June 30, 2004

Mutlimedia Learning


Here's yet another effective form of learning.

Motivation

I am thirty pounds overweight and must exercise at leasst 30 minutes a day to work off the fat.

Access
I can transfer MP3 sounds files downloaded from the 'net via the USB port on my computer.

This tiny $80 device can record or play two hours of voice.

Learning
Yesterday I downloaded a variety of high-tech intereviews by Doug Kaye. Later, I trudged up a steep hil while listening to interviews with Chris Perillo, Steve Gilmour, and Craig Newmark. Forty-five minutes later, I had completed the day's exercise and learned a lot more about sydication, the Microsoft/Sun deal, and forming social networks. I had also completed the day's exercise.

Hearing a recorded voice has more impact than reading the same message. Talk about a cheap delivery system. Give everyone one of the gizmos and load if up with need-to-know information.

It my case, this is an example of mutlitasking that works.

Posted by Jay Cross at 03:56 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

June 28, 2004

Nonverbal impact?

Sahib Spiderman. Maish points to this example of extreme localization. To the right is Indian Spiderman..


I was never a Spiderman fan. Superman and Batman were in vogue when I read comic books. Recently, Spidey has been popping up on my radar. Only yesterday, Boing-Boing pointed to Spiderman satire. [Refresh the page when you get there for a rotation of 20 strips.]

I'm losing my hearing. It's not like someone turned down the volume knob on my ears. No, it's more like the sliders on my mental audio mixer are set to drop out a few frequencies. A sound in an otherwise quiet room is crystal clear but a voice in a crowded room fades into the generalized noise. This got me to thinking about nonverbal communication and the oft-quoted finding that most of what's communicated in conversation does come through our ears.

Professor Albert Mehrabian has pioneered the understanding of communications since the 1960's. Aside from his many and various other fascinating works, Mehrabian established this classic statistic for the effectiveness of spoken communications:

* 7% of meaning is in the words that are spoken.
* 38% of meaning is paralinguistic (the way that the words are said).
* 55% of meaning is in facial expression.

"Mehrabian's research involved spoken communications. Transferring the model indiscriminately to written or telephone communications is not reliable, except to say that without the opportunity for visual signs, there is likely to be even more potential for confused understanding and inferred meanings." Mehrabian's site is worth a look, too.

Thinking back on the findings that people tend to treat computers as if they were people, I began to wonder if an avatar can communicate nonverbally.

Spiderman is clearly a poor choice because he rarely changes expression; I'm not even sure he has lips.

Better pick some more expressive figures. Have them all say the same thing and see if the impact of the message differs....

Are the messages equally compelling? Believable?

Does the "speaker" influence your evaluation of the content? Do you feel one communicates better than the other?

Leave a comment if you think there's anything to this.


Top 10 Tips for Nonverbal Communication


Excellent communication skills are the key to success in your personal and professional life. Research shows that nonverbal communication is actually more important than verbal communication. Here are the top 10 tips for using nonverbal communication to improve your relationships.

1. 'Dance' with the nonverbal signals being sent your way on a moment-to-moment basis.

Stop and ask the other person what their nonverbal behavior means if you are uncertain about it. It is more effective to be 'in the moment,' tuning in to your audience, than to drone on with what you were trying to say.

2. Use the tonality of your voice the way that a musician uses an instrument.

When you are expressing love you can speak in soft, lilting tones. When someone is crying you can speak with a 'crying' sound in your voice. When you are setting limits on a toddler's behavior you can use a tone of authority and firmness.

3. Soak in the hugs that others give to you.

Many people have difficulty being 'present' in the moment to truly receive the affection that comes with a hug. You probably need to be hugged more than you are being hugged, so why resist?

4. Express gratitude to your audience when they are being attentive and responsive.

The encouragement could increase the level of attentiveness and responsiveness, making it a more enjoyable experience for you and for them.

5. Use good eye contact.

Many people stop using eye contact when they are speaking about their successes due to fear or embarrassment. Others stop using eye contact when they are talking about painful things.

6. Stop what you were doing when your listeners look glassy-eyed or bored.

Take ownership and responsibility for the situation by saying, "I must be 'off' tonight because I'm not getting that 'you're interesting' look." Change something drastically about what you were doing.

7. Tune in to the 'metacommunication' that is going on at a given moment.

Metacommunication involves noticing the larger context of communication. It can be helpful to tune in to the larger context when there is a sense of being provoked by what a speaker is saying. For example, you might ask yourself, "Why is my teenager telling me that he is going to pierce his tongue? Is he telling me to test me or to take a risk of being open with me?"

8. When you are confronting someone who you are in a close relationship with, reach out to take their hand in both of yours.

This kind of gesture will communicate that you want the difficult words that you are sharing to increase your intimacy rather than to put a wedge in it. A caring gesture during a confrontation can assist the other person in hearing you instead of defending themselves.

9. Notice the effect that your words have on others.

Do they cause life or dampen life? With practice, your 'radar' will improve and you will immediately know the effect that you are having on others.

10. Hug others as if you were St. Peter greeting newcomers at the Pearly Gates.

Leo Buscaglia was on to something. Dr. Buscaglia, the famous educator known as Dr. Hug, made it part of his lectures to hug any members of the audience who would line up for the embrace.


Posted by Jay Cross at 08:29 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

June 21, 2004

Don't Lose a Common Sense: LISTEN

When Jennifer Hoffman asked me to record a few thoughts from Training Directors Forum on a tiny RadioShack IC recorder, it struck me as kind of hokey but since I'm always open to experimentation, I recorded a blurb.

"Listen, learn, change"
David Gergen

Someone responded yesterday, so I trekked over to InSync Center to post a reply. Once there, I saw a few friends' faces and felt obligated to hear what they had to say. When I heard Lance, Ghenno, Marc, Saul, Harvey, and others giving their extended sound-bites, it triggered their larger messages. It helped to have their photo alongside, tool

As I upgrade the Workflow Institute site, I plan to add some soundbites you can call up with a button. Jennifer's done a great job of making this easy to use. I suggest you take a look.


Meanwhile, on the screen, this message just arrived in my gmail box:

Dear Sir

I Durga doing research in e-learning standards relationship and its role.

So I am conducting survey on this area. Here I attached my survey form. I will be happy if you could give me your opinion. I look forward to a favorable reply.

Please send my form by email or Fax.

A year ago, I would have opened the attachment and answered this chap's questions. Not now. For all I know, this is a virus-bomb being lobbed inside my firewall from a spoofed address. A wolf in sheep's clothing.

A pity this crap is so commonplace.

Posted by Jay Cross at 10:04 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

June 13, 2004

Repetition, reverb, and echoes

It's Sunday morning and I've giving myself the luxury of interspersing web crawling with work. I just landed on Robin Good's Online Collaboration news page.

Robin filters, reviews, and points to noteworthy items on the web. His interests and mine dovetail, so I can spend beaucoup time sifting through what's here. For example:


  • Group Collaboration Vs. Individual Achievers = 1-0 Wired
    "The evidence is clear: groups - whether top executives evaluating a potential acquisition or sales reps and engineers analyzing a new product - will consistently make better decisions than an individual. Companies have spent too long coddling the special few. It's time for them to start figuring out how they're going to tap the wisdom of the many."

  • Small Technologies Loosely Joined. The Small Technologies Loosely Joined presentation is a complementary and fascinating participatory online event, focusing our attention on the emerging use of readily available, mostly free, discrete sets of "small" and "loosely joined" technologies - weblogs, wikis, instant messaging, audio video conferencing tools.

    There's the start of a great debate over centralization vs decentralization. The decentralists picture their position as:

  • The Individual Is The Epicenter Of The New Media Revolution is a theme with which I could not agree more.

