Remember, by declaring war on ineffective e-learning, we’ve rejected linear, page-by-page organization as the default method of delivering content. It’s maddening that these outdated habits, and every converted PowerPoint and webinar have become the de-facto standards for e-learning. So please, help us keep making the distinction between x-learning and all that other stuff. Almost everyone can use some variation of x-learning to improve their results. And we intend to keep pushing the front line in that direction.

X-learning, as you may remember from other w/ blog posts:

• Allows learners to eXplore content at a pace, and in the order, of their choosing
• Provides avatar-driven eXplanations and demonstrations of successful approaches to common problems, and
• Builds eXperience through practice in a safe, simulated environment

When we put these three elements of x-learning together, we’ve created what w/ calls a PowerSim™. A few reminders about PowerSims:

• Their construction is based on business risk areas, where employees are likely to falter or fail, without additional training support.
• Risk areas represent top- and bottom-line strategic objectives related to brand, sales, marketing, customer service, leadership, management and production.
• We design a PowerSim to provide practice in differentiating between good choices and better choices. This helps learners to improve their decision-making...and results...when faced with the real situation.

So how’s that working out?

To start talking about numbers, I’d like to use the past year’s the results from a single program where we’ve been developing our ideas about x-learning over the past 18 months. In 2009, this North American sales training program has:

• Served more than 11,000 learners (nearly all of whom are non-employees)
• Chalked up more than 100,000 successful online course completions, and
• Put the cost of learning at just dollars per course completion

The best part of these numbers is that 43% of 500 sales managers surveyed, told us that they believe our courses have improved sales from 11% to 18%. That’s anecdotal information, but even if they’re half right...

Some more numbers.

Each year we complete a program survey, at no cost to our clients, because we want to know what learners can tell us about how we’re doing. Here are some convincing numbers and comments, where learners “strongly agree, or agree”:

• 84%...Actually meeting the customer characters made them more real for me.
• 88%...It was helpful to observe the retail sales character's approach to selling.
• 92%...The coach provided useful insights and advice on customers and selling.
• 89%...It was useful to actually practice selling the products to customers.
• 88%...It was helpful to go through the selling scenarios more than once.

With numbers like these, it’s also interesting to point out some additional facts:

• This survey was done as part of launching the first avatar course in a long-established program of traditional e-learning.
• The learners’ ages range all the way from 20-something to 50-something.
• 650 of the first 700 learners to take the course voluntarily participated in the survey...and with a response like that, they were obviously eager to share their experience with us.

These next numbers I’m borrowing from another recent blog on mapping a PowerSim, that you may also want to reference, if you haven’t already seen it. In a simple, two-product selling simulation (remember, aimed at better sales results in an area where salespeople are likely to falter or fail) learners are presented with:

• 40 relevant options or points of view
• 14 learner inputs or decisions
• 16 expressions of customer preference
• 8 demonstrated coaching tips

Since you only have to qualify the customer once, it doesn’t take long to go through the eight versions of the scenario. And the thing is, each time, learners internalize valuable knowledge about how to be more successful. Because of all that valuable practice, we don’t even include the traditional e-learning course assessment.

So there you have it. Some really persuasive and exciting things to think about, with x-learning by the numbers.

Whenever I tackle anything new, especially if it's big and new, I like to examine what I know and what I don't know. What the givens, are and what remain variables. In a way, it's like sorting the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, where the edge pieces are the givens, and everything else is a variable.

Here are some of the ideas that we consider givens in simulation design:

• We use simulations to provide safe practice in making critical decisions (with our clients, mostly soft skills, but sims are excellent for mechanical or other processes, too)
  
  
• We use avatars to make soft skill simulations more social and engaging (this social sensibility also gains us trust and credibility with learners)
  
  
• Avatars can demonstrate, coach or role play with the learner (all are valid roles, depending on the learning objectives and social setting)
  
  
• The more real-world we can make the simulation, the better results we will get (something to remember here is that the real world may not be simple or predictable, so neither should sims be)
  
  
• In a simulation, if learners don't have a good opportunity to fail, they also don't have a good opportunity to learn (the real advantage to building in failure is that you can help learners discriminate between small, but important, concepts and options)
  
  
• The simpler, more streamline we can construct the simulation, the more learning time will be available (when there's value in it, people will go through a sim more than once...so don't use up more time than necessary; this gives them more time to practice)
  
  
• The construction of the simulation should give the learner the same sort of options, process, flow as the real situations (even while designing in failures and demanding critical thought, you don't want to trick the learner) 

Do you have any other givens, to add to our list? Let me know!