Establishing the principles behind the ecosystem was the first step in developing Ecosystem 1.0.Having these principles available lets me take advantage of opportunities while I attempt to organize everything into the new TOGAF-based architecture.It's even more important when working in an organization that does not particularly value the act of planning.  You still need to show progress and activity.  Creating a Visio flowchart or a Requirements matrix doesn't really count.I also need some critical success factors to measure against. The world won't stand still while I get my act together.The principles I am moving forward with:- As needed performance support- Continuous professional developmentCritical success factors:- Visibility - can people find the training they need?- Communication - do people know what they need?- Tracking - do people know how they are doing?The Ecosystem is at a point where I need to re-establish relationships with the stakeholder community (there have been a number of changes) and validate whether we want to maintain these particular principles and critical success factors.Unfortunately, the primary stakeholders and supporters within my division have other priorities right now.  So I am going to move forward with this until the timing and environment improves.  At least this gives me a foundation to work with.

Our Enterprise SWAT Team Lead has started an Innovation Forum within our division.During one of the forums, our HR Client Partner at the time asked about ways we can create a training page for our Division.This has been on my mind since the inception of Ecosystem 1.0.Opportunity knocks....-----------------As we discussed in the previous post, just because we are busy planning doesn't mean the world stands still.The SWAT Team Lead, the HR Client Partner and I (with the blessing of the Deputy Muck)  spent a month putting together a training portal through our SharePoint site.Beyond providing a page that combines all of the training resources available to our division, we are also using this as a prototype for a University-wide training portal.  This is also a way for us to rapidly prototype this idea within SharePoint.  See what works and what doesn't.A few notes:We opened this to view-only for the entire organization.We will likely isolate some permissions for things that are Division-only, but this is a start  Edit permissions are available to the Division.  We are going on the assumption of trust.We are currently using documents and links to the documents as the structure for the curriculum.  Depending on how the interfaces with other groups go, this might change to the Wiki features or a SharePoint add-onThere is currently no tracking or reporting attached to any of this outside of whatever is native to SharePoint.  This means, no completion records.  Again, this might change if the organization determines that it is a requirement.  Right now, it's not on the priority list.  Specifically reportable items are accessed through the LMS.The 7 minute video below provides a walkthrough of the portal.Hope this helps. Comments welcome.

From Techfellows - University of Alaska Anchorage.--------------------------- As I put together the architecture, I have to decide whether my efforts are going to be present-focused (ie. capturing the current baseline) or future-focused (ie. documenting where I want to be - also known as Target First).Unless you work for an organization that has clear, centralized configuration management and everyone (you, your IT group, the stakeholders) has a solid understanding of the current architecture, chances are you will be documenting Baseline first.This is a really good exercise.  I personally find it hard to do any system improvement if I don't know what the system is in the first place.  Not that I haven't tried....-----------------------There are three main "architectures" I will be documenting during the course of this process.The Business Architecture (Stage B) - ie What people do.  Focused on what they REALLY do vs. what we THINK they SHOULD be doing. Warning: Danger lurks here.The Application Architecture (Stage C) - ie What tools we use.The Data Architecture (also Stage C) - ie What we are trying to get out of it and where that information is housed.So what about the Technology Architecture (Stage D) you ask? Chances are, your team (talking to mostly trainers and educators etc) is not responsible for the infrastructure of your tools (servers, the network, whether or not it is in "the cloud"etc).This will be a good opportunity to make friends with your IT folks who have knowledge of these things. We'll talk about the questions to ask later....--------------------------As you'll notice throughout this series, I am doing a number of these phases in parallel vs. in the correct "order".  Again - taking advantage of opportunities as they present themselves.Besides, there is nothing in the TOGAF manual that says I HAVE to do things in order.And anyway, so much of this process for me is a "fact-finding" mission to see what we have and what we are working with.My goals for this process are:Figure out what is lying aroundDetermine how to optimize what is lying aroundIdentify gaps in functionality (and, ideally, avoid duplication)Identify knowledge gaps and fill them Identify stakeholder gaps - now is a good time to do the "people work" to minimize political surprises later.Share what I've learned with the organization.  Put TOGAF through its paces to see what works. None of us have really done this before.  And the best way I learn something is by doing it.  And if I have something concrete - I can see what modifications need to be made.

From lynda-m at Deviantart.com ---------------------------------------- The Preliminary Phase of the architecture is supposed to have 4 outputs.  I am outlining these below to help provide a checklist of the types of information I need to gather and some of the early decisions that need to be considered.---------------------------------------The Organizational Model for the Architecture provides a rough idea of what you have to work with:People Who is impactedWho we need to target for governance and decision-making around the architectureWhat roles these people play - I'm going to include support hereStuffWhat we haveWhat we don't haveConstraints around what we can do to fill the gapsHow much money we might need (though I am going into this assuming there will be NO money)Usually - there would also be an assessment of architectural maturity. The answer for us is "non-existent and the gap is huge and I may have potentially bitten off more than I can chew, but it's worth a shot....."---------------------------------- There is also a Tailored Architecture Framework.  In this will be:What method I am using (deciding to use TOGAF. There's other methods)What other methods for activities need to be used to align with the organization (I'm sure more will appear as I work on this)Service Management - ITILProject Management - PMBOKRequirements Management - tbd.  Could be BABOK or Volare or something elseTemplates for deliverablesArchitecture principlesThe Initial Repository (where I'm storing stuff)Other tools I should be using.  Flowcharts - Visio, planning to use Archimate modelingMS OfficeAnything else that may come up that will help me communicate to others--------------------------------- There would also be a Request for Architecture Work created by a sponsor. This document would contain high-level information on the following:SponsorsMission statement for the architectureBusiness goals to be addressed by the architectureStrategic plans for the businessTime limitsChanges and challenges in the business environment triggering this architectureConstraints - internal and externalBudget constraints and informationCurrent business system descriptionCurrent IT system architecture descriptionDescription of the developing organization and the resources availableI may still write one of these up.  More for my own reference and to serve as a template if I am able to get a sponsor that's not me.---------------------------The Architecture Definition Document defines what this architecture / ecosystem IS.This will be written after the other three documents are at least in draft form.Scope of the architecture - in my case, "Learning / Teaching activities" Goals, objectives and constraints for the architecture.  This would be defined in the Request for Architecture work.Architecture principles - how I'm basing decisions for the Target (future-state) architectureBaseline architectureThe architecture models, for each iteration of the future stateThe rationale and justification for the approach -why I'm using TOGAF instead of Zachman or some other architecture modelThe mapping of the Architecture Repository - where it is, table of contents, how to categorize stuff, how to find stuffGap analysis - what needs to happen to go from point A to point BImpact assessment - what we think will happen if we manage to be successful--------------------------None of these documents will be final at this point.I personally see it as more of a checklist....Do I have everything I need to answer these questions? Have I thought of everything that may apply to the architecture?Is the definition of my scope accurate and clearly delineated?

