Don’t sell ice to an Eskimo

Traditional sales heroes were those who could ‘sell ice to an Eskimo’. I think the rest of us refer to them as ‘rip-off merchants’.

In the learning & development context, there are a variety of methods of delivering learning such as e-learning courses, coaching, workshops, conferences, 1:1’s and so on.

What is important is recognising that no one method of delivery is inherently better than the other. What is true is that certain learning delivery methods will be more appropriate depending on the organisation, the individuals within the organisation and the type of learning that is required.

I was out on a couple of client visits with Neil on Friday and it was clear that trying to sell e-learning to one of our clients would be as appropriate as selling ice to an Eskimo.  We might have the best e-learning courses in the world, but the culture of the organisation and the kind of people who require the learning prevent e-learning from being a suitable solution to this particular client.

Knowing our client (those to whom we deliver the learning & development, not just those who sit in on the meetings), helps us to make sure we provide the most appropriate learning solution to them. In this case we will be running small workshops which teach basic theory but provide plenty of opportunity for skill drills. That’s what they need and what will provide the best ROI for them. We won’t even attempt to sell ice to Eskimo’s.

Measuring Soft Skills

“How is it possible to measure soft skills?” was the question that someone recently asked on LinkedIn, and the answer which was chosen as ‘best answer’ was written by yours truly. Here is what I wrote:

Taking the term ‘soft skills’ to be a wide range of skills in interacting with people, there are definitely ways in which one can measure these skills.

As a company we have started to employ Branching Video as a method of testing soft skills.

Let me explain:

We recently trained 1500 sales managers across Europe for a large financial services company. Part of this was to show them on how to run 1:1 meetings.

To evaluate their learning in this case, we used branching video of a one to one meeting in action, and asked the delegates to explore possible outcomes.

In each instance they would see the stem, a piece of video that outlined part of the meeting. They could then explore two or three further video clips showing ways that they could deal with the situation.

Following this they would make a decision and go on to see the consequences of those decisions. A critical part of evaluation is to encourage people to make decisions and evidence those decisions as well as understanding the impacts of those decisions.

This part of the evaluation strategy was very popular and effective and is now being expanded to incorporate other areas of the business.
Of course this method could be used for a variety of soft skills and provide an ability to measure an individual’s learning.

By applying certain key performance indicators to each soft skill, one is therefore able to measure the ROI as well.

1, 2, 3, 4

Retention. Dealing with Change. Interpersonal Skills. Self development. Empathy. Basic skills training.

Sesame Street has it all. Do you challenge your audience with so many different training styles within 60 minutes?

And all with catchy tunes.

Dimensional Learning

Picking up from The Gorv’s comment on yesterdays post I think there is more to “learning 387.0” than meets the eye.

Generally everyone loves a term, something catchy, a container that describes what’s inside in a quick, snappy phrase.

Does “learning 387.0” cut the mustard?

I quite like it.  It has a certain lovely, meaningful yet sarcastic ring to it.  Ok, so probably not quite the buzzwords we are looking for.  

Let’s have a look at learning’s journey (a bit like the title of this blog may suggest), and give it a scientific twist.

Imagine a classroom filled with pupils and a teacher at the front with a blackboard. The teacher has a set lesson plan and teaches the class by telling and showing. There is no listening from the teacher, no questioning allowed and no feedback on whether the training works or not. As an alternative the teacher could wheel in a TV and video to the front of the class, stick a tape in, press play and walk out again.  

This is one way learning.  It’s one dimensional with information only traveling outwards from the assumed subject expert.

Adding another dimension means information suddenly goes both ways in the form of questions from the students and answers from the teacher.  It may also feature tests which are an obvious and effective way of measuring learning. This is effectively 2D but as with anything 2D it’s a rather flat experience.

3D learning occurs when we have information going both ways on the 2D plane and there is a third source which is referred to from within the classroom and delivered from the outside.  Think of this as every student having a computer connected to the internet and using it as a library to support and increase the knowledge given within the class.  This form of learning has a much greater depth.

In science terms the forth dimension is all about space and time.  This is similar for learning too. 4D learning is all about the ability to bend and distort the learning experience and sometimes fold it all the way back into itself.  It’s about coming at learning from all angles.  Now in our classroom we still have our teacher and our students but the teacher isn’t the only expert in the room and they are also open to furthering their knowledge on a particular subject.  Learning here is all about sharing.  What happens in the class doesn’t stay in the class and on the outside the whole world can share, participate and add to the learning experience.  

