Pivot: Missing the Mark on Quality eLearning

I’m with MarcRosenberg: I too hate eLearning. Actually, what I hate is the volume of badeLearning out there, despite the efforts of so many well-intentioned eLearningdesigners and developers. How did our industry get to a place where most of ourcustomers, aka learners, view eLearning as an unpleasant experience to beendured, not enjoyed? It is clear that we are missing the mark on qualityeLearning.

Why are we missing the mark?

To be sure, there’s no shortage of innovation in tools ortechniques. On the instructional design side we’re embracing microlearning,branching scenarios, gamification,explainer videos, and interactive PDFs. On the development side we have a rangeof off-the-shelf courseware and tools, as well as custom-coded HTML5, to buildwith.

So what gives? Why are so many eLearning courses, videos,and job aids missing the mark on quality eLearning? In my view, it happens whentwo simple ingredients are missing in the eLearning design and developmentprocess: management oversight and quality controls. When it comes to newtraining projects, too many L&D executives have a “make it so” attitudewith their teams (which is great), without providing quality standards orproject parameters for doing so (which is not).

Management oversight and quality controls can help tame theWild West that eLearning has become. L&D executives: Please considerimplementing or strengthening these four essential eLearning quality controls:

1. Provide eLearning principles and parametersto your L&D design and development teams. As I’ve mentioned before, alleLearning programs need guidelines to ensure that they meet standards ofquality. These guidelines should answer a few basic questions. What toneand personality should your eLearning convey to employees? What’s themaximum duration of your compliance courses? What are the accessibility,responsivity, and technical requirements of your eLearning courses? What areyour language and branding standards? These and many other parameters must bespelled out and shared with any internal or external eLearning developers.

If in doubt about where to start, refer tothese two essential reminders of the values and characteristics of effectiveeLearning: the Serious eLearningManifesto and Will Thalheimer’s DecisiveDozen.

1. Set limits on the authority of contentexperts, and define the number of revision cycles created by eLearningdesigners and developers. Whilewe need both of these roles to create accurate, engaging eLearning, both canlead to unintended results if not kept in check with reasonable projectschedules. Contentexperts, when asked to share what they know about a topic, invariablyattempt to share everything they’ve ever learned about it. Their job is to verifycontent, not generate it. Don’t let them hijack the process with content bloator unending edits.

Similarly, eLearning designers areprone to adding all sorts of bells and whistles that may not be appropriate forthe topic or target audience, or may be unnecessarily labor-intensive, resultingin longer project schedules. Accurate and innovative training can’t be at theexpense of employees who are kept waiting for information they need to do orimprove in their jobs.

1. Avoid one-stop-shop eLearning developers.No one person, whether an L&D employee or vendor, can or should beresponsible for creating training for an entire organization. While there arecourseware applications that tout their usability as a cost-saving advantage,do you really want one person lecturing your employees? Think about it: aneLearning course designed, written, and developed by a single person is like anEncyclopedia Britannica entry. However, today when people require just-in-timeinformation, they choose user-generated, peer-reviewed Wikipedia-like entries.Shouldn’t eLearning follow suit?
2. Incorporate customer experience designprinciples and processes into your L&D projects. The eLearning industryis one of the few I can think of that does not obsessively track and keep pace withcustomers’ preferences, habits, and outcomes. Ensure that your training teamsare consulting with the target audience for each new project. Do not fall preyto trainingitis, a term I use todescribe a mindset that overtakes many training designers and developers andconvinces them that they know what’s best for the dozens, hundreds, orthousands of employees they are sharing information with.

In order for eLearning to remain relevant andeffective, we need to involve our customers in the creative process: if nothingelse, think of their involvement as a risk mitigation strategy. Wouldn’t yourather know sooner rather than later if an eLearning course or program isn’thitting the mark?

In conclusion

As Marc Rosenberg points out, it’s challenging (but notimpossible) to create good eLearning. Instructional designers and developersare doing their best to create what they think is best for learners, but theyneed L&D senior managers to set the direction, tone, and quality standardsfor their work. Without eLearning quality controls, we will continue to hearfrom employees who want training but hate eLearning. We will be missing themark on quality eLearning.