“E-Learning and Change Management
– The Challenge”
by Lesley Mackenzie-Robb
Vantaggio Ltd
Little
Orchard
Yeovilton
Somerset
BA22 8EZ
Tel:
07730 609 646 & 01935 841433
Email:
lesley@vantaggio-learn.com
©.
Lesley Mackenzie-Robb, Vantaggio Ltd, England, May
2004
Contents:
- Introduction Page
3
- Definitions, Status and Roles Page
4
- Case Studies
3.1
University
for Lloyds TSB Page 9
3.2
Rolls-Royce
plc Page
10
3.3
Somerfield Group Page
12
3.4
IDeA Page
14
- The Future Page
16
- Summary Page
17
- Acknowledgements Page
18
- About the author Page
18
1. Introduction
Much has been
written about e-learning being a lot to do with change management, but with
little explanation of what this actually means.
The hypothesis here is that e-learning is everything to do with change
management, and that the two – although practised as separate disciplines – are
inextricably linked. Furthermore, in the
same way that e-learning can be a force for change, change management can also
be a force for e-learning.
The question
is, does it matter and if so, how? Well,
the contention is that it matters a lot,
that e-learning, by its very nature, introduces change to both the
people and business dimensions of an organisation, on any scale. And good business practitioners know that you
cannot change the way in which an organisation works simply by implementing the
change. It must be analysed, measured,
communicated and planned. It must be
managed.
Getting to
basics, the process of learning is concerned with attitudes, values, skills and
knowledge, and has the aim of effecting a change in performance and behaviour,
and so achieving the objective of adding value to an organisation. In this environment, the true potential of
e-learning lies principally in the ability to provide on-tap learning –
learning available anytime, anywhere – combined with the tools to measure learning
outcomes, and a network to enable collaboration. Therefore, the potential for an organisation
is that it can be in a state of continuous learning – continuous change. In this way, e-learning has the potential to
change the dynamics of an enterprise, which is the fundamental aim of the
change management practitioner.
There is a
common perception that e-learning has not really delivered on its potential nor its promises. 2003 saw the publication of a raft of
surveys and case studies with this as their general conclusion. Is it the case that e-learning has been
tarred and feathered as an underachiever for the simple reason that the issue
of change management has not been considered and addressed as a fundamental
part of the process?
As a foundation
for the paper, research was undertaken with four new case studies drawn from a
cross section of business: a manufacturer, a government agency, a retailer and
a financial services company. All are
involved in implementing e-learning throughout their organisations, all at
different stages, and all took a different approach, but none-the-less
encountered common problems and issues.
What this paper
sets out to do is to define what e-learning is within the change model, and to
describe a new approach, with a strong argument that e-learning must evolve if
it is going to attain a valid and valuable role in private and public sector
enterprises. In fact, it needs to become
something more aligned to “e-transform”.
2. Definitions, Status and Roles
In order to understand
where we need to go, we need to understand where we are, and where we have come
from, so that we have a clearer idea of the issues at play.
The starting
point is to recognise that e-learning and change management must be seen
against a broader background of often conflicting issues and dynamics, and the
shifting sands of corporate structure and organisational change. Secondly, there are ever increasing demands
on organisations, commercial or otherwise, to achieve a state of continuous
improvement and innovation, with the aim of becoming more competitive. And they seek to fulfil a lot of this through
the introduction of new technologies such as intranet portals and information /
knowledge management systems. Curiously,
e-learning is not regarded as a core tool in all of this.
However, the
endeavour of attaining continuous innovation can only be satisfied through a
perpetual mix of existing thinking with new thinking, new experiences and new
ideas: in other words, an environment of collaborative learning, where the
value of the network increases in proportion to its size. This concept lies at the heart of the change
management model, but is not fully expressed in its e-learning counterpart. So, we’re only dealing with half of the
picture.
E-Learning – the issues
The status of
training has always been problematic. It
is perceived as a separate activity from the core business, immeasurable and
unquantifiable: in other words, it’s not perceived to be a core business
process, but rather a “cost” or “overhead”, which is frequently the first in
the firing line when budgets need to be cut.
The e-learning proposition played heavily on this aspect of training by
promoting the financial savings to be gained through its introduction as a
replacement for expensive and time consuming classroom based training sessions,
in much the same way as a plug-in or sticking plaster might be applied. This, of course created a classic “Catch 22”
where, on the one hand, the potential cost benefits of e-learning proved very attractive,
but at the expense of perpetuating a perception of training as a singular and
isolated activity on the other. As long
as it remains seen as an overhead cost, as opposed to a business process,
learning and training will remain in the fiscal firing line.
Added to this,
there is far too much emphasis placed on e-learning as a product, a menu of
items to choose from, bespoke or otherwise.
Again, this attitude limits the role of e-learning, and keeps it firmly
on the sidelines of the enterprise, and off the agenda of top management. Its impact on the business is measured in
terms of money saved and training outcomes for each individual. Again, a limited horizon. In this model, e-learning remains nothing
more than an ad hoc tool, an adjunct to corporate activity, supported by top
management but not integral to their enterprise management agenda.
Another part of
the e-learning problem lies with definitions.
The vocabulary of the industry is ill-defined and persistently
misunderstood or misinterpreted. Just
ask four different people for their definition of e-learning, and you are more
than likely to receive four different answers.
This is compounded by a lack of understanding of the role of technology
in all of this, and the impact that technology based training might have on an
enterprise from the inside out. Of
course, this is not an entirely unexpected result where you have a relatively
new industry and practice that relies on a loose and often conflicting alliance
between educationalists and trainers, technologists, and designers: each has
their own language, and set of priorities.
You would think
that some or all of these issues would be addressed and resolved through the
practice of developing and implementing a properly researched and thought
through e-learning strategy. Not
so. Some organisations which have taken
this approach have floundered, others have found
themselves throwing them away. Still
others have achieved a measure of success without even having one. Why is this?
More than likely these strategies are narrow and wholly focused on
training needs analysis, training objectives and cost reductions. Any facet that could remotely be considered
to lie within the realm of change management will be limited to some vaguely eschewed
“campaign of awareness”. And, in some cases, nothing at all. Again, the issue is one of definition.
Taking these
three issues together – the status of training, the role of technology and
shifting definitions – you end up with something called the “problem
triangle”. The elements are mutually
dependent: if one is not working, none of them will.
Having said
that, Laura Overton’s recently published study on “Linking Learning to
Business”* does reveal some positive developments, and
its key findings describing the common factors in success would appear to
support most of the current thinking on e-learning, namely:
- That the e-learning strategy is
aligned to and fulfils a core business strategy from the outset, and continuous
integration with multiple business processes ensures ongoing
sustainability;
- That learner motivation is
understood and developed as a high priority;
- That quick wins are delivered early
on in the implementation process;
- That investment is made in various
support mechanisms;
- That success criteria and
measurement are varied on a project by project basis but uses an agreed
set of criteria for reporting to management;
- That strong investment is made in
communications with all stakeholders at project launch and on a continuous
basis.
But, there is
nothing here that relates to a proactive relationship with change management
practice. And e-learning remains, for
the vast majority, stuck somewhere between the training department and the IT
department. Could it be that the lack of
addressing the change agenda has kept it here?
Nowhere do we
see the visionary who sees e-learning as communication, as the language and
enabler of change and who draws a picture of an outcome not based on
individuals, but on an organisation as a whole.
This is what is meant by “e-transform”: the vision to achieve a
perpetual state of transformation and therefore innovation whose currency is
not money, but knowledge.
So what is
change management, what is its relationship with e-learning, and does it
matter? If it does, what can a new
change management based approach do to further success?
Change Management
Change
Management – sometimes referred to as “mess management” - is a totally separate professional
discipline and body of practice, with its own models that are not too
dissimilar from those that we see associated with e-learning. Its aim is to effect managed change in both
the people and business dimensions of an enterprise simultaneously. Practitioners
and theorists are concerned with internal and external drivers for change; an
internal driver can be, for instance, a need to streamline the time it takes to
move an idea from the drawing board to the production line whereas an external
driver could be a new piece of legislation that introduces new mandatory
responsibilities for a commercial enterprise.
In reality, all drivers have their root externally, and most enterprises
are in a constant state of enquiry, movement and change. It doesn’t, however, follow that this process
is managed in any meaningful or effective way.
The point is that the more able an enterprise is to embrace change, the
more successful it will be. And, if
change is concerned with learning, then learning should be at the very heart of
this movement.
The central
theme of change management revolves around the act of moving from one state to
another and its principle diagnostic tools are known as “change goals”.
Transform goals describe the differences between the current state and the future desired state – the “why”. Reduce goals describe what needs to be actioned or put in place in order to reduce the transform
goals to zero – the “what”. Apply goals
describe how this will be done – the “how”.
