For the past few months, a multi-faceted debate has been growing in the L&D industry, particularly amongst proponents of the hottest topic in our industry: social learning. Some of the debate concerns the definition of what a Learning Management System (LMS) is today, what it could be, what it should be, and where LMSes can and should fit into the broader architecture of enterprise systems. First there were some provocative blog postings, including but not limited to:
- "What is the Future of the LMS?" by Jane Hart
- "LMS is No Longer the Centre of the Universe" by Harold Jarche
- "A Transition Path to the Future" by Jane Hart
- "Identifying a Collaboration Platform" by Harold Jarche
- "A Case for the LMS?" by Clark Quinn
Then the topic of “LMS – Lessons Learned” was the subject of one of the weekly 90-minute "chats" on Twitter (these go by the name #lrnchat, pronounced "learn-chat.”) This involved a healthy but at times frustrating discussion, with many people sharing their negative experiences with current or past LMSes, but also including David Wilkins of Learn.com, myself, and a few others who provided some balance to the discussion.
Then, a few days later, and after some side email exchanges by some of the lrnchat participants, Wilkins wrote a lengthy blog posting titled, "A Defense of the LMS (and a Case for the Future of Social Learning)." In this posting, Wilkins not only displays his deep understanding of the LMS market, but provides a compelling list of features that "current versions of industry-leading LMS solutions" provide -- including varied Web 2.0 / social learning features. Mentioned as examples in his short list of such LMSes were Learn.com, Saba, Cornerstone OnDemand, and Element K’s KnowledgeHub. His posting is a fun read, and should be very educational even for industry veterans.
Wilkins' blog post generated many great comments, both pro and con his viewpoint, and I chimed in a few times with some thoughts of my own. But the debate didn't end there, as the weeks that have followed have seen numerous responses to Wilkins and additional posts on this topic, including but not limited to:
- "When to LMS" by Clark Quinn.
- "Standalone LMS is Still Dead (Rebutting & Agreeing w/Dave Wilkins)" by Dan Pontefract.
And then David Mallon from Bersin & Associates further chimed in, linking as I am here to many of the posts in this ongoing debate, and providing some of his own perspectives along the way.
At Element K, our KnowledgeHub LMS has for nearly two years now provided customers with a set of Web 2.0 tools -- such as blogs, forums, and wikis -- integrated into the rest of the platform in some deep and compelling ways (e.g., search results span across both traditional formal learning content and the social learning components that the learner has access to.) For more on these features of our learning solution offerings, see our Collaboration information site. And see also the whitepaper I wrote on Blending Web 2.0 Technologies with Traditional Formal Learning.
In an industry as diverse and complicated as the L&D industry is, no one can predict with certainty what will happen in the future. Nor would anyone in this debate argue that one single solution is best for all organizations or all circumstances. What I can say with certainty is that I find the very fact that we, as an industry, are having this debate at all demonstrates the passion we all feel for providing the best learning and development solutions we can. I strongly encourage all learning leaders to read the above blog postings (fun beach reading this summer?), to stay current on this important topic. At the very least, I suggest that you read Wilkins' excellent posting and the comments and responses to it.
— Thomas Stone (Tom_Stone@elementk.com and on Twitter @ThomasStone)
Comments