sustainable organisation performance sustainable ... - · pdf filesustainable organisation...

sustainable organisationperformance





stewardship,leadership

and governance

buildingHR capability

sustainable organisation performance sustainable organisation performance

future-fitorganisations

xxx xxx

Research InsightApril 2012

From e-learning to ‘gameful’ employment

future-fit organisations

Be part of something big

When you’re a member of the CIPD, you’re part of a globally recognised organisation

with over 135,000 members across 120 countries – including more than 50,000 who

are Chartered. CIPD members include the next generation of HR professionals and

many of the world’s most influential senior HR leaders from world-class organisations.

Wherever you are in your HR career, the CIPD and its members will support and inspire

you to achieve your full potential.

Call +44 (0)20 8612 6208 to discuss your options.

Or visit cipd.co.uk/membership

1 From e-learning to ‘gameful’ employment

Executive summary 2

Introduction 3

1 The ‘adjacent possible’ of e-learning 4

2 The ‘emergent possible’ future of e-learning: artificial intelligence and gaming 10

3 The impact of gaming on learning: optimists and pessimists 14

Conclusion 16

References 17

Acknowledgements 19

Contents







and governance




xxx xxx


In our Focus on E-learning report of summer 2011 we looked at the emerging trends around e-learning and identified several current problems in terms of completion, user experience, effectiveness and economic impact. We explained that, to use the new wave of e-learning technologies, practitioners have to get their heads around these current realities.

In this current report we first explain how these new technologies are indeed beginning to impact the learning and talent development (L&TD) landscape – specifically, how we currently leverage the availability of the following related technologies to make existing e-learning approaches more compelling and effective.

We call this the ‘adjacent possible’ of e-learning:

• theuseofvirtuallearningenvironments,webinarsandotherformsofnetworkede-learning

• theuseofsocialmediasuchasTwitter,LinkedInandFacebook

• theintegrationofsmartphonetechnologyintothelearningenvironmentandtheuseofattendantapps.

We then look at how we can usefully integrate emerging technologies into e-learning. We call this the ‘emergent possible’:

• possibilitiesfortheuseofartificialintelligenceandmachine-basedlearninginthee-learningenvironment

• theopportunityforknowledge-sharingandmanagementmadepossiblebythefusionofvarioustechnologies

• thefutureemergentenvironmentofgame-basedlearningwithafocusonuserexperience.

We then:

• considersomecontroversiesaroundtheimpactofgamingonlearninganditseffectonlearningandcognition, particularly the ‘dumbing down’ issue.

Our aim is to equip L&TD specialists with a broad understanding of these trends and their likely impact upon e-learning for two main reasons. Firstly, so that they can be in a position to shape and influence future e-learning design and delivery, and secondly, so that they can generate compelling insights and inspiration around e-learning. We have kept it free of too many references, though the evidence base can be accessed in our extensive online literature review, and other supporting papers will be made available. As a stand-alone resource, however, we think it will provide a timely refresher for the experienced and a helpful starting point for those yet to contemplate the future which e-learning could lead to.

Executive summary







and governance




xxx xxx








and governance




xxx xxx

In 2011, the year of Steve Jobs’ death – one of digital technology’s supreme innovators – e-learning advanced markedly. Over the four years since he presided over the launch of the iconic smartphone the iPhone and later the iPad tablet computer, e-learning has gone from a fringe activity pushed by enthusiasts to a more encompassing approach (Overton 2011).

That trend is likely to deepen with the further spread of apps (mini programmes designed for smartphones), and the increasing need for people to learn everything from languages to budget forecasting as their job roles are stretched. The more people learn on connected devices, the more their workplace will need to connect with that aspect of their learning lives. It is evident that the boundaries between workplace learning and leisure time will become blurred. Gaming technology, with enhanced image quality, and a new trend towards motion sensitivity and machine-readable intelligence could herald a whole new world of learning.

Adjacent technologies such as forums, wikis, webinars, podcasts and blogs are providing a compelling platform for learning and development. Some of these trends are more recent than they appear to be. For example, the CIPD’s 2008 report Web 2.0 and Human Resource Management (Martin et al 2009) didn’t have a reference to the microblogging phenomenon Twitter; our next report will reference something as yet unknown. The context of massively multiplying opportunities for e-learning has seen huge innovation and game-changing delivery from organisations such as BT, Edinburgh City Council, BP, KFC, Yum brands, National Grid and many others. These will be featured in a forthcoming online case focus series.

However, while it’s tempting to surf the possibility curve of e-learning and workplace technology, let’s get back to earth quickly. Our latest survey on e-learning from June 2011 (CIPD 2011) shows some worrying trends in terms of the implementation and impact of e-learning as it currently stands: namely, there is a low completion rate, user experience is poor and many firms are focusing on the economic benefits of deploying e-learning. What they are getting is poor learning effectiveness. We believe that these challenges are now better understood and they are now being addressed. They need to be because, as our Focus on E-learning report also explained, many of the uses of e-learning are centred upon compliance issues such as health and safety, food hygiene, financial services training and induction – areas where the cost of poor training can be considerable.