It’s a bit like the Training Needs Analysis process.
So far, on a
superficial level, the approach to both change management and e-learning would
appear to be similar. But there is one
major difference. Change management
tends to focus on the whole organisation, and analyses the impact that change will
have enterprise wide, on the basis that something is only an end or a means
when it is in relation to something else.
The change management practice determines these relationships in order
to forecast a valid outcome of a change process. Conversely, with e-learning, it is sometimes
regarded as a bonus that people use e-learning in a way that had not been
anticipated – in other words, unplanned!
Another interesting and fundamental difference between the two practices
is that change management extols the virtues and indeed necessity of “tossing
out the rule book” from the outset. If
change is to be effected in an enterprise, it will not happen through adhering
to pre-existing dogma. With e-learning,
the practice has over time become almost hidebound by rules and guidelines
allegedly drawn from best practice. The
principle, therefore, with e-learning is based on the idea that if it worked in
this way with one organisation, it will work similarly with another, which is
not strictly speaking true. In fact, in
almost all of the case studies contained in this paper there was a marked and
pointed disavowal of the generic e-learning approach, but tempered with a
desire to communicate with other e-learning users not so much for the purpose
of swopping best practice experiences, but more for
sharing issues and problems.
A widely
accepted change model is ADKAR†. This is based on a five stage process:
Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability and Reinforcement. The figure below illustrates how this model
works.
Post – Implementation Implementation Concept &
Design Business Need
The Awareness
stage determines the need for change and Desire focuses on generating a desire
to participate and support the change.
Knowledge is concerned with determining how to change, which results in
the Ability to implement the requirements of the change, whether it be new
skills and behaviours, or procedures and processes. The Reinforcement phase is critical in
sustaining the change post-implementation, and in e-learning terms, would
relate to the provision of support and personal reward, for instance. In a perpetual state of transformation, the
enterprise is constantly reviewing and analysing its business needs to ensure
that it is always aware of any need for change.
This, of course, links back to the earlier stated concept of continuous
innovation through collaborative learning.
Like
e-learning, change management research shows the absolute imperative of having
top level sponsorship for any project.
With change management, it’s easy to see why, as such a project is all
about effecting a change to a larger or lesser degree in how the business
works. In reality, e-learning projects
seek and get no more than a top level sanction (mainly because of the budgets
involved), and are not seen by senior management as tools for enterprise
change. They are seen as tools for
enterprise cost-cutting and pragmatism.
Change
Management has four recognised strategies:
|
Rational-Empirical
|
The change
strategy is based on appealing to human self-interest through offering
incentives. |
|
Normative-Reeducative |
This strategy
has the tenet that people tend to adhere to social and cultural normalities,
and therefore if these are re-defined, commitment to the new values can be
achieved through communication and education. |
|
Power-Coercive |
Here, the
approach accepts that people will do as they are told, so the change strategy
is based on the exercise of authority with, where necessary, the imposition
of penalties for failure to comply. |
|
Environmental-Adaptive |
People are
adaptable. This approach is based on a
gradual transference from an old environment / organisation to a new one. |
In almost every
case, e-learning has been introduced to an organisation using the
Power-Coercive approach, or a combination of this and the Rational-Empirical approach. And probably not for
considered reasons, but more for practical and financial reasons.
Interestingly
enough, a survey carried out in 2003 by an American Change Management* research and publishing company in the
change management field concluded that the key factors to success were
extremely similar to those highlighted by Laura Overton, but with a much
stronger emphasis on methods of overcoming resistance barriers.
3. Case Studies
The case
studies were chosen to reflect a cross section of business activity, and
different levels of e-learning adoption.
These are all based on indepth discussions
with key people within each organisation.
The intention was to draw out different approaches to and experiences of
e-learning, and to gain an understanding of the impact that e-learning had on
both the businesses and their people.
Did e-learning bring about change at the enterprise level, and what can
be learned from these examples?
3.1 University for Lloyds TSB
Background
Some six years
ago, Lloyds used around 800 standalone PCs for e-learning throughout the
organisation. There were two key
catalysts that brought about a sea-change in the approach to and use of
e-learning. First, Lloyds and TSB
merged, which naturally raised a plethora of management issues. Second, around 3 years ago, the Lloyds TSB
intranet arrived. But it took one more
catalyst to realise the importance of this: a senior manager with a background
in Sales, IT and Training. Although the
intranet had been built with core business processes in mind, this manager saw
it as a communications channel for learning.
