SkillSoft's inGenius: About adding meaningful context...

SkillSoft recently (about 3 weeks back) announced the launch of inGenius. This social learning layer will integrate with SkillSoft's Book 24X7, a vast repository of technical and IT-related literature that many organizations use as off-the-shelf content to enable their employees.

inGenius will allow users of Books 24X7 to post comments on the books, add notes, start discussions, rate content and perform other similar activities that will enable the addition of CONTEXT to make the generic Books 24X7 content organization specific. Learners/users, by rating the content in order of specificity for their organization can point other users in the right direction. All of these undoubtedly can improve the overall efficacy of the content in question.

For organizations that have already invested in licenses for access to Books 24X7, inGenius could be an added benefit that would allow users to collaborate and add context. John Ambrose in his post Social Learning Will Fill Enterprise 2.0’s Empty Drums, Part II points out the advantage of "leveraging the amplification benefits of social technology" tools like inGenius.

Tony Karrer, in his post, Social Learning Tools Should Not be Separate from Enterprise 2.0: eLearning Technology, while applauding the effort SkillSoft is making to integrate Social Learning, does criticize the fact that they are tying this to SkillSoft and to books as learning resources.

But he adds the most valuable point about social learning that drives adoption and increases the perceived ease of use manifold: Same tools as your work tools.

To summarize, what could be the advantages of inGenius for organizations already using Books 24X7?

1. It is integrated into a platform that already has content
2. Users are thus free to add context by co-creating, sharing, commenting, rating, discussing...
3. Because it is a part of SkillSoft, it will be perceived as a more secure way of collaborating and is likely to get more buy in from enterprises
4. It will also be seen as a safe and secure launching pad for organizations wishing to introduce the concepts of and explore the benefits of collaborative learning, user generated context and content, community building, etc.
5. Most importantly, it does not require familiarization with a new set of tools as users would already be accessing SkillSoft in the course of their daily work

On the downside, inGenius is very SkillSoft centric and will not give a true sense of collaboration and networking. But, it indeed is a good start...

One more point that could make organizations happy: it seems that future releases of inGenius will extend support to SkillSoft's SkillPort LMS and other e-learning modules. (Source: SkillSoft Raises the Bar for e-Learning with its inGenius Social Learning Layer)

However, there seems to be a dichotomy here. LMS' are top down management tools used for tracking and has really nothing to do with "learning." Collaborative features/informal learning features and are essentially bottom up. How the two would be integrated in spirit depends on the philosophy of trust practiced by organizations.

It should be interesting to see how inGenius gets adopted in organizations and how it evolves to be the bridge between formal and informal learning...

Note: The Books24x7 library includes more than 25,000 titles, on-demand resources comprising digitized IT and business books, book summaries and videos on a wide range of relevant information technology, business skills, computer desktop skills and compliance subjects. (Source: SkillSoft Raises the Bar for e-Learning with its inGenius Social Learning Layer)

Application Training Programs: What's the Big Deal?

Preamble

The following para from Karl Kapp’s post called Yes, We Should Keep ADDIE, HPT and ISD Models is the trigger for my post. His post is an old one—almost 3 years old—yet extremely relevant in our situation today. I have pasted the para below:

“Products typically aren’t designed, built and marketed in a day. Why should training for that product be designed, built and marketed in one day? Same with software systems that take years to develop and then they want training created and delivered in a week...? What are they thinking and what are we thinking when we AGREE to the unreasonable demands?”


This was further ratified by a detailed post by Sreya, a co-blogger, called Challenges and solutions to technical software product training: Gathering Information. Through the details, the post illustrates the time that would be required to understand an application and gather relevant information before a training can be designed.

Currently, I am in the middle of creating a simulation-based training program for certain applications for a well-known organization. The application itself is and has been in the process of being designed and developed for quite a few months now. The organization wishes to roll out the application along with the training modules—a noble endeavor and a logical one, no doubt. Users need to know how to move around within the application before they run amuck on the live system and wreak havoc.

Wherein Lies the Problem

1. This need for a training module was not identified earlier and the training design team, i.e. us, came into the picture a week or so back.

2. The client is sadly under the impression that capturing screenshots of the application using a Rapid e-Learning Authoring Tool like Captivate and putting those inside a UI is what goes by the name of sim training modules.

3. The application is large, complex, and will be used by users of multiple roles performing varied tasks for very different business reasons.

4. This mean, the technical team developing the application cannot always provide business reasons behind all the tasks. They do and can explain the usage without necessarily knowing the logic.

What is the way ahead?

The onus, I think, is squarely on us to explain the following to the client and other stakeholders:

1. The training design team MUST be given time to understand the application from the following angles:

a. Different user profiles (Roles)
b. Tasks that each profile will perform
c. Business need for each task
d. Business need of the application
e. Whether the application is a new rollout or an upgrade (this defines the design of the training which would be a Product Upgrade Communication in the latter case)

2. This first step analysis has to be followed by the design team going through the application themselves. This helps a designer understand where separate Instruction Tips will be required to explain the logic of the step or set it in a larger context for the users.

3. A set of users needs to be identified who can be the test group for the first few modules. Based on this user feedback, the modules and program can be revised.

4. All of this can happen smoothly once the application design and development is over. If the logic of the application changes in the interim, this will directly impact the design of the training as well—not only from the perspective of different screen grabs being needed but most importantly, Instruction Tips would change.

In Conclusion

Going back to what Karl Kapp began his post with—the need to have our fundamental models in place, ADDIE, ISD and HPT—I firmly agree.

Without thorough analysis, it would be foolhardy to claim that we can design a training program that will work. A badly designed training program is as likely to wreak havoc as zero training.

Today, when the need to justify every cent spent is HIGH, an organization stuck with a training program that does not work—read no/below average User Adoption—will not be a happy client. User Adoption = ROI + improved efficiency + greater productivity


Therefore, it is time we put our foot down and claim the time it will take us to deliver effective training programs based on sound instructional designs. The client has to be a partner in this and provide organizational support post implementation to drive adoption.

We cannot “throw away good design in favor of fast design.”

Related posts:

What are the Results of Following an Instructional Design Process? by Karl Kapp
Rapid eLearning Tools: eLearning Technology by Tony Karrer
Rapid E-learning Authoring Tools from Kineo

Related links:
• Articulate www.articulate.com
• Atlantic Link www.atlantic-link.co.uk
• PointeCast www.pointecast.com
• Qarbon www.qarbon.com
• SCATE www.scate.com
• Udutu www.udutu.com