    How's this for a self-referential play-within-a-play? "Individuals, the future "newsmasters" and "digital information librarians" will
    be the ones that will elect themselves to become active filters and aggregators
    of the increasingly vast amounts of information becoming available online.
    Without them, you would be either submerged or you would have to surrender to the poor, superficial and frequently manipulated reporting available through
    mainstream media channels only. Individuals are also the new sustainable artists of tomorrow.

So much great information, so little time.

But that's not what I intended to ponder and write about this morning. Robin's Online Collaboration blog also lists this pointer:

    Collaboration Technologies Empower The Enterprise Jay Cross shares his original live presentation at the ASTD Conference. The presentation containing his original audio and all of the accompanying slides gives an extraordinary overview of just some of the critical issues relevant to effective collaboration inside the enterprise, while exemplifying in very simple words how the greater facility of communicating and sharing in groups can so dramatically enhance the work and the results we are to obtain with it. Jay covers RSS, information overload, blogs, wikis, social networking and much, much more. In his familiar, uncontrived and direct tone, he breezes through an interesting and textured panorama of skills and technologies no organization can afford to do without. Highly recommended. (1:06' Breeze streaming format).

(Thanks, Robin!)

When I posted my presentation to the Web, I mentioned it on thisblog. In typical blog fashion, that entry has scrolled off the page. For visibility, that's worse than being "below the fold" on the front page of the paper. Off the page means Lost in Space.

As anyone who has run an ad campaign knows, nothing really happens until the ad is repeated again and again, sinking into the buyer's consciousness. Imagine the multiplier effect of hitting a diverse group of readers again and again that this post is out there for free viewing. Maybe I'll put a pop-up box of faves on the front page to give the good stuff longer tenure there. While I enjoy creating new stuff, the 80/20 rule tells me there's more payback from seeking exposure from what's already here.

Posted by Jay Cross at 11:26 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 07, 2004

More TDF04

The Wild Horse Pass Resort is a classy operation. The help smiles and says hello in the hallways. The towels are full-sized and plush. The fake boulders in the lobby have fake petroglyphs.

Saguaro cactus ribs are built into the gigantic Native American fetishes on the ceilings. The morning OJ is served in handsome wine glasses. But (there’s always a “but”)…there is no Wi-Fi in the conference rooms. So I’m writing this on the fly and will periodically go back to the lobby to upload.

Saul Carliner is exhorting people to take some of the empty seats at the front of the room, saying that it has been proven that people in the front of the room learn more. Saul’s hosting this event, the 20th annual TDF.

Research Results You Can Use

Brenda Sugrue, ASTD’s research director, challenges each of us to jot down a research question as a warm-up for her presentation on Benchmarking. Benchmarking is the ultimate performance improvement strategy. Benchmarking research can focus on expenditures, cost/hour, outsourcing, etc., across companies, award winners, profit leaders, etc.

    Sample question: How large should the annual training budget be?

    Issues: “Dirty data.” 50% of that submitted to ASTD is rejected.

    Brenda displayed data on training budget as a percent of payroll and per employee. The mean % of payroll is 3.6% but the variance is wide. The mean budget is $1626 per employee, averaging $231 to $4,970.

    This is interesting but doesn’t tell that much. It doesn’t address the organizations’ strategy, correlation to results, spending patterns, a training industry value chain, a more sophisticated diagram.

    ASTD has discontinued its former benchmarking service. The new Benchmarking Forum is asking new questions and developing a Benchmarking Performance Scorecard. It will evolve into an online performance support tool.

Jim L’Allier, CLO of Thompson NETg, is preparing to talk about the impact of various combinations of learning methods. Jim’s framework is Kirkpatrick Levels (agh) and blended/unblended. He just about lost me until he said the measure of evaluation was ability to use the skill (completing a spreadsheet).

    The instructor-led blend cut the time to complete the task in half. However, the non-blend option did not include the opportunity to use the software. More meaningfully, there was no significant different between ILT, text, and sim. Blended learning is not about blended media. It’s about how the media is designed to be used. The important factors are job-specific scenarios, realistic job problems, competencies linked to the learner’s job. The questions to ask are:

  • Does the instruction contain job-specific scenarios?
  • Are the scenarios realistic?
  • Are the competencies being taught linked to the worker’s job?
  • Is the learner given opportunity to practice?
  • Does the learner received corrective feedback?


27% of the population of the U.S. are boomers (born 1946-1964). We have an aging population. Life expectancy is up nearly 10 years in the past fifty years.

Time to consider retention, succession planning, mentoring programs, knowledge capture, KM, training burden, for in seven years, the boomer begin to drop out of the workforce.

Let’s see now. We have all these wise people about to leave the workforce. Why don’t we redefine their roles where we can continue to tap into their strengths, their knowledge, and their judgment? Instead of putting oldsters out to pasture, make them into coaches, mentors, and high-level help desks. I think the training community continues to draw too tight a boundary around their turf.

Once upon a time, fulltime employees were the only beneficiaries of training. Then we began to add subcontractors and part-timers. Then partners and distributors came on board. Now we talk of training everyone in the value chain, from suppliers to customers. It’s about time to add corporate alumni to training’s charter.


Sam Adkins gave a presentation on the latest in learning technology.

  • Benjamin Bloom found out long ago that tutored students learn as much as the top 2% of classroom students. New work finds that cognitive tutors produce even better results!

  • Enterprise application training (SAP, Oracle, PeopleSoft, etc.) has accounted for 55% - 65% of all corporate training, but several years from now it will be dead, replaced by the smart single business interface.

  • 17% of the American workforce is actively disengaged from work.

  • Business process design is indistinguishable from Instructional Design.


IBM’s Nancy Deviney gave the lunchtime keynote on The Future of Learning. You’ve heard my thoughts on IBM’s learning strategy before. In sum, it’s great.


James Sharpe and Andy Sadler showed a variety of integrated tools for supporting informal, unstructured learning. The demo was compelling because it dealt with realistic examples (figuring out an Excel spreadsheet rather than trying to boil the ocean). Within an on demand workplace, Jim and Andy built a course, enrolled in a class, located experts, set up an emeeting, and more. Guidance was built right in every step of the way.


Posted by Jay Cross at 04:10 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

Training Directors Forum 2004

Training Directors Forum kicked off this evening at the five-star Sheraton Wild Horse Pass Resort and Spa outside of Phoenix. We're in the middle of an Indian Native American Reservation in the Sonora Desert. This enables the hotel to run a casino which is (thankfully) located away from the resort proper. I hitched a ride in with Marc Rosenberg. It's so pleasant to hop into a car with the air conditioning on full blast when it's 100 degrees outside." border="0">

TDF attendance is up 9% over last year. The evening reception was a chance to catch up with old friends and make new acquaintances. (Note to ASTD: The bar here was free. After what you pay to attend one of these events, the cash bar thing is insulting. It's nickel and diming your best customers.) Many familiar faces: IBM's Margaret Driscoll, Nokia's Andreas Forsberg, Julie Groshens (who's training to run a marathon!), Deborah Stone (we go back decades), Saul Carliner (who kicks this thing off tomorrow morning), Lance Dublin, Phil Jones (who has his heart in this business, as do a lot of the former Lakewooders), Ghenno Senbetta, Fred Posar, Leah Nelson (great smile!), Brenda Sugrue, and many others.

I remember reading Robert Cialdini's book Influence when it was published. Click, whirr, act as if you are a robot. The concept has legs. Bob is presenting here. We talked about Influence, its longevity and rebirth, and his current projects. He's focused on time, specifically, what moments have the most impact. One of his latest experiments was testing which environmental-friendly cards in hotels ("Don't replace the sheets") were most effective. The winner: "Most people do this...."

