fbpx
Home Blog Page 898

Faith Communities

0

What spiritual and religious communities are in your area? What do they mean to you?

Learn to Play an Instrument

0
Learn to Play an Instrument

Unleash the sound of music for Christmas and New Year

Are you getting a musical instrument for Christmas? How about your new year resolutions? Will they include mastering an instrument? Research shows that learning an instrument can improve cognitive function and benefit the brain, no matter what age you begin learning. Apart from boosting your brainpower, the sheer pleasure to be had from being able to play music is reason enough to start. Keep reading to learn how to play an Irish instrument.

The question is, where to begin? If you yearn to learn piano, but don’t have the space or the budget for the traditional upright, there are now many small electronic keyboards with prices to suit any budget. Perhaps you fancy scaling the heights with a wind instrument. A penny whistle is the perfect getaway instrument and is very affordable. It will train your ear and help you with the breathing techniques you need for playing the flute, sax or trombone. If strings are your thing, the guitar deserves its standing as the go-to instrument for flexibility and ease of learning. Or how about the violin? It’s harder to play but your perseverance will be rewarded.

Once you have chosen your instrument, you’ll need lessons to help you master the basics and that’s where Alison comes in. We have dozens of courses in everything from piano to accordion and drums, and string to wind instruments, with a surprising range of genres included! 

Traditional Irish Music

We recommend our series of courses in Traditional Irish instruments for basic training that will stand you in good stead for playing other styles of music. Our Traditional Irish Music Hub includes certified courses in fiddle, guitar, flute, tin whistle, concertina and button accordion. We also have excellent courses in unaccompanied (sean-nós) singing and the handheld traditional Irish drum, the.bodhrán (pronounced bow-ron).

The tutors are all national champions, and many are well-known performers, such as Irish TV presenter Doireann Ní Ghlacáin, who teaches the fiddle courses, singing tutor Nell Ní Chróinín who’s the lead vocalist with the well-known group Danú, and our guitar maestro Michael McCague who has performed with some of Irish folk music’s biggest stars.

These courses will take you from basic beginner through to intermediate level in no time, teaching you skills that you can use across the genres.

Music Instrument Courses

Take our popular Guitar Beginner 1 course, for instance. Tutor Michael McCague provides lessons in the basics of playing using the Drop D tuning system, which lends chords a rich, open sound. His guitar classes will give you the foundations for playing blues and rock along with folk.

Dermot Sheedy, drummer with top folk-rock band Hermitage Green, teaches the bodhrán courses and in the Intermediate course, progresses to extra rhythms and tips for adding colour to any drum rhythm.

With the tin whistle and flute courses, champion player Brian O’Loughlin will show you how to breathe correctly and how to add ornamentation to make your playing more colourful. His brother, Conor O’Loughlin, will teach you all you need to know about playing the concertina or if you prefer a bigger box, another champion player, Conor Connolly, provides free button accordion classes. 

Each of the tutors brings you foundational teaching in their instrument with lessons that progress to the sorts of skills that only seasoned players can teach. 

If you would like to incorporate some Irish culture into your party routines, don’t miss our Sean-nós Singing courses at Beginner 1, Beginner 2 and Intermediate level where native Irish speaker and top vocalist Nell Ní Chróinín will teach you songs in both Irish and English.

All of our Traditional Irish Music courses come with downloadable pdfs that will help with your practice. 

Alison’s free online music courses also include other exciting instruments, like the baby harp, classical violin, the cello and of course, the piano. And we don’t stop there. You can also get a masterclass in composition, learn to produce electronic music or master the basics of playing by ear. Our music theory courses cover everything from harmony to rhythm and form.

Best of all, it won’t cost you a penny. All you need to do is register for a free account on Alison.com, enrol in the course of your choice and begin learning. Now all you need is that instrument. Happy, musical new year!

Have You Made Any New Year’s Resolutions?

0

Do you find it easy or difficult to set goals and achieve them?

Lesson Plan: ‘How a Visual Language Evolves as Our World Does’

0

In this lesson, students will learn how video technology and social media have given deaf people a new way to communicate and how it is transforming American Sign Language.

Your 2023 Most-Anticipated List

0

What are you looking forward to this year?

Word of the Day: abjure

0

This word has appeared in three articles on NYTimes.com in the past year. Can you use it in a sentence?

Free January 2023 Wallpaper & Instagram quote

0
Free January 2023 Wallpaper & Instagram quote

Free January 2023 Wallpaper & Instagram quote

Free January 2023 wallpaper is here!

Happy New Year! We are starting 2023 with a frosty winter wallpaper featuring various blue shades and pops of bold, warm coral red. Even thou those are contrasting colors, I still find this combination very calming, and I hope it will warm you up during those cold days.

Each wallpaper download from January 2023 includes:

  • Desktop wallpaper x3 (plain, with the calendar, and with a quote)
  • Phone wallpaper x2 (plain and with a quote)
  • Tablet wallpaper
  • Instagram ready quote

As always, January’s free wallpaper comes with two different mobile phone layouts. They are great to use at once – the simple version for your phone background and the one with a quote for the lock screen.


Quote for January 2023

Start this year with new energy and make it your best year so far! This month’s quote will motivate you to stay positive and believe that every new beginning is magical.

Trust the magic of new beginnings

P.S the square image is also included in the download package below! Feel free to post it on your Instagram.



Looking for more? Check our previous wallpapers!

The free download includes three desktop options – one with the calendar and one without the calendar, and one with a quote. There is also a wallpaper for tablets and two options for the phone. We have also included an Instagram-ready square with the weekly quote.

FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY.

NOTE: This wallpaper is available as a free download through January 31, 2023 only. After that, a $5 download fee applies.


What font is it?

If you are curious about what font has been used this month, let me help! I’m starting this year with mya ll time favorite, Opulent. I love the natural handwritten look of this font and the different options for each letter. It is definitely must have for all script font lovers.



Your voice matters!

