What would you do if you had to develop and deliver personalized training to 900,000 employees, located in 34,000 different locations globally with a complex set of variables that changes training on a location-by-location basis? The key is reusability 2.0. While technology-delivered training has become mainstream in many organizations, most are still not fully leveraging the power of reusable learning content to meet their instructional needs.

A Chapman Alliance White Paper, Sponsored by: Xyleme, Inc., April 2007

Members may click here to read the full white paper

The need for an organisation to track and monitor training that each of its employees undertakes, is not a recent innovation. Before e-learning became available many IT systems existed, often called training management systems, which held records of the training courses that its staff had undertaken, on subjects such as health and safety. This was to prove to anyone that subsequently needed to know, that a person had been trained and hence no culpability by the company could be admitted in the event of litigation following for instance an accident. Now, most industries in the UK or the USA have a regulatory body who are empowered by law to enforce rules and regulations on numerous separate issues. Organisations must therefore keep accurate and detailed training records should an inspection take place or a breach of the regulations be detected.

A Cobent White Paper, December 2007

Members may click here to read the full white paper

In late 2006, Noverant, Inc., a Learning Management Systems provider, surveyed Life Science companies, posing a series of questions to gauge awareness of enterprise-wide application service provider (ASP) Learning Management Systems (LMSs) and their ability to support life science entities' training requirements. The results of this survey suggest that the LMS vendor community (including Noverant) is doing a poor job of providing adequate information on cost-effective alternatives to in-house make/buy LMSs. This white paper is intended to address the identified concerns of the surveyed group and to educate life sciences companies on the cost-effective alternatives available in a market that traditionally has favored in-house developed LMSs. Additionally, this white paper will offer selection criteria for LMS vendor evaluation.

A Noverant Inc. White Paper

Click here to read the full white paper

Alison Massey assigns her lieutenant training managers ever greater stretch goals. They respond by producing more web based content thinking it will minimize training delivery costs. Massey reviews the numbers and wonders if the promise of rich-media learning is more hype than hope.

A Clear Crisp Communications White Paper

Members may click here to read the full white paper

This paper explores the business case and implementation considerations for Content Management Systems (CMS), including the key components of CMS and ongoing management. The paper discusses the features of a CMS, the associated benefits, and how CMS can support Ecommerce capabilities.

A Navisite, Inc. White Paper, 2006

Members may click here to read the full white paper

In this white paper, you will learn a six phase framework for designing effective blended learning programs, and where to most effectively use different learning modalities to create proficiency in learners.

A Q2Learning White Paper, January 2006

Members may click here to read the full white paper

Blended Learning Opportunities by noted experts on blended learning, Dr. Allison Rossett and her colleague Rebecca Vaughn Frazee, explore the common components of blended learning and how organizations are preparing to best use this new learning method.

By Allison Rossett and Rebecca Vaughn Frazee, 2006

Members may click here to read the full white paper

Instructional design practice for developing online environments deserves its full attention. Many see an online environment simply as a delivery point or interface in which to deploy content. Learning occurs within an electronic learning community when learners interact with each other as well as the content. Learning within an online environment also can be a result of users interacting with content that has been delivered in an online format such as computer based training (CBT). In both views, the basic tenets for designing instruction need to employ the existing methodology in the most economical way. Do we need a new Instructional Design Methodology, revised methodology or can we rely on existing techniques without change? The argument by Nickols presented in Gordon and Zemkes’, article, (2000) noting ISD takes too long, costs too much…(p 46) has some merit but it fails to offer solutions that can speed up the process without cutting corners.

An Idesign Learning White Paper, 2006

Members may click here to read the full white paper

Historically, organizations have followed two disparate strategies to resolve their learning delivery needs. They will pursue one approach or the other because based on the weight of requirements that can be addressed by one solution or the other. In reality, the focus on the need for Learning Management Systems (LMSs) and Learning Content Management Systems (LCMSs) has generated more confusion than clarity. The terms and acronyms are used interchangeably. Organizations tend to direct their requirement towards one or the other based upon a preconceived notion, and vendors will often escalate the situation by pitching one or the other as more valuable or appropriate for the organization’s needs.

An OutStart, Inc. White Paper, December 2005

Members may click here to read the full white paper