Richard Leider challenged us to think about "What makes you get up in the morning?" He's spent his time on earth as a "student of the second half of life." Most of us were clearly in the second half; those in the first half were probably in the pool, dancing, getting new tatoos, or doing things that defy description in a professional blog.

Richard has asked many oldsters what they'd do differently if they could relive their experiences. They tell him:

  1. More itme for reflection. Grow whole, not old. Come closer to the magic of the fire. Stare into the flame. Join the village elders in the front row.
  2. Courage. Take more risks in work and love. "What do you intend to do in your wild and crazy life?"
  3. Purpose. Everyone wants to make a difference, to leave a dent in the world.
Be authentic. Find your calling: give your gifts away. Passion. Values. Find a calling, not a job.

Great grounding talk. I asked Richard if he knew the Fritz Perls remark that at the end of his life, he didn't want to be saved. He wanted to be spent.

The gang from Enspire Learning, demonstrating what it's like to work in a start up. I remember these folks from when it was six guys in a house in Austin. Bjorn tells me they now number more than 20 and are hitting the targets in their original business plan in spite of the recession. Enspire creates cool simulations.

Jack Phillips and I talked for 90 minutes about ROI, values, lifestyle, the future, and more. The power of face-to-face: i now respect a fellow I'd previously classified as focused entirely on yesterday's news. Jack's a delightful fellow and has his head screwed on right.


Posted by Jay Cross at 12:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 04, 2004

ASTD 2004 Leftovers

This is the fourth in a series of reports on ASTD 2004.

"Profits, like oxygen, are necessary for life, but you don't live to breathe." Arie de Geus

Pat Galaghan charms the crowd at the Canadian Embassy by offering her thanks in both English and French.

Telling Ain't Training is the ASTD Press best seller of all time. (7,500 copies)

Words I heard over and over again: Perform, organization/individual, leadership, change, engagement.

Leverage positive energy for change.

Gloria Gery: "It's a Rubik's Cube sort of problem but you have to solve it in a short time."

Grand Canyon University, "Arizona's only private, Judeo-Christian, liberal arts university," is renaming its business school "The Ken Blanchard School of Business." I imagine a zany curriculum of The One Minute Manager, Gung Ho!, Raving Fans!, Whale Done!, and Full Steam Ahead! Perhaps students will earn an MBA! degree.

Sam Adkins: "Service-oriented architecture is the end of software as we know it."

Sam also suggested we check out www.alicebot.org, and that soon led me to the Prosthetic Head.

DDI's Periodic Table,
a well-executed concept.
(Click for humongous view.)


Washington has the most beautiful Metro in the land.

Posted by Jay Cross at 10:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

June 01, 2004

Mintzberg & Cooperider

This is the second in a series of reports on the 2004 ASTD Conference.

Henry Mintzberg

Henry Mintzberg is a professor of management at McGill, well known for his books and articles (Here is his 23-page CV.) He earned both his PhD and his MS in Management from MIT's Sloan School of Managmenet. His appearance at ASTD coincided with the publication of his new book, Managers, Not MBAs.

Professor Mintzberg's website describes the message of the new book like this:

Henry Mintzberg believes that both management and management education are deeply troubled, but that neither can be changed without changing the other.

Mintzberg asserts that conventional MBA classrooms overemphasize the science of management while ignoring its art and denigrating its craft, leaving a distorted impression of its practice. We need to get back to a more engaging style of management, to build stronger organizations, not bloated share prices. This calls for another approach to management education, whereby practicing mangers learn from their own experience. We need to build the art and the craft back into management education, and into management itself.

Mintzberg examines what is wrong with our current system. Conventional MBA programs are mostly for young people with little or no experience. These are the wrong people. Programs to train them emphasize analysis and technique. These are the wrong ways. They leave graduates with the false impression that they have been trained as managers, which has had a corrupting effect on the practice of management as well as on our organizations and societies. These are the wrong consequences.

Mintzberg describes a very different approach to management education, which encourages practicing mangers to learn from their own experience. No one can create a manager in a classroom. But existing managers can significantly improve their practice in a thoughtful classroom that makes use of that experience.

I caught up with Professor Mintzberg at a press briefing and also at an event at the Canadian Embassy. Henry is an entertaining speaker, although I sense that his compelling soundbites cover up some rather weak arguments in favor of his view of management. (Disclosure: I have yet to read more than the introduction to his book.)

"Take away the dollars, and you'll find there aren't many leaders left."

"Management and business schools are 'off the rails.'"

"Shareholder value is another term for corporate irresponsibility."

MBAs need to "do a better job, not get a better job."

"You cannot measure what people learn. Attempts to measure learning are a monumental waste of time."

In the press briefing, Henry said that as a starting point, he'd reviewed the performance of top grads from Harvard Business School. Only five out of nineteen had a clean record. The losers included Frank Lorenzo, who personally destroyed more than one airline! HBS does not teach management. It teaches only business functions. The students are youngsters. Business is taught as if it were engineering.

Explaining that I would soon be returning to Harvard Business School for my MBA class reunion, I asked for clarification, since I didn't want to mislead my classmates when I gave them the news. Some have said that if you housed HBS's entering MBA class in a large motel in the middle of Kansas, they'd come out a couple of years later having learned most of what they would have had they stayed in Boston. I wondered whether Henry's findings were the result of the admissions policy or the schooling. After all, Henry had said the schooling was largely ineffective.

Reflecting on this exchange later in the day, I couldn't reconcile Henry's ability to judge Harvard from observing a few dozen graduates with his statement that you cannot measure what people learn.

Before the press briefing ended, Mintzberg said that the primary utility of laptops among students was email, not assisting learning.

 

Henry and I met the next day at a buffet table at a reception at the Canadian Embassy. I'll admit that I baited him. He had complained that MBAs don't learn management. I pointed out that is was he who had a Master of Science in Management and a PhD from a School of Management. My Masters is in Business Administration; it was awarded by the Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration. Wasn't he attacking the wrong school?

The day before, the subject of Harvard's case method had come up. I said that I didn't think any program should slavishly commit to a single method of instruction. In fact, my reaction to the case method had been to develop the first business curriculum for the University of Phoenix. "The University of Phoenix? Is that Thunderbird?" he asked. No, it's a different operation. "What is the University of Phoenix?" I explained that it was the largest accredited, for-profit university in the world, with an enrollment of 125,000. Its students are working adults who average 34 years of age. 36% of them are enrolled in undergraduate management programs; 20% are taking graduate management courses.

At this point, I was called away to the podium to give the opening remarks. When I returned, I couldn't find the professor. I hoped to find out how someone can study management education for decades, conclude that it's wasted on the young and learned through practice, and not know of the University of Phoenix.

 

David Cooperider

Lest you this I'm just in a nasty mood, let me say that I was really looking forward to meeting Case Western's David Cooperider, and I was not disappointed. David is the father of "Appreciative Inquiry," or "AI" as it is called by its adherents.

Cooperider's core message is to lead from positive emotions and strength, not negativity and problems. As Peter Drucker told him, "The task of leadership is to create an alignment of strengths, making our weaknsses irrelevant."

Just as Marty Seligman's positive psychology focuses on individual happiness in lieu of mental illness, AI builds on achievements, opportunities, innovations, tacit wisdom, vital traditions, social capital and business strengths, not problems. Cooperider contends that organizations move in the direction of what they study. Focus on problems and that's what you'll get ("Deficit Change Theory").

Change begins in the imagination of the creative mind. Before reading about Appeciative Inquiry, I billed myself as a problem-solver. Since then, I've converted into an opportunity maximizer.

We must learn to scale wholeness, to ask what's possible rather than what's wrong, and to move from systems thinking to systems living.

