Archive for category Learning Technology

Learning Design and Development Toolkit

As part of the Learning Technologies review that I’m undertaking for a large corporate I’m compiling a toolkit for use by learning design and development team.  To identify the type / category of tools to include in the kit and examples of specific tools that could be used I’ve used the following sources:

  • Tools already in use in the decentralised Learning and Development teams across the organisation
  • Top 200 Tools for Learning 2017 published by Jane Hart at the Centre for Modern Workplace Learning
  • Recommendations from people in my network

The list I’ve compiled for further research is below.  This list is reasonably long and some of the tool types would not be required by all organisations.  This depends on the delivery methods and type of content that the organisation wants to use .  Other factors in the organisational context may create specific needs e.g. examination management to met regulatory requirements in aviation.  However, the list should provide a reasonable starting point against the generic needs of a corporate learning design and development team.

What do you think of this list?  What would you change on this list?  Is there a type of tool or a specific tool that you suggest be added to the list?




Requirements List – Learning Technologies

Last week I posted about a review of learning technologies that I am doing for a large corporate organisation. At that time I was developing requirements and scope for the review, which aims to develop a high level three year plan for learning design and delivery technologies.  I’ve now finalised a list of requirements for the review.


The purpose of these requirements is to guide:

  • selection of technologies to include in review, and
  • evaluation of feasibility and benefits of technologies.

I drafted the requirements by reviewing outputs of workshops held a couple of months ago that focussed on (a) internal customers of Learning and Development (L&D), and (b) current and future learning solution approaches.  From these a set of requirements could be derived that would meet current and future customer needs, and also enable preferred approaches to learning solution delivery into the future.  These draft requirements were reviewed in a short workshop with people from Information Technology and a small group of L&D Leaders.

The final set of requirements is listed below, noting that for each item on the list a short (1-2 sentence) statement was written to describe the requirement.  In the workshop we recognised that the requirements list could be used as an ongoing set of requirements when new technologies or tools were being considered in the future.

  1. Compliance
  2. LMS interface
  3. Governance
  4. Efficacy
  5. Cost-effective
  6. Timely
  7. Sustainable
  8. Scaleable
  9. Adaptable
  10. Flexible
  11. Solution standardisation
  12. Technology configuration
  13. Content re-use
  14. Rebranding
  15. Bite-sized and modular
  16. Realistic environment
  17. Engaging
  18. End User experience
  19. Efficient administration
  20. Vendor support
  21. Obsolescence
  22. Development pathways
  23. Five moments of need
  24. Workplace learning
  25. Performance support
  26. Change communication
  27. Navigation
  28. Collaboration
  29. Social learning
  30. External sources
  31. Self-directed learning
  32. Professional development
  33. Accessible
  34. 3rd party access
  35. All-site access
  36. Chokepoints
  37. Inclusivity
  38. Network performance
  39. Security protocols
  40. IT enterprise principles
  41. Multi-timezone support
  42. Availability
  43. Offline functionality

I’m interested to hear if anyone else picks up this list and uses it  in their organisations, and also if there are additions you would suggest.

No Comments

Five Moments of Need and Learning Technologies

I’ve just started work on a review of technologies for learning design and delivery for a large corporate organisation.  The output of this review is a high level 3-year technologies implementation plan.

One of my first steps is to prepare a set of requirements that the selected technologies should meet.  I also wanted to frame some generic use cases that could be used to help select and screen a suite of technologies.  The 70:20:10 framework may have been adequate for this purpose.  However I was concerned that it may limit the range of technologies considered.  Instead I’ve used the “Five Moments of Need” model described by Bob Mosher and Contrad Gottfredson, in their 2011 book, Innovative Performance Support.  The authors summarise these moments in an eLearning Industry article as:

1.  New: Learning something for the first time

2. More: Expanding knowledge of what has been learned.

3. Apply: Acting upon what has been learned. This can include planning, remembering, or adapting.

4. Solve: Using knowledge to solve a problem in a situation when something didn’t work out as expected.

5. Change: Needing to learn a new way of doing something. This requires giving up practices that are comfortable for practices that are new and unknown.

Image Source:

Mapping Technologies to the Five Moments

Below is my initial mapping a range of learning technologies against the five moments.  I’m sure that this mapping will be refined as I work through the review and consider more specific use cases and delve further into technologies that I’m less familiar with.

Notes on mapping:

  1. The technologies are not mutually exclusive e.g. video may be used as part of eLearning, virtual online sessions or social learning.
  2. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a label that seems to be applied to a range of functionality from basic automation of processes to more sophisticated adaptive and personalised learning.  I need to clarify what forms of AI are in scope.

Initial observations on mapping

The map points out the relative inflexibility of eLearning and Learning Management Systems across the range of moments of need.

I’m sure that there are some boxes that could be marked with a cross in the table, even if a little creativity would be required to use them to meet a specific moment. Even so, there are a lot of crosses entered, suggesting that some of the technologies are very versatile.   To ensure that the mapping assists in discriminating between technologies I may update it to highlight the moments that each technology is particularly strong in meeting.

Your thoughts?

I’m curious about whether others have a different view from that shown below as to whether / how a technology can be used for different moments of need.

I’m also open to questions you may have that I could potentially answer as I undertake this review.

I look forward to your thoughts in comments against this post.