Changing Your Learning Management System: a case study

1
Changing Your Learning Management System a case
study

• Marilyn Mitchell, MBA
• Konica Minolta Business Solutions
• Dr. Gary Woodill, EdD.
• Operitel Corporation

Mar. 15, 2005
MM
2
The Scenario

• Minolta deployed its first Learning Management
  System in 2000.
• Through changes in business processes, customer
  needs and ROI opportunities, we discovered a new
  LMS was necessary to drive our business forward.
• Minolta deployed its second LMS in 2003.

MM
3
The Scenario
MM
4
Objectives

• Common trends in consumer and eLearning
  technologies
• Examine common issues with LMS systems
• Review critical issues with our first LMS
• Outline the process of changing to a new LMS
• Report on differences with the new LMS
• QA

MM
5
Common Issues with LMSs

• Exaggerated claims
• Hype curve of the industry
• Focus on technology, not on sound educational
  principles
• Poor designs that are inflexible, hard to change
• Lack of integration with other learning
  technologies
• Failure to manage a wide variety of types of
  online content
• Dont use the advantages of the new computer
  technologies to engage and excite learners

GW
6
Hype Cycle Consumer technologies (Gartner)

GW
7
Hype Cycle e-Learning (Kevin Kruse)

GW
8
Common Issues with LMSs

• Exaggerated claims
• Hype curve of the industry
• Focus on technology, not on sound educational
  principles
• Poor designs that are inflexible, hard to change
• Lack of integration with other learning
  technologies
• Failure to manage a wide variety of types of
  online content
• Dont use the advantages of the new computer
  technologies to engage and excite learners

GW
9
History of e-Learning at Konica Minolta

• Started with home grown systems
• Multiplicity of databases, servers, content, etc.
• No coherent plan
• First online course
• Driven by an immediate need to train 400 dealers
  in a short period of time
• SAP implementation project
• Konica
• LMS meant lady management system

MM
10
Process of Choosing our first LMS

• Vendor was already working with the company
• No research carried out on alternatives or
  business needs
• Low expectations, no vision
• No idea of how much it would cost
• No focus, no one in charge
• Being driven by the needs and desires of both
  sales and service
• Instructor led courses vs. online
• Main benefit was less travel

MM
11
Issues with our first LMS

• As an early adopter, we had to suffer through the
  limitations of early LMS software
• e.g., no registration functions
• Both our staff and the vendor were learning on
  the job
• No requirements from us other than all training
  records needed to be in one location

MM
12
Issues with our first LMS

• With experience, it was clear that the software
  had not been designed with usability in mind
• Had been designed as a technology without an
  educational perspective
• Vendor had to make all changes, and charged
  handsomely for each change

MM
13
Facing the Limitations of the LMS

• We drew up a requirements list and submitted it
  to the vendor
• The price for changing the LMS to meet all of our
  needs was higher than buying a new system off
  the shelf
• A feeling that we were boxed in by proprietary
  software where we had no control over changes
• Lots of resources being used by both sides
• Many promised features were just vaporware
• Mounting frustration levels as we were often told
  that we cant do that until the next release
• Biggest frustration LMS crashed when running
  reports

MM
14
The Beginning of Change

• We were hesitant to make changes without another
  system in place
• Need for flexibility
• Business units and organizational structures kept
  changing
• Over 90 days to make a change in the LMS
• By now we knew more
• We were able to define current and future
  business requirements for an LMS, and project
  costs
• Proper requirements gathering process
• Resulting in a detailed specifications document
• Input from all business units
• Overcoming resistance to change
• Had to be honest with our vendor
• Vendor was able to continue doing business with us

MM
15
Choosing a new LMS

• Investigation of alternative systems
• Significant amount of money involved
• Needed to feel comfortable with a new vendor
• Needed to try out the system to get buy-in
• Developed ambassadors who did demos for different
  parts of the company
• Needed an LMS that met all requirements, but
  which was flexible enough to easily change as
  required

MM
16
LearnFlex the new LMS

• LearnFlex was designed from the ground up by
  educators
• It was also designed as a set of database driven
  components that were easily reconfigured as the
  business changed

MM
17
LearnFlex the new LMS

• The flexibility of the system was demonstrated
  when Konica merged with Minolta during the
  implementation phase
• Easily adapted to the new reality without being
  reprogrammed
• Met all of Konica Minoltas requirements

MM
18
Managing the Change Process Client View

• Vision, ownership and leadership
• Executive sponsor team (virtual corporation)
• Project managers for both the company and the
  vendor
• Set realistic goals in spite of pressure to
  change quickly
• Didnt pull the plug on the old system until it
  was clear that the new LMS could take over
• Set a schedule needed to be adjusted as the
  project progressed
• Continual communications

MM
19
Managing the Change Process Vendor View

• Executive in charge had technical, business, and
  change management experience
• Separate dedicated implementation team
• Client is an integral part of the implementation
  team
• Software is configured as opposed to being
  customized
• Dual objectives - ensure client satisfaction and
  ensure that a 100 knowledge transfer of the
  daily business of using the software is
  transferred to the client
• Administrative tools for client to make their own
  changes

GW
20
Managing the Change Process Vendor View

• Formal change management process managed by a
  committee of vendor and client staff
• All change requests documented
• Centralized document repository for all changes
  with a Help Desk ticket system
• Vendor must be as agile and accommodating to
  changes/pressures as much as possible.
• A partnership not a vendor-client relationship
• Change is seen as positive

GW
21
The Difference after two years

• Capabilities have tripled in terms of what we can
  now do
• We are able to show the value of training
• Training group has changed from a cost center to
  a revenue generator
• The new LMS is extensible new communities have
  been added who were not previously served
• Much less stress and frustration
• Training is now in high demand
• Users see new possibilities, new ways of using
  the LMS
• Positive feelings by end users and administrators
  of the system

MM
22
Lessons Learned

• Walk away from vendors who only talk about
  their technology
• Vendors must show a deep understanding of
  teaching and learning, business needs, and design
  in addition to superior technology skills
• Understand the costs involved
• The system must be able to be run by educators,
  not IT departments

MM
23
Lessons Learned

• The right LMS can be an enabler, opening up new
  possibilities
• With new vision comes new confidence and
  empowerment for the users
• Dont suffer with a system that cant meet your
  needs
• Maintain a great sense of humor
• Take the plunge!

MM
24
Recap

• Common trends in consumer and e-Learning
  technologies
• Examined common issues with LMS systems
• Reviewed critical issues with our first LMS
• Outlined the process of changing to a new LMS
• Reported on differences with the new LMS
• QA

MM
25
Sharing Experiences

• Open Discussion

MM
26
Good Luck

• Thank you!