Elearning in Corporate Environments Organizations and Elearning

ELearning in Corporate Environments

Organizations and eLearning

Organizations today are in a continuous state of evolution. There is consistent learning, interacting, and implementation of new solutions to organizational challenges. This means that in order for organizations to succeed they must find ways to share their collective wisdom, preferably in real-time. The remedy most turn to is technology. Specifically, organizations are finding creative ways to include eLearning, or electronic learning, into their overall business and training processes (Ambrose & Ogilvie, 2010).

Technology allows organizations to be innovative in their approach to training. Corporations in general spent an estimated $92.5 billion on training last year (Capdeferro & Romero, 2012). More than half of this figure is in eLearning content demand. eLearning by definition includes all forms of electronic supported education and teaching (Roy, 2010). Organizations have been incorporating eLearning into business practice since the 1990s. This was spurred by changes in the higher education field (Chieh-Peng et. al., 2010). Organizations were able to emulate the positive success of colleges and universities using distance learning to reach more students. It was quickly learned that best practices in eLearning in higher education could also translate well for other industries (Roy, 2010).

Two primary forces have helped create the shift to eLearning among organizations -- the accelerated pace of business itself and information creation and the shift in organizational information needs (Ambrose & Ogilvie, 2010). Today there are new considerations for corporate learning including the need for a faster transfer of knowledge among workers, a need to shorter trainings with more readily available content, and a need to lower overall costs to the organization (Roy, 2010).

Economic growth and societal changes have also put greater demands on training. As brought out by Guile, during the1990s organizations moved from looking at eLearning as "will we?" To "how will we?" (2002). The September 11th tragedy and other events also increased the focus on eLearning (Roy, 2010). Reduced budgets and the inability or unwillingness of people to travel caused many organizations to start looking at digital collaboration as core mechanisms for conducting business. In addition, talent shortages in some industries have led to an emphasis on skill sets and the hiring and training of personnel (Sloman & Reynolds, 2003). There is greater interest today in training current employees for expanded roles. Thus, organizations today have new views about learning and development, and look to eLearning to assist with everything from recruiting, performance evaluation, leadership development, and cross training (Guile, 2002).

Today nearly every organization has some form of eLearning for employees allowing them access to knowledge they need to carry out their positions, reference information and get the support they need to perform well (Brecht, 2012). Simulations and online exercises also allow employees to learn from one another and practice with their newfound knowledge. This leads to an enhanced learning experience. eLearning can also act as a valuable community builder and help overcome geographic barriers for organizations with team members in different physical locations (Sloman & Reynolds, 2003). Thus, cost and training complexity are two organizational challenges that can be lessened by leveraging eLearning.

This paper explores how organizations can successfully implement eLearning into their overall business practices. It identifies important considerations for management as they attempt to push for adoption of eLearning within the organization, including working through cultural resistance at both the organizational and learner levels. This paper will also examine best practices, learning transfer and considerations for organizations in terms of eLearning design, implementation, evaluation and assessment.

Introducing eLearning & Overcoming Objections

eLearning in the form of web sites, online tutorials, company portals and learning management systems are all very common today among organizations (Ambrose & Ogilvie, 2010). The virtual classroom can be accessed 24/7 with very little cost or complication. However, the initial introduction of eLearning into some organizational cultures can be difficult. A poll conducted by Forrester Research identified three common obstacles to launching a successful eLearning strategy: lack of interactivity (56%), cultural resistance (41%) and lack of bandwidth or resources (36%) (Roy, 2010).

Perhaps the most important, and often overlooked, challenge can reside with the organization's workforce. The human side of eLearning implementation is often the key factor in success or failure (Capdeferro & Romero, 2012). This is because while technology can just be upgraded or replaced, changing human perceptions and attitudes is much more difficult. The learner must be able to see the value and benefit of change in the work process, which includes learning through technical platforms. The more significant the change, the more significant human resistance can be (Chieh-Peng et. al., 2010).

