An instructor with a monotone voice that just wouldn’t stop talking. Photocopies with the day’s lesson. A projector showing some awful PowerPoint presentation. Keeping notes on a notepad while bored to tears. All the familiar ingredients of an enterprise (offline) training session circa 2000. The stuff nightmares are made of. No wonder most enterprises have since embraced online training with both arms. Not all of them, of course, and not in equal measure in different parts of the world, but any business that has seen the advantages that web based LMS platforms bring to the table in terms of time, cost and training efficiency is not going back anytime. As for the rest, we hope that by the end of this blog post we’ll have them convinced, if not to immediately adopt eLearning, at least to start evaluating the available options. Offline training is costly Let’s be clear about the biggest pain point with offline training first: it’s expensive. You need to pay instructors, buy course books, print and distribute hardcopies, and find a classroom, which usually translates to devoting some (precious and costly) office space for training purposes — space which you of course need to furnish with desks, chairs, whiteboards, projectors and all these kind of things. What’s worse is that those costs only go up as the number of learners increases and you need to have more instructors, textbooks, teaching materials, and training spaces. Contrast with eLearning, where, in the case a web based LMS platform like TalentLMS, you just need to pay a monthly subscription that’s good for hundreds of students, or -in case you need to cater to thousands or even hundreds of thousands of students-, a small flat per-user fee. Plus, thanks to the way eLearning works in general, but also thanks to the powerful automation features in TalentLMS, a single instructor is often enough to create and manage all your different courses and to supervise all your learners — even across different departments, branches, offices and countries. Offline training is a disruption What makes offline learning expensive is not just the costs inherent in maintaining a training space and paying for instructors, hardcopies and the like. Also expensive, and perhaps even costlier than the above, is the fact the offline learning, due to its synchronous nature, disrupts your normal business hours and operations. "Synchronous", in case you’re wondering, is a fancy IT term meaning: "students have to be there at a specific time to take the course". With offline learning enterprises either have to devote working hours to training their employees, or keep them late after work (when they’re exhausted and can’t wait to get back home) to attend their classes. In both cases productivity plummets. This, of course, gets even worse if the training has to take place in some remote location away from the office. That’s why one of the best features of online learning is its asynchronous (the opposite of "synchronous") nature. You just need to put the material up there, and your learners can go through it at their own convenience and at their own pace. And if you go with an always available and accessible from everywhere web based learning management system, employees can not only study from their home but even go through their lessons while commuting to the office, through the magic of "mobile learning", which makes eLearning content accessible to smartphones and other mobile devices. Offline training is ineffective If offline learning was vastly more effective than online learning, it might be worth paying more for it. But, as you probably expected, that’s not the case. In fact a recent meta-study led by researchers at the Imperial College of London concluded, after examining the results of a total of 108 scientific studies, that students acquire knowledge and skills through eLearning as well as or better than they do through traditional teaching. For enterprise training it’s of course even worse, since it’s often performed in an ad-hoc manner, by instructors who lack pedagogical skills and/or teaching experience (e.g. senior employees assigned by upper management with the task to train new hires), and with low quality (and, dare we say, boring) training material, dreadful bullet-laden PowerPoints, hard to read lecture notes written the night before the lesson, etc. A web based learning management system allows instructors to prepare and plan a course in advance, and enables them to incorporate all kinds of supplementary material in it, such as PDFs, images, videos and web content, but also interactive elements, tests and quizzes. This way online lessons can provide a far more rich and rewarding experience compared to having to squint at some PowerPoint slides across a room, or having to endure the slow pace of some instructor repeating the same things over and over. Offline training is hard to evaluate What’s worse about the low quality of offline enterprise training is that enterprise managers are none the wiser about it, as it’s hard to evaluate its efficiency. Online training again comes to change that. TalentLMS for example, the popular web based LMS platform whose blog you’re reading, comes with advanced built-in reporting capabilities that let instructors track the training progress of individual students as well as groups of students. From test scores to lesson attendance and skills acquired, everything that