Solve a Business Problem or Create a WBT?

I had an interesting chat conversation over the weekend with a budding instructional designer.

ID: I wanted to discuss about Instructional approaches

ID: Suppose there's a client who says " they have been using ILT that has not been successful, their mentors are not motivating enough& nw wants to change it to a WBT.......and target audience are senior &middle level managers well versed with sales, dealing with retailers etc.....

And I've to give them 2 approaches.....do u hv any ideas?

Me: why is their ILT not successful?

ID: their mentors are not motivating enough

Me: why do you believe wbt will be motivating?

ID: hmm.....It would give them the space of doing the training at their own pace and on their own

after all they are senior managers..who might not like to be trained

I mean not support trainings

Me: basically your instructional strategies need to remove the problems they are having with ILT

so if the mentors/trainers are boring, the WBT has to far far more interesting and interactive

ID: Yep.....

Me: so you have the answer...

unless i understood the question wrong

ID: and with just this information and the fact that I've to develop 2 approached based on level 2 interactivity.....

I needed some ideas

See.......ok, can you list down types of approaches......

one can be scenario based, case study based.....

dialogue based

Me: you should know more about the users, job profile is one, what about their other characteristics -- gender, age, race etc.

Me: also what kind of industry are they in?

ID: they are in sales industry

all senior and middle level managers

pharmaceuticals

Me: basically sales guys travel a lot, they don't like to attend training

do they have PDAs etc.?

which country are we talking about?

ID: India

Me: what access do they have to computers and Internet?

ID: broadband

Me: from home?

ID: yes

everywhere

Me: so the company is expecting the sales guys to take training from home?

ID: anytime they are free.......

Me: they are never going to be free

ID: they are senior level and middle level managers!

Me: are you expected to solve the business problem or just create a WBT?

my response will be different in each case

ID: just create a WBT

Me: :-)

Now I know this person is a budding, relatively junior instructional designer and probably is just doing what she has been asked to do. There was a sense of déjà vu for me. I know many a times, the client appears to be very clear about what they want and wants the vendor to "just create a WBT". Not all clients want to have a business problem discussion with the vendor. And not all instructional designers want to solve business problems. They are happy with creating a WBT and getting on with their jobs. Unfortunately that's a lose-lose situation for both clients and instructional designers.

My advice to instructional designers is to stay focussed on solving the business problems. Sometimes creating a WBT might not be the solution, even though that's what your company may have been contracted to do. Focusing on solving the business problem will help you add value in your interaction with the client and that will in almost all cases eventually lead to more business.

And if you are a client outsourcing a learning content creation project, my suggestion would be that you work with the vendor and collaborate on solving the business problem. There is no harm in having raking up more brains to solve your business problem. And if you are sure that WBT is indeed the answer to your business problem, then provide that information to the vendor so they can do justice to your project.

What color pen are you?

This post is written by Taruna Goel

What color pen are you? This is a question that Dan Roam asks each of us. His book "The Back of the Napkin -Solving Problems and Selling Ideas with Pictures " offers a refreshing view about visual thinking skills. If it helps, this book is ranked as the number 5 in the business book of 2008 category by Amazon. To get a teaser of what's in the book, click on the napkin for some engaging nuggets on visual thinking. Learn about how to solve any problem with a picture, the 4 steps of visual thinking, the 5 focusing questions, and the 6 ways we see (and show).

And as Dan puts it, “Solving problems with pictures has nothing to do with artistic training or talent….” “Welcome to the whole new world of looking at business.”
To catch a glimpse of Dan, what's inside his book, and his plans for the next book, check out Dan's blog. This blog contains a link to the video capture of Dan’s session with Microsoft. I saw it and its quite inspiring.

I have been doing visualization skills training for instructional designers for years and have definitely improvised it from where we were…but there’s lots to do. After this video, I want to apply some of the stuff shared by Dan and maybe include the video/elements from his blog/book as self-learning and include some of the concepts and examples/techniques during the classroom session…. As you can note…. I am meandering right now… but I am clearly inspired :)

BTW, what color pen are you – the black pen, the yellow pen, or the red pen?
I keep oscillating between black and yellow...
Watch the video to find out!

Why Instructional Designers Should Play Games?

This post is written by Rupa Rajagopalan

Has it happened with you that you saw a movie and wondered how the director visualized the amazing scenes?

Has it also happened that you checked out an e-learning course and wondered how the Instructional Designer thought of the visuals, animations and interactivities?

Well, it has happened with me an umpteen number of times. I just keep thinking what gets into people’s heads that they think so creatively.

Designing E-learning course just like movie making requires lot of creativity and innovation. An Instructional Designer has to visualize every screen of an e-learning course and get the graphic designers and programmers in the team to implement it exactly the way he/she visualized.

Doesn’t this remind you of a movie director, who visualizes every scene of a movie and gets his actors to enact it exactly the way he visualized?

The Instructional Designer has to work with the available content, strategize and present the content in such a way that it appears new and interests the learners.