To overcome this challenge, organizations should understand the motivators that cause people to embrace or resist change (Leimbach & Emde, 2011). There are a number of cultural issues that can impact eLearning adoption in organizations. For instance, the previously accepted use of computers within an organization can be a barrier in some cases. Perhaps an organization has an unwritten policy restricting computer usage on the job to work tasks only. This might have been put in place to prevent employees from web surfing all day, visiting inappropriate websites, or spending excessive amounts of time on email or social media sites such as Facebook. A sudden directive to embrace a new corporate intranet or use the web for training purposes could be perceived as unrelated to actual job function and confuse the formerly understood rules. Employees would have to change their behavior which will inevitably have ripple effects on organizational culture (Capdeferro & Romero, 2012). The rollout of an eLearning initiative in such an environment may have a rocky start. Other challenges could be that eLearning is viewed as unnecessary. Members of the organization may not see a need for any change. In addition, some may not be fans of technology or lack the skills and experience with computers to truly feel comfortable. Thus, culture and perception mean are top considerations for any organization moving to eLearning.

Senior leaders and human resource managers must always stress eLearning benefits. A top down approach can be beneficial. Middle managers can communicate the value of eLearning further down the line (Skillsoft, 2004). For example, mid-level managers can use eLearning to deliver up-to-date content to their teams, along with more individualized feedback and performance support. Training materials can be quickly edited and communicated when policies and procedures change. In addition, eLearning content can be accessed in varying forms. Employees who prefer to print materials often can, depending on the eLearning platform. Similarly, employees who are more technically savvy can quickly reference information through FAQs or searchable knowledge databases if they prefer. Also, content can be developed in multi-language versions to better support organizational diversity and ensure a consistent message is shared with all.

Sometimes it is the senior leaders and executives that need convincing (Roy, 2010). They may have major concerns over the investment required to institute an eLearning solution which is usually a substantial development expense. This requires many budget discussions. For instance, some may feel that the existing technology can accomplish the training goals. There can be push back and demands for justification for additional tech expenditures (Ambrose & Ogilvie, 2010). To overcome these objections, it helps when eLearning advocates speak in terms of operational and business advantages, return on investment, and overall cost savings.

Making a strong financial case that demonstrates return on investment is critical. Research suggests that eLearning tends to be less expensive than classroom training if an organization has many learners who are spread widely geographically and if the content needs to be repeated several times (Brecht, 2012). For example, adopting eLearning means that costs for instructor salaries, meeting space rentals, travel, lodging, and meals and catering may be eliminated. eLearning can also reduce employee time away from the office and therefore positively impact productivity.

Training and development positives include the fact that learning times can be reduced by as much as 60% and that knowledge retention has been estimated to increase up to 25% over traditional training methods (Guile, 2002). Self-paced, asynchronous eLearning can mean more consistent delivery of content when expert knowledge automated. Important knowledge can be more easily communicated and captured for future use. Quality eLearning systems typically also allow for proof of completion which is an essential element of training initiatives. These are all benefits worthy of being noted.

Learner obstacles are more ambiguous. Many people keep opinions about work culture and changes in organizational practice to themselves. Organizations who wish to be successful in rolling out eLearning across the enterprise have to look for signs of employee resistance or discomfort with learning new methods and using new tools, or expressed preferences for learning through social interaction or direct access to experts (Crowley, 2002). When there is evidence of this in an organization, management should communicate the learner advantages of eLearning which include the ability to complete training from home or after work hours at their own convenience, self-pacing to reduce anxiety and stress often encountered in classroom settings, and the many ways eLearning can be interactive and collaborative (Capdeferro & Romero, 2012).

Organizations can create collaborative online work groups, use online chats, threaded discussions, and live collaborative learning events via phone to help facilitate eLearning and create a feeling of community (Sloman & Reynolds, 2003). It is also worth noting that studies show that eLearning can often mean more access to experts and trainers through email, webcasts and other features (Capdeferro & Romero, 2012). Communicating these benefits can garner support and build confidence in learners, further supporting adaptation of eLearning across the organization.

Experts contend that a well-designed eLearning program demands interaction, critical thinking, and synthesis (Skillsoft, 2004). Positioning eLearning as an extension of job responsibilities can help reduce resistance to taking on personal responsibility for learning. Learning accountability can also be worked into performance appraisals (Chieh-Peng et.al, 2010).