can be measured is, and is made available in the form of easy to comprehend charts, tables and lists of information. Offline training has slow reflexes The difficulty of updating your training content when doing offline learning is perhaps a minor point for businesses whose training needs and materials rarely change, but it can be of big importance to more fast-paced industries and organizations. If your enterprise training needs are frequently changing (e.g. having to quickly adapt to updated industry regulations or to train your users to new technologies and products as they arrive in the market) then offline training, with its ties to the physical world, just doesn’t cut it. As with "snail mail" vs "email", manipulating and distributing bits is way faster than manipulating real physical objects. Or, to use a concrete example, a single instructor can update online course materials and have them made available to all your learners in less than the time that it takes your photocopier operator to prepare and bind 50 copies of the handouts for a single lesson (and with much less waste for the environment, which counts for something too). Offline training is not standardized If you need to have multiple teams of employees, across different branches, offices and even cities and countries, go through offline training, you inevitably need to employ multiple instructors, which in turn might give more emphasis on different things, and generally teach in their own different ways. Sometimes that’s OK, as it’s not a big deal to have some employees in one of your enterprise office learn this, while others in another office learn something slightly different. Other times, as when you’re dealing with delicate processes, precise regulations, and important procedures, that’s not OK. With online training you can be sure that all your students have seen the exact same training materials, presented in the exact same way by the same instructor. What’s more, standardized and automated tests used across all your offices and employees (even if they reside in different continents) ensure that all the important parts have been absorbed. Offline training is offline (duh!) Perhaps the worse offense of offline learning in today’s interconnected world is its "offline" nature, which makes it an isolated island out of reach from your other business activities and systems. A web based learning management system, on the other hand, is in perfect tune with today’s increasingly online (and web-based) business workflows. It can connect to your back office apps, it can share training statistics with your other systems, it can be accessed globally through a simple web browser and it can even connect with your legacy infrastructure through various APIs. Offline and online training are not mutually exclusive Of course not all businesses can totally ditch offline training. When training needs to convey practical (that is, physical) skills to employees, offline training is often the best way. That’s just a small part of enterprise training, though — for all other needs online training is just as good, or, in terms of cost and flexibility, even better. Besides, it’s not like it’s an either/or proposition between offline and online training. TalentLMS, for example, offers "blended learning" functionality, allowing instructors to combine physical classes with online ones, and even manage all of them, regardless of type, from the same web-based user interface. Blended learning, or instructor-led-training as it’s also known, let’s you have the best of both worlds: asynchronous, cost-effective and flexible online training for most things, combined offline (classroom based) training when the latter is called for. In fact TalentLMS also supports a third possibility, "webinars", which are real-time seminars that take place online (e.g. through teleconference). Conclusion In this post we had a look at the benefits that a web based learning management system has compared to the traditional, classroom based, offline training, and especially as it pertains to enterprise training. But don’t take our word for it. Take TalentLMS for a test drive with your free account and see for yourself how a modern web based LMS platform can take your enterprise training to the next level. The post Can web training software replace your offline training? appeared first on TalentLMS Blog.

Who hasn't heard about Brandon Hall Awards? Every year I check out the list of winners which typically includes Allen Interaction Inc., A.S.K Learning, Enspire Learning and so on. I consider these companies to be the best in the industry. Well, that's why they are on the list right? This year, Kern (we have always been dreaming of entering) sent in an entry in the Best Use of Blended Learning category. We knew our work was good because we used our very own learner-centered methodology for this project.Getting to the point, we have won a bronze award for this entry! This year, our name will appear on the list of who's who and someone else will look at it in awe. Kern Communications getting its due recognition through this award... We are now officially (I believe we always were) in the same league as the best in the industry!I am extremely proud to have been part of this project, which was Geeta's brainchild btw, and to belong to this organization that continues to strive for the best.Please read the official press release here.