In this report we want to focus on the possibilities of the currently available and emerging technologies for workplace learning, but we suggest that practitioners visit the 2011 report and a companion report (CIPD forthcoming), to make sure they are addressing the issues identified. We start this report by focusing on the future of e-learning and on the application of what we term the ’adjacent technologies‘.

Introduction

A growing number believe that technology can help them become more agile (72% now believe that learning technologies will help them respond faster to changing business conditions), help them release new products faster and respond to organisational change (77%) and help them share good practice within the business (78%). Overton 2011








and governance




xxx xxx

1 The ‘adjacent possible’ of e-learning

According to Johnson et al (2011), who have written extensively on technology and innovation, there is a point in the innovation cycle where we can discover the ‘adjacent possible’; that is, a readily reachable improvement made possible by a combination of technologies or ideas which have emerged at different points in time. This in turn opens the door to new possibilities in a product or the development of a step-change new product. YouTube, when it was launched in 2005, was a brilliant idea; had it been launched in 1995, before broadband and cheap video cameras were widespread, it would have failed to fly.

The proliferation of learning technology in and around the workplace promises to offer many opportunities; however, another reality check: many of the existing technologies are not yet being fully embedded, as Figure 1 indicates.

The ‘adjacent possible’ of e-learning is already being driven by a focus on three principal groups of technologies:

• webinarsandvirtuallearning

• socialnetworking

• mobilelearningandsmartdevices.

Related adjacent ’knowledge-sharing‘ technologies, such as the use of wikis, e-books and rapid authoring software, are also part of these trends. Figure 1 captures the extent of regular use of these technologies for comparison. These groups all of course overlap, but they can at least be seen as distinct phases in the development/delivery of e-learning. Our 2011 survey asked organisations to record their experience of using these various technologies. We begin with webinars and virtual learning environments.

Figure 1: Use of adjacent e-learning approaches

Adjacent learning technologies

• Blended learning programmes (36%)• Webinars and virtual classrooms (20%)• Use of learning libraries and wikis (17%)• Audio learning and podcasts (14%)• Rapid authoring software (13%)• E-books (11%)• Learning through social media such as

Facebook, Twitter, etc (5%)• Mobile learning using smartphones (3%)








and governance




xxx xxx

Virtual learning environments (VLEs) are sophisticated platforms often connected with blended learning and knowledge-management systems. For example, VLE tools such as Moodle take learners through a whole system of learning experiences and integrate the online interactions of the learner. According to our survey, about a third of organisations use blended learning programmes, where a variety of learning methods are combined with online content. These include face-to-face learning, action learning sets, project-based learning and other approaches such as coaching and mentoring. Only about a tenth of respondents are not aware of such systems, so their visibility is high.

Virtual learning systems and learning management systems also fall into this ‘adjacent’ category. These systems are used by just under a quarter of respondents regularly and frequently but, with over a fifth being unaware, they are not as well established as blended learning. It’s a similar picture with webinars, virtual classrooms and wikis. While rapid authoring software – which allows those without programming skills to design content using programmes such as PowerPoint – may be well known in e-learning circles, our survey shows that nearly half of our L&TD respondents are unaware of the technology. About a third are unaware of the use of ‘social media’ such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and so on, as possible platforms for e-learning. We now look at the implications of this social networking technology for e-learning.

Figure 2: Webinars, virtual and networked learning

Use of webinars and online

virtual learning environments

• Use frequently (6%)• Use regularly (13%)• Use occasionally (26%)• Seldom use (19%)• Would consider using (24%)• Not aware of (18%)








and governance




xxx xxx

Blogging and networking: connecting learning communities

In our Web 2.0 and Human Resource Management: ‘Groundswell’ or hype? report (Martin et al 2009), the microblogging phenomenon of Twitter was not listed in the glossary. It didn’t exist then; now it’s almost commonplace. What did exist then was LinkedIn and it has grown enormously – to the extent that any professional without a LinkedIn account might feel isolated. LinkedIn’s increasing use as a recruitment and recommendation site makes it central to the sort of collaborative and networking skills increasingly important in business. Facebook, primarily a leisure networking product, is also used in this way, though inappropriate postings and security issues have made many shy away from it professionally. Learning communities and knowledge-sharing are a regular feature of LinkedIn, especially in the case of continuing professional development (CPD).

Arguably Twitter, the ‘killer app’ for microblogging, has more influence than any social networking product. Microblogging is an ever-increasing phenomenon with a major learning aspect implicit within it. The power of cloud computing, which allows massive storage capacity and ready access for content, enhances the use of social networking technologies. Twitter, Yammer and other microblogging programmes have begun to play a massive part in social networking and they have a key role to play in e-learning.

The urgency and brevity of microblogging means it can be extensively used to support and stimulate learning. The abundance of ever-expanding networks, with growing capacity, makes it more useful than ever. According to The Economist’s personal mobile technology survey, Twitter – the best-known microblogging site – has gone from 27 million short blog messages in 2009 to 250 million in 2011. At the moment Twitter is a channel of opinion and comment. Bored celebrities and opinionated footballers tend to dominate the public discussion, but it’s also hugely important for political dialogue: witness the use of such technologies during the Arab Spring of 2011.

The use of microblogging represents a major change in how we think about learning and development. It’s content-light but context-rich. This can be harnessed for corporate learning through business micro-blogging/knowledge-sharing tools such as Yammer. At Ford, motor engineers working on a similar problem can discuss technical points on Twitter/Yammer and these can be captured and distilled into learning points. This type of approach would work well to blend and connect aspects of a compliance-

Figure 3: The use of social media in learning

Use of social media like Facebook, YouTube and

LinkedIn to support learning









and governance




xxx xxx

type training intervention. Though the use of microblogging, in volume terms, is primarily for social purposes, its flexibility and profile mean it has a real role to play in learning. US communications technology company Pitney Bowes gives an indication of its role in helping collaborative learning:

• better employee learning: Yammer facilitates and augments the highly valuable ‘casual learning’ that happens every day within Pitney Bowes

• easily searchable knowledge base: each discussion is archived and accessible to all within the organisation for future access

• better knowledge: knowledge isn’t siloed into specific regions or departments.

Source: Pitney Bowes case study available at http://www.jarche.com/2010/08/connected-and-crazy/

Socially networked learning is made possible in large part by the use of smartphones and other such devices, boosted by the power of cloud computing. We look at the current use and potential of these technologies next.

Mobile learning: getting the learning signals around smart technology

Mobile and smartphone technology is another key platform for e-learning and we look at some of the key trends and implications for workplace learning which arise from its rapid growth and spread.

Recently a New York-based father and son photographed the curvature of the earth using an iPhone as a location device, an HD camera, a foam lunchbox and a helium balloon (http://siteboat.com/videoiphone-sent-into-outer-space-by-brooklyn-dad-and-kid/). This astounding feat is an indication of the possibility of smart technology with huge computing power and extended battery life. Effectively a smartphone allowed some ordinary, technically savvy people to monitor and guide a space mission. This is mind-bending and the opportunities for powerfully leveraging this technology are almost endless. Yet while we all get excited about smartphone technology and the endless possibilities of apps as a learning medium, it brings us down to earth slightly to know that only about 1% of our sample regularly use such applications in their design and a third don’t know of their use in e-learning.

Figure 4: Use of mobile learning

Mobile learning packages designed for smart devices









and governance




xxx xxx

That’s set to change, but it does show us – as our previous report on social networking (Martin et al 2009) indicates – that we should distinguish ‘groundswell’ from ‘hype’. Smart devices are going to be a key component in workplace learning. According to the UK telecoms regulator Ofcom, a quarter of all adults have a smartphone, and their use is spreading worldwide. Their use is growing particularly in emerging markets, allowing users to ‘jump’ the PC or laptop stage of ICT equipment. The choice of ‘apps’ – the small, powerful, parsimonious programmes which drive smartphones – is increasing massively. From half a billion app downloads in 2008 to nearly 18 billion by 2011 and a projected growth to more than 50 billion by 2013, apps offer not only games and lifestyle formats but literally power to learn in the pocket (The Economist, 8 October 2011). This growth has been accompanied by a changed development focus. Much of the output of companies harnessing smartphones is now aimed at consumers. The cost of the hardware is, like PCs before them, falling rapidly, as providers seek to ‘monetise’ from add-ons such as ‘apps’ and from network access charges. While this is common knowledge, the implications for learning are massive and so far our data shows that only a few pioneers at the far shore of e-learning and development practice are truly engaging with what it means.

It helps to see these phones as what they are: powerful personal computers. If you link these with their larger-format cousins, the ‘smart pads’, you have scalable mobile e-learning. When we consider the costs of desktop equipment and the fact that many smartphones and desktop computers can synchronise, they will increasingly become a learning tool. Learning will be and is one of the many activities for which people use smart technology. This can either be in the shape of productivity-enhancing applications, such as time management, project development and data applications, or it can be leisure-driven learning, such as short games like Angry Birds or Farmville which can teach particular cognitive and social skills. The power of smartphones depends on two interrelated technologies, as outlined in this recent article in The Economist.

Using smart devices to connect up learning

At the outset of the smartphone revolution, one writer devised a framework for learning design. This is based on the way in which smartphones and their scaled-up bigger cousins, the smart pads, allow learners to access a whole range of learning experiences. These can take many shapes, but two immediate uses are in enabling location-aware learning and in acting as rich note-making resources (Norman 2011).

Location-aware learning

The iPhone in space is an extreme example, but in some industries with multiple locations, such as mining and oil and gas, the use of location-aware learning can help to really contextualise the e-learning experience. With GPS and sophisticated roaming technology, such devices can provide local maps and resources at a fraction of the cost and effort required to do this in a conventional environment. They also help, for example, with situational learning, perhaps memorising the location of outlet valves in particular locations for an engineer, or route-learning for a delivery driver (Norman 2011).

Amazingly capable mobile devices and oodles of cloud-based content are two of the three pillars on which the personalised computing revolution is being built. But it is the third pillar – the proliferation of broadband connections – that has turbocharged it. In many rich countries fixed-line broadband connections are now commonplace, often with a Wi-Fi link at the end of them to allow people to use their devices wherever they are in homes or offices. And a variety of wireless technologies including ‘third-generation’, or 3G, networks, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth have made it possible for people to stay connected to the internet almost everywhere. The Economist, 8 October 2011








and governance




xxx xxx

Learning by note-taking: making it commonplace

From the collected notebooks of Charles Darwin, known as the ‘commonplace book’ which helped him develop the insights for his work on evolution, to the quick scribbled to-do list of a time-pressed manager, note-making and -taking has been a feature of learning. Note-taking eases the ‘cognitive load’ on working memory and with the ability to recall and reshape, save and edit within smart devices and always available on PCs, it has never been more convenient. Many note-taking apps exist. The notes function in the iPhone and iPad helps to take notes in a stylised script, much like writing. Notes and memos can also be recorded, adding to the power of recall. This can help us clarify thought and track learning and can also be a major tool for reflection. Smartphone technology supercharges this tried-and-trusted technique and turns it into an e-version of the Victorian ‘commonplace book’; Darwin and many other curious thinkers would approve (Norman 2011).

In this section we have discussed the ‘adjacent possible’ future of e-learning: issues of virtual learning platforms, wikis, webinars, mobile and smart device learning and the whole area of networked community learning through the ‘blogosphere’. These are all key current components of the e-learning revolution. But what about the trends and challenges which are out there but are yet to make themselves felt in the learning environment? In the next section we look at the rising tide of new technology characterised by artificial intelligence, neural networks and gaming as ‘waypoints’ navigating towards the very near future of ‘gameful’ employment.








and governance




xxx xxx

2 The ‘emergent possible’ future of e-learning: artificial intelligence and gaming

In this section we look at the ‘emergent possible’, that is, technology which is already available and which is already being used in other settings but which has not as yet been applied on a large scale to learning.

These are:

• thedevelopmentofartificiallearningandneuralnetworks

• thecapacityofinternalsystemsandcloudcomputingtoenableknowledge-sharing

• thecreationofgamingandsimulationenvironmentsasastep-changeinengaginglearners.

The e-learning environment is set to change dramatically and will see acceleration in the use of technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), greater use of online knowledge management and computerised gaming. These will all make use of advances in computing, cognitive and neuroscience, as well as in other scientific fields. Coupled with the ‘adjacent possible’ technologies, this emergent stream of technology allows us to fuse new combinations and to drive learning and talent development forward in new directions. This in turn makes it easier to create and share corporate knowledge in pursuit of the ever-elusive ‘learning organisation’. To understand the context for these developments, we briefly look at the foundation of all of them – the concept of artificial intelligence.

Artificial intelligence and machine-based learning

Steven Spielberg’s 2001 film A.I. tells the story of a race of intelligent manufactured humanoid robots who try to master human emotions. The film takes place against the background of extinct humanity and generally, when people see AI referred to, they think of the human race being supplanted by super intelligent machines.

Yet artificial intelligence is really about computing, not robots. It’s about how computer systems can learn to link and use information in order to fulfil more and varied tasks. It’s about how computer systems – ranging from the chips in phones and PCs to systems and hardware – can learn routines which come close to equalling the flexibility of human minds. It is already deeply embedded in our world through ‘algorithms’, which are basically structured programmes for calculation. For example, data mining uses ‘intelligent agents’ to search for relevant numbers and patterns. Motion-sensitive gaming equipment and vacuum cleaners that detect corners use algorithms. The algorithms which make these developments possible are part of our modern technological society. The possibilities of intelligent and interactive computing have grown. The latest memorable example was the performance of an IBM computer, ‘Watson’, on the US quiz show Jeopardy in 2010. Here the computer showed a capability to interact with, and add to, the type of questions which would require its memory to interrogate lots of additional reasoning necessary to answer questions on topics such as celebrity gossip as well as ‘higher order’ issues such as identifying lines of poetry. A previous triumph was the IBM supercomputer ‘Deep Blue’ beating the chess champion Gary Kasparov in 1997.

The brilliant mathematician Allan Turing, the father of binary computing, prescribed a test known as the ‘Turing test’ to probe the ‘intelligence’ of computers. Put simply, the test tries to ‘fool’ a human interacting with a computer into believing that the response has come from a fellow human being. Many people have misinterpreted such advances in computerised intelligence as a threat to the primacy of the human race. Yet the obvious logical point – that no computer could interact unless programmed by a








and governance




xxx xxx

human designer – sometimes gets lost (see Christian 2010 for a humane and often hilarious view of the test and its implications).

The implications of the AI experiments are far reaching and, from an L&TD point of view, we need to understand them. That doesn’t mean we need to go into great depth on the computing and mathematical aspects of these developments. However, we do need to be both curious and intelligently aware of the trends and understand the very real possibilities such developments could offer. There is also an opportunity to ensure that this new domain of learning has the professional input in learning theory and practice which can supplement and enrich the emerging computing science knowledge. However, one barrier to that is the need to understand – at least at a basic level – emerging evidence in neuroscience, cognitive research and computing to propose inputs and suggestions. (The CIPD will be looking at these issues in our Future-focused L&TD: Steady state to ready state report in summer 2012.)

For example, there is the possibility that AI programmes could improve e-learning compliance through interacting with users and setting questions to capture learning. It could revolutionise more conceptual learning methods such as coaching and mentoring and action learning using ‘intelligent’ agents which ‘learn’ various scenarios which could help move learning forward. Overall, the frontiers of AI are in further and higher education. We can already see a familiar AI method, which is the machine-marking of multiple-choice examinations and the machine-guiding of certain types of learning experience. The spread of embedded chips in intelligent devices such as smartphones, but also in integrative users’ devices, is another example of this. Though this is by no means a new frontier, it is set to be further explored as computing devices, power and infrastructure make it possible.

E-knowledge and the corporate brain

It’s not just about individual and corporate learning. One view sees AI as enabling a form of ‘distributed intelligence’ which allows organisations to capture and exploit knowledge in fresh and novel ways. The slightly off-putting term for this concept is ‘the corporate brain’. Information science and its related disciplines tell us that the pivot point for change and innovation is often at the transition between one state in an organisation and another. Some writers have referred to this as ‘surfing at the edge of chaos’. The nature of the brain and how it interacts and learns is critical in this sort of approach. The notion of ‘heuristics’ (thinking shortcuts) and biases (our tendency to believe what’s in front of us) are all issues here (again, to be covered in our forthcoming Steady State to Ready State report). The notion of corporate brainpower and a ‘collective brain’ is made much more urgent in a technology environment based on cloud computing, embedded chips, smart machines and all the related paraphernalia of the e-learning environment. By capturing and distilling learning experiences, this whole notion can be revisited and refined in new ways (see McKelvey 2001 for an early take).

Artificial intelligence and its companion technologies of ‘neural networks’ and cloud computing offer possibilities for revolutionising learning. While the existing technologies have accelerated the growth of e-learning, the fusion of mobile learning, smart devices, AI and gaming will reshape the whole basis of learning in fundamental ways. There is rising evidence to show that this could take place through a step-change in the use of gaming and simulation. We address this in the next section.








and governance




xxx xxx

Towards ‘gameful’ employment?

It’s Olympic year – 2012 – in London as this report goes to press and it’s a good time to reflect on games. Games have been with us since ancient times. They fulfil a human need to be engaged and entertained and they also have a serious purpose – whether building problem-solving and thinking capacity, as in chess, or helping people remain fit and ready for battle, as with most physical sports. Sometimes, of course, games are about avoiding boredom or providing simple diversion and distraction. Whatever their purpose, games are a fundamental aspect of our civilisation (McGonigal 2011).

Gaming has featured for many years in the learning and development agenda. Board games on scenarios such as accounting and contingency planning have been with us for a long time, and every skilled learning specialist knows how to use games, such as quizzes, to fire up learning. However, the use of games in learning is set to accelerate with the proliferation of gaming technology and, more importantly, insights about how people learn in gaming situations. The combination of computing power, proliferation of gaming in leisure time and the need to capture the attention and engagement of learners means gaming will be increasingly crucial. Our 2012 L&TD survey (CIPD 2012) questioned practitioners on their awareness of emerging issues in L&TD, including the use of game-based learning. About 12% are aware of this learning approach and integrate it, with a fifth aware but choosing not to deploy the approach and over a quarter feeling that they are aware of it but do not fully understand it. About two-fifths are not aware and 1% do not see the relevance.

L&TD will need to develop its awareness of this compelling new platform for e-learning quickly. Gaming allows learners to gain skills needed specifically in an information-based culture. In addition, specific gaming content can overlap with course content, helping students learn material in an innovative way. Hernandez et al (2010) discussed the use of business games in order to simulate a business environment where each team manages a virtual company. The software therefore simulates the business environment in which users can compete with other virtual companies, share information and experience competition. Moreno-Ger et al (2009) suggested that gaming can address the need for personalised learning in which the learning experience is adapted to the requirements of different users and contexts. Gaming can modify lessons using different parameters and a set of predefined rules in order to cater for the needs of all kinds of learners and maximise effectiveness of learning.

Figure 5: Practitioner use of game-based learning

Learning from game-based

learning

• Aware of and integrate into my practice (12%)• Aware of but don’t use in my practice (20%)• Aware of but don’t fully understand (27%)• Haven’t heard of (39%)• Don’t see the relevance of (2%)








and governance




xxx xxx

Squire (2008) explained that games offer ‘immersive experiences’ in which players solve problems. Players learn more than just facts – they learn ways of seeing and understanding problems so that they become different kinds of people. Publishing content online is not sufficient to improve learning or performance; the effective design of instruction is necessary to make sense of that content, to make it meaningful. This carries the somewhat ugly term ‘gamified learning’, or ‘gamification’.

According to Bersin (2012), ‘gamification’ is based on six dimensions: progression, achievement and rewards, cascading information, countdown, levels and quest. He suggests practitioners can shake up and revitalise learning by paying attention to these six dimensions (see http://clomedia.com/articles/view/game-on).

The users of game-based learning want more engaging and ‘immersive’ experiences, as the context in which learners develop is important. Games create an emotionally compelling context for the player and build on nostalgia, curiosity, visual appeal and employees’ interest. They connect with the player emotionally and are an invitation into a world that is to be learned. Games establish challenges and goals for learners to meet (for example ‘rescue the company’) and establish seductive identities and capacities for players (‘high-performing manager’). They use approaches that are organised around situations, roles, activities and practices through understanding human psychology and how people interact with information as opposed to traditional instruction. Games can include masses of information, even in the simplest interfaces. However, there is a shift from storing information towards what a person can do given access to tools, resources and social networks.

Therefore, knowledge arises through activity rather than being presented to the learner. Games are unlike other interactive learning systems in that they contain ’failure states’ – conditions where players’ choices can lead to negative consequences. Game constraints push up against players’ behaviour, limiting what they can and cannot do. Games are fundamentally about doing; players learn basic skills and can try these basics out in limited conditions, then return for future training before trying out the next level.

Effective game formats involve designs which anticipate what players might be thinking and doing and regulating the level of complexity and challenge for the user. This has major implications for organisational learning. Indeed, some enthusiasts in the gaming world go so far as to argue that the ‘blissful productivity’, ‘flow’ and ‘pro-social’ engagement which can be built through the right kind of gaming experience can change the workplace for the better. Indeed, they see gaming as a solution to the problems of society, such as oil shortage, world hunger and the impact of natural disasters! They point to the altruistic behaviour of those playing games, such as World of Warcraft, a PC-based quest game where players learn specific skills such as sword-forging to take part in a quest. Jane McGonigal (2011), a gaming software scientist, asks the question: why would people do that? What is it about such games that help people connect and co-operate with strangers to complete a task which is virtual and, to a great extent, unnecessary? Already gaming is attracting a lot of interest from learning and talent specialists. One challenge for L&TD specialists is to be able to detect the ’signal‘ of useful and relevant evidence from the ’noise‘ of commentary and comment which attends this area of learning. It’s easy to get drawn into polarised positions, which we outline in the final section, along with a more nuanced and helpful position.








and governance




xxx xxx

3 The impact of gaming on learning: optimists and pessimists

The optimists

Optimists such as McGonigal (2011), Anderson (2006), Johnson (2006) and others have pointed out that computer games stimulate our learning pathways like nothing else. They explain that game-based learning has a role in supporting collaboration, problem-solving and communication, and advanced learning skills. They contend that computerised gaming through the use of productive role-play, which allows for experimentation, exploration of identities and even failure creates a higher-order intelligence which is more flexible and adaptive and is better suited to the constantly shifting globalised economy.

Johnson’s manifesto has been embraced by many businesses and thought leaders. For example, Mark Thompson, the current Director General of the BBC, is strongly influenced by Johnson’s approach. McGonigal has a ready audience for her view that game-based learning could help to unleash a massive wave of motivation, trust and, ultimately, engagement with the world’s problems. These writers make explicit connections between the value of immersive gaming and productive learning. In the learning field, Gee (2007) suggests 36 principles which can drive learning from the use of what he calls (probably quaintly for some!) video games. He also suggests that gaming requires new languages and ‘design grammars’, which some L&TD people are reluctant to engage with. He explains very well that gaming taps very different learning potential and engages more layers of learning than traditional methods.

The pessimists

A contrasting view is that games deaden and desensitise us, warp our minds and degrade our capacity to think and reason. Susan Greenfield, a neuroscientist, sees gaming as, at best, a distraction and, at worst, a danger to engaged thinking and even a challenge to our future cognitive development.

Nicolas Carr, a former editor of the Harvard Business Review and a major contributor to Wired, the ‘cyberutopian’ publication, has become increasingly sceptical, pointing to a decline in IQ evidenced in the US and the UK1 (Carr 2011).

Carr (2011) sees gaming and the use of related technologies such as the Internet and search technologies as destroying the deep and critical engagement in learning which is embodied in reading. The pessimists also believe that electronic readers such as the Kindle and Sony Reader stimulate the brain differently and will necessarily cause learners to interact differently.

The burgeoning technologies of the twenty-first century have the potential for bending the brain in new ways and opening it up to manipulation as never before in the history of Homo sapiens. The biggest question for me… is whether the result of such an unprecedented brain changing might be reflected ultimately in unprecedented transformation in human identity? Greenfield 2008, p35

1 Carr cites evidence on the decline of IQ in both countries, but he infers the cause. Elementary statistical awareness cautions us

against inferring that because two phenomena go together that they are ‘caused’ by one another (the ‘correlation does not equal

causation’ argument).








and governance




xxx xxx







and governance




xxx xxx

One could accuse both Greenfield and Carr of failing to see the good in technology-driven knowledge. Their accounts, however – though sometimes overstated – do caution against a view that technology will provide a primrose path to progress in learning or in any other domain.

Jaron Lanier (2011), a key Silicon Valley technologist, reflects upon the ‘forms’ of Internet infrastructure and content and how they impact and erode human creativity. Despite his own background as a godfather of technology – developing the concept of virtual reality, for example, and much of the early software on pattern recognition – he refuses to endorse what he terms a ‘cybernetic totalism’. He sees this approach – based upon cloud computing, algorithms (AI) and smart devices often promoted by large Internet providers – as a form of ‘digital despotism’. One of the ‘forced formats’ he bears particular malice towards as a performing musician is the MP3 format, which compresses music for online distribution.

That said, Lanier strikes a more positive mindset for critically engaging with the technology. The approach is worthwhile because an uncritical acceptance of technology is as limiting for L&TD professionals as a failure to engage with the future promise of technology. To make sound judgements as corporate learning professionals, we should at least be aware of the debates which shape this controversy. Many are technical, but increasingly there are philosophical questions about humanity’s place in cyberspace, for example issues such as human–computer interaction (HCI) and the sometimes rarefied debates around semantics.

Whatever position we take on the influence of the Internet it’s evident and increasingly obvious that it is beginning to constitute an ever growing proportion of knowledge and communication. Therefore L&TD as a whole needs to ’negotiate‘ a place in cyberspace which allows us to harness its power and make use of its many benefits. At the same time we need to be intelligent critics of how it can, in Lanier’s view, lead to deadened formats and encourage sameness. We may need many more skills than we currently have to do that. For example, we may need to integrate coding and programming skills as part of the design of effective e-learning and the skills repertoire of L&TD professionals. Our design and story-boarding skills may also need to be improved if we are to generate gaming scenarios cost-effectively. We can’t assume and nor would it be desirable that these specialists skills are warehoused in consultancies, for the scale we will need to operate at won’t support that cost mode. Nor can we assume ICT departments will resource these skills for us. So we need to think about how we can resource these new skills. We also need to think anew about how we engage and communicate the value of such learning, not just to individuals and their managers but to demonstrate the business impact as well. These are just a few of the challenges to be met.

The news is even more disturbing than I had suspected. Dozens of studies by psychologists, neurobiologists, educators and Web designers point to the same conclusion: When we go online, we enter an environment that promotes cursory reading, hurried and distracted thinking and superficial learning. It’s possible to think deeply while surfing the Net, just as it’s possible to think shallowly while reading a book, but that’s not the type of thinking that technology encourages and rewards. Carr 2011, pp115–16








and governance




xxx xxx

Conclusion

The key current challenges in e-learning remain as they were: we have issues with compliance and completion, with learner experience and with the tendency to favour economic efficiency over effectiveness. These current challenges should also be balanced with the excellent work that has been carried out in interactive design of user experience, which allows constant monitoring of that experience. We see smart technology as an enabler for this and we also see the current and future generations of webinar and virtual learning environments (VLEs) technology as helping to address these three issues.

There is no strict breakpoint between these current issues and the emerging three issues of mobile and smart device enabled learning, artificial intelligence, and gaming and simulation. They are here and present and their importance will grow in the future. The issue for L&TD is how we can develop our awareness and engagement with these key learning technologies and turn them into learning and development insight. The current approach of most organisations is to use e-learning as a method of cost reduction; we need to move towards a more transformational mindset, as BT and others have done. The benefits of such an approach will be a far better productivity pay-off.

The future of e-learning is upon us and L&TD will need to engage with many of the issues we outline. Many L&TD practitioners already understand the need to become more aware of the issues around e-learning, but as our survey indicates, this is still a very new agenda for many. It’s especially important that the L&TD community engages with these issues before a new wave of e-learning issues impacts the workplace. By building, blending and connecting, we can ensure that we have a sustainable approach to e-learning, one which harnesses its current value and ensures that it fits with existing L&TD provision and helps us to prepare for an exciting and challenging future.


References

ANDERSON, C. (2006) The long tail: how endless choice is creating unlimited demand. New York: Hyperion.

BERSIN, J. (2012) Game on: there are hundreds of ways to apply gaming to learning. Chief Learning Officer. Vol 11, No 2. p16.

CARR, N. (2011) The shallows: what the internet is doing to our brains. New York: Norton.

