Top Down & Bottom Up LMS implementation approaches for employee training

When it comes to LMS implementation in any organization for internal training, most common approach is top down. Top down approach is heavily based on maintaining controls at the top level and selectively giving some rights to lower levels in the training delivery hierarchy (which is generally same as org structure).

top-down

This approach requires lot of upfront planning, identifying stakeholders across the organization and resolving internal conflicts within different teams to create common ground for a centralized LMS. On many occasions, this whole process takes several months to a year before LMS can be fully rolled out to employees, thus resulting in huge upfront cost. Even after rollout, the top down control of rights creates an ongoing battle of control and sometime conflict of interest among different groups who needs to use the LMS. All these factors limit the adoption, and returns on the investment.

If we look deeper into why this happens so frequently, we find the biggest cause is a common issue with many LMS products; most of them are built with assumption of global role based controls. In most systems, only admin or instructor can do activities like course creation and setting up its delivery. These rights are not available for individual team or group level, resulting in big process bottlenecks. Course content has to be managed by a few selected people (L&D managers or Curriculum developers), for a very large number of teams. Team leads do not get the ability to quickly create their own training courses and deliver them to their teams. This also makes the job very tough for the L&D managers who typically are at the top of the Training Delivery hierarchy. They must find time to create & facilitate training courses and provision them for entire organization. This process takes too much time to plan and becomes difficult to execute. As a result, not all departments get equal attention and become indifferent to LMS or find their own (adhoc) solutions. A clear symptom of this effect we see is – existence of multiple LMS in the same organization, which is owned by different teams. Although this gives full control of the LMS these teams own, but as a whole the organization doesn’t get a clean & coordinated learning environment, and the cost becomes too high.

Top down approach has its merits in many kinds of training such as compliance, that requires full control, but there are several other kinds of training usage (especially informal) where it becomes a limiting factor.

EduBrite offers a clean solution to this problem by allowing possibility of a Bottom Up implementation strategy. We discussed this topic in our webinar last week, recording of which can be accessed here – http://bit.ly/1mSodHO

bottom-up1

Bottom up approach works by allowing everyone to create training content (courses) and managing its delivery. LMS implementation can be done at rapid speed with just a potential announcement of its availability and may be a “getting started” video, and allowing different team leads to start using it for their teams. No setup of org hierarchy / departments / roles etc. is needed. The team, who need the LMS most, can be the first to adopt, and lead the way for other teams to follow. Leaders or experts can join hands and create community groups (super groups) as well by merging or sharing resources from their own group and evolve onto a organically grown Group structure for training/learning activities.

bottom-up2

Regardless how large the overall organization is, team level implementation seems very simple and quick. L&D managers can still be overall admin for the system and can visualize the system usage, and other analytics about the adoption. They can even create a healthy competition among teams to make best use of the LMS. From the cost perspective also, you can get high return on investment by not buying a large number of seats for the LMS upfront; rather follow the scaling model based on the demand growth.

Since Bottom up approach is based on participation by teams, it becomes a more stable and likely more successful implementation, compared to top down model. If LMS permits (like EduBrite does) you can also have mixed implementation approach in the same system.

mixed

Key product features that allow implementation of bottom up strategy are –

  • Allows training content creation, ownership and provisioning rights to all users, so they can develop and deliver trainings for their teams
  • Allows Group level roles, sharing content across groups
  • Allows multiple group membership by the same user, so they can play different roles in different groups
  • Makes it easy to evolve the group hierarchy and allows possibility of multiple alternate hierarchies to co-exist in the same LMS
  • Allows re-use of training materials to create different variations or courses and programs by re-packaging it to make it suitable for different groups
  • Hierarchical group based permissions for administration, data visibility and reporting

Best implementation strategy heavily depends on the specific usage and may be different in each organization, but having familiarity with the options and availability of the right features in the LMS can give you full flexibility.

 

SCORM Quiz – Item Analysis issues & solution

SCORM is widely used in the eLearning community so I will not get into what it is, rather I will get straight into the fundamental issue it presents for a Learning Management System (LMS) from Quiz reporting perspective. This is based on my first hand experience while developing EduBrite LMS and having seen a variety of SCORM content thru several customers.

