Hello all,

We are a learning organization that provides instruction to architects and engineers on how to use complex CAD software. Like most organizations, we have several different types of training to adress our client's needs.

Feature based open enrollment - The majority of our training (60%) is standard open enrollment training that follows a preset curriculum. The curriculum is primarily based on teaching how to use the features that are available in a given software package. Because we instruct numerous different types of people (architects, civil engineers or mechanical engineers) at the same time on how to use the software, we must keep it generic and at the software feature level. We don't have time to allow each group to go off on their own tangent in order to apply the generics to their specific needs.

Customized process based - This type of training is devoted to a single organization and more importantly to a specific group of individuals with common learning needs (training that is customized to their work process). For custom process based training we develop a curriculum that is specific to their unique needs and carry the customization down to their in-house processes and procedures. We also customize the software to their unique needs and then develop training around this customized software and the way that they should use the software in their normal business processes.

I am looking for a report that shows the benefits of the custom process based training over the generic feature based training. Has anyone seen a ROI that justifies the effort and expense associated with developing the custom training vs. the generic training?

We all "know" that providing the customized training is better than the generic training. It would seem to be common sense that a group of people would learn and retain more if the training was developed specifically for their unique needs, yet how do we go about proving that? Is there a report or study that can associate a given performance increase for customized training over generic training? Perhaps something that I can build a ROI around in order to assist our sales people to better educate our clients and justify our custom training services?

I look forward to your feedback and most importantly to any reports or studies that can substantiate the benefits of customized training over generic training.

Thanks,

Rick

Food for thought -- Compare these objectives...

Using the Print command (feature based)

Printing a document (specific task)

now these...

Using the Loan Analyzer (feature based)

Comparing and selecting loan products for a customer (specific task)

Instead of worrying about generic vs. customized, I would first try tweaking the feature-based training so that it is task oriented. That will allow learners to customize it on the fly during class -- for example, they can "tune out" of tasks that are irrelevant to them. NOBODY walks out of any of those classes remembering everything anyway.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: ASTD ADMIN,

Rhetorical question ... To whom do you need to prove that you - the experts in adult learning - know how to best deliver adult learning?

Any tome, journal or article on instructional design, active learning, accelerated learning, adult learning will support the fact that learning should be learner focused. Where have you looked?

Thank you again LoveLearning for your input. We don't have to prove that we know how best to provide adult learning.

We are a corporation that sells training services to architects and engineers. My charter is to grow our business and to find new ways to do so. We have locked down the open enrollment type of training business. We need to increase our custom training business, because along with that revenue comes additonal services that further drive additional revenue.

In order to sell these services to our clients we use a ROI calculator that I built and several other selling tools. In addition to this tool I would like to find an unbiased study that compares the benefits of customized training to generic training. I'm not looking to pull from multiple resources; however, I will if it comes down to it.

I have searched the internet, ASTD archives, Brandon Hall, The British Institute of IT training, Peter Honey, and practically anywhere that I could locate via the internet. I am now turning to the forums here to see what anyone has possible found.

Why narrow your search to only the internet - particularly if you want valid proof of something? (rhetorical question)

I'm afraid I don't quite understand the limitation. Authors to investigate -- Knowles, Meier, Senge... you can probably find some excerpts on the internet, but again - you're limiting yourself by doing so.