Elearning, Virtual, Classroom, or a Blended Solution?? Too Many Options!

I was talking with a client recently who was trying to decide which path to take for hosting a conflict management course – he was looking at all of the options: elearning, virtual, classroom, or a blended solution – and trying to determine what would be the best route to take. Price alone wasn’t a concern – he wanted to choose what would be most effective and efficient for his team.  He had already spoken to a few training vendors to learn about what they had to offer and was getting a bit confused by everything he was hearing (much of which was in conflict with each other.)

First, I wanted to be sure we were on the same page with definitions of each – here is what we agreed to:

• Elearning: self-paced Web-based learning, log on anytime
• Virtual: facilitator-led Web-based learning, log on at a specified time
• Classroom: face-to-face learning led by a facilitator
• Blended:  any combination of the above

Then, we discussed the expectations of the program – I asked a few questions; his replies follow:

Question: Are the individuals taking the conflict management course all in one location?

Answer: No, they are in 3 different locations with two different time zones, but they can be in one location easily enough. Travel is not a problem.  There are 8 of them altogether.

Question: What is the objective for having the individuals take the course?

Answer: To improve their ability to handle any types of conflicts.

Question: What are the issues now that make you believe they need to handle conflicts better?

Answer: They all avoid conflict – even the smallest amount of conflict, even conflict that might be considered “good” conflict.  For example, if two groups – say marketing and sales – are arguing over how to invest a certain amount of budget monies, it takes a significant long period of time before the groups finally escalate the conflict for a more strategic decision to be made.  Literally, the budget monies one year remained unspent because they couldn’t move forward with what to do with the monies.  I frankly don’t expect them to come to agreement on their own, but would like them to recognize when they need to push a decision up the ladder.  In another situation, one member of a production team was not pulling her weight.  No one was willing to address the issue with her as they didn’t want to upset her or have to deal with conflict.  The project ended up over budget and over time since they brought in another person to do her job but kept her on the project also.

Question: What do you want them to do after the course is completed and they are back on the job?

Answer: The goal is that they will be able to more effectively handle conflict that occur in a variety of circumstances – whether every-day interactions with others in the company, interactions with clients or with vendors.  They will also know when to escalate for a decision to be made that requires input and judgment from an executive in  the company.

Now…which choice: elearning, virtual, classroom, or some combination – a blended model?  The client was willing to pursue whichever option would be the best to accomplish his goals – keeping in mind:

• Cost efficiencies
• Reduced time out of the office
• Reduced travel costs
• Ensuring the training would have a positive impact on the group
• Fitting it all in with everything else going on!

Let’s look at each option:

Elearning

Developing the conflict management course on an elearning platform would certainly save travel costs and time out of the office. Additionally, participants can take the elearning course when they chose to do so – thereby more easily fitting it into busy schedules.  However, given that it was important that the participants be comfortable in managing conflicts, which meant role playing was a required component of the workshop, elearning wouldn’t be appropriate for the entire workshop.  It might be possible to have a portion of the workshop be on an elearning platform – for example, the participants could learn about a conflict resolution methodology/process via self-paced learning in a 2 – 4 hour elearning module that includes some individual activities.  The role playing could be done separately, outside from the elearning modules.

Virtual

The virtual platform offered some more possibilities than elearning and would also save travel costs and time out of the office.  If sessions were kept to 2 – 3 hours at most and done over a couple of weeks, it would reduce time away current projects.  With a virtual classroom solution, the participants could still participate in group exercises and could do conflict resolution role plays via the virtual platform – although likely role playing in this way would not be very effective.  There would also be a facilitator available and leading the sessions.  However, since, the participants are uncomfortable with conflicts, it may not be as beneficial to them to practice the skill without actually being face-to-face with a facilitator right there in front of them to support them.  Similarly to elearning, virtual learning might be used to learn a conflict resolution methodology/process, but then add (because of the virtual platform) the ability to do group activities.  If the virtual platform was used for transferring of knowledge only and some group activities, it might be accomplished in two 2-hour virtual sessions.  Again, the role playing could be done separately outside of the virtual classroom.

Classroom

The classroom options certainly provides for a more robust experience – combining knowledge transfer, group exercises, individual activities, case study work and role playing to develop skills in conflict management.  Certainly, with a facilitator available, right there in the classroom with the participants, it will be easier to gauge the comfort level of the participants and provide better support to those struggling with the material.  It would be easier to make adjustments to the curriculum – such as additional role plays, more time spent on certain topics – during the day depending on participants’ progress.  Given the needs of the organization, the classroom material could be presented in a 2-day format; however a 3-day classroom experience will provide more richness in role playing.

Blended Solution

There were many options for a blended solution – including:

• Elearning and virtual
• Elearning and classroom
• Virtual and classroom
• Elearning, virtual and classroom

Certainly a combination to include classroom learning would enable much better role playing opportunities.  Any combination of the above would reduce the time out of work and reduce travel costs.  The combination of elearning and virtual would incur no travel costs.

The Solution

After much consideration – considering time out of the office, travel costs, trying to fit in a program with everything else going on and, most importantly, the need for the participants to be comfortable so they can learn and then be successful in conflict situations – it was decided that a classroom environment would be the best option.  The most fitting option was a 3-day workshop as it would provide extra support and role play.  However, 3 days out of the office would be a bit much for the group.  The following was developed:

Initially a 2-day workshop with discussion around a conflict management methodology/process and case study work on the first day and a second day of role playing.  Communication continued between the participants and the facilitator via a discussion forum where everyone could participate and assist each other.  After a one month period, the group got back together for the third day with the facilitator to discuss how they did during the month and review where they may have questions or need additional support.  Follow up support was provided via the discussion forum for an additional 3 month time period.

Outcome

The level of comfort in recognizing good and bad conflict managing conflicts increased after the 2 day workshop and then significantly further by the end 6 months. The knowledge gained around understanding different conflict situations, when to handle with the team and when to escalate, helped to improve a variety of areas, including working relationships, teamwork, and time to market.  Additionally cost savings were realized and quality improved overall.