An important step in this process is to figure out who your stakeholders are and perform a bit of Stakeholder analysis.What is their role in this architecture? Responsible for completing an action in the architecture? Accountable for making sure that action is completed?Consulted (advised) if something needs to happen?Informed once certain things are finished?How supportive are they of what you are trying to do? (Interest)How badly can they derail your plans? (Power)These are the questions I asked during the first go-around when I was trying to figure out who did staff training at the University. It's been a few years, so I need to get back to my network and start asking questions again.  This will be happening mostly on an "opportunistic" basis.Do you train people? - Looking for other "trainers". Just because they don't have "trainer" in their title or don't have "training / learning / education / etc" in the organization name doesn't mean they don't perform training activities.)Do you NEED to train people? - Looking for SMEs + people who need to get reporting out of this architecture.Are you responsible for a compliance / regulatory program?Are you responsible for an IT application?Are you responsible for a mission-critical business process?Do you have to maintain a certification? - I'm asking this more to isolate "power-users" since pretty much everyone in the organization has to touch this system as a  "student". Particularly for the certification programs.Do you find learning new things "interesting"? - I'm also looking out for people who are excited about making the experience for the end user better.  These people usually give fantastic feedback and will take the time to do so when the other groups might not.Who ELSE do I need to talk to? - This is the "political" question.  The answer to this question will also tend to be the people who magically "appear" when you are about to actually do something and can derail a plan quickly.  Best to get these folks involved early. Once I have my list together, I can start putting together  my stakeholder contact list, a RACI chart, and the super secret power/interest grid.All of this stuff gets dumped into my Architecture Repository as I do the information gathering.Because this is a large scale, long-term effort - I anticipate the stakeholder list, the RACI chart and the Power/Interest grid to change as things evolve.  I will need to come up with processes to keep things up-to-date.

Argue about the validity of ADDIE if you must, but most training teams I have encountered still use this as an organizing structure for what they do.I'd rather talk to my  stakeholders in a way they understand.This particular iteration is from Chico State IDTS. ----------------------The "Power Users" for the Learning Ecosystem will be the folks performing staff training design, development and delivery activities.One of the important things to figure out is what these folks actually do.This is the start of the investigation for the Business Architecture.----------------------------- In my organization - there does not seem to be any separation between the design/development team and the delivery team in the groups that do training. Often, its the same person from start-to-finish. And EVERYONE (stakeholders and trainers) is curious to see whether the training "worked" (or at least got some butts in seats).Where I found the differences between the groups in my organization was in each team's preferred delivery format.Some groups are really "classroom heavy".  Some groups did a lot of webinars. The group I am in tends to do a lot more asynchronous development and assists other teams with their asynchronous development.I'm going to start this at a high level. We're going to break these processes down even further - but it provides a start as to what we need to start mapping out.---------------------Level 1 - the super duper high level. Look familiar?Figure out what training is needed and/or do intake for "training" projects.Design trainingDevelop trainingDeliver trainingFigure out whether training worked-------------------------- Level 2 -  High-level processes that all of the training teams seem to do.  There might be some things that a particular team doesn't do - but I want to make sure every possibility is covered.  This is going to help give us a rough outline of the scope we are dealing with for the Business Architecture.I reserve the right to change things as I discover stuff  and think things through.  Consider this an "agile" document.Figure out what training is needed and/or do intake for "training" projects.Project intake process Needs assessment process SubjectObjectivesAudience Design trainingProject Management processInstructional Design process Outline developmentDelivery format DeliverablesDesign ApprovalsDevelop materials for trainingDevelopment process - first draft ClassroomWebinarAsynchronousBlendedCurriculum / Curation - or, how this stuff goes together if it is a multi-item project Iteration processPilots - you are piloting your training materials, aren't you?Modifications - pre-deliveryApproval for delivery / go-live  Deliver trainingRegistration process - for studentsRegistration management process - for trainers / stakeholdersReservation process - includes human resources, classroom resources, technical resourcesFor classroom, webinar, and any blended approach that uses synchronous trainingUpload process - where can we put this stuff so people can find it?For asynchronous and any blended approach using asynchronous trainingAlso consider any recordings resulting from webinarsALL supplemental information from the classroom and webinar approaches should be considered here as well. DevOps  - or, how are we going to maintain this stuff?Communications process - how do we tell people that this is available?   Reporting process - I'm sticking this here because it makes sense to me right now.  In operations, people tend to run reports right after training delivery. Butts in seats and if they are happy - mostly. I may change my mind later.....Figure out whether or not the training worked.Evaluation process / Report analysisUpdate process - or, how are we going to handle changes?

