Home

Organizational Issues in ALN

by Sloan-C

ABSTRACT
Work done on two pilot projects, Team Building at NYNEX and Managing Business Risk at the Risk and Insurance Management Society, led to the identification of key issues facing organizations wishing to implement asynchronous learning. These issues include finding a champion to spearhead the drive to cultural change, enhancing the computer literacy of their employees, overcoming resistance from the human resources department, and promoting the perception of value and effectiveness of this delivery system as a training tool.

I. INTRODUCTION

The issues discussed in this article developed from two pilot projects with asynchronous learning (AL) in corporate and association settings. The first project was a joint one between Westchester Community College and NYNEX (now Bell Atlantic) for a pilot project on Team Building. The frustrations of working with a corporate unit included decisions about whose server to use, how to guard security, gaining access to the server, getting cooperation of their server administrator and the computer readiness level of participants. The second project was with the Risk and Insurance Management Society, Inc. (RIMS) and its corporate members with a short online course, Managing Business Risk. Those issues included computer readiness, awareness of the delivery system, and motivation of participants.

II. BACKGROUND

Approaching AL in a corporation is a complex task that requires the intellectual capital of the organization.

A. Champion
The introduction of AL is not simply a new delivery system placed on top of the traditional forms of training delivery. It really represents a change in the culture of an organization. Any cultural change requires at minimum a champion at the senior level of management to promote, mentor, guide and otherwise lead the charge, so to speak, for the new methodology.

But before there is a champion, there needs to be some research and a feasibility study to determine the information with which to approach the champion. Create a business proposal that outlines the resources needed and the benefits expected before enlisting the support of a champion [1]. "I think the first AL project in an organization should be positioned from the beginning as an R&D project, so everyone understands there are unknowns, including time and cost. The instigator should first create a task force, team or committee within the organization and get all the views on the table, do some research, etc. This requires a time investment but no budget. If there were positive interest, the next step would be to bring in outside expertise on a consulting basis (small cost) to meet with the team. A mini-feasibility study should be created with an approximate budget or budget range. Only then does the team have enough information to approach the champion. This should be someone in senior management who can allocate the budget and support the project throughout" [2]. That is a good way to overcome some of the natural reluctance and uncertainty in organizations about trying new approaches.

The champion’s sphere of influence must include the upper management to make a cultural change. A champion might be the head of a division, the head of human resources or the head of technology. What matters more than the department is the influence this person has over the rest of senior management within the organization. A well thought-out plan of marketing, promotion, development and implementation which includes top decision makers, the human resource department and the information technology departments will help insure the success of a program. "Agent of change and innovation" is probably the most important role the champion will play on the project [3]. That means the individual must be well connected within the organization, be well respected, be involved in the strategic planning process, and have input into the budget.

At NYNEX we worked with the person in charge of the Distance Learning unit so he had the authority to make the decisions about budget. However his next in line did not, and that created difficulties in moving ahead during the project implementation phase. At RIMS our champion was and is the President, a volunteer position. We also had the buy-in of the Executive Council, the equivalent of a volunteer Board of Directors, which was important for the budgeting process.

B. Computer Literacy of Employees
For many employees there is a gap between their skill level and what they need to know to take a course online. While many employees are more computer literate and can take learning a new software package in stride, the majority of employees are still using e-mail and not much else. The idea of learning a new package, or HTML language, can be threatening. Whatever software is selected to deliver the online course, one can not make assumptions about the ability of the participants to learn it quickly.

Whenever I hear the words "it’s easy" or "it’s intuitive" about software, I cringe. The only people for whom it is intuitive are the software developers, not the users. All participants must have a base level of technology expertise to avoid the obstacles of technology. Therefore an initial cut must be made of those potential users who are somewhat computer illiterate, and they must be trained in advance. Some of these issues can be avoided by creating a self-quiz to identify those with insufficient computer expertise. While it is impossible to ensure that all employees will be up to speed, it is possible and preferable to train the inexperienced participants in the asynchronous program before the content actually starts. This training can be done in a number of ways: live, traditional classroom, online tutorial, written materials or a combination of these techniques. At Westchester Community College we put people online with no training session and gave them online and telephone support. At RIMS we provide written documentation in advance of the course start date and an online tutorial at the beginning of each online course, as well as e-mail and telephone support.

We found that at NYNEX, although their internal software was based on Lotus Notes, most employees had little knowledge or practical experience with it except for e-mail. The first pilot was unsuccessful because of this lack of basic literacy in Lotus Notes. The second pilot used participants who were more familiar with the software. Some of them were in the distance learning unit and others were in training. Ultimately, for the programs at RIMS we chose to use Learning Space, which has a shorter learning curve for participants. Although we take registrations up to the first day of "class," we still urge participants to sign up at least one week prior to the program to familiarize themselves with the software.

C. Resistance From the Human Resource (HR) Department
Whenever a new technology is launched, it is natural for traditional trainers to be resistant. They may be threatened, for fear their livelihood is being taken away. They need to buy into this delivery system from the beginning, and they should be the ones training the future developers and facilitators. Develop a strategy with the human resource department early on in the process so they buy into the new delivery system. This includes making HR an integral part of the decision-making process by having them choose which courses are appropriate on line and which employees to participate in the pilots. Have trainers create a train-the- trainer program for developers and facilitators, then make them the first pilot group to take the courses online.

Take advantage of the expertise of trainers for the online project. They will be extremely helpful in constructing a design document for the new courses. They can help figure out how to translate activities in the classroom setting to the online version of the course. They can do a gap analysis of employees’ skills to discern who needs which skills training. They can create a pre- and post-course evaluation. And they will be the first ones to want to compare the effectiveness of the asynchronous course to the traditional classroom version.

D. Perception of Value
Is online training as good as, as effective as, live classroom training? What is the perception from senior management's standpoint? What is the perception from the employee’s standpoint? We can easily point to successful programs in other corporations, such as Olsten’s, AT&T, and CIGNA, to name a few, or with college students at University of Illinois, New York University or New Jersey Institute of Technology. Motorola University has embarked on an ambitious development effort to create object-based learning for its worldwide training programs [4]. Research done with participants in other programs has shown that indeed participants learn as much or more as those in live traditional classrooms. The value lies in the group process and the sharing of information and ideas.

In selling the benefits to participants, simply stating how others have benefited is not enough. One must make the transition between what other participants have gained (in terms of networking, knowledge and skills) to what will be a realistic outcome for one’s audience. Value may be based on the equivalency to a live course – in terms of contact hours or costs to the participants. People still want to know "How does this course compare to the same one in a traditional live setting?" Compare the number of hours so potential students get a picture of the length and breadth of the course. Compare the price so students understand this is the same or better value than a live course. Then create awareness of the advantage of more interactions with the instructor to sell the benefits. We also show savings in terms of time and money saved by not travelling.

People always want to know, "what’s in it for me?" Objectives need to be very specific so participants can decide whether they need to know the information or skills in the course. An opening screen that engages participants in learning will sell the course better than a dry description [5].

E. Internal Marketing
Internal marketing is a crucial piece of the strategic plan to insure success, whether one isworking in a for-profit corporation, a non-profit organization or a member-driven association. It is not enough to announce the new online course in the corporate newsletter, post it on the cafeteria bulletin board or send a memo or e-mail around to all department heads. A strategic plan for internal marketing needs to include repeated demonstrations and announcements over a period of time. A series of articles in the corporate internal publication to explain asynchronous learning, the characteristics of a successful online learner, how the course works and first-hand accounts will prepare employees for the real thing. I wrote an article, "Logging On: Diary of a Distance Learner," which appeared in our monthly magazine with a circulation of 15,000. We published a series of four brief articles in our monthly newsletter on distance learning, asynchronous learning, characteristics of a successful online learner, and characteristics of a successful online instructor.

Demonstrations at the Board of Directors and senior management meetings, and demonstrations available during lunch hours in the cafeteria will begin to raise awareness among all employees. An event can be created to launch this new delivery system. An example of a special event might be a big announcement at a company-wide or department-wide meeting with an introduction by the highest-ranking manager and a demonstration on a big screen. Top management must also be persuaded to participate in a brief pilot course. We offered online demonstrations at our annual conference in 1998 on PCs, and again in 1999 on a big screen monitor. We have an ongoing demonstration at our Website [6].

Use all possible distribution channels within an organization or an association. A monthly newsletter, chapter newsletters, and live announcements at chapter meetings reach members. The website and a monthly paid subscription magazine with an editorial or advertisement reaches members and non-members. For non-profits and membership associations, repeated demonstrations at chapter meetings, and regional and national conferences is a major part of the marketing plan.

F. Why Training? Voluntary vs. Mandatory
This is the same question that HR trainers ask themselves all the time. If a course or program is not required (e.g., for promotion within the company or for a performance appraisal) why give it? Why promote it? Will any one care? Will anyone benefit from it if they do not want to be there or do not have to be there?

What are the benefits to the employee? Aside from learning some new skills, what would convince an employee to take advantage of this new delivery system? Chiefly, they have more flexibility--they can log on any time of day or night or on the weekends. They do not have to lose time at the office. On other hand, this may be seen as a detractor for employees who see training as a paid vacation. If the online course is part of the employee’s individual development plan or a requirement for a raise or promotion, then the incentive is there to participate fully, if not enthusiastically, rather than to be a fly on the wall.

With asynchronous learning, the question of benefit becomes paramount. Even though the company feels a program is necessary or vital, employees may feel otherwise, and their behavior in the classroom demonstrates their attitude. As training budgets decline and less training is being offered, more people feel imposed upon to go to training. The resentment level builds. Employees need a very good reason to attend. Otherwise they are at best indifferent, or worse, hostile participants.

At RIMS the introduction of online test preparation courses for the Associate in Risk Management (ARM) designation was an incentive for people to try our AL delivery system. The ARM is a desirable designation for risk managers to attain, and to do so they must pass three examinations. Those who otherwise would not have taken a course or self-studied for the exam found the online prep course an easy, convenient, somewhat "painless" way to study. Participants came from ten states and all lived in or near major metropolitan areas, so access to a college or university was not an issue.

G. Budget Considerations
Embarking on an AL delivery system for a corporation or organization is a long-term high maintenance project. It requires a major commitment of time, money and human resources. Through the business proposal and then the strategic planning and budgeting processes, the champion and senior management need to understand that this is essentially a research and development project. What we are seeing is a maturation of instructional technology infrastructure to accommodate web-based training [4]. It is not, first and foremost, a revenue-generating project. One can expect to generate revenues to cover direct expenses, with luck, after three years. Our budgets reflect expenses and very little in revenue, certainly not nearly enough to cover expenses except for faculty salary, for the first three years. But the initial outlay for infrastructure, hardware, software and training can be recovered only through improved performance in the organization.

III. SUMMARY

Both profit and non-profit organizations need to consider issues that impact their planning, budgets and human resources when considering an AL project. AL can be a powerful successful delivery system for continuing professional education as long as one is aware of the issues and champions the benefits.

IV. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to acknowledge the consultants Marion Murphy of Always Learning, Inc., and Peggy Troupin of Class Act Inc. for their insights into the AL process. Thanks to Flora Mattis for her suggestions on the corporate point of view. Thanks to Alan Friedlander for being the first RIMS instructor to pilot an online course.

V. REFERENCES

1. Driscoll, M., How to Pilot Web-Based Training, Training & Development, Nov. 1998.
2. Troupin, Peggy, Class Act Inc. http://www.classactinc.mindspring.com
3. Eadie, D., The Extraordinary Leader, Association Management, 83-94, Aug. 1998.
4. Bassi, L., Cheney, S., and Eleesha, L., Trends in Workplace Learning: Supply and Demand in Interesting Times, Training & Development, Nov. 1998.
5. Cohen, S. and Rustad, J., High-Tech High-Touch High Time? Training & Development, Dec. 1998.
6. Risk and Insurance Management Society, Inc. http://www.rims.org

VI. ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Amy J. Geffen, Ph.D.
Director of Professional Development
Risk and Insurance Management Society
655 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017
Phone: (212) 286-9292 x219 fax: (212) 986-9716

Amy Geffen joined RIMS in 1997 as the Director of Professional Development. She is responsible for the planning and development of training and educational programs for RIMS members and others in the risk management profession. These include AL via the Internet as well as live and satellite programs. A higher education executive with 20 years’ experience, she served the past four years as assistant dean of Westchester Community College overseeing continuing education. She managed an associate degree in telecommunications for NYNEX and developed courses for distance learning on the Internet with grants from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Formerly, she was National Director of Training for the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. Prior to that, she was Vice President at the College of Insurance in New York where she designed and implemented a marketing program that increased revenues more than twofold. She also organized the college’s first Art and Insurance seminar and its first Pacific Rim seminar. She was Acting Director of Training at the New York City Department of Personnel and Director of Corporate Education and the Summer Session at Long Island University where she worked with Brooklyn Union Gas and AT&T.

Dr. Geffen is a member of the SUNY Advisory Board for Workforce Training, of the Steering and Marketing committees for the Statewide Strategic Training Partnership with SUNY, SED, BOCES and the New York State Department of Education. She is a member of the American Society of Association Executives. She has been co-chair of the Academic Technology Committee for Strategic Planning since 1995. She has spoken and written extensively on the subject of distance learning, training and faculty development.

She received her Ph.D. in French literature from New York University and a Master of Arts in French literature from Harvard University. She earned a Bachelor of Arts from Brooklyn College, where she graduated Magna Cum Laude and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa.