This is a slight revamp of a post I did a couple of years ago on a different blog. I’ve seen interest in LMS adoption by associations grow in the meantime, but I still see relatively little attention given to use cases.
***
I recently received a regular e-mail update from one of the corporate e-learning research firms, with the subject line “Are all of these LMS reps really telling the truth?” The premise was that organizations often purchase learning management systems based on claims made by the sales representative about particular online learning features or functionalities only to discover that the finalized product does not really work in quite the way expected. In an effort to sell one of its recent reports, the research firm suggests that the issue is not really one of sales representatives telling the truth, but rather of differences in how LMS companies approach fulfillment of specific feature requests. In its review of more than 200 features across dozens of learning management systems, the firm assigns one of six classifications to each feature reviewed:
- Automatic: Built-in, out-of-the-box functionality that can be simply switched on and ready to be used.
- Semi-automatic: The feature is mostly available in the system but requires some programming and/or customization to activate.
- Semi-custom: This feature is partially available in the system and can be adapted through some moderate custom program.
- Custom: This feature is not available in the current system but can somewhat easily be added through custom programming services at the time of implementation.
- NA; not a current feature: This feature is not available in the current release of the software.
- Third-party add-on: This feature can be added upon implementation using third-party software.
This list of categories is followed with the impressive claim “The result is that you know exactly what you’re getting when selecting a learning management system.” In a word: nonsense.