This is the Carta Marina. Please note the monsters.You will find some on your journey.An interesting interactive version of this map can be found at Slate.com------------- I now have a rough idea of the processes that need to be documented.And this is where things can get a little hairy....I've learned that anytime you document human processes you learn:What is "supposed" to happen (often "management's" perspective of the situation)What actually happens (usually discovered when you are talking to the people who actually do the work)The interesting behavior that occurs among your stakeholders when you uncover the difference between the two.So why the gap?Work-arounds because the process is too slow, too kludgy, too dependent upon anotherThe tools that the process relied upon didn't work quite right when they implemented the process and they never bothered to retrain after the initial implementation.....The designed process doesn't create the designed result, but no one will tell the process designer (often an executive-type) - so this is the cover-up"But we've always done it this way" (cites process they learned when they joined the company 20 years ago)Someone is leveraging the process for his/her personal ends ....  Thankfully, this is infrequent.This is why it is really important to talk to the people actually DOING the process.  Not just the managers.  Because often the managers are hearing what their staff wants them to hear. And/or they don't want to admit that parts of their process don't work.It's natural. --------------A lot of time and thought and heartache and soul-searching are usually involved in any process improvement process.The admission something is not workingFeelings of shame because something in your area is not working Wanting to prove competenceWanting to improve a situation for themselves, while negotiating around others who want the same thing, just maybe in a different way.  And the emotional stress of those negotiationsThe big reason why I have seen process improvement projects stall is because no one accounts for the emotions involved. You are shaking up their comfort zone. Often FORCING change and doing so in ways that only benefit one group of stakeholders without considering the others. There's something that works in the "way they've always done it."If not practically (anymore), at least emotionally. Ignore that.....monsters.

Now that I have a rough idea of what processes I need to document, it's time for me to start mapping out the individual process.  The act of doing this will help me break this down further.Working within a  training team, I figured it was best to start with us.This will also help provide a point of discussion when I talk to other teams.Allow me to see how our process differs from theirs and why.We have already defined the general processes we need to begin mapping. The first process I am documenting is our Registration process for students. Eventually, I will do all of the processes, but I wanted to start with something that was pretty well-defined and possessed common agreement among all of the participants of this process (ie our team).Choosing something "easy" allows me toMake sure I am using a visualization that makes sense to everyoneReduces the risk of me setting off alarms around what I am doing (remember - "Planning" can be perceived as threatening. Here Be Monsters.)Shows progress quickly to others. Gives me a quick "discussion point" for the other stakeholders.Gets me comfortable with the process of building and validating these flowcharts.  Provides more bandwidth to experiment with the architecture program itself vs arguing over the accuracy of the individual flowchart (at least....that's the hope) Since I am in very early days, I still have templates and systems to develop around this effort.I've got a mess of processes to document. Have I figured out a process to develop these flowcharts quickly and accurately so I can focus on the accuracy of the information vs. playing with Visio / PowerPoint / Archimate / other flowcharting tool?Do other people understand what I am trying to communicate? Stakeholders? Executives? Does this fit in with the Architecture team's standards?  (Remember, this is going to help them too...) Is this easy to edit and share once I am done with it?How many other people do I want to give edit permissions to these workflows to?How I am going to organize this information? Can other people find it?------------------------So before documenting - I asked the Architecture team the following questions:Is there a particular tool you want me to use?  Their answer - no.  I'm using Visio for this effort, but you can also use PowerPoint, Word, or drawing stuff out on paper and taking a picture with your cell phone.  Actually...drawing stuff out on paper or using sticky notes and a wall isn't a bad way to start.Is there a particular modeling technique  you want this in?Their answer - "Well, Archimate would be nice"My solution - just getting it down first. I have a lot to learn about Archimate and will use this particular flowchart to start learning it.This link provides some best practices for documenting workflows with Archimate.

The article this image came from talks about how the client-side marketing research department could politically position themselves to make use of the data.A fascinating read itself - if not related to the below post...------------------- As you might have guessed, I'm writing these posts as I am doing the work.And you may have noticed that I am not doing the stages "in order".I'm organizing and creating the pieces as the opportunity and inspiration presents itself.Such is the risk when a venture like this is done as a "side job". All of this information eventually appears in the following stages:- Preliminary (to see what we have) - referenced in the Architecture Definition Document. Eventually.- A: Architecture Vision (to help us developone)- and the appropriate Architecture development stageIt's messy.  A lot like life.---------------------------I wanted to show you my process for documenting workflows.Phase 1 - what it looks like on paperPersonally - I find it a lot easier to hash workflows analog.There are many ways to do this.  I know sticky notes are really popular.But I tend to come up with these ideas in random environments.I don't have an "assigned" office where I work.  And I fear losing sticky notes. Phase 2 - getting it on computer in a way I  understand itSo this is the first draft.  I left out specifics for my organization, but I figure this is a general workflow for a lot of us.A few things I am trying to do here. - First pass at an attempt at Archimate.  As in....first time EVER....  I warned you that you are seeing this as I do it.- Get it in electronic format. - Refine it.  I think differently on paper than I do on computer.  I catch things I may have missed.This was done in Visio.  But you can also do this in PowerPoint or Word if you have access to those.Since this is my first process flowchart for this Learning Ecosystem in this new format, I am also using this as an opportunity to build out my templates.Next steps for me....- Show this to my colleagues on the team.  Is this right? Does this make sense if I wasn't around to explain it?- Once I have the workflow right....talk to our SWAT team - does this make sense to them?  Could they work with it?  Remember - this whole initiative is about being able to communicate to both the business side (ie - the trainers) and the IT side (which is being represented by the SWAT team)- Talk to our resident Archimate expert.  To see how badly I bungied this and what I need to do to modify and other considerations.-----------------There are lots and lots of these to build.  Not just for the individual workflows but also for how they relate to each other. Think I need to build out a production list.....

I ran into our SWAT team guy for integration after a meeting one day.  He came from an organization with a more mature enterprise architecture practice.  He also happens to be our resident expert in Archimate.  I was hoping to pick his brain and see whether what I was doing a) was on the right track and b) would help him and the rest of the SWAT team in any way."I have something to show you."We wandered back to his cubicle. He shook his mouse a bit and unlocked his screen saver."I found a really nifty tool called Archi.  I've been using this to document our enterprise."He opened up our Technology Reference Model (TRM).  He and the other architects built it a while back and the SWAT Team Lead introduced a draft to us during the TOGAF certification training.Goldmine!The Technical Reference Model (TRM) in TOGAF serves as the high level model and taxonomy for the architecture. Basically a high level model of what we have, where it fits, and what we are going to call it.Your IT department should have something like this lying around their shop.  Or at least in their heads. Our draft was based on IT's service catalog.And there are many ways to visualize this model.Ohio State provides a nice one.Idea2Prod also provides excellent examples of a TRM + other diagrams and graphicsSince I am working in a segment (and a business segment at that), I wasn't worried about creating an entire Technical Reference Model.  That rightly belongs in your IT department.  I am, however, worried about particular sections of that model.  The sections in red.Behind each of those little boxes is a lot more detail.Except for Learning Management and Training under Enterprise Applications.The SWAT team left that for me.

