e-Learning Blog

Based on my experience of seeing the e-learning content and implementation status of many clients, I would like to introduce three examples of failures. These are all common types of failures.
*However, please note that there are some changes made intentionally to avoid identifying specific clients.

Case Study of Company A: Well-Crafted Educational Materials by Technical Experts!

The accuracy of information and information optimized for e-learning are different.
In this case, the author was familiar with the content of the teaching materials and also provided instruction, but wanted many people to see it, so the amount of information in the teaching materials became enormous. Due to the large number of various annotations and in-depth points, even when viewed as a whole or just one slide, there was too much information and it was difficult to grasp the main points. In addition, the time required for each lesson was well over an hour, making it difficult for people to casually learn. Furthermore, due to the high level of expertise and complexity of the content, without confirmation from the author, it was difficult to even update the content.

Case Study of Company B: Red Light, Not Scary If We All Cross Together

"The culture of learning" is important, as mentioned repeatedly in past blogs, but there are cases where a culture of "not learning" is established.
In this case, learners prioritize their work and, furthermore, because studying during work is not allowed by local laws, they are in a situation where they just want to finish quickly. Specifically, they skip through slides by repeatedly clicking the "next" button and share answers for tests.
The cause is not with each individual, but with the organizational culture surrounding them, and the measures that were being considered were to set the "next" button to not be clickable immediately and to have random questions. If the operation was made stricter in this state, the image of e-learning would deteriorate and there would be no improvement in understanding or learning effectiveness. This would create a vicious cycle and lead to a situation where they would say "make the rules stricter" and "cause backlash"... a potential spiral.

C Company Case Study: The Purpose is to Create

When belonging to an organization, it tends to prioritize following decisions and orders from superiors as the top priority. While this is certainly important, it can lead to neglecting the need for reviewing plans and forgetting the original purpose.
In this case, prioritizing schedule adherence and secured budget, the original goal of ensuring that sales representatives understand the differences between products A, B, and C and can propose appropriate products to customers was neglected. In addition, there were no set goals or objectives (business impact) such as increasing negotiation success rate by X% or increasing sales profit by X%.
As a result, the development process did not thoroughly consider who, when, and where the training materials would be used, and the reason why the materials were necessary was not shared with stakeholders. Despite facing technical and quality issues during development and the need to reassess deadlines, only superficial improvements were made and there was no fundamental plan review. As mentioned earlier, these goals were not properly communicated to learners, causing confusion and hindering them from achieving satisfactory results.

Company A has issues with content creators, Company B has issues with learning environment, and Company C has issues with objectives and goals. The degree and scope may vary, but this is a situation that is happening in many e-learning companies. Even if the quality of the content is good, it will not lead to success. It can be said that it is important to consider the awareness and recognition of the creators, as well as the design and environment for the learners.

After reading the above three examples, some of you may have an idea of what it takes to succeed. However, the success of e-learning depends on small differences such as existing organizational culture, environment, and individual attributes, so there is no definitive answer.