The movie director has to work with common themes and strategize to present the theme in such a fashion that it appears new and interesting to the audience.

Now both the Instructional Designer and the Movie Director have to be really good at visualizing. This is critical both to the movie and the e-learning course.

What do you think a movie director does to improve his visualization skills?

Watch a lot of movies, read novels, etc.

Now what do Instructional Designers to do work on their visualization skills?

Check out other e-learning courses and what else?

Apart from checking out and analyzing e-learning courses, an Instructional Designer must also play a lot of games.

Most people think playing games is a waste of time. But then it is not true for an Instructional Designer at least.

Just as in a game, visuals and interactivities are crucial to an e-learning course too.

So here I list the three reasons why Instructional Designers should play games

Three Reasons Why Instructional Designers Should Play Games

Reason 1: Games have loads of visual strategies

I seriously believe games give you lot of visual strategies much more than any other sources. If you keep playing games, you get an opportunity to see different visual designs and then when you get to design e-learning courses you can use similar ideas.

For example the other day I had gone to Subway and I really hated the sandwich the chef out there made. I thought he was not trained. He did not know the combination of sauces that would make the sandwich taste good.

And then I thought of this as a business case for e-learning. Suppose Subway management decides to go for an e-learning course for all chefs in Subway. Let’s say the management wants something visually appealing, something interactive and engaging.

I could just visualize the following:

Virtual customers, virtual kitchen and virtual ingredients. Customers order a customized sandwich. The chefs drag and drop the ingredients on the sandwich in the right combination depending on customer requirements. For every correct sandwich they gain points. For every wrong sandwich they lose points. The chefs' objective is to gain maximum points by making right sandwiches.

If it is a low budget course, you can use just images and simple animations. If budget is not a constraint, this can be a simulation.

Now this strategy is inspired by games as follows:



You could use this strategy when learners have to learn something by rote.

The bottom line is to identify good strategies while playing games and use in e-learning.

Reason 2: Games show ways in which you can encourage audience participation

Most games require mouse clicks or pressing arrow keys. But then it doesn’t get monotonous because the context and objective of the game is different every time. In the given context the whole act of clicking and pressing gets very interesting and exciting. When you play games you get to know how to use existing interactivity models in different contexts and for different purposes.

For example in the game called Dreams, you simply click to find the differences between the two images as shown below:



The interactivity model used above is simple and basic, yet the objective and context of the game makes the play interesting.

Likewise in the game below, you just have to mouse over the faces that show up. The challenge of the game is to mouse over maximum faces that show up within a time limit.



As you start playing the game you get addicted to it.

The bottom line is when you play games you get to know how to innovate on existing interactivity models.

Reason 3: Games show ways in which you can engage the audience

People love playing games and they get so engrossed that they forget time. Games can just engage anyone and everyone. So what is it in a game that engages people?

The answer is simple. It is the challenge in the game that engages audience. People want to badly reach the objective of the game and this sustains their interest.

I guess e-learning courses must also have this element of challenge which will engage the learners during the learning process and games will give you ideas on how to make your e-learning courses challenging.

With this I end my post here and leave it open for discussion

Please check out some online games here and let me know what you think:

Miniclip
Kongregate
Big Fish Games

Comic Strip as an Educational Tool

This post is written by Anamika Biswas.

Google launched its new browser with a bang. By now there must have millions and billions downloads of the same. Before I could really start with browser I got hooked to its engaging comic- Google Chrome Comic. During our childhood, we all were charmed by comics and their characters. We have admired those fictional characters and their colorful backgrounds. Comics remained as our good companions and entertainers.

Even though, the use of comic strips/comic characters for advertisement has received good response. But Google Chrome Comic made a mark on my psyche as Comic strips can be used as an effective educational/tutorial tool. I have read it more than four to five times. Every time I had a different reason to read it: of course, first reading was to understand what this new browser has on offer? Rest of the re-readings was to appreciate the brilliant usage this medium known as Comic.

Scott McCloud the artist behind this Non-Fictional comic has made it into an engaging tutorial by:

• Converting life cycle of the product into an illustrative narration. (We all like to read stories, so do we like this one as well)
  
  
  


• Introducing names of the team members to make narration authentic


• Presenting visual of various actions/reactions of technical ingredients/elements of the chrome


• Employing animated facial expressions and body language of the team members to inspire the reader to feel emotion of the narrative
  
  
  
  


• Using symbols/icons to expand the linguistic aspects of the narrative.


• Utilizing limited and essential technical terms used with ease


• Creating easy to relate illustrations from day to day life to narrate technical concepts


• There is a desired attempt to make user familiar with the features and feel of the chrome through various indirect method as:
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  • It carries the theme of the chrome i.e. simplicity at its best. So the back drops of the comic strips are quite simple
  
  
  • Scott McCloud has used similar blue color with combination of white, as the Chrome has
  
  
  • Comic is divided into five parts. Every time a new part starts the layout of the strip carries the New Tab Frame of the chrome
  
  
  
  

Hope to see more such unusual mediums to be part of educational/learning tools.