Most LMSs (including EduBrite) have some kind of built in Quiz creation feature. (We are focusing the discussion only on LMSs that provide quiz-authoring capabilities). As a eLearning content developer you have option to use the built in Quiz feature or embed the Quiz questions inside a SCORM package that you can create using authoring tools (like Storyline or Captivate). You can even hand code a SCORM if you are taking deep dive into 700+ pages specification and have reasonable experience with Javascript.

In this article I will discuss the implications of your choice, from the reporting perspective between SCORM based quizzes vs natively created quiz in LMS. This will also help in setting the right reporting expectation from LMS, an eLearning developer can have.

Generally, for the Quizzes created in LMS, we have seen far superior and usable reporting but for SCORM based quizzes, the reporting doesn’t go that far or isn’t that usable especially from the non-technical user’s perspective. And it often leads to dissatisfaction among the LMS customers, because they expect LMS to provide same usable reports, regardless of whether they are using SCORM or using built in quiz in LMS.

At EduBrite we created a mechanism based on data mining to provide same reporting for SCORM quizzes as what is available for quizzes directly built in LMS. But this feature is experimental and isn’t full proof yet to cover all scenarios, especially considering wide variety of authoring tools and few areas where SCORM specification leaves things open to implementations.

In this article I will first describe technical challenge in reporting for SCORM based quizzes, and that would explain the differences and limitation you will find when you use then in any LMS. I will also explain how EduBrite tried to solve it (although not with full perfection), and (few) shortcomings in our solution.

To set the context for remainder of this article, lets look at an example of a very commonly seen multiple-choice quiz question.

Question

What is 10+2

Choices

  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13

 

Design time

First let’s look at the design time (authoring time) difference from the data awareness point, and by design time, I mean until this question is attempted by a user. When you create the quiz/question in LMS, it knows everything about it, like question id (internally assigned by LMS), question type, question statement, choices, correct answer. But when you create the same question in SCORM, and upload the package (zip) in LMS, LMS knows nothing about this question. What you packaged inside the SCORM zip file is completely opaque to the LMS, except for the manifest, which only describes SCO you have inside the package.

Runtime

Let’s look at what data points LMS can get in both cases, when a student attempts the question.

A. LMS Quiz

When you use built in authoring of LMS, it is able to capture student’s answers to this question and link it to the already known question id in the LMS.

Consider that student picked up a correct answer 12 (3rd choice). LMS would immediately know that out of the four available choices, user has picked 3rd choice which was correct, when was the question attempted, how much time the user spent on the question and what should be the score for this attempt.

If the above question is attempted multiple times, by multiple students, LMS can provide an Item Analysis report about difficulty level of the question, e.g.

item-analysis

LMS can also provide a report to show student’s attempt and full context of the answers they selected.

question-result

B. SCORM Quiz

Now if we were using SCORM, lets see how the situation changes. When student submits the response to the question, SCORM will send a set of data elements known as interactions in specification. For example SCORM might send something like this to the LMS –

cmi.interactions.0.id – Q1
cmi.interactions.0.type - choice
cmi.interactions.n.learner_response - 12
cmi.interactions.n.correct_responses._count - 1
cmi.interactions.n.correct_responses.0.pattern - 12
cmi.interactions.n.result – correct (we have seen variations like correct/incorrect or 1/0 in content produced in different authoring tools)
cmi.interactions.n.weighting – 1 (commonly interpreted as score or relative score w.r.t. total score)
cmi.interactions.n.timestamp – 114-01-04T21:23:37 (interaction time)
cmi.interactions.2.latency - PT00H00M02S (time spent on this interaction)

So upon receiving this data set, LMS becomes aware of this question for the first time in its lifecycle. It knows the question ID, the type of question, what was student’s response, what is the correct response, whether the student’s response was correct or incorrect, score, time of the attempt and time spent on the attempt.

Important things that LMS doesn’t know yet, which was available when question was built in LMS are –

  • What exactly was the question (statement)?
  • How many choices were there in the question, or what other choices were available to pick from, that may be correct or incorrect

 

We can address first of the above two points by using SCORM 2004 (if LMS also supports it). In SCORM 2004, new data element “description” was introduced for interactions. You can send following new element about the interaction to the LMS.

 cmi.interactions.0.description = What is 10+2

With this new element, LMS can report what was the question, and what was student’s answer, and whether it was correct or incorrect. But it still doesn’t know about the other available choices (other three that are incorrect but are not picked by the student).

Solution

As a LMS provider, here is how we tried to tackle this issue, and provide full report similar to questions created in LMS.

