This is a concept project I created for a fictional company, Nanny Co. Nanny Co. specializes in matching experienced nannies with families in need of child-care.
Problem Analysis
Nanny Co. was experiencing a high rate of match breaks between the families and the nannies within a few months of the match. This resulted in financial loss for the company as well as frustration and emotional stress for both the parties involved.
I believe the key to successful and meaningful training lies in whether there is a performance gap that the training will fix. If there’s no actual performance gap, the training is just “wanted” and not really “needed.”
In this case, after analyzing the problem, I found that the Nanny Co. program coordinators met with the families to help them prepare for the nanny interview. The program coordinators were given some basic directions and code of conduct to handle the meetings. However, they were not prepared to anticipate and handle the different scenarios they could encounter in their meetings with the families. Nanny Co. clients include families with different backgrounds and varied needs. It was imperative that the program coordinators were trained to prepare for the different scenarios they could encounter. This would help them to look for specific cues in the meetings that would influence their response and make them more confident to guide the families in the best possible manner.
Design and Development
After identifying and analyzing the problem, I felt that an in-person training involving role plays would be the best solution to include a wide variety of scenarios to help the program coordinators prepare and practice.
Nanny Co. has program coordinators all across the country. The client was concerned about the cost and the infrastructure this type of in-person training would entail. So, instead, I suggested a scenario-based e-learning program. The program coordinators could take the e-learning anytime and from anywhere. They would just need an internet connection and a device like a laptop or a mobile phone to access the e-learning.
Once I received the go-ahead from Nanny Co., I read the company’s manual, code of conduct, and other materials available on their intranet to gather the basic requirements for the meetings. I then met with the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), two of the most experienced program coordinators at Nanny Co.
During the discussions with the SMEs, I encouraged them to share their varied experiences of their meetings with the different families. I asked them to tell me stories and share anecdotes of those meetings. I made extensive notes on – What worked well? what didn’t? In cases where their matching was successful, what did they do differently? In cases where their matchings were not so successful, do they wish they’d changed their approach? If yes, how? I used these stories and the SME’s experiences as a starting point for my training scenarios. My next step was to create characters. I zeroed in on a family in need of a nanny and developed their unique situation – busy physicians. From there, I worked on how the interaction between that family and the program coordinators would take place.
I used Action Mapping to help me with the branching of the different interactions the program coordinator may have with them. I initially wanted to keep the branching open and give the learners final feedback at the end. But as I developed the scenario, I felt it would be better to provide feedback to the learners as soon as they make their choice. In this way, they would get the feedback of their choice instantly which in turn would help them retain the learning.
After my scenarios were fully designed, I created the storyboard in PowerPoint. Creating a storyboard helps me finalize my design thoughts and saves time during the actual development. While creating the storyboard, I also searched for the images for my project online. I found beautiful pictures in Unsplash.com that matched with the color theme I’d envisioned and decided to use those in my training. I finally developed the module in Articulate Storyline 360 using different triggers and layers.
Evaluation
This is a concept course but if it were an actual project – I’d like to evaluate it on different levels:
Did the learning happen?
This course is one of the 4 courses that will be offered to the learners to practice and learn how to look for cues in the conversation with the families and respond accordingly. Once they complete these 4 courses that will help them practice their responses in diverse situations, there will be a final test that will check their learning. The test will also be a scenario-based storyline module. But, instead of one family, there will be 4 different families each with their own unique situation. The feedback will be given to the learners at the end of the course instead of after they select each response, like in case of the practice courses. The final score in this test will be the basis of the evaluation of the 4 practice modules – how well the learners were able to grasp the basics of identifying the cues and query handling. For the practice modules, I would also like to track the learner’s clicks on the responses. This is possible using xAPI. xAPI can be used such that, each time a learner selects an answer, an xAPI statement is generated. These statements can help identify which questions are challenging for the learners. They can also help identify if additional information or training is required on a specific topic.
Did the behavior change?
To evaluate, whether these practice courses helped change the behavior of the program coordinators, I’d suggest interviewing/getting information from the families they met to find out how they interacted with the families. This could be done in-person or over the call. This will help identify whether the responses of the program coordinators were in accordance to the training they received. This would also help identify whether more refresher courses are required.
Did the results improve and the performance problem resolve?
Finally, the success of the practice tests would be evaluated based on the actual results – was there a change in the rate of match breaks between the families and the nannies within a few months of the match. The training will be considered successful if the families and the nannies stayed together for the period of the contract or for more than a year, when the contracts were of a longer duration.
Scenario based e-learning
Overview
This is a concept project I created for a fictional company, Nanny Co. Nanny Co. specializes in matching experienced nannies with families in need of child-care.
Problem Analysis
Nanny Co. was experiencing a high rate of match breaks between the families and the nannies within a few months of the match. This resulted in financial loss for the company as well as frustration and emotional stress for both the parties involved.
I believe the key to successful and meaningful training lies in whether there is a performance gap that the training will fix. If there’s no actual performance gap, the training is just “wanted” and not really “needed.”
In this case, after analyzing the problem, I found that the Nanny Co. program coordinators met with the families to help them prepare for the nanny interview. The program coordinators were given some basic directions and code of conduct to handle the meetings. However, they were not prepared to anticipate and handle the different scenarios they could encounter in their meetings with the families. Nanny Co. clients include families with different backgrounds and varied needs. It was imperative that the program coordinators were trained to prepare for the different scenarios they could encounter. This would help them to look for specific cues in the meetings that would influence their response and make them more confident to guide the families in the best possible manner.
Design and Development
After identifying and analyzing the problem, I felt that an in-person training involving role plays would be the best solution to include a wide variety of scenarios to help the program coordinators prepare and practice.
Nanny Co. has program coordinators all across the country. The client was concerned about the cost and the infrastructure this type of in-person training would entail. So, instead, I suggested a scenario-based e-learning program. The program coordinators could take the e-learning anytime and from anywhere. They would just need an internet connection and a device like a laptop or a mobile phone to access the e-learning.
Once I received the go-ahead from Nanny Co., I read the company’s manual, code of conduct, and other materials available on their intranet to gather the basic requirements for the meetings. I then met with the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), two of the most experienced program coordinators at Nanny Co.
During the discussions with the SMEs, I encouraged them to share their varied experiences of their meetings with the different families. I asked them to tell me stories and share anecdotes of those meetings. I made extensive notes on – What worked well? what didn’t? In cases where their matching was successful, what did they do differently? In cases where their matchings were not so successful, do they wish they’d changed their approach? If yes, how? I used these stories and the SME’s experiences as a starting point for my training scenarios. My next step was to create characters. I zeroed in on a family in need of a nanny and developed their unique situation – busy physicians. From there, I worked on how the interaction between that family and the program coordinators would take place.
I used Action Mapping to help me with the branching of the different interactions the program coordinator may have with them. I initially wanted to keep the branching open and give the learners final feedback at the end. But as I developed the scenario, I felt it would be better to provide feedback to the learners as soon as they make their choice. In this way, they would get the feedback of their choice instantly which in turn would help them retain the learning.
After my scenarios were fully designed, I created the storyboard in PowerPoint. Creating a storyboard helps me finalize my design thoughts and saves time during the actual development. While creating the storyboard, I also searched for the images for my project online. I found beautiful pictures in Unsplash.com that matched with the color theme I’d envisioned and decided to use those in my training. I finally developed the module in Articulate Storyline 360 using different triggers and layers.
Evaluation
This is a concept course but if it were an actual project – I’d like to evaluate it on different levels:
Did the learning happen?
This course is one of the 4 courses that will be offered to the learners to practice and learn how to look for cues in the conversation with the families and respond accordingly. Once they complete these 4 courses that will help them practice their responses in diverse situations, there will be a final test that will check their learning. The test will also be a scenario-based storyline module. But, instead of one family, there will be 4 different families each with their own unique situation. The feedback will be given to the learners at the end of the course instead of after they select each response, like in case of the practice courses. The final score in this test will be the basis of the evaluation of the 4 practice modules – how well the learners were able to grasp the basics of identifying the cues and query handling. For the practice modules, I would also like to track the learner’s clicks on the responses. This is possible using xAPI. xAPI can be used such that, each time a learner selects an answer, an xAPI statement is generated. These statements can help identify which questions are challenging for the learners. They can also help identify if additional information or training is required on a specific topic.
Did the behavior change?
To evaluate, whether these practice courses helped change the behavior of the program coordinators, I’d suggest interviewing/getting information from the families they met to find out how they interacted with the families. This could be done in-person or over the call. This will help identify whether the responses of the program coordinators were in accordance to the training they received. This would also help identify whether more refresher courses are required.
Did the results improve and the performance problem resolve?
Finally, the success of the practice tests would be evaluated based on the actual results – was there a change in the rate of match breaks between the families and the nannies within a few months of the match. The training will be considered successful if the families and the nannies stayed together for the period of the contract or for more than a year, when the contracts were of a longer duration.