From the Technology Reference Model,  the Integration SWAT Team guy then began to drill down into the architecture."I've been working mostly in the Applications, Data and Technology Architectures.  I haven't touched the Business Architectures."  He smiled.  I think he's leaving that for me.--------------------------I wanted to give you an example of what this looks like from our perspective.Below is an Archimate version (as best as I was able to put together) of a typical basic setup for a training group.  This is a high level Application and Data view.  I used Archi to put this together.The top level is your high level application service - ie: what you need your tools to provide.The second level is the actual functions that the tools deliver.The third level are the actual tools and applications you are usingThe fourth level is the data the tools are producing or accessing.From here, you start putting together how these things are related.(Warning, still learning, so you may see an edit to this after I talk to our Archimate guru)The solid line with the dots = "assigned to". If you look at the Online tutorials and LMS link, that would read "LMS is assigned to online tutorials"  I added "Trackable tutorials" since we are only putting tutorials that require reporting into our LMS.The dashed arrow pointing to something = "realizes".  Look at the dashed arrow between LMS and Content Delivery. This reads "LMS realizes content delivery".  Or, in more human language, I (the user) can find content in the LMS.The dotted arrow pointing to something = "access".This doesn't seem quite right and will likely need some review, but it means "LMS accesses LMS reporting".  Which is true in a sense since to allow a user to go back to a bookmark in a tutorial, the LMS will look at the records in its database to determine where that person is.--------------The nice thing about this view is that it begins to relate what you are actually doing to the tools you are using.More importantly, it provides us a way to start speaking the language of the folks who need to help us.---------------A more detailed introduction to Archimate can be found in the Open Group ArchiMate page.Again, this is just my attempts to apply it.  "Learning out loud."Any recommendations for improvement are highly welcomes.

Over the past year - I've been finding myself using Capability Matrices for a wide array of purposes:Evaluating whether to use one application over another when hosting training materialsShowing my management the level of effort (and money) it would take to replace key functionality if they choose to eliminate or replace a particular application.Figuring out WHY I don't like any of the tools at my disposal to accomplish a particular task A Capability Matrix generally has the name of the application on one axis and the requirements on the other axis.Below is a very high level SharePoint example from CMSWire.In this case, the requirements are the rows and the applications are the columns.-----------------------------------In an ideal world - the requirements would be pulled from the requirements that were used to purchase the application.I don't live in that world.Also - requirements lists can get pretty long. For our Unified Communications project - our requirements document was about 200 pages. When we finally get around to building out the capability matrix for that system, you can bet we are chunking that up into much smaller functional sections.-----------------I find the "requirements" in my early capability matrices have been based on1) The decisions that need to be made around the particular applications (keep or ditch? should I use this or that?)2) Generic requirements around that particular application - just go to any "checklist for evaluating X" article to find decent starter requirements.3) Surfaced use cases for our more mature applications (ie - what people are actually using vs the "nice to have")Over the next few posts - I'll talk through the use cases.

The first example I want to flesh out is the capability matrix I am using for determining where to host my training materials.Doesn't your organization have a content strategy?Thankfully, we are starting these discussions again - since the applications we are using for hosting have changed and multiplied.2 years ago - it was pretty straightforward. Any training content that needed tracking went into the LMS/CMSAnything that needed to be external facing to our audience and didn't require tracking went to our web siteWorking files, base files, anything that needed sharing among the project team etc went to a shared driveNow - we have:The LMS (for stuff that needs tracking)The web site (internal - mostly a server we upload files to)Google Apps (currently replacing our shared drive) A document management system (secure)SharePointExternal-facing web site CMSA Knowledge Management systemA Project Management system with document-hosting capabilities (that is also currently being switched out)and...at some point...a Digital Asset Management systemI still have projects where I need to have my materials tracked (occasionally) and visible (often).Plus - I still need to be able to find my own stuff.So in this example - I am using the capability matrix to help make decisions regarding where to host content.--------------Rough setup:Rows: each of the applications I have access to where I can store content.At some point, I will flesh this out to other applications that are in the environment.  Right now, I am more concerned about what I can do TODAY. Columns: The "requirements"Section 1: What file types each application can handle.eLearning has some file types and packaging that are not used by the rest of the organization.  I have also discovered the hard way that some applications handle these packages a LOT more gracefully than others.Some applications also handle certain file types "awkwardly" (please see Google Apps and MS Office)Section 2: Other desireable featuresI am using wiki, blog and real-time collaborationSection 3: Who has approvals over contentWhen I make a decision over where I want to host my stuff - the less approval overhead the better.  If I need to go through layers of approval - I always warn the project team that they will need to tack weeks onto a project and to not expect that materials will be updated quickly.  Since many of the projects I have been on recently have been Agile (though I haven't been on an implementation project in my entire career that hasn't had development occurring in parallel with training) - approval processes get very unwieldy very quickly.  Below is a brief demo video below of my current capability matrix for content hosting.

The second way I have used a capability matrix is to make decisions regarding application replacement.In this instance, management was investigating getting rid of our staff LMS.By itself, I don't have a problem with that.However, they were looking to do it in a very tight timeframe - as in, not renewing the contract that expires in less than a year.I used this particular capability matrix to show the following:What we have and what each application does (most of them are content libraries containing pre-built tutorials) What functionality we currently lose if we just stopped using that application.Our current options (ie - what we have in-house that doesn't require us to purchase anything) for replacementIncluding who "owns" that optionThis matrix quickly showed management the amount of work that would be required to make the transition.Our current Compliance program is very dependent upon our LMS.We can later use this same matrix to help guide purchasing future content libraries and LMSs.----------------------So Wendy, why did you put the content libraries and the LMS together?  They are different things!Not to management.  They just see "learning".Showing these things together helps show them the difference between the types of systems. -------------------------SetupRows - The content library / CMS / LMS currently in our environmentAgain - this is the stuff we are absolutely certain about.  There are many other LMSs and content libraries in our environment through individual schools and departments.  These change frequently and I'm currently not in a position to do an inventory.  Remember, I am doing most of this in addition to my current job.  And we are starting to hit the busy season for higher ed IT.Columns - Requirements For this one, I pulled the requirements we used for the LMS portion of the Talent Management source selection.  I then took them to a higher-level since management doesn't need to see the technical details.I also added some newer requirements - for when we decide to actually replace the LMS functionality.  Especially since there are new standards in our world (xAPI and CMI-5) that we will need to accommodate in the next iteration of our ecosystem.Finally - since our solutions tend to have content attached to them, I wanted to outline what content was in the libraries.  

- Gaping Void of course. I could leave well enough alone, couldn't I?Naaaah..... -----------------TOGAF encourages the use of a requirements repository.We don't have one. So I need to build one. Somehow.The initial reaction the business analysts had when I asked what format they use for requirements and told them of my plans to consolidate them into a searchable library was...."Why would you do that?"Well....Our functional needs haven't changed for decades. The general functionality of the tools we use haven't changed since the advent of the internet.I don't feel like re-creating the wheel with each upgrade or re-evaluation of the toolkitRequirements for some of these tools can help other groups since, if we think about it, the tools we use for "learning" perform many of the same functions as the tools we use for "working." Below is the way we are (still) thinking about the ecosystem.No matter what happens - people still need to access stuff, people need stuff to access and people will want proof that they completed the stuff.So what are the requirements we need to collect?Well - what do you have lying around the office?Chances are, you (as a Learning and Development team) have the following:LMS requirements (example from University of Central Florida)Webinar tool requirements (Top Ten Reviews - scroll down to see the requirements list and comparisons)Classroom technology requirements The examples below cover the physical infrastructure of the classroom.  If you have designated training rooms, these are part of your Learning Ecosystem.  The individual pieces (projectors, microphones and speakers, Smart Boards, clickers etc) should have their own requirements section or list.Virginia Tech - Design Standards. Penn State - Classroom design and construction minimums - pay close attention to Section 27 - Communications"I need an online tutorial covering X topic" requirements Find the Needs Assessment / Intake of all of your old projects that required an online tutorial.  Don't have online tutorials in your environment and need to start from scratch?  Look at the Needs Assessment / Intake of all of your old Instructional Design projects.....Development tool requirements (Upside Learning has a nice tool comparison discussion and grid)I'm sure you have more.Don't have these lying around at all?The next few posts, I'll show you my process for documenting this stuff. Meanwhile - enjoy your scavenger hunt.

I have been working with our lead architect on a couple of survey projects.The first project captured self-reported application development skills.  We've had a couple of projects this year where our in-house staff didn't have the skills needed for the new application. No one's fault - it happens when you replace a major piece of your enterprise system after using the same thing for 10+ years. The architects and management wanted to get a better feel for what skills our developers possess and, when we go into another one of these projects, what we need to account for if we go a different direction from our current systems. For me, this project was a lesson in why skills databases are so expensive.Another project captured feedback for in-house, vendor supplied and commonly available training materials and events. This includes webinars, week-long classroom "bootcamps", online tutorials, YouTube videos, knowledge bases, books, anything someone grabs to learn how to do something.  What are people accessing if they need to learn something? What are the pros and cons of what they used? Is this worthy of further investigation and investment? Is there a particular direction we should take when we spend training money?  More online support? More boot-camps?   Ultimately, management wants to see where the best return on investment lies.It has been a good opportunity to see what we have lying around the office and how the survey tools we have available work.Unfortunately, I have not been entirely happy with the survey tools I've used so far.I want to figure out why I'm not happy with what we have + see whether there is something within our existing tool set that I may have missed.The exercise also provides evidence that what we currently have doesn't meet our needs (if that is truly the case - I think part of the issue is my inexperience).-------------------So how do survey tools fit in to the Learning Architecture?1) You know those smile sheets? Type of survey.2) Want to do more robust Kilpatrick evaluations? Survey.3) Quizzes? The way most are written (multiple choice / true-false) - Survey.Most of the LMS and Talent Management systems I've encountered have built in assessment / survey tools.And the nice thing about putting together requirements on our side - it helps other groups outside of "training".  Many groups within an organization, at some point, want to run a survey to figure outWhether their service meets their customer's needsWhere there may be opportunities to improveIf a program is working (at least by perception, reality may need further validation)Over the next few posts - I'm going to show you my process for capturing requirements from scratch.

I tackled the survey requirements first by brainstorming what I think I want.I then did a Google Search - Survey Tools ReviewFound a couple of baseline requirements lists and added stuff that we needed to consider that I missed. Survey Software Top Ten Reviews for a short version Relevant Insights for a very comprehensive version.I then dumped the initial list into a requirements template I created under "Scenarios". Honestly, I'm not sure I'm going to keep this template, but it is a start.I'll clean it up later.Video is about 5 minutes long.  This is pass 1. Enjoy.

Learning TRENDS by Elliott Masie - July 7, 2011.#669 - Updates on Learning, Business & Technology.55,3214 Readers - http://www.masie.com - The MASIE Center.Host of Learning 2011 - Over 656 Registered Already! 1. Video Chat Capabilities Surge.2. Peter Cappelli on Managing Older Workers.3. SumTotal Buys 2 More Companies.4. 30 Years Ago - A Bus With 40 Future Leaders. 1. Video Chat Capabilities Surge: In the last few weeks, we have been seeing a dramatic increase in the capabilities and formats for live video chat and conferencing. First, Microsoft bought Skype. Yesterday, Facebook embedded video chat (in conjunction with Skype) into their product. Google launched with group video chat options. And, this week, we are testing www.bluejeans.com - a cloud-based bridge that combines room-based video conferencing with desktop and phone access, regardless of brand or mode. This is very exciting news for the world of learning. The MASIE Center has been tracking the rise of live video, for structured learning experiences as well as mentoring/coaching/expertise access, and we are seeing significant deployment of these new resources by trainers, learners and learning designers. As browser-based access to video chat rises, with integration into corporate communication suites you will see evolutionary deployment in our learning programs. The ability to create real-time, instant panels of subject matter experts from the field is so exciting to me as a designer and teacher. And, the ability to embed live video in a blended fashion to asynchronous learning modules opens up new doors for our development and deployment of learning resources. 2. Peter Cappelli on Managing Older Workers: I am thrilled to announce that Peter Cappelli, one of the leading thinkers in the world of Talent and HR, will be a keynoter at Learning 2011. I will be interviewing Peter about his research on "Managing the Older Worker: How to Prepare for the New Organizational Order". He is the George W. Taylor Professor of Management at The Wharton School and Director of Wharton’s Center for Human Resources. Peter will be providing a keynote perspective via a live interactive video interview from Wharton on Monday morning, focusing on the Changing Workforce and Workforce Imperatives. We now have over 656 colleagues registered for Learning 2011, to be held in Orlando from Nov 6 to 9th. Details and advanced registration discounts at http://www.learning2011.com 3. SumTotal Buys 2 More Companies: Another merger/purchase in the learning system world.  SumTotal, one of the major LMS players, just announced the acquisitions of CyberShift and Accero - both Talent Management entities. Details at www.sumtotalsystems.com As I wrote in last week’s TRENDS, you will see 2 more of these deals in the months ahead, reflecting both a shift toward wider Talent systems and renewed equity market interest in this space. 4. 30 Years Ago - A Bus With 40 Future Leaders: Thirty years ago this week, I had a very different job. I was leading a group of 40 teenagers on a bus tour across America. I put together a project called "National Student Leadership & Adventure Trip", selecting 40 teenagers between the age of 14 and 16 to spend six weeks camping and learning across the U.S.  Each student had leadership potential and was willing to be part of a collaborative learning experiment. They planned their own itinerary, shopped for and cooked all of their meals and interviewed citizens and leaders around the country. We started our trip in July 1981 at the steps of the New York State Capital and drove over 6,000 miles - learning every step of the way - from the Grand Canyon to Little Rock, Arkansas. Thirty years later, I am in touch with many of the students. They have gone on to lead really interesting lives, ranging from my colleague Jonathan Kopp who is the head of Digital at Ketchum, to Robyn Benson who is a Doctor of Oriental Medicine in Sante Fe, to Eric Reed, a program manager at Microsoft and a pilot on the US Hang Gliding Team. Each looks back at the action learning experiences of 30 years ago that ranged from working on rules for collaborative decision making to learning from interviews with people across the country as some of their most powerful learning experiences. Thirty years later, I find myself smiling with pride when thinking about the power of powerful learning designs. Note: There are still several spaces in the upcoming Video for Learning LAB & Seminar: http://www.masie.com Yours in learning, Elliott Masieemail: emasie@masie.com MASIE Center Seminars, Events and Services:* Video for Learning LAB & Seminar - July 18 - 20 - Saratoga Springs, NY.* Learning 2011 - Nov 6 to 9, 2011 - Orlando, Florida.* Membership in The Learning CONSORTIUMInfo and Registration: http://www.masie.com

Learning TRENDS by Elliott Masie - July 13, 2011.#670 - Updates on Learning, Business & Technology.55,339 Readers - http://www.masie.com - The MASIE Center.Host of Learning 2011 - Over 656 Registered Already! 1. Corporate Learning & Higher Ed: Learning from Each Other!2. Why Am I Investing in Broadway’s Godspell Show?3. Summer Reading - What Are You Reading?4. Last Minute Seats for Video for Learning. 1. Corporate Learning & Higher Ed: Learning from Each Other! Every year, I am struck by how similar some of the issues are that colleges and universities face with learning approaches to our own challenges in the corporate world. Yet, our 2 worlds rarely discuss or collaborate. Well, I am very pleased and honored to announce that EDUCAUSE’s President, Diana Oblinger, will be a keynoter at Learning 2011, to be held in Orlando in November. EDUCAUSE is the association, with 2,300 colleges and universities as members, whose mission is to advance higher education through the use of technology. Diana will present research and perspectives on how learners are evolving, learning systems need to change and ways in which workplace learning and higher education learning can learn from and with each other. I am excited about helping to build this connection. Diana will be meeting with the CLOs and other learning leaders at Learning 2011 to discuss collaboration between our two worlds. Info at http://www.learning2011.com 2. Why Am I Investing in Broadway’s Godspell Show? You may have figured out that I am a compulsive learner. I thrive on learning about new fields, new worlds and new ventures. So, when I heard that one of my favorite shows, Godspell, was coming to Broadway as a revival, I thought it would be great to invest and learn about that world. Actually, the world of theater, it turns out, has a lot in common with learning design. The producer of Godspell, Ken Davenport, has been keeping a daily countdown blog, detailing the decisions - from casting, to marketing to design - that go into staging a Broadway show. The musical opens for preview on October 13th and on Broadway on November 7th. If you would like to follow along and learn with me, Ken’s blog is at http://www.godspellblog.com/ 3. Summer Reading - What Are You Reading? We are compiling a list of books that learning colleagues are reading this summer. They can be professional, recreational, go-to-the-beach books - just anything that you are reading this summer. Send a quick note to me at emasie@masie.com and I will post a list of some of these titles for those of us wanting some new "reads".  4. Last Minute Seats for Video for Learning: There are a few seats left for last minute registration in next week’s Video for Learning LAB & Seminar, which starts on Monday in Saratoga Springs, NY. Info at http://www.masie.com  Yours in learning, Elliott Masie email: emasie@masie.com MASIE Center Seminars, Events and Services:* Video for Learning LAB & Seminar - July 18 - 20 - Saratoga Springs, NY.* Learning 2011 - Nov 6 to 9, 2011 - Orlando, Florida.* Membership in The Learning CONSORTIUMInfo and Registration: http://www.masie.com

TO: Learning ColleaguesFROM: Elliott Masie, Learning 2011 HostDATE: July 19, 2011 RE: John Lithgow to Perform and Keynote at Learning 2011 We are honored to announce that Tony, Emmy and Golden Globe Award Winner, John Lithgow will perform "Stories by Heart" and be interviewed by Elliott Masie on "The Power of Storytelling" at the Learning 2011 Conference on November 8, 2011 in Orlando, Florida. "We are very excited that John Lithgow will be featured at Learning 2011 - focusing on stories and storytelling, a key element in the field of learning. I have seen John Lithgow perform in TV, Film and Broadway, [ranging] from 3rd Rock from the Sun, to Dexter, to Footloose, to Shrek and even Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. He is also an author and musician. John Lithgow will be performing an incredible 1 person, 1 act play, where he plays all the characters at our Learning 2011 evening celebration on Tuesday night.  That afternoon, I will interview him in an "actor’s workshop" format, exploring what makes stories and storytelling powerful and effective. We are looking forward to laughing and learning with John Lithgow at Learning 2011," said Elliott Masie. Watch a 30 second video preview of John Lithgow’s appearance at Learning 2011 at http://www.learning2011.com Other presenters at this year’s event include President Bill Clinton, Founder of the William J. Clinton Foundation and 42nd President of the United States, who will be addressing the Learning 2011 Conference at our Monday afternoon General Session. We will also feature inventor Dean Kamen, EDUCAUSE’s Diana Oblinger, Wharton’s Peter Cappelli and more. Over 200 learning sessions and seminars on the changing world of learning are on the agenda.  Learning 2011 is co-hosted by The Learning CONSORTIUM and ASTD. Complete details on Learning 2011 and Advanced Registration are available at http://www.learning2011.com Yours in Learning, Elliott MasieChair, The Learning CONSORTIUMemail: emasie@masie.com MASIE Center Seminars, Events and Services:* Learning 2011 - Nov 6 to 9, 2011 - Orlando, Florida.* Membership in The Learning CONSORTIUMInfo and Registration: http://www.masie.com

Learning TRENDS by Elliott Masie - July 21, 2011.#671 - Updates on Learning, Business & Technology.55,339 Readers - http://www.masie.com - The MASIE Center.Host of Learning 2011 - Over 746 Registered Already! 1. Joint Special Operations University - Spotlighted for Excellence!2. Selectric Typewriter and Usability Smiles.3. Checklists for Learning - Frameworks for Collaboration. 1. Joint Special Operations University - Spotlighted for Excellence! The Learning CONSORTIUM is proud to announce that the Joint Special Operations University (JSOU) will receive a Learning Spotlight Award at Elliott Masie’s Learning 2011, November 6-9, in Orlando, FL. In these complex times, this award recognizes JSOU’s unique mission: the education of the Special Operations Forces executive, senior, and intermediate leaders and selected other national and international security decision-makers, both military and civilian, through teaching, research, and outreach in the science and art of Joint Special Operations. "We are deeply honored to recognize the unique role that Joint Special Operations University plays in supporting the critical missions and activities of Joint Special Operations.  Their education, training, research and lessons learned activities are important keys to mission readiness and talent development in the world of Joint Special Operations.  In these complex times, we are honored to spotlight JSOU’s important learning leadership." - Elliott Masie "As a representative of our nation’s Special Operations Forces, I am honored to accept this award on behalf of the men and women of the Joint Special Operations University. As a new learning institution, we have concentrated on developing the cognitive understanding and intellectual capacity of our force to think beyond the norm. Our strength lies in rapidly combining the best instructional methods with highly relevant content into academic programs specifically tailored for special operations", said Dr. Brian Maher, President, Joint Special Operations University. At Learning 2011, we will spotlight the work, programs and innovations of Joint Special Operations University. Details at http://www.learning2011.com/jsou 2. Selectric Typewriter and Usability Smiles: I just bought a reconditioned IBM Selectric Typewriter. Why? First, I love to collect artifacts of the progression of technology. But, actually I miss the feel of the wonderful keyboard. Like many other Baby Boomers, I wrote my college papers and a decade of work letters using a Selectric. From the feel of the keys to the nice auto-correct button, it was well designed and reflected great usability. While my keyboards are OK now, I really wanted to refresh my memory with one in my office. It arrived, got spruced up, and within a few minutes, I was typing at 70 words a minute. I even remember the sound of pulling the completed paper from the roller, with a flourish!!! Here is a link to pictures of that wonderful machine http://tinyurl.com/3th3bec 3. Checklists for Learning - Frameworks for Collaboration: One of the projects that we are undertaking in the coming months is focused on Checklists for Learning! Inspired by "The Checklist Manifesto", we are curious about the ways in which we can create a Checklist Culture that leverages both e-learning assets as well as collaborative frameworks, including common vocabulary and peer feedback on core work steps. If you have ideas or opinions about Checklists for Learning, please send a note to our CLO Bob Baker at bob@masie.com Yours in learning, Elliott Masie email: emasie@masie.com MASIE Center Seminars, Events and Services:* Learning 2011 - Nov 6 to 9, 2011 - Orlando, Florida.* Membership in The Learning CONSORTIUMInfo and Registration: http://www.masie.com

