Subscribe
Ryan Healy is a recent college graduate. He is a founder of 
Email Ryan
Read more from Ryan
New here? Employee Evolution is a blog written by Ryan Healy. Ryan is a Co-Founder of Brazen Careerist, the webs #1 social network for young professionals. Ryan speaks with organizations on best practices for recruiting and retaining Generation Y and how to effectively use social media to reach your target market. To contact Ryan, please visit our contact page.
I recently received an email from career coach and corporate consultant, J.T O’Donnell. She attached a link to a new e-learning course that she gives to young employees, and she asked for my input. For days, I debated how to respond. Eventually, I replied and told her that I hate all e-learning.
She said that most millennials she works with dislike e-learning. So, she only designs e-learning tools that are coupled with personal teaching and discussion.
After mentioning my desire to write a post about doing away with e-learning, J.T gave me some great insight. She told me, “It helps save companies thousands in training costs.”
Bingo! Now I know why companies are using e-learning to replace hands-on mentoring and teaching - it’s cheap. Clearly, a company’s main goal is to make a profit, and this means minimizing costs wherever possible. However, training and developing your employees, especially the confused new hires, is not the right area to cut costs.
At orientation, the first time my peers and I logged in to complete an e-learning course, we all looked at each other with puzzled faces. I thought, “Is this serious?” Others snickered throughout the whole assignment and most of us jumped through the course totally bored. Without discussion or one-on-one teaching e-learning is cheap, ineffective and gives the impression that a company does not care enough to invest time or money into training. Which in turn, gives the impression that employees are unimportant.
I don’t necessarily think that loathing e-learning is a millennial trait. My Gen X co-workers constantly complain about the thoughtless “busy work” that comes from e-learning tools. My mother even called the other day to rant about the stupidity of her e-training classes. So who actually benefits from this?
Maybe companies use this cheap training because they expect people to job hop and don’t want to waste budget dollars on employees who won’t be around for long. But in reality, not focusing on personally training and developing entry level employees is probably what causes them to job hop in the first place.
If an e-learning tool can somehow be coupled with actual face-to-face learning or mentoring then I am all for it. Just don’t use it as a replacement for real teaching. I crave the personal connections that come with one-on-one or classroom teaching, even if the rest of my life is spent online.
There is research done (by ASTD) every year into what the population of companies are doing for training (I worked for a management consultant firm).
E-Learning has proven to do really well in quickly and cheaply training people on technical skills (new programming languages, navigating an unfamiliar program) but, as you mention, there are many courses that should not migrate to a computer.
We found the smart companies (that valued employees) coupled our training with the technology resources we offered before and after the program (like a take-home guide to help with additional questions).
Personally, I saw from 2005-2007 the spending on e-Learning has come back down because companies realize it’s insufficient in most cases.
You are probably right, quicky training people in highly technical areas can be achieved through e-learning. The problem comes when companies completely replace face to face learning with these programs.
-Ryan
Definitely, but think back a few years. They still made videos for folks to simply sit and watch, right?
It’s the newer, hotter cheap ‘n’ easy.
As an employee, there are a number of classes that I prefer to take as e-learning classes. And you’re right, they tend to be either technical in nature…. or the kind of thing that they used to make us read long involved memos about. In those cases, the convenience of desktop interaction that can be stopped and re-started at my convenience significantly outweigh the benefits of sitting in a classroom and moving at the pace of a whole group.
I disagree. E learning has allowed me to triple the content that I can provide my employees (a budget increase was not going to happen). My employees really enjoy and use it. Many are able to satisfy their continuing CEU requirements for licensure with these online courses.
Like most educational systems (K-8, high school, college, grad school) the student will get out of the process proportional results to what effort they put in. I’m currently using www.webce.com to renew my insurance license. I like their eLearning software and feel I’m learning a great deal. Why? I’m actually reading the course material, not just skipping straight to the exams. It’s more about discipline than the delivery method. Some people actually like to learn and can focus, others cannot.
We find it cost effective and for the most part rather useful and effective. People can due the learning at their own pace and time schedule without the hassel of travel or forced time table to complete. However there is little feed back if any and should be restricted to technical issues where difinitive answers and content are available. Little exchange of ideas are available in elearning so it is the impossible forum for developing strategies or brainstorming methods.
I have a sneaking suspicion than the majority of people who really get something out of e-Learning are IT related. I think people in non-IT related fields are probably less prone to find e-Learning to be a useful tool. Maybe I’m wrong…someone give me some insight.
There’s good e-learning and bad, just as there is good salads and bad, and even good and bad instructors and coaches. It’s not the form; it’s how you use the form. Take a look at the potential in blends, where you combine human and technological touch: www.amanet.org/blended/pdf/WhitePaper_BlendLearn.pdf But even with blends, it still boils down to useful, vivid messages.
The real issue here is whether e-learning is optional (meaning you really want to learn the material) or mandatory. If I am really interested in a topic and want to learn all I can about it, then any type of learning will work. I read books about topics I’m interested in, there is no personal interaction in a book, but I learn a lot because I choose to read.
However, when a company mandates that all employees take an elearning course in order to advance up the ladder or learn boring company policy, employees will skip right through to the end. You may fool yourself into thinking that your employees really care about this stuff, but unless they choose to take a course for their own well being, the courses are utterly pointless.
Companies would be much better off if a charismatic upper level manager or HR person taught the mandatory material with some enthusiasm and a little hands on work. Your employees may actually get something out of the course if this happens.
-Ryan
E-learning is okay to supplement one’s training; however, many employers don’t spend the money to provide classroom training — and this is a major problem. I work in IT, and we constantly add new things to our environment and are expected to support new technologies. Employers provide e-learning because it is cheap, but it is near-impossible to take an e-learning course during work hours (with constant interruptions). In addition, there is no way to get questions answered in e-learning. I do believe that one CAN learn from e-learning, but employers usually don’t provide their employees time to take the courses; and, I would argue that I don’t feel it is nearly as effective as other types of training as there usually isn’t any hands-on. As far as doing training after work, I don’t want to go home and do training during my personal time after working 60 hours. I need to have time for sleep and to take care of personal needs.
I love e-learning, I am in sales and if I am in a classroom as opposed to prospecting during golden hours, the company stands to loose a lot. I am also a new parent, so any opportunity I have to do training after my child has gone to bed, I am all for it. As a result training is not affecting my productivity nor my home life, and the training is still being completed. So now the formula is, lower cost training and more time for employees to actually do their job while at work. I agree many e-learning curriculums should be supplemented with face to face, but there is clearly a place for e-learning in our world.
E-learning is extremely helpful for time constraint people.
I’m pleased to see the range of comments on this subject, especially the initial piece about the primary motivation for companies and e-learning. As the director of education for a healthcare organization, we are grappling with an intelligent use of e-learning over classroom programming. So far, our applications and our inclinations are consistent with the comments here: that there are technical/information-only based subjects that are suited to the medium, while interactive, group discussion workshops are more appropriate for others.
Thanks for an exchange that I can ultimately present to my executive team, as the push to keep education costs to a minimum continues to mount.
Jonnie,
I’m glad we could help. Good luck with the presentation.
Other points to consider in this discussion:
Refresher training or time of need training — I can’t clone my best instructors and make them available to learners whenever they need them. I can build interactive, engaging elearning that they can access anytime they want. Which shows more committment to employees, giving them what they need when they need it, or praying that they retain significantly more than the 20-25% that the average learner remembers from an instructor led class?
Geographic distribution — sure, it would be better to onboard with real trainers, but if I’m a global company or a retail chain with thousands of locations, do I want some local schlep manager who knows diddly about HR or training delivering the onboarding messages or do I want to package that so it’s consistent and accurate, reflecting company culture and priorities? Again, which is better for the employees?
If I’m training something that’s important, especially compliance initiatives, I may need proof that someone took “x” training and passed it so that if they screw it up in six months time, my entire organization is not held liable for failing to train them on “x.” Instead, I can just fire their but and take a slap on the wrist (hopefully). If I train them in class and have no objective proof of success, now what? It’s he said / she said and now I might be facing serious sanctions or even forced closure (look up Marsh and Elliot Spitzer if you think this couldn’t possibly happen). This isn’t about saving money; it’s about saving the organization which in turn, saves the jobs of the employees.
Having classes online and in an LMS with a Performance Managment capability enables an employee to see required competencies and skills for their role as well as roles above and around them, enabling the employee to not only see their own “fit” for their current job, but “fit” and required skills for other jobs. This level of transparency did not exist before elearning. Moreover, learners can actually take required classes to meet the objectives of other roles, often without any intervention by management. This is good for the company and even better for the employees.
The list goes on and on. And yes elearning is often cheaper too. But in smart companies, this is never the primary motivator. Though when a company like Pfizer can save 16 million dollars by adopting elearning in just one group (sales) while also increasing learner satisfaction, it’s hard to deny the appeal. Candidly, this sort of “it doesn’t work for me” comment without any regard for the big picture or analysis of how it actually might be good for others in your same organization is why Millenials get a bad rap. You can do better than this and if you ever want to climb the career ladder, you will need to.
Dave:
I think if you would read the last paragraph you would see that the writer isn’t TOTALLY against e-Learning. He just doesn’t want us to forget the value of face-to-face interaction. He is also open to collaborative tools that harness e-Learning benefits, but also use traditional training.
I think the reason millennials get a bad rap is because things that don’t work for some of them, but work great for you are being questioned…and that’s scary.
Some great dialogue on both sides have been reflected here. So I’d say Healy did a fine job.
Having spent more years in the learning and development arena than I care to admit, I am still amused by people who claim that one method for delivering learning is better or worse than another. What the reality is, is that people learn in a variety of ways, and not necessarily just in the way they are most comfortable with. Good e-learning produces good learning. Good face-to-face learning produces good learning. Bad e-learning produces bad learning, and, you guessed it, bad face-to-face produces bad learning.
The key is ensuring that what ever method you choose, you take advantage of what that method does well. When Ryan Healy noted in dissection of e-learning that “At orientation, the first time my peers and I logged in to complete an e-learning course, we all looked at each other with puzzled faces.� I have to wonder why they were all looking at each other taking an e-learning course. That is not taking advantage of what e-learning does well, so it does not surprise me that “…most of [them] jumped through the course totally bored.� I can assure you that I have attended face-to-face programs where I was totally bored as well, and craved for the chance to try out the skills I was watching being demonstrated by a live instructor. I have also had very bad face-to-face, one-on-one coaching sessions. As you might expect I have also had very good ones as well.
In summary, the method you select for delivering learning does not make the difference, how well you use the method you select makes the difference.
I agree with Drew’s comment. It’s more about discipline than the delivery method. I use www.ceu.com to renew my insurance license every year. I like their multimedia online insurance ce courses and for $129/yr I can get all the credits I need.