While the AI methodology sounds touchy-feely, the results are real. One organization's recent AI Summit focused on:

  • Customer retention
  • Market share growth
  • Exploiting market position
  • Entry into adjacent markets
  • New lines of business

Who's doing AI? Blue Cross, BBC, Boeing, Bristol Myers Squibb, British AIrways, BP, British Telecom, Cap Gemini, GE Capital, GlaxoSmithKline, John Deere, Roadway...

Soren Kaplan is working to support AI with Icohere. David said the potential "sends chills up his spine."

David concluded with two of my favorite Einstein quotations:

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it. We must learn to see the world anew."

"There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle."

 

Visit the AI website


T - 20 minutes, Thursday morning.
Will anyone fill the chairs at Jay's session?
FInd out in the next installment.

Posted by Jay Cross at 04:56 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

May 14, 2004

The shortest presentation on metrics you will ever hear

If you're concerned about demonstrating the value of learning, I suggest you check out the Learning Economics Group. This is hot. HP's Tom Hill reports that 70 people have signed up in the past six weeks.

Yesterday morning's meeting featured a presentation by HP Senior Human Performance Consultant Daniel Blair. It was a good session, with several dozen of us paying homage to informal learning, ambient learning, taking a portfolio view, causal chain analysis, intangibles, and more.

The group is to be applauded in their search for the value of learning. I found myself agreeing with a lot of what was being said. In my usual style, I noted that my thinking was not clouded by a PhD in Economics, which appeared to be the dominant degree in the group.

The toughest nut we'll have to crack is the impact of outside events. So many efforts at measuring intangibles oversimplify the environment, suggesting models like this:

That's not the world I live in. Mine's a little more unruly:

I volunteered to speak at a future meeting, prompting Tom Hill to inquire about my presentation last week in Canada. I plucked out the prime slides, recorded an overview, and posted it on the web. At twelve minutes, this is the shrotest presentation on metrics you'll ever hear.

Posted by Jay Cross at 05:55 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

April 24, 2004

The Best Things in Life Are Free

Final Jeopardy: Its objective is to provide practical information about how to use eLearning. It’s free. 30,000 people read it every month in the course of 80,000 visits. Its archives boast 300 substantive articles and a 100 product reviews on eLearning. Its many contributors are an influential community of practice. Sites in 65 countries link to its glossary. It has never spent a dime on advertising.

What is it? You have thirty seconds to write down your answer.

It’s Learning Circuits, the online magazine “all about eLearning.” I remember talking with Tom Barron, the founding editor, in late 1999 when he and ASTD’s Pat Galagan were preparing to launch Learning Circuits. ASTD had been publishing a print magazine, Technical Training for years, but on-line delivery was the obvious wave of the future, and Pat decided it was time for ASTD to, ahem, eat its own cooking.

Last week I called Ryann Ellis and Eva Kaplan-Leiserson to find out what goes on behind the scenes and what might explain Learning Circuits’ stunning success. (Disclosure: Learning Circuits has published several of my articles, and I manage the Learning Circuits blog. I am a fan.)

My curiosity had been aroused when I read “You may be surprised to learn that Learning Circuits is produced by only two people.” Those two people are Ryann Ellis and Eva Kaplan-Leiserson. Ryann, now in her tenth year with ASTD, started with T+D magazine and worked on ASTD’s Web team before becoming Learning Circuits editor in February 2001. Eva joined T+D as associate editor four years ago when her dot-com melted down and spends about a third of her time on Learning Circuits. While not involved in day-to-day operations, Paul Harris built the often-quoted news area of Learning Circuits and recently handed the news chores to Ryann so he could start writing case studies. (An unbiased case study is hard to find.)

I asked Ryann and Eva what stories were their favorites. After their courteous assertion “Yours, of course,” they returned to reality and identified:

  • Sam Adkins is the most interesting. “He blows me away even though I only understand half of it.”
  • Clark Aldrich and Tom Barron wrote a powerful series on customer-focused eLearning early on, before others were thinking that way.
  • Paul Harris has written some great ones, for example his article on outsourcing last June.
  • In the Fundamentals series, Making Peace with eLearning was cool, suggesting yoga as a means to escape the inevitable frustrations of eLearning.
  • Also, though she was too gracious to bring it up, Eva’s two-part series on We-learning, has popped up all over the blogosphere.

Like all of us who survived the dot-com bubble, Learning Circuits has evolved with the times. For the first year, new stories appeared once a month, much like a print magazine. Now new material is added weekly. The site has been redesigned every year to improve navigation, accommodate new features, and keep a contemporary look. In early 2002, Learning Circuits was the first eLearning publication to publish a companion blog.

The content, mostly contributed by a loyal following of volunteers, is compelling. On the web, it’s rare when a reader stays more than five minutes; on Learning Circuits, the average stay is 15 minutes!

In late 2000, few people had a grasp of the terminology of eLearning, anything from asynchronous to zipfile, so Eva led a band of volunteers who created what is probably the best glossary of eLearning terms on the web.

From the outset, Learning Circuits has strived to be very practical with “Five things you need to do to set this up or buy that or include in your RFP.” If you have some practical wisdom to share, email it to Ryann; the readership is insatiable.

In addition to the articles, case studies, news, and glossary, Learning Circuits has:

  • The Learning Circuits blog kicked off in April 2002 with commentary from Peter Isackson, Tom Barron, Clark Quinn, Bill Horton, Kevin Wheeler, Margaret Driscoll, Allison Rossett, Richard Clark, and Jay Cross. This was before most people had ever heard the word blog.
  • Answer geeks. ASTD members-only service. The Best of Q&A appear later as a column.
  • Many readers are working on their second generation of eLearning. They are beyond the basics, so Learning Circuits just started running OpEd pieces that are more theoretical and reflective than its traditional how-to stories.
  • A couple of months back, ASTD opened up searchable discussion boards. They will be adding additional features like polling. Ryann and Eva report there’s “tons of activity.”
  • Product reviews and demos. Not just a link to a vendor webpage. Eva checks out what’s being offered to make certain it’s worth your time. Often vendors assemble a special package for Learning Circuits readers.
  • Quarterly Trends column. Coming soon. Eva’s working on it.

Learning Circuit’s objective is to provide practical information about how to use eLearning to everyone, not just ASTD members. Ryann and Eva are educating the market. They are making the world of eLearning a less scary place. By the way, in addition to soliciting and editing articles, Ryann also personally does the layout and coding for Learning Circuits.

I know what you’re thinking: What can I do to help Ryann and Eva progress with Learning Circuits? I’ll offer a few suggestions:

  • Since Learning Circuits lives by viral marketing, tell a friend.
  • Share your experience; send in a story to rellis@astd.org.
  • Drop a note to Pat Galaghan to tell her how much you appreciate Ryann & Eva's work on Learning Circuits.

Posted by Jay Cross at 07:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 19, 2004

OpEd: ROI vs. Metrics


Learning Circuits just published my article, ROI vs. Metrics, which I thought was just telling it like it is, but editor Ryann Ellis considered sufficiently controversial to make it the first OpEd piece they've ever run.

What's controversial with this?

ROI is often a mask for uncertainty or an attempt to quantify cost-benefit with accounting principles that don't count people as assets. I contend that the business return on an e-learning investment should be so obvious that you can figure it out on the back of a napkin. Traditionally, executives assume training has little or no impact on revenue, so they measure training benefits in terms of cost savings. This works against e-learning, in which increases in top-line revenue generally exceed reduced expenses by a wide margin. Enter metrics.

I don't understand how anyone could disagree when I write

Present-day accounting is an anachronism. In a nutshell, the basic problem is that intangibles are valued at zero. Vast areas of human productivity--ideas, abilities, experience, insight, esprit de corps, and motivation--lie outside the the purist's field of vision.

