Many AI chatbot platforms are designed to simulate human relationships and are marketed as companions or experts. The APA urges for safeguards to mitigate harm because 1) adolescents are less likely to question the accuracy and intent of the chatbot and 2) adolescents’ relationship with AI may displace or interfere with development of healthy, real-world relationships. The APA recommends:
Prioritizing the development of features that prevent exploitation, manipulation, and erosion of real-world relationships. For example, providing regular reminders that they are interacting with a bot or offering resources and suggestions to encourage human interactions.
Developing regulations to ensure that AI systems designed for adolescents protect mental and emotional health.
Parents, caregivers, and educators should discuss AI literacy with adolescents through programs that a) explain that not all AI-generated content is accurate, b) discuss the intent of some AI bots, and c) educate about indicators of misinformation.
AI for adults should differ from AI for adolescents
Adolescents are a particularly vulnerable group and as such AI programs designed for adolescents should be stringent. The APA recommends:
Age appropriate defaults
Transparency and explainability
Reduced persuasive design
Human oversight and support
Rigorous testing
Encourage uses of AI that can promote healthy development
AI can assist in brainstorming, creating, organizing, summarizing, and synthesizing information (3). Additionally, AI can provide scaffolding and personalized feedback (4). All of these features can enhance learning and development when used appropriately. That is, when AI is encouraging further elaboration and exploration of a topic, rather than short cutting it.
“To maximize AI’s benefits, students should actively question and challenge AI-generated content and use AI tools to supplement rather than replace existing strategies and pedagogical approaches.” (1)
As I’ve written about before, I have many doubts and criticisms of the whole-sale adoption of AI. One of the aspects that I am most concerned about is the potential to bypass meaningful and beneficial challenge. For example, when I discuss note-taking strategies with students I highlight that even the decision about what to take notes over is one of the first steps in an active learning process. Having AI generate a summary of notes deprives you of that initial learning opportunity. However, there are real-world time constraints and use cases that may mean that it’s less important for you to have that initial learning opportunity. I’m in favor of the APA’s guidelines here because they call for having a conversation about the pros and cons so that educators and learners can make that choice for themselves, rather than assuming that it’s either all “good” or all “bad”.
Limit access to and engagement with harmful and inaccurate content
Exposure to harmful content is associated with a number of poor mental health outcomes, like anxiety and depression. The APA recommends:
Developing robots protections for AI systems used by adolescents. This includes protections against content that is inappropriate, dangerous, illegal, biased and/or discriminatory, or may trigger similar behavior among vulnerable youth.
User reporting and feedback systems to customize content restrictions
Educational resources to help adolescents and caregivers recogize and avoid harmful content
Collaboration with mental health professionals, educators, and psychologists
Accuracy of health information is especially important
Adolescents often seek out health information online (5) and misinformation, or incomplete information, can lead to harmful behaviors and misdiagnosis among other negative outcomes. The APA recommends:
AI systems that provide health information should ensure the accuracy of the information and/or provide explicit and repeated warnings that there may be inaccuracies.
AI systems should provide clear and prominent disclaimers that AI-generated information is a not a replacement or substitute for professional health advice.
AI systems should provide resources and reminders to contact an educator, school counselor, pedatrician, or other approrpiate expert of authority to seek real-world help
Parents, caregivers, and educators should remind adolescents that health information provided by AI may not be accurate and may potentially be harmful.
I want to note that these recommendations come after APA met with the Federal Trade Commission to discuss the impersonation of mental health professionals by chatbots in February 2025. There are at least two lawsuits against an AI company after teenagers interacted with AI chatbots claiming to be licensed therapists. One of the cases tragically ended in suicide after prolonged interaction with the chatbot.
Who is leading the pack? Who is setting themselves apart here in the mid-year?
Are they an LMS? LMS/LXP? Talent Development System? Mentoring? Learning Platform?
Something else?
Are they solely customer training/education, mentoring, or coaching? Are they focused only on employees? Are they an amalgamation of all or some?
Well, they cut across the board – hence, they slide under the “Learning Systems” umbrella, which is under the bigger umbrella term – “Learning Technology.”
Speaking of cuts, I’ve had the wonderful experience of stitches in my hand.
Your top five injury picks are missing if you haven’t had this fun opportunity.
Who doesn’t love top picks?
To my friends in England, name me the top five kings who were found buried under a car park.
If Richard III isn’t your top pick, the Richard III organization (hey, they have an American branch—who knew?) wants to talk to you.
How I went about the top picks
This is where it all falls into place.
Think of this as a potential precursor to the end-of-the-year Awards.
I say this only because the front-runners are here.
Granted, because it is mid-year, there are usually surprises for the end of the year, simply because system X could be here, and then zing, do a few items, and get there—i.e., the top 10 for the end of 2025.
It’s happened every year since the awards started back in 2016.
Part of this, excluding what I noted before, is that a vendor could be here now, then fumble or freeze, if you will, and fall back.
Interestingly enough, I see this way too often.
The post isn’t an in-depth analysis; that is, for the end-of-the-year awards. Instead, it starts with an overall grouping and zing; we move on.
AI factor?
Depending on the target audience, part of the challenge is that vendors across the board ignore the statement of fake or false information when having learners tap into the search box, if you will, and write in a statement or question.
I continue to be baffled by why vendors seem belligerent when it comes to this information, which is the biggest issue in any LLM and, therefore, any Gen AI, which today is listed as AI.
The idea that people know this is false.
The idea that it won’t make an impact really irks me.
Let me know your takeaway when someone is doing safety, regulatory, compliance, or even product training, and when it presents false information, the learner thinks it is real.
Real consequences.
I like a few of the five systems, but one in particular lacks this. Even though “nobody has this” is accurate, the output cannot be guaranteed to achieve such.
Why isn’t X listed?
There are always variables in play here. One vendor (name withheld) wanted me to sign an MDNA with a statement that said, among other things, I could not criticize the company (i.e., the system).
The reason for the non-sign was only around the company – i.e., the system.
Plus, if you are saying, “Well, Analyst A says this, and you say that,” why is that? I have no idea about their methodology; analysts look or should look based on various parameters.
Finally, sites such as G2, Trust Radius, and similar ilk heavily utilize customer feedback.
The problem is that many others and I get an email asking for a review of system Y when we have never used it. If I leave a review, I get a gift card, assuming it’s positive.
The list (in no particular order, sans the category)
Here is a slight change to help everyone.
Categories: L&D-specific, Combo (L&D and Training, think internal/external audiences), and Customer Training/Education (this means customer education, which some vendors use to mean the same as customer training).
Vendors that slide under this category, 90% plus their client base, are customers/partners/distributors/B2B/associations. Heck, a few will do B2C.
Again, it is worth mentioning that the majority of systems today are combos, even ones that promote talent development as a system—which screams L&D!!! Oh, and HR or Training for employees only.
Customer Training (aka as customer education, aka as extended enterprise – a legacy term)
Eurekos is the only vendor on the list that bills invoices monthly. Thus, you are not being forced to pay upfront – or billed upfront – the standard in the industry—100% customer training/client/partner/associations audience.
Thought Industries – Customer-heavy focused, starting to enter L&D, but the customer is the core.
Absorb LMS—You get it all, Including Together, a top-tier mentoring platform that is a top pick on the mentoring side if you go standalone.
They are a Combo here—employees, customers, associations, government, well, you get the idea. You can also buy Together by Absorb as a standalone platform.
NetExam – Customer training driven. AI capabilities. One I have seen with other systems, the other? Intrigued me.
HALIGHT—Their main area is consumer electronics, which is very niche; they also note their other industries, but this isn’t one system for all verticals—again, I like that.
The snippet’s capability on their learner side blew me away. I haven’t seen that before, which is one reason I went HOLY MOLY—that is brilliant.
LearnUpon – They easily are a Combo system, but they do damage on the customer side and association segments – and their audiences are heavy on that side.
Docebo – Pushes the narrative as customer learning, even though they do have plenty of clients on the employee side only.
Combo system, but higher audience for customer training/education (EE and now something called customer learning, which is training someone, but I digress). Docebo was #3 in 2024, and thus I continue to wait for the big MIC drop feature or functionality in 2025.
Combo (Customer and Employee)
I mentioned a few above, even though they slide more on the customer piece.
D2L—I just think they have a rocking system. It was customer-focused at one point, but now they are doing well in the employee-focused piece, too. Thus, customer training and internal L&D.
Quick note: A company can provide training for their employees (internal) but also offer/provide training for an external audience on the same platform.
These folks would be combo themselves.
L&D, Training, HR, too
Plenty of vendors are targeting HR folks, and these systems are not limited to Talent Development-only platforms or L&D. Anyway, for category sake, I posted them here.
Learn Amp is the #1 Learning System for 2024. They still rock. They are noted as an employee development platform, which is the same, at least to me, as a talent development platform.
BizLMS plus BizSkills—L&D core to the bone for now. I love this system—affordable but robust. It’s great for SMBs and Enterprises. For folks who still believe Percepio by Skillsoft is the answer or LinkedIn Learning, move to BizLMS—you will thank me later. Oh, and it’s a talent development platform to boot.
Cornerstone Learn is an impressive suite of products in one package—an okay suite. It was the #2 vendor in 2024 and has only pushed forward, especially with AI. Learn comes with an immersive learning solution with legit immersive authoring, not a person talking to an avatar.
For mentoring, it is built into the system – another plus.
There is a large enterprise feel here. They can do mid-market and enterprise work, too. There is a Talent Development angle here, even though they have clients that are internal only or external only. I’d consider a buy if your clients are internal only OR a combo internal/external.
NovoEd Learn+, Practice+, and Mentor+—Buy Learn, and you get the other two products, too. Suite city, that is sweet (hey, made a funny).
Practice+ isn’t just about tech skills; it also covers business skills, employee development, and sales training.
Mentor+ is their mentoring platform—it just rolled out and will be a player by the end of 26. You can buy Mentor+ as a standalone, which is why it is also under Mentoring Platforms.
The days of knowledge management systems have constantly reminded me of stodgy, so I’m seeing a new approach, vibe, and, honestly, something that makes 100% sense, especially for frontline workers.
It rolls out later in July. I placed them here because they are going to surprise a lot of folks. System worthy of a top pick.
360Learning – I refuse to calll them an LXP, because that limits them, in so many ways.
This is an LMS/LXP, which, honestly, pretty much everyone is these days; they just do not include it in their marketing angle.
The system has a lot of potential, which I know people are going to say, “Duh.” I’d argue that somewhere along the way, they lost their way.
I like now where they are heading.
I have high expectations for them now, especially with their L&D AI prompt management capability and improved skills-based mechanism.
Digital Chalk—Another vendor that lost its way for a few years is now putting the resources into its system and overhauling it to match.
Combo true and through, but they are the first vendor in my experience to have an affiliate marketing capability for clients using the system for customer training/customer education/aka extended enteprise aka as customer learning.
You can also go to employees here for the system.
Learning Pool – Heavily skewed and sees themselves as L&D core.
They are also pushing their system as an LCMS—Learning Content Management System. LCMS is not new—it was strong in the early 2000s but dropped rapidly thereafter.
When you consider it, a large number of capabilities are doable in an LMS, Learning Platform, or other type.
Anyway, if you have never heard of an LCMS, don’t worry. Fun fact: Xyleme, the Chameleon of learning systems, once called itself an LCMS.
CYPHER Learning: They heavily focus on AI as the primary, which I support.
But AI is only as good as what you do with it, rather than just saying you have it and nobody else has XYA.
CL slides in both categories.
Overall, I like the system, hence its inclusion in the top picks here, but I am still a tad perturbed that for a company that knows all about hallucinations, they ignore the small statement on one of their search boxes, i.e., prompt windows, that goes to the content in the system itself, for example.
There are a lot of nice bells and whistles here, but when you realize their expertise around AI and the level they are at (there are a handful of systems that can match and surpass – one is Cornerstone, but I digress), your expectations should be, “Okay, that’s nice, but what else is there you can do?”
Anyway, the sound system. Better suited for L&D, although they are combo, so they go after customer training too.
Mentoring Platforms
I noted NovoEd Mentor+ and Together by Absorb, but the one mentoring 100% standalone platform that stands out is Chronus.
I loved the pre-assessment thing, which is really more about identifying the type of person—skills, personality, and just in general (and yea, I am messing up the terminology)—before you are connected with the right folks or folks with potential. I dig the system quite a bit, which is why I am doing a Product Review of it in July.
Here are my results from the initial assessment, which will give you a better idea of what I referenced earlier.
NovoED Mentor+ and Together By Absorb product reviews come in August.
Other
Sana – Kidding. If you asked me who has or is the most overrated system in today’s market, I’d place them in the top five category. Yes, they push AI, but there are systems out there that are doing far more.
Wait, changed my mind. Top three. I haven’t seen this overhype since the promise of robots that can drive me everywhere. Sure, you can clean my house, but where is my order for vegan pizza that you were supposed to get?
Who stands out?
Being a top Pick, should be enough, but I know folks will want to know more!
What I will say is that there is one vendor who totally surprised me with what they have now, some of which just rolled out.
On top of that, some nice capabilities and updates are coming in Q4 2025.
I’ll be upfront they lack AI today, but its on their roadmap for later this year or early next year. It is better to have a plan than just wing it in there, especially on the customer training side.
I didn’t do a customer training bracket this year – but if I had there would have been a final two, (I did the calculations, but ran out of time to post) – it would be TI and Eurekos.
Absorb was the clear #3, based on points tally – tied to 12 variables (which is what I compared all the CE/CT systems too, and where the final two are based on those points), the winner would have been, okay, is
Eurekos.
They are my top pick for customer training/education, also known as extended enterprise, or, I guess, the new term of customer learning, which is a nice new way of confusing folks.
Anyway, yes, the UI/UX needs a refresh/revamp—something they are working on for launch later this year (target). Yes, they lack AI—but it is on the map, and their map track record in 2024 was in my excellent category—therefore, a great track record.
Stand Out – Newbies
Meta-Level Analysis—I always mention deep segmentation data regarding content and how many vendors ignore it, even though it is very relevant.
What Eurekos can do is go page by page within a course, if you will, and track that data with that learner and thus learners to see how long they have been on that page, how often, and other data that is very useful when you are doing a certification program OR, for me, when you are debating on what courses/content you want to build next.
If I see that 125 of your 145 customers are going into Chapter Two out of all the chapters, and nothing else, okay, why is that?
If you see that within Chapter Two, they are all focused on pages a and b, that is a clue that the audience is screaming they want more content around those areas.
Tada! New content. Think about partners and faster engagement, for example.
I should add that there are vendors who can drill down, but you have to download or view a report, and the meta-analysis level isn’t there, unless you have a BI tool.
Oh, and it screams Look here, not there for a certification program.
Speaking of certification programs, they have something in the works that I haven’t seen before—and I’m sorry, I can’t share—I promised.
I should mention that on the AI side, they are working on incorporating it with the metrics they will generate.
On the employee side, which is Talent dev-driven, the two standouts are Cornerstone Learn and Learn Amp. I will include a third, NovoEd Learn+, which includes Practice+ and Mentor+.
Bottom Line
The Picks for 2025 are similar to mid-year, which is truly mid-year. A lot of things can change between now and December.
Maybe HALIGHT does something that yells LOOK at ME, or a vendor on my list but not on this list, does ABC, and shoots up into the top 10.
Perhaps a vendor debuts in June, grabs my eyeballs, and I dive into them, and go, okay, you have something here. I reach out to these types of systems all the time. Looking for that diamond that I know is out there, waiting to be discovered.
Coursera receives the maximum possible score in eight criteria, including Partner Ecosystem, Individual Skills Assessment, Team Skills Assessment, and AI Capabilities for Skills Acquisition By Karine Allouche, General Manager, Enterprise, Coursera
To compile the report, Forrester selected the eight most significant tech skill development platform vendors and evaluated them across 19 criteria, including speaking to Coursera customers. The report states: “organizations seeking broad tech domain coverage through many customizable learning plans as well as a data-driven approach to continuous upskilling should consider Coursera”. Here are four key reasons why we believe Forrester has named Coursera a leader:
Job-relevant learning, offered by world-leading institutions
In the report, Coursera’s vendor profile states: “Customers highlight its high-quality content from recognized partners and speed of new content as significant advantages”. Coursera partners with world-class universities – including Stanford, Yale, Johns Hopkins University, and the University of Michigan – and leading global companies – such as Google, Meta, Microsoft, IBM, and Amazon.
Coursera has “a strong [content] partner ecosystem”, according to Forrester’s report, and Coursera received the maximum score of 5/5 in the Partner Ecosystem criterion. In total, over 350 university and industry partners collaborate with Coursera to offer critical job-relevant skills to workers across more than 1,600 paid enterprise customers.
AI platform innovations for personalized, customized learning
Coursera’s AI platform innovations, such as Course Builder, Dialogues, and Role Play, are designed to empower Learning & Development leaders to create customized, immersive, personalized learning experiences. Coursera received the highest score possible in the AI Capabilities for Skills Acquisition criterion. Forrester’s report acknowledges that Coursera’s customers “commend the AI-enabled course builder for rapidly enhancing the creation of tailored learning paths.”
Extensive up-to-date coverage of key skill domains
As Generative AI, cloud computing, and other new technologies rapidly transform the workplace, organizations require skills development platforms that equip learners with essential modern job skills. Forrester’s report recognizes that Coursera “rapidly adapts to trends, such as adding content on new AI tools within 48 hours”, and that Coursera’s ‘content marketplace ensures strong domain coverage’. Coursera received a 5/5 score in the Broad Tech-Domain Coverage criterion.
Powerful analytics for tracking individual and organizational skills development
As organizations seek greater adaptivity to the changing economic landscape and evidence of ROI on learning and development programs, they demand sophisticated ways of tracking employee learning and skill acquisition. Forrester’s report states that “Coursera excels in individual and team skills assessment”. Coursera received 5/5 in both the Individual Skills Assessment and Team Skills Assessment criteria.
Coursera received the maximum possible score in the following criteria:
Individual Skills Assessment
Team Skills Assessment
Broad Tech-Domain Coverage
AI Capabilities for Skills Acquisition
Skill Acquisition Analytics
Learning-Plan Customization
Accessibility
Partner Ecosystem
Check out the full Forrester Wave™ report to learn more about why Coursera is a Leader among tech skill development platforms, and how we believe Coursera for Business is empowering institutions across the world to equip their employees with essential job skills.
Forrester does not endorse any company, brand, product, or service included in its research publications and does not advise any person to select the products or services of any company or brand based on the ratings included in such publications. Information is based on the best available resources. Opinions reflect judgement at the time and are subject to change. For more information, read about Forrester’s objectivity here.
For any employer, hiring is not just about finding the most qualified candidate; it’s also about finding someone who fits with the company and its culture. It is imperative to identify people who can not only do the job well, but also those who will thrive in the company and adapt well to the environment.
One critical, but often overlooked, element is how they communicate – within the team, one-to-one, interdepartmentally, and externally.
Too often, traditional hiring practices may not be sufficient to garner a deep understanding of communication competency and general style, which can determine whether a new hire is a triumphant, successful addition to the team, or a costly error with potentially detrimental effects to business outcomes, organisational culture and staff morale.
Today’s workplace demands more than traditional methods. And the great news is that the solution is within reach. Utilising tools like English proficiency and personality assessments will help HR and L&D teams to gain better insight into candidates they have shortlisted. This reduces bias and improves role fit within jobs.
The Hidden Costs of Biased Hiring
Bias may not always be obvious, and it isn’t just about unfairness. It is also about inefficiency.
Decisions that are influenced by personal assumptions, rash judgements and misunderstandings mean that sometimes great candidates are overlooked and those who may not be the right fit are hired.
For example, when standard testing and assessments are not incorporated, some candidates may be dismissed or bypassed due to an accent or mannerism, while another candidate who seems “confident” may be given the job.
Companies often end up hiring people who perform well in interviews, rather than those who work well.
Personality Testing
Each role has its own requirements and demands, unique to the position and company.
Personality testing helps identify whether a candidate matches well with a particular job and the team.
Did you know that more than 80% of companies today are using some form of personality testing as part of their recruitment process? Interestingly, those companies are seeing a 30% improvement in employee retention rates and a 20% boost in their team’s overall performance.
Why? Because they made a more informed choice.
Assessments allow for a deeper understanding of each person’s working style. They can identify if a person is detail-oriented, whether they work well with structure or flexibility, and how they respond to stress and feedback.
These insights prove invaluable when hiring and help to prevent mismatches. By aligning a candidate’s personality with the job requirements, companies can set candidates up for success before they start their job.
Aligning Communication Skills With Job Success
Effective communication in any organisation is a vital component for success. It ensures people are aware of their roles, responsibilities and helps build strong client and employee relationships. Employers must ensure that communication is a priority if they want to have happy employees and ultimately great productivity. Research shows that 70% of employers consider English proficiency a critical skill within their teams.
Another study showed that over 1.5 billion people worldwide are currently learning English, as they have identified it as the language of business.
Consider the following benefits of learning English:
Reduced conflict in the workplace
Healthy employee relationships
Improved productivity
Improved relationship with clients
Healthy work culture
Employee satisfaction
Alison’s English language test offers insight to hiring managers about a candidate’s ability to:
Understand written communication
Communicate ideas well and maintain professionalism
Engage in team meetings
Write emails and reports accurately
This is quite useful when hiring globally. Having an objective measure of English skills allows hiring teams to make correct hiring decisions and avoid overlooking great candidates.
When the English is aligned early, it removes uncertainty, improves onboarding, and builds a more cohesive workforce.
Why does this matter?
Hiring mistakes can be frustrating for companies, and for smaller companies, this may even be devastating. Smaller organisations mean that every hire has a bigger impact, and there are fewer resources to make mistakes that HR departments often make with employees.
This is why it is important to have personality and English assessments in place. They provide a clear, results-driven outline that will surely help busy managers and business owners make more informed decisions.
Take the Guessing Out of Hiring
Most HR teams don’t have access to this level of insight. They make decisions based on resumes and cover letters.
LMS+ is much more than just a learning platform; it’s a tool for making results-driven decisions.
With this tool, you will have access to:
Aptitude testing
Workplace personality testing
English proficiency testing
Learning profiles
Assessment dashboards
This tool and all its features were designed to reduce the time, error, and workload involved in making great hiring and upskilling decisions.
Hire Smarter With Alison
Even though we try to employ without bias, it may be impossible because employers and hiring managers are only human. However, these tools seek to minimise the influence of bias in hiring and assist in making better decisions.
Combining English proficiency, aptitude, and personality testing helps hiring managers get a better perspective.
They’re not just guessing or feeling; they are making well-informed decisions.
Ready to use data to find the right candidates? Schedule a quick demo to see how quickly you can adopt a data-driven approach to hiring.
