For such a young industry as ours, we've had more than our fair share of ups and downs. But this time, we may be able to defend ourselves. Most previous downturns have occurred before the "knowledge economy" became common currency, before learning-management systems allowed us to track what our learners were doing, and before the majority of our most valuable workers spent their lives in front of a screen.

If we can demonstrate that the value delivered by learning technologies can navigate an organisation through troubled times, we may have less to fear than ever before. The problem is that when it comes to the value we create and the benefits we deliver, our industry has on the whole failed to present a unified, clear, and above all business-driven case.

Providers of learning technology services often couch their offerings in a vague cloud of benefits in the hope that some of these will resonate with their prospective clients. In bad times, however, it is absolutely critical that organisations focus on what they're going to get from technology-enabled learning.

Two agendas

The discussion around the benefits of learning technology tends to reflect two broad themes:

• "The efficiency agenda" - use technology to deal with similar learning challenges as previously, but cut cost and time
• "The effectiveness agenda" - use technology to add value in a way only new technologies can; to address learning and performance challenges in new ways

In reality these two agendas often overlap.

We have found, over an extended period, that identifying and surfacing these issues helps in directing attention towards realistic benefits and providing a realistic focus for a project or broader initiative. It is particularly important to surface these issues where different stakeholders have different agendas, such as where one member of a client team is aiming to cut staff downtime, while another has improving collaboration as a key goal.

The table below lists the most common benefits that tend to be discussed, mapped against each agenda.

It is possible to extend this differentiation to describe, at a high level, what a typical learning experience might look like if driven primarily by one agenda or the other. This is illustrated in the table below.

A key differentiation can be made between "content-driven" and "experience-driven" approaches. In the former, a project will typically be driven by existing content (in the form of presentations, documents, etc.) that will be converted into digital format with basic interactions added. Much rapid eLearning is produced in this way. The latter approach takes as its starting point the transformation that learners need to make, then aims to develop an experience that will facilitate this transformation.

What about blended learning?

Blended learning presents particular challenges, as the process of selecting and combining different media and methods can be complex, leading to a lack of clarity about the benefits required from individual components or the blend as a whole. We tend to take a structured approach to this selection and blending process, mapping each potential method in the blend against learning goals and selection criteria. The decision as to whether blended learning is appropriate at all should be an early outcome of clarifying the primary focus of the project.

Conclusion

It is often said that economic problems sharpen business focus. In that sense, the current downturn may do our industry good. If we are to be considered a mature, value-adding industry, we must be clear regarding the benefits we offer. Even in difficult economic times, there are many instances where an organisation needs to focus on improving quality - on "doing it better"- rather than simply cutting costs. For providers of learning technology services, it is imperative that they are clear about their clients' agendas, whether stated overtly or not.