Another
Way?
 A
cosy and rather unhealthy vendor-driven consensus
has evolved in relation to e-learning implementation
strategy, according to Adrian Snook.
It
must be obvious to anyone who reads the Training and
HR Press regularly that a cosy and unhealthy vendor-driven
consensus has evolved in relation to e-Learning implementation
strategy.
In
the current economic climate, HR and training functions
that placidly accept this conventional implementation
agenda are facing real problems when selling their
e-Learning strategy and its consequences to senior
managers and business units. As a consequence, some
of these proposals are either being rejected or are
doomed to failure.
An
alternative and more pragmatic vision is required
- one driven by the needs of buyers and not by the
interests of vendors.
The
Way Things Were...
Internal Power Struggles
The 'Killer' Application
The War for your Wallet
What
does this mean for Major Organisations
An Alternative Vision
Sidestep the Technology issue:
Outsource and Externally Host
Focus
on Content and Your Business Objectives
Conclusion
 The
Way Things Were...
To
understand how this unhealthy vendor driven consensus
evolved, you first need to understand a few things
about the recent past.
During the autumn of 1999 growing interest in the
subject led the (then) Institute of Personnel and
Development (IPD) to organise TechTraining '99,
their first Conference to focus entirely upon technology-based
forms of training and development. I attended that
event as Speaker but the key reason I remember the
event so vividly was the keynote address by the American
training guru Elliot Masie. He covered a wide range
of topics but his clear message was that a momentous
shift was occurring in the market for technology-based
training.
In
his usual inimitable style Elliot effectively declared
that the term e-learning was being embraced by interest
groups with huge resources and that this new term
would soon redefine our industry and change it forever.
Like many others, I returned from that conference
convinced that the future of traditional Computer-Based
Training (CBT) companies would rest on their ability
to re-equip with web technology, tools and know-how
as quickly as possible.
By
the Spring of 2000 the predicted e-learning boom was
in full swing.
The
new technologies created a great deal of excitement
amongst major corporations, immediately followed by
equal measures of confusion and conflict.
Internal
Power Struggles
In the days when CBT was hard disk resident or accessed
from a CD-ROM the training and HR functions of organisations
were far less dependent on the IT Department than
their counterparts today. If they chose to do so,
they could even circumvent the IT professionals completely,
by buying their own dedicated training PC's and installing
these in learning centres or training rooms.The
requirement for technology was basic and did not impinge
significantly on business critical systems. In
those circumstances the IT Director was often happy
to turn a blind eye.
The advent of Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area
Network (WAN) and Intranet-resident e-learning changed
all that, because the skills, knowledge and technology
required fell beyond the resources of the typical
HR or Training team. Networked learning requires careful
conformance with network protocols and constraints
and is delivered via large numbers of PC's in use
for a wide range of applications. No IT Director in
his right mind would allow anyone from HR or Training
freedom in these areas without close supervision.
Despite
this IT functions were often surprisingly reluctant
to get involved. Their experience with general business
applications was not that helpful when dealing with
multimedia technologies and the implementation of
e-learning looked likely to take them outside their
traditional comfort zone.
When
some HR and Training functions began to develop compelling
business cases to justify a significant investment
in e-Learning, IT functions really began to take notice.
They perceived both a threat of intrusion into their
domain and an opportunity to further expand their
burgeoning power and influence. If there was budget
to be spent, they resolved to ensure it was spent
in ways that they understood and which served their
vested interests.
The
'Killer' Application
The special "interest groups" elliptically alluded
to by Elliot Masie in the Autumn of 1999 were composed
largely of hardware and software vendors who saw huge
opportunities to up-sell, cross-sell and on-sell enabling
technology to organisations seeking to implement e-learning
solutions.
In 2000, John Chambers, the chief executive officer
of Cisco Systems famously stated:
The
next big killer application of the Internet will be
education[it] will make email look like a rounding
error.
Some
would claim that Chambers was principally addressing
the priorities of an sales audience when he said this.
Cynics have subsequently interpreted the words "killer
application" as implying "a great opportunity to sell
software, routers, switchers and other assorted web
technology".
E-learning
certainly represents a huge revenue earning opportunity
for all technology vendors, especially if they can
convince the customer that a huge investment in infrastructure
is required i.e:
-
Selection and implementation of a Learning Management
System must form the starting point for any e-learning
strategy
- This
LMS and all content selected has to be hosted internally
on the corporate intranet.
The
War for your Wallet
Existing Human Resources (Information Systems) HRIS
and Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) vendors had
been slow to spot this potential and often had no
mature products to offer.
This
vacuum led to the entry of a range of new Learning
Management System (LMS) vendors into the market, often
managed and staffed by former employees of the key
database and ERP vendors.
The ambition was to replicate the internally hosted
approach and traditional license-fee based business
model that had propelled companies like SAP to the
top. The goal of these new vendors was to convince
the market that the implementation of your own LMS
was the obvious first stage in the evolution of an
e-learning strategy. They set about convincing the
market and key industry figures that this made sense,
glossing over many key issues in the process.
Whilst
a LMS is obviously a very useful tool it is a distortion
of priorities to say that the implementation of an
LMS should always be your first step.
Since
a basic LMS is not that difficult to create the number
of competing systems proliferated and within months
there were over a hundred on the market. A few were
excellent, some were OK, most were awful, and a few
never actually worked at all.
As
organisations struggled to make sense of the rapidly
expanding LMS market, a growing demand for system
selection consultancy developed. The management consultants
and systems integrators sat up and began to take notice.
IT professionals who were struggling to give shape
to the hazily expressed ambitions of colleagues in
HR and Training seized on the concept of LMS with
enthusiasm. Here was a vision of e-learning they could
relate to.
What
was apparently required was the selection and implementation
of a huge internally hosted ERP-style software system
and a massive investment in the corporate intranet,
ideally accompanied by an increase in head-count within
the IT function.
Thus
major organisations set about drawing up plans to
spend huge sums on infrastructure, enabling technology
and finally on content. In doing so, they were often
pursuing an agenda set by vendors, rather than by
the enterprise business units. Whilst the occasional
voice of dissent is raised from time to time, this
consensus has remained largely intact to this day,
with incalculable long-term consequences.
What
does this mean for major organisations?
HR
and training functions that accept the conventional
implementation agenda I have laid out are facing real
problems when selling their e-learning strategy and
its consequences to senior managers and business units.
In many cases these proposals are doomed to failure
for some very simple reasons.
The first set of problems relate to the high level
of disruption and initial cost likely to be associated
with the implementation of a conventional, internally
hosted Enterprise Learning Management System. A major
up-front investment in software, hardware and integration
consultancy will often be required before learners
gain access to e-learning content for the first time
and their managers gain access to useful learner data.
"Purchasing
an enterprise level e-learning infrastructure is a
commitment of a magnitude similar to an ERP implementation
a long decision-making process, extensive custom programming,
and time-consuming implementations." - WR Hambrecht,
March 2000
Most
IT functions will need additional manpower to host
and support the implementation of a conventional LMS
but the precise volume of resources and the level
of associated cost is always hard to predict, giving
rise to difficulties calculating a total cost-of-ownership.
Extended Elapsed Time for Implementation
The
second set of problems relate to the period of time
typically required to implement a conventional internally
hosted Enterprise Learning Management System:
"We spent the last two years implementing our learning
management system, and now we are ready to start developing
our e-learning program." -Major US Airline, March
2000
It is effective interaction with e-learning content
that improves skill, builds knowledge and generates
return-on-investment. In the current economic climate
it is often difficult to gain support from business
units for a proposal that involves un-quantified business
benefit deferred for longer than a fiscal year, especially
in exchange for significant immediate expenditure.
Lack
of Flexibility and Responsiveness
The
lack of flexibility and responsiveness implicit in
conventional e-learning implementation projects is
often noted and can give rise to significant resistance.
Business units inevitably have urgent short-term training
requirements that need to be addressed before the
implementation of mediating technology can be completed.
Business units sometimes feel justified in pressing
ahead with the roll out of e-learning content independently
using physical media. Alternatively they are sometimes
forced to implement more expensive and less effective
traditional solutions. Neither option is probably
in the long-term interests of the enterprise at large.
Limited Scalability and Accessibility
Where
e-learning is internally hosted, individuals located
outside the corporate firewall and without remote
access to the corporate Intranet are often effectively
excluded from participation.
The
future of e-learning within the Enterprise is therefore
inextricably linked with the future growth and capability
of the corporate intranet. Scaling any solution of
this type up from a pilot to meet the needs of tens
or hundreds of thousands of learners located in remote
sites is likely to prove complex, expensive and very
time-consuming.
For
global companies aiming to service their extended
enterprise a high capacity global Intranet might need
to be developed, almost replicating the broad geographical
coverage provided by the Internet itself.