I am hooked to Clark Quinn's blog posts on ID. When reading one such post, I came across another article, The Case Against Pre Testing for Online Courses by the same author. This had me thinking, when do I use pre-tests in courses?When there is a discrepancy between what the learner knows and what he/she thinks he knows. It is a dangerous situation when the learner thinks he/she already knows what you are about to teach him/her but from your research you know otherwise.If the learners' profile shows discrepancy in prior knowledge, pre tests help identify which path will be best suitable for the learner. For example, the pre test shows that the learner is good at communication skills but poor in active listening, he/she will be directly taken to active listening.To help the learner understand which areas need more focus.To help the learner understand more about themselves. For example: You have a personality test to help the learner understand his/her personality type.This being said its not necessary to have a pre test in all courses. Pre test should not be used for the following:To judge where the learner is; we should have already done our research to identify thisWhen motivation to learn is high; it may be demotivating to continue with the course if the feedback is not encouraging To set expectations; your objectives screen and gain attention screen should be sufficient to set expectationsPre tests are effective tools when used correctly. Pre tests should be designed carefully. These are very useful for soft skills such as communication, personality types, and so on. Well designed pre tests are non-judgemental and encouraging.

I met a few training professionals who use DISC, a personality assessment to analyze people. They observe the person for sometime and then come to a conclusion about which personality traits (combination of D, I, S, and/or C) they portray. I asked one of them how this information helps them. He explained that knowing a personality helps me deal with the person at work. As a trainer, I answer a query/response based on the personality that my learner depicts. I also know that I need to have a high 'I' for my audience to 'like' me. They have to like me to want to listen to me. Makes perfect sense, doesn't it.How are personality tests useful in learning? When can they be used? Here are my thoughts:Personality tests are extremely useful when you want the learner to reflect on his/her own personality.These tests are useful when you need to bring about a behavioral change. For example: For a salesperson, there are a list of attributes that he must have and others that are undesirable. We can use personality tests to check where the learner is, deliver learning, and check where the learner to identify if a behavioral change has taken place. These tests will definitely help us understand the learner profile better. We can design courses keeping the dominant characteristics in mind.Some thoughts that follow these points:Does a behavioral change mean a personality change? Do we understand the deficiencies in our personality and consciously work on them? I guess, personalities are also outcomes of a person's socio-historic context (the environment). This would mean that our personalities are constantly changing based on our experiences. Will the audience show a specific personality pattern? This could happen. If we take the salesperson's example again. When a company hires their sales executives, they look specific characteristics features. How confident is this person? Will he/she be able to hold my attention for long? Will he/she be able to convince/persuade me? So, they may show a specific pattern. (If anyone knows for sure, please share.)Would it be more useful in classroom training? You interact with the learner directly. Based on how they behave, you quickly categorize them and respond accordingly. It sounds like a tough job.

Testing E Learning ProductsView more OpenOffice presentations from Kern Learning solutions.A presentation by Kern Learning Solutions.

I was reading Dave Ferguson's post, Resisting change: a phone-y example. This had me thinking. How do people in the training/learning field resist change? (These are only generalizations.)Clients:Avoid trying news modes of delivering training.Refuse to understand that a learning program that is fun, can also be serious.Spend money on things they have been spending money on for so many years.Being part of the brainstorming session which will help them contribute and stay in the loop.Refuse to treat their learners as responsible adults and are always suspicious of their intentions.Trainers:Refuse to let go. They have to have the power and control. (Read Jane Bozarth's post) Resist innovative ways of teaching.Insist on sticking to the content centric outlook.Think they know what is best for the learners. Hate to say 'I don't know.'Instructional Designers:Stick to Gagne's nine events without trying anything new.Include assessment questions right at the end of the course.Overuse right image-left text templates.Think they know what is best for the learners.Design for themselves rather than for the learners.Have an irresistible itch to design even before they have the information.Do not do enough research to identify interesting videos, example, and case studies.Do not network and prefer to interact through e-mails only.Do not wish to stay in touch with news and events.Think it is not necessary to learn about new technology. SME:Refuse to treat ID's as experts and learners as adults.Refuse to make learning interesting.Refuse to take responsibility for their role.Do not play a more pro active role in the design phase. IDs have to haunt them to get something out of them.They only validate, but add no value to the program.Continue to have a content centric outlook.People, being people, resist change. All of us do. What makes us change is a powerful, positive or negative experience. Keep the following in mind:If you wish to change someone else's life through training, remember to make it a high impact, powerful learning experience.And, keep your mind open.Look for opportunities to try something different.Do not stick to things you are comfortable doing.Read a lot and form your own opinions!Network, you will learn a lot from others.Always remember that you can always do things better. Easier said than done! But, let us give it a shot.

Dave Ferguson raises a valid point in my previous post "Are you ready to change?" I have made an attempt to respond to Dave's concern. Please feel free to add your thoughts.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is a bit tangential to your question, but I saw cell-phone use while driving as a behavior that's widespread among early adopters and change agents.These are often the people trying to get others to change. What's more, my hunch is that they see their behavior as skilled multitasking, and dismiss evidence suggesting that talking while driving is on a par with driving after two or three drinks.So: how comfortable, convenient, effective would they find it to make their own change? To do what the bumper sticker puts gently as "hang up and drive!"One story I see in this is that if you don't want to change, or don't care to change, then change is hard, even if it's rearranging your desk or trying new outfits. All the more difficult if we're talking about significant changes to the way you work (or prefer to work).I'm not defending people who don't change. On the other hand, I think some people who constantl push change might balk at what they'd see as changing back.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I am reminded of the post by Geetha Krishnan on Changing Behavior. As Dave suggests, most of us know using the cell phone while driving is hazardous but we still do it. Similarly, there are several other things that we continue doing though we know we shouldn't be. Dave discusses an interesting point: "What's more, my hunch is that they see their behavior as skilled multitasking..." Many believe that multitasking in reality reduces efficiency and that at any point in time you are actually focusing on one task before you switch to another. (Change Blindness; you cannot be aware of everything) The concern that Dave voices is that early adopters and change agents themselves refuse to change. Like Dave mentioned, people take drinking and driving more seriously than talking and driving. Why?People do not seriously believe that talking while driving can cause any serious harm. This is especially true in the case of early adopters and change agents.Most people spend several hours commuting from home to their place of work and back. Busy as life is, they take this time to catch up with others. Cell phones are also important links between home and work. I will probably not ignore a call from home because I may consider it urgent. (Though I strictly do not use cell phones when I drive. I prefer to stop the car and then attend to any urgent calls. But, that could be because I am sure I can not concentrate on driving and talking.)Curiosity may be a strong reason why people take calls. When they see a name flashing, they wonder 'What could he/she want?" This question has to be answered and therefore, they take the call. Sometimes you just have to take the call. It could be a client, your boss, wife/husband, or a person you have been trying to get in touch with for ages.People genuinely think they call keep the call short (while waiting at the traffic signal) but are unable to do so.When do people 'change'?When it suits them: It is as simple as that. People change when it suits them. I have seen people answer the cell and say I am driving right now and make their excuses. The same people have chatted on other occasions. Therefore, people 'change' when it suits them. This is along the same lines of people 'learn' things that confirm their own ideas or thoughts (read it somewhere on Twitter and agreed this made sense).When people experience a negative experience: Negative experiences impact behavior. It could be a near-death experience, a traumatic experience, a humiliating experience, or an emotional experience. These have huge impact on an individual's psyche. People change to ensure that this kind of experience never happens to them again. When they see a HUGE benefit: I say huge (in caps) because it has to really big from people to change their behavior. What is beneficial for one person may not be the same for another. People may change to set an example and earn a good name. People may change to acquire a goal they have set their minds to.What can we do to ensure a change to encourage a desired behavior? I know most people claim that bringing about a behavioral change is close to impossible through training. I think it depends on what kind of behavioral change you are trying to bring about. If it is a deep routed value/belief/habit that you are trying to change, it is bound to be extremely difficult. In other cases, what are the things that you can do to ensure a change is brought about:Monitor behavior: If it is a workplace behavior (which it is most of the time), ensure that you have monitoring in place immediately after training is delivered. This may seem school-like, but if you are required to bring