If you have your favorite quotes and would like them to appear on the next free wallpaper, make sure to post them in the comments below or send us your ideas via email.

Enjoy!


P.S This post includes affiliate links so by clicking them you are supporting us. Thanks!

Comment on Enterprise Learning Systems – What does that really mean? by greg gw

0
Comment on Enterprise Learning Systems – What does that really mean? by greg gw

Enterprise.

The term, is ambiguous in its nature. What does a company who themselves may refer to as an “Enterprise” really mean exactly? Is it based on the number of employees? Or setup of operations? Multiple locations and LOBs (or divisions)? Is it all the above, none of the above, something totally different?

Trying to define “Enterprise” related to business, isn’t clear cut. Here is just a sampling of what I extracted off the net.

  • Defined based on “Revenue” – In this angle, it is large enterprise only, there is no such thing as small or mid size enterprise.
  • “A legal entity that has the right to do business. To create contracts and agreements. A for-profit company or organization. Can incur liabilities, own property, generate revenue.”
  • “any type of operation that is involved in providing goods or services with the anticipated outcome of earning a profit” (Malcolm Tatum, https://www.smartcapitalmind.com/what-is-a-business-enterprise.htm). Malcolm adds that it doesn’t only apply to large enterprises, but any size of business.

I think you see the point here – no clear-cut definition, no “this is X and only X”.

What about Technology?

From a technology standpoint, it is a bit more clearer, but nowadays when a vendor says “Enterprise” they are not thinking from the technology standpoint

This is why solutions back in the early 2000’s called ERPs – SAP, Oracle, JD Edwards and Peoplesoft took off, especially SAP. An ERP, depending on the modules you purchased, could or should streamline your entire process of operations – connecting billing with accounting with supply chain/logistics and financial analytics for example, add human resources, oh how about some sales and customer service. They still exist of course, SAP, Oracle, the others, plus Workday (founded by the guy who founded PeopleSoft). Plus there are systems just for supply chain, and customer relationship – both are types of Enterprise solutions.

And again, the learning system vendor or e-learning provider?

When a learning system vendor when referring to an “Enterprise” system isn’t really focused on this angle (the tech one) – sure they may say it will streamline your learning or training, but it is about use cases here, and numbers – end users that drive the term “Enterprise”. Actually, let me change that, slightly. There are only a handful of vendors in the entire learning system space (what I refer to as Corporate – including for-profit, non-profit, associations) that base the term “Enterprise” for Revenue and Large Enterprise at that. For example, one vendor defines “Enterprise” as a company that does a minimum of 50 million dollars (USD) per year.

For me?

I think of “Enterprise” in terms of user bases, regardless of the size of the company, whether they are profit or non-profit – although I rarely hear someone say the term “Enterprise” and they are talking about a non-profit or an association for that matter, there are vendors who never stipulate the term itself, and that only adds to the confusion.

Then there are the customers, the clients to be or are. They themselves may not know what the term “Enterprise” really means. They hear it, they hear from the company, or somewhere and say, “Yes, we are enterprise”. But, it depends on the definition of what that company or whoever is presenting it to them, is “Enterprise”. Nowadays, due to the business world, you could be a for-profit business, with no physical location, and define yourself as an Enterprise. Heck, I could be a professional training operation, that hits a couple of “enterprise definitions”, and refer to myself as an Enterprise. True, I would actually be an “Extended Enterprise” – another legacy term that should be punted into the fields along with the Model T. Which is why, the new terms are “customer education/training, partner training, B2B”, and why I try to get vendors off the term “Extended Enterprise”, because I could be one person who sells content to other businesses, makes a lot of money, and slide under “Extended Enterprise”, which in of itself, isn’t clear cut.

You say Potato, I say POH-TA-TO

Enterprise does make a big difference in the learning system industry, depending on the vendor. It affects pricing. Feature-sets, opportunities for the vendor themselves.

Pricing, Features, Options

The approach goes this way – I sell an “Enterprise” version of my learning system. It may cost higher than the non “Enterprise” version (there are vendors who sell different versions, which is a whole other box of snakes). For the Enterprise version, it may be listed as having more features and capabilities and what you can have – such as premium support or dedicated customer manager, versus the non-enterprise version.

If you – the prospect/buyer wants all the above, but you do not see yourself as an “Enterprise” can you still buy it? Absolutely. A vendor would have to be in the non to make money business to demur. And even if their salespeople said that “No” to you, trust me hundreds of others will say yes.

Twist

Ahh the twist. There are vendors who have a minimum number of end-users, who if you do not slide to that minimum, they won’t sell their system to you. The number tends to slide in the 5,000 min. range. Is it a smart business move? Heck, no, because it is based on a faulty premise that higher user numbers means higher budget to purchase the system, which trust me, is not always the case. I know of a company with 1,800 users. Their budget? Nearly 1M dollars for a learning system. Another had 7,000 users. Their budget? 35 thousand dollars (35K).

Back to Enterprise – Vendor Wise

When I talk to any vendor, and they say “Enterprise”, I always ask them how they define the term. Sometimes I get “what do you mean” – which isn’t a good sign, and then leads me to say, how many users – which leads to me, “we base it on active users” – which unless they bill monthly (and some do) – is a total farce – because the bill annually, which you pay upfront. They will always want to the total number of users. It’s Pricing Bundle 101 (the #1 pricing model in the industry, regardless if they go range or not behind or publicly).

I will push, until the vendor gives me a number – whether it is users (common) or revenue (extremely uncommon).

The Number

If only it could be so simple. Everyone with the same numbers, would be a great start. Or close to the same numbers. Or, heck stay with the numbers over a period of time, like at least a couple of years, that would be good.

But, nope, not in our industry. No way.

Time Machine Enterprise Ship – BTW, why was the U.S.S. so lame in technology? I mean the Klingons and Romulans had stealth and what did we have? A captain with a bad toupee (sorry to tell you) and a ship that does warp speed.