(Images from googlebooks/chrome)

Response to Manish’s blog on Can eLearning Help Change Behavior?

This post is written by Taruna Goel.

This is in response to Manish’s blog on Can eLearning Help Change Behavior?

I realized I had much to share and a comment box would not do justice to it.

-----------

All learning/training is meant to change behavior. That said there are various media available to deliver the required training.

While most content may be a good candidate for either elearning or facilitated instruction, I think a case in point is psychomotor skills. To learn how to ride a bike, you need to ride it! No amount of elearning can prepare you for the ditches, puddles, and the falls!

A few years ago, I would have said, yes, 'sensitive' issues such as harassment are best facilitated. But maybe not today. There are enough opportunities to build collaboration, question and answer, and discussion forums to support people in learning about such areas through elearning too.

There is a bit of research that I did and here is what I found:

1) http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/jan2002/anderson.html - By Terri Anderson

A very good article about what makes a better candidate for elearning and some of the key questions to ask before we decide to use this medium.

In summary:

• …..there are still some instructional content areas that may not be suitable for e-learning.


• Attitudinal skills and psychomotor skills are content areas in which e-learning may support but not entirely replace traditional instructional programs. Attitudinal skills typically require expert modeling and reinforcement that increases the interactivity requirement and the cost of e-learning programs. Psychomotor skills, in particular, require hands-on practice and interactive demonstrations for learners to achieve mastery.


• E-learning programs are especially effective at teaching cognitive skills in well-structured domains where conveying information is a critical part of the instructional process. Examples include teaching employees how to use software programs, having employees discriminate between two set choices, or providing instructions for completing a benefits enrollment form. Each of those skills requires understanding and applying a procedure or information with clear right and wrong choices.


• Poorly structured problems require high-level cognitive skills, such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of unclear or conflicting data. Learners are required to recall, understand, and apply information to unique situations or problems for which there's no clearly defined right or wrong outcome. Examples of ill-structured problems include evaluating the merits of outsourcing work, developing a comprehensive marketing strategy that incorporates diverse data, or evaluating the merits of a strategic business acquisition. Although e-learning may support part of those learning needs, it works best when combined with additional collaborative strategies.


• Determining whether content is suitable for e-learning requires close inspection of the learning objectives. For example, cognitive skills appropriate for stand alone e-learning programs ask learners to state, understand, identify, and select between two clearly defined alternatives; read information and answer questions about a specific topic; or complete an assignment with clearly defined parameters. However, e-learning programs will need support from additional learning activities if employees are required to analyze, design, predict, evaluate, synthesize, construct, formulate, or develop a procedure or plan.


• Key questions to consider when evaluating e-learning programs for a specific content area include:
  
  
  
  • What are the learning objectives that the company is trying to achieve?
  
  
  • What are the skills the company is trying to teach?
  
  
  • Are the skills cognitive, attitudinal, or motor skills?
  
  
  • Is the problem well-defined?
  
  
  • What instructional methods are required to deliver the content?
  
  
  • What type of follow-up, practice, or support is required to achieve mastery?
  
  
  • What degree of learning interactivity or collaboration is required?
  
  
  • What resources are available or required to achieve the instructional goals?
  
  
  • What is the best or most cost-effective venue the company has to deliver this content to the learner?
  
  
  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating e-learning strategies?
  
  
  
  

2) http://faculty.mercer.edu/codone_s/elearningprimer.PDF - By Susan Codone

A well-organized article about the benefits and limitations of elearning. The key highlight is a table listing the criteria that should be used to identify whether a particular content is suitable for elearning. The table is based on criterion provided by Brandon Hall and the federal Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) initiative. Another point highlights that instructional outcomes highlight the choice of instructional strategy (and therefore medium). David Merrill states that the following instructional strategies are suitable for multimedia development:

• instruction that provides information about a system or object


• instruction that provides information on the parts of a system or object


• instruction that provides conceptual or categorical information


• procedural knowledge


• process, principle, or information on how a system works

On another note, this article also has some dope on development timelines for elearning.

Guess, these are enough points to ponder for instructional designers like us!

Can eLearning Help Change Behaviour?

As part of judging entries for the Brandon Hall Awards this year, I encountered an elearning module that attempted to teach the company’s sales people its new service orientation and its service oriented products. The elearning module was very well made, full of videos (actually it was practically a ‘video-based-training’ disguised as elearning) with very well written script and extremely professional production quality. The script and production quality was so good that I would have been proud of the product if it had been made by my team.