If large number of students attempts the above question in SCORM over a sufficiently long period, statistically at some point some student will pick each available choice (probability 1/4). And if LMS could correlate several interactions record to correspond to same question ID, it can learn about all other incorrect choices, or keep learning more possible incorrect choices with time.

E.g. when a student picks the first (incorrect) choice, LMS will see following data elements:

cmi.interactions.0.id – Q1
cmi.interactions.n.learner_response – 10
cmi.interactions.n.result – incorrect
cmi.interactions.n.weighting – 0

And assuming LMS has seen question id Q1 before, it can check whether it has also seen the answer 10 before or not. If not, it can add 10, to the other available choice for the same question. And it also knows that this is the incorrect answer.

Similarly when LMS sees another incorrect answer

cmi.interactions.n.learner_response – 11

it would learn that there is another incorrect option available for the same question. Eventually LMS will learn about the fourth (all) option when it sees

cmi.interactions.n.learner_response – 13

By correlating all the above interactions to same question, it can fully re-engineer how the question looks like. And now, it can provide same kind of report, as the quiz created natively in LMS. It can also show the question context when showing details of a student’s attempt.

But in order to accomplish this correlation, LMS should be able to unambiguously match question ids among several interactions (from several students) that are reported to it. The first thing that is needed is to only consider the interactions reported by the same SCORM package. And this is where the ID of the SCORM package as mentioned in the manifest can be used, along with the internal id that LMS may have assigned to the uploaded SCORM.

So it appears that we do have a solution that can give same (full) reports for the quiz question (interactions) embedded within SCORM. Nice. But there are few cases where we need to be cautious.

1. Multiple Attempts (interactions)

Multiple interactions on the same question (or re-attempts) provide an interesting case. We noticed that different authoring tools (or elearning developers) have different ways to represent the interactions ids.

Some re-use the same question id (effectively overwriting the previously stored answer) following a technique referred as Sate, while some other tools add an attempt count suffix to the question id, for each unique interaction. E.g. Q1_1, Q1_2 etc, referred as Journaling. (ref – Tim Martin http://scorm.com/blog/2010/11/4-things-every-scorm-test-should-do-when-reporting-interactions/). Although we found inconsistencies among tools in how they generate Ids even when using Journaling to not overwrite answers from previous attempts.

This presents a potential problem while reverse engineering; because LMS can’t cleanly (or consistently) correlate these interactions to the same question ID and might interpret each attempt of the same question as a new question. This effectively limits the accuracy of the item analysis because same question may be reported (or interpreted) as different question depending on the attempt (first attempt, second attempt).

Based on our analysis of several packages from several authoring tools (like created in Storyline, Captivate and few others), we have devised a pattern-based logic to derive the question id and attempt numbers accurately. But this may not be fully accurate in handling all authoring tools and ID naming conventions.

2. SCORM ID in Manifest

If content developer changes the SCORM content (questions and/or choices) but keeps the same ID in the manifest and replaces it for the existing uploaded package in LMS, the reporting can completely go out of sync. Because LMS would incorrectly correlate unrelated questions because they will be assumed to be part of same SCORM due to same ID in the manifest. This can be avoided easily by using new ID in the manifest (unless the changes are minor).

3. Randomization

If the SCORM has internal logic to randomize the questions, but it doesn’t sends the consistent interaction IDs regardless of the position (sequence), then the reporting becomes inconsistent. eLarning developers can also solve this by using IDs in consistent manner.

4. Multiple correct answers

We have noticed inconsistent behavior in how SCORM tools report the correct_responses and learner_response. Some tools embed choice identifier (like a, b, c etc) in the response, while others don’t. Similarly when there are multiple answers some use comma delimited while others use space, tab or other conventions. This is one of the open problems we are working on and based on known conventions of many tools we can solve it to some extent.

5. Probability

We assume that statistically all choices will be picked up at least ones, but practically there is no finite time-frame in which it will happen. So when you are looking at reports, you might find an incomplete list of choices for a question in LMS.

All the above problems can be avoided during SCORM content development, by having a little more closer attention to the IDs and having a perspective that what runtime data SCORM sends to LMS can be used for further correlation and analysis.

Are MOOCs good option for corporate learning?