CHRISTIAN, B. (2010) The most human human: what talking with computers teaches us about what it means to be alive. New York: Doubleday.

CIPD. (2011) Focus on e-learning [online]. Survey report. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Available at http://www.cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/survey-reports/focus-e-learning.aspx [accessed 20 March 2012].

CIPD. (2012) Learning and talent development. Annual survey report. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Available from 26 April 2012 at http://www.cipd.co.uk/learningandtalentdevelopmentsurvey

CIPD. (forthcoming) Current challenges for e-learning. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Economist, 8 October 2011, Survey Personal Mobile Technology.

ETTINGER, A., HOLTON, V. and BLASS,E. (2006a) E-learner experiences: what is the future for e-learning? Industrial and Commercial Training. Vol 38, No 4. pp208–212.

ETTINGER, A., HOLTON, V. and BLASS,E. (2006b) E-learner experiences: key questions to ask when considering implementing e-learning. Industrial and Commercial Training. Vol 38, No 3. pp143–147.

GARAVAN, T.N., CARBERY, R., O’MALLEY, G. and O’DONNELL, D. (2010) Understanding participation in e-learning in organizations: a large scale study of employees. International Journal of Training and Development. Vol 14, No 3. pp155–168.

GEE, J.P. (2007) What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. London: MacMillan.

GREENFIELD, S. (2008) ID: the quest for identity in the 21st century. London: Sceptre.

HANSEN, J.M. and LEVIN, M.A. (2010) Retail e-learning assessment: motivation, location and prior experience. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management. Vol 38, No 10. pp789–805.

HERNANDEZ, A.B., GORJUP, M.T. and CASCON, R. (2010) The role of the instructor in business games: a comparison of face to face and online instruction. International Journal of Training and Development. Vol 14, No 3. pp169–179.

JOHNSON, S. (2006) Everything bad is good for you: how popular culture is making us smarter. London: Penguin.







and governance




xxx xxx








and governance




xxx xxx

JOHNSON, L., SMITH, R., WILLIS, H., LEVINE, A. and HAYWOOD, K. (2011) The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

LANIER, J. (2011) You are not a gadget: a manifesto. New York: Alfred Knopf.

MARTIN, G., REDDINGTON, M. and KNEAFSEY, M.B. (2009) Web 2.0 and human resource management: ‘groundswell’ or hype? London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

MCGONIGAL, J. (2011) Reality is broken: why games make us better and how they can change the world. London: Penguin.

MCKELVEY, W. (2001) Energising order creating networks of distributed intelligence: improving the corporate brain. International Journal of Innovation Management. Vol 5, No 2. pp181–213.

MCKINSEY. (2010) How businesses are using web 2.0. McKinsey Quarterly. June.

MCPHERSON, M. and NUNES, M. (2006) Organisational issues for e-learning: critical success factors as identified by HE practitioners. International Journal of Educational Management. Vol 20, No 7. pp542–558.

MORENO-GER, P., BURGOS, D. and TORRENTE, J. (2009) Digital games in e-learning environments. Simulation and Gaming. Vol 40, No 3. pp669–687.

NORMAN, N. (2011) Smartphones: a smart way forward for learning. Brighton: Epic.

OVERTON, L. (2011) Towards maturity: 2011 benchmark study with learning and development specialists from 600 organisations. London: Towards Maturity. Also available online at: http://www.towardsmaturity.org/2011benchmark [accessed 20 March 2012].

SQUIRE, K. D. (2008) Video game-based learning: an emerging paradigm for instruction. Performance Improvement Quarterly. Vol 21, No 2. pp7–36.


The CIPD wishes to thank the community of practitioners who consistently respond to our surveys for refreshing our data and giving us the scope for new insights and evidence. The data has been gathered from our surveys over the last two years and from deep engagement with practitioners and specialists in the field of e-learning. Further detail will appear in online case studies. We also wish to thank our research partner, Dr Emma Parry of Cranfield University, for a major literature review which put many of the issues in context, as well as our marketing team for developing a professional and polished document.

Acknowledgements







and governance




xxx xxx


Notes







and governance




xxx xxx

Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development151 The Broadway London SW19 1JQ Tel: 020 8612 6200 Fax: 020 8612 6201Email: [email protected] Website: cipd.co.uk

Incorporated by Royal Charter Registered charity no.1079797

Future-fit organisations is one of the three themes in our Sustainable Organisation Performance research programme. The other two themes are stewardship, leadership and governance and building HR capability. Within each of these themes we will research a range of topics and draw on a variety of perspectives to enable us to provide insight-led thought leadership that can be used to drive organisation performance for the long term.







and governance




xxx xxx







and governance




xxx xxx







and governance




xxx xxx







and governance




xxx xxx

Issu

ed:

Apr

il 20

12

Refe

renc

e: 5

708

© C

hart

ered

Inst

itute

of

Pers

onne

l and

Dev

elop

men

t 20

12

sustainable organisation performance sustainable ... - · pdf filesustainable organisation...

Documents