Download 2012 Simulations and Serious Games Portfolio PDF Advanced Learning Strategies Clients include
About Us Clark Aldrich Bio Books and Articles Simulations and Serious Games Registry

The 10 Lenses to Overcome Blind Spots and See Opportunities in Organizational Learning

Introduction

This article was co-written with Tom Parkinson.

Lenses are contexts to look at existing processes and become aware of “blind spots.” Many a training pundit have come to high regard based on their surfacing of new lenses. “What if we look at social media?” Or, “what if we consider baby boomers differently than Millennials?” Or "what are the implications if there are different learning styles?" Or, “what if we train customers using eLearning as well as employees?”

Ten Lenses

Given that, we are currently at a time in the Learning Industries when there are perhaps 10 useful lenses. We have to move back and forth between them to properly prioritize opportunities.

The ten lenses are:

1. Ages of End Users

Such as: Millennials; Gen Xers; and Baby Boomers.

Are you teaching the youngest employees and the oldest employees in the same way? Really?

2. The Flow of Skills

This occurs between: practitioners; experts; and occasionally instructors and students.

Are you focusing too much on enabling instructor-to-student, and missing the huge opportunity of peer-to-peer or expert-to-practitioner?

See overview article here and follow up here. This can also be around a specific project as it progresses from pilot to commodity, see diagram.

3. Types of Learning

The three primarily types are Learning to Know (new facts); Learning to Do (new abilities); and Learning to Be (new views of themselves and their relationships with others).

Are you using "learning to know" approaches when you want "learning to do" results?

See entry here.

4. Moments of Learning

When does the need for and fulfillment of learning occur: Learning before use; Learning while using for the first time; Learning to use new features; Learning when things go wrong; and Leaning new versions based on old?

Are you supporting learners at the point of application of learning?

5. Time in an Employee's Lifecycle

These can include New Employee; New job; New Manager; High Potential; and Senior Executive.

Are you missing entire segments of employees?

6. By Function

Such as: Training; Help Desk; Documentation; and Marketing (and then by country and product line).

Are stovepipes adding costs and hindering messaging?

7. By Audience Role

Such as: Employees; Channels; and Customers

Are best practices and content going where they are needed? Is the organization set up to best meet the needs of each?

8. By Organizational Priority

Such as: Short Term Critical; Medium Term Strategic; Legal Necessity; and Legacy

What does you organization need right now? What will it need in one year, and can you start now to meet that need?

9. By Message to User

Such as: Low cost/don't worry about it; High cost/this is critical.

What does it say to your employees when ethics training is bought off-the-shelf and deployed as cheaply as possible?

See entry here.

10. By Approach, including New and Traditional

New approaches includes: Social Media I (including blogging, Twittering, and podcasts), Social Media II (including Facebook style interactions); Mobile; and Sims and Games.

Traditional approaches include: Classroom; Online Workbooks; and Live Synchronous Virtual Class.

Do you even have the skills to use the right approaches, if they make perfect sense?

See new approaches against flow of skills here. For a look back ten years, see the Pensare vision.


Every new lens sheds light on missing processes. And one of the greatest values of a new lens is creating awareness that many people in the room may be seeing the same thing very differently.

We can risk both lens fatigue and spending too much time appreciating each new model. Having said that, both understanding the models that people bring to the table and the opportunities available are essential to meet the organization's needs.

What's the difference between an educational simulation and a serious game? An excerpt from The Complete Guide to Simulations and Serious Games

What follows is an excerpt from The Complete Guide to Simulations and Serious Games, my final book on the topic, published by Wiley in 2009.


One might be able to best differentiate between EDUCATIONAL SIMULATIONS and SERIOUS GAMES by their origin examples.

The best example of an educational simulation, and also its earliest success and justification, is the flight simulator for training pilots. Flight simulators have many of the attributes respected and desired in educational simulations today. They are first person (what you see in the simulation is what you would see in real life), directly relate to the needed skills, and their value is self-evident (in this case, keep both pilot and plane from crashing, which would result in killing hundreds of people and costing millions of dollars, and just making a big ol’ mess).

Flight simulators impressively deal with simple actions like turning a flap and nuanced actions such as using the throttle, but these actions are also interfaces into complicated, dynamic, and intertwined systems like wind shear and flying with broken equipment. And these actions and systems are all coordinated towards the straightforward goal of landing a plane safely, and ideally at the right airport. The hope and promise of the educational simulation movement is that this model can be used for more academic and higher-level skills such as “understanding the decisions of a historical leader” or even “applying leadership.” And we will dig more deeply into those three aspects of content, actions, systems, and results, soon enough.

In contrast, the prototypical serious game is Will Wright’s brilliant SimCity (and later The Sims and Spore, but SimCity is where it began). In SimCity, players are highly entertained while designing and nurturing the cities they evolved. It was designed to be (and published as) a game and yet has found its way into many academic curricula. It is simple to use, originally even presenting a model train interface, yet presents complicated and interesting systems.

Players become proud of their city, in a way that few are proud of homework assignments. They even view their cities as an extension of their own views and priorities. Players also gain (some) insight into urban planning. The hope and promise of this serious games approach is that many more examples emerge that likewise are equally addictive and educational.