Today the
e-learning system consists of three channels:
- Standalone PCs, which clocked
around 150,000 sessions in the last year
- Intranet, which logs 750,000 hits
on average each month
- Internet, which logs between 15-16,000 hits per month.
- It is expected that a new online
testing system will deliver 1.6 million tests during 2004.
Altogether the
University for Lloyds TSB provides training services to around 70,000 employees
and has two residential centres plus a further 35 training centres around the
Experience
and impact
Up until now,
the use of e-learning has been driven predominantly by “needs must”, starting with the merger
of the two institutions and the need, for example, to create and implement one
single computerised counter system. With
so many people to train in such a short space of time, alternatives to
traditional methods had to be considered and e-learning provided the
solution. However, before this could be
tackled, there was one very practical issue that needed to be resolved. Until 4 years ago, all TSB staff had never
used a Windows system before. Rather
than instigate a Windows training program, instead Lloyds TSB created cybercafés inside all main buildings, which allowed people
to “play” and get familiar with Windows in an informal setting which is an
ideal approach to adult learning, inspiring a sense of comfort, confidence and
security. So, in this instance, a
normative re-educative approach was taken, and it worked.
Between then
and now, the e-learning strategy has been very much project based, and guided
by a cross-discipline Strategy and Faculty Board comprising board level
directors. It was their role to ensure
that the learning agenda was continuously reviewed against the company’s agenda
and business needs. This board also had
an agenda of change and leadership development.
This structure will shortly change and, for the first time, Lloyds TSB
will have a Human Resources Director sitting on the main board, whose remit
includes e-learning.
A major change
is the introduction of an enterprise wide Performance and Learning Management
System (PLMS), giving the ability to link performance to competencies for the
first time. The impact that this system
is likely to have on the business and its processes, the way that learning is
experienced, and the way that people work is massive, and planned for. Effort has been invested in ensuring that
some cornerstone functions of the PLMS are already in place, such as the
concept of managed career and personal development. The objective is that the PLMS will be
operating “as part of the business as usual” within two years. It is clear that in their planning, Lloyds
TSB have drawn on the experience and vision of a multi-disciplinary team who,
although not perhaps using the precise terminology of change management, have
demonstrated the application of change goals to better understand why changes
are needed, what needs to change and how, and, most importantly, what the
impact will be on the enterprise as a whole.
It is
interesting to note that Lloyds TSB do not rate their success in terms of
statistics on course completion, for instance.
Quite rightly, success is considered to have been achieved if the
learning objectives are achieved – that is, an assessment passed. Taking a pragmatic point of view, completion
of a learning course is irrelevant, so long as the learning outcome is
achieved. On anecdotal evidence it has
been noted that where a group of people from the same working environment
attend a course, typically one will complete all of the learning content. That person becomes the unelected “expert” in
the topic!
The evidence
from Lloyds TSB shows that the organisation is following a change agenda rather
than an e-learning specific one. The
emphasis is on measuring a change in knowledge as opposed to course completion,
which empowers the individual to customise their own use of the learning
offering.
3.2
Rolls-Royce plc
Background
Rolls-Royce,
unlike many enterprises, has a long standing training culture, stemming back to
the 1960s when the company regularly recruited and trained around 1,000
apprentices at any one time.
The company’s
first toe into the e-learning bucket, like Lloyds TSB, was driven by a “needs
must” approach when in 1991 a new manufacturing system was introduced which
required the rapid training of a very large group of people. Traditional classroom methods were considered
to be impractical and prohibitively costly, whereas e-learning, delivered via
Learning Resource Centres, seemed to offer the best solution. A couple of interesting and early lessons in
change management were learned.
First, the
e-learning program rapidly became obsolete because as people started to use the
manufacturing software system, having gone through the training, they started
to adapt and alter the way that they used it.