I went through the modules as a learner, something I hadn’t done in a while. I was probably the right audience, not in terms of being part of that company, but perhaps with about the same experience as the intended audience. So after being impressed with the first few video clippings I got down to actually attempting learning from it. And man was I unhappy going through the training. The training included lots of case studies and ‘role plays’ (the wrong and right way to sell videos). As an intended audience, I felt bad and felt the training was demeaning my intelligence and showed what I might be doing right now (remember I was trying to be in the actual learner’s shoes) in very bad light. Something like this might work in a controlled classroom environment where a trained instructor would be able to provoke me and respond to my reactions to the content being taught, and I might also have a healthy debate with others in the class. However using the elearning module, I felt the module was preaching to the choir and insulting the learner’s intelligence. Since it had no facilitation of a trainer and there were no other peers to learn from or debate with, I felt very bad about the content.

Which makes me wonder – can self-paced asynchronous elearning be a good tool for attempting to change behaviour? Is elearning better suited for certain types of audiences when attempting to do this? Are there some content areas that should just be dealt with in a classroom? Or perhaps is there a better way to teach behaviour change using elearning?

The Value of Instructional Design

This post is written by Taruna Goel.

I was learning my usual way - through blogs - when I reached this video. Amazing!

Watch the video and then read what Tom has to say about it on his blog!

Designing a Stop Sign

This seemed like a good followup to Taruna's post on simple designs.



Need I say more... although I have a feeling it's not just the clients, we probably do this to our process too... and perhaps this is what the developers feel about getting reviews from SMEs, Reviewers and Editors...

Simple Designs - a myth or a reality?

At times, I use the white board at my workstation to scribble interesting quotes that appeal to me. A few weeks ago, I wrote this one:

"There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. (Charles Hoare)."

The quote led to an interesting discussion amongst the ones who read it. The curious question was – what is ‘simple’ design. I pondered for a while. I knew that simplicity was far complex than I thought. I wanted to understand what is means to have simplicity in content design, media design, functional design, web design, and any other design that we ought to do! So I started my journey to explore what is simple design…here is what I found on my way. An interesting definition.

This is an excerpt taken from an article titled, “Keep it simple, stupid!” by Pär Almqvist.

A Definition of Simplicity
What is simplicity? It could be defined as "the absence of unnecessary elements," or even shorter "the essence." Simplicity doesn't equal boring. Simplicity doesn't equal shallow. Simplicity is especially important when designing information- and media-rich interfaces. Simplicity isn't a design style, it's a perspective on design, an approach which often creates the most beautiful and the most usable results. A common mistake is to think that obtaining simplicity is a matter of reduction, of reducing something which is more complete than the "simple" end result. On the contrary, simplicity requires serious thought and effort. As I wrote in my article Fragments of time; "A modern paradox is that it's simpler to create complex interfaces because it's so complex to simplify them."

How to Obtain Simplicity
Simplicity isn't easy to obtain. I have, however, roughly devised a formula that lays the foundation for simplicity. Albert Einstein said; "If A is to succeed in life, then A = x + y + z. Work is x, y is play and z is to listen.
"A functioning formula for simplicity (where A equals simplicity) could be A = x + y + z. x is good research and prototyping, y is play and z is the reduction of unnecessary elements.

In the above definition, the author reiterates that simplicity requires thought and effort. Another example to support this definition is here, where the author (Nika Smith) discusses the evolution of Gmail chat and specifically how the Gmail chat window was designed.

The author reiterates, “Often, the features we launch seem so simple that you might think they're the result of blatantly obvious design decisions. In fact, every feature is subjected to a healthy dose of scrutiny within the Gmail team, and usually that includes rapidly iterating on designs by collecting user feedback, learning what works and what doesn't, and improving on our work based on this knowledge.”

From what I gather, I believe simple designs:-
- appear intuitive and easy to make - but they take time to build
- involve multiple iterations of review and feedback
- are meant for the purpose (meet requirements)
- are naturally usable
- have more impact because they have less distractions

So, what does simplicity mean to you in the context of design?

Are simple designs better than complex ones? Do our users appreciate simplicity? Is simplicity the need and the reality of the day?

OR

Is simplicity simply an overrated aspect of design? Does simple sell or do our users want more features? Is simplicity a myth?

What do you think?

Definition of Design

I have been trying to figure out a generic definition of design -- a single-sentence definition that applies to all types of designs that we have seen, created, or envisioned. I guess it’s time to share my thoughts so that we evolve a definition collaboratively.

When I think of design there are five aspects that come to my mind: requirements (purpose), elements, function, space, and arrangement (or placement, form). In addition, there is a product (or service) for which design is developed.

I think purpose is the first thing that should be determined. Purpose or requirements help us distinguish between a good design and a bad design – a good design would fulfill all the requirements.

Then there are elements or ingredients that form the final product. For example, the elements of a car design would be seats, dashboard, and engine, color, and so on. It’s important to note that each of these elements would have their own ‘designs’ and therefore elements that form them. These elements should be selected based on the requirements. For example, there is no need to have a small LCD screen on a TV remote because its purpose is to control the TV from a distance and not to show a preview. Each element has attributes that makes the element appropriate for the stated requirements. For example, the thickness of RCC slab used in roofs would be designed based on the load it has to carry.

The elements would have some function, which is the third aspect of design. Design need not have the elements functional but the definition should be clear and they should map with the requirements. For example, when we want to control the volume of a video running on our computer, we prefer a slider rather than a button control because a slider saves us the repeated clicks.

The elements would be arranged in some space. By space I mean the constraints (or specifications) under which the design of the final product should be developed. For example, a gear needs to fit in a space, a painting needs to fit in a canvas, and a theme park should be designed within the space in which it will be housed.

The last aspect is the arrangement. By arrangement I mean the layout, the structure, sequence, or the relative location of elements to best meet the requirements. For example, a course has a content outline that defines the chunking and sequence of modules, lessons, topics, etc. Unfortunately, this aspect is generally over emphasized and equated with the design.

So let’s try to define design keeping the above aspects in mind.

I would say design is: The description of the functionality and arrangement of elements in a space to ensure that the requirements from the final product are fulfilled.

While I have considered many aspects in the above definition, it’s possible that I have ignored/missed some aspects. I also feel that the above definition is too scientific. However, design is more of an art than science. Would anyone help me reach a solid and appropriate definition?

And my second question is: if you agree with this definition, do you think that there is a generic process that can be followed to design anything? In other words, is there a sequence in which the above aspects need to be defined or a designer can follow any sequence?

Design ...

We design. We breathe design, we live design. We talk design…
Design should be sound, should reflect the objectives well. It should be user friendly, should have great usability, good navigation, and interface, so on and so forth. There are several requirements for a good design. But as Ranit correctly asked what is design? Do we have a generic definition for the same?
Let's try...
To start with generic definition, Design means plan, outline
Antonyms are disorder, and disorganize.
As per thesaurus : Design as noun can be defined as:

• An element or a component in a composition :device, figure, motif, motive, pattern.
• A method for making, doing, or accomplishing something: blueprint, game plan, idea, layout, plan, project, schema, scheme, strategy. What one intends to do or achieve: aim, ambition, end, goal, intent, intention, mark, meaning, object, objective, point, purpose, target, view, why. Idioms: end in view, why and wherefore.

In generic terms Design as verb can be defined as:

• To form a strategy for: blueprint, cast, chart, conceive, contrive, devise, formulate, frame, lay, plan, project, scheme, strategize, work out. Informal dope out.
• To work out and arrange the parts or details of: blueprint, lay out, map (out), plan, set out.
• To have in mind as a goal or purpose: aim, contemplate, intend, mean, plan, project, propose, purpose, target.

These are generic components of any design. They apply on one and all kinds products and services. To further enhance my learning on the same, do post your opinions.

Design- Human Centered Design vs Activity Centered Design?

As a design professional, our entire success and failure rests on -DESIGN. What is design? What are the basic types of design? When I tried to explore, I got very interesting insight from Don Normans website*.The same is my understanding and inspiration behind this article. He has discussed designs at a good length. To start with, there are two categories of design:

• Human Centered Design (HCD)
• Activity Centered Design (ACD)

HCD -The most crucial principle of HCD is to “know your user.” It is utmost important for any design to be created with a detailed deep knowledge of the users. Such design helps to overcome the poor design. By emphasizing the needs and abilities of those who were to use, usability and understandability of products can be improved.

One basic philosophy of HCD is to listen to users, to take their requirements and understanding seriously. Yes, listening to customers is always wise, but acceding to their requests, wishes and desires may lead to overly complex designs. Several major software companies, proud of their human-centered philosophy, suffer from this problem. Their design gets more complex and less understandable with each revision.

And what happens when a product is designed to be used by varied people or anyone in the world?

ACD -Activity-Centered philosophy tends to guard against this aspect as the focus is upon the Activity, not the Human. As a result, there is a cohesive, well-articulated design model. If a user suggestion fails to fit within this design model, it should be discarded. Alas, all too many companies, proud of listening to their users, would put it in.

ACDs are developed with a deep understanding of the activities that were to be learned or in other words skills required to be learned and later performed successfully. They are created by design teams. Difference lies as these designers used their own understanding of the activities to be learned and performed to determine how the design would be operating.

Here, what is needed is a strong, authoritative designer who can examine the requirements, and suggestions; and evaluate them in terms of skill to be imparted as end objective. When necessary, it is essential to be able to ignore the requests. This is the goal to cohesion and understandability. Sometimes what is needed is a design dictator who says, “Ignore what users say: I know what’s best for them.” The case of Apple Computer is illustrative. Apple’s products have long been admired for ease of use. Nonetheless, Apple replaced its well known, well-respected human interface design team with a single, authoritative (dictatorial) leader. Did usability suffer? On the contrary: its new products are considered prototypes of great design*.

The “listen to your users” produces incoherent designs. The “ignore your users” can produce horror stories, unless the person in charge has a clear vision or Conceptual Model for the product. The person in charge must follow that vision and not be afraid to ignore findings. Yes, listen to customers, but don’t always do what they say*.