2000 to 2010

The most common user numbers for “Enterprise” by learning system vendors (as a whole, and yes there is always variance)

10,000 users (regardless if they are employees, customers, apes – watch for Cornelius, I don’t trust him)

2010 to 2015

Anything over 5,000 – thus the 5,000 minimum

2015 to 2020

All of over the map, but generally a minimum of 1,000 users. A few vendors started at 500, one well-known vendor listed 300 or more as Enterprise.

2020-2021

Map time – pick a place, here we are. Generally though two numbers appeared the most

1,000 or 2,500 as Enterprise

Oh, same well-known vendor stayed with 300 or above.

2021-2022

Map it Carmen! 1,000, 2,500 or 5,000 as the minimum for “Enterprise” – Some vendors may say mid-market or mid-size enterprise for the lower numbers, then go Enterprise for 5,000 and Large Enterprise as 10,000 plus.

Guess what? Same well-known vendor went with 300 and above. It’s all about consistency.

2022-23

5,000. Although there are enough vendors who see 1,000 too.

Well-known vendor moved off of 300. It’s now a min. of 1,000.

Large Enterprise

The industry talks about (majority of vendors) behind the scenes. Even then the numbers aren’t fully clear, for those who do not look at it from a revenue standpoint.

How I define Large Enterprise

Min. of 25,000 users

Vendors?

Common ones – 10,000; 25,000; 100,000

And yes, there are vendors who see Large Enterprise as anything above 5,000.

I know of one vendor, who defines large enterprise as anything above 200,000.

I am Enterprise, you are Sputnik

I know some of you are thinking, “who cares, how the vendor sees me or how I see “Enterprise”. Well, I am going to tell you why you should care.

  • Perception. It is very understandable to think when you say “Enterprise” and see “Enterprise” as say a minimum of 50,000 users, to think that the vendor themselves sees “Enterprise” as the same thing. OR you see yourself as an enterprise and have 2,225 users, and the vendor sees enterprise as 1,000.

Thus, the vendor says we have 1500 “Enterprise ” clients. That will impress. But… it is common to think what you define and think is “Enterprise” is the same as them. Now, if you think “Enterprise” is 5,000, because that is your user base, and the client says 1,500 enterprise clients, it is natural to think – impressive – the perception is the same as you. But, what if 1,410 of those enterprise clients are 850 users. And only five are 5,000, the rest below that. Are you still impressed?

  • Features and Pricing – As noted earlier, you may be paying more for more features, etc. and thus price point is higher just under “Enterprise”. This appears BTW when vendors have tiered package pricing.
  • It taps into very common propaganda techniques – including just like you and me – which is why you think X, the vendor is Y, but you think their client size as “enterprise” is like you.

What you can do you?

  1. Ask them. The salesperson should know what they – the vendor considers Enterprise to mean. They may ask, “what do you mean”, so tell them – you want to know what is the minimum number of users that the vendor considers to be the minimum for Enterprise. If they don’t know – find out who runs sales, get their name (first and last) and e-mail address. They will know. If the salesperson doesn’t want to give it out, or says, “they will find out”, decline, and ask for that information. You want or should want a vendor who is trustworthy. If they won’t tell you, then that isn’t very trusting is it? Transparency is the key here. Any every vendor knows what they consider Enterprise. If a vendor bases it on revenue, fine, give me a number.
  2. Now you know what Enterprise means to them. Does it match you?
  3. If they do tiered packages, with Enterprise being the call us, or however they spin it – and it offers more than say what you think you need, consider that you are not looking at today – you are looking down the road. Secondly, the features are already in the system, they just deactivated them. Lastly, pricing comes down to user base, again the active thing is a farce, unless they bill monthly – and that is a tiny percentage. As I say, how do they really know the active user base when they make you pay upfront? What Nostradamus is a direct relation?

If the vendor notes that their system is Enterprise or just says we sell an Enterprise system, and you are not what you think is enterprise, you should still ask what they define enterprise as. If nothing else, it will tell you clearly how transparent they are. Which isn’t such a bad thing. If they tell you, great, go forward if you like them anyone. If they won’t, then they are not for you. I mean if you can’t get a straight answer out now, what does that say down the road, when you run into a speed bump or what further responses on something?

Bottom Line

The industry loves the term “Enterprise”. Love it. Love saying it. Love messaging it. Love telling others about it.

Enterprise system. A system for learning enterprises. A system for customer enterprises (whatever that means, but let’s roll with it). A system for employees in the enterprise.

I call it Ad nauseam.

Then I ask,

Okay, so what do you define enterprise as?

Because if you don’t ask,

They won’t share.

And that isn’t ad nauseam,

it’s just stomach

churning.

E-Learning 24/7

Comment on Cohort-Based Learning (Online) – Learning Systems Hot Trend in 2023 by By Craig WeissLearning Systems Forecasts for 2023

0
Comment on Cohort-Based Learning (Online) – Learning Systems Hot Trend in 2023 by By Craig WeissLearning Systems Forecasts for 2023

When I was putting together this post, I knew it would not be as simple as say, this is cohort-based learning, this is why it is so amazing, and why vendors are jumping to it, as well as folks in L&D. It is not as simple. There are pluses for doing it, and yes, cons. They are variables and factors to consider before jumping head first into it, and then espousing how it boosts knowledge, people retain more, and everyone is collaborating in such a way, that it taps into a combination of informal and formal (which cohort does).

Here are a few quick items to recognize before discussing cohort-based learning in the corporate side – regardless if you are in L&D, Training, HR, Marketing, Sales or some other department.