A friend of mine read the article, came to this site, and plunked down $250 for the latest version of Metrics. If his $250 subscription to Metrics helps him justify his $500,000 eLearning budget, it's cheap at the price. If his newfound attitude improves his career options, that's icing on the cake.

The next version, Metrics 2.0, will be a great improvement, but it's not out yet. Here's a piece from the introduction:

Origins

Last year at TechLearn I promised to send several people my thoughts on measuring the value of learning investments. On the flight home, I assembled a batch of white papers, interviews, and articles I’d written over the past few years and was surprised to find I’d come up with 90 pages! This was more like a book than a sheaf of white papers.

Why had I written so much on learning metrics and ROI? Frustration. I’ve been in the training business for nearly thirty years, but before that I had been a systems analyst and market research director and I’d earned an MBA. I cut my teeth selling loan officer training to major banks. That requires real what's-in-it-for-me ROI. It pained me to go to conferences like TechLearn and Training and ASTD, only to hear the same worthless claptrap about Level 1 and Level 2 and ROI. Many of the “experts” got their expertise from textbooks rather than the real world. This made me angry. I wrote to expose the charlatans.

Metrics 1.0 & 1.1

Metrics 1.0 was little more than the white papers and articles put in a logical sequence. I slapped on a table of contents and inserted transitions. I sent copies to two dozen friends in the business for advice and comment.

I love books. Several rooms of my house are lined with bookcases. Last year I donated eight cartons of books to the library to clear some shelf space. Already, the gaps have filled in, and the shelves are packed. Nevertheless, I chose to make Metrics an eBook rather than a printed one. Our understanding of how to measure value is in flux; printed books become dated so quickly. I also figured that if I responded to readers’ questions and advice, the work would always be getting better. So Metrics 1.1 was issued as an eBook – and I promised purchasers they would receive the next version as well as this one.

Metrics 1.2 & 1.3

Metrics 1.2 was considerably tighter. I incorporated a mind map to introduce the subject and a simple flowchart for carrying out the full cycle of the Metrics process. I corrected glitches readers had pointed out. Version 1.3 was a minor upgrade, mainly error correction. Several readers pointed out weak spots in the manuscript. They wanted a more direct, forceful, organized presentation. They also asked me to spend less time trashing the current situation and more time on what to do next. To get Metrics into distribution, I offered it to charter subscribers for a mere $25.

Few readers actually gave much feedback but one individual made up for the silence of the rest. The GAP’s Dave Lee went beyond the call of duty. Dave’s background in publishing, experience in accounting, and current work in eLearning make him the ideal critic. Dave is a major influence on the improvements you’ll see in version 2.0. He offered suggestions on overall organization. He convinced me to take a more positive attitude, for example, telling me, “Jay, I’m not sure what accountant ran over your puppy when you were young, but you really don’t need the strawman of 'accountants are out to get us' to make your argument.”

Metrics 1.3 is the current version. People who purchase it will receive Metrics 2.0 when it is ready. The charter subscription period is over. The price of Metrics 1.3+2.0 is $250.

Metrics 2.0

Metrics 2.0 is a total reorganization and rewrite of the original material. It focuses on what to do and why in lieu of me bitching about the ramblings of false prophets. I’ve chopped superfluous material and added more explanatory text. I expect the final Metrics 2.0 to be ready in a couple of months.

People tell me they buy Metrics because they have an immediate need. They’re in budget trouble; their management just doesn’t get it; the big boss wants to see the numbers. In all likelihood they already know part of the material and have come to me to fill gaps or help them polish their approach. This latest version of Metrics begins with a roadmap of what’s to come. The map will guide you to the chapters that contain what you most need to know. I’ve relegated more philosophical issues to the back of the book.

Making the business case involves a lot more than doing the math. You have to understand the business. This takes credibility with managers outside of the training function. You must, as SumTotal president Kevin Oakes recently wrote in T+D (2004), “earn a seat at the table.” My goal is to help you get there and to be invited back again and again. It's probably a better job than the one you have now.

April 2004


More about Metrics
Posted by Jay Cross at 06:35 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

April 02, 2004

Jackpot!


Concentrated wisdom from Serendip at Bryn Maur.

I believe that education must be conceived as a continuing reconstruction of experience, that the process and the goal of education are the same thing.

I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living.

-- John Dewey, My Pedagogic Creed

The teacher is not only a communicator but a model. To communicate knowledge and to provide a model of competence, the teacher must be free to teach and learn

-- Jerome Bruner, The Process of Education

We think we learn from teachers, and we sometimes do. But the teachers are not always to be found in school, or in great laboratories. Sometimes what we learn depends on our own powers of insight. Moreover, our teachers may be hidden, even the greatest teacher.

-- Loren Eiseley, "The Hidden Teacher" in The Star Thrower

A manual? Give me a break! Let me get in there and muck around and try various things and see what happens.

-- John Seely Brown, "Learning, Working, and Playing in the Digital Age"

Posted by Jay Cross at 09:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 29, 2004

SumTotal savings

Here's an answer for the critics who questioned how the Click2Learn/Docent combo was going to cut costs while moving forward.


SumTotal to invest $8 mn over 2 yrs

The company expects to move customer and technical support and engineering work fully to India.



SumTotal plans to increase headcount

HYDERABAD: SumTotal Systems Inc., the new entity created by the merger of Docent and Click2learn, plans to increase headcount in Hyderabad centre from 90 to 160, though at the global level it will go down from 470 to 400 (excluding Hyderabad additions) by the time restructuring is complete. Investment in Indian operations is also likely to be about $3 million in the next 12 months, according to Sudheer Koneru, Senior Vice-President, International Operations.

SumTotal Sets $3 M Aside For Hyderabad Development Centre


OUR EFE BUREAU
HYDERABAD: SumTotal Systems Inc, the newly-formed merged entity of Docent Inc and Click2learn, is planning to make its Indian development centre as the hub for products, services and research and development for its global operations. With a combined cash reserve of over $40 million in hand due to the merger, SumTotal has proposed an investment of $3 million in the Indian development centre over a period of 12 months, said Sudheer Koneru, senior vice-president, international operations of SumTotal Systems Inc.

Announcing the completion of merger of both the companies here, Mr Koneru said following the merger, SumTotal will end up saving $15 million annually, with a combined turnover of $60 million. The company, which has its largest manpower at the Hyderabad development centre, will add another 30 professionals basically for research and development and product engineering work, Mr Koneru said. He added, “We see the development centre emerging as a hub for our research and development, products engineering and solutions.”

Following this development, the R&D centre of Click2Learn, will now broaden its work and include the Docent product line. This will also increase the number of techies based in the Hyderabad centre from the current 130 to about 160 and expand the maintenance work for the two companies.

The investment of about $ 8 million would cover both the working expenses and capex in the company centre based in Hyderabad.



Uncomfortable? Get used to it. Business is global. This is good business practice.


Update

From ZDNet

Tech Update Software Infrastructure

Gartner CEO to CIOs: Embrace offshoring or else


By David Berlind
March 29, 2004

San Diego, CA -- "Rather than waste precious energy on a fruitless effort to preserve the economic structure of the past, we need to embrace, control, and ultimately own the changes that are underway. To survive the offshoring threat, IT leaders must present themselves as an outsourcing authority that their company can't do without."

That advice was delivered by Gartner Group CEO Michael Fleisher to a roomful of IT executives here at Gartner Symposium/ITxpo 2004.

Fleisher admonished IT executives who have been resisting the "unquestionable" benefits of outsourcing. Fleisher's warning was subtle but unmistakable: Not only IT's rank-and-file jobs are at risk; even IT leaders could be out of their jobs if they aren't looked upon within their organizations as the go-to people on outsourcing.

Fleisher acknowledged that outsourcing, and particularly offshoring, would be a very painful experience for those IT professionals whose jobs face elimination, but he offered little if any practical wisdom on how to deal with the trend. "I don't for a minute want to minimize the pain involved to individuals in this transition," Fleisher said. "The government has an important role in helping our citizens make this transition as quickly and painlessly as possible through education and retraining."

It's an open secret that Gartner reads Internet Time Blog, but this time they beat me to the punch by twelve hours.

Many of the IT jobs being outsourced today are destined to be wiped out by the efficiencies of Service Oriented Architecture in the next few years anyway. Gartner's Fleisher warns CIOs to take control of outsourcing rather than fight a losing battle against it. Otherwise they'll have to deal with the unruly consequences, much as they did when the obvious benefits of unauthrorized PCs forced centralized IT departments to adopt client/server architecture.

Fleisher identified four major factors that are going to reorganize the world of work:

  • secure broadband wireless
  • always-on/always-connected devices
  • easy access to vast amounts of very reliable and very cheap computing power
  • service-oriented architectures that make application development cheaper and faster.

The Workflow Institute was delighted to note that Fleisher did not mention worker empowerment, learning, culture, job enrichment, community, teamwork, or any other human factors, assuring us that we'll have plenty to do amid the evolution to the new way of doing business.

Posted by Jay Cross at 11:46 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

March 26, 2004

Training transfer to the job.

Have you heard -- or used -- these stats?

"Only 10% of training transfers to the job."

"Only 10% of the investment in training
actually transfers to the job."

"Although $100 billion is spent on
training each year, only 10%
of these expenditures
result in transfer to the job."

Rather than accept stuff like this, Will Thalheimer responds, "Says who?" You see, Will takes a scientific approach to learning. His workshops are fascinating because he describes experiments, not theory. (No, he doesn't pay me to say this.)

A Pennsylvanian named Robert Fitzpatrick nailed the source of the 10% bunkum above. Here's the story.

If you're a contrarian like me, you'll enjoy Will's site.

Posted by Jay Cross at 11:38 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

March 21, 2004

People, a good investment

Laurie Bassi is a rare individual. Research convinced her that companies that invest in their people just had to do better than penny-pinchers that cut training and payroll the moment the economy sours. She invested in a portfolio of stocks of companies that invest heavily in their people. The returns are "in line with a growing body of empirical research showing that organizations that make extraordinary investments in people often enjoy extraordinary performance on a variety of indicators, including shareholder return."


March 2004

How's Your Return on People?


Companies that invest in employee development can outperform the market. Just ask their shareholders.


by Laurie Bassi and Daniel McMurrer


"Managers are always claiming, “People are our most important asset.” But deep down, they can’t shake the feeling that employees are costs. Big costs. And they treat them that way. Quarterly earnings off? Cut the perks, rein in training, and downsize. This strategy may increase earnings in the short term, but it’s myopic. Recent studies suggest that layoffs actually destroy shareholder value. And our research shows that treating employees like the assets they are—by investing in their development—boosts returns over the long term."

"For years now, our research has measured the effect of spending on employee education and training—a “cost” that is buried in general and administrative expenses—on the stock prices of 575 publicly traded firms."

Every year for three years, Laurie and Daniel selected a portfolio of 20 to 40 companies that spent at least twice as much as their peers to develop their human resources. In 2003, these heavy investors in human resources outperformed the S&P by 17% to 35%.

Laurie Bassi (lbassi@knowledgeam.com) is the chairwoman and Daniel McMurrer (dmcmurrer@knowledgeam.com) is the chief research officer at Knowledge Asset Management, a money management firm in Bethesda, Maryland.

Posted by Jay Cross at 05:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 10, 2004

ISPI and Metrics

Measurement Counts! Metrics, ROI, and Accomplishments (the missing element)

A recent publication, Metrics, by Jay Cross of the Internet Time Group, presents an opportunity to comment on some current issues in measurement and evaluation. The author, who happens to be an old friend, is an entertaining and wide-ranging thinker (some might say Renaissance Man), and his book is noteworthy in part because of its unconventional form: a constantly updated eBook available for purchase online. Jay’s history in financial services, training, marketing, and a whole host of cerebral pursuits has left him most recently in the world of e-Learning, where he has become something of a pundit.

While I don’t agree with everything in Metrics, I recommend it because it’s a quick and enjoyable read, because it contains valuable references and links, and mostly because it challenges us to think outside many of the current ruts in measurement and evaluation.

Things I Like about Metrics
Here are some of Jay’s key points along with my comments:

  • “Metrics are measurements that matter.” With this sentence, he challenges us to measure results that our clients agree are important and to look for large valuable improvements. He adds, “Don’t fritter away time on the small stuff.”

  • “Start with business problems and work backwards.” He later adds that we should “focus on process not on behavior.” These comments point in the direction of our best strategy for measuring the right things, following Thomas F. Gilbert’s dictum to identify accomplishments, the outputs of processes or of individual jobs that contribute value toward business results. Behavior costs money while accomplishments have value. Following the path from business results back through measured accomplishments will lead to the behavior and improvement strategies that produce worthwhile organizational outcomes.

  • “Forget measurement of value based on cost savings!” As an e-Learning strategy consultant, Jay has probably tired of cost justifications based on saving travel time and expenses. It is critically important that we find ways to use our technologies and interventions to improve outcomes, not simply reduce costs for the same (often mediocre) outcomes.

  • “Time matters.” Whether we’re speaking of time to perform (fluency, productivity), time to achieve benchmark performance (ramp-up), or results over time (revenues, profits), we cannot ignore the time dimension in either our measurement of learning and performance during training or our measurement of desired business results.

  • “Gather baseline data.” While it is easy to interpret this statement as simply that we need a “before” measure to evaluate the worth of our “after” results, the “line” in baseline is very important. To clearly understand the effects of our interventions, we must view current performance in the context of measured levels, trends, and bounce (or variability) over time. We need a series of counts (per minute, per day, per week, or per month) to establish a true baseline so that we can tell whether our interventions or ongoing efforts are changing trends, levels, and/or the “bounce” (variability) of measured outcomes.

  • “You must be able to relate your decisions and choices to the profitability of your organization.” While much of Jay’s discussion focuses on what I call “validation data”—measurement to justify expenditures by showing that programs work—the best measurement systems support ongoing decision-making. This is why I recommend ongoing measurement as feedback to performers and decision-makers, and why I like Timm Esque’s book, Making An Impact, so much.

  • Jay disagrees with much of the current thinking about ROI, suggesting that his book can save you the cost of an ROI workshop. Whether or not this is true, managers would certainly prefer to see how your program improves their specific outcomes beyond a general payback ratio or cost justification. And since some current-day ROI “methods” use subjective estimates of payback rather than direct results measures, we need to question in detail many ROI claims before we accept them.

Things I Don’t Like So Much About Metrics
Lest you think I’m giving my friend a free pass, let me make a few comments about shortcomings.

  • The second half of the book is mostly a justification for e-Learning, something I would have preferred left to a few pages. I recognize that Jay makes his living in this field, but it would be more helpful if the book addressed the general case with a broader set of examples. Moreover, it is inconceivable that even the best e-Learning program will produce optimal results without efforts to improve other factors in a performance system, including expectations, feedback, tools, resources, consequences, and selection.

  • Jay does not discuss what’s a good measure and what’s not. For example, he mentions the limitations of test results as metrics but does not explain that percentage correct is not a measure of performance because it is a dimensionless quantity from which we cannot determine either the count of behavior or accomplishments nor the time required to complete them. He does not point out that the best metrics count things in absolute units (dollars, widgets, gallons, etc.) rather than rating them on subjective scales. Careful application of all his recommendations can still yield meaningless measurement if we fail to adhere to this basic principle.

