As the COVID-19 pandemic subsides, most learning programs have shifted to hybrid formats, at least for the short-term. Although the definitions of hybrid learning can vary, they usually describe learning where some of the participants are learning online, in a virtual format, while other participants are learning in-person at the same time. Program funders and sponsors are approaching this with a critical eye: Is it working?
This situation has created the need for program owners to design and implement hybrid learning with the desired outcomes in mind and ensure they are working and delivering the desired results.
The problem
It’s the virtual component that may create the problem. Studies show that many virtual learning programs break down when measured at the application level (participants not using what they’ve learned) and impact level (the business impact connected to application). In polls with L&D webinar participants, the vast majority (about 90 percent) suggest that participants in virtual learning are not using what they have learned.
Fortunately, L&D professionals can avoid this breakdown. To secure the support and funding that virtual learning needs, the programs must deliver business results. This article will explore how designers, developers, providers and program owners can design virtual learning (and hybrid learning) to deliver outcomes at the application, impact and ROI levels.
The chain of value is always there
It is important to understand how success is achieved with hybrid learning — or any type of learning, for that matter. How do you deliver more productivity, improve quality, have more innovation or be more responsive to customers? Hybrid learning can easily provide these outcomes if it is connected to the business measure in the beginning, the right solution is implemented and it’s designed to deliver the impact results. More important, the amount of improvement in the impact measures caused by the program can always be pinpointed. The success follows a chain of value, outlined in the figure to the right.
Why it breaks down
ROI Institute has had the opportunity to evaluate virtual learning for many years and has compared instructor-led learning with e-learning, often in parallel, to see the differences. What we’ve found is that virtual learning typically breaks down at level 3 (application) and level 4 (impact) — but it doesn’t have to be that way. So, why does the virtual component break down? There are a few reasons.
1. Multitasking inhibits learning. Virtual learning attracts multitasking, and research shows that multitasking reduces a participant’s ability to learn, according to Devora Zack’s “Singletasking: Get More Done — One Thing at a Time.” There is a myth that a person can multitask and still absorb in-depth knowledge and information. That doesn’t happen. With instructor-led learning, multitasking is better controlled in many ways.
2. Manager support is usually missing. Participants typically leave their work areas to attend in-person learning programs. Their manager knows they are involved and likely were involved in the decision for them to participate in the session. The manager also creates expectations for the program. In this scenario, it is in the manager’s best interest for the learning to translate into something useful and worthwhile for the department. Because of this, managers are often involved before the program with setting goals and then after the program with following up.
For the virtual learning component, the manager may not be involved. For the most part, the manager may not even know that participants are involved. This is because most virtual learning usually occurs during regular work hours at home or in the participant’s daily environment, and the manager may often not even be aware of it. Without the manager’s involvement, the most significant influencer for transferring learning to the job is removed.
3. Virtual programs are designed for learning, not application and impact. Instructional systems designers design virtual programs to deliver learning. Designers think their work is complete when the participant has gained new knowledge or skills. However, the executives who provide the budget want to see the business connection from participants actually using the learning.
For example, very few virtual learning programs have impact objectives. Without impact objectives, some key stakeholders may not fully understand why the program is being implemented. When impact objectives are in place, the team can design the program for application and the desired business impact.
4. Technology failures. Technology failures and connection problems routinely appear in the best virtual learning in the best of organizations. Add to this Zoom fatigue. The challenge to instructional designers is to make it seamless and as easy as possible, while anticipating and managing failures that occur far too often. For an in-person program, these types of failures rarely occur or can easily be adjusted. The good news is that instructional designers and technology providers are working on this.
How to make it work
In our work at ROI Institute, we have been involved in thousands of ROI studies, many of them in the learning and development space. In the past two decades, we have been involved in the evaluation of many virtual, in person and blended learning programs. We have had the opportunity to see what works well and what does not.
In every one of our evaluations, we collect data on barriers and enablers. The barriers are the things that get in the way of the participant having success with the program. The enablers are the factors in play that help the program achieve success. As you can imagine, these enablers present tremendous opportunities to see what can be done to enhance application and impact. They provide us with proven techniques that have already worked and with proof that they made a difference in application and impact. The barriers tell us what we need to remove or minimize to have success and create an opportunity to design for success in the future.
Following are 30 techniques that can enhance the application and impact of hybrid learning programs, for both those learning in-person and those learning virtually.
Actions before the program:
1. Develop application objectives for participants.
2. Have participants develop customized impact objectives.
3. Use performance contracts, or contracts for application and impact between facilitator, participant and manager.
4. Create an application guide to enable and support application.
5. Create a job aid to use in application.
6. Have a significant other (manager) create expectations before the program.
7. Make it easy to provide application and impact data.
8. Require application and impact data as a basis for participation.
Actions during the program:
9. Use action plans to detail application steps.
10. Have action plans presented to the group to increase commitment.
11. Teach to the application and impact levels.
12. Review level 3 and level 4 follow-up questionnaire in the last learning module.
Technology-enabled actions:
13. Create coaching videos to use at appropriate times.
14. Use apps to encourage and enable the use of content.
15. Use guided support software to enable application.
16. Use selfies with the customer after the sale.
17. Use Riff analytics to record quality and dominance of conversations.
18. Use WhatsApp to network for encouragement, support and enablement.
19. Post recorded content reviews.
20. Use automated reminders for application and impact.
Actions after the program:
21. Organize a group coaching session after the program.
22. Apply nudging techniques from “Inside the Nudge Unit.”
23. Collect action plans in a follow-up period.
24. Organize follow-up sessions to share results.
25. Use an on-the-job trainer to support application.
26. Provide encouragement from the manager (significant other) after the program.
27. Host a lessons-learned meeting after participants have used the content.
28. Share successes with other participants.
29. Hold a contest based on achieving success for application and impact.
30. Use a peer feedback process for on-the-job performance.
These techniques are appropriate for hybrid learning, virtual learning, in-person learning, blended learning, e-learning and mobile learning. You get the picture. They are proven strategies to design for and deliver application and impact. Using a dozen of these techniques can make a significant difference in the outcomes.
To know if it’s working, you have to evaluate major programs at the application, impact and, sometimes, ROI levels. The ROI Methodology was designed to deliver and measure results at these levels. For a case study to see how this is accomplished, you can access our book, Measuring the Success of Learning Through Technology. To request a copy of our guide, “Thirty Techniques to Design Virtual Learning to Deliver Impact and a Positive ROI,” which contains more in-depth information about the techniques discussed above, contact us at ROI Institute.
