We have been hosting some online radio programs "Training Tech Talk" and I thought our viewers would like to listen to this week's show. Our guest was Carline Avey,learning strategist and director of innovative learning strategies with ACS Learning Services, a Xerox company. She has over 15 years experience in instructional strategy, design and development, working on custom and generic projects for Fortune 500 clients and public agencies. Currently, she is known for her work on developing strategies and practical applications of learning in 3D-virtual worlds , web 2.0 learning applications and mLearning. Most recently, her teams are working on Kiosk learning solutions for iPad and using mobile tagging for sharing of knowledge objects. In 2009, she won the Innovator of the year award for ACS, a Xerox company.
Click here to listen to this show.
Friday, August 20, 2010
Monday, August 9, 2010
Measuring the Value of Learning
We are getting ready to present our class "Frome ADDIE to IMPROV" at the Chicago eLearning Showcase on Wed. Auguest 11th. Even though this will be an abreaviated version of what is normally a 1.5 to 2 hour workshop, one element of this workshop we hope people walk away with is a new perspective on how to measure the results of training on the organization.
Many senior training professionals are asked to measure ROI of training. This form of measurement ususally calculates the direct costs with delivery of the training vs. the impact that it has on the business. I think one of the reasons for this is that the impact measurement may take more time or the training executives feel that this is out of their control. I say Baloney!
In the ADDIE to IMPROV workshop (the I stands for Impact) Instructional Designers and training executives needs to think about how will their training impact the business and then work backwards from there. I'd like to say I can take credit for this approach but I won't. This approach has been supported by other highly recognized professionals such as Jack Phillips and Patti Phillips. They have done significant research using this form of measurement. They are both founders of the ROI Institute
To demonstrate how this works, think about a time when an organization is making some major change or installing new software applications. There is an obvious need to create training around this initiative but rather than looking at only the skills need to learn this new procedure, do it in a way that let's you embrace how this new process or application needs to work in order to be measured successfully impacting the business.
Ask these questions
1- Why is this change or software being implemented
2- What is going on in the business to require this change
3- What tangible value will the organization receive as a results of a successful implementation -- i.e. reduce errors, faster delivery times, decrease waste--- put real $'s to this
4- What tangible cost will be incurred if not successful -- lost customers, increase waste- overtime etc.
5- Then start to develop the training to meet these goals
Many times we as designers get caught up in the skills and application side which can derail what the real intent of the training should be. Here is a statement I found as part of a series of interviews from CorpU
"We need to make our evaluation work a critical element of the “front-end” work, never as an afterthought"
So the next training program you become involved with think about the metrics for how this will have tangible measurable impact to the business vs. strictly level one or two evaluations.
Many senior training professionals are asked to measure ROI of training. This form of measurement ususally calculates the direct costs with delivery of the training vs. the impact that it has on the business. I think one of the reasons for this is that the impact measurement may take more time or the training executives feel that this is out of their control. I say Baloney!
In the ADDIE to IMPROV workshop (the I stands for Impact) Instructional Designers and training executives needs to think about how will their training impact the business and then work backwards from there. I'd like to say I can take credit for this approach but I won't. This approach has been supported by other highly recognized professionals such as Jack Phillips and Patti Phillips. They have done significant research using this form of measurement. They are both founders of the ROI Institute
To demonstrate how this works, think about a time when an organization is making some major change or installing new software applications. There is an obvious need to create training around this initiative but rather than looking at only the skills need to learn this new procedure, do it in a way that let's you embrace how this new process or application needs to work in order to be measured successfully impacting the business.
Ask these questions
1- Why is this change or software being implemented
2- What is going on in the business to require this change
3- What tangible value will the organization receive as a results of a successful implementation -- i.e. reduce errors, faster delivery times, decrease waste--- put real $'s to this
4- What tangible cost will be incurred if not successful -- lost customers, increase waste- overtime etc.
5- Then start to develop the training to meet these goals
Many times we as designers get caught up in the skills and application side which can derail what the real intent of the training should be. Here is a statement I found as part of a series of interviews from CorpU
"We need to make our evaluation work a critical element of the “front-end” work, never as an afterthought"
So the next training program you become involved with think about the metrics for how this will have tangible measurable impact to the business vs. strictly level one or two evaluations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)