Although it was widely used during implementation, the subsequent cost
of revising the program’s contents proved prohibitive, and it was not a
long-term solution for refresher training or new starters
post-implementation. Second, it became
obvious that there was an issue concerning IT skills levels, which had not been
anticipated. So, in this case, the
introduction of e-learning brought about a change in the way that people did
things, and therefore how the business operated, but this could not be readily
reflected back into the training content itself and so the training could not
be sustained. However, this program did
provide the foundation for the establishment of Learning Resource Centres
across the company’s main
Today,
Rolls-Royce has six training centres in the
Experience
and Impact
The company’s
early forays into e-learning proved invaluable as it allowed a considered
approach to be taken during the early hype of e-learning in the late
1990s. The lesson had been learnt that
there were no easy cost savings to be made in the company from e-learning, and
it allowed a more planned and strategic approach to be taken. This time, it can be argued that change
management acted as a force for e-learning (within a blended learning environment). During the mid 1990s, Rolls-Royce
transitioned from a predominantly British based company operating in the
Aerospace industry, into one with a broadened business portfolio and with 40%
of its employees now based outside of the
The introduction
of e-learning at the enterprise level was therefore an enabler of this
change. Moreover, in a mirror of the
organisation’s transition from a predominantly “function-based” to a customer
facing business, the company’s approach to learning was restructured into a
structure similar to that of a corporate university, taking a lifelong learning
approach. Now, employees have access to
professional development frameworks, encompassing generic as well as profession
specific learning.
Significantly,
Rolls-Royce recognises the value of extending the Return on Investment model to
measure the benefits of learning against business performance because this gives a measure to
change. Moreover, in order to fully
express and address change issues, it is vital that the e-learning strategy is
embedded within the company’s overall learning strategy which, in turn, is
closely aligned to the company’s business strategy as a whole.
As a
fundamental step forward in this process, the Learning and Career Development
Group have effectively begun the process of change management by determining
the desired future state versus the present one, and therefore the
identification of the change goals. Some
of these issues are focused on:
- Ensuring stakeholders within the
main Rolls-Royce businesses are involved in guiding the direction and
policies around e-learning.
- Addressing the IT skills levels by
forming links with local colleges who can provide the necessary upskilling courses.
- The need to create consistency and
manage and amount of “freelance” e-learning products being created and/or
used by different elements of the company, by applying corporate policies
and standards.
- Developing a solution for the time
scheduling problem, where there is a perception that it is more difficult
to spend an hour at the desk doing a piece of e-learning than it is to
take a day out at a training centre.
The plan is to introduce “learning zones” at places of work so that
people don’t have to sit and learn at their own desktops.
- Providing better access to hardware
facilities for factory floor employees (frustratingly, the IT department
keeps on raising its head as a major hindrance to the roll out of
e-learning). An inspired solution
involved the piloting of factory floor kiosks.
- Evaluation of the benefits of
moving towards a single HR system for the company and a single Learning
Management System, from the current position of having different tactical
solutions put into place by different parts of the business. [The tactical solutions being necessary
to achieve progress in an affordable and technically acceptable way].
- The control, management and
validation of learning content.
Rolls-Royce saw
e-learning as an enabler for enterprise wide change. Now, e-learning has become a force for change
in its own right, with points of delivery embedded throughout the organisation,
from desktops to classrooms and factory floors.
3.3
Somerfield Group
Background
The Somerfield Group first “dabbled” in e-learning some 8-10
years ago, introducing it to facilitate instore IT
training, and this immediately raised very similar issues to those experienced
by Rolls Royce. This first step into
e-learning evidenced that when used for IT training it would become obsolete
very quickly, typically within 12 months of implementation. Again, similarly to Rolls Royce, they found
that although it was useful for initial or implementation training, it was
useless for refresher or ongoing training.
Once a person had completed the course and started to use the software
tools themselves, the training content would become irrelevant. Not a
particularly good start but what it did show was that unless the outcome of the
training in the wider sense was addressed at the outset as a planned method for
change, the investment in the training was ephemeral and not future-proofed.
Somerfield again took up the e-learning toolset
starting around 3 years ago. This time,
two drivers were responsible for this fresh look, both a result of enterprise
wide change. In the first, a
cost-cutting exercise had effectively reduced the traditional training capacity
to almost zero. Trainers by their nature
are “unseen”: they’re normally training in a classroom. The results of their training were seen as
unproductive and difficult to measure, particularly in financial terms. Training was seen by senior management as a
corporate activity not a core business process.
Much of the responsibility for training was subsequently devolved to the
Store Manager (SM) or Deputy Store Manager (DSM). The result was a vacuum. There was no way of ensuring the effectiveness
of the SMs or DSMs in this
role, and the quality of training relied heavily on how good the existing
resources were. In the majority of cases, these consisted of
books.