Human-Centered Design guarantees good outcome as well as it leads to improvements of bad ones. Good Human-Centered Design will generally leads to lesser failures. It also ensures that products work as per expectations of the users. Are we aiming at good design only? We (most of us)dream and aspire for great design.We aspire for customer/ user's delight. I don't think, it can be achieved with just a Good Design. We need Great Design. For sure Great design can only be created through breaking the rules,Thinking beyound what is generally accepted and practiced,by pushing forward with a clear concept and conviction of the end result. In such case,we shall be ready for both great successes and great failures. If we want great rather than good, this is what we must do.

Note*-Column written for Interactions. © CACM, 2005.The definitive version was published in Interactions, 12. 4, (July + August, 2005). Pp. 14-19. There are excerpts of the same article used here for purely non- commercial use.

Thinking...website design

I have very often heard this statement… “The Customer is Always Right”. This statement has been interpreted in different ways by different people. But I must say that this statement has always triggered me to provide the most suitable solution to the customer in the given circumstances.

I recall one such instance where we were working on designing a website for a leading humanitarian organization that is dedicated to fighting poverty and social injustice. The goal of designing this website was to offer newly-hired staff with a more streamlined and consistent on-boarding experience.

Through this blog, I want to share how the design-related challenges that we, as a team, faced and the way we came up with an appropriate solution. The final solution not only delighted the clients but also gave us repeat business.

One of the first challenges was to design and develop this website in-house without vendor support within a limited budget. Second challenge was that this organization had been supporting more than 1,000 poverty-fighting projects in 71 countries to reach more than 65 million people. Most staff members (who were also the SMEs) were very keen to share their valuable experiences with the new employees through this website. So NIIT was instructed to accommodate all these experiences, thoughts and ideas into this website.

The team got together to understand and explore how best to accommodate all essential information into the website. The points listed below provide a quick recap of the design elements we integrated into the Web site. I am sure all of us are quite familiar with most of these elements. However, they will help you evaluate how these design elements were accommodated into the end product (once you actually look at the end product shared as a link at the end).

1. Easy Navigation: This website was designed in such a way that the main links were placed at the top of the page, drop down menus were created along with “bread crumbs” to ensure smooth navigation. This way the end user would not have to click on one page in order to find a link to navigator to another page. The layout used was very similar to the New York University website.

2. Quick Downloads: We know the end users do not want to wait to get to the right information. Use of high quality graphics and rich interactive media makes the site look attractive but slows the load time of web pages. So the graphics were constructed only for those instances where they added maximum value to the website's information. This way we achieved faster loading time for the web pages.

3. Attractive Color Scheme: This is an important and underrated area in web design. Use of bright backgrounds like red, yellow and green draws much attention from the users but also distracts them from what is important on the website. The users want to feel comfortable and relaxed while going through this website. Thus, the team used warm, attractive, earth colors that complimented well with each other.

4. Page Layout: Layout of web pages was consistent ensuring navigation took place from the same location. All important information was prioritized and located in different headings and sub headings in a manner that was easy to find. These pages had a common theme throughout the site.

5. Avoid Sideways Scrolling: We know that websites with horizontal scrolling is not user friendly. It is very likely that the users will not scroll and may miss valuable information. So all vital information like the important contact IDs, site addresses, information of their Country Offices, talks about the successful projects/achievements, etc were included as a separate link.
The biggest constraint was to accommodate 16 pages of content received from SMEs all over the world. We could neither disappoint the SMEs nor single out any one of them. They were all very enthusiastic to share their thoughts and ideas with the new joinees.

That is when the team’s creativity and “out of the box” thinking came to work. We introduced the Perspectives column in the Home page of all main links, included the photographs of the SMEs and wrote their ideas in form of two links- “ What I wish…” and "One tip to help you…” This was a major breakthrough. We not only delighted the SMEs by adding their photos (that gave a personal touch) but also included most of the contents provided by then. In fact NIIT team received a special appreciation in the Credit link of this website.

I have added the Perspectives column in the beginning of this post to help you visualize its layout and functionality. Please feel free to access the link below to visit the website:

http://www.careacademy.org/navigatingcare

If I May..."The Tastemaker"

How many times have you heard… “hey this looks fine, but the tastemaker is missing”!!!

I just heard it recently after someone reviewed my design.(… and thanks to the someone-PSM!)
So what is the tastemaker…ofcourse the key ingredient that makes your stuff wow! And why do I write “stuff” because I now apply the “tastemaker theory” to almost everything I do- design, script, review, construct….and cook!
It went like this..when we started with the “IAAB-Individual As a Batch” training program, I was asked to design a very very explicit Corp LLD-low level Design...I winced thinking my facts and principles are better…then I spend time musing…the feeling did not pass…I was apprehensive to start the design. Finally I did and Wow! I learned about the “Raho na Raho” principle-and the Tastemaker Theory!!!
Let me know spread the gyan…
Raho-na-raho- create a design such that if you vanish to another planet, the aliens here can safely take it to execution. They will not need to contact you ever!
Tastemaker Theory-Yummy! Create a design with that extra dash of Zing! Something that makes your audience say yum-give us some more! That little dash of flavor that makes all the difference!