  • It will be a hot trend in the e-learning industry, especially around the learning system space, and even some HCMs that have a learning module. The trend is starting as we speak, err you read this, and by the end of 2023, it will overtake the whole skills hot trend (albeit, skills will still be very popular – and yes, is heavily tailored to a professional (office) workforce).
  • There will be learning system vendors, talent platforms, HCMs with learning that will say they have cohort-based learning, but lack all the key components (which will be presented below). If they are missing just one, it is not cohort-based learning. I want to stress, this, a vendor can say anything, but just because they say it or it appears in their marketing, doesn’t make it true. I’ve seen this firsthand with vendors saying they have LXP features or an LXP in their system, yet they lack all the key components/items that LXPs all have.
  • There will be learning system vendors, HCMs and others, that will say or show cohort-based learning and have really no clue what it is, where it came from (EdTech) and how to really tap into it’s power.
  • There will be learning system vendors, HCMs and others, who will do nothing – they won’t add or have any interest in cohort-based learning, because they will argue that “a client” or “clients” haven’t asked for it. This is by far one of the lamest excuses I ever hear, and I hear it a lot. That said, it does explain why a system may be behind the times, when it comes to forward thinking learning technology and functionality. As I note, if I never knew about X, then why would I ask if you have it?
  • As the person or persons who will implement cohort-based learning for your employees, members, even customers (and it is doable), it is required for you to know all the components, the pluses and minuses. I can tell you first hand, that if you rely only on the information you can glean off the internet or other so-called experts, who have never implemented cohort-based learning with e-learning and corporate, you will be led astray.

This is actually a two-part post, something I haven’t done in probably eight years or more. (I did it one other time, excluding awards).

Part one is the post on July 27th, 2002 (for those who will read this at a later date). Part two is the week of August 4th. The second part is going to continue from part one and contain research findings (based on a literature review, that I am conducting – Thesis or Dissertation anyone? Sorry, it is a common aspect of either of those two wonderful experiences).

If you are interested in conducting your own research, than fear not, the second post will include citations, and where you can read or find the information and dive deeper. I will be writing the second post similar to the way my Literature Review was written during my thesis days. It will be the first time, since my thesis, that I will angle a post in a more academic manner, so apologies upfront, because it will not include any of my wonderful sarcastic or snide remarks.

The challenge that I see as a whole when covering cohort-based learning is that the majority of data comes from EdTech, especially higher education. Now, you can argue well, it doesn’t matter, they know what they are doing. Respectfully, I disagree. Sure there are items you can extract to give some perspective, but you must remember that the common range of students at a university/college is 18-21 (adult learners 25+ are at universities/colleges, but they are not the core). There are K-12, tapping into cohort-based learning too, and I strongly recommend ignoring those, unless you have a child and the school is about to go this way.

EdTech with online learning has been a mixed bag, because it relies heavily on synchronous based learning – which means as it relates to the course and content. Again, I find vendors even in EdTech who are unaware what constitutes SBL.

In the corporate world, asynchronous based learning now referred to as self-paced learning, is the dominate form of learning. Even folks who go blended, usually have a self-paced learning piece.

Are they colleges/universities that have ABL (for the purpose of this post, I will refer to it as self-paced)? The answer is yes, but they are few and far between. You are more likely to find someone who still thinks CBT was the coolest form of learning and that online learning is no match to ILT (sorry Charlie Tuna, you are wrong).

From the United States standpoint, remote learning (the term coined for EdTech online learning) was a massive fail (overall) during the pandemic. It got an awful rep, which it still hasn’t recovered from. Are schools still using it anyway? Yes. But people still drove the Pinto in the 70s, even though it was a tinderbox with wheels.

EdTech SBL is based on three core items – which I mention here, because these three appear in cohort-based learning, and which you will or should see if your system offers it – BTW it is a requirement, err requirements as part of cohort-based learning.

  • Think ILT classroom shoved online – in that it contains a) Syllabus, b) Linear based format – i.e. step by step, until you pass the step, then you go to the next step (no self-pace for you), c)the instructor drives the process of learning – thus if they are active and strong online, then it can be very good, but if they are lazy or just awful online, then it will be miserable
  • The courses usually have a TOC (Table of Contents) this is because of the whole syllabus angle (at the corporate level, you may not see the syllabus angle, but the TOC should be there (honestly, it really must be, but again, people and systems may skirt).
  • Interactive and engagement are not core here. Having a click like hot-spot or watch a video or some other reactive approach is not real-time interactivity or engagement. Robust sim based learning isn’t happening here in the SBL format
  • Assignments are very popular and usually (as beyond the majority) a component of SBL. You have to complete these assignments and you have a set time to do so.
  • SBL taps into a time limit – as in you have until X day or time to complete the first step, and if not, you can get zinged for it (although on the corporate side, that is less likely to happen, what is more likely is the facilitator will just carry on)
  • Remember the MOOC craze? The format that is used is SBL. The completion rates still hover around 8 (eight) to 10 percent. That honestly is awful. Thankfully, with cohort-based learning and its approach, those numbers should not exist – however, I am writing here at this moment on the specifics of SBL and SBL only as it exists in EdTech and MOOCs which were heavily influenced around academia topics followed to the letter the SBL format.

Cohort-Based Learning

There are terms you will want to remember when you think or consider Cohort-Based Learning. It should never be an acronym, so any vendor who does this, should be forced to watch 100 hours of their CEO explaining the benefits of someone working there, with an awful green screen behind them OR one episode of TV show where the cops sang the whole time (yes, it did exist).

Terms

  • Transfer of Training (This is really mentioned, but is very relevant for cohort-based learning)
  • Activities
  • Problem-Based and Problem Solving
  • Guided – Very important
  • Facilitator or Guide (the latter ties around Guided, but you will refer to the individual as one or the other)
  • Mentoring – This is not the same as coaching. Not even close. You want the mentors (mentoring angle). It is a must for cohort-based.
  • P2P Learning – This means Peer to Peer
  • Community – It is a component of Cohort-based
  • Peer Collaboration – See above
  • Learning Pods – This isn’t mentioned in any article I have found around cohort-based, but I think it is very applicable in the corporate side of the house, and so much easier to explain to someone, when they think community – because it can go the extra level you want. Vendors are likely not to use this term, which is a shame, again, it makes so much sense to do so, and even show it – which is really cool.
  • Knowledge Sharing – It is a component of cohort-based learning
  • Network – A must. This is to me, one of the core objectives here in the end.

