Mobile Accessible eLearning

Managers Do Still Make a Difference

The point of all training provided by an organization is to improve people’s performance on the job. For this to happen, employees must use what they have learned when they are working. In their 1992 book, Transfer of Training, Mary Broad and John Newstrom evaluate the impact of three key resources on skills application – the facilitator/designer of the training, the trainee, and the trainee’s manager. Their analysis showed that the largest contributor to whether people actually use what they learn on the job is the manager. And the biggest factor was not what the manager did after the training (like coaching) but what the manager did before the training occurred.

Since Broad and Newstrom’s work was conducted nearly twenty years ago, and there have been a lot of innovations in how we deliver training, including eSimulations, virtual classroom, social learning, and mobile, I was curious to ponder whether  the role of the manager in learning transfer has changed?

Based on a three-year study of over 10,000 learners by KnowledgePool, not that much. Their research shows that “where learners receive line manager support, 94% go on to apply what they learned”.  Apparently, managers do still make a key difference

The question this raises for me is, as we move to more “bite-size” and ubiquitous training through social and mobile learning, how do we continue to ensure that we tap into this critical resource to ensure learning gets transferred? As stated above, Broad and Newstrom’s work indicated that what a manager does before the training session occurs is even more critical to learning transfer than what they do afterwards.

In 1991-92 its very likely that a manager would have had significant opportunity to interact with the trainee before a training session, if nothing more than to ensure there was coverage for their absence to attend a class. Even if the training was offered via elearning, it is likely the manager was aware of when the employee was going to take a particular course.

Now jump to today (and even more so into the near future). The trainee may be just as likely to complete a 5-10 minute mobile learning session while waiting in line at the cafeteria or bank drive-thru. Or perhaps, they’ve spent part of their lunch time browsing through recent postings in their favorite Community of Practice portal. Will the manager even know that they have engaged in learning? It may be that self initiated training like this will consistently have a high transfer of learning, but I think we are failing our clients if we don’t continue to find ways to engage managers and tap into the impact they have in ensuring that what is learned gets used on the job. Just as we are developing new and innovative ways to deliver training, we will need to find new and innovative ways for manager involvement.

Classroom or eLearning? – There’s an App for That!

Need to make an ROI assessment on whether a classroom program or eLearning solution is right for you? Now there is an app for that.

Brainvisa recently released a free iPhone app that helps you calculate the development, implementation and maintenance costs of a classroom program, and compares those costs to developing an eLearning solution. Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) Tool for Learning Investments asks you a series of questions about the program to be develop, such as: “What’s the approximate length of this course?” — “How often it will need to be updated?” and, “How many times it will be offered?”

tool1

Next, the app steps you through similar considerations for implementation such as, cost of space, cost of facilitation, hourly rate of attendees, etc. Using all this information, it then calculates your total cost. Next, it asks if you would like to compare that cost to the cost of developing an eLearning solution.

tool2

CAB doesn’t ask any of the same questions about the eLearning development or implementation, so Brainvisa must be using their development costs for those calculations.

I did three test runs of CAB to check it out. The results of two of the test runs indicated that eLearning was a more cost effective approach. The third test run, with less than 50 people to be trained, said a classroom solution was a more cost effective approach.

Now there is nothing here that you couldn’t do with a simple spreadsheet – or even a pencil and piece of paper! But CAB is simple, the voice over that asks the questions is done with a sense of humor and the math is done for you. More importantly, it is an early demonstration that not only is mobile learning going to be a big trend in 2010, but I think we will also see more mobile tools to support the development, implementation and maintenance of learning solutions.

It looks to be a very interesting year!