The Guru who propounded both the theories is here in NIIT, and here is a public THANK YOU to Ron…for all that I learned!!

elearning by Self learning

I would like to share my experience of self learning through The Rapid elearning blog. The Blog shares practical tips and tricks to help you in understanding and creating elearning. It is hosted by Tom Kuhlmann who has over 15 years of hands-on experience in the training industry and currently runs the community at Articulate. The blog has quite a few good articles on best practices in elearning. I must add that the blog has great elearning environment. It is highly engaging with various demos with audios. While surfing this blog I got an experience as on how an elearning learner feels while taking an online course. The topics I enjoyed most are:
· How to Create E-Learning Courses That Don’t Waste Your Learner’s Time
The article gives an insight about the two categories of learners:
o The learners are taking the elearning course because they have to, and not necessarily because they want to. For them, it’s a matter of getting in and out quickly and then back to work. It’s just that many elearning courses are compulsory and the person taking it isn’t motivated by learning the content.
o The learners are taking the course because they want to. While their motivation is different, they also want the course to be focused and a good use of their time.
Considering the fact, that the both categories of learners need to gather essential information, take the required quiz, and get on with their lives; Tom has given guidelines on how to avoid wasting learner’s time.

· The Single Most Important Word in Your E-learning Design Arsenal:
The article discusses how to reach at a solution as a learner. While designing scenarios, it is essential to avoid jumping to the obvious solution. In order to avoid obvious solution, it is crucial to ask Right questions. The articles give a fair idea on how to ask right questions.
· What We Can Learn About Instructional Design from Post-it™ Notes
The article talks about why do people use Post-it™ notes, cheat sheets, and other job-aids to help them do their jobs? And, how does this relate to elearning?

· Here’s How to Avoid Needs Analysis Paralysis:
This article talks about best practices in need analysis and gives the essence of the need analysis -Keep this goal in mind: create courses where the content is real to the learners.
You can also subscribe this blog and can get an update on each new posting.
So happy learning.

Who is the boss- QC or Client?

There are two types of courses created in elearning practices:

• Zero Defect courses from QC test but are entirely rejected from the client.
• Courses rejected at QC test plan, but are accepted by the client with minor concerns.

Which is a better situation than other? I am sure none of them is an ideal situation, but both are real and practical.

This generally happens with legacy clients and projects; the role of an instructional designer seems very restricted. Templates, standards related to graphics, language and QC are already established. For all good reasons neither the project team, nor the client is ready for change. In such cases, an ID can only innovate various techniques of introducing content, and assessments to achieve the defined objectives. For a content developer who is working on such projects for long , standards related to formatting, graphic and QC are not a big challenge. In most of the cases, these experienced content developers produce Zero Defect courses for QC testing.
I have seen such courses being entirely rejected from the client. Each rejected course from client is a bad experience left with the client and of course de-motivating for entire team working on it. I have also experienced that courses which get rejected at QC test plan, are accepted by the client with minor concerns.

This leads to two inter related questions –

How relevant and successful is the QC test plan?
In which situation, do you think the ID should be held responsible for the rejection?

While debating on these issues, I have come across two very strong opinions:

First opinion says ID in first situation should not be held responsible as his course has passed QC test with Zero defect. He had followed all the defined standards religiously.

The second opinion supports the ID in the second situation. ID should not be held for the QC defect. The ID has done complete justice with his role, in understanding content and designing assessments and activities as per the client’s expectations.It says that to follow defined standards is secondary if we compare it with the understanding and creating a course up to the client’s expectations. QC test plan is led out to define standards as basic general rules to maintain consistency across the entire project. Whereas, understanding the content for each new and different course and designing it to the client’s expectation is a bigger challenge and responsibility, which in this case has been handled successfully.

I am leaving this debate open to all, would like to know your interpretations and opinions, before I conclude.

Design - do we understand it?

After reading Sonali’s thought provoking article, I decided to explore more on ‘the design’. I came across this beautiful definition by Paola Antonelli, Museum of Modern Art,

“Good design is a Renaissance attitude that combines technology, cognitive science, human need and beauty to produce something.”

However, the struggle at most times is that a beautiful design may not be functional enough and hence beat the purpose of its creation, whereas a functional design may not appeal and retain the audience and hence may fail to attract enough eyeballs.

Let me explain this better with the following example on automobiles. Most American- make cars like Jaguar, a few Ford and Chrysler (previous) models were based not on solid functionality but on the market surveys that told the car designers what consumers find beautiful!