  • Jay speaks of using both “subjective and objective” data. For me, the term “subjective” means open to wide interpretation or idiosyncratic. What I think he means by “subjective” is measurement of opinion or preference, which can be very objective if we refrain from applying “voodoo math” by summarizing numbers on rating scales of subjective impressions to produce “average” ratings. It is not subjective to say that “20 people out of 45 rated the program as very good and 10 said it was poor”—a quantitative measure of personal opinion that can be safely manipulated within the rules of arithmetic.

I suggest you read Metrics yourself, and discuss it vigorously with your colleagues and clients. I am sure you will find it both entertaining and illuminating.

Dr. Carl Binder is a Senior Partner at Binder Riha Associates, a consulting firm that helps clients improve processes, performance, and behavior to deliver measurable results. He may be reached at CarlBinder@aol.com. For additional articles, visit http://www.binder-riha.com/publications.htm.

Posted by Jay Cross at 07:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

my test page

Yesterday I followed a link from cogdogblog to a presentation in Breeze by Alan Levin, D'Arcy Norman, and Brian Lamb that showed the power of RSS in education. The presentation is worth watching simply as a model for rapid-fire, low-cost, yet compelling development. But in my case, the content was quite useful as well.

The Maricopa reference page, RSS Feeds via JavaScript, showed me enough to begin including RSS feeds in my webpages.

Check out my test page to see the most recent posts to a dozen favorite blogs.

Admittedly, I'm a newbie. (I think Stephen has been doing this since the beginning of time.) The page takes forever to load -- so I think I'll move the underlying scripts to my own server. Also, it doesn't look like the items automatically refresh.

If you're an RSS afficianado who owes me one or wants to top off her/his karma account, I wouldn't mind receiving some advice on this.

Posted by Jay Cross at 12:36 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

March 09, 2004

Ted Nelson, way out

Like the fish that is unaware of water, Ted Nelson says computer users are blind to the 2D tyranny of paper. Herewith, a few excerpts from his thought-provoking paper....

WAY OUT OF THE BOX
Theodor Holm Nelson
Keio University and University of Southampton

The world you are brought up in has the seeming of reality; it can take decades to unlearn. "Growing up" means in part finding out what's behind the false assumptions and misrepresentations of everyday life, so that at last you understand what's really happening and what the well-mannered pleasantries really mean and don't. But must our computer tools also be such a masquerade to be unlearned?


The usual story about Xerox PARC, that they were trying to make the computer understandable to the average man, was a crock. They imitated paper and familiar office machines because that was what the Xerox executives could understand. Xerox was a paper-walloping company, and all other concepts had to be ironed onto paper, like toner, to be even visible in their paper paradigm.


There are still millions of people who believe that the Macintosh represents creative liberation. For this astounding propagandistic achievement we can thank the Regis McKenna public relations company, which sold the Macintosh to the world (in the famous 1984 video commercial and after) as smashing the prison of the PC. In fact the Macintosh was a newly-designed prison-a-go-go. And that prison's architecture has been devotedly copied to Microsoft Windows in remarkable detail.


Today's arbitrarily constructed computer world is also based on paper simulation, or WYSIWYG. That's where we're stuck in the current model, where most software seems to be mapped to paper. ("WYSIWYG" generally means "What You See is What You Get"-- meaning what you get *when you print it OUT*). In other words, paper is the flat heart of most of today's software concepts.

This too was a key legacy of Xerox PARC. The PARC guys got a lot of points with Xerox management by making the "electronic document" MIMIC PAPER-- rather than extending it outward to include and show all the connections, possibilities, variations, parentheses, conditionals that are really there in the mind of the author or the speaker; rather than presenting all the details that the reporter faces before cooking them down.


One result is office software that's incredibly clumsy, with slow, pedestrian operations. Think how long it takes to open and name a file and a new directory. Whereas video-game software is lithe, quick, vivid.

Why is this?

Very simple. Guys who design video games *love to play video games*. Whereas nobody who designs office software seems to care about using it, let alone hopes to use it at warp speed.


Even stranger is the "browser" concept. Think of it-- a serial view of a parallel universe! Trying to comprehend the large-scale structure of connected Web pages is like trying to look at the night sky (at least, in places that stars are still visible) through a soda straw.


Finally, we must overcome the tyranny of the file-- meaning stuck lumps with final names. While files are necessary at some level, users don't need to see them, and much less need to give their projects unchanging names and locations. Human creativity is fluid, overlapping, intercombining, and many creative projects overflow their banks time and again.

Computers aping paper, corporate learning aping school, popular songs aping wisdom:

When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school, it's a wonder I can think at all."
Posted by Jay Cross at 09:10 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

March 06, 2004

Edubabble from Ontario

My co-conspirator at the Workflow Institute, Sam Adkins, sent me a delicious link to the Organization for Quality Education, a group of Ontario citizens up in arms over the poor quality of their public schools. Nothing is funnier than the truth.

OQE logo

Let's start with a few definitions of education buzzwords.

Buzzword: Research has shown...
What parents THINK it means: It's proven.
What it REALLY means: Other people say so, too.

Buzzword: Child-centered
What parents THINK it means: Your child is of greatest concern
What it REALLY means: Your child does what he wants to do

Buzzword: No memorization
What parents THINK it means: No boring stuff
What it REALLY means: We don't teach facts

Buzzword: High-order thinking
What parents THINK it means: Thinking
What it REALLY means: Lost in the fog

Buzzword: Brain-based learning
What parents THINK it means: Science teaches a lot about learning
What it REALLY means: I believe in feng-shui, too

Buzzword: Discovery learning
What parents THINK it means: It's fun to learn
What it REALLY means: Kids will spend a week learning what lively, engaged instruction could teach in a day

Buzzword: We don't "teach to the test"
What parents THINK it means: No drills just for the sake of passing some test
What it REALLY means: We don't like being told what to cover in class

Buzzword: Education theorists
What parents THINK it means: Deep thinkers about education issues
What it REALLY means: People who spout opinions without any supporting data

Buzzword: Education researchers
What parents THINK it means: People who analyze data about what actually works
What it REALLY means: People who summarize the view of the theorists

OQE logo

That was just a warm-up. What is a quality education? How can you judge? You look to your customers.

    A quality education system produces students with the knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, and work habits needed to become productive, fulfilled citizens. It provides clear goals, high standards, good teachers and a well-organized curriculum.

    Much of what is wrong with Ontario education today is the result of the system's clinging to an outdated concept of quality. Over the past 30 years, organizations in the private sector - and now increasingly in the public sector - have come to the realization that quality can no longer be patronizingly defined by the providers of goods and services. Today, quality means meeting or exceeding the expectations of customers. In other words, something isn't good quality unless the customer says it is.

    So what are the customers of Ontario's schools saying? The employers and post-secondary educators, the school system's most obvious customers, are its most vocal and consistent critics. Meanwhile, parents line up overnight to enroll their children in academy schools where high academic and behavioural standards prevail, in stark contrast to the laissez-faire attitudes in most schools. Much like sixties Detroit automotive engineers who largely ignored the requests from motorists for smaller, fuel-efficient cars, the education system dismisses these criticisms as coming from people unqualified to determine what constitutes quality education.

    Modern quality is about outputs, not inputs. Yet status quo educators define quality primarily in terms of inputs to the education system, such as funding levels, class size, and teacher certification. The effects of these inputs on learning outcomes, however, are anything but clear. Studies in some jurisdictions, for example, have found that the more school boards spend, the worse students learn!

