The Real HCM Maturity Model

I read an interesting article over on Learning Circuits entitled HCM Maturity Model. Two years ago, I might have simply nodded my head and moved on, but now I think that something very different is happening. First, their model is presented as:



Their definition of the "Knowledge Targeting Stage" includes:

By enabling line-of-business managers to collaborate with HR and training departments to tailor learning to their people, real business value begins to emerge as employees extend their knowledge beyond basic skill sets to specialized talents that have a direct impact on business performance.

The knowledge targeting stage of HCM provides HR and training leaders a unique opportunity to connect with business leaders, understand their challenges and deliver tangible value to them.

As you move up the maturity model you get into bigger and more centralized solutions with the ultimate solution being an all-you-can-eat tool. Oh, did I mention that the author comes from Saba? A good company, but an obvious bias.

Now here's the reality...



While I work a lot with LMS products (including Saba) and believe that they are really great for may things, I also find that they can easily become a barrier. For example, what if I just want to put up some quick-hit information. I'm not going to put it under the LMS. This is the same thing I talked about in my post: eLearning Technology: Tools for On-Demand Information - An LMS?

Shift in Blended Learning - Example of Melding of Training and Support

In a previous post Shift in eLearning from Pure Courseware towards Reference Hybrids, I talked about the shift from Courseware towards other kinds of Blended Learning solutions with a greater emphasis in information sources.

As an example from the software training world, what we are seeing more an more is a melding of Training and Support materials. In other words, our blended learning model often used to look like:

now it looks like:


Note: the midpoint represents the launch of the system. The key differences here are:

1. Support materials such as help, cheat sheets and manuals are seamlessly integrated with training and used prior to actual system launch. The training materials are also seamlessly integrated into with support materials so that they can be easily accessed at the time of use.
   
2. "Training" is handled over time with a series of learning events that includes learning events scheduled post-launch and that are often more like office hours. This spacing is known to have much better impact.

Keywords: eLearning Trends

Shift in eLearning from Pure Courseware towards Reference Hybrids

Just when you've made the transition from the prior generation of CBT authoring tools (e.g., Authorware, Toolbook) to the new generation of WBT authoring tools (e.g., Captivate, Lectora), it looks like things are slowly shifting again.

The shift I'm seeing is away from the design of pure "courseware" solutions
and much more to "reference hybrid" solutions.

To explain this, I need to step back and deal with the fact that terminology around eLearning Patterns is problematic.

In my mind, "courseware" is interactive (to some level) instruction run asynchronously. It is created via an Authoring Tool or an Learning Content Management System. Often there's period quizzing to test understanding. It's designed to hit particular instructional objectives. It's the stuff you see demonstrated at every Training conference over the past ten years. Oh, and it almost definitely has a NEXT BUTTON.

"Reference" is static content - meaning no interaction other than allowing the user to link from page-to-page and to search. It is asynchronous. It is normally a series of web pages, but can be PDF or other document types. It can be created using Wiki software, a content management system, web editing software or even Microsoft Word stored as HTML. It's designed to provide either real-time support for work tasks or near real-time support for look up. Often they are designed based around particular job functions and tasks to provide good on-the-job support. It almost certainly does not have a next button and should have search. You probably don't see many demonstrations of these kinds of solutions, because they aren't sexy.

I realize that these terms are vague, so let me go see what other people have to say. If you look at various eLearning Glossaries: Wikipedia eLearning Glossary, WorldWideLearn eLearning Glossary, Cybermedia Creations eLearning Glossary, you'll find that there are hopeless definitions of "courseware" and no definition of "reference." Reference sometimes comes out as "job aids" or "online support" or "online help" or various other things. Each of these other terms in slightly more specific than "reference" as they generally imply a bit more about the specific structure of the content. Thus, "reference" to me is a good umbrella term.

By the way, if you can help me ... Am I missing an alterative term for "reference?" Are we just calling these "web pages?"