One classical example being Cadillac that (inspired by the airplane design) eventually failed due to its extraordinary length that made manoeuvring the car at corners tough (yes! even on American roads), the infamous fins made it very heavy and hence a gas-guzzler. (You may like to read a book titled ‘How Cadillac got its fins?’ to find more about this design)

Whereas, the Japanese cars, which are purely based on function and utility rule the American roads due to their efficient and fluid designs. Not only are these fuel-efficient, have efficient engines, but inmost cases are aptly dimensioned for eased driving.

Coming back to instruction design this means that if instructions are logical, structured, flow well, are based on learner friendly technology and appeal to the learner, in most likeliness these instructions will fall under well-designed category and hence the design should be successful.

So it seams one of the biggest struggle is managing the functional and aesthetics balance in a course. Any tried and tested methods out there?

Thinking Design..Part II

In spite of repeated reminders from Manish I have been postponing this for quite some time (owing to the tight deadlines for the project for which we did this design)! However, I am finally here ready to share my very interesting and engaging experience about coming up with “multiple” design options for one of the large IT companies!

At the very beginning of the project, our team got instructions from Manish that he plans to send this course for Brandon Hall and therefore, we better come up with some innovative/out-of-box/something we haven’t done before – kind of design for this course! At the same time, he instructed that he wants to see two “unique” designs that have nothing in common! That very moment, our struggle for a “good” design started. Four of us (2 LD ppl, 1 CD person, and 1 CT person) in the team started with brain storming amongst ourselves; however soon realized that this exercise should be taken to a larger team to get more perspectives and fresh ideas! We held meetings with several people in content and CD practice. We got many creative ideas from different people. Though for the first initial days it was very difficult, we did not limit our thinking to what we had been doing for so long – but focused our thoughts on what “newness” along with “value add” can we bring about in the course.

On submitting the two design options to Manish, he suggested that we scratch those two ideas and come up with another new one! Phew!! K We thought this wasn’t possible considering that we had already exhausted the list of “new” ideas we had in our mind and got from other people!! However, with much vigor, we started to “think” one more time. Unlike our initial belief that we won’t be able to come up with anything new now, we did manage to hit some new ideas! We presented the last design option to Manish which we all finally agreed upon to take forward with some modifications.

While this entire exercise was one of a kind (took us about 5-6 working days) and one that I haven’t done before in my 8 years long stint at NIIT, it sure posed some critical questions in my mind: Do we understand design? Do we understand what all constitutes design? Do we really design our courses? While I am may not be able to answer all these questions right away, some important things that did etch to mind while doing this exercise are:

1. “Get together” across teams: Instead of working in isolation as LD, CD, or CT teams, it is important that people from each team get together and create design. One of the important things to understand is that a “design” doesn’t only constitutes the overall instructional theme or the instructional strategies you plan to include in the course; but also includes the interface, look and feel of the course and functionality related issues. So, it is best to thrash out those ideas at the initial design phase to avoid any “mishaps” later.
2. Brainstorm: Again, one of the biggest mistakes we make as IDs is to work in isolation while creating the course design. The best way to come up with new ideas is to get into a time-packed mode and brainstorm both within and outside the team. The “outside” view is important as it helps in getting non-biased and fresh perspectives in the design.
3. Find the key takeaway: While you think about design, try to explore what is the key thing/message you are trying to drive home for the learners. What is it that the learners will carry with them after going through the course? This will help you in coming up with an instructional theme for your course.
4. Forget what you know, think anew: One of the biggest limitation is that we work with constraints in our minds: we are either too comfortable with the way we have been working or we are afraid to try anything new. Whatever be the reason, for once if you are creating a design for the course; forget all that you know and think what is the best possible way to teach the learners about this content.
5. Do not forget the learner: Amidst all this, do not forget the learner! Evaluate what are the design elements that you will include in the course that will help the learners in any which way – this include the types of interactive you plan to include, the way you want to segregate the “should” know vs. “could” know information, option to print documents, the way you want to test the learners, etc.

Please feel free to add in to this - based on the design experiences you had!

Thinking Design

I find this image on our corporate wiki design page a very powerful representation of what goes in creating a course. Somehow in all the rush for meeting unquestioned timelines and perhaps in most cases just being plain lazy, we don’t really spend the time on designing our products. I was recently part of a project to create induction training for one of the large IT companies. It was an interesting experience to see the team struggling in the initial stages to come up with ideas. But once they got going, they had many new ideas. The first few design presentations by the team were tough on them but they soon got going.

I am hoping that one of them will soon contribute to this blog and share their experience (hint, hint guys ;-)…).

5 Sure Shot Ways to Muck Up your Training Design

Making mistakes, failing, and then reflecting on my failures has helped me learn for life.

Here are some of the mistakes that I have made and learned from when creating a design.

1. Somewhere along the design process, forget the learner and his needs.
2. Let the Subject Matter Expert (SME) lead the design.
3. Don’t consider the implementability of the design given the learner’s work environment.
4. Don’t onboard the training holders and understand their expectations.
5. Don’t enable the development team to realize the design.