Elearning! - December 2007/January 2008 - (Page 34)

thebusinessvalueofe-learning intrinsically expensive and time-consuming to create. While most executives intuitively realize learning is a basic necessity and that e-learning can provide greater flexibility for workplace learning to occur, there is increased frustration from the lack of evidence to show that learning programs of any modality really work. As executives and managers watch budgets grow without appropriate accountability, return-oninvestment (ROI) calculations and evidence of bottom-line value are now being routinely required from learning departments and e-learning functions. Sponsors need to see how major investments of time, money and resources are paying off and contributing to strategic business goals. In today’s dynamic, cost-competitive, resource-constrained business climate, measuring and evaluating learning has earned a place as one of the most critical issues in the learning and development field and is largely driven by the needs of the clients and sponsors of learning projects, programs, initiatives and solutions. same as those generated with e-learning — and that is not always the case. THE RECOMMENDED APPROACH An accurate ROI calculation of an elearning program requires data collection at four levels: reaction, learning, application and impact. The impact data is isocomplete an instructor-led comparison. Consequently, the ROI based on cost savings alone may be appropriate. The key issue is determining program success with targeted learning outcomes. For instance, if there is data from the instructor-led program that shows the extent of desired learning gains, then the same measures can be used to compare learning gains from the e-learning perspective. In other words, if the participants learn just as much or more with the e-learning delivery method as they do with an instructor-led option, then it may be proper to compare the two projects on cost savings alone — with maybe one more adjustment. At level three, when the evaluation follows what participants do back on the job with what they have learned, our studies have shown that participants in e-learning programs are less likely to follow through than in an instructor-led program. In an instructor-led process there is often a commitment made between the participant and the instructor that might increase the likelihood of participants applying what was learned and increase the likelihood that performance improvement and impact data is provided in a follow-up survey. An e-learning participant is generally disconnected from the instructor and can conveniently ignore the computer, which reduces application of learning. This factor will then tend to reduce the monetary value or business impact of an e-learning option, because the monetary benefits will not be the same as those from an instructor-led solution. In this case, the complete ROI study would be conducted using benefits and costs for the e-learning, along with the cost savings generated by the cost differential of presenting the program two different ways. This should also include a footnote suggesting that the e-learning results might not be quite as impressive, because there will typically be less application. Essentially, the payoff is expressed as a difference in the cost two different ways, but with a qualifier statement. continued on page 36 Our studies have shown that participants in e-learning programs are less likely to follow through than in an instructor-led program. THE E-LEARNING PERSPECTIVE Despite heightened interest in measuring the value of learning, there seems to be much confusion about measuring the ROI of e-learning methods. From the practical perspective, e-learning is simply another method of instructional delivery and that the process of calculating ROI is the same, regardless of the delivery method. However, in far too many cases, e-learning investments are justified by simply comparing the cost of the instructional-led approach to the e-learning approach. This can result in radically different cost amounts because of the savings generated with travel, lodging, classroom facilities and instructor cost. For such a comparative analysis to be accurate, the outcomes of the instructor-led learning must be the 34 December 2007 / January 2008 Elearning! lated from other influences and converted to monetary value. This monetary value is then compared to the cost of the elearning program. The result is an incredible ROI study. To fully compare the value of an e-learning program to the value of an instructorled program requires two comparable studies with the same calculation process in which a string of benefits and costs is developed for both scenarios. If the ROI is higher for the e-learning delivery alternative, then it can be proven to be a good approach from the economic perspective. AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH Due to the extra effort to capture four levels of data and conduct a comprehensive ROI study, it is not always possible to

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Elearning! - December 2007/January 2008

Elearning! - December 2007/January 2008 Contents Editor’s Note News Google Tops List Learning Hours Increase Web 2.0 Whitepaper Available Listing World-Class Learners Kick Your Career in High Gear Trendline Best of Elearning! Awards Happy Birthday to Us Virtual Worlds for Learning Learning Leaders: Innovation, Excellence Learning Leaders Case Studies The Business Case of E-learning The Business Case for E-learning Case Study: Adecco Case Study: GlaxoSmithKline Case Study: Williams Scotsman New Products Collaboration Tools Content Pop Quiz Last Word

Elearning! - December 2007/January 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.