PARTNERING PROBLEMS

PARTNERING PROBLEMS

"My company recently purchased an LMS, and we are in the process of purchasing other tools (authoring, etc.) and content (custom and off-the-shelf) as well. These 'other' tools are from other vendors -- not our new LMS provider."

"Does anyone have any tips or words of advice to share regarding how to handle all of these players to ensure that at the end of the day, everything -- content, tools, and the LMS -- works together? What about negotiation tips for getting those from several separate companies to work together well, so that I'm happy with the finished product?"

http://www.vnulearning.com/learninggroup/search/index_taxonomy.jsp
We ran responses to this query in our last issue (March 14, 2006). Here are more:

Purchasing an LMS BEFORE analyzing course development and content needs puts one at a disadvantage, says Mark Undeberg (marku@mediapodium.com). One would hope, he continues, that the reader has not also already purchased authoring tools.

"If not, your path is simple. Just ask prospective authoring tool vendors and/or course suppliers to give you a sample course that you can test by plugging it into your LMS. If the implementation isn't cost-effective ... move on to another vendor or have the vendor adapt its materials."

Assuming the reader's LMS is SCORM- and/or AICC-compliant, he or she should be able to easily implement any SCORM- and/or AICC-content. "If you're working with vendors who are not SCORM-or AICC-compliant ... well, you probably shouldn't be."

Any vendor with integrity will help the reader integrate with other vendors and will do it for a reasonable fee, says Undeberg. "However, if you have purchased products that are not compliant and are not compatible, you're going to have to share the blame and expense for creating a situation that is hard on everyone."

"If you have already purchased your products with no thought for compatibility and your vendors are behaving unreasonably, your best option is to hire a consultant who can call their bluff."

Undeberg is president of MediaPodium LLC, an e-learning provider in Seattle, Wash.

PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE

Unfortunately, many companies make the mistake of purchasing LMSs long before they have any content to serve, agrees Al Moser (al@readygo.com). "This is like building a highway system before owning any cars or trucks."

That said, when looking at authoring tools, here are some of Moser's recommendations:

1. Make sure that your LMS supports the same specifications (AICC, SCORM) as the authoring tools you are considering. Many LMSs have an internal authoring system that uses proprietary specifications, notes Moser. These systems may offer some advantages over third-party tools, but they don't always allow users to deploy their content on another LMS or Web server should they encounter problems with the LMS.

2. Make sure that your LMS vendor promises to give your authoring tool's support department access to the LMS's technical development department. "My experience is that tech support departments at many LMS [vendors] don't know what SCORM and AICC are. Their usual response when a course is not launched/tracked properly is that the problem is the course, not their LMS." The real problem is usually more subtle, says Moser. For example, there is perhaps something in the course that is not supported by the LMS. Or the issue may be that something is compliant with the specification, but the LMS does not gracefully handle it. This can occur, says Moser, for both courses and content that are officially "certified."

3. Verify that your authoring system supports more than one behavior. "Within the e-learning specifications, you can get different behaviors based on how the LMS handles different information. For example, some LMSs will prevent students from returning to a course once their status has been set (by the course) to 'complete.' If you want to avoid this, your authoring tool should be able to instead set the student's status to 'passed' when he reaches the desired benchmark." If the authoring system only offers one version of SCORM or one version of AICC, it means that you will be restricted to the one behavior envisioned by the authoring tool's developers, says Moser. Thus, check that courses built with a tool are capable of reporting more than just score, lesson status and elapsed time. "The course should also report every answer provided by the student, though many LMSs don't store or report this."

4. Ideally, the authoring systems you are looking at can give you a list of the LMSs with which they already have integrated. "If they haven't integrated with the one you purchased, what is their support policy? Will you be able to get the LMS's technical development people to assist the authoring tool's personnel?"

5. Find out what plug-ins are required by the authoring system. "If it requires plug-ins that conflict with the plug-ins required by your LMS, you could run into trouble."

6. If possible, create a demo course with your candidate authoring systems and post it on your LMS to see what you do and don't like. "You'll be amazed at how much you learn about your LMS, the authoring system, and, in many cases, about your e-learning assumptions and processes."

Moser is VP of engineering at ReadyGo Inc., an e-learning authoring tool provider in Mountain View, Calif.

as published in Training Magazine

WHY IS MONA LISA SMILING?

WHY IS MONA LISA SMILING?

In his best-selling book How to Think Like Leonardo Da Vinci: Seven Steps to Genius Every Day (Delacorte Press, 1998), author Michael Gelb draws on Leonardo's notebooks, inventions and legendary works of art to introduce seven principles for thinking like history's greatest genius. OLN&R recently spoke with Gelb about his work:

OLN&R: What are three practical things that Leonardo did in his daily work that might help learning professionals to not only improve their own work, but the work of those they train and teach?

GELB:
He kept a notebook to record his observations, musings, insights and inspirations.
He found an optimal balance between concentrated, focused work and relaxation/incubation time.
He disciplined himself to consider all his subjects from at least three perspectives.


OLN&R: What inhibits great thinking at work? What steps can individuals take to overcome these obstacles?

GELB: Great thinking is inhibited by the belief that it is reserved only for those who are especially gifted. And most people don't understand that thinking is a skill that can be developed. In other words, they aren't aware of their true capacity to think and they haven't been trained to access that capacity.

OLN&R: Similarly, what inhibits learning at work? What steps can we take to overcome these obstacles?
GELB: The number one inhibition to learning at work is the fear of failure and embarrassment. Individuals can cultivate their understanding of the nature of the learning process by, for example, modeling the behaviors of Leonardo Da Vinci, but in most cases a major organizational culture change is required.

