skills it takes to succeed
• Game play, rules, consequences...whatever it takes make it really immersive
• Avatars that are real enough to truly humanize the learning experience

Professor Andrew McAfee (left) just finished his keynote Enterprise 2.0: The State of an Art at DevLearn 09. He emphasized that web 2.0 isn't something to miss out on and shared some convincing survey and case study results as proof (I promise to share more on these in a future blog post).

He also made the case for getting out of the way, if you're going to be successful with web 2.0. For instance, stop obsessing about the risks, and also, keep things simple. McAfee made a great point for not getting trapped in credentialism (despite the fact that he has five degrees) but rather, trusting in the wisdom of the crowd.

Now, let's take the next step forward, together...

In light of both McAfee's comments, and your own experience, please share with us what issues might have kept you from embracing web 2.0 in the past. The poll widget below is live, so you'll get immediate feedback on what others have been experiencing in their organizations.