“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 • Q&A 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 • Don’t 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 • Don’t 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 can’t 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 Minolta’s requirements MM

18. Managing the Change ProcessClient 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 • Didn’t 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 ProcessVendor 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 ProcessVendor 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 • Don’t suffer with a system that can’t 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 • Q&A MM

25. Sharing Experiences • Open Discussion MM

26. Good Luck • Thank you!