MOOCThis question came up in recent discussion as I was interacting with one of my colleagues at work who is toying with an idea of designing and delivering training offerings based on concept of Massive Open Online Courses or MOOCs. In case you are wondering, what exactly are MOOCs? These are free online courses offered by institutions with an unlimited capacity for learner registration. When these were introduced few years ago, MOOCs revolutionized the world of education as some people were of the opinion that these may eventually make the traditional institutions irrelevant and obsolete. Many large universities such as MIT and Harvard jumped on the ship to make MOOC’s available as one of their offerings.

The question we are trying to answer here is, if we are well aware of the benefits and challenges of MOOC’s and are these good option for corporate learning?

Let’s start with challenges related to MOOCs first. The biggest challenge seen with MOOCs is the continuous engagement and commitment towards completing MOOCs. Concept of MOOC is very inviting to students since it’s a free learning opportunity. As the cost of education is rising, more and more students are getting attracted towards MOOCs. At the same time, since it’s completely free with no accountability towards completing it, most of the students although registering for it, never actually complete it. Some even start the courses and then leave them in between. The universities surveyed for assessing completion rate on MOOCs reported that it is less than 10 percent.

As we all know, that measuring success of training programs using completion rate, is not the key measure, although it is used as one of the performance indicators. The key objective is to have training and learning stick to employees and result in actual learning and improvement of skills. The question is how to achieve that goal and if MOOCs are right tool for that? Are there approaches to make MOOCs appealing and engaging to employees to be able to use as a tool which actually contributes toward their development. Let’s look at ways to address this challenge and how MOOCs can contribute as one of the key components towards this goal.

One of the ways MOOCs can be made appealing is to move away from completion based approach which forces employees to complete the MOOCs and not really helping with creating interest and engagement. Instead educate and guide employees on skills they need to excel in their jobs and how MOOCs can benefit them. Let them use MOOCs to their advantage on how they want to pick and choose the MOOC content to meet their objective. MOOCs can also be made engaging and fun by integrating them in employee’s everyday schedule and making them available on their mobile devices. We know most of the employees are tied to their mobile devices and availability of MOOCs on their mobile experience could enhance the overall experience and provides better engagement.

Another strategy which has brought tremendous success is integrating MOOC’s experience with gamification approach and delivering better engaging experience, which can be accessed both on desktops and mobile devices. For instance – Use MOOC’s purely as learning vehicle and add assessments and certifications to it for employee’s to measure and demonstrate enhancement to their skillset. Vendors can issue certifications for every MOOC program completed, which can be tracked and measure. And we can do more; For every assessment/certification completed by an employee, reward them with badges which can be shared on social networking sites as well as internal employee sites encouraging competitiveness and engagement.

How about for-profit organizations? Can they use MOOCs for making money? Yes, it is possible. While MOOCs are free, the associated certifications which demonstrate attainment of certain skills can be paid. Organizations can use MOOCs to sell more certifications. MOOCs can be used to introduce and cross-sell/up-sell paid resources such as onsite classes, hands-on labs, etc. Some institutions also offer in-person version of some of the MOOCs courses which are paid.

The good news is that when MOOC’s are used as a critical component for overall package and strategy with needed structure around it, it can be successful and learning leaders such as CLO’s or L&D leaders can easily quantify the engagement and value delivered in terms of certifications and badges completed and skills enhanced. And for-profit organizations can also demonstrate monetary value MOOCs can bring to their business.

Author: Praveen Khurana (#PraveenKhurana)
Praveen Khurana is a learning technology leader in learning management and human capital systems. He has 18+ years of experience in this industry and has consulted with and has implemented learning, talent and knowledge management systems for many fortune 500 companies.

For Profit – External Training

External_Training_ProfitWe all have heard about ‘For Profit’ education and the key concept of this type of training is to have enough revenue to not only use the public funds to finance all of the business operations, but also maximize profit for the business.  For profit education spans multiple domains, from educational institutions delivering K-12 education to higher level school education, professional training institute to corporate level career education. In this article we are going to focus on the later domain where we are going to talk about the key components of ‘for-profit’ corporate level professional and career education.

Most of the corporate organizations have either centralized education services departments with the name XYZ University or XYZ Global Education Services and their main objective is to deliver training not just for internal employees for enablement and compliance but to train their customers and partners as well and collect revenue from it and hence the name ‘External’ or ‘For Profit’ training. Business objective of these departments is to maximize the training revenue by training their customers and partners (Better trained and informed customers is the most satisfied customer) which in turn results in selling more products (and training). In order to succeed in their business objective, these departments need solid infrastructure in terms of tools and technologies and that is where very robust, flexible, start of the art, easy to use and configurable learning platforms play a huge role. We are going to talk about the key components of such platform to make external training business successful.