Business
units are likely to legitimately question the rationale
behind any proposal to build a proprietary global
network for e-learning when Internet based solutions
are already accessible from some most company offices,
many employee's homes, all internet cafes, most libraries
and colleges world-wide.
Challenges relating to reliability
IT functions have a broad range of conflicting responsibilities
for business critical systems all of which place competing
demands on the available resources. Levels of system
availability approaching 99.7% are vital for effective
on-line e-learning because learners spend so much
time on-line actually interacting with courseware.
This can prove very hard to ensure unless an internally
hosted e-learning platform is given top priority by
IT management at all times and is supported by significant
investment in redundant, fault tolerant systems and
the highest levels of burstable bandwidth. How often
is this true in the average organisation?
If business units are to embrace the e-learning project
then they will want reassurance that their training
demands can be met in a timely manner with extremely
high levels of reliability, both now and in the future.
An
Alternative Vision
The
time has come for major organisations to seize the
agenda and adopt a radically different set of priorities.
Where the volume of e-learning usage looks likely
to create problems in terms of management and administration
in the long term it obviously makes sense to plan
carefully for scaleable deployment and learning management.
However,
this does not necessarily mean that an internally
hosted enterprise LMS the best place to start, nor
that your project needs to degrade into a lengthy
IT-led technology implementation initiative.
Sidestep
the Technology issue: Outsource and Externally Host
Whilst
it has been possible to implement a completely outsourced,
internet-hosted e-learning solution in the UK for
some time, very little publicity has been given to
the fact that this option exists.
A
number of providers offer a combination of catalogue
content, comprehensive custom-build services, access
to standards-compliant third party content and a hosting
and management platform accessible from any Internet
browser world-wide.
An
ASP (Application Service Provider) approach to e-learning
allows you to present an attractive proposition to
business units. This approach involves the provider
entering into a contract to provide all the components
necessary for the initiative, hosted on servers outside
your organizations firewall.
Low
Up-Front Cost
A
typical outsourced, web-based e-learning Portal can
be implemented and maintained at a fraction of the
cost associated with a conventional internally hosted
solution. Aside from the provision of Internet connections
where none already exist no hardware or software typically
needs to be implemented within the firewall. Providers
typically make upgrades to the platform continuously
over time and make no charge for software releases.
This means that, unless training in relation to new
functionality is required you normally incur no additional
cost. Rapid Implementation.
An ASP Portal can be implemented in a fraction of
the time required to implement a conventional internally
hosted solution, providing the flexibility and responsiveness
demanded by business units.
Flexibility and Responsiveness
An
ASP Portal and associated content can be developed
and implemented very rapidly, reducing any risk that
demands for training will go unfulfilled. This provides
high levels of flexibility and responsiveness to emerging
demands.
Library content can be "turned on" instantly whilst
custom-built content can be developed from scratch
and be made available to learners worldwide over a
matter of weeks.
Scalability
and Reliability
ASP
platforms have proven themselves to be extremely scaleable.
For example DigitalThink claim that their platform
is currently meeting the needs of 2.4 million concurrent
registrations users world-wide, with capacity for
many millions more.
Monitoring studies carried out by Keynote systems
have confirmed that ASP e-learning platforms are capable
of consistently outperforming the Keynote e-Business
40 index of top e-Commerce sites with consistent sub
two-second response times and site availability levels
exceeding 99.7%.
Focus
on Content and Your Business Objectives
Content
is the one component of any e-learning strategy that
actually builds skills and knowledge, delivers performance
improvement and business benefit. It is the component
of the strategy that is visible to learners, business
units and ultimately shareholders.
The
starting point should therefore be a business case
built around sourcing or developing standards-compliant
content, accessible within an rapidly implemented
and/or outsourced web-based platform that provides
the management facilities required to achieve specified
business objectives.
The
Internet is already the planets' largest learning
resource and is effectively a global shopping basket
for e-learning courseware. What organisations actually
want is the freedom to source standards compliant
web-based content from wherever they choose both quickly
and flexibly.
Conclusion
Look closely at the needs of your organization, map
business needs onto content requirements and then
look closely at all the options for speedy deployment
and management.
Letting technology vendors and your IT department
loose with your e-learning budget can sometimes be
a bit like putting a self-employed carpenter in charge
of the budget for your local library. You could end
up with the finest in furniture and bookshelves but
precious few resources left for books.
Adrian
Snook can be contacted via email at: asnook@e-learningzone.co.uk
e-Learning
Age is published by Bizmedia Limited, 80/82 Chiswick
High Road, London, W4 1SY, United Kingdom.
For
further information and subscription information please
see:
|
