quote:

Maybe so few compaines have seen good ID/delivery, they do not know it exists.

I think this is true in a lot of instances. There was a big debate a few years ago among the "big name" leaders in the training and development industry about whether ISD provided value or whether it was an obstacle to getting the job done. I can't remember what issue, but T & D magazine did an interesting article on it. My general impression after reading the various comments was that ISD may very well be on its way out. However, hasn't happened.

I have to agree that some instructional designers - some, not all - do get in the way of doing the job because they are so mired down in minutia it would take years to get one single course out. Then there are others who get hired as ISD consultants for big bucks and can't write a performance objective! Yet the organization keeps right on paying the big bucks and eventually hires them full time. Anyway, there is some evidence out there that organizations just don't know what good design is - unfortunately.

It's a murky field. There is so much variability in skills/knowledge/experience of people who call themselves instructional designers. That is a real obstacle to those who truly are talented in the field and do exceptional work. Organiations don't seem to know the difference - and therefore don't appreciate the difference. The title "instructional designer" really means nothing in particular. A hiring manager, not knowing how to evaluate a candidate, often hires the wrong person - and/or agrees to pay them the same salary as a good instructional designer makes.

So, that leads to the question, what does "instructional designer" mean? Why do people call themselves instructional designers when they don't know how to design learning events?

I still can't think of a way around some kind of certification or degree requirement. But it's certainly not a perfect solution - I understand the down side of it too. What are some ideas others have about how to educate organizations so they hire the right people at the right salary? How do credible instructional designers distinguish themselves from John Doe who knows next to nothing?

quote:

Originally posted by KaliKo:

quote:

Maybe so few compaines have seen good ID/delivery, they do not know it exists.

So, that leads to the question, what does "instructional designer" mean? Why do people call themselves instructional designers when they don't know how to design learning events?

Tha's why I asked on another thread what terms people liked. ASTD likes "workplace learning and performance professional" and calls the field WLP. At least that's what I'm getting.

One problem with "ID" and "training" is that those are often not the best "interventions". Coaching, OJT and other solutions are often better.

I think people call themselves Instructional Designers because 1) all instruction (and indeed, all performance interventions) need some sort of design; and 2) Instructional Designer sounds like someone who deserves a lot of money.

Back to the initial topic, though, I think another aspect is that some (many? most?) organizations have ideas about what they want in training. If a good designer comes by with something that is faster, cheaper, better or even different, they want no part of it. Yes, I've had that experience. The inexperienced IDs may be "worth more" to the organization because they may be more willing to toe the line. Maybe.

Oh, the ISD debate goes on. That's why I use "ID", to be more general.

quote:

One problem with "ID" and "training" is that those are often not the best "interventions". Coaching, OJT and other solutions are often better.

I prefer performance consultant or learning consultant, but nobody seems to know what the heck that means either. LOL.

...didn't I say I was going to go enjoy my weekend?... :-)

And no offense to anyone who is certified, but there is no piece of paper from any organization or school that proves one is a good [fill in the blank]. I know plenty of certified this and certified that who have no critical thinking skills (for example). It's one thing to be able to pass all the tests, etc. set by a particular institution, it's another to actually know when and how to apply the knowledge and skill.

quote:

Originally posted by Fanatic Facilitator:

I prefer performance consultant or learning consultant, but nobody seems to know what the heck that means either. LOL.

I got 'em both covered. I use "Learning and Performance Consultant".

quote:

I know plenty of certified this and certified that who have no critical thinking skills (for example). It's one thing to be able to pass all the tests, etc. set by a particular institution, it's another to actually know when and how to apply the knowledge and skill.

Me, too! Time will tell if it helps bring in clients...

quote:

ASTD likes "workplace learning and performance professional" and calls the field WLP. At least that's what I'm getting.

Well, that's part of the problem I think. ASTD is constantly reinventing new terminology for just about everything. There's really no other explanation for this termoil over what to call ourselves. How on earth can organizations and especially people outside the field be expected to know what to call us - or what to do with us? It's impossible. Does a hiring manager know the difference, or even if there is a difference, between a trainer, a facilitator, a workplace learning consultant, a performance consultant, an instructional designer, a learning technology specialist, a human performance technologist, an e-learning designer, a coach, etc.? No, they don't in most cases. And even if they did, would they know how to evaluate the level of expertise? I doubt it. What other profession has so many possible titles to call themselves? A lawyer is a lawyer; a psychologist, a psychologist; an engineer, an engineer; an architect, an architect, an accountant, an accountant, a nurse, a nurse, etc. It's simple. There's no outside industry group constantly changing their titles.