Learnlets

Secondary

Clark Quinn’s Learnings about Learning

Climbing the expertise ladder

7 December 2007 by Clark 4 Comments

Tony Karrer picked up on the Knowledge Planet + Shared Insights = Mzinga (means ‘beehive’ in Swahili) merger, and said “points to another direction – combination of LMS capability + community / social networking. I’m not sure I quite get what that means yet”. He got an explanation he liked from Dave Wilkins (KP, now Mzinga), but I have what I think is a somewhat different one.

To me, courses are at the bottom of Tony O’Driscoll’s map of the transition from novice to expertise. Communities are at the top. What I haven’t previously seen is an elegant transition between the two. I’ve argued that you really should wrap community around the courses at the bottom to support the transition from learner to participant/practitioner to expert/innovator. There are nuances about how it should be done, of course, like so much of what we do. Whether that’s in Mzinga’s direction is an open question.

Tony mentions Q2 Learning as someone else working in the space of learning and community, though while their one product meets the need of learning wrapped with community it’s not clear how that segues from there to their community product. And he cites Wilkin’s pointer to Gartner’s guess that “Enterprise social software will be the biggest new workplace technology success story of this decade.” Which resonates with my previous post about knowledge management.

I really believe that eCommunity and eLearning need to be integrated (it’s part of my eLearning strategy, after all), and I’m pleased to see some initial steps in this space, but as usual I have some specific ideas about how that should happen and I’ll be on the fence until it looks like someone’s really ‘getting’ it. Same with elearning and performance support & portals. LearningGuide seems to be doing it, but is it enough?   Eventually, you want courses, performance support, and community working together, and any two is only a partial step.

The opportunity to elegantly integrate the necessary components is sweet, but maybe loosely coupled components through web services (ala Jay Cross) will ultimately make more sense than a monolithic system. More flexibility, the ability to elegantly do each component rather than try to have a Swiss Army knife…

Comments

  1. brent schlenker says

    7 December 2007 at 10:39 AM

    The way of the monolithic software app is long dead. The LMS is a dead idea. Maybe they plan to kill the LMS side of the house and focus on the Shared Insights side. I think a marriage of tools like ClearspaceX and Buzzlogic is MUCH more appealing to me. Let’s facilitate the informal learning conversations and also measure the impact of those conversations and identify the key contributors in an organization. I don’t care if the LMS says that my people were all sitting somewhere at a certain time, or wasted 2-4 hours guessing multiple choice questions. But I do care if they are communicating with others, solving problems, and getting work done. Sharing and collaborating and learning IS the work these days…the important work anyways. I want to make that happen better, stronger, faster, and reward the people contributing to the collective achievement of business goals.
    Just my $.02 ;-)
    Cheers!

  2. David Wilkins says

    16 December 2007 at 5:42 AM

    I just wanted to respond to Brent’s comment. While we agree that it’s time to rethink the LMS, I think it’s a bit of stretch to say that LMS is a “dead idea.” Like many established LMS companies, we have some big names in our client list, many of whom are part of heavily regulated industries. Financial markets, manufacturing, mining, construction, healthcare etc… do lots and lots of compliance-related training. They need to be able to show that “x” person took and passed “y” course — and “course” in this case can’t mean “read a couple of blogs, added to the wiki, and watched a video.” It needs to be a structured thing with finite boundaries that can be replicated and produced for govt agencies or State Attorney General’s as required. This does not of course, preclude any of us in the LMS business from introducing deep, community-like features to the LMS: discussion, comments, ability to add your own user-generated “courses” or content, etc…

    Nor does it preclude us from rethinking the non-compliance side of the learning business. This part of the business requires a radical rethinking. This is where Brent’s comments are dead-on. Today, our only vehicle for delivering “courses” and “learning” is the LMS — even when it’s not the best choice, even when the rest of world is relying on a lot of what Brent is alluding to, even when user-generated content is becoming a standard paradigm in the way people “use” the internet.

    I don’t think Brent is off-base in the big picture, but specifically as to the need for LMS, this is not going to change anytime soon. Innovation needs to be inclusive of these needs or larger companies will be ill-served by what we’re doing.

    Dave Wilkins
    Senior Director of Content, Mzinga
    dwilkins@mzinga.com

  3. Clark says

    16 December 2007 at 12:35 PM

    I appreciate the reality check, but I’d like to see that they passed the “y” assessment, not survived the course. For some things a course might need to be available (e.g. when you need a full skill shift), but I don’t need to track whether they accessed the info, I care whether they can ultimately do the right thing!

    Agreed, there’s a role for the course, and making it available, but I want to track ability to perform, not evidence they endured a content dump. If reading a couple of blogs, adding to the wiki, and watching a video leads to the outcome, who cares? Which of course I don’t think it contrary to what you mean.

  4. David Wilkins says

    16 December 2007 at 6:00 PM

    Hey Clark,

    Yes, changed performance is ultimately the goal of all of this. And none of what you have written is contrary to any of this. We’re on the same page with you on all of this.

    I do think though that there is another element here that some folks might be missing. Companies often need to reproduce the exact training that a given learner “passed” (or at least have the capacity to reproduce it). Being able to pull up the exact training that a learner took 3 years ago is a real need for large organizations. While I don’t think there is a ton of “value” in this, from a legal and compliance perspective, it’s critical for certain subjects. It’s not clear to me (yet) how we (or anyone) can do this with more dynamic content like blogs, wikis, discussions etc… I’m not saying it can’t be done any other way, just that, for now, what we currently describe as “courseware” is one of the few mechanisms we have to easily encapsulate and store training content that must be reproduced at will. That said, this is something we will be able to eventually address based on some of the deep reporting stuff we’re doing on the “informal” side. And of course, for any content that is not compliance-related, everything you said is dead-on.

    Sorry if I wasn’t clear about this in my original post. I totally agree that results should matter more than the method. But when companies get in trouble due to an employee messing up, it’s critical that a company can show that they provided the “right” training, even if the employee didn’t carry through with it. Anyway, I hope my original post makes more sense in this light.

    Dave

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Clark Quinn

The Company

Search

Feedblitz (email) signup

Never miss a post
Your email address:*
Please wait...
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

Pages

  • About Learnlets and Quinnovation

The Serious eLearning Manifesto

Manifesto badge

Categories

  • design
  • games
  • meta-learning
  • mindmap
  • mobile
  • social
  • strategy
  • technology
  • Uncategorized
  • virtual worlds

Blogroll

  • Charles Jennings
  • Christy Tucker
  • Connie Malamed
  • Dave's Whiteboard
  • Donald Clark's Plan B
  • Donald Taylor
  • Harold Jarche
  • Julie Dirksen
  • Kevin Thorn
  • Mark Britz
  • Mirjam Neelen & Paul Kirschner
  • Stephen Downes' Half an Hour

License

Previous Posts

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006

Amazon Affiliate

Required to announce that, as an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Mostly book links. Full disclosure.