OQE logo

Meanings are important. I maintain a glossary at Internet Time, one of about five edutech glossaries on the net that aren't simply copies of someone else's glossary. OQE offers a glossary for debunking edubabble. It's extremely thought-provoking. The definitions come from The Schools We Need & Why We Don’t Have Them by E.D. Hirsch.

    metacognitive skills = A term that, like “constructivism,” has a legitimate technical but an illegitimate nontechnical meaning. The illegitimate, broader application of the term identifies it with “accessing skills,” “critical-thinking skills,” “problem-solving skills,” and other expressions of the anti-knowledge tool conception of education.

    multiple intelligences = ...Despite the fact that schools are not competent to classify and rank children on these highly speculative psychological measures, the concept had become highly popular, probably because it fits in with the already popular notions of “individual differences,” “individual learning styles,” “self-paced learning,” and so on, not to mention its appeal to our benign hope for all children that that will be good at doing something and happy doing it. The distinguished psychologist George A. Miller has said that Gardner’s specific classifications are “almost certainly wrong.”

    portfolio assessment = A phrase for a version of performance-based assessment. In portfolio assessment, students preserve in a portfolio all of some of their productions during the course of the semester or year. At the end of the time period, students are graded for the totality of their production. It is a device that has long been used for the teaching of writing and painting. But there its utility ceases. It has proven to be virtually useless for large-scale, high-stake testing.

OQE logo

I'm writing this as I explore the site. I was going along with Hirsch for the first few definitions but now I am beginning to suspect that he's an extremist. His message is that students need to master basic skills and learn facts with rigor. Only then will they be able to develop (Hirsch hates this term violently) "critical thinking skills." But Hirsch seems to win his arguments by setting up strawmen and then knocking them down.

Admittedly, my expertise is in adult performance, not childhood education, but I'm too big a fan of learning by doing to throw it out the window just because some teachers don't set it up right or some students don't join in. Hirsch says learning by doing is "a phrase once used to characterize the progressivist movement but little used today, possibly because the formulation has been the object of much criticism and even ridicule." He continues on, saying "The idea behind it resembles the real-life activities for which the particular learning is preparing the student. It is claimed that the best form of learning is that which best allows the student to learn in the natural, apprentice-like way in which humans have always learned."

So far, this sounds pretty good to me, but not to Hirsch, who writes, "By performing 'holistic' activities, the student, it is claimed, will reliably discover the needed learnings. This is an attractive doctrine, but it is also a highly theoretical one that has proved to be false. The value of such a method depends on its actual effectiveness. If by 'effective', one means that all students learn reliably and efficiently by this method, then the theory has been entirely discredited in comparative studies. Both recent history of American education and controlled observations have shown that learning by doing and its adaptations are among the least effective pedagogies available to the teacher."

I disagree. Situated learning -- doing the work rather than learning about the work -- is often the best way to learn. By "effective," I don't mean something works for all students, just that it's a winner for some of them. Of course learning by doing in the real world requires leaving the artificial reality inside the protective walls of schools.

I'd hoped to win one for the Republic of Berkeley, debunking public education, but I end up admitting that schooling is a supremely complicated area and that (Are you ready for this?) I don't have a clue as to how to fix it. It's late. I was looking for black and white; I found shades of gray. This is a provocative site, well worth visiting.

Posted by Jay Cross at 11:33 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

March 04, 2004

Speaking of timing...

I went to my DSL provider's site because they've imposed some limit on the number of recipients allowed per email, and I wanted to get some information. (The only inbound information I ever receive from these guys is a bill.) Their site appears to be five years out of date. Must be one of those artifacts from the phone monopogy culture of days gone by.

Windows 98 and your Pacific Bell Internet Services Account

Pacific Bell Internet Services recognizes that many of our customers have converted to this new operating system. The following information is provided as a resource to help prevent problems while using our software with Windows 98.

Pacific Bell Internet Services is now providing software that is compatible with Windows 98. This is a very specific package, and needs to be used exclusively with Windows 98.


I'm in the midst of doing taxes. I once had a securities account with Bache, before they merged with Halsey Stuart Shields and were acquired by Prudential, becoming Prudential-Bache and then Prudential Securities before being acquired by Wachovia recently. Lord, but I detest banks. Here's one more reason:

Posted by Jay Cross at 09:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Credibiliity

Chuck Fred is author of Breakaway. Here's my Amazon review:

If you only have time for one book this year, read this one. September 21, 2002 Reviewer: Jay Cross, Berkeley, CA USA

What has really changed in our world in the last two decades? Time has sped up and surpassed all the other busienss variables in importance. These days time is more important than money.

To win in business, you must break away from the pack and stay ahead by serving your customers extraordinarily well. "Speed-to-proficiency is more than a theoretical advantage; it is the most devastating competitive weapon in a world where the competitive forces of scale, automation, and capital are subordinate to the power of a proficient work force."

I enjoyed this book, right from the first sentence -- "This book is designed for the business reader, to be read in the time it takes to fly from Chicago to San Francisco or Denver to Miami." Breakaway is an easy read with a vital message. Read it.

Chuck and I talked this afternoon about the continuing lack of discipline in measuring the impact of corporate learning. That's the topic of my Metrics, my strongest statement yet that "training metrics" are a fantasy. The appropriate metrics for training are business metrics.

Chuck and I are both obsessed with time. Chuck's a former competitive runner and the "breakaway" of his book's title is that point when the winners pull ahead of the also-rans. It worked for Jesse Owens and it works for Wal*Mart. The name of this site is a reflection of my view of time. Time has become the prime business metric. How soon can our team reach proficiency? How can we get there faster? How can we stay ahead of the game? How can we speed things up? How soon will we be ready to execute?

The genesis of Chuck's book was interviews with 300 CEOs. He promised them absolute confidentiality in return for their candor. He maintains these relationships to this day.

Late last year, Chuck asked the CEOs about their levels of confidence in the ROI presentations made in suport of training expenditures. Specifically, he asked about purchases of off-the-shelf courseware, training technology & infrastructure, and training-related advisory services.

Nine out of ten CEOs said they had no confidence in the ROI of training as presented to them. You can reach Chuck at Breakaway Group.


Posted by Jay Cross at 05:21 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

March 01, 2004

Metrics

Jay:

Thank you for Metrics. I read it immediately. (Most of what I needed anyway, which was a lot)

I was able to compose a draft Revenue Model for E Learning Enterprise justification because your knowledge, references, links and other insights were there when I needed them. I will be discussing the metrics on Wednesday to determine the level of acceptance of my projections.

The metrics included estimated comparative costs of conventional training to E learning, lost opportunity costs, profit loss, turnover savings, and increased revenue due to decrease in job analysis error rate.

I don?t know where this is going, but the potential could be groundbreaking for solutions to problems in the industry under study.

Your approach to ?get real? terminology regarding the important items to measure for training effect is refreshing and entertaining.

I have been in the training, and performance change, business for more years than I would like to admit. However, these days are encouraging, because we are being invited to leave the laboratory of the ?fuzzy? and enter the arena of investments that matter.

Regards,

Frank Murphy
EQUIFOCUS, LLC

EQUIFOCUS offers training consultation, E Learning content development, and outsource services that improve performance for Equipment Manufacturers and supporting Service organizations.



Metrics is an eBook because it's continually updated. Buy a copy today. You can download the current version immediately. When the next edition is ready, I'll send you a copy of that as well.

Metrics shows you how to calculate ROI, but that's the tip of the iceberg. More important is understanding how business executives make decisions, how to describe "soft" benefits in monetary terms, how to sell your ideas, and how to perform a meaningful cost/benefit analysis. Here's a map of the topics covered:

"Can't imagine anything I'd add or change ... for anyone looking for a real understanding of ROI,as well as various ways to calculate their return, this is the best A-Z guide I have read. And you hit the nail on the head ... it's ultimately about performance and the cost of improving performance."

David Grebow
Chief Learning Officer
Trinity Learning




Metrics, by Jay Cross.
100 pages, $250.







Posted by Jay Cross at 09:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack