I’ve been thinking about corporate training and the common methods used, like click-through modules and static assets, such as tests. But I wonder if this really moves the needle. Just because you clicked some buttons on a screen doesn’t mean you’re ready for the job you’re training for, right? On the other hand, a truly immersive experience, almost like a simulation of the job, would be the best training ground. I look at tools like Syrenn and Colossyan and feel hopeful that training can become a more immersive and customized experience. My question is, what is the value of all the quizzes, tests, and static content that’s out there?
Just curious, do you have an experienced L&D Professional on the team at Syrenn? Like someone with years in the industry at the Director or VP level?
No, we just have two guys who experienced the problem firsthand using click-through modules to train consultants and wanted to do something about it. Why do you ask?
Given the users and market you’re targeting, having someone with experience in the L&D industry could be really helpful. They could bring valuable insight into solution development, especially from a user perspective.
For sure, it would help. If you know anyone, including yourself, then private message me.
The reality is that a fully immersive experience isn’t always possible. Modules and tests aren’t great by default, but I’ve seen people ‘move the needle’ using what they have in interesting ways. Like, modules that simulate, challenge, entertain, or even subvert expectations. Tests that use scenarios rather than just rote knowledge can turn into a learning experience themselves.
That makes sense. So, it’s not about the format itself but how you use it?
I personally prefer learning directly from subject matter experts. Peer-to-peer learning is great, but I also believe in the 70/20/10 model. Have you heard about what Learnie is doing?
Oh, interesting. It looks like a peer-to-peer microlearning platform. By what mechanism is the content verified? In other systems, like Uber, your driver doesn’t need to be an expert, just capable of driving. So, how do they verify content on Learnie?
The community owner can approve or request changes to the content before it’s visible. There are lots of controls around content and people. Also, about the 70/20/10, it’s a learning model that suggests 70% of learning comes from on-the-job experiences, 20% from interactions with others, and 10% from formal training.
With over 30 years in the business, including 15 in public school teaching, I can say that andragogical principles suggest a hands-on immersive experience will yield the best results. But time and cost don’t always allow for that.
What specific cost and time benchmarks prevent immersive experiences?
By definition, clicking on slides and answering questions are interactions, and they serve an important role in knowledge transfer. You’re asking users to complete actions or recall knowledge. Simulation-based training has its drawbacks too because of the resources needed to design and develop them quickly and with quality that learners will accept.
So, you think the resources needed for quality simulations don’t justify their effectiveness?
I’m a big believer in on-the-job training with an experienced trainer. It’s tough to replicate many activities in simulations. Using standard work, I focus on ensuring safety first, then quality, and then ramping up productivity. The ramp-up speed depends on the task’s complexity and frequency, allowing them to build skills.
That sounds like a solid approach. Have you found it effective across different organizations?
Yes, it has worked well in various settings.