What are the key components which are required to make external training successful? Let us look at the key features which pretty much apply to most of the businesses these days.

Easy to use User Interface: Any application or tool which is customer or end-user facing needs to be truly exceptional when it comes to serving the needs of the customers. It needs to be simple, intuitive and to be able to deliver desired results in no-time and with minimal number of clicks. Not just it needs to be user action oriented, but it also has to be intelligent and personalized to be able to recommend and prescribe trainings.

Configurability: This is another key area where most of the platform vendors are focusing on these days. Gone are the days where the applications were customized inside the firewall by the development teams. These days many of the platforms are available on cloud and as SaaS service. The configurability of the platforms is key to be able to successfully launch the tools and easily adapt within the target audience community. Plus the cost of ownership also stays low.

Training Delivery Methods: The platform needs to be able to offer standard training delivery modes of Instructor-Led, Online/Self-Paced, virtual Instructor-Led, etc.

Bundling and Packaging Ability: Complex businesses and use cases often demand complex and flexible offering structures. If the platform offers capability to construct flexible training offerings, it gives huge advantage to the business and gives ability to meet complex business demands. Any course or content can be packaged or bundled with various paths and/or rules with flexible pricing models, meeting demands of multiple use cases in various countries.

Multiple Payment Methods and Credit Card Integration: Since we are talking about the commercial business, training platforms need to be able to offer flexibility in payment methods and integration with all popular payment platforms.

Discounting and Promotions: Every commercial business also demands multiple options for delivering promotions and discounting models. It could be X% (or X amount) off certain group of trainings in certain period OR Y% (or Y amount) discount to certain audience group or market segment. It could also be promotion on new training products for certain period.

Training Units or Virtual Currency: Many times big training businesses when dealing with other big customers want to sell training retainers (similar to gift card kind of model), hence creating a training delivery pipeline which can be realized in upcoming period, typically valid for 1-2 years. Education business may sell set of training units equivalent to dollar amount which customer can use for purchasing training services as and when needed.

Subscription Models: Some businesses operate on all-you-can-eat buffet kind of model for their training business. They sell yearly subscriptions to their customers for the set of training offerings they have and then it is upto customers how they take advantage of the subscription service they have bought.

Mobile and Connected Training (on the go): Past few years have seen the trend of making training available on the mobile device. This is very helpful for the sales kind of people who can access training anytime and anywhere as they travel to their customer sites. With advancement in mobile platforms such as tablets and smartphones, this has become much easier. Learning platform which easily integrate and deliver seamless experience across devices, but still keeping the user connected to the content (along with their progress) are hot these days.

Social platform Integrations: For the learning platforms which are able to deliver the training, but are not providing social platform interface are missing big time on user engagement and informal learning experience. User’s today demand that they should be able to collaborate with their peers and industry experts. This is becoming one of the selection criteria for the learning platform vendors.

Managing delivery operations: Among all the features listed here, this is one of the key features of the learning platform. To run any business, you need to be able to manage and administer your operations. Starting from creating the content, listing out classes for enrollment, management of resources to deliver the classes and content, administering the learner experience pre and post classes, etc. is part of operations and there needs to be solid administrative foundation part of the platform to support running the business.

P&L Analysis with reporting: Finally, when you run the business, wouldn’t you like to analyze the total cost and revenue to see if the business you are investing in and how you are running it is resulting in profit or loss. Commercial learning platforms need to be able to provide reports and analytics for the operations team to give needed business visibility. Also businesses demand that it should also be integrated with corporate reporting systems for the same purpose.

 

Author: Praveen Khurana
Praveen Khurana is a learning technology leader in learning management and human capital systems. He has 18+ years of experience in this industry and has consulted with and has implemented learning, talent and knowledge management systems for many fortune 500 companies.

Sales Enablement with Sales Training

13862858524_a6353f6508_zSales Enablement – Does every learning and education professionals know what this is or what it means? Sales training is getting popular in most organizations but is that same as sales enablement? Not every learning professional knows that sales training is just one component of the enablement and there is lot more to enablement than just training. There are still lot of organizations where ‘Sales Enablement’ function doesn’t even exist and enablement of sales is carried out by other functions such as sales operations, go-to-market (GTM) operations, marketing operations, or even HR.