Communicating Strategic Intention

eLearning has the power to transform the educational experience in a positive way, but organizations must also understand its potential risks and challenges. This is important so that eLearning strategies enhance learning and do not impede it. An eLearning implementation without an internal champion to help promote it may fall flat (Roy, 2010). Typically, there is a combination of information technology members and human resources professionals who function as primary advocates for a shift to eLearning (Ambrose & Ogilvie, 2010). The most common denotation of eLearning is a small 'e' and large 'L' to indicate that the technology is there to support the learning. Some organizations have also positioned eLearning with the 'e' not tied to electronic learning, but rather to enhanced learning (Sloman & Reynolds, 2003). This helps shape perceptions.

One way that eLearning champions can explain their intentions and objectives to others within the organization is to establish the correlation between learning initiatives and the company's competitive advantage (Roy, 2010). This message might be different for different groups. Decreased employee turnover, more effective workers, more employee time dedicated to core business and better speed to market all impacts the bottom line which appeals to various organizational members for various reasons (Crowley, 2002). The reasons for moving to eLearning must appeal to all stakeholders.

eLearning Strategies

Technology is at the core of eLearning and must be planned for properly. Organizations must consider what types of technology they will use to make eLearning happen. Distribution technologies allow distance learning to take place. For most organizations, this is internet and web technology (Arbough et.al., 2009). This is where the term online originates when eLearning is described. Some organizations however, still rely more on CD-ROMs or even conference call and PowerPoint technology (Crowley, 2002).

Learning Management Software (LMS) refers to the technology that ultimately simulates a physical classroom experience. Communication and collaboration in eLearning usually takes place in rich, shared, virtual workspaces with expert-to-learner interaction in the form of discussion boards, web chats or virtual classrooms. Interactions may be one-to-one, one-to-many, or many-to-many allowing learners to work together anytime and anyplace (Brecht, 2012). Database technology and shared information spaces allow experts and learners to work at different times and places, or LMS systems can be incorporated that allow for live learning sessions, providing real-time interaction between all members.

Organizations must decide what approach will be used or if a combination of eLearning tools such e-mail, discussion databases, streaming audio, video, instant messaging, or audio/video conferencing are better suited for the organization (Chieh-Peng et.al, 2010). They may select one approach or a blend of several which is referred to as blended learning. It is the combination of one or more of the aforementioned tools, and may or may not also include actual face-to-face educational components (Arbough et.al, 2009). Another important consideration for ensuring success is course support. This includes all tools that support the learning experience such as FAQs, electronic libraries, printable or downloadable reference material, and a means for learners to reach out for help or ask questions (Guile, 2002).

The consensus among both large and small-to-medium businesses is that eLearning tends to be more effective when combined with traditional forms of learning (Arbough et.al., 2009). In other words, blended formats, where there is also a requirement for some traditional face-to-face contact, often work best. eLearning champions in organizations, therefore, might try to speak of technology as an enhancement to the learning experience as opposed to positioning it as a complete abandonment of more traditional training practices. Learners may be more receptive to that approach.

Organizations must develop a strategic plan document to serve as the guide for the eLearning project (Skillsoft, 2004). It must communicate the infrastructure and approach that will be taken in the instruction. It should also seek to manage expectations for how the eLearning will look to learners and how it will be used. This helps communicate goals and strategic intention for eLearning instruction across the organization..

Content Development

Content is the actual subject material to be delivered through eLearning methods (Gunawardena et.al., 2010). Organizations should consider the training goals and knowledge needs of each learner group and actively involve them in the content planning process (Capdeferro & Romero, 2012). When determining goals and objectives, best practice is to ensure that eLearning content- whatever the subject -- also supports the organization's goals and mission (Leimbach & Emde, 2011). Human resource managers are very helpful in assisting the organization in determining what learners know vs. what they need to know. Insight on this may also come from published standards or industry regulations. In many business and industry environments it is important to be aligned with market demands for legal reasons. For example, industry and government regulations impacting a specific company, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, would naturally be important to consider when developing goals that define content for a food service or medical organization. So an organization's quality and profit goals should be reflected in the eLearning program goals (Ambrose & Ogilvie, 2010).

Knowledge, skills and attitude gaps should be able to be addressed by the content of the eLearning program (Capdeferro & Romero, 2012). Other considerations include those things that an organization wants learners to contemplate. Learning activities do not always have to be related to specific job tasks. Some organizations have found success with turning to eLearning to cover critical policies on subjects such as sexual harassment, diversity issues and ethics (Roy, 2010). eLearning can be leveraged to emphasize desired cultural experiences and ensure that all members of an organization understand policies and expectations.

There are many content providers that author and publish material that organizations may use (Crowley, 2002). Some products include customizable courseware, synchronous and asynchronous course delivery, linear and branched content, and complex multimedia simulations for soft skills (Skillsoft, 2004). Services can also be obtained to cover organizational needs related to custom curriculum design, skills assessment and testing, strategy and development consulting, program implementation and integration support, coaching and mentoring, training effectiveness analysis, and hosting (Arbough et.al, 2009). Organizations are tasked with examining their current infrastructure to assess the extent to which external support and resources may be needed. It is also worth noting that advisory boards or focus groups can serve excellent resources for determining content, validating and testing, obtaining feedback, and pushing eLearning projects at peer levels (Roy, 2010).

Encouraging Participation

After tackling larger issues of resistance and adoption within the organization, managers still have to find creative ways to motivate people to actually partake in eLearning courses (Brecht, 2012). The most common way is to incorporate it into over-arching training and development programs (Gunawardena et.al., 2010). Linking eLearning courses to salary and promotion can also be quite effective. Most will want to ensure their job security and promotional prospects. Along this line, some organizations publish positions which list the eLearning courses and scores required in order to be considered for that particular role.

Others use eLearning courses as certification tools. Employees may receive an eCertificate in the form of a URL which future prospective employers can visit to see the learner's certified credential (Leimbach & Emde, 2011). Google Analytics courses function this way. People who work as lead generators or marketers must complete special online courses through Google to become certified in certain areas. Once certified, their name is added to a worldwide database of others holding that credential that can be researched and verified by future employers. It is a powerful incentive for successful completion of eLearning courses.

Learning Transfer

eLearning in an organization must be practical to be effective. In other words, it must be solid enough to ensure that what is learned is quickly transferable into everyday practice. The more well-designed the eLearning plan, LMS system and content, the more efficient learning transfer activities will be (Gunawardena et.al., 2010). Organizations can take important steps to increase the application of new learning on the job. Research in this area has revealed an 80/20 rule in regards to corporate eLearning: about 20% of learning transfer activities creates 80% of the impact (Leimbach & Emde, 2010). There are steps an organization can take to work within this formula and ensure eLearning success.

For starters, it is important to gauge learner readiness (Capdeferro & Romero, 2012). Employees need to be prepped to ensure learning takes place correctly. This means addressing identified objections and resistance, as cited earlier. Organizations must also work through other issues of motivation, enthusiasm and positive anticipation prior to a learning session. Learner readiness really deals with all the way organizations ensure that learners see the value of new skills and are confident they can use their learning on the job.

General Electric, also known as GE, carried out an interesting initiative to prep its learners (Ambrose & Ogilvie, 2010). Employees received a warm-up in the form of email announcements, a short video and introduction that also featured a sample of how the eLearning courses work. The communications made very clear statements regarding how the courses would positively impact the work of employees and benefit the organization. Following the introduction, employees were asked to do a self-assessment of their current work-related strengths and where they had room for improvement. This feedback helped with content development and ultimately led to more positive outcomes and improved skills. The psychology behind it was allowing learners to contribute, as well as learn, something new. This made them more invested in the process.

Another area of consideration for positive learning transfer is the design of the transfer, or opportunities to practice and trial what is learned (Gunawardena et.al., 2010). Simulations, structured follow-up activities and action plans, or opportunities to practice course concepts are key. Without these elements, knowledge retention may not take place. For example, marketers in an eLearning course may work collaboratively with other class members by sharing a current project or challenge and applying their new skills and knowledge to analyze it and develop solutions (Arbough et.al., 2009). This has much more staying power for the learner vs. simply reading through possible solutions presented in a class. It gives the learner a chance to practice new behaviors, approaches and ideas and receive feedback. This can also be reinforced through downloadable reference materials, tip sheets and web-based coaching. Continued reinforcement and application activities post-course help learners make their new knowledge a part of their everyday work routine.

Finally, organizational alignment supports learning transfer (Gunawardena et.al, 2010). Executives can steer the organization into a learning culture. For instance, if customer service is a high priority, a company that does business internationally may want to implement a global effectiveness skills development program. Role-plays and videos may be an excellent eLearning tool in this case and help support learning transfer (Brecht, 2012). Employees can more effectively learn about and model cross-cultural business relations.