I did try another avenue to find better definitions. I went over to Brandon Hall's Awards Site. He has awards for "custom content" organized by the type of function they were supporting, e.g., sales. I would think that "content" is an inclusive term for courseware and reference. However, if you look at the judging criteria the first question is: "How engaging is this entry?" So, I've got to assume they really are looking for courseware and not for reference material (which is inherently less engaging - and in fact you would claim that you don't want it to be engaging, you want it to be quick and to the point).

The other categories for Learning Technology. The sub-categories here are:

• Course Development Tools
• Software and System Simulation Development Tools
• Soft Skills and Technical Simulation Development Tools
• Tests or Instructional Games Creation Tools
• Rapid Content Creation Tools
• Live E-Learning/Virtual Classroom Technology
• Just-in-Time Learning Technology
• Innovations in Learner Management Technology
• Innovations in Learning Content Creation and Learning Content Management Technology
• Open

None of this makes me think about "reference," but maybe it would be included in either "Rapid Content Creation" or "Just-in-Time."

Okay, now that I'm done ranting about terminology, here's the real point ...

We are seeing a significant shift in development away from mostly creating courseware to creating more-and-more reference materials designed to be just-in-time support.

Even more so, we are seeing a shift towards Hybrid Reference and Courseware combinations where the Courseware is embedded within the Reference. So, if you don't quite understand the concept or you want to make sure you provide a nice introduction, you put that embedded within the web pages.

As an example of this, we've created several hybrid reference/courseware solutions that are designed to both introduce and support the use of software. Traditionally, we would have built courses in something like Captivate and pointed users to go take these courses first. We would have separately created a "support" site that would have a FAQ and help on various tasks.

In the hybrid solution, we created the support site as the first element you go to and put a prominent "First Time User" link on the home page. This page takes them to instructions on how to get up and going. Most of the content is presented as static web pages that tell how to perform particular tasks, but some of the pages contain embedded Captivate movies to demonstrate or simulate use of the system.

This design has given us several advantages:

• End-users can get started with the application quickly and receive incremental help on the use of the system as they need it. We've eliminated most up-front training.
• End-users only see one solution that provides "help on using the application" as opposed to seeing "training" and "support" separately.
• It costs less to produce because there's greater content sharing between training and support materials and because we build more of the content as reference which costs less.

I'll be curious to hear if other people are seeing a similar shift in what they are building.

Keywords: eLearning Trends, eLearning Resources

Surveys in eLearning

Through two recent experiences I've come to realize that many people in eLearning are not using Survey tools nearly as much as I would have thought.

For my recent Collaborative Learning eLearning 2.0 Class, I used a SurveyMonkey survey to ask the class members about their background, interests and availability. You can see the survey results on the Course Wiki.

SurveyMonkey is very easy to use. It's free up to a limit. It will even help send the surveys, track who's taken them and nag people who have not completed the survey.

And, of course, there are lots of other tools out there that are equally easy to use and equally free. I've used Zoomerang before and it's great as well.

So, why am I hearing that most people aren't aware of these tools or aren't using them for pre & post course surveys?

Keywords: eLearning Resources

Email, Knowledge/Content Management - Email as a Future Application Interface

James Robertson's excellent Column Two blog pointed me to an interesting article by Seth Gottlieb - Email and Content Management which provides some practical suggestions about how to move from email based content management towards better mechanisms.

While I agree with Seth's main contention that email, especially email with attachments, makes content management much harder, I actually think that Seth is swimming against a very, very strong current and is probably going to get sucked into the ocean shortly. He may know this since he points us to another article that explains The Good In Email (or Why Email Is Still The Most Adopted Collaboration Tool).

And, I personally believe that email is going to become more and more the "front end" of many of our applications. Many of the systems we build these days are workflow applications that often email the people involved to notify them or even allow them to respond. This is our way to "get in front of the user." And it works extremely well. And most every application is starting to do this. As we begin to get more sophisticated about workflow, we are going to see this increase.

So, while I would love to believe that much of the current communication that occurs through email will be migrated to other kinds of vehicles with more appropriate persistence and searchability characteristics (e.g., wikis), I think that most users are not heading that direction today and what is a more likely trend is to have email become more integrated so that it acts seamlessly with our CM/KM solutions.