“Whoa….Mon…maybe it should be.” But then I ask myself – “Self, is that a knee-jerk reaction I alone hold as truth? I think any training organization needs to assess whether it is indeed a knee-jerk or a reality startle moment.
The title of this post was a response I witnessed in a meeting not too long ago where the video editing gurus on my team offered to help some of the instructional designers with some very “lite” editing required as part of an e-learning development effort. The response seemed a contradiction to me. It seems that video editing in any form was not within scope for hybrid ISD/developer types. This observation is not a reflection on the contribution the ISD team contributed; rather, it provokes a question specific to the evolution of how training assets are developed…and by whom. I heard a phrase at a Masie Consortium Regional Meeting that – “A picture is worth a thousand words…and a video is worth a thousand pictures!” Learning assets are radically shifting from read-to-learn to view-to-learn, also heard from Elliott at this same meeting. If this shift…if this exponential growth of video in support of learning is THAT real, I have to ask …
Would it be a reasonable expectation that an instructional designer/developer role would encompass at least minimally competent basic editing skills?
I realize there are purists on both side of the issue of producing quality in video output, both with valid points of view. My video team was a perfect example. Being Jedi video warriors, they would begin to vibrate when asked to consider the viability of amateur video captured on flip phones and cheesy $100 or so video cams, ultimately producing consumable, user-generated content. These are the guys who watch YouTube and just shake their heads…not at the content…but at the quality. Then there are the McCoys…the camp that finds a way to live with “good enough” being just that…good enough. With millions of views a day on YouTube, and company-centric sites popping up daily, that “just-good-enough-is-good-enough” camp is growing pretty rapidly.
Does that bode well for training’s future?
I think this is a question we need to answer to ensure there is a balance among video quality, deliverability, editability, prudent re-useability, accessibility, deliverability, etc. When we overlay the domain of video consumers who are disguised as learners in the workforce, we find them up to their hocks in their work context. That means they are in their respective workflows, some may even contront moments of learning need, and some face a level of urgency and risk that could be mitigated with the right learning asset(s). I am convinced “training” has a responsbility to be in this space, and being there disrepects most training paradigms we all know and love. Learning assets become non-linear, smaller, and very targeted to work-centric tasks. Not all learning assets…just those that are designed to help the workforce DO something flawlessly.
Enter Video: The New Participant Guide. If video is in fact going to play a greater role, how do we as training professional harness the power? What controls, what governance governs, what manages of video assets, what delivery technology is best fit?
How do we ensure learning is effective, timely, work context-friendly, compelling, and readily accessible from/to an array of end-user devices? Oh yes…and from any place at any time.
If we are not examining these variables, I question if we are getting the bang for our buck from the use of video…or worse…missing the opportunity to integrate video to put some performance bang in our training buck.
I think we have some video readiness questions that need answers before we can determine what…if anything…we need to do differently…stop altogether…or start doing with great haste – with a chaser of due diligence.
- How are you handling video production in your world?
- How is video being used in your world?
- Who is capturing/creating it?
- What is being used as your capture tool(s)?
- If you can edit the end-product, what do you use to accomplish the editing effort?
- Where is video content archived? Who manages the “vault”?
- Who develops the taxonomy for archived content? Who is the “enforcer”? Who is the jailer/executioner for scoff-laws?
- How is ownership managed? Link integrity? Currency? Shelf-life?
- What is the delivery engine(s) behind making video assess accessible…or pushing…streaming…to the end-users?
- Who is monitoring innovation?
You may be able to think of others, but these come to mind as I re-live the recent past. Any additional ideas? Any random thoughts, or rants you’d like to riff on, feel free!
Take good care!
Learning & Performance Solutions Strategist