Training Industry Predictions for 2009

As we all know the economy has slow down, which has caused the training expense in the corporate and government as well. Training Industry has published the top 10 predictions in the learning and training arena for 2009 and me too feels the same will happen by looking at the current scenario. The top 10 predictions are:

1. Total spend for training services will decline by 10%
2. The Training Workforce in North America will decline by 11%
3. Re-engineering Activities for Training Organizations Will Increase
4. Investment in Customer Training Increases to 59.5% of Total Spend
5. Consolidation of Training Departments Will Increase
6. Fixed Resources Dedicated to Training Will Decrease
7. Supply Based Training Models Will Decrease
8. Availability of Informal Learning Content will Increase
9. Creation of User Generated Content Will Increase
10. Development of Compliance Based Training Increases

In North America, the total spend on training service is expected to be $116B compare to $129.2B in 2008. Per Training Industry report, the expected declines to be smaller in IT, energy and utilities, government, and construction verticals.

In 2008 the estimated total job market in training and learning related jobs was 568,000 professionals (308,000 worked in traditional corporate training organizations and 260,000 working for training suppliers or as independent training consultants). And in 2009 the job market for training related activities will drop by 65,000 (the supply and independent consulting side of the industry). It will bring down the job market to 503,000.

Per me, the slowdown will also affect the re-engineering activities in 2009. However Training Industry expects there would be some increase in the spending for the re-engineering activities.

As new products and services become more technology oriented, certainly there will be increase in the customer training and channel partner training programs. Customer training has traditionally been about generating revenues, now it is about corporate responsibility. In 2008, on average, 58% of a corporation’s spend for training was targeted to customers and channel partners. In 2009 there will mix of spend for customer training to employee training will grow by 1.5% to 59.5%.

Virtually 100% of Fortune 1000 companies have more than one training department, with some having more than 50 independently managed training groups. Decentralized business models were more advantageous when training was predominantly instructor led and delivered in conference and meeting rooms. With the increased adoption of technologies for learning delivery and administration, the advantages of consolidating resources are increasing.

Consolidation of decentralized organizations is a frequently used strategy when executives seek to eliminate duplication and realign the level of service provided by a corporate function in lean economic times. Whether their objective is to reduce costs, increase access to information about training activities and results, or improve economies of scale, you will see more companies consolidating duplicative activities and moving to a ‘federated’ or 'centralized' model for training administration and the delivery of non-proprietary training.

Reducing the number of fixed resources in non-core functional areas continues to be a strategy for managing costs in 2009. Training organizations are not immune to having to shift to a more virtual and variable workforce for design and delivery. Instructors and instructional designers are easily sourced on an as needed basis. The move to reduce the number of administrative resources will grow as more training goes online. You will see a strong emphasis on eliminating real estate and moving to variable classroom space. Procurement organizations will drive variable sourcing models. More companies will move beyond the use of contract instructors and instructional designers to out-tasking and outsourcing of training administration, vendor management, tuition reimbursement, and more.

Re-engineering training will lead to the creation of new business models. Training has traditionally operated under a supply based business model where you create portfolios of courseware, publicize a schedule, see how many people register for the courses, charge back the costs to the business, and measure success based on how many people attend. This is proving to be the most inefficient model for corporate training.

Informal Learning is similar to On the Job Training (OJT). And it is also about access to information when it is needed. With the introduction of the computer and then the internet, expectations have been high that there will be an increase in e-learning. The shift to date though has been more about access to information delivered in a less formal manner than courseware. Search for knowledge on the internet has become much more accepted than delivery of knowledge.

Informal learning improves how employees and customers get access to intellectual information when they need it and in a format which they need it the most. We will continue to see the use of mobile technologies, social networking, and innovative asynchronous learning environments. It’s not only about how it will be delivered, it’s about the design and packaging of information.

SME (subject matter expert) generated content, or user generated content, is the future core of online learning. New tools and technologies are being created to allow the subject matter expert to create rich media based content while being a novice in the use of internet based instructional design and authoring tools. This empowers SME’s within the lines of business to create rich media training for their peer employees at a very low cost, without anyone from the training organization having to touch the material.

With the increase in litigation costs from employees and customers suing companies because they were not properly trained, we are seeing an increase in compliance based training to mitigate the risk and cost of litigation. In the healthcare industry, compliance based training is the standard as the costs of not training is greater than the cost of training. This translates into strong growth for companies that provide testing and assessment services. Where the risk of failure is high, testing of skills will increase. Continuing medical education (CME) for doctors is highly regulated and mandatory.

Compliance training is also an important marketing tool. Automotives have used compliance training as a marketing tool for repair and maintenance technicians. There is a greater expectation that more professional skilled jobs must comply with training requirements as well as testing and assessment mandates.

In Response to The prediction made a year back by several training experts and Gurus for 2008 eLearning industry - how far they met the reality? Part1

Hi Folks, in responses to the post “The prediction made a year back by several training experts and Gurus for 2008 eLearning industry - how far they met the reality?” I have received many replies, many of them supported Clive Shepard and Tony Karrer.

Following are some interesting responses, please have a look:

From Clark Quinn -- "I also saw interest in looking at eLearning more strategically, and I predict this will continue to increase. Organizations are increasingly realizing that they need to move beyond courses, and even beyond content, and start looking at solutions."

I think that SLOW progress is being made, but many organizations are still focused on tactical actions, ie more courseware created to be delivered via their LMS -- instead of really thinking through the right learning medium/media to reach their target audience in their intended environment. I sure wish Clark's prediction had made more progress, as I think most of us (in this industry) would be having more fun once that progress is made!

Mark Oehlert's 2008 prediction I think hit it right - "Organizations will continue to fail to appreciate the strategic and differentiating nature that rich training and learning opportunities provide, that part of that failure will continue to rest with training departments' inability to articulate their alignment with the larger business goals."

Thus I agree, we achieved his "grumpy" prediction, that the most strategic progress will continue to be missed! Maybe in 2009, we can make more progress given the broad array of Web 2.0 tools which have become so easily available recently.

To make a classroom training more interesting how about using YawnBuster in your presentation?

Research suggests that Group Activities can significantly enhance attention in a classroom. If you are looking for an easy way to build and effortlessly facilitate Group Activities in your classroom sessions, look no further.

With Harbinger's another revolutionary product, YawnBuster, you will never wonder if your learners are with you. You will always have their attention, involvement and interest throughout the duration of the class.

Whether you are an instructor, teacher, trainer, educator or presenter, bring your classroom sessions alive with best-of-class Group Activities in YawnBuster.

With YawnBuster you can:
-Make classroom training more interesting
-Rest assured the whole class is with you and nobody is left behind
-Choose from a variety of Icebreakers, Activators, Group Exercises, Energizer Games and Closers.

For more information visit http://www.yawnbuster.com and for free trial download click here

The prediction made a year back by several training experts and Gurus for 2008 eLearning industry - how far they met the reality?

Elearning experts has made several forecast in January this year; am interested to know the resemblance of behavior of the industry with those experienced statements.

Like, most of the experts talked about eLearning 2.0, Virtual Classrooms and Rapid Development models will rule through out the year.

Also for your reference please find below some predictions I have looked at, by the gurus in 2008.

• Manish Mohan
• Benjamin Hamilton
• Clark Quinn's Learnets: 2008 Predictions for Learning
• John Shaffer - Learning Predictions for 2008
• Wendy Wickam
• Clive Shepard
• Stephanie Sandifer
• Jay Cross
• Tony Karrer - Ten Predictions for eLearning in 2008
• Karyn Romeis
• Gabe Anderson - "Articulate Will Dominate" in 2008
• Peter Isackson - InterCultural Musings
• Suzana Gutierrez - My prediction (in Portugese)
• Sergio Lima - here (also in Portuguese)
• Dan McCarthy
• Kapp Notes: 2008 Predictions, Remembrance and Challenges
• Oehlert's 2008 Predictions
• Christy Tucker: Predictions for E-Learning in 2008
• G-Cube: US Economy and e-Learning in 2008
• http://www.soprando.net/ap/previsoes-de-aprendizagem-para-2008

My own personal study by this time says that Manish Mohan, Clive Shepard and Tony Karrer's were talking close to the today's situation months back.
I welcome your thoughts and observations here and help me to analyze.

How Many People Does It Take to Make a Success: A Look at Qwitter

The following post is from eLearn Magazine Editor-in-Chief Lisa Neal's blog "How Many People Does It Take to Make a Success: A Look at Qwitter" After reading, I find this good to keep on my post as its describes one of the way the people are using web 2.0 technologies.

In Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations, Clay Shirky discusses why some social networks stick while others collapse. Wikipedia is one of his examples of a success. When I looked at Qwitter, my first reaction was it was a failure because there were only 614 people using it. Qwitter, a cleverly-named initiative from TobaccoFreeFlorida that harnesses Twitter, is promoted as “a social tool designed to help you quit smoking” through keeping track of daily cigarettes and feelings about smoking. They also provide tips. That 614 people signed up for Qwitter seems low given that 750 people sign up for Twitter daily and 3 million people use it.
My initial reaction was reinforced by looking at how Qwitter was used, since many of the users had started in April (due to launch publicity, I speculated) and had stopped using it after a few - or just one - use. This is notable given that many Twitter users tweet many times daily. Looking through Qwitter users, I finally found a recent and more sustained user who tweeted pretty regularly for the past month, although there didn’t seem to be any cessation taking place. Click here to read more.

Is it cheaper? Offshore Elearning Development

Given that it's now common for organizations to outsource development work to India and China, is it true to say that it is still cheaper than developing the material in house in or are there other value adds one would need to consider?

Offshore elearning development can be cheaper, but it's important to consider the type of training, availability and stability of written content, clarity of the ISD process, communication channels and goals of the initiative.

In general, the direct costs for off-shoring elearning development are cheaper. However, without clear stable content, a well documented process for providing and reviewing content and solid channels for providing and reviewing work in process, slippages, re-work and delays can eat deeply into cost savings.

Additionally, it has been my experience that some training projects are much easier to offshore than others. When the training covers simple, explicit topics it's relatively easy to offshore. As the learning becomes more complex, it becomes increasingly difficult to offshore.

As with any elearning development or complex project, partnership and teaming experience can be great levers for increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the effort. If you have an offshore partner you work with often, they will be more familiar with your content, processes, systems, and methods of communication and potential bottlenecks. The more you work with together, the quicker and better will be the process. If you are looking at costing projects, be sure to think through what this means in terms of the value chain. When you do sign a contract with an offshore partner, make sure the terms are written in such a way that you can either capture or share such savings. In the long run, that will pay you huge dividends.

The cost of creating a simple tutorial can vary greatly. It depends on tools used, whether the cost is based on straight development, or whether time for other components in the process are integrated into the per hour factor used to cost the effort. If you are paying for your partner to make storyboards, complete a detailed design, conduct multiple reviews, add graphics, conduct multiple SME reviews to get content, test the deliverable, load it to an LMS, manage the pilot and complete other critical steps in the process, the per hour rate can look staggering. However, having a skilled partner handle such activities can save time and money. Likewise, it’s important to understand the skill level of the developers who will be working on the project. If they know the various elearning tools required for the project and are familiar with Instructional design, and can work to ask questions and gather unknown information, you will pay more per hour, but end up with a much better, cheaper deliverable.

Serious Games and Related Concepts...

This post focuses on the domain of serious games. There are, however, related and sometimes overlapping domains, such as e-learning, edutainment, game-based learning, and digital game-based learning.

E-learning is a rather general concept that refers to computer enhanced learning, computer-based learning, interactive technology, and commonly, distance learning.

Edutainment – education through entertainment – was popular during the 1990s with its growing multi-media PC market. In general, edutainment refers to any kind of education that also entertains even though it is usually associated with video games with educational aims. The primary target group was preschool- and young children, with focus on reading, mathematics, and science. However, edutainment software failed success since it resulted in what has been described as “boring games and drill-and-kill learning”.

Computer video games for non-entertainment purposes were developed long before the edutainment era, however, and as edutainment failed to prove profitable – and technical advancements in providing realistic settings grew, and multiplayer gaming developed – the concept of serious games was re-examined during the late 1990s. With the U.S. Army’s release of the video game America’s Army in 2002, the serious games movement got started. The same year the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholar in Washington, D.C. founded the Serious Games Initiative, and the term “serious games” became widespread.

In general terms, serious games are associated with ‘games for purposes other than entertainment’. Serious games encompass the same goals as edutainment, but extend far beyond teaching facts and rote memorization, and instead include all aspects of education, teaching, training, and informing and at all ages.

Game-based learning (GBL) is described as “a branch of serious games that deals with applications that have defined learning outcomes”. Others consider game-based learning and serious games more or less the same. GBL has the potential of improving training activities and initiatives by virtue of, e.g., its engagement, motivation, role playing, and repeatability.

Digital game-based learning (DGBL) is closely related to GBL, with the additional restriction that it concerns digital games. DGBL is the “newest trend in e-learning”

Also please have a look at the following image taken from University of Skövde, Sweden School of Humanities and Informatics report on Serious Games which clearly describes the differences between Serious Games and Entertainment Games.