E-Learning in corporate setting

The effectiveness of blended learning in the corporate setting

Introduction

The increased growth in social media and the internet provides a significant and global opportunity for e-learning across all industries.  During the growth surge, e-learning has been used synonymously with other terms such as online learning, internet-based instruction, and distance learning.  As a result of the interchangeable verbiage, it is important that we establish a proper definition of e-learning.  Steven Gold (2001), defines e-learning as the delivery of content via all electronic media, including the internet, intranets, audio/videotape, interactive TV and CD-ROM.  Kerstin Grundén (2011) defined e-learning as the expanded upon Gold’s definition to include the goal to “transform and support teaching and learning process.”  Reiser, et al (2018), characterized e-learning by two trends: (1) functional structural design that use various collaborative entities and components, and (2) technics designed or selected to reach learning outcomes.

While the focus of e-learning has been primarily in the higher educational field, there has been a surge in the business and corporate industries.  Over the course of the last decade, the traditional instructor-led training delivery method, in the corporate sector, has declined (Gold, 2001, p.77).   The growth of corporate e-learning delivery methods is due in part to the assumed reduced cost, flexible access, reduced barriers for training and allowance for different learning styles.   Nunez et al (2009), confirmed that the use of learning technologies in the workplace is being utilized at all levels from simple help to complex applications.  The usage and prioritization of e-learning training methods vary based on the company size which coincides with the budgetary restrictions.  Larger corporations usually have a long-term vision of e-learning to incorporate in their staff development programs (Nunez et al, 2009, p. 102).  As would be expected, the larger corporations also have a larger budget available for the development of e-learning.  Medium to smaller corporations have a shorter-term vision of e-learning implementation.  They also have a smaller budget dedicated to the creation of e-learning and when utilized the focus is more on task development. 

Although companies are increasing their emphasis on e-learning, there is little research on the effectiveness of e-learning in the workplace and to the business performance.  Reisner et. al. (2018), discussed the history of instruction and technology, the high expectations and disappointing outcomes of the initial marriage of instruction and technology.  Given the disappointing performance outcomes associated with the sole implementation of e-learning, many companies have opted for a blended learning approach. Strother (2002, p. 1) confirmed that a “blend of web-based and classroom/instructor-led instruction reduced training cost by 35% while improving consistency and scalability.”  The implementation of the blended learning environment is easily adaptable to both synchronous and asynchronous training formats.  Reece and Lockee (2019) advises that a blended learning environment caters to the various learning needs of the learners in the class.   Blended learning can be designed to prepare the learner for the upcoming training and also to teach the skills needed for the role.  This will help build the needed entry-level subskills prior to learning new information.

Literature Review: Key Implications for Instructional Design

Nunez et al (2009, p. 107) referenced how current workplace e-learnings support a behaviorist learning theory, as in traditional learning.  However, a well-developed blended learning module should encompass more of a constructivist approach.   When designing the e-learning portion of the blended learning module, it is important to choose the right technic to support the learning outcomes.  In a rush to use the latest technology media, some companies will make the technic the priority and try to force the instruction to adapt to that technic.  Reece and Lockee (2019) and Nunez et al (2009) both emphasized the importance of identifying the learning objectives first before identifying the technic to be utilized.  As I reviewed the literature, though not directed stated, many of the articles supported the implementation of some feature of Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction to create an effective e-learning module.  Reece and Locke (2019, p.51) mentioned that communication of the program plan and learning expectations, to the learner, is critical.  This tenant supports the Gagné’s second event to “Inform Students of the objectives.”  Another limitation proposed by Reece and Locke (2019, p. 51) is potential “push back” from learners as it relates to the time required to complete the instruction.  They referenced the importance of engaging management support.  Nunez et al (2009) and Grundén (2011) also mentioned the importance of the learning culture in the adaptation of the learning material and the importance of management engagement.  Grundén advises that management engagement is necessary to legitimize the importance of the course and to subsequent job integration.  Herrington’s and Oliver’s (2000) authentic learning environment suggests that the utilization of experts, in this case, managers, to demo the task can create and renew the learning culture.  There was also an underlying theme across the articles referencing the importance of measuring learners’ pre-knowledge and adjusting the instruction accordingly (Grundén, 2011; Nunez et al 2009 and Reece and Lockee 2019).  The eighth event of Gagné Instruction model suggests the use of a pretest to gauge the prerequisite skillset of the learners. Grundén (2011, p. 11) also highlighted the influence of the learners’ socio-cultural perspective on the learning of a new task.  This speaks to the situated learning theory and how it should be applied to the design process.  It goes without saying that the situated learning theory and the schema learning theory are closes linked as the socio-cultural perspective forms the existing schema that the new information will be linked to for the learner to retain the information. Kirsten Grundén (2011) also referenced the importance of motivation as a learning prerequisite to help maintain engagement in the course and more importantly the subsequent integration post-training.  Grundén spoke of the importance of implementing the Motivation-Opportunity-Ability (MOA) model to instruction as well.  Motivation can be influenced by making sure the training is relevant to the job and reflective of the job responsibilities.  

As aforementioned, there is limited information related to the effectiveness of the e-learning.  Much of the training evaluation involves a survey of the learners’ experience of the trainer and the delivery.  In the corporate environment, a heavier emphasis is placed on finance and performance improvement post-training.  Strother’s (2002) article outlined how the Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation should be utilized to evaluate a blended learning environment.  To account for the financial aspect sought out by most corporations, Strother’s (2002, p. 9) added Level 5: ROI from the Phillips’ model.

Case Study: “Was not thinking about it” case study by Kirsten Grundén (2011).