Let’s take an example of a wiki on dog training.  The teacher kicks the wiki off by adding some core content.  The students then begin to add to the wiki maybe with what they already know, maybe with what they discover en route.  This wiki can be seen by the whole world and suddenly you have other dog handlers and trainers adding to it.  Sometimes information given can be incorrect, maybe not now but maybe in the future.  Say for example a chihuahua will always perform a trick for a juicy bone, somebody makes a note of this on the wiki and the information is shared.  Maybe in 100 years time the whole chihuahua breed has become vegetarian and that information is void but the wiki still exists.  No problem, time is bent, the wiki is adjusted and then the information is up to date again.  The beauty is that everyone who is subscribe to this wiki via RSS will be updated when a change happens so the learner is never left behind.

So you see 4D Learning is all about being user driven.  It’s about a multi-way experience which is constantly changing, evolving and responding to learners input and support.

Can you get any better than 4D Learning?  Will there be a fifth dimension?  Absolutely not.  By it’s very nature 4D Learning in itself is also constantly changing, evolving and improving.  As a result it is a term that adapts and grow as and when necessary.

This is obviously just my opinion, not news.  Is it just fluff or do we actually need a term to create hooks?  If I’m going into a client meeting with either the term “learning” or “4D learning” I know I’d have much more success with generating excitement from the latter.

Marton House’s patent for the term “4D Learning” is pending… in my mind at least.

Image from wikipedia

e-learning 2.0

The diagram you see above is taken from a post over at Learning Circuits.  In it Tony Karrer discusses the transition from e-learning 1.0 to 2.0 and demonstrates the changes.

When you look at the table you’ll notice in the middle column the heading E-Learning 1.3. Is this a half-baked bridge between 2 landmarks in e-learning history?  Actually no, moreover it’s probably the place where e-learning actually found it’s feet.  I’d also argue that LMSs didn’t really occur until this stage either, leaving e-learning 1.0 being stuck with delivery methods such as CD, which would have made it truly one way and top-down.

To be honest most e-learning is still being created at the “1.3” level, and I can assure you development time is not rapid in most cases.

The right column is the intriguing one as the ownership has flipped.  Now learning is bottom-up and learner-driven with some of the best learning coming from colleagues and peers.  In the most recent release of The Platform we deal with learning and training, with a view to getting our audience to understand the benefits of traditional and non-traditional learning.

Looking at the right column again we can see wikis, social networking, blogs, and mashups. Utilizing all these forms of learning requires a high level of interest from the learner and a deep-rooted curiosity.  We termed this form of learning as “beachcombing” and you can see a video we made all about that below.

Now after watching that video surely our minds are opening up to the possibility that all those learning tools listed under e-learning 2.0 expand much further outside of the electronic world?

Has e-learning evolved so far that we should ditch the “e” like The Gorv mentioned in his comment yesterday?

Tomorrow we’ll look at this “learning” revolution.

 

Is e-learning yesterday’s news?

Are we out of date by even mentioning the term e-learning here? Is it even necessary these days? Let’s look at the facts.

According to learning entrepreneur Jay Cross he coined the term “elearning” in 1998.

Then Blackboard Inc. were awarded a patent for the term “e-learning” in January 2006.

A web backlash against Blackboard Inc. came about shortly after and a wiki was formed which attributes e-learning to Vannevar Bush all the way back in 1945 when he wrote an article about a proposed hypertext-like machine called the Memex.

Does this mean that if we offer “e-learning” as one of our services we run the risk of infringing on a patent set by a competitor?

Elearning, e-learning, electronic learning, enhanced learning  whatever it’s called it would appear to have been around for a while now.  Does this mean elearning is an old term though?  Does the term e-learning have any place in this technologically advanced world?

Our company, Marton House is of course synonymous with the term e-learning as it is a massive part of our company offering.  Though we quite often recommend instead a blended approach to learning, with facilitators and trainers supporting the material or vice versa with the materials supporting them.

So does that mean e-learning as a stand alone product has had it’s day?  On the whole probably not as the benefits of e-learning still outstrips many more traditional approaches.  It’s cost effective, it can be simultaneously rolled out in multiple locations world wide, it can feature data and accurate result tracking which is very difficult and slow to achieve in more traditional forms of delivery, and it can replicate and simulate complex systems during the learning process which means training mistakes do not occur on live customer facing systems.

Is it evolving though?

I’m currently doing some e-learning myself in the form of learning Spanish via my Nintendo DS.  Suddenly I find myself as the student rather than the deliverer and as much as I have every belief in this game and what it can offer me on my path to speaking Spanish there is sadly one thing that is sorely lacking – the human touch.  I met up with a buen amigo of mine at the weekend who speaks Spanish and for the first time I could put the individual words I had learnt into sentences.