about a change, the management must show that they are serious about it. Provide positive reinforcements: This again may seem school-like. But it works brilliantly. We had to teach sales executives at a retail store about grooming skills. In the form of positive reinforcement, we had suggested internal competition with announcement of Best Groomed Employee. This worked wonders. The learners were highly motivated after taking the tutorial and we all geared to display the newly acquired knowledge to win the title.Make it a habit: Through monitoring and positive reinforcements, you can ensure that the behavior becomes a habit. For example: people buckle in their seat belts (not in India thought) as soon as they are in their vehicle due to a habit and not because its a rule.Show consequences: In some cases, it becomes necessary to show a cause and effect relationship. It is important for the learner to see the consequence of their actions to understand how the decision they have made it going to effect them.Show them, rather than tell them: Rather than telling them how they should be doing it. Ensure that you show them scenarios in which they get to see the plot unfold. Let the learners arrive at their own conclusions. Ensure that your case it a strong one, else learners will find excuses. For example: Recently, we designed a course for programmers. During the learner testing, we realized that the learners were making excuses for applications by passing the blame on to the users. Therefore, we realized that the impact had to be higher and we had to ensure that all loose ends were tied.I am sure they are still doubts as to whether external factors can change an individual and I think the external factors could play an important role. Rest is upto the individual. If the person does not want to change, nothing you say or do will bring about a change. I don't necessarily agree that people who push for a change may not want to change themselves. I think it depends on what aspect they need to change. Again, if it is an internal belief which they feel strongly about (say religion), change may be impossible. But, if it suits them, most early adopters and change agents will change. I think it is a matter of making sure that it also suits them.Your thoughts are welcome.

I read this interesting post on Have you thought of Character Driven Stories for Your eLearning? by Rupa (@ruparajgo). I was tempted to blog about it myself (thanks for the inspiration, Rupa).What role can a character(s) play in your eLearning porgram?1. Expert: This is probably the most common use of a character in eLearning.Type 1: This type takes you through the course and is a constant feature. You can design an expert who will take the learner through the course. This expert simplifies information or provides useful tips drawing from his experience.The character takes on the role of a mentor. The character symbolizes wisdom and is always present to see the learner through tough situations. He/she could encourage and motivate the learner through the course.Type 2: This type "pops up" when necessary. The role could be defined such that he/she makes an entry to challenge, guide, provide useful information, and so on. This character supplements the content when necessary.2. Peer: The learner is introduced to the world of a peer. We define the environment and then ask the learner to observe the peer in action and help when the peer gets stuck.Peer is the 'damsel-in-distress' (not necessarily a damsel). The peer depends on the learner to help him/her through a tough situation. The learner has to make the right decisions to get the situation under control. 3. Guide: The guide is a another common character in eLearning. I have seen several online courses that have an animated character on the top left corner that lip syncs the audio (Her eyes follow your cursor. It is a little freaky.) I have never understood the value these characters add to a learning program. They are neither experts, nor peers. They are the host, who accompanies you through the course.4. Trouble maker: This could be a boss, an expert, a peer, a competitor, or an enemy. This character challenges the learner at specific instances. Their feedback is blunt, even rude at times. They reprimand the learner if he/she goes wrong and grudgingly accept if they get it right.The relationship is that of power. The character throws a challenge: Let us see how to get past this hurdle. The learner has to make the right choices to save face or 'win'.Like Rupa mentions, characters make the course more lively. Remember the following when creating a character:Give them a personality: I love building a persona for the character. Give him a name, a background, prominent traits, and so on. When creating such a character, I think to myself, what impression do I want this character to make on my learners. Do I want my learners