The following e-learning enablers must be effectively implemented to ensure access and usage.
The right e-learning technology infrastructure and support
Time allocated for e-learning
Affordable investment and demonstrated return on investment
Existence of an organizational e-learning culture
Figure 8-1: Factors That Impact Involvement in e-Learning
Because learning technology is still maturing, significant technical issues can be encountered by the learner. It is therefore important to identify risks, to anticipate contingencies, and to identify the constraints and limitations of systems and tools.
Although it is important to keep in mind that this is essentially a learning project, and not an information technology project, the Masie Center emphasizes that the supporting technology infrastructure for e-learning is an enabler and one of the primary factors affecting successful deployment, along with ongoing support in the development and deployment of e-learning content.
Modern e-learning courseware often dictates the use of broadband technologies to fully support the functionality. Individuals are drawn to e-learning by multimedia streaming services, such as always-on Internet access. Adequate clock speed, processor capabilities, and unimpeded access via broadband to a corporate intranet, both from within the corporate environment and from home, encourage the use of corporate e-learning. Online learning today extends a company's training environment into their employees' home environments, and thus support for the home technology infrastructure needs to be factored into help desk support capability.
In-Stat/MDR has found that U.S. households find the cost of broadband is still a problem, and as a result, fewer than 33 percent of U.S. households will subscribe to a broadband service by 2006. According to In-Stat MDR, 42 percent of dial-up subscribers claim they have no need for broadband service, while 32 percent believe that the technology is too expensive. In contrast, only 8 percent reported that broadband was not available in their area. A limited subscriber base is a potential barrier to the uptake of home-based corporate e-learning. Thus, companies may choose to provide alternatives which can support off-network learning, such as providing courses on CDROM, with assessments being available online in the office.
An important bridge from face-to-face classroom teaching to e-learning is live e-learning. Live e-learning tools, such as Centra, Interwise, WebEx and Mentergy support the use of virtual classrooms, and are designed to work on the basis of minimal bandwidth, although they fully support VoIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol). However, their true functionality, in capabilities such as application sharing, are best utilized at higher bandwidths. Most of the live e-learning tools do not require substantial, or difficult desktop configuration, and are intuitive and easy-to-use.
When deploying e-learning that people will attend from their desktop, spend time in the beginning teaching people how to use the technology.
*See Chapter 13:The Prudential
The likelihood of ongoing interest in e-learning has been found to be heavily influenced by a positive and worthwhile first learning experience being and worthwhile. Limitations in bandwidth, formats, and sometimes browsers can make an implementation and successful adoption difficult. Nothing discourages users more than a defective or restrictive infrastructure, and a single exposure to a defective technological infrastructure may be enough to act as a disabler to future exposure.
From an ongoing support perspective, it is important to provide learners a single point of contact for assistance and ongoing global technical support for learning tools and technologies. It is also critical that the learning technology infrastructure track and support progress, and thus be employed to provide follow-up capability through course completion.
For many learners, one of the overriding negative aspects of participation in, and completion of, e-learning is the perceived lack of approved, allocated time during work hours in which to complete the learning.
In the classic model of learning, the line between time for training and for work were clearly delineated. Managers provided approval for an individual to attend classroom training, and workers left the workplace to attend the class. In many modern organizations, e-learning is readily available as part of the work environment, and requires limited, or no approval from superiors. The challenge for many is that they have to schedule their e-learning during working hours, where it can be construed as being unproductive, and where they can also be distracted by everyday working activities, such as telephone calls and e-mail. These individuals may then choose to consider to, or be forced to, complete e-learning at home after working hours.
In e-learning, 'little bits of small are better than three bits of big.' Big files that take a long time to download and complete discourage people from engaging. If it is small enough, people will fit it into the day.
* See Chapter 15: Unilever
Time for learning seems to be less of an issue when the learning is broken into smaller, manageable modules. The design of learning content (see Chapter 4) highly influences this element. Studies indicate that providing content in learning chunks, which can be completed in a single sitting, seems to encourage both learning retention and the probability of e-learning completion.
Instructor-led live e-learning has the disadvantage that it requires attendance at a certain time. However, live e-learning sessions can be recorded, edited, and stored as alive e-learning objects for later use as many times as needed by those unable to attend the original online session.
Many companies have experienced success with e-learning initiatives by establishing e-learning laboratories: secluded, private spaces equipped with appropriate learning technologies and high-speed access to the corporate intranet and to external Web sites.
The agency created space within the office for e-learning that eliminated interruptions, whether it was a separate cubical location or hanging up a sign that alerted fellow workers that an employee was engaged in e-learning and their learning time was to be respected.
* See Chapter 14: Austrade
Companies are increasingly demanding a return on investment (ROI) on their learning costs (see Chapters 2 and 6). What constitutes the cost of an e-learning infrastructure? Primarily it consists of the purchase, or design and building of courseware and ongoing maintenance costs. Also, the people and management costs in a design and build environment form a high proportion of overall cost, and many companies are reaping the benefit of outsourcing e-learning program coding to offshore vendors. The infrastructure costs can be substantial, with the implementation of learning management systems (LMS), supporting hardware, as well as interfacing costs for linking the LMS with the corporate human resource management, financial, and other corporate systems. Help desk support for both hardware and software also is an important cost element. In addition, the construction of in-house learning laboratories and associated hardware can be expensive.
Where are the savings? Through deployment of e-learning courseware and live e-learning teaching, companies may reduce, or even possibly entirely eliminate expenses related to classroom training and travel expenses incurred in classic, face-to-face training programs, and can impact the opportunity costs by reducing the time learners are away from their office and their daily jobs.
As discussed in Chapter 2, it is important that the learning function be aligned with the business goals and have an impact on the business. It needs to be beneficial to the organization and either reduce core processing costs, or enhance corporate profit, and ideally both. How is this learning business run? In some cases, course costs are allocated to departments, and many times this can be done electronically by interfacing the LMS, human resource and financial systems. A possible advantage of this approach is that the learning budget is not held centrally, but decentralized across departments. The disadvantage can be that consolidation is required to provide the full cost of learning, or that the full cost of learning is never apparent.
In many of the companies interviewed for this Fieldbook, formal approval processes exist for faceto-face training. Some companies have carried this process forward into the e-learning environment. However, this approval requirement can act as a barrier to always-on, always-available, unrestricted e-learning opportunities. Learners may be prevented from taking the lead in their professional development, a critical aspect of the e-learning culture.
There are two major contributors to the learning culture of an organization: the national culture, as discussed in Chapter 9, and the corporate culture.
Globalization has become a driver for economic prosperity for many individuals and companies, which operate both nationally and across national borders. e-Learning has played an important role in the supply of learning globally. The importance and impact of national cultures on the uptake of e-learning may be reduced over time as the globalization and localization of e-learning content becomes more widespread.
Global Reach estimated that some 64 percent of the total global online population was from non-English speaking zones, or the equivalent of 403.5 million non-native English speaking Internet users. Twenty-six percent of Internet users have an Asian language as their first language. Chapter 9 examines this, as well as various other factors in multicultural adoption of e-learning in more depth.
Within a national culture there are multiple corporate cultures. Many corporate cultures are now rooted in increasingly information and knowledge-based industries. Information-rich organizations are increasingly distributed across countries and even continents. In this twenty-first century reality, the classic method of face-to-face training is thus less feasible than in the past.
What is corporate culture, and how does it affect the success or failure of e-learning? According to Neuhauser, Bender, and Stromberg, corporate culture "is a major component of the infrastructure engine that drives the organization in the direction it has set for itself. Culture is often defined as the way we do things around here. If the way a company does things does not match its business strategy, the culture wins every time. No matter what a company says it intends to do, the way people actually behave, think, and believe determines what really happens."
This implies that dictates, or mandates, which are not supported by the right sponsors, or which do not match the business culture, are doomed to failure. A half-hearted, or poorly sponsored e-learning program, that does not support true business or individual needs will probably not be accepted by the majority of the learners, who would resist it en-masse.
Corporate culture is thus an e-learning enabler, or disabler. William C. Symonds offers as an example the e-learning experience of the U.S. Army, which since January 2001 has had approximately 10,400 soldiers taking online courses and earning degrees online from 24 participating colleges: "Students at eArmyU, as its known, receive a free laptop and printer and 100 percent of their tuition. No wonder the Army expects enrollment to hit 80,000 by 2005 as it takes the program Army-wide."
The technology maturity of the e-learner and their willingness to complete e-learning is influenced by the work environment—their corporate culture. The headquarters or country of origin of the organization may also play a role in corporate culture and subsequent adoption of e-learning.
The mainstream adoption of e-learning appears to have started with global IT firms such as Cisco Systems and IBM Corporation, and moved from there to professional services firms, and subsequently to other organizations and industries. Thus, we have seen that large American multinationals are more likely to utilize e-learning across their global operations.