The study was done in conjunction with the Västra Götaland Regional Council of Sweden.  The municipalities are responsible for preschool, social services, and elderly care, as required by the government.  The main task is to manage healthcare within the region in addition to the growth and development within the sectors.  In 2005 the council decided to develop an e-learning course to focus on the interactions of disabled patients with healthcare professionals.  The learning outcome was to improve the interpersonal behavior of healthcare professionals towards disabled patients.  A project group was created to define the course contents.  The project group consisted of representatives from the health services team, regional offices, disability and inclusion services, and disability organization.  The course was offered to 45,000 employees and was designed as an “interactive e-learning course distributed on the intranet of the regional organization (Grundén, 2011, p.8).”  The desired performance outcome was to change the informal meeting behavior of the healthcare professional and the disabled client.  The training was a blended learning approach using a combination of individual and group discussions with the e-learning course material.  The e-learning course included 7 different patient and healthcare professional interactions.  It also included links to improve the learners’ knowledge, different questions, and tests.  The course time was estimated to be 1-2 hours.  The course organization varied based on workplace location.  Some workplaces allowed only individual course study.  Other workplaces allowed individual studies in conjunction with workgroup discussions. The group discussions and follow activities were arranged by work departments.

Case Study Evaluation

The course evaluation was conducted using a quantitative survey distributed to a sample of healthcare participants after course completion.  The author used the survey results as the basis for a qualitative follow-up analysis.  The qualitative study was used to measure the integration of the learning outcome into the work situations.  Only four respondents changed their meeting behaviors according to the survey results.  These four respondents were selected as one respondent group of the qualitative study.  The other respondent group consisted of five respondents that had not changed their meeting behavior. All respondents were interviewed and recorded for an hour.  The interview was then transcribed to allow for a content analysis to be performed.   Work changes, as a result of learning outcomes, were identified.

Case Study Findings

Based on the content analysis of the qualitative studies, the following findings were revealed:

1. The group that didn’t change their behavior advised they already had a good meeting behavior, so the material was not beneficial.
2. Majority of the respondents advised that the course material relating to the accessibility to the physical environment was the most relevant. Based on this information, many locations improved their access accordingly.
3. The reduction of study time was feedback from several respondents. This was mentioned as a probable reason group discussion was not had in all organizations.
4. Group discussions were prioritized in the jobs with a high degree of impact even though the discussion took more time away from daily work.
5. Course Relevancy: High degree impact groups rated the course contents as relevant to the job responsibilities and pre-knowledge skill set. Low degree impact groups advised that the course contents were not relevant by job responsibilities. 
6. Management and coordinator engagement: High degree of management and coordinator engagement contributed to the high degree of adherence to the course and subsequent department changes. Low degree of management and coordinator engagement contributed to low course adherence and subsequent department changes.
7. Organizational Responsibility. There was not a defined process to identify the organizational team that should own responsibility for the development and implementation of the e-learning courses.  As a result, there was a lack of organizational support of the implementation post-training, resulting in the variances across departments.

Case Analysis

There should have been a needs analysis performed prior to the development and implementation of the course.  This needs analysis not only would have accounted for the learning objectives but gauged the pre-requisite knowledge, the importance of manager engagement and customization of the material based on the impact groups. Once the needs analysis was completed, the project leaders and designers should have followed the Gagné’s Nine Model of Instruction, as the opportunities missed in the case study is directly addressed in this model.  Also, this project could have benefitted from the use of an instructional analysis to highlight the managerial support needed.  The instructional analysis would have also streamlined the organization’s responsibility so that all groups were able to participate in group sessions and to enhance learning retention and skill to job transfer. Tailoring the material would have allowed for examples to be inserted for the group that felt they already had good meeting behavior.  This group also seemed to struggle with motivation and job relevance.  Implementation of the MOA model and situated learning theory could have help tailor to their experience.  The e-learning should have included embed questions throughout instruction, especially where timing was an issue to access learner performance and provide immediate corrective actions.  This will also allow for the evaluative data collection that can then be compared to the post-job implementation and performance change.   Another opportunity is how gathering of feedback.  Given the corporate environment, there was not an ROI measure produced to validate the effectiveness of the course.

Summary

Communication remains the most important skill as it relates to instructional design.  Communication of project needs, instructional needs, and learner needs will help make sure that the created course will support the learner, the company and that the correct technic is utilized.  The learner characters inclusive of motivation, socio-cultural perspective, and existing knowledge should not be overlooked.  These factors are impactful in engaging the learner and help them make sense of new information by allowing them to reference past experiences.  Learner guidance and management engagement is imperative, especially in the corporate environment.  I grouped these together because by encouraging the management to help guide the learning will give validity to the instruction and build learner confidence in the skill. The need to establish an effective evaluation method for instruction continues to be a field opportunity.  However, the use of learning analytics can help identify the appropriate measures of success.

Reference

Gold, S. (2001). E-learning: The Next Wave of Experiential Learning. Development in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 28, 76–79.

Grundén, K. (2011). Integration of e-learning outcomes into work processes. eleed, Iss. 7. (urn:nbn:de:0009-5-29168)

Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23-48.

Nunes, M, McPherson, M, Annansingh, F, Bashir, I & Patterson, D 2009, ‘The use of e-learning in the workplace: a systematic literature review’, Impact: Journal of Applied Research in Workplace E-learning, vol.1, no.1, pp.97–112.

Reece, M., & Lockee, B. (2019). Improving Training Outcomes Through Blended Learning. Online Learning, 9(4), 49–57. doi: 10.24059/olj.v9i4.1778

Reiser, R. A., Dempsey, J. V., & Van Eck, R. N. (2018). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (4th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

Strother, J. B. (2002). An Assessment of the Effectiveness of e-learning in Corporate Training Programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 3(1), 1–17. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v3i1.83