to admire him? Do I want them to empathize with the character? Do I want them to respect him?Ensure Consistency: It is important to ensure that the character is consistent in behavior across the course. You do not want a timid character being very bold in another scenario. The learner will get confused.Weave the storyline well: The storyline must blend in well with your theme. Do not introduce characters in an abrupt fashion. Build a simple storyline. Ensure that the storyline is in sync with the theme. Also, ensure that the storyline will flow smoothly through the complete course. Some become too forced if not thought through.Do not use characters as decorative elements: Characters must aid to learning and the overall learning experience. These characters are not meant to be eye candies.Sharing some great resources on this:Learning Agents Part 1: Why Learning AgentsLearning Agents Part 2: Learning Agents Done WellLearning Agents Part 3: Done Poorly

For majority of my career, I had the privilege of working on some amazing content. After eight years of experimenting with the boundaries of ID in the domain of soft skills, products, and process training, I was skeptical when I got a job opportunity from an IT company. My thoughts were: Would technical training be as boring as I imagine? Do I really want to try my hand at this to see if I can tackle this domain also?Will creativity be restricted? I reached out to my peers and received mixed opinions that left me more confused.  I finally spoke to one of my mentors, Rashmi Varma, who suggested that I should give it a go. My husband kept encouraging me to try something new. I then decided that I would attend the interview. The interview itself was very interesting. I was interviewed by a person who was quite paranoid about technical training. In what way, you ask? Well, he kept asking me if I have done any technical training and I kept replying no, I hadn't. He then started trying to convince me about how difficult and boring technical training is. After a while, I lost my patience and exclaimed 'I have the confidence to work with any type of content. Now, it is up to you to decide if you think I am suitable for this role.' What is it about technical training that people are so scared about? I decided to take the offer and find out for myself. I went in with an open mind. I have now been designing technical training for one and half years and here are my observations: Technical training is also about people: Regardless of the topic/concept, if you are trying to train people, then there is a story to tell. If it is a software application, it is important to tell the story about who will be using it. And, the demystification of a software product gives me immense satisfaction. Most times, we get bogged down by focusing on the complexities of the topic. We should be focusing on understanding the human angle. How do people use it? Most times, even the people who design these products don't know the 'whole story'. Can you find it and tell them so that they do their work better? If you are a good ID, the domain does not matter: If you are a good ID, you should be able to design courses regardless of the domain. At the end of the day, we are here to ensure that we use effective learning strategies to teach. We need to be smart enough to understand 'how things work.' We should be able to ask the relevant questions and get the answers that help us build the story. Technical Training also provides oppurtunity to think creatively: My second project was about an abstract product. This product was very new and the concept was very abstract at the beginning. There was no case study to help as the product hand been launched yet. With the help of the SME, I created a detailed scenario that helped the learners understand the product better. Therefore, you can choose to be creative in any domain. You can design detailed scenarios to help the learner understand how the product will work in the real world. The bottom line is there is no point blaming the content or the tools... we can create opportunities to make it creative. The beauty is in simplification: With most things, especially technical training, the beauty is in simplification. Can you understand the product enough to simplify the explanations you provide? Can you de-jargonize it and say it in a 'simple' fashion? Do not get overwhelmed by its complexities. There are always SMEs to help you understand things better. Ask them the right questions and do extensive research. Keep abreast with the products you work on. It prepares you for when the training does come your way. To summarize, I thoroughly loved the first 8 years of my ID life, and I continue to do so. I do not regret working with technical content. I can now say that I have a complete portfolio! This experience has taught be to overlook biases and see things in a different light.

