a n g i l s symposium 001

Company overview

Kevin Corti, PIXELearningApply Group Symposium31st January 2008

Demystifying the design, development and deployment of large-scale, internet-based immersive learning simulations.

Company overview

Session structure

The Landscape- organizational, designer & audience needs

Project walk through- stages, issues, challenges and process

Discussion points- Roles, time, costs, approach, pitfalls & risks

Company overview

That word…’game’

Immersive Learning Sim vs Serious Game etc- What does the market think?

“A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet,but would a game by some other name sell to the executive suite?”- Jeff Johannigman

Company overview

Organizational requirements- rapid implementation- cost effectiveness / cost reduction- performance, productivity & quality gains

Quick, cheap and good – are these competing pressures?

- Yes….if you try to create a solution from scratch each time!

The (ILS) landscape

Company overview

E-Learning designer requirements- motivate / engage- higher level thinking/learning activity >> build skills- ‘game the skill’ – realistic yet safe environment

E-Learner requirements- be engaged / satisfaction / fun?- personal and vocational relevance – links to explicit desires/needs- task-based / problem-centric / ‘learning by doing’

The (ILS) landscape

• Cost effectiveness (or cost reduction!)• Performance improvement• Productivity improvement• Quality gains• Develop realistic and measurable ROI argument• Establish clear processes for sign off and change controls

Don’t try to sell ‘FUN’ to a CXO!

Client: US-based ‘Big 4’ accountancy firm- Not first sim project- Ambitious goals- Large budget

Project timescale: 5 months

The client was already convinced that the transfer of skills can not take place without opportunities to practice in an authentic and immersive environment.

ILS case study

Simulate job-specific processes

Promote internal tools and sources of support (‘job aids’)

Build ‘soft skills’

AND

Make the learning experience relevant to the actual job function

Reduce ‘time to competency’

Aid recruitment process

The challenge

2,000 a year

From all over the USA

Very diverse (other than age)

Motivated

Don’t want to be lectured at

Very tech savvy

The audience

Conceive, design, develop, test and implement inside 5 months.

A ‘Hard stop’ – classroom session booked – no ‘fudge factor’

Ensure consistent learning experience for all

Deliver explicit & measurable performance & quality gains

Objectives

Standardised global desktop

Very high security settings

‘No connectivity’ policy

Delivered in external hotel resort

User environment

“XBOX look & feel”

Use fictional characters to drive simulation flow with dialogue-based instruction, guidance and directive feedback

Embed fictional and instructional info in realistic context (e.g. emails)

Mix simulation authenticity with game engagement qualities

Design considerations

Multiple stakeholders and personalities

Client needed heavy guidance – initial vision lacked clarity

Design first, develop after (waterfall) – didn’t work!

Many concept mock-ups & prototypes needed

Iterative releases (weekly reviews)

Development approach

Compliance – technical content accuracy

Branding – look & feel, text

Formal alpha – testing by client’s L&D team

Formal beta – with detailed testing plan/dedicated testers

Final release - intensive testing by client (usability, learning & technical)

Observation of actual use for future updates

“Post mortem”

Testing

Primary goal – enable quality performance improvements

Formal learning assessment to L4 Kirkpatrick

ROI analysis (Phillips) / organisational impact measurement

“Simulation bridges the gap between classroom training and actual job experience”

Very significant productivity gains

Evaluation/assessment

Screen examples

Company overview

People & organizational roles- Who needs to be involved & what do they do?- The importance of a ‘SME’ and a single ‘vision holder’

Timescales & costs- Does Sim project mean long project?

- Are sim projects ‘big budget’?

Big issues

Company overview

Where do you need to focus?- clear organizational objectives- clear learning objectives- know the IT environment- understand who will use it and how it will be used- establish solid working processes

Clarity of vision = effective design

= effective implementation

Getting it right

[1] Fail to recognize that a simulation/serious game is a complex software application.

It is NOT ‘content’ strung together to form a linear course.

[2] Fail to assess actual (as opposed to perceived) organisational needs at both strategic and operational levels.

The ‘what, who, why, when & how’ enquiry process.

Getting it wrong

[3] Fail to select (and keep to) an appropriate design/development process

Classic ‘waterfall’ vs ‘iterative’ - consider how well requirement is pre-defined, time and budget availability.

[4] Have too many voices / design by committee

The contractor ideally needs a single client contact who has the authority to say yes or no. Implications are: delays, changes, cost and feature creep.

Getting it wrong

[5] Have inadequate project communication.

‘Meet’ regularly - make everything available to people who need to see/input/approve.

[6] Don’t identify milestones & establish clear ‘sign off’ protocols

e.g. Concept layouts - NFM – Alpha – Beta - FCR

Getting it wrong

[7] Don’t establish change management protocols

Variations to initial design (especially if in ‘waterfall’ mode) MAY have $ and time implications and MAY also effect effectiveness of final release.

Needs to be approved by client single point of contact

Getting it wrong

Kevin Corti,CEO, PIXELearningkevin.corti@pixelearning.com

Company web: www.pixelearning.com

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/kevincorti

Blog: http://theevilnumber27.wordpress.com

Richard Naish, MD, Qi Conceptsrichard.naish@qiconcepts.co.uk

Company web:www.qiconcepts.co.uk

LinkedIn:www.linkedin.com/in/richardnaish

+44 (0) 24 7623 6971