A post by Dr. Gennadii Miroshnikov, Technology Manager, Executive Education, London Business School. gmiroshnikov@london.edu <\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Executive Education comes in various shapes and forms, from\none-day programs and workshops to multi-modular pathways, and from open\nprograms available to anyone who meets the entrance requirements to tailored\ncustom programs that use the joint forces of an Executive Education (EE)\nprovider and the client\u2019s L&D department. The range of EE providers is also\nwide, ranging from traditional universities and business schools to consultancy\nfirms and online learning platforms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This post takes a look at the topics of the ALT conference\nfrom the perspective of EE learning technologists. It collates the themes of\nthe conference and the main current problems in the field, which could help to\ncreate an agenda for EE and management education professionals, as well as for Further\nEducation professionals and learning technologists supporting corporate L&D\ndepartments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Digital technologies have a significant and diverse impact\non EE, from offering new content to many management training programs and\nallowing managers to cope with disruptive technologies and digitalization to enhancing\nthe training and learning experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A survey conducted by CarringtonCrisp shows that the top\npriority when considering an EE provider is \u2018learning that enables staff to\nhave an impact at work\u2019. Thus, measuring the impact after the training has been\nconducted is one of the most important tasks of EE providers, and a solution to\n maintain high market positions. Data\nmanagement, including the collection, processing, and analysis of training and\nperformance data, is the main tool to measure the impact and effectiveness of\nEE training. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
This year’s conference focused on both data management and\nLearning Technology for wider impact, which makes it particularly important\nfrom the point of view of EE professionals. Of particular interest were issues\nrelated to comprehensive data analysis and correlations between the results of\ntraining and data from external systems\u2014such as the financial performance of a\nstudent\u2019s company, or the results of implementing a particular strategy or\ninitiative. Often, companies acquire EE programs during organizational changes\nto better support these changes, so the data and its analysis should answer the\nquestion of how effectively the training was able to contribute to this\nactivity. From the point of view of L&D professionals, it is very important\nto identify and understand the interdependence between corporate indicators and\nthe results of these programs, which allow companies to determine the ROI and to\nevaluate the effectiveness of the program and provider, as well as to justify\nthe L&D budget. Many EE programs use existing external digital systems such\nas Belbin, 360, and personality tests; hence, these integration issues remain\nrelevant to provide a holistic analysis of data to measure the change impact on\nthe company. Collecting and analyzing student data from various sources\nincluding survey platforms, Customer Relationship Management systems, and\nimpact assessment tools that improve program design is another example of the\nimportant challenges facing EE providers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As coaching is one of the main building blocks of many EE\nprograms, the issue of collecting and analyzing data from coaching sessions is\nalso important for understanding the holistic picture. It\u2019s clear that EE\nproviders already use various digital systems to deliver their programs, but\noften these are separate external systems, the data from which are not always\ncompared. Thus the integration of these systems is an urgent task, the solution\nto which will significantly improve impact measurement and will provide\nfeedback to help companies make corrections to the design of their programs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Creativity, which was another main theme of the conference,\nexists in the framework of EE programs in such forms as personalization and\nmatching the branding of the client company to better reflect the link between\nthe mission and strategy of the company and the EE program. EE providers often\nadapt the visual component of the program in accordance with the requirements\nof the client’s branding policy using existing VLEs. However, such problems pose\nadditional costs in graphic design and restrictions and limitations of VLEs, and\nthe branding policies of the customer and the EE provider can sometimes be at\nodds. Thus, the fast graphical adaptation of EE programs, usually on both web\nand mobile versions, to client requirements while preserving quality and\ncompliance with the branding requirements of the EE provider is extremely\nrelevant. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Another problem related to creativity is the lack of a\nsingle VLE to fit all programs. A poorly-selected VLE can become an obstacle to\ncreativity, program development, and delivery of the main objectives. In\naddition, a large number of patches, add-ons, and external subsystems affect\nthe complexity of the maintenance, support, and development of such systems. EE\nproviders are increasingly diversifying their digital delivery system portfolios,\nshifting from a single VLE to a few systems that are better suited to the goals\nand objectives of each program. Technologies are considered by EE providers as\nan \u2018opener\u2019, especially now that the industry has seen a shift from traditional\nface-to-face delivery to blended learning models with digital modules\ncomplementing and sometimes completely replacing face-to-face sessions.\nTechnologies are carefully considered to erase the boundaries between the classroom\nand online learning, create an engaging learning environment while adding the\nadditional value of personalizing the learning experience and taking into\naccount the individual characteristics of each student. Examples of technology\nengagement are quizzes and polls, face-to-face sessions, online modules, and\nreflections. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Since the design of many custom programs takes into account\nthe realities of a particular company and a direct connection with its\noperation, and as it may include proposing or implementing changes or projects\nin a given organization, the ability of technologies to build a bridge between\ntheory and the real corporate environment and to create real-world problem-solving\nis especially valuable. One example would be companies that use the opportunities\noffered by social learning with a focus on problem-solving to organize\ndiscussions and gain feedback from peers, managers, and other stakeholders. The\nVLEs that are traditionally used by HE providers can be insufficiently flexible\nand intuitive for HE students, faculty, and coaches, which leads to lack of\nengagement. Therefore, the possibility of effective selection and the quick and\nstreamlined VLE implementation of the option that is most suitable for each EE\nprogram is also extremely relevant. Findings in these areas will be very\nvaluable for EE providers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Because EE programs are designed for global coverage and\noften include students from different countries, multilingual support is another\nrequirement for effective program delivery. The ability to include subtitles,\ndownload transcripts, view instructions in different languages, change video\nspeed, and access the platform and all its components from anywhere in the\nworld is also one of the industry\u2019s current challenges. One example is the complete\nor partial restriction of Google services, YouTube, and Vimeo in China, despite\nthat it is one of the most promising destinations for delivering EE programs. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The ideas, research, experience, and best practices proposed\nand developed by the learning technology community in these areas are of\nconsiderable interest to Executive Education professionals, and this conference\nis a great example of how an evidence-based approach can be used in the field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
References:<\/p>\n\n\n\n