Lastly, I saw a comment that noted that cohort-based learning is the practice of it as the key and not the functionality. I disagree – you need both and parallel at that. This is not one first, other second. Hand in Hand.

Secondly, there was a comment that you may need to find other systems – to do all these items above. Again, you shouldn’t. A vendor who totally provides cohort-based learning must have all the components, it may not be great, but it may suffice. I will add that there will be vendors that go deep integration to say a solution like MentorCloud, because it can really take mentoring to a whole new level, includes learning pods, and just goes full throttle. Which, if it is is deeply integrated, you won’t know.

That said, you will find mentoring on learning systems who do not go deep integration with a third-party solution, which is there choice, all over the map. I’ve seen cool and I see a lot of “are you serious?”. Anyway, just an fyi.

Oh, for those who want to go multiple systems and want to use MentorCloud with a learning system, you can. They can integrate. I only mention MentorCloud, because at the time of this writing, it is the best (new) platform I’ve seen in 2022.

Cohort-Based Learning – What you need – If you are a vendor, you must have all of these components. ALL OF THEM. So if you want to buy a cohort-based learning system (and yes, there is one that truly is), and there are multiple vendors adding cohort-based by the end of this year, you will want to make sure they either have it when they roll out OR will add it before the end of 2023 (which means it is on their roadmap, and I surmise that many vendors rolling out Cohort-Based will not have all of these components, simply because they are not aware).

  • Synchronous based learning – They may call it something else, but the format I described earlier in the post exists here. Again, the Syllabus angle may not appear but a TOC has to, in this case.
  • Assignments – Yes it is part of SBL, but depending on how the vendor notes it, they could place it as not a direct part of SBL, but a feature that exists as part of the “community” – again, my preference is the term “learning pod(s)”.
  • Activities – A vendor may you this interchangeably with an assignment, but to me they are different. A workbook that you have to use daily or weekly or whatever, is an assignment. Think homework of some nature. An activity is collaborative with P2P learning – and knowledge sharing. It shouldn’t be, you do this, and I will do that angle – which you see in Academia – and which you run into the dreaded “dead weight” person in the group, who you gripe privately about, but say nothing to the professor, when they ask how it went in the group. Oh, you have experienced this with those “activities” in a seminar, where everyone is supposed to be contribute and one doesn’t.
  • Group Communication – Essential. I will cover some key pieces of Group Communication later in this post. As someone who studied theoretical communication, of which group comm is a part of it, there are some realities folks tend to forget when it comes to groups.
  • Guided learning – with either a facilitator or a guide (again, a vendor may use them interchangeably, but in this angle it is just semantics – so whether you want to refer to the person as a facilitator you can OR you can refer to them as a guide. Whichever you choose, stay with it, trust me, confusion will be here anyway, so why confuse more, when a vendor can do that for you? HA
  • Mentors – A must. I identify the ideal one you want further down below. You may have only one, but ideally you should have a few, depending on the number of pods, and size.
  • Network – Share Knowledge, Share the Experience, Connect within the cohort, and ideally connect outside of it (could be via vILT or meeting up somewhere, or whatever) – think of them, as being a collective to tap into at any point, any time of your career or membership (if an association) or again, whatever.

Let’s Discuss Guided Learning with a Facilitator

I’m going to use Facilitator as the term here.

  • Ideally it should be a trainer or trainers. Someone with a training background. If you recently or have former teachers on your staff that taught above sixth grade (thus at least 7th or eighth grade), they will work too. These folks have the knowledge already on how to facilitate. This is extremely important. If you are in an L&D department, you are likely to have someone who oversaw your ILT sessions or vILT or whatever you provided to folks on-site, for say even a leadership class. If you multiple trainers (regardless if it is L&D, HR or Training), pick the best or top ones. Not everyone is good a training, even if that is their role. If you are in a department or entity, that has none of the above, then find someone. Do not have Sal who works in marketing or sales who has no background in training or training/learning/educational principles) to facilitate. That is beyond an awful idea.

Factoid

There will be people in L&D or Training or whatever title your company/association uses, some call them, Director of Education, that it is you only, and no one else in your department. I feel your pain – because I’ve experienced it.

However, fear not – there are a lot of teachers who are quitting or have quit teaching due to the recent events in 2022. As such, many are seeking jobs on the corporate training side. I understand cuts are coming or about to, but you may find someone who willing to be flexible, until the time comes to be hired full-time.

Never use a SME (who does not have a background in either training, L&D or education, above 6th grade level)

SMEs are wonderful for specific items, like knowing their subject inside and out, for example, you are creating a course in sales, and need a SME who knows everything about the cold calling, then that is the person you or whomever you have creating the course, talks to.

Think this way – you need to take your car into a place to be repaired. You want a mechanic who is an expert with that model or type of car. Thus they are a subject expert. Now would you want that same expert to facilitate your business skills class at your company? Highly unlikely.

Even though your facilitator will mostly be guiding via the SBL manner, either with a ILT aspect (Yuck) or VILT (yeah) and online courses/content (beyond SBL, yes, you can add self-paced here), if you think well, I can grab anyone to do this, you are going to regret it the moment you observe it – and if you are running L&D or Training or HR, you want to observe at intervals, without telling the facilitator ahead of time. Again, I speak from experience running training departments and then showing up without notice to see how my trainers were doing (even VLT back then).

Back to the List for Cohort-based Learning

  • I recommend no more than 10 people in each community, hence the benefit of using the term “learning pod” – You can have as many learning pods as you want, but once you go past 10 folks it becomes unmanageable and I can guarantee you will have certain members who are very active, some that are active, and some that are nearly non-existent, unless heavy peer pressure is placed on them, but even then, they will eventually drop back.
  • Another perk of no more than 10, is you can achieve a very active Pod. An ideal number actually is six per pod, but I get some folks just won’t be able or wish to do that. Remember, full P2P learning is extremely relevant an important here, and thus, going into the 50 or 100 or even 25 will become ineffective. And, you will have only one facilitator. Try to imagine having hundreds or even thousands in one pod, with one person facilitating it. If you have ever attended a seminar or webinar, how many people are really paying attention? Exactly.