OLN&R: We know Leonardo was a great thinker, but how would you describe him as a learner? How did he approach learning, and what made him a particularly effective student?

GELB: Great learning and thinking go hand-in-hand. Leonardo was a committed, passionate lifelong learner. He taught himself Latin when he was 40 so he could read the classics. In his notebooks, he records the definition of more than 9,000 vocabulary words. He wrote, "Iron rusts from disuse, water that does not flow becomes stagnant. Thus it is with the human mind!" Freud wrote that, "The great Leonardo continued to play as a child throughout his adult life, thus baffling his contemporaries."

OLN&R: If you could only give one piece of advice, based on your work, to training professionals on how to make their training more effective, what would that advice be -- and why?

GELB: Always be engaged in learning something new! If you are stretching your own comfort zone with new learning challenges then you'll nurture the "beginner's mind" that inspires the best teaching/training.

OLN&R: Why is Mona Lisa smiling?
GELB: Because she knows how to think like Leonardo, and after this presentation, you will, too!


as published in Training Magazine.

Who's Coming, Who's Going and Why

Who's Coming, Who's Going and Why

There will be no rest for trainers in 2006, if the latest hiring projections are on target. According to the latest quarterly survey conducted by Milwaukee-based employment services provider Manpower, payrolls will continue to be added to throughout the second quarter. Of the 16,000 U.S. employers surveyed for the Manpower Employment Outlook Survey, 30 percent foresee an increase in hiring activity for the second quarter of this year, while just 6 percent expect a reduction in staffing.

Fifty-eight percent report no change in hiring plans, and 6 percent have yet to determine their staffing needs. No matter what sector you're in, the stream of new hires to orient and train should remain strong. Employers in sectors such as construction, durable and non-durable goods manufacturing, transportation/public utilities, wholesale/retail trade, finance/insurance, real estate and services, all report little change in hiring as they look toward the second quarter, Manpower reports. To learn more about the study, visit www.manpower.com.

Meanwhile, the employees you do let go may just make a comeback, a 2005 survey conducted by Philadelphia-based workforce consultancy Right Management, reveals. A poll of more than 14,000 displaced employees from more than 4,900 organizations throughout North America who found new jobs last year using Right Management's services, found that 13 percent who had previously been laid off were rehired by their former employers. The survey found that 54 percent of employers are at least occasionally rehiring former employees who were displaced by earlier downsizings. For more information, visit www.right.com.

And what about those who leave of their own accord? They often do so for reasons that go beyond their wallet, Los Angeles-based executive search and workplace consultancy Korn/Ferry International reports. Based on a global survey of executive respondents from more than 80 countries who had registered online with the firm between December 2005 and February 2006, only 5 percent cited inadequate or inconsistent compensation as the primary reason for leaving their last job. To learn more about this study, visit www.kornferry.com.

as shared in Inside Training.

A Simulation Success Story for the ABA

A Simulation Success Story for the ABA

Banking is one of the world's oldest professions, no doubt, but when Washington, D.C.-based banking trade group the American Bankers Association (ABA) wanted to sell primers on topics such as financial, estate, retirement and tax planning to the financial advisers it serves, it turned to one of training's newest technologies--simulation. "They were looking for engaging and interactive, scenario-based simulations, something that would be in the neighborhood of maybe 30-45 minutes," says William Geheren, marketing director for Pearson Performance Solutions, a training provider in Chicago that creates custom solutions for clients, and which the ABA turned to for help.

More than merely watching life-like instructional scenes play out before them, the association wanted users to be able to practice and test themselves within the simulation. "They wanted us to help them [users] highlight gaps in knowledge," Geheren says. The result was the creation of 70 assessments built around simulations that users and their managers could access to create instruction followed by tests on areas they might need boning up on.After sitting down together to work out the details, Pearson and the ABA agreed that it was important to create a tool that wasn't just impressive from a technological bells-and-whistles perspective. The organization needed simulation-based assessments that would be versatile and practical, meaning able to instruct and test users at a range of skill proficiencies on each of the topics it addresses.

"Something that no matter what level they were at, they would be able to relate to and grad a hold of, and, again to make sure the results from that demonstrated their competencies and weaknesses," Geheren explains. Each scenario is based on a financial challenge faced by a fictional family that the user of the simulation assessment is asked to advise. Descriptions are provided for each member of the "family," including what the head of the household does for a living, Geheren says, as well as details such as the kind of schooling given to the children. One scenario, for example, might focus on the couple Sarah and Jack, who lead very busy lives, but want to make sure they're planning adequately for the future in terms of their taxes.

The quandary presented to the financial adviser user of the simulation could be this: given the goals of this couple, when should their trust tax be filed? Options are then given for the user to choose from including "at the end of the calendar year," "one year from the date of so-and-so's death," "at the end of a two-year period" or "the 15th day of the fourth month following the close of the taxable year."The program, which was made available to employees around the beginning of this month, has not yet had its effectiveness measured, but Geheren says Pearson will be working with ABA to create measures of the program and make adjustments as needed.

"I've been told that so far they've received positive feedback from several of their banks," he notes, "primarily regarding how interactive the simulations are and just how realistic the quality of the content is."For more information, visit http://www.elabs2.com/c.html?rtr=on&s=cc4,j8r,21,93w5,4pws,bv7k,fy01.

J.B. Hunt Limits Accidents with Training

J.B. Hunt Limits Accidents with Training

When Lowell, Ark.-based transportation company J.B. Hunt Transport Services wanted to find a way to reduce accidents, it turned to training, emphasizing the issue of safety in its fleet management and operations classes. It also launched ongoing safety awareness initiatives. These measures have made a difference, with preventable accidents as defined by the Department of Transportation falling from .41 per million miles to .36 per million miles in 2004.

as published in Learning Tools