Having someone to quiz and bounce off is sometimes the most vital need for the learning process.

The trick to effective training and learning is all about support.

So we mix e-learning with more traditional methods of delivery and we get “blended learning”, a term that does the job but doesn’t exactly get everyone in the room jumping up and down with excitement.  It’s not a new term either.

Then we have feedback and peer learning as an extension to that approach.

So should we be pioneering a new term?  Maybe it’s just me but electronic learning does make me think of the children’s learning aid machines from the 1980’s such as Speak ‘n’ Spell and blended learning makes me think of learning how to make cocktails.

We are dangerously close to the term “e-learning 2.0” cropping up and that makes me shudder.  It’s too easy these days to strap on the term “2.0” to anything which is new but, as the evidence shows it is happening across all areas (see web 2.0, business 2.0, Jake 2.0 etc.)

Tomorrow we take a look at the journey from “e-learning 1.0” to “e-learning 2.0“.  How did we get here and how on earth did we end up versioning everything?

Bye-Bye Binsey.

It’s a sad day today here at Marton House as one of our team is moving on to pastures new.

You may know her as Binsey in the blog-o-sphere but here at MH towers she is affectionately known by her real name, Sarah.

Sarah has been working with us here for three and a half years now and during that time has proven herself to be an invaluable asset. She is a team player and also a leader, but more than that she is one of the nicest people you could ever hope to meet.

The loss will not only be felt by us here it will also be a great loss to readers of this blog as Binsey was one of the most regular contributers to The Learning Journey.

She is off to take on the role of Head of Learning & Development for a national high street fashion company. The allure of the job is obvious: new challenges, greater responsibility and a hefty discount off her clothes shopping bill!

Sarah, we wish you every success in your new career.

We is gonna miss ya!

E.learning Age Team of the Year – Come On…

Last night saw us celebrating in style as we won the prestigious E.learning age Team of the Year at the 2007 e.learning age awards. The team faced stiff competition from 7 other shortlisted companies including Shell International and BT Retail at the swanky Sheraton Park Lane awards ceremony. The team were recognised for their work with Britannia Building Society during the integration of Bristol and West – pulling out all the stops to deliver an e-learning system in 12 weeks that enabled Britannia to meet a crucial deadline and potentially saved millions for the business.

A quote from Marton House’s multimedia developer Steven Andrews swung it for the judges:
“There was a great vibe when we were working with them and it really felt like we were making a big difference. I think this really helped us work so well together as a team – we all wanted to deliver a high quality product – even though we were really up against it. I look back now and think it’s amazing that we still managed to innovate and develop new techniques and approaches under such time pressures – and that’s what makes us a winning team.“

But this blog is about learning and sharing. So we’ve uploaded our entry document as a pdf. You can read it here.

And below is the moment it all happened…

Out with the Old…

…and in with the new. Marton House has a new website, so hats off to our very own Steve and Caron for making it happen.

It’s a much slicker and simpler affair than our previous sites and we hope it makes it easier for our clients to fully understand what Marton House is all about.

You can check it out by clicking here.

Whilst we’re on the subject Seth has a very good post on his site today about website design.

E-Learning – there’s no such thing

Bit of a strange point of view for someone who works for a company that creates E-Learning solutions, I agree. But hear me out …

Learning isn’t something ‘electronic’ … we learn today in the same way we always have learned:

• through seeing (reading and watching)
• through hearing (listening to teachers, parents, video, commentaries, etc)
• through doing (physical actions … with “E-Learning” via the keyboard and mouse – clicking, dragging and dropping)
• even through smelling and tasting things. These aren’t available at all in E-Learning (well, not yet).

We can’t “electronically learn” … we learn as we have always learnt, through our five senses and our experiences. Unlike the rapid change in technology in the last 20 years, we haven’t changed how we absorb information and behaviours over the last two decades. All that has happened is that we have a new way of being presented with the information.

So if there’s no such thing as E-Learning, what is there?

Well, I’d argue there’s a form of E-Teaching or E-Instructing … maybe even E-Facilitating or E-Presenting (none of which are snappy phrases, I agree). E-Learning is just another way of presenting information to the learner – a surrogate teacher / instructor / facilitator, often embellished with images, video and, all too often, lots of text to read. So maybe not the quantum leap that people thought …

That is why some people may have become so disappointed with E-Learning – they believed there was a new way to learn that would give amazing results, but in reality we still learn in the same way we always have.

So, there is no such thing as E-Learning … might have to start thinking about a new career, I suppose!