I just read (1-31-24) that during the Pandemic, students (EdTech, K-12, Higher Education) went down something like 4% in learning. That’s not good. I blame it on two areas – that seem to reverberate that e-learning isn’t as effective (I disagree).
The first? Professors and teachers only do synchronous-based learning (which I believe isn’t as effective unless you add some parameters such as activities, deep thinking, etc.). The second? The Bore Factor – as in professors, teachers, heavily (in some cases, all the time) on the screen using a web conference solution (edtech often refers to it as a digital classroom) and talking. How engaged is that? That is like an audiobook, whereas it teaches you how to fall asleep to someone speaking in a monotone voice. Instead of leveraging what kids use these days, such as Instagram and TikTok, EdTech did the same as they would in a classroom. They changed nothing, but the problem is they failed by doing so. And who takes the whammy for that? Online learning – which EdTech refers to as remote learning (I guess remote viewing was unavailable because the CIA tried it during the Cold War).
Next up? Many “experts, including some analysts,” use learning systems to refer to all learning systems except an LMS. Thus, you will see LMS and Learning Systems. This makes no sense to me.
An LMS can do everything an LXP can do (depending on the vendor), and the combo LMS/LXP angle is a mish-mash of whatever a vendor thinks an LXP is (in reality, there are only a few that are legit combo – Juno Journey is one). A learning platform is second in the type of learning system – the challenge is that the vendors who slide under a learning platform rarely call themselves that. I’ve seen – an employee engagement platform – I’m sure everyone is running to type that into a search engine or say it when considering what system to buy. Employee Development Platform is another. Some weird concoction that a vendor has devised is another. Mentoring platforms are a combo; the core is the mentoring piece, and learning plays a significant role. A coaching platform follows the same angle. Thus, you have a CORE component and a twist within it.
Bouncing back to the LMS for a moment, here is a post I did about the reality of the LMS and breaks away the myths you might hear or will hear and read.
There are still vendors out there who say we are not an LMS or tap into the whole traditional thing (which is inaccurate), and yet they will use “LMS” as a keyword in their AdWords campaign and/or as a word when you search an LMS. If they believe they are not an LMS, why place that as part of your search?
One vendor told me it is a way for people to visit their website (I figured that out on my own). I’ve heard that before, so let me get this straight – you think an LMS is traditional, but you aren’t an LMS. Hey, we add it to our SEO keywords.
The most popular learning system is an LMS. Number one. It always has been. There is a reason: people who investigate the LMS will find that the whole formal focus, compliance angle only, is invalid. You can add content (or have a 3rd party). And you have always been able to since the corporate systems launched in the early days. Heck, I bought content through my LMS vendor in 2000.
If you seek a learning system that targets or pitches for frontline/diskless workers, blue-collar will slide under that (but in some systems that target, they rarely mention them – rather, they use “manufacturing” as a vertical). The most critical piece is the mobile app; it has to have an on/off synch. It has to be designed with the learner in mind – not the person running the department or division (such as the head of L&D, HR, or Training (internal). Ideally, a mobile app should be able to identify the bandwidth speed and change it accordingly. You might think that is impossible, but some vendors did it years ago. Just as they were able to change the playback speed, thus lowering FPS (frames per second) while maintaining quality.
Today? It’s rare to find one. Suppose you have someone working at a retail location (where the net is all over the map, often bad), on the plant floor (ditto), or at some other location on-site (those items noted above, I think it would be relevant).
Every vendor will say yes when people ask if the system is mobile-responsive. They really mean that you can access the system via a mobile web browser – the same spin if you ask if they have mobile learning – yep, via the mobile web browser.
Some vendors angle the “no need” to use an app because folks can access it via a mobile device. Yuck. I have problems at home with top-tier mesh adaptors. Some places in the UK would be excited if they could get 10MB speed. And these folks think a mobile browser via your mobile device will suffice.
The Shell Game of Active Users or MAUs
The pricing approach continues to confuse. The whole “active user” that is counted is seriously propaganda unless that vendor sends an invoice to you each month and charges you for each month. That’s it. If that isn’t happening, the whole “active user” spin is just spin. Ditto on the MAU thing, which is monthly active users. I know vendors who are confused by what they see other vendors do regarding the pricing of “active users.” Think about that for a second. The folks who sell a learning system, can’t understand how the active model really works – because it is a shell game.
Look here. Look there. Pick where the ball is. Sorry, it’s not there. It’s over here.
Some vendors say, “Okay, we will bill quarterly,” and count only the active users—two sides here to this coin. Unless the vendor is counting each month, and it isn’t, we break out your total bill over four quarters – but if it is the same price you would pay annually, then well, it is the latter.
I can tell you that some vendors are jumping into the latter or offering it as an option (plenty do, even before 2024), which will help you financially. Plus, it sounds like a better deal – around the whole active piece.
I want to stress – I repeat stress – if you are paying annually upfront OR the split for each quarter is the actual annual price, just broken up from an invoice standpoint – the vendor is not counting your active user count and bouncing it back to zero to start up again. It is not happening. Do not get into the shell game here. I know there will be a lot of people who will fall for that. Heck, I talked to one vendor who does it, and I kept asking, no, this is the way it is done, and they went all over the place, where for a moment I got confused – but with lots of pushing, finally got them to admit, that yes, you pay upfront annually.
Please do not get all Svengali with the vendor; they are Svengali, and you are his pupil. You pay upfront? They are not counting the active side back to zero. Focus on the proposal total. The bundled model is the most effective pricing model (it’s been around since 2000). ”We will sell you 1,000 seats,” – some now use licenses, but the term behind the scenes is seats. You have 650 active users. What are you paying upfront for? 1,000 seats. If you end up with 720, you still pay for the 1,000. There are no refunds here.
Nowadays, the bundled model is often tied around range pricing (behind the scenes), but it is still bundled.
How many vendors go with this type of pricing approach? My guess is about 90%. Always remember the goal of a learning system vendor, learning tech, whatever system you are purchasing, or tech you are buying, is to make money. Generate Sales. Not to lose money. They won’t last long if they follow that approach, albeit, behind the scenes, there is always at least one vendor privately on the market – either due to financial straits, or they want out, and are seeking the right buyer. Many fall into the former category – which I have found is always due to mismanagement at the top of the food chain. Soylent Green, anyone?
Other pricing news you need to know about in 2024 (as of today’s post, 1-31-2024)
- It is going up more than going down. People are losing their jobs. L&D, Training, and HR departments are the first to get cut. It’s too bad many vendors are ignoring that.
- You pay more for better support or support in general. There is one vendor that offers support packages right out of the gate. Free? Ain’t happening. And each package is expensive. It has nothing to do with your user base. And you pay yearly. The bummer for me? I like the system, but that is bad business.
- The number of hours of free training is dropping. I see one hour with some vendors. One hour? Who retains information over an hour? If the department/division/company head wants to be trained on the system, give it to them for free. If the admin needs more training on XYAX, give it to them. Give it to them if they have a new admin or one that has gone on vacation and needs to be trained. As many hours as needed. Why? Those support calls into your company aren’t free – they cost, and wouldn’t it make more sense to offset and stop that before it happens? Who is running the strategy around the low-hours training? Elmer Fudd?
- One way vendors are trying to lower it is to provide training videos on specific areas. It sometimes works, but there isn’t any way to know what someone needs training on. And unless you are going into every key spot, that won’t work. A vendor should look at the support calls or tech issues and see the top five using trend lines. That should be the indicator here. Not how to log in.
- Tiered pricing is back! You get XYZ at this cost. Then, another tier, and you get more. There is often a “most popular,” which means – this is the one the vendor wants you to buy unless you are an Enterprise. Then you contact them.
The problem? Only the vendor knows what Enterprise means. It may be 500 users or more. It may be 1,000 or 2,500 or 5,000 or 10,000 or how much revenue the client brings in (bad idea, but anyway, have fun with that). I’ve seen vendors who say 1,000 or more – but it is listed as Enterprise. They also show up to 1,000 on a lower tier. Which is it? I’ve seen vendors who go Enterprise, Mid-Market – SMB. Now, SMB means small to mid-market.
Suppose you are already saying mid-market (which many people have yet to learn what that means – which is why vendors do not say it out loud – nor should they), then do not say SMB. What do you say? Small business. If you privately say Large Enterprise, have a number min. for that. I’ve seen it all over the map. A vendor will always have a sweet spot. And in my experience, it is different from the 20,000 or more. As a prospect, you will not know – that’s ok. It is not relevant to a buyer.
Appropriate to an analyst – I always ask. A vendor should know it. No surprise, I talk to vendors – and I mean high-level, who have no idea. And they are often running sales.
Gen-AI Potential Fiasco
Okay, you will see AI. You are already seeing it everywhere. When you see the term AI, what the company, even vendors in our market, really mean is generative AI (there is machine learning, too, but nowadays, the vendor, entity, and even the folks selling LLMs, it is generative AI).
There are two types – Text (the most common one today) – which you will see in quite a few systems that already have it, or it is coming, OR multi-modal, which means it will generate text, video, audio, images, and so on. For example, synthetic audio is used when you see AI audio. A vendor may say it is in their product you can generate synthetic materials such as audio, images, etc.
Or they may not, but it is synthetic.
I continue to be surprised at the number of vendors needing to figure out what they are doing. Sure, they went with ABC, and they know some stuff, maybe a lot about AI in general, but they do not know how to leverage or tap into within their learning system, learning tech, heck, even 3rd party content platform.
I see it all the time, and it drives me up the wall – because here is the kicker – they tell you they know it and do this and that. Yet, when I dive in, I see them writing stuff down, which clearly says, I didn’t realize that, OR I should be doing this. Even when I write stuff, I hear from vendors who have AI now and are surprised that it can’t do this OR that its hallucinations piece will still exist when the client is adding only their stuff, whatever it might be, into the LLM (think foundation for gen AI).
Inquire what the text input and output are. Deer in the headlights look.
Inquire whether it is multi-modal or not. Silence, then they ask you what that means exactly. They tell you the token fees are low and are not impacting them. Then you notice that only the admin side can use the AI – no wonder it is low.
Wait until your learners type in text and seek it tying content or skills and content – recommending it based on what they want, and since they do not know what they should do – to get a clear response and more aligned – the fees will go up. Have 10,000 people hit that? I hope you calculated that cost into your pricing strategy. I see plenty who don’t because they have yet to learn many of the nuances of AI.
AI bias? It occurs. The snake eats it’s own tail? It’s called Model Collapse – and yeah, it is a genuine concern in the AI space. It involves training of the LLM, which is achieved by scraping text, etc., off the internet. Let’s say it is scraping stuff already written by AI on websites. Researchers have already found it in ChatGPT and Bard (which uses Gemini Pro).
What do you think will happen?
Recently, a researcher used Midjourney to create an image of the “Joker.” It did. The problem? It was the same as the copyright version.
Let’s say your employee asked that question, saw what they viewed, and had no idea it was copyrighted. Then they place that into some document (uh, not the Joker, but something else). How will that play?
Training with vendors providing AI must be extensive.
Content Providers must create content around AI – and how to leverage it for better results (to reduce token fees). All learning tech, learning systems, providers, and e-learning entities – will need to know the ins and outs – far more so than the general public. Today, I’m not seeing it.
Other issues showing up in AI? Data Poisoning or what is referred to as “sleeper agents.” Wait. What about the Poision Pill angle, when it comes to images, photographs, etc. that an LLM is trained on. By using those images and photos that have this code in it which poisons the image or photograph. Making it as researchers note, unsuitable for AI training. When do you find out? When you try to create an image or photo with the code in it.
L&D and Training Responsibilites – Because the vendors won’t always know
L&D and Training departments have to stay up to date, know about context windows (basically the number of input text that someone could enter at one time in a context window – i.e. known as a prompt window), and create online content on an ongoing basis so that their employee doesn’t damage the company. If the employee doesn’t know – and let’s say they looked at what was produced – under the improved productivity aspect – and then they push that up to their boss – and their boss doesn’t know – how will that work? Who is the expert here? Trust me, it is unlikely to be the vendor. It has to be you, and therein is the biggest issue.
Are vendors aware of small LLMs? I only know two – and that is because the folks who oversee AI at their companies stay current and knowledgeable – about gen AI. Everyone else in our industry? Not likely. Model as a Service? Across the board? Good luck.
Is Bard better than Bing? And what’s the difference – pluses and minuses of Bard – Bing – Claude. I note the last one because Bard is now built on Gemini Pro (a work in progress), Bing (ChatGPT), and Claude is Claude, a legitimate competitor to all three. Who knows about Gemini Ultra? Well, is it available in Windows Copilot. The thing that costs you $20 extra with particular business 365 packages. Oh, some vendors state “copilot” in their marketing copy.
Do they have it? When I look at it, no in nearly every case, and maybe in one, but it is a stretch.
And those in L&D and Training – do you know what it is and how it works? It isn’t just Microsoft’s exclusive term, nor the only one doing it. Because you better – the vendor that has it? Trust me, they won’t know the ins and outs.
Why?
They are not training their employees – if you are lucky once. I know of one 3rd party content provider that regularly has clinics for their employees – training on the latest with AI – that vendor? OpenSesame.
Bottom Line
Genesis once sang about this being the “Land of Confusion.”
I call that a prophecy.
That has come
True.
E-Learning 24/7
