What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Apostolos Koutropoulos -
Number of replies: 10
From conversations that I've had with former classmates that work in corporate training (Instructional Designers), corporate does care about what grade you get, but perhaps they don't care how you use the knowledge you've gained. The main thing that comes up are compliance workshops that are mandatory. You need a grade of 70% or above to pass (just naming a figure, actual figure may vary). All corporate is concerned with (from the use cases I've heard) is that their people pass the mandatory compliance. No evaluation past the L1 or L2 (if you are concerned with compliance) evaluation is ever done.
In reply to Apostolos Koutropoulos

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Peter Condon -

It seems to me that industry has to set targets for the completion of courses to satisfy accreditation (or mandatory compliance as Apostolos says).  Once past the basics, many industrialists that I have dealt with in the past have been more interested in the outcomes of the learning, for example:  What will the learner be able to do/ do better/ contribute more, etc., what benefits will the comapny gain?

In addition the cost/ benefit has to be justified by the provider/ HR department, to ensure more of the same (if that is what you want to encourage).

They (HR/ Provider) then need to persuade the learner (if the course is not to be compulsory) why they need to undertake the course: The immediate  benefits: future prospects: relevance to current role, all apply here but there may also be an element of who else is taking/ has taken the course and the personal interests of the learner.

In this way I think that a 'Hunch' based analysis might be beneficial in influencing course design, subject matter presentation and may well be better placed at the end of a course rather than at the beginning to relate to uptake decisions / success rate and even completion rates.  As long as the results are used.  So much analysis is quickly reviewed and the filed away - never to be used again or not looked at in the first place. 

How many of those who looked at Hunch would return to it again in a years time to performa a comparison.  In addition it may be difficult to get learners to complete an in depth analysis.  How many have answered all of Hunch's questions - how many got bored before they finished?

I think the questions I would like to ask is 'Who are the analytics for - the learning provider or the learner?' Which leads to 'Should the analytics be up-front or hidden?'

In reply to Peter Condon

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Gillian Palmer -
Peter, my own view from organising corporate education/training is that if the analytics are hidden, they can cause major loss of trust between the employee and the organisation. The employee may be quite happy for the manager to have data, or their learning mentor, or the HR person or the union rep but people in non-compliance programmes are, in my experience, not usually happy for all - or even any - of them to have the information without their knowledge. There's a psychological contract in place that runs something along the lines of, "If I get the right learning outcomes, how I get there is my business as a professional responsible for my own work and you have no more right to micro-manage that than you do any other aspect of my work." Of course, if you draft the learning outcomes properly and share them, then the analytics can be built-in for the benefit of all rather than tacked on as a back-room service. For more on my unease about non-disclosure see my blog where I'm working slowly through the doubts to try and get to a practical and learner-centric solution. Latest entry here: http://learningandqualifications.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/learners-using-their-lms-data/
In reply to Peter Condon

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Dolors Capdet -
The corporate training, unlike academic training, can not be measured during the training process because it is linked to its practical development.

It is only possible to measure its effectiveness based on its practical application in the real working environment, where does not measure the specific result of knowledge adquired but if you measure the degree of achievement of individual goals and group obtained.
In reply to Dolors Capdet

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Francisco Reis -
It can be measured during the training process if we allow trainees to use their real work during the course. Isn't that what life long learning is all about?
In reply to Francisco Reis

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Dolors Capdet -
No, no. Corporate training is not what is meant by lifelong learning, although there are coincident points.
You may you be formed throughout life in different topics, not necesarily only of your current job.
The business training especially for new and old workers is usually provided in a simulation environment and only at the last moment can access on the real environment - to avoid mistakes.
In reply to Dolors Capdet

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Peter Condon -

Dolors: If, as you say, corporate training can only be measured by the results of applying the learning in the learner’s work, I would struggle to see the difference between corporate training and lifelong learning.

In my experience it is the knowledge that is gained that is assessed by corporate training and often courses are written that do not allow the learner to progress unless they prove their knowledge of the current study. In fact this is my argument against much of the current corporate training; that it only teaches knowledge, to be able to do something by rote, not the application of the knowledge or the development of skills. Of course there are courses that are skills based, but I do not know of many such online courses in industry. To write a course that can assess skills costs more than the general (off the shelf) courses that teach and assess the knowledge since the skills will be relevant to a particular company’s systems and the course applicable only to that company.

Francisco: I think that companies would be reluctant to allow trainees to use their real work during a course because of the risks involved. For example; in the Timber Industry (with which I am familiar) trainers often take on trainees from different companies but have to develop their own scenarios because of the secrecy many companies have about their processes.

In the UK, the term ‘Lifelong Learning’ is applied to any learning that is undertaken after leaving formal education. In theory online corporate training would fall into this category but, to me, it does not fit well due to the simplistic methods used (in order to assure assessment) and because it does not address the acquisition of the ability and skills needed to apply the knowledge. Lifelong learning is more about knowledge based upon experience (both one’s own and that of colleagues) and therefore bound up with skills and ability. The trick is, understanding how to capture this lifelong learning in a way that is meaningful to employers (current and future). I am hoping that learning analytics may supply some of the answers.

In reply to Peter Condon

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Dolors Capdet -
We agree Peter.

Indeed, one thing is the learning and other is the skills training. The first is permanent while the second is set to a particular work situation

And it is true, which the training have controls (tests) that measure the understanding of the basic concepts learned. However, I think this does not really measure learning but justifies the payment of fees of training.
In reply to Peter Condon

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Francisco Reis -
Of course, Peter, there are many diffent situations and no rule.
But my experience is that even in traditional higher education you have students doing internships in companies whose work has to be kept secret (my students are from software engineering). All goes well not even involving lawyers!

Joining this with John Fritz post on students being the ones to act on their own data I think all makes even more sense: we learn our way with our personal and/or professional data and interests and we share just what we want.

Is this utopia? I do think in many cases we can achieve it.
In reply to Dolors Capdet

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Apostolos Koutropoulos -
From all the training sessions that I've had, I can say that some things can be measured during training, but more substantive things (like L3 and L4 evaluations under Kirkpatrick) cannot.

I also tend to think that some training does require more than the time one puts into completing the eLearning module (or classroom session). I think that post-training interventions and assistance really do make it much more likely that the information gained in training can be put to use.
In reply to Peter Condon

Re: What about learning analytics in the corporate sector?

by Mark Melia -
I think you hit the nail on the head here Peter with this:

What will the learner be able to do/ do better/ contribute more, etc., what benefits will the comapny gain?

In the corporate world learning analytics has to tie to the return on investment for training - why would a commercial entity do it otherwise?