Technologies and components of an IGKT system (part 9)

1.1.1.1 On-line and Off-line use

Based on this there are additional technology beyond the web service that are needed. The first is a directory structure that will support the device checker and the rights assignment for users. The simple model for this would use groups within the directory to manage the security application. If you are in the off-line, some training group than all training authorized for your group would be available to you, and all authorized off-line training would be available. The reverse, the no off-line training group would have all training available to that group when on-line, but none that can be transferred.

1.1.1.2 PC/Tablet/Mobile Devices

The device checker application would reside with the web service on the server system. It would determine both the device being connected, the total available storage on the device (this would be set by the user creating a top utilization percentage say 95% of storage consumed) taking the percentage of usable storage and not exceeding that. IE if you are asking for 10 gig of training to be downloaded notify the user that they only have 5 gig available, and that based on the connection of the device the download would take 2 hours. (or 15 minutes or a week you get the idea). Finally, the device checker would also if needed create the secure container on the device consuming the training. This would allow all users to easily consume training that is public or openly available. But only those users with rights would get training that was secure. If the training was secure the device checker would manage the secure container for the training. The TTL of the certificate given the user could be determined based on a number of factors. When the TTL expires the user has to enter their password, or has to connect to the server system, enter their password etc. Depending upon the security requirements for the device and for the training.

1.1.1.2.1 Easy addition of new material:

During a course a user needs the ability to offer comments and offer new thoughts. Beyo9nd specific to a course there needs to be an easy uploading of linked and unlined content. Linked content would be a user podcast or vlog or blog focused on the content and information in a training course. Either nuisances or additional material. New would be something there isn’t currently a training module for or something that isn’t currently considered. This allows for parking lot ideas to being creating training content. Additionally, this allows for off-line interaction with brain storming sessions and feedback on new ideas and potential areas of organizational growth.

Often new materials such as the ones uploaded above have an incubation period and a review period. Users in this system would be able to select “known good sources” that would bypass the review period for specific users they have selected. This allows information to flow quickly throughout the system. It also allows the SME’s to see who is next up.

One of the things that I have always advocated is that SME’s have to be rotational. I’ve seen great community and KM systems that fail over time because the same people are doing the leadership jobs year after year. At some point, normally after a year, the been there done that experience is no longer valid. So rotational SME’s is a critical component with the DLM© system. If you spend more than a year in a SME role there has to be a uniqueness about that role that requires your presence. Otherwise, every SME in the system should be looking for the next SME! SME’s that stay too long in the role actually create a barrier that is hard to get around. They hoard information (that they share) but reject or exclude information that isn’t in the system they created.

Where in the past a SME was an information owner. We want in this system to move them to solution owner. That way if the information they have, doesn’t fix the problem or solve the issue they will seek new information related to the solution. It creates a more inclusive system for knowledge transfer.

1.1.1.3 Easily download new information, and suggested additions:

The next component that needs to be built is that of a comparison and interest connection. Part of this will come from the SME’s (people interested in cloud computing will be interested in Server less computing). Like the various on-line shops when you buy X, you get a message that says previous purchasers of X also bought A, D and F. The same true for our training system where the SME’s recommend A, and we watch trends to capture D, F and any others beyond that. This tool operates in the background tracking completed training (which the system captures anyway).

1.1.1.4 Integrating DLM© Libraries:

As we build out the information catalog or service catalog for IGKT we will need to integrate the components of the DLM©. This includes (but is not limited to):

· SME developed information

· Known good IP

· IGKT data store

· Known Good Solutions

· Know solution variations and other methods

· Templates and delivery vehicles for solutions

· How to media data

· Podcasts

· Formal and informal training

1.1.1.5 SME Developed Information

The reason we select SME’s (for 1-2 year terms no longer) is that they have knowledge (working and real world) of a solution. They have been there and done that. Why is that critical, when they create data they do so from the real world experience perspective. That means that they remain open to new ideas. If they stay in office too long, they lose that ability.

1.1.1.6 Known Good IP:

Known good IP is interesting. First off that we have to differentiate information in the first place. But there is the concept of a known good source and beyond that known good IP. When troubleshooting installed Microsoft server products on your own the best place to do your own research is TechNet. That, TechNet, is a known good source for fix data related to Microsoft products. In the case of TechNet, you connect your IGKT system to that source easily for users.

1.1.1.7 Leveraging an IGKT Store:

Over the past couple of years I have worked with a number of crowdfunding projects. The enthusiasm and desire to create something new is invigorating. The one thing that always seems to bite the campaigns (there are a few that don’t have this issue) is the reality of not understanding manufacturing. While the reality of manufacturing is never quite what we think it is, or for that matter what the salesperson tells us it is, we should learn. A component of the integration of the DLM© is the storage of IGKT information of the past. This can be a connection to a human being, if that person is still in the organization just now in a different role.

Building an inter–generational knowledge transfer system (part 9)

Web services: flexible and powerful but most importantly the overall technology view must be platform independent. If the solution is bound to a specific platform ultimately it will not provide the flexibility required for the solution.

The web service offered as part of the initial system must support the following:

· On-line and Off-line use

· PC/Table and Mobile use

· Easy upload of new materials

· Easy download of new materials

· Integration with the DLM© Libraries

· Integration with various feedback loops for class improvement, new classes

· Integration with the brainstorming system

· Integration with the parking lot system

Based on this there are additional technology beyond the web service that are needed. The first is a directory structure that will support the device checker and the rights assignment for users. The simple model for this would use groups within the directory to manage the security application. If you are in the off-line, some training group than all training authorized for your group would be available to you, and all authorized off-line training would be available. The reverse, the no off-line training group would have all training available to that group when on-line, but none that can be transferred.

The device checker application would reside with the web service on the server system. It would determine both the device being connected, the total available storage on the device (this would be set by the user creating a top utilization percentage say 95% of storage consumed) taking the percentage of usable storage and not exceeding that. IE if you are asking for 10 gig of training to be downloaded notify the user that they only have 5 gig available, and that based on the connection of the device the download would take 2 hours. (or 15 minutes or a week you get the idea). Finally, the device checker would also if needed create the secure container on the device consuming the training. This would allow all users to easily consume training that is public or openly available. But only those users with rights would get training that was secure. If the training was secure the device checker would manage the secure container for the training. The TTL of the certificate given the user could be determined based on a number of factors. When the TTL expires the user has to enter their password, or has to connect to the server system, enter their password etc. Depending upon the security requirements for the device and for the training.

During a course a user needs the ability to offer comments and offer new thoughts. Beyo9nd specific to a course there needs to be an easy uploading of linked and unlined content. Linked content would be a user podcast or vlog or blog focused on the content and information in a training course. Either nuisances or additional material. New would be something there isn’t currently a training module for or something that isn’t currently considered. This allows for parking lot ideas to being creating training content. Additionally, this allows for off-line interaction with brain storming sessions and feedback on new ideas and potential areas of organizational growth.

Often new materials such as the ones uploaded above have an incubation period and a review period. Users in this system would be able to select “known good sources” that would bypass the review period for specific users they have selected. This allows information to flow quickly throughout the system. It also allows the SME’s to see who is next up.

One of the things that I have always advocated is that SME’s have to be rotational. I’ve seen great community and KM systems that fail over time because the same people are doing the leadership jobs year after year. At some point, normally after a year, the been there done that experience is no longer valid. So rotational SME’s is a critical component with the DLM© system. If you spend more than a year in a SME role there has to be a uniqueness about that role that requires your presence. Otherwise, every SME in the system should be looking for the next SME!

.doc

Knowledge Management Geek

Building an inclusive training system (part 8)

In the information age, the time to produce training will decline. Why? It becomes more of a pulling tougher via a DLM© system the information needed. There are three distinct types of training that exist today and few others that are emerging.

· ILT – lecture

· Self-guided

· OJT – on the job

Mentors fit into both self-guided and ILT. The impact of mentoring though has to be measured on the larger scale of solving the problem rather than the smaller scale of content and delivery. ILT is measured today wholly on content and delivery. OJT is measured on the longer term solving the problem. There are professions today, that have for many years, required a significant OJT portion. People will say yes, plumbers, contractors and so on. But that actually is only part of that story. Social Workers, Doctors and Nurses all have significant pre-license practice before they are allowed to offer services outside of a managed environment. Those professions (and others) measure the ability of the student to solve the problem before they are called a practitioner.

Building feedback loops within the training system also has to include separation of roles and functions. Technical training focused on building technical skills fast may quickly overwhelm a non-technical person attempting to add or improve skills. Based on that their entry point (knowledge 1 say) was too low for the course. So pre- course knowledge assessments are important. First off because it helps you determine where the person ends up

Training

Learning starting point

Learning mid-point

Learner end point

Feedback loops

Introductory topic

0 or 1

1

2

Information met initial needs (yes/no)

Further guidance needed

Training focused on practitioners

4 or 5

5

6

Training met needs (yes/no)

Further guidance needed (mentor or additional training)

Experienced person training

7 or 8

8

9

Creative experts. Two -way training (capture information from experienced person as well as deliver)

Now the more experienced the users that are being trained the less reliance on direct user quality of training feedback. Experts or those with significant expertise tend to have the most negative views of the actual trainer. So you have to discount the 1’s and 2; s given the trainer based on the seniority of the people being trained.

imageWhen considering the feedback delivered in the loop itself we can create a loop within the feedback loop. This is where we take feedback and apply additional loops. Is the feedback applicable (I.e. senior people when trained tend to be more negative)? The other side of the feedback before considering rebuilding the training is the reality of actionable. Can we act on the feedback given for the training? That ability to act or not act also

determines the applicably of the feedback. Cutting edge technology training that receives a feedback of more hands on may not be feasible. But an existing system that has been in operation that gets the feedback more hands on training, is more applicable. This is a common system today although very few training teams would acknowledge this. The problem is the reality of actionable. Frankly, actionable often runs head on into the greatest blocker to organizational improvement there has ever been. That, is not the way we do things.

.doc

Trainer, dreamer, inventor of The Syncverse

Building a inclusive learning system (part 7). Truly evaluating the impact of training with OODA Loops.

One of the goals of this system, the combination of something presented before (The Syncverse), something built a number of times and the new additions I’ve picked is an end game of an inclusive learning system. Part of that is creating a training and knowledge system within the organization that provides inter-generational knowledge transfer. But also provides inclusive knowledge transfer and training. One of the key building blocks in all of this is John Boyd’s OODA Loops.

Observe, Orient, Decide and Act are the four primary components. Orientation for a learning system and a knowledge transfer system involves aligning the two viewpoints (or views as Software Architects say) of the existing problem and solutions. A critical component however is the extension of, and utilization of feedback loops within the overall learning system. If, training is delivered there has to be effective feedback of the training. That is gathered in two distinct ways, survey/discussion/follow-up with the training consumer. That is the right now class feedback.

There is however another impact that isn’t often evaluated that should be included. You see, if training fails (short term) we tend to either pull the class or the instructor. But, training like knowledge-transfer systems is complex.

imageTraining is created for a purpose. Otherwise we would spend all day every day documenting and building training for every idea we have. Beyond training there is the concept of delivery and the concept of content.

A great trainer can deal with poor content and still create an excellent short term delivery. But, we had a goal for that training. What was our goal? One of my very favorite adages is “When you are up to your neck in alligators, it’s hard to remember your original job was drain the swamp.” The goal of training is to introduce a solution to a problem. Teachers in schools deliver solutions to various problems (reading, writing, math and thinking). Using methods and models that are pretty the same for the past 500 or more years they help students move from I can’t read to, I read 300 words a second. The problem or goal of the initial teaching is help the student learn to read. We have exacting measures for that. It’s called state and national grade level tests. (students upon completing 3rd grade should be able to do this…).

Corporate or organizational training has the same types of goals, but we don’t measure the impact of the training in relation to the goal. We measure the content and the delivery. Going back to that adage I love, if the goal is the drain the swamp, properly identifying the alligator species isn’t relevant. Certainly an instructor that doesn’t inform the students of the impact of alligators when knee deep in a swamp has done a poor job of delivery, if there is still an un-drained swamp 3-6-9 months after the class they actually did a worse job. Assuming of Couse that draining the swamp was the ultimate goal of the training.

Itimage becomes a Yin and Yang problem. If the goal of the training is to stop, prevent or modify a behavior and our system only evaluates based on content deliver or content we are missing something. Evaluation on goals, I.e. did the swamp get drained is as important as the two currently assessed content and delivery. The risk here, bad deliveries will reduce the impact of the content and the completion of the goal. But, even bad deliveries sometimes solve the problem.

Creating a feedback loop for training that includes evaluation of achievement of goals, as well as content and delivery then becomes critical. Training today is often delivered in a reactive mode. It takes months to develop and focuses on solving a single problem. This means the impact of the training is lessened by the rigidity of the training system.

.doc

John Boyd Fan

Design components of a learning system (Part 6_)

First thing is a landing page. Landing pages are different now than they were and this one encompasses a lot of internal and externally available information. So the first part is the landing page has to be mobile friendly in both forms of mobile friendly.

·       Don’t assume a high bandwidth connection

·       Offer the ability to buffer connections (I.e. load multiple trainings off-line while in high-bandwidth areas)

1.1.1.1      Building the device checker:

The first thing we have to do then is verify the device. There is training that our organization doesn’t want on mobile devices. The reality of mobile devices is they are convenient. The other reality is they are frankly easily stolen. While we can remotely wipe our training container it still offers risk, in that cellular chips can be removed or disabled. That means our training container itself has to have a TTL so that the information in the training isn’t at risk if the device is at risk. This gives us our initial matrix of the device and the risk to the organization. The lowest risk is a secured desktop in the facility. Given a user requesting off-line training on an internal desktop system it provides least risk and can be quickly authorized. The next is a laptop (hopefully encrypted) that the user can take out of the facility with them. Lower risk than the user consuming the training on a mobile device but higher risk than the user

imageusing the company provided desktop. This gives rise to the next category of training provision that will will discuss separately. The next is a high risk device. This is a mobile device such as a tablet or cellular phone. They are higher risk than the laptop or desktop.

Finally we have the unusable device.e This is the first check although the last category. If the training request assets not available on the requesting device notify the user right away that the device isn’t supported. While this is a rare issue, it would apply to classes or training that include direct technology instruction not supported by tables or other mobile devices.

This initial device checker than leads us to the other side of risk. Sometimes risk is a good thing because it opens the door to reward. The risk of the training is initial checked device specific. The secondary risk is what is the cost if the training isn’t provided. This results in a more formalized risk assessment process that has to be completed. The automation of this initial assessment isn’t something huge, but should be part of the device checker application.

ID Risk

Exposure

Cost

Impact

Accept/Decline

Mitigation

Contingency

Executive heading off to an event will be speaking about organizations “new” offerings. Needs new offering (competitive advantage) training on mobile device

High

High

High

Accept

Place training in a TTL container on the Execs mobile device.

Rely on WIFI of facility where exec is attending event and stream live new product training.

User is going on vacation to a known problem country and wants to take training on mobile device

High

High

High

Decline

User is informed of risk and is offered non-business risk training

User provides business case for training risk that exceeds potential loss, decision is reversed.

.doc

Creator The Edison Scale

Building an inclusive learning system (Part 5)

Virtual training allows a number of additions to a training process. First off there are a number of virtual training systems. The US Smithsonian Museum has created a model that you can find here http://3d.si.edu/apollo11cm/ of the Apollo 11 space capsule. This interactive 3d model allows you to wander around the Apollo 11 capsule. Another project in this area is one using the Minecraft engine from Microsoft. It is called MindRising and focused on the digital story telling. In particular, a very effective retelling of the history of Ireland.

Just these two show the amazing abilities and capabilities of Virtual training. There are many more, within the Oculus store today there are several additional Virtual Reality training systems. You can place someone in the position of immersed training. You are as a training organization no longer bound to web sites and books. You are not bound to video presentations that are in front of the user. You have a 360-degree world to build training in.

Imagine, for a moment being inside the Apollo 11 capsule. Or for that matter servicing a dishwasher. With VR you can experience this directly. You can familiarize yourself with the sharp edges and metal pieces that will grab you and tear your shirt, or worse provide you with a nice cut and a chance to visit the emergency room for stitches.

VR also does other interesting things for training. One of the training systems that I see having significant value from VR is that of Virtual Immersion© originally shared on the CloudTweaks blog. Virtual Immersion© allows you to actually add additional components that are specific to what you are training for. The example would be back to that dishwasher. We would have the person training actually inside a space the size of a corner of a kitchen and the projection would be into an even smaller space. The cramped, warm and uncomfortable feeling would help the person later as they sit in your kitchen repairing your dishwasher. The same is true for repairing cars, or for repairing people. Smells and sensations could be added to allow the trainee to experience the actual feeling of complete ling the process. A fully immersive training experience.

As VR training catches on, expands and becomes de rigor there are many additional areas where VR adds value. Anything that can only be done once, should be practiced in a VR setting first. Anything that requires risk for a human being would be practiced in VR mode many times first.

But the other change will be the actual academy for training. With VR you can expand the capabilities and delivery abilities of the learning system. You can create virtual rooms, deliver virtual training with people interacting all around the world. ILT can become Instructor Led Virtual training allowing the effective development and delivery of global training, without having to pay for travel and other expenses.

I envision a virtual school within any training site. Where you can go and attend any class. If you arrive after the class started, you can quickly catch up by reviewing the recorded classes and within 1, 2 days actually join the live class. It changes not only how we store and manage training but opens doors to allow people to train at their pace.

VR is to training and the computer is to the world we live in now. It is a game changer. One that will continue to expand the capabilities of the training organization within your organization. Virtual Immersion© adds the ability to train people in core functions that are risky or exacting multiple times before they actually go out into the field and deliver it. VR and Virtual Immersive© training allows the organization to have virtual classrooms that allow students to work through the class at their own speed. If they learn best watching after the fact they can do so. If they are most comfortable in an ILT format, they can interact live with the instructor. Virtual Immersive© allows you to build a training system that recreates the environment and delivery mode for the solutions your organization trains on.

It is to steal a line from the song, a future so bright you have to wear VR Goggles (no sunglasses required, except VR Goggles are well effectively sun glasses).

.doc

Virtual Reality dreamer

Building a learning system (part 4)

The first thing to note in building an inclusive learning system is the need to span all learning styles. Traditionally the focus of learning systems has been two modes, off-line (user driven) or Instructor led. Many companies have built massive IP libraries of Video and Audio to give self-guided students something to do. The rest they pile into instructor led classes.

What is the problem with that? Well the first one is designing a system that supports the user being able to take training off-line. So we need a device checker. As we build the system we have to build into the system a device checker. One because some types of training have hands on labs. Some types of training have competitive advantage information in them, so the type of device they can be viewed on has to be controlled. Finally, some types of training end up being huge and so transferring them to a mobile device isn’t the best idea.

1. Device checker. A tool that validates the user (are you allowed to view the training? Are you allowed to view the training off-line? Are you authorized to have the training on a mobile device?) The three being increasing risk for the organization, but also greatest reward in the more training that can be pushed to more users at all three levels.

2. Central web site (mobile friendly) for the training system. One of the things we talked about early in this process was brain storming meetings. This is where they live. Right here in the learning system. But the web site has to be inclusive of this process. Not lip service to mobile workers but actual support for mobile and remote users. The web site must be of simple design so that it loads easily on a mobile device. It needs to have support for persistent chat built it into the system so that braining storming can be ongoing. Parking lot meetings should also be managed out of this system as well. Finally, the site needs to have categories of learning available easily placed so the users can find what they are looking for how they need it delivered.

So the initial pieces to be built are the device checker and the site itself. The system, once I was introduced to the first component many years ago has been built for 4 different customers. The areas that most organizations need to start in are different than building the web site. The first project has to be creating a roadmap for learning. The value of the site, is greater if it is built around a roadmap. The roadmap being a way I can get from where I am to where I want to be. The roadmap itself should be broken into categories that fit learning systems within the organization.

· On-line learning: podcasts, videos and whitepapers available for users to consume. This would include ILT (Instructor led training) that has been previously recorded.

· ILT (adding live) instructor led live training. This can be handed in three ways. The first is the alignment of the recorded ILT, with an ongoing session of live interacting. The various talks by the instructor are captured, and an instructor kicks off the class and monitors the discussion of the class members. The next would be the academy style where the class kicks off with a meeting and then discuses and works on the problems. Finally, you have the VILT, which has no direct class meetings but off-line email or persistent chat based interaction.

· DLM© search for organizational standards. Companies and organizations do things a certain way. Knowing that way is very important. SME’s can also build mini-sites where unsolved problems are presented (Brainstorm session) and answers are captured and tested. Finally known good answers are provided for known problems. Of course the other side of this is the concept of getting napkin ideas (this is possible) into the system as quickly as possible.

· Off-line learning- the ability to take the information you need training on off-line. Part of this will be managed – your device cannot use this training off-line please connect your company laptop as you need 4 gig of space for this training. Or, you shouldn’t consume this training on a mobile device due to organizational risk.

.doc

Knowledge isn’t something to keep to yourself.