One of my jobs a few weeks ago was to facilitate sessions at the Rome Share Fair. This included making sure there was some sort of blog post or notes from each session. Well, I fell behind after one session. I got my blog post up on the Graphic Facilitation workshop, and convinced Sophie Alvarez to blog about the Communities of Practice Clinic Etienne and I did, but then there were FOUR more! Mamma mia. Here is one… from the session on New Technologies and Innovative Approaches in Rural Family Poultry. (Slides below) Antonio Rota (IFAD) and Olaf Thieme (FAO) have been working on an approach to small scale poultry farming in rural areas that offers a glimpse into the factors that help farmers succeed in putting food on their table and making  living for their families. We joked that this session could have been called "how to make a development project that works" or, riffing off of Rob Burnet’s talk on Tuesday where he talked about an attention getting technique they used, the "Chicken of Change!" (Graphic recording I did of Rob’s talk is here.) First, a bit about the session. We kicked things off with a human spectrogram (http://www.kstoolkit.org/Human+Spectrogram) to learn  more about the 20 people who came to the session. The group was diverse; some with a lot of experience with poultry and others with less experience but plenty of interest. While there may be more interest in the stars of livestock, cows, I’ve learned that it is poultry, goats and other small animals that are accessible to the very poor and very rural. Chickens can produce eggs and meat for high nutrition, and selling eggs and chickens brings in income.  These little chicks offer financial empowerment for women. But poultry just isn’t on the radar screen and there are not many statistics to help shine a light on chickens and ducks for development. Poultry production can contribute to the MDGs around poverty, hunger, education, gender empowerment, health, and even reduction in HIV/AIDS. Super chickens! I realized as I listened there is a ton of common sense in our work, but what matters is listening and acting on that common sense. Antonio and Olaf shared a story about a village poultry project that, while scientifically sound, ran into some practical problems, like the challenge of finding high volumes of local varieties of chickens well suited to a free-ranging lifestyle, and reasonable ways to get eggs hatched. (Just a side note: in our preparation, Antonio mentioned that some people talked about "free ranging" chickens as "scavenging livestock." Hm, interesting how language might shape  our perceptions, eh?) I was amazed how fascinating all the elements were as Antonio and Olaf told engaging stories. There were issues of vaccine distribution for Newcastle disease. Access to vaccines varies by distance from cities and the creation of vaccine networks is critical.. Poultry raising practices in general vary by distance from cities, with more intense production in peri urban and urban settings where there are more resources and capital. In the very rural areas, women have to make due with what they find locally.  And all these things need to mesh with local customs and practices. So is the big pattern emerging? Yes, context! Local knowledge and adaptation matter. Innovation does not have to mean rocket science. 90-95% of poultry loss is from disease and then second greatest loss is predators, including humans. Villagers developed a simple basket cage to protect their chicks out a wide varieties of material. Breed choices focus on runners who can evade predators and forage in the rural areas, not a slow broiler. In the cities, you can build hen houses for more intense production. To grow more chickens you need more birds. Brood hens only work for small production. So villagers have created simple incubators that can be built in remote locations. Think about it. If you are targeting 10,000 women with 10 hens each…where do you find 100,000 local breed chickens? Large scale breeders offer "Ferrari" birds that require a lot of feed. Then woman have to decide, "feed the birds or feed my children?" These past dilemmas have caused evaluators to say "Chickens don’t work." But they can. Oil lamp incubators were developed by women in Bangladesh. This and related methods are adaptable to different contexts informed by the women’s’ experiences. For example, in the past, telling women to turn the eggs every hour, around the clock was downright impractical. Sponsors provided a lot of training, but people abandoned the work after training. One woman however was successful, but not willing to turn the eggs every hour. She turned twice a day and still the eggs hatched successfully. Voila! Local adaptation. The training was also adapted, moving from two full sequential days, to 28 days of working with the women in doing the work, solving the little problems. This reflected the hatching cycle. This is where the idea of the buffer zone of sand for the oil lamp hatchery was identified and which greatly increased success. Now new village industry is building on local breeds with locally done genetic improvement through cross breeding for village conditions. This is an important remote option of poultry breeds for the poor, rural farmers and populations. Few institutions are focusing on poultry. There apparently is little focused research. No one is doing extensive training. So we need more networking for exchange of information on poultry production. And information that is locally and contextually adapted. The days of projects with blanket design for rural poultry are finished at IFAD and FAO. From now on they will be specifically tailored around social, economic and location specific conditions. Marginal areas need local breeds, local knowledge and resources used for food security. Closer to urban and peri urban centers we can look more at market based systems. We need to listen to farmers and local knowledge about what is possible and use a comprehensive approach, with motivation, training for success as well as technical advice.Antonio and Olaf offered a word of advice to the new player, BMGF. "If they only invest in one of the many technical factors they will fail. We have learned from our mistakes. We know we need a holistic approach. We want to share what we learned." New technologies and innovative approaches in rural family poultry (SLIDES) View more presentations from copppldsecretariat PoultryPublication