Learning TRENDS by Elliott Masie - July 28, 2011.#673 - Updates on Learning, Business & Technology.55,349 Readers - http://www.masie.com - The MASIE Center.Host of Learning 2011 - Over 746 Registered Already! Special:  "Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips" A recently released study caught my eye this month, focusing on the changing nature of how learners deal with memorization.  Dr. Betsy Sparrow, a psychology professor at Columbia University, has been studying the impact of the access to search engines on learner’s expectations and processing of memory.  Her work, which is done with several colleagues, was so fascinating that it was covered by The New York Times and PBS.  And, I reached out to her and she has agreed to be a keynoter at Learning 2011 in November in Orlando. Here is the abstract of Dr. Sparrow’s paper in Science Magazine: "The advent of the Internet, with sophisticated algorithmic search engines, has made accessing information as easy as lifting a finger. No longer do we have to make costly efforts to find the things we want. We can "Google" the old classmate, find articles online, or look up the actor who was on the tip of our tongue. The results of four studies suggest that when faced with difficult questions, people are primed to think about computers and that when people expect to have future access to information, they have lower rates of recall of the information itself and enhanced recall instead for where to access it. The Internet has become a primary form of external or transactive memory, where information is stored collectively outside ourselves." There is a great video interview with her at our site: http://www.learning2011.com Dr. Sparrow and her collaborators, Daniel M. Wegner of Harvard and Jenny Liu of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, staged four different memory experiments. In one, participants typed 40 bits of trivia — for example, "an ostrich’s eye is bigger than its brain" — into a computer. Half of the subjects believed the information would be saved in the computer; the other half believed the items they typed would be erased. The subjects were significantly more likely to remember information if they thought they would not be able to find it later. "Participants did not make the effort to remember when they thought they could later look up the trivia statement they had read," the authors write. A second experiment was aimed at determining whether computer accessibility affects precisely what we remember. "If asked the question whether there are any countries with only one color in their flag, for example," the researchers wrote, "do we think about flags — or immediately think to go online to find out?" In this case, participants were asked to remember both the trivia statement itself and which of five computer folders it was saved in. The researchers were surprised to find that people seemed better able to recall the folder. "That kind of blew my mind," Dr. Sparrow said in an interview. The experiment explores an aspect of what is known as transactive memory — the notion that we rely on our family, friends and co-workers as well as reference material to store information for us. I am very excited to have Betsy Sparrow join us at Learning 2011.  I will be interviewing her in one of the opening keynote session and she will participate in our new Research to Practice sessions, where there will be drill-down conversations about the impact of this type of research on our learning design. Once again, check out the video interview of her at http://www.learning2011.com and click on Dr. Sparrows picture on the home page. This is one of the really fun parts of being the Designer of our annual global event. I get to reach out to really smart and creative people doing great work in fields that have impact — and then get to introduce them to the critical world of workplace learning.  Yours in learning, Elliott Masie email: emasie@masie.com MASIE Center Seminars, Events and Services:* Learning 2011 - Nov 6 to 9, 2011 - Orlando, Florida.* Membership in The Learning CONSORTIUMInfo and Registration: http://www.masie.com

TO: Learning, Training & Performance ColleaguesFROM: Elliott Masie, Editor - Learning TRENDS RE: eBook - "Learning Strategies" for Download Here is a free, Open Source eBook from The MASIE Center: Learning Strategies!Including articles from CNN, CIA, Farmers Insurance and others.104 Pages - Edited by Nigel Paine. Download: http://www.learning2011.com/strategies We hope you enjoy this resource. Yours in learning, Elliott Masie email: emasie@masie.com MASIE Center Seminars, Events and Services:* Learning 2011 - Nov 6 to 9, 2011 - Orlando, Florida.* Membership in The Learning CONSORTIUMInfo and Registration: http://www.masie.com

Learning TRENDS by Elliott Masie - August 3, 2011.#674 - Updates on Learning, Business & Technology.55,403 Readers - http://www.masie.com - The MASIE Center.Host of Learning 2011 - Over 746 Registered Already! 1. Summer Reading List from TRENDS Readers.2. Over 11,000 Downloads of "Learning Strategies" eBook.3. Apollo Buys Remedial Education Tool Company.4. 95 Days to Learning 2011 - Disney Mobile Learning Examples. 1. Summer Reading List from TRENDS Readers: A vast number of suggestions poured in from Learning TRENDS readers about things that they are reading this summer - on the back porch, beach or at their desks. We have posted a sample list of these books, along with the colleagues that suggested them. It is a fascinating slice of professional and personal topics. Check it out at: http://www.masie.com/summerbooks 2. Over 11,000 Downloads of "Learning Strategies" eBook: In the last 21 hours, over 11,000 colleagues around the world have downloaded our new, free, open source eBook: "Learning Strategies!" This 104 page, non-commercial and non-sponsored collection of perspectives from CNN, CIA, Farmers Insurance and others has gone viral around the learning world. If you would like to access a copy, just go to http://www.learning2011.com/strategies Thanks to our contributors and Nigel Paine for editing this timely publication. Watch for more from The MASIE Center in the months ahead. 3. Apollo Buys Remedial Education Tool Company: In the continuing merger and acquisition world, Apollo, the parent company of U of Phoenix, today purchased Carnegie Learning, Inc., a publisher of research-based math curricula, including the adaptive Cognitive Tutor(R) math software, for $75.0 million. In a separate transaction, Apollo also announced it has agreed to acquire related technology from Carnegie Mellon University for $21.5 million, payable over a 10-year period. It is interesting to see the valuation of education tools aimed at adaptive testing, tutoring and curriculum. We are predicting similar interest in "Personalization" of content and curriculum, down to the "Class of One" concept in the corporate learning marketplace 4. 95 Days to Learning 2011 - Disney Mobile Learning Examples. Every day, Learning 2011 gets closer and I get more and more excited about its design and content. Today, we confirmed a live video feed from the Disney Parks by Greg Hale, Disney Chief Safety Officer, to demonstrate how Mobile Devices are being used for safety learning and support. We are excited to bring the over 1,700 participants right into various workplaces during Learning 2011 to see new learning technologies in action. Save $ and register early at http://www.learning2011.com Yours in learning, Elliott Masie email: emasie@masie.com MASIE Center Seminars, Events and Services:* Learning 2011 - Nov 6 to 9, 2011 - Orlando, Florida.* Membership in The Learning CONSORTIUMInfo and Registration: http://www.masie.com