As we enter the New Year, I keep having the feeling that all the shiny, brand new objects in the learning world are just today’s reinterpretation of all the right stuff that we’ve been doing all along. A cynic would say that somebody else is getting all kinds of credit for inventing something that really isn’t new, but in the spirit of the New Year, I think I’ll choose to be excited that I can bring so much existing life experience to these “brand new” trends.
Like many training professionals, a lot of my work has to do with the implementation of new business processes and systems. My first SAP implementation was back in 1994, more than 20 years ago, and in between I’ve created end user training for every flavor of ERP system as well as a wide range of custom software solutions. And while you may think the crazy challenges of this type of work would be getting old by now, I think, in fact, this might just be the most exciting time ever for the kind of work I do.
Over these 20 years, the tools and technology available for learning have evolved tremendously, and in some ways, so have the needs of our learners. Most of them have multiple systems they use to do their jobs on any given day, and these systems are constantly evolving—especially the “cloud” varieties. So while basic learning needs in some ways remain the same—“Tell me what I need to do to do my job, show me how to do it, let me practice, and help me when I get stuck”—employees need agile and effective ways of learning now more than ever.
One of the biggest challenges with this type of training has always been how to provide learners with realistic, hands-on practice on the systems they will use. For many years, our recommendation was to provide a training database with realistic custom data for use in classroom training. Nothing can beat getting in and playing around with the system in a safe practice environment with support from an instructor.
Some years ago, however, the availability of various simulation tools convinced many organizations to switch from live system exercises to system simulations. The argument for using simulations makes sense on a number of levels: Simulations eliminate the need for creation of massive amounts of data, the mechanics of training delivery are greatly simplified, and there is no need to maintain the training database over time. Easy peasy, right?
But I’ve been noticing a funny thing happening over the last six months or so. Organizations are starting to realize that simulations aren’t the silver bullet they once appeared to be. They are realizing that live system exercises offer a lot more value than they thought. Simulations are, in most cases, just a pale imitation of the system employees will be using. Even simulations built with great foresight don’t teach complex transactions well. And most importantly, simulations don’t allow us to experience failure or learn how to recover from it. Yes, there are some pretty sophisticated simulation tools out there, but it takes a lot of effort to create and maintain those simulations, and you still don’t get the richness of a real training database.
So is it time to go back to live system exercises? As always, the answer is a resounding, “It depends.” It depends on the learners. It depends on the processes and systems. It depends on your organization’s learning culture. And most likely, if you are dealing with a broad ERP implementation or a range of systems, you will find a different answer for each learning need. So as you try to figure out the right solution for your specific situation, I would encourage you to consider the following questions:
- Should instructor-led training (ILT) be a part of your learning solution? These days, many topics can be covered in eLearning or just-in-time video microlearning. For highly conceptual process training or simple task training, you may not need ILT. But for teaching employees complex tasks in a new system, I would still argue that the best approach is traditional ILT.
- If ILT is the preferred solution, is the learning audience centralized or distributed (so as to require virtual ILT [VILT])? If you need to conduct VILT, facilitating hands-on exercises in a training database can be a real challenge. Make sure your instructors are fully trained on how to conduct exercises using your VILT technology and be sure to have a fallback plan if they start getting in trouble. That plan could include local help resources, the use of simulations as a backup, the ability to take over a learner’s laptop, or even switching to “demo only” mode.
- Is hands-on practice required for each system task? Often, it is possible to simplify training database requirements by saving hands-on exercises for the most complex tasks. Simple tasks can then be taught through instructor demonstrations, job aids, or simple simulations. The added benefit of this approach is that you may find you can segregate your content to allow some of the ILT to be taught as eLearning, with smaller, more focused ILT classes for the complex content.
- Will the exercise solution you have in mind be sustainable over time (and does that matter)? Truth be told, this isn’t just a question related to exercises. It’s a question for your entire learning solution. If you decide to use live exercises, you will need to consider how your training database will be kept in sync with the production system. But equally important (and often forgotten), if you are going to use simulations, how will they be maintained as the system and business processes evolve? (Especially with cloud solutions!) And what are the mechanics for how new employees will use the learning solution to get up to speed? Will classes be taught? Will super users work with them one on one? Think through the future before committing to a solution.
These are just a few of the questions you should be thinking about, but they will get you started. Best of luck in applying this “new” learning trend in 2016!