The
implementation of an enterprise wide broadband intranet brought with it a
possible solution. Although this was
designed solely to support management systems such as stock taking and finance
tools, others saw its wider possibilities.
And, like the Lloyds TSB case, it took a senior manager with a
background in both IT and training to act as the catalyst for change.
Experience
and Impact
In the initial
stages, the intranet was used to provide access to electronically held training
manuals, the main advantage of which was an assurance that the most up to date
versions were in circulation. However,
barriers were discovered: some people simply did not like reading from screen,
so all this really did was shift the responsibility for printing elsewhere!
With
considerable foresight, when the Group purchased a new HR and Payroll
management system, it chose a solution that also came with the capability to
expand, providing integrated training records and performance tracking.
This new
management system was just one aspect of an enterprise wide change. Acquisition of new businesses into the Group
had created an environment of multiple-cultures, and there was a need to
rationalise operations across the business as a whole. With so much change now coming into play, mostly
managed by an HR implementation team, one of the most profound effects was a
realisation that people needed to be trained: they needed to have proper
appraisals, career paths and learning objectives. There was a real sense of desire to make
training part of the corporate culture and to help people feel more valued.
The Group had
no master plan for e-learning, no vision for a future state. What happened came about through an organic
process of collaboration between key individuals, all with different
backgrounds and experiences. As with any
enterprise, a business case is required to gain access to funding for new
projects. Here, the business case has
involved the development of a pilot e-learning program. The training group considered a number of
change projects as possible topics for a pilot.
It’s interesting to note that, although Induction is an obvious topic to
use for a pilot project, particularly in Somerfield’s
case where the average staff turnover is around 35%, it was considered by the
team to be too risky. Induction is
something that all staff do, which would make it a highly visible pilot, and would
run the risk of encountering barriers such as low IT skills levels or
discomfort with the idea of learning via a PC.
Instead, the
team chose “Cash Management in Stores”. The use of e-learning in this instance not
only supports the corporate change agenda but proactively fulfils its
aims. Historically, only one or two
people in any one store are trained to perform cash management. From a corporate perspective, this needed to
change. Each store should have at least
three people with this skill. Also, it
would no longer be a dedicated job, so those who traditionally performed cash
management could be freed to perform other roles within the store. The outcome of the training would be easy to
measure, for obvious reasons!
So, Somerfield’s pilot e-learning course is being used as a
mechanism to bring about an active change in the way that stores operate, and
at the same time, will prove that e-learning can fulfil the role of an embedded
business process, and not just a corporate activity.
3.4
Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA)
Background
IDeA was established some 4 years ago with
the main objective of supporting internal improvement within the 400 local
councils of
The Agency
provides the councils with practical tools, starter packs, seminars, support
and advice. It also provides a portal
called the Learning Pool, through which tools and content can be accessed. In essence, it’s acting in a catalyst role,
facilitating the debate on issues such as the role of e-learning. Since its launch in February 2003, over 60
local councils in
Experience
and Impact
Of all of the
four case studies included in this paper, the IDeA
case is probably the most accessible in terms of demonstrating the relationship
between e-learning and change management.
And, perhaps the most important impact that e-learning is having is on
the way that councils communicate both internally and externally.
The IDeA approach is to help councils to develop their
e-learning resources and skills organically, rather than starting out with a
specific e-learning strategy, and so encourage a more “bottom up”
development. It is therefore a normative
– reeducative approach, which is important in
developing new processes and methods that are sustainable over time. The IDeA approach
is strategically important: as a result of placing emphasis on developing
internal e-learning development capabilities, what we are seeing is an increase
in cross-departmental collaboration, and so, in a very real sense, the act of
developing an e-learning module becomes, for those involved, a collaborative
learning experience and a platform for communication. Change.
It is true that
in many cases, councils are perceived to have a view that e-learning is all
about tools and content, and that it is not yet seen as a business process, but
rather as an extension to training. In
fact, the experience is that the sales messages and arguments put forward by
e-learning vendors are actually not helping in achieving this perceptive
transformation. There is a strong
motivation to sell e-learning as a product or range of products rather as a
single embedded business process. It is
not unusual to find a council with up to 50 different e-learning products
gathering dust on a shelf, unused and irrelevant. Also, the complexity and sophistication of
some of these products is viewed as a very real barrier.
As a catalyst
and facilitator, one of the roles of IDeA is to
“harvest” examples of good practice – success stories - and make them visible
to all of its subscribers. One of these
concerns a council in the northwest of
This is
important because it evidences the concept that all departments will view
e-learning content and objectives differently.