Who is in your pod?

There is a lot of materials out there, that may no distinguishable approach on this, but I did find one, that really hit home and made 100% sense. Let’s go back to when you attended school – especially if you went to college/uni/2 year college).

Who was in your class? People will all different backgrounds and knowledge. Some come from large cities, some came from small towns. Some came from this state or country or province that was not the same as you. Different genders. Different perspectives. Different socioeconomic.

Different skills. Different ways of learning – and acquiring knowledge. I know there is a massive camp of folks who say learning styles do not exist, but forget that if they attended a college or university, they preferred a style or two. I preferred auditory, I didn’t have to watch the professor, I could just listen. Some people needed slides or something on a screen. There are some people who can study with music blasting, others who must have it quiet – this is not a learning style, though, it is with this example, learning preference.

The point being regardless of their style or preference they were in your class.

There were jokesters and serious folks. There were people you did not see every class (if it wasn’t mandatory) and if you did attend every class, those who were there like you. I am happy to report, that I did not attend every class for a subject matter, and achieved high grades – but I digress.

There were note takers, and folks who slept. There were folks who asked a lot of questions, and folks who said nothing. And depending on the person teaching the class, they were either engaging and espoused knowledge in such a way, that you got it – and thus liked them, OR they were dull and monotone and you decided, not to attend every class or to fall asleep in the back.

Speaking of which, think back to your time in school, even college/university. I guarantee you can think immediately of someone who made a huge impression on you, that you held or still hold in high regard – and think why that is? And you will remember at least one person, teacher, who was awful – and why was that?

The former made a difference in who you are, and what you have achieved – they were in essence a mentor. This is the mentor, and/or mentors you want to have in your cohort-based learning program. And if you can’t find someone exactly, and honestly, you won’t – which is why you hold the former in such high regard, you can find someone who exhibits some of those same traits or attributes, regardless if they are new to the company or have been there for a while. This is especially true for an association and their members.

All of this is mentioned here, because the epiphany I had when I read that article, is that to have the networking experience tied around P2P learning, with guided, you want people who are different than you.

When attending school, were all your friends just like you, with the same background, knowledge, skills, etc? Or where they different, even one difference? For me, different – even in grad school. I loved that.

When you are at work, have you met people who are not like you? They may have the same interests, but do they have all of your interests? Do they have all the same skills and at the same levels? Did they grow up in the same socioeconomic background as you? Same ethnicity? Same experiences?

And you like that, or I hope you do. You connect. You share knowledge, and provide insight and work together, in some manner even if you are not in the same department or location.

That is a shared experience. You can share and transfer knowledge, work together on a project or something else that is not job related (maybe a birthday party). You are connected at a whole other level, and you can learn new skills and interests, that you may decide to try out.

They maybe at different levels, ie. job wise, and have a different job, but connectivity and unity exists. That’s part of a cohort method, without even realizing it, you are part already of a cohort-based experience, even learning if you will – sans the SBL.

Therefore an ideal pod, should be people who are not the same. Who are in different job roles, different levels at the company – i.e. newbies, and folks that have been there for more than two years, or five or 10. They should have different skills and strengths. Even weaknesses.

You cannot attain an effective cohort-based approach with everyone being the same – same job role, same skills, some career goals or member objectives. You can’t learn with that. You cannot get the full power of cohort-based learning with that.

Bottom Line

I tried to limit the post in length and scope, and yes, didn’t do a great job at it. However, cohort-based learning isn’t a simple idea or process.

It has to understand that in groups, you are always going to have at least one leader – and if you ahve more than one, eventually the stronger of the other(s) will take charge. You have to recognize that the rest of the group, will follow whoever is the leader, but it doesn’t mean, that they respect or even will truly connect with them. And if there are more than one leader or attempts to be, there will be private squabbling going on- and you may not even recognize it.

You are going to have people who are not active. And those who are highly active. As the leader of the group, it is your responsibility to engage everyone. To collaborate, seek input and insight and have those individuals become a real part of the cohort. You must ensure that their ideas are incorporated in some way, activities ditto. You must appreciate everyone.

A cohort-based learning process online – can include self-paced courses/content – which is a great way to share new idea and insight. Allow folks to communicate those ideas with the others in the pod. They do not need nor should complete the entire self-paced course. That will exist – i.e. have to complete it all with your SBL course(s).

Empowerment.

It’s not just a word that people love to espouse as a way to reinforce some attribute or thought process.

With cohort-based learning it must be a daily

Weekly, Monthly and yearly

Occurrence within each and every pod.

No exceptions.

E-Learning 24/7

Comment on Interview with PeakSpan Capital, A Growth Equity Firm by By Craig WeissLearning Systems Forecasts for 2023

0

Many are unaware that one of the biggest roles in this industry, are those played by Private Equity (including Growth Equity) and VC (Venture Capital) firms. From the learning system and learning technology standpoint (and yes, I see a difference) the PE or VC firm is the one to go to when you seek capital or seek to be acquired. They are the ones that many vendors still today, hear from, to gauge whether or not said vendor is interested in being acquired or receiving funding.

In the learning system and learning technology space, the Growth Equity firms lead the pack due to the number of early-stage companies who have the high growth potential. However, recent buys such as Cornerstone for example, came from a PE firm. Another big-time player in the learning technology/system space is Vista Equity, a PE, who at one-time in the 2009-time frame owned SumTotal. In 2021, they invested in Schoox.

PeakSpan Capital, is a Growth Equity firm. Their recent investments in our industry include Bongo Learn.

I spoke with Sanket Merchant, Principal, of PeakSpan Capital.

Q: Refers to the question, it will be bolded in Green. A: Refers to the response from PeakSpan Capital, it will be italicized.

Q: Consumers may not be aware of certain terminology and then, if they go and look it up, sometimes the explanations are even more confusing. For the non-financial person, what does a Private Equity firm, VC and Growth Equity firms do?

A: It’s a great question and certainly has grown in complexity. If we take a step back, the landscape for “private capital” investors is fairly broad with categories such as Venture Capital, Growth Equity (i.e., PeakSpan Capital), and Private Equity. The simplest distinction between each group is (i) the perceived risk (and type of risk) being assumed by each investor type, (ii) maturity of the business being invested in (oftentimes measured by revenue and growth), and (iii) returns target and how the investor typically generates a return.

Venture Capital firms are typically taking on more risk, writing smaller equity checks, and have greater returns expectations to compensate them for the risk of investing in an earlier stage business (smaller in terms of revenue scale but showcasing hyper-growth).

Growth equity investors like PeakSpan Capital stay on hymnal with our name – we’re typically investing after strong evidence of product-market fit and investing in growth. While risk is never zero; growth equity investors are typically taking on less product/technology and/or market risk and instead taking on more execution risk, particularly around go-to-market.

Returns expectations are slightly lower (likely 3-4x their invested capital) given risk of losing money on investments is innately lower as companies mature. Lastly, private equity investors are writing the biggest equity investments (tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars) and often will use some level of debt capital, particularly if it is an investment where the PE firm is seeking to purchase “control” or more than 50% ownership of the business after the investment.

Private equity firms are presumably taking on the least amount of “risk” given maturity of the underlying businesses. Like growth equity investors, they’re actively engaged and will typically bring in large operations teams to assist portfolio companies in accelerating growth, driving operational efficiencies, complete strategic tuck-in acquisitions (or M&A of smaller businesses) as a complement to organic growth programs, etc.

Q: I find that potential buyers of learning systems see that a vendor has raised X capital, and thus perceive that the system must be making a lot of sales, and be a great system – i.e. elite.  However, that isn’t the case all the time is it?

A: You’re absolutely right – certainly not the case every time! The advantage of being a private company is that you do not need to publicly disclose your financial performance; however, there are a few things you can do to build a directional sense of how large a vendor is or how well they’re doing. First, I would look at their LinkedIn headcount, and, in particular, sales headcount to build a directional sense for the size or scale of a vendor (i.e., assume a $ of revenue per FTE to estimate directional size and revenue scale).

Second, I’ll caveat that I haven’t seen the most recent research but several analyses we’ve seen in the past that looked at how much equity capital had been raised to generate a company’s current revenue scale. For most Silicon Valley companies that number for at least $4 (or more).

What that means is that companies had to raise $40M of equity investment to reach $10M in ARR or annual recurring revenue. I’ll caveat that the number likely has changed and, importantly, every company is different in terms of how efficient they’ve been with any equity capital they’ve raised, so challenging to paint with a broad brush.

For example, Calendly (leading provider of scheduling software) raised < $500K to reach $100M+ in ARR before whereas other companies may have raised $400M to reach the same revenue scale. Keep in mind just because someone has raised lots of $$$ doesn’t mean they’ve been anywhere near as efficient in deploying that capital as you may have been!

Q: When a vendor seeks to raise capital, in your experience, what are they focusing on (area or areas)?  And from your perspective, what do you look at, key indicators or variables to determine if that vendor (in this type of scenario) is a good candidate for receiving capital from you?

A:

Vendors are likely looking at some combination of the following: (i) resource to accelerate growth, (ii) change in ownership in the business (founder or early investor requires or wants liquidity), (iii) access to network and operational resources, and, most importantly, (iv) want help scaling their business to the next level because an entrepreneur (or team) may not have the direct experience with the next few stages of growth/evolution in the business so critical to have an experienced investment partner in your corner.

From an investor’s perspective, it’s fairly simple – investors are looking for “alpha” or opportunities where there is high conviction in generating a return on invested capital.

That requires two things to come together nicely – (i) perception of a high performing business and (ii) attractively structured investment (valuation, terms, etc.). There are certainly some great businesses out there but given valuation expectations may not be great investments given performance required to generate an attractive return.

Let’s double-click on the above.

Investors are looking for businesses that are (i) showing product and delivery leadership in a large and strategic segment of the market (i.e., LMS for SMBs, Sales Enablement, Customer Training or Extended Enterprise), (ii) scarcity value or competitive advantage that can extend well beyond underlying technology, (iii) attractive financial profile (revenue scale relative to capital raised to date, strong accelerating growth, capital efficiency, etc.), (iv) attractive unit economic performance (i.e., retention (gross- and net-dollar / logo), acquisition efficiency, etc.), (v) strong leadership team led by a visionary founder/CEO, and (vi) clear evidence of opportunities to drive value in the business (accelerated growth, operational efficiency, etc.).

Q: Let’s follow up on more question around this above inquiry. Do you ask if you are the only vendor that vendor is seeking capital from?  What is the typical approach when it comes to multiple PEs or investment firms or individual investor(s), when the vendor is accepting multiple funding partners?  Is the majority based solely on total investment at that time, or over a period of time?

A: Despite the challenge of the current market environment, we’ve been living in a world of what I call a “supply-demand imbalance.” What I mean by that is there is considerably more capital available from a broader constituency of investment firms (i.e., demand) then businesses that are a great candidate for that growth capital (i.e., supply). As a result, it’s my view that any investor that thinks they’re the only firm that a vendor is speaking with is being naive! I suspect any high performing business I’m speaking with about a prospective partnership is likely talking to multiple firms.

Like selling your home, if you’re hoping to maximize the outcome (price, terms, etc.) then you want to have a competitive process, which means engaging multiple firms that you admire and believe could be exceptional partners to the business participate in a structured process where they’re getting access to information and following a consistent timeline.

It’s my job as a prospective partner to differentiate myself and the “product” we’re offering as a prospective partner from our peers that extends well beyond the capital we’re providing, which in my view has commoditized given the plethora of sources that have emerged over the years.  

Q: Is there a typical percentage or requirements that a PE, Growth Equity or VC will ask for if they offer to provide capital to a vendor (supplier)?  In other words, let’s say you want to provide Vendor X with 5M, what is the usual percentage (that you find or aware of)?  Does any capital infusion come with a requirement of at least one board seat? (Assuming it is a private company – which in our industry – is the overwhelmingly majority)

A: That is really only applicable at the earlier investment stages (i.e., Seed) and less so at later stages of investing where valuations are governed by a value placed on a dollar of revenue (often the case because SaaS businesses that are growing quickly are incurring losses or not profitable) or dollar of EBITDA. It’s common that most lead investors will ask for a board seat given they’re a minority investor and don’t control the business. Some investors require it while others may request it.

In most cases, the founders’ control of the Board of Directors and, while biased, I think having your lead investor hold a board seat can be additive (especially with the right investor) as they can offer a complementary perspective based on prior experiences and be helpful in thinking through a variety of strategic topics to the business.

Q: Let’s say you decided to acquire a learning system vendor or a vendor in the e-learning space (could be a publisher), are the variables or parameters different than say, providing capital to the vendor (not an acquisition)?

A: It doesn’t change much from the eyes of an investor and largely a function of strategic objectives from existing stakeholders in the business. However, where it can differ is it is considered a “strategic acquisition” where either it is an independent (or publicly traded) software company or a portfolio company of a private equity investor who is looking at you [the target] as a bolt-on acquisition. In that case, I would say quality of product/technology and strategic fit within the acquirers existing portfolio (i.e., does it fill a strategic product gap or provide access to a new market/buyer) and synergies (i.e., cross-sell opportunities, added revenue scale, additional profitability, etc.) elevate in importance.

Q: I am going to pose a scenario to you, that I see often in our industry.

In the last five years, there are a lot of firms out there trying to acquire learning system vendors, and off-the-shelf publishers of courses to a lesser degree.  It has only increased, and there are way too many vendors who think “they are the only ones” receiving these inquiries.

 What would you tell a vendor if they receive one inquiry or multiple inquiries from investment banks/firms, PEs, individual investor(s)?   How can they tell legit from snooping around?

A: First, I would meet with your existing stakeholders (or board) to discuss that interest and discuss key strategic objectives for your business today and going forward. Do you have interest in raising capital to accelerate growth? Have any existing stakeholders expressed interest in selling some or all of their equity? Do you want to explore a strategic sale of the business either to a PE firm or strategic to realize a full exit? I think it is important that businesses are developing relationships with investors that they think could be excellent partners at some point in the business as it does offer downstream benefits and building relationships with vendors that could ultimately acquire the business.

What you’re raising is a reasonable concern and would recommend folks consult with their boards to remain organized, consult with their lawyers to ensure they have appropriate confidentiality agreements in place if you’re sharing information openly (including non-solicit provisions if with a strategic acquirer), and most importantly, openly discussing “intent” to ensure those conversations are productive, aligned, and a good use of time.

Q: And if they are interested in pursuing further, what do they need to do on their side?

A: A well-structured process is the key to success, which can be either managed internally or outsourced to an investment bank that can assist with providing access to investors/acquirers, create marketing materials (including financial analyses, models, etc.), and assist with process management (which can become a full-time job on its own in addition to managing the business). I believe being able to complement that interest with other relevant investors/acquirers is key to driving the best outcome! If you’re unable to do that then I would ensure you’re consulting with your existing stakeholders and legal team to ensure you’re being presented with a deal that you believe is attractive absent competing offers!

Q: I tend to see that vendors who move forward with being acquired always seem stunned at how long it takes, and what is all involved.  Can you provide a timeframe (in general and no, I am not holding it to you), of the process, what is involved in the process, who must be involved in the process and so forth? (Let’s assume it is a private company, and not public).

A: I would conservatively estimate 6-12-months to complete an acquisition. It can certainly be faster but unlikely to be less than 3-months in a best-case scenario!

Last question

Q: I’m a learning system or learning technology vendor and I want to raise capital.  What should I do? Let’s say, I really don’t know who to reach out to, although I asked around and received a couple of names.  Should I solely rely on that, or should I do my own due diligence, and if yes on the latter, where and how?

A: I would initially reach out to existing investors to get recommendations on firms that you should engage with as they’ll likely have a perspective on firms they admire that could be a great fit given sector, scale, stage, profile, etc. If not, I would get access to sources like Crunchbase or PitchBook to see if you can find investors that have been active in the L&D category (or exited prior LMS investments) where your current round and stage are a perfect fit with their strategy.

Upfront research on the narrowing on investor outreach that would be an ideal fit for your round will be incredibly valuable to ensuring you’re being efficient with your time, engaging with groups that you believe will be additive to your business, and those that will immediately appreciate what you’ve accomplished and share your vision for the market opportunity ahead of the business.

I would certainly conduct your own research and no harm in taking a look at their existing (or exited investments) and reaching out to a few entrepreneurs to get an off-list reference on the firm. If you like what you’re hearing/seeing, then I find a warm introduction (like with anything in life) is best – identify the partner that brings the relevant domain expertise and see if you can find a mutual connection to provide an introduction. Best of luck!

Huge thank you to Sanket Merchant from PeakSpan Capital.

About PeakSpan Capital

PeakSpan Capital is a growth equity firm based in New York City and San Mateo. Having partnered with over 30 high-growth software businesses and with $1.5B+ in AUM, PeakSpan’s mission is to be the partner of choice for growth stage entrepreneurial teams who are building amazing software targeted at business buyers of all sizes. PeakSpan combines deep domain expertise within a select number of themes with a homegrown, proprietary technology platform providing visibility into company and market performance, to help disruptive entrepreneurs drive resilient, risk-adjusted value creation. PeakSpan has been actively investing in Human Capital Management, HR Technology, Learning & Development, and Education Technology broadly for decades with representative investments (prior and current) including HireVue, Plateau Systems (acq. by SAP SuccessFactors), EpignosisFuel50KudoboardRallywareBongo, and more.

To learn more about PeakSpan Capital and its portfolio, please visit: www.peakspancapital.com.