What is Sales Enablement though? The short way to describe it is… “Activities or efforts carried out to ensure that sales professions are competent and ready to sell.” It is not a onetime effort, it is a continuous and ongoing process to optimize and fine tune revenue generation capabilities.

Where sales enablement and sales training overlap and is same or different? Sales training is one key component of sales enablement. Sales training focus is on onboarding training, providing product/solutions training, process training, soft-skill training and compliance training. Whereas sales enablement goes way beyond training and also encompasses processes and tools for continuous field communication (this is especially critical since most of the sales force is in field), cross-functional collaboration (e.g. collaboration with marketing and engineering for pre-sales), ongoing learning (continuous on-demand and just-in-time content delivery for the sales reps in the field covering topics from policies/procedures to howto’s to new product features) and post sales engagement with customers for customer loyalty and cross-sell/up-sell opportunities.

The most common tools used for both sales enablement and sales training (which sometimes blurs the line between enablement and training) are quality video content with its on-demand delivery and collaboration tools for buddy learning. Video content technology has become quite advanced and there are many vendors providing advanced services in this area. Organizations can build quality content/videos once for different aspects of their business including Product/Solutions features and installation, Compliance training certifications, Policies and procedures, Selling strategies, etc. and deliver as just-in-time methods. This enables the field to access what they need and when they need it. Similarly enterprise collaboration tools allow sales force to stay connected with their peers or with other functions and learn from each other when they need and how they need.

Do you still think sales enablement and sales training are same thing? 

Author: Praveen Khurana
Praveen Khurana is a learning technology leader in learning management and human capital systems. He has 18+ years of experience in this industry and has consulted with and has implemented learning, talent and knowledge management systems for many fortune 500 companies.

photo by Rajesh

Mobile Learning – Bridging Generation Gaps

iPhone-iPad-EBHave you ever come across this generic question from the learning organizations or your business stakeholders, i.e. Can you support learning on mobile devices since that is the primary way we want the training to be delivered? What exactly is wrong with this question?

What is wrong here is not the desire to have learning available on mobile devices or focusing ‘just on the device’, but also the absence of the strategy on how to build and offer the training to blend multigenerational workforce. The learning needs to reconcile and shape up learning to meet various learning styles and taste.

Mobile learning needs to span and support multiple generations from digital immigrants (i.e. baby boomers) to digital natives (born in last 20-25 years). The effective way to bridge the gap and blend it effectively is to use mobile learning as supplementary training to meet just in time need and not as the primary training tool. Mobile programs need to be built to engage the workforce, to make it useful within the day to day work and effective in a way to create want for them instead of pushing it to the employees.

Using training as an ongoing support tool and accelerant helps pretty much all generations to meet their learning needs. For an employee who has gone through traditional training course can use it as post- training support to refer to concepts as they start applying the training in their work life. For the new generation, who is looking for just-in-time training content to either learn ‘How-to’ or ‘solve a specific problem’ can search and access the specific nugget of content on their mobile device accordingly. Sales organizations can build online games around competitive nature of the business and ask employees to solve a specific problem or excel in particular knowledge area for their success in the field and hence mastering those skills. This creates inherent want for the successful people to do better and the gaming aspect creates the engagement and interest.

The key for success is to keep the old concepts and fundamentals of L&D in the back burner and focus on new way of thinking about developing training programs. The content needs to be designed such that the training offered through mobile experience meets immediate needs, is of smaller size to make quick impact and integrates seamlessly in the workflow. When designing such training, focus on the design principles of keeping the user experience at the top, and building smaller bite size content and make it available ‘just-in-time’. This helps to meet needs of multiple generations and positions mobile learning as a tool which becomes necessary to get job done and hence automatically creates the motivation.

Author: Praveen Khurana

Praveen Khurana is a learning technology leader in learning management and human capital systems. He has 18+ years of experience in this industry and has consulted with and has implemented learning, talent and knowledge management systems for many fortune 500 companies.

New Features Timeline – 2014

 

look-back-2014

2014 is behind us and it was an year in which we continued our platform growth. EduBrite LMS grew by direct feedback from very engaged customers. We kept our eyes and ears open to see and listen to their genuine needs rather than what some experts may be saying. Let’s look at our important milestones in 2014.

Read more – https://www.edubrite.com/oltpublish/theme-lms/cms.do?view=year2014

 

 

%d bloggers like this: