Report season #KineoInsights and Brightwave #TotalLearning events

We have hit the pre-Christmas reports, awards and events rush in UK learning and development circles, a number of which lead to new developments and analysis at the big post-Christmas events such as BETT and Learning Technologies.

Awards in ‘the Learning Industry’

Personally I have never really been into industry awards, yes I can see the point of celebrating success but I am always suspicious of back patting that doesn’t directly come from your customers.

Recent reports/events

My involvement in all of this has really being limited to attending two events in the last week or so – some notes and reflections below…as always apologies to the presenters for any misunderstandings.

Recent events 1: #KineoInsights

The first of two events I attended really focused on three reports:

(1) Kineo’s “Learning Insights” Report

Report: http://resources.kineo.com/learning-insights-report-2014-download

The presentation specifically focused on the report and ran through the 10 tips identified from the 35 contributing L&D managers.

The context for the report was explained as an increasingly digital one, quality of experience and appropriate mix of solutions are essential in this environment – mobile/digital/online/in person banking given as an example of an industry which has evolved quicker than L&D.

One line of argument was that Learning now has to prove value above and beyond compliance. Personally I wonder if the trick there is if compliance needs to prove its value beyond “we have to do this” – if we can crack that then other learning will immediately be recognized as more important?

I will not list the points from the report as, as you’d expect, the managers highlighted a number of current themes in L&D thinking as well as reinforcing many of the points that have been as around for a long time (work with the business, learning should be in the workflow, more mature blends, etc). I was pleased to see a general thread of decentralization from L&D in the highlighted report items through, for example, making learning more open including the use of peers (there was a plug for a new social tool coming to Totara) and managers/leaders/learners all being better embedded in workflows.

The main issue identified, and discussed a lot through the day, was the skills gap between L&D teams and what they need to offer. Marketing and communication are now very important but not key skills for most L&D staff, whilst the lack of CPD for our L&D teams was highlighted as a major issue. Personally I don’t always understand the CPD question, sure, there might not be a great podcast and courses (such as the one I did which has since been cancelled) are few and far between but we have plenty of blogs, events, etc to learn from.

Finally, there was a suggestion that L&D teams perhaps need to be bolder, stress the value of in-house standards and seek a quality balance between in-house teams and vendors.

(2) Towards Maturity’s annual report

Lot of data in the slides: http://www.slideshare.net/kineolearning/learning-insights

A similar, albeit larger, report to Kineo’s. Key themes in their received responses included the need to really kick on with actions towards modernizing learning whilst still often having to do more with less (although this year 33% reported they have an increased budget and will be recruiting).

Personally, I had seen quite a lot about the report including this LSG webinar, already but one interesting aspect was this year’s focus on the top performing 10%. Most organisations can now be seen as sharing three goals:

  1. Respond faster
  2. Build performance
  3. Continuous learning embedded in culture

Interestingly, when people are asked what the barriers to L&D supporting these three are there seems to be a blame culture of ‘aint us guv’ – with costs, user/learning skills and IT the top three scapegoats (this seemed pretty amazing to me considering user/learner skills is something L&D should be directly able to influence).

Items of emerging importance include better use of data in decisions making, with business leaders expecting analytics to review, leading to improvements and better decisions. However, the data shows only 32% of respondents work with business leaders on KPIs for learning. I am somewhat torn on this as whilst KPIs have been something of a ‘holy grail’ for business in the past I would rather work with a business leader who recognizes learning as something that should be fully embedded in the culture of the business and thus difficult to measure without looking at wider issues, not least engagement.

Lessons from the top performers included that learning need not present solutions, but understand learner preferences and act from there. In addition, learning has to be part of the wider talent agenda. Skills diagnostics, content curation, 70/20/10, micro-content and linking learning to career development are all useful but achieved by few organisations. In other words, L&D departments have aspirations to move the agenda on but only “the top deck” is achieving many essential elements. Some of the ways they have achieved this were mentioned, including L&D driving BYOD policies where mobile/social have been a success, having a communications policy in place and business agreed KPIs.

I asked if there were specific organizational traits that could be seen in the top performers, hinting towards my concern that ‘corporate universities’ have pushed L&D down a narrow focus. The response from the presenter was that top performers can be seen as those organisations that successfully foster strong networks for L&D professionals and often best performance is where L&D report into business units rather than an L&D/HR silo.

(3) Kineo’s onboarding/induction report

Slides: http://www.slideshare.net/kineolearning/learning-insights-live-nov-14-blends-that-work-for-onboarding-induction

Report: http://www.kineo.com/resources/papers-and-guides/induction/onboarding-for-results-best-practice-guide

I’d read this report before so there wasn’t too much new for me in here but the figures on turnover and related costs from new joiners are amazing and really backs the argument for ensuring a good induction.

The idea of balancing ‘empathy’ for new joiners with ‘efficiency’ was a nice idea, i.e. value joiners as people, in balance with all the boring compliance stuff you have to enforce on them. This can include giving them a voice, for example at BP they have new joiners write a presentation on the future of the organization, senior people come to the event and answer questions the participants have. At Tui they have a just-in-time information focus on their eLearning platform, the idea being that it is a source of information for sales people which goes beyond what you can find on Google – making the use of information is what makes the sales people better for customers than booking online.

I particularly liked one idea that was mentioned – send a welcome card, signed by team members, to a new joiner before your first day. I would suggest extending this to LinkedIn invites so new starters can get to know who’s who, faces at least, and more detailed CV information too.

After this presentation, and in a number of other discussions on the day, there was a feeling of “only do eLearning it it’s good eLearning”. I think this is a valid point in that eLearning has become the standard approach for many L&D teams but is often unpopular with learners, however, I would say this is really based around SCORM packages rather than bespoke eLearning blends to solve the problem. eLearning courses in higher education, combining resources, remain ahead of the L&D SCORM-centric debate in many ways here. Interestingly, there was little talk of Tin Can which, I would argue, can have a place in Induction as we can get new joiners to develop an approach to reflection on the job which is more difficult for those who have been at a company a long time.

(4) Gamification at McDonalds

The third presentation on the day, prior to the onboarding presentation, was one looking at Kineo’s award wining gamification solution to McDonalds’ new till training. Interesting for me in that:

  • It was not massively advertised, going viral from the intranet.
  • Leaderboard technology wasn’t worked in, so teams could develop the level of sharing they were happy with – in store, by franchisee, by region, etc. This was interesting to me as I always remember the unpopularity of till speed tables at one of my early (supermarket) employers, the Kineo tool working in customer service questions to ensure it is not just a speed test.
  • Nice articulation of the essential gamification elements: goals, rules, challenge and interaction.
  • There is no set score for getting correct answers, it uses a more complex algorithm with ‘show me’ option if you get stuck.
  • Part of the success was that it offered a safe environment – a familiar theme to the old ‘walled garden’ argument for having VLEs/LMS.
  • I wasn’t horrendous at the game when volunteered to test it out in front of the audience J

Recent events 2: #TotalLearning

Introduction

The Brightwave event started with Charles Gould commenting that many clients still look for eLearning solutions similar to what Brightwave encountered when he founded the company 12 years ago. His call to action was that L&D professionals need to better exploit the opportunities provided by technology.

David Smith (Global Futures)

Not happy to just point out where L&D are behind the times, the event started with a keynote speaker (https://twitter.com/davidsmithgff) who outlined many of the changes society at large may see in the near future. This was a whistle-stop tour and, like with my futurist of choice Gerd Leonhard, no doubt only some of this research will come to fruition. As someone pointed out over lunch, 30 years ago we might have heard ‘are you ready to be living on the moon?’ Yes there has been huge change, but technology has only really been universal where there is money to be made.

Some of the main points were certainly valid though:

  • We tend to do old things with new technology, takes time for real transformation.
  • Sourcing skills is changing, old ways of work are disappearing, and not least as the growing world population cannot be maintained by traditional corporations alone.
  • For organizations to be a success they need to develop a ‘talent cloud’ around the network’s skills.
  • We should be moving to the post email era, with new collaborative technologies and ‘work swarms’.
  • Oculus Rift, virtual reality, an example, of a tech that has taken time to become monetized.
  • We need learning organizations to adapt to pace of change, not least new mediums of data (Internet of Things, etc)

Kim George (Getty Images)

A great example of an L&D team that appears to be fully embedded in helping their organization develop and achieve better results. The presentation focused on the ‘fastest path to value methodology’ which Getty’s technology teams adopted to be more agile but has spread, not least to the L&D team. Ultimately it was explained that their team’s approach boils down to: #get****done (which I love!).

Four key elements to fastest path:

  1. Immediate progress. Start now.
  2. Focus on learning.
  3. Fastest path to customer.
  4. With a focus on frequent, small, releases.

There were two projects presented as examples to how this was achieved, the second being a new SharePoint intranet which sits within L&D responsibilities, recognizing that all material has a learning purpose (although formal L&D material does sit on an LMS).

Overall their L&D team seems to be nicely positioned as internal performance consultants, beyond simply offering courses.

Nancy Kinder (Feverbee)

I had heard of Feverbee’s community consultancy work before and it was good to get a bit more detail on the way they recommend communities are built, measured and maintained.

In relation to measurement it was argued that you can analyze learning communities/communications in terms of increased revenue and reduced costs (including calculation of work time savings – for example, using answers as a knowledge base resulting in less help-desk tickets). People value comes in increasing the sense of belonging, greater influence of global teams and ease of upskilling.

Argued that, to successfully accelerated learning, you need three things:

  1. People
  2. Process
  3. Technology

People is the tricky bit and delegates in the room pointed to familiar barriers including billable hours and commission as blocking people wanting to get involved in such activities. The presenter argued that fear is the key barrier; the culture needs to be in place to support use.

A workflow for establishing the community can be:

  • Research objectives to meet
  • Analyze your people
  • Coach and let members influence success.

Processes for learning acceleration can include working in reminders around the fun stuff; ultimately it is all about relationships. The sense of community can be tested via survey and other quantification approaches.

I find the ideas around Communities of Practice within learning fascinating. Having been involved with them for a while including presenting at a conference on their possible irrelevance as well as being a keen supporter for CILIP Communities, on which I co-lead the ‘eLearning’ subject. However, as the presentation mentioned there is something of ‘critical mass’ and I suspect CILIP never managed that and the community manager on the initial project was missed once gone.

There was a nice three-step summary:

Research > Relationships > Report

In other words, know your audience/challenge(s), develop relationships and report the benefits. For reporting and other elements Feverbee make free help resources available on their website.

LearnerLab: How strong is your learning brand?

This was one of those conference/event sessions where I wanted to jump in at multiple times with challenges and questions. I didn’t but in, partly as some of the issues were dealt with in the presentation and I expected others to be tackled in the following session.

Overall, this was talking about how to get L&D advertised internally to promote the value of learning. The argument was that L&D needs to learn from digital experiences to improve learner engagement. L&D teams needing better communication to build the brand, drive purpose and engagement.

My concern was that this was very L&D-centric. I wondered how much, such a brand building activity would be for L&D staff to feel more valued rather than delivering better business benefits.

That all said, I would agree with a lot of the points made:

  • You need to know your stakeholders and plan for engaging with them.
  • Learning brands are easily marred by bad experiences, building trust is harder than destroying it, you have to be consistent in doing what you say you are doing.
  • Brand is an experience, not a logo. The users own the brand.
  • Mentioned learning needs to be ‘frictionless’ (although I’d query if brand is needed if you make learning totally frictionless and just part of day to day work).
  • Amplify stories to motivate, recognize successes and strategic contribution.

For me, there was one point though that really helped save the presentation – “Focus on outcomes not activities”. Overall we should not be selling courses/resources but rather what they mean for the learner/organization afterwards, this message should be inline with the corporate strategy.

Finished with a summary argument, that you need to “set your stall out” via clear communication to sell L&D internally.

TescoBank

This session focused on the award winning success of Tesco Bank, developing a learning culture to support their growth.

The presenter was excellent in arguing key aspects, a number of which challenged the ‘learning brand’ session:

  • Department exists for the business, not learning for the sake of it.
  • Knowledge does not equal power; is about an ability to find information via your personal networks.
  • People coming in need to be allowed to decide on what to learn.
  • Need a colleague brand, not learning, learning is just part of deal for colleagues as part of the organization’s nature.
  • HR need to act as marketers, have a Head of Employee Experience to tackle the challenges posed by desirable workplaces such as Google. Even if you can never tackle the physical environment.
  • L&D/HR need to be: business consultants, colleague experience support, storytellers, workforce planning (big data), digital adoption and facilitating access to information.
  • Need an agile environment in everything you do.
  • “Inspiring great performance” is the brand for their colleague proposal.
  • What you produce needs to be as highly quality as what you offer external customers (I would challenge this as I think quick and dirty is often actually best).
  • Don’t come up with your own metrics, use the ones business leaders use.
  • They do have an online ‘academy’ but it is for curation of external material. Tesello is used separately for graduate onboarding.
  • Recorded 12 “why learning matters to me?” videos as part of communication – tell stories!
  • Ultimately about abolishing ‘learning’, just something you do in the workflow. He has never written an L&D strategy – act faster (obviously a challenging point but I would agree, to some extent, that the end game is to have a pervasive learning culture where everyone can contribute).

I asked if compliance (considering the banking industry) breaks the model of people being bought into such a learning everywhere culture. The answer was that people know they have to do a certain amount, transparency about this stops other things being devalued, but they are starting to think about compliance in a different way.

Q&A Panel

I wont cover this in full but I liked one line – L&D need to be facilitators in a much broader sense. I thought this was an excellent point and really takes me back to my hinterland of the interplay of learning, tech and information (educational informatics) to achieve personal/organizational outcomes. This may mean the organization has to give up more time to ‘learning’ but you should be aligned enough for them to realize this importance.

Tesello at Unison

A brief presentation which showed quite nicely how well a CoP website can succeed. Using Tesello’s technology meant that organizational and personal development were both served via sharing tools and Learning Record Stores. One small point I thought was interesting was that they referred to their tiles as the ‘organising library’ – a nice wrap up from the futurist suggesting that we use new tech in old ways but also something of a confirmation for me that my ‘librarian’ background certainly still has relevancy today – after all curation is nothing new.

Summary

The blend organizations can now implement to develop the knowledge and skills of their people is far more complex (and as I’ve mentioned before doesn’t need to be size orientated) than even 10 years ago. The two events just really highlighted the different approaches L&D departments are taking to learning culture/communities and support for new ways of working beyond a focus on traditional approaches. In many ways neither day really discussed anything new, just reinforced (for me) that its better to drive change than to allow it to happen to you.

Moving beyond an LMS to support an ecosystem of learning (as recently covered by the eLearning Guild), be that McDonald’s Intranet based game or Brightwave’s Tessello, makes sense and is really about better supporting learning at large. We have never been able to ‘manage’ all workplace learning but we should at least be able to put in place processes and technology to help our people.

Overall, I would see this as an interesting time where there appears to be growing interest in workplace learning, as part of talent policies, as leaders fear the implications of attrition and global competition. Indeed such is the potential for change that we are seeing big money flowing into L&D (for example Xerox’s purchase of Intrepid Learning) in a similar way to the venture capture that has flown into education. Therefore, there is real potential for L&D professionals to seize the opportunities and put themselves in a position where they offer their organisations something valuable.

Whatever happened to ‘Edutainment’?

Couple of things that have got me thinking in the last week or two….

  1. A post on the Learning and Skills Group Forum which asked the question of how technology is changing the (workplace) learning paradigm.  Are instructor led training, computer based testing and web based training on their way out?  “Is mobile learning ready to receive the baton” or is there a need for “new instruments”?
  2. A colleague querying what music I was listening to when they spotted me on my commute.  The answer, that my phone does not have music on it only podcasts, seemed to have surprised them.  I looked at the LSG Forum for some learning related podcasts but I could only find an old post from 2010.  As a result, I thought I would throw out on Twitter [400th tweet btw] what learning (or learning technology) podcasts people would recommend:

Whilst this got a RT [thanks @Andrew] and seems to have encouraged some new followers [*waves*] no one actually replied (as yet) with an answer.  Now, if we are going to be serious about the use of technology to appropriately support learning outcomes surely there should be a podcast which helps professionals keep on top of what is happening?  Well, perhaps not.  There are, after all, lots of webinars (not least from the LSG), newsletters (for example from ALT), Brandon Hall events, etc.  Lest we forget the conferences… lots of conferences.

Paradigms for learning tech

Anyway the above two points got me thinking, once again, about the nature of a professional identify in learning technology.  I will not go over old ground here, and there have been some good recent posts from the HE perspective (including this one).  However, there is a key point in that HE-orientated post that I think is the crux of the issue where learning technology falls down in the corporate world (at least based on conversations I have had at CIPD, LSG, etc events):

Curious[ity]

Now I think most people I have met in corporate L&D are curious about new paradigms.  However, and unlike in HE in many places, hands are tied by corporate red tape to apply this into practical solutions (see my response to E.Masie on this topic).  For example, IT systems will be more risk adverse so you can not encourage wide spread adoption of (say) mobile apps.  I can look at my personal experience for plenty of examples; when working in FE/HE I could see something worth investigating and work it into a program (through discussion with a tutor or instructional designer) immediately, or at least into our own learning tech training, in the corporate environment scale and other issues often work against you.

A greater shift in paradigm would be to look to influence culture first and deliver ‘solutions’, to training needs analysis that we can easily quantify, second.  Again, the obsession with length and tracking, often inflicted by professional certification agencies and governments, does not help but we also need to be far more flexible if we are to recognize the ’70 and 20′.  Let us wear curiosity on our sleeves in L&D, a badge to be proud of and worry about tracking later.  There are, of course, many paradigms that can be enabled by ‘learning’ technology to mix up workplace learning and make it more varied – including virtual reality, virtual classrooms, games, etc.  Let’s aim to entertain, not to just record high smiley sheet scores, but to deliver valuable outcomes.

Podcasts, the ultimate edutainment?

I learn a lot from podcasts.  They also entertain.  They often combine the best of ‘anytime anywhere’ learning with interesting narratives (normally via discussion and other radio techniques) and hosts.  However, we don’t seem to have a stand out example for learning technologists to learn from?

The British Tech Network or the US-based TWIT (The Week In Tech) will cover you for technology topics including Mac, Windows, corporate tech, Google, security, gaming, mobile and web design.  Perhaps the issue is that learning technology crosses over all of these, we use software from a range of areas to produce outputs to solve learning needs.

The lack of a podcast leader for learning technology certainly is not for lack of action in the direct field though.  The Adapt Framework, for example, retrofits functionality familiar from (Flash) web based training interactions into a HTML5 tool.  Now, I’m excited about Adapt and have been attending webinars about it.  Do we need an independent podcast to follow this kind of development free of bias from the developers?  Just look at the money, for example $2000, for independent views of LMS systems!

Now, there are some podcasts (my listening list is here) and I have done some research in the last week or so and added some new things to listen to but I have still not been able to find a news-orientated show to offer a view across the profession(s)/industry.  That said, search for EdTech podcasts (for example in iCatcher my app of choice) and you do go get a lot of results (indeed I have followed EdTechTalk on YouTube for a while) so maybe my ‘holy grail’ is out there but I am missing it.  Perhaps it is just me and other professionals keep up-to-date well enough via their RSS and other feeds?  Certainly across blogs, LinkedIn, etc there are plenty of people doing good ‘curation’ roles for industry news.

Personally though, I would argue that, there seems to be a space for a podcast to cover:

  • learning technology related news
  • panelists’ views (with a mix of K-12/school, FE/HE and workplace)
  • the week ahead (webinars to look out for etc)
  • panelists’ picks (something to try this week)

For example, recent stories that could be covered in ‘news’ would include:

Would love to say I could host such a thing (even though I acknowledge it would be a LOT of work) but I have a terrible voice for radio/podcasting 😉

Virtual Free Schools

I’ve mentioned previously, on this site and old blogs, my belief that we need to be look differently at schooling going forward.  Continuing with traditional school models is an option but we also need to look to offer children and their parents new options.  Online options could potentially be cheaper for the state and more appropriate for the learner.

I have done a bit more research around the topic of late – including noticing this article from 2006.  Yep, the benefits were clearly articulated in a BBC article…in 2006!  Indeed Ofsted have reported on benefits too

Now, I know there are virtual school providers in the UK.  However, they remain largely private (fee charging) or for those children outside of the mainstream system (for example those who are vulnerable and in care).  I previously asked the New Schools Network back in 2011 if state funded Virtual Schools were emerging thanks to the changes of regulation resulting in Free Schools (it surprised me this week when I realized that email conversation was 3 years ago!).  Their reply at the time:

We would agree that at present the Free Schools policy and application process are not particularly tailored for this type of school, but we have talked to the DfE and they are receptive to proposals for virtual schools.

So when I reached out this week to NSN and on LinkedIn to a Free Schools group it was good to get one solid reply that work is underway.  In fact I offered my assistance, if I can offer any, as I really believe we need to consider online learning as opposed to the postcode lottery of existing provision.

Not to say that traditional schools are not investigating the possibilities, for example with this director of eLearning post currently advertised.

Anyway – I’m going to keep this Google Drive presentation up-to-date with a vision for an online school, if I ever have the time perhaps I will look to investigate it more.  However, having read Toby Young’s guide to setting up a free school, I doubt I will ever have the time needed to fully support the launch of such a school.

Reflections on a first trip to Asia – and implications on (Instructional Design) training

The MSc I studied is no longer offered as the awarding university opted against running any further cohorts (declining student numbers against a need to update the content).  This is a shame, in my opinion, as it was about the only course I could find, in the UK at the time, that specifically called out “instructional design” (ID) in its content.  The take on ID was probably different to how the more numerous American ID courses viewed the subject but ID was there nonetheless.

Anyway, due to work I recently found myself in Malaysia – my first ever trip to Asia.  All in all, this was an enjoyable experience.  One very obvious thing in Malaysia was the clear messaging that the distinct ethnic groups in the country should support its “unity”, for example this fountain:

Malaysia three bowl fountainMessage of Malaysian unity

This was particularly interesting as I was there during the week of the Scottish Referendum vote, not to mention the ongoing fragmentation within ethnic and religious groups the world over – not least in Syria and Iraq.

On coming back from Malaysia it was then coincidence to see an article on instructional designer training in that country:

On becoming a civic-minded instructional designer: An ethnographic study of an instructional design experience

Now the model created in the article:

The civic-minded instructional designers framework
Source: sorry, I seem to have lost the link to the site this was on

could, in many ways, be applicable to any profession/industry.  However, the suggestion of social responsibility for all is, no doubt, missing in most university education.  Would training bankers in such a way have helped avoid previous crashes?

The article suggests a focus on simply technical skills fails to develop designers of the type that are needed.  This made we wonder – perhaps if there was more universal consideration of social responsibility there would be less reason for so many companies to feel the need to train staff into values that cross-borders and get everyone onto ‘the same page’?  My hope would be, from a Learning and Development perspective, that any values or other cultural change program does not ignore the wider environment (as included in the above ID training model).

The conclusion of the article suggests the need for civic responsibility to increase in the balance against the “career-centric and technically orientated” content of most courses.  However, perhaps too much of a shift would have a negative impact on Malaysia in decreasing the technical ability to compete with, say, India in the global ID marketplace?  “The needs of the design industry” perhaps need to be better articulated with more cross border understanding of ID as a concept, after all my UK MSc almost certainly took a different angle to the predominate North American viewpoint.  Here, through ID, is an interesting example of where we could look to benchmark skills globally whilst providing what a society feels it needs locally, regionally and globally (or micro, macro and mega).

Anyway, something of a rambling post but interesting that some of what I could see as an issue for a country in general is quite clearly embedded into the professional conversation of what it means to be a (ID) professional.

The inevitable backlash to ‘curation’

One of the popular terms of the last eighteen months or so, both on the wider web and specifically in L&D circles, has been ‘curation’ – indeed I mentioned it back in August 2013.

Well, inevitably the backlash has begun:

What does Curation mean?
Source: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BzPoCRHIIAAQ0mD.jpg

or at least the backlash against people who “don’t get it”.  Ultimately my take on this has not really changed…

Curation is nothing new.

Directories drove the early web until search improved.  We now see ‘live’, largely automated, directories aggregating content on an ongoing basis – albeit at the risk of rehashing old ideas and not moving the conversation forward.  Quality curation is one way to raise, above the noise, genuinely new insight, research, data, etc.

Information skills are essential to any non-automated approach and there would certainly be an argument that where ‘time is money’ some level of automated curation (as part of a personal learning and information system) could be supplemented by people focusing on information management/curation and distribution in your organisation (rather than the potential for duplication of effort, etc by everyone spending time managing their own).  However, I see two major challenges:

  1. Personal network versus “supported learning network”.  The inevitable problem for any kind of internal awareness, communication or learning curation will be that it has already been captured by an individual’s personal system.  For example, a colleague may share something on my team’s internal social tool which I have already engaged with via Twitter.  We have moved past restrictions enforcing only ‘work tools on work time’ so how can we balance this without boring ourselves and our audiences via multiple sharing/discussion streams?
  2. ‘Human touch’ curation capabilities are limited.  The cutbacks of recent decades to information-related teams mean that the focus is more likely to fall on the individual, supported by groups such as internal communications (for distributing key messages) and knowledge/record management (for longer term curation).  I see the recent focus of L&D on curation, to capture quality content and share appropriately as one area where my information background and learning technologies crossover – quality content has been the core reason for libraries and now we are seeing transformation of learning away from ‘our stuff’ to recognizing the value in UGC and integration with 3rd party materials.  Ultimately we would want everyone’s daily work to be built around a single company virtual space which can do everything we might need around learning, sharing, communication, etc.  The challenge is that this system realistically does not exist and, in all probability, existing businesses face fragmentation and silos.

So I would say lets strive to ensure our organizations appropriately curate but recognize it will have failings and is not the solution to every form of learning/content need.