For instance, a trainer might devote few resources to the development of
an Induction module, seeing it as an internal training device only. Someone higher up in the organisation, or
perhaps someone in marketing, might take the view that an Induction module
should be given a high priority because of its potential use outside the
organisation in, for instance, attracting new recruits, or promoting the
council in general. So, what e-learning
is doing within council organisations is prompting debate, acting as the glue
for collaboration, and engendering a broader approach.
Another example
of how e-learning can effect a change in the way that councils work is through
visibility which leads to organisational learning. For example, best practice operated by one
department and captured into an e-learning program becomes easily available to
other departments. Again, it’s acting as
a communications channel for knowledge, and encouraging sharing and collaboration.
E-learning is
in its infancy in this environment, but clear lessons are being learned through
experimentation and sharing. This
organic phase can be called a piloting stage, similar to that of the Somerfield Group.
And like the Somerfield Group, when this pilot
stage reaches the point of being able to deliver and evidence tangible
benefits, it needs to move forward to a higher more strategic level of
responsibility. There are already plenty
of case studies that demonstrate the financial rewards gained through the use
of e-learning: those derived from a transformation in the way that people and
departments communicate are still anecdotal but are on the increase.
The biggest
issue that IDeA and its customers have is that of
support. Ironically, in order to make
e-learning work and to step out of the “it’s there so use it” attitude,
significant investment may be required in people to act in a support role. In other words, it may be necessary to
undermine the original business case for introducing e-learning in the first
place – that people costs can be saved.
4. The Future
The starting
point of this paper was the hypothesis that e-learning has not reached its full
potential because practitioners, commissioners and users have failed to address
it within the change management environment.
The approach has been too narrow, too product centric, too training
centric. Little heed has been paid to
how the implementation will bring about change in both the business and its
people, and, as stated earlier, unplanned outcomes have often been perceived to
be a bonus.
E-learning
needs to evolve. E-learning vendors need
to get a wider agenda. E-learning
commissioners need to think beyond the training objectives.
For the last
few years, as the e-learning offering has moved from desirable to necessary,
the debate has been consumed almost to the point of asphyxia by issues such as
definitions of learning objects, interoperability standards and pedagogical
values. Much emphasis has been placed on
the need to “compel” learners with exciting content to meet their expectations
for high levels of quality and engagement.
Frankly, learners’ expectations are that their skills and competencies
are developed, that they are trained not entertained. At least two of the organisations interviewed
for this paper expressed the strong view that content needs to be fit for
purpose: it does not need to be “play station”.
So, what might
a new model look like? First the agenda
– which breeds the requirement – needs to be expanded.
- Analysis: of the current state versus the future
state, based on consideration of the drivers for change;
- Diagnosis: of the transform goals, the differences
between the current and future states;
- Strategic: what
needs to be done or put in place to achieve the transform goals, in other
words, what are the reduce goals;
- Tactical: how
will this be achieved, what are the apply goals;
- Awareness: consideration
of sponsors, learner profiles, approaches, communications and
collaborative planning;
- Desire: implementing
quick wins, rewards strategies, achievements, “What’s in it for me”,
cascade sponsors;
- Tools and Resources: creating a platform for knowledge
communication, sharing of experience, development of ability, putting into
place the people, networks and evaluators that will support the enterprise.
- Reinforcement: mechanisms for sustaining the change and evolving it on a
continuous basis.
The e-transform
model can be visualised in this way:
Business
Dimension
The aim is to
achieve perpetual change through collaboration and sharing of knowledge in a
way that supports and enables the process of change both in the people and
business dimensions of an organisation = continuous innovation = knowledge
innovation enterprise.
5. Summary
The background against which e-learning has
made its appearance is one of technology convergence. This is forcing enterprises to look at how they work, and why, and make fundamental changes in the way that they operate from
the bottom up. If e-learning is to fulfil a valuable and
vital role in this future, it must integrate with and share this change agenda.
The debate must
move on from cost and time benefits to harness the real promise of the
e-learning proposition. As the case
studies have shown, the introduction of e-learning at any level within an
organisation will either effect a change in the way that it operates or it will
be simply sidelined as an unwanted or short lived solution.
E-learning hasn’t failed. After several years of critical battering, it’s still here. Which means it’s wanted and needed. However, the stakes can be raised considerably and its importance within an enterprise leveraged