Web 2.0 and Learning: Too Informal?

There's some bitter irony in that it seems many training and development professionals have taken so long to come up the Web 2.0 learning curve. Even as other experts look beyond current technologies to the next stage (variously termed "Web 3.0," "Web Squared," etc.), some learning professionals are still trying to catch up. It's possible that a number of training professionals may simply think it's too late to get on board. Perhaps they have been burned by technology fads in the past and figure that by the time they adopt Web 2.0 technologies, lightning-speed advancements will render the tools antiques destined to go the way of the abacus and the slide rule.

A recent study commissioned by the American Society for Training & Development and conducted by i4cp found that the vast potential of Web 2.0 technologies has not yet been realized by the learning functions in most organizations. In fact, many are still just getting familiar with these technologies, which tend to rely on user collaboration and include specific applications such as Web services, blogs, podcasts, and online social networks.

That's not to say that most learning professionals don't at least see the handwriting on the wall. The majority believe that the learning function will use Web 2.0 technologies more in the next several years. So far, however, only a minority of firms are among the vanguard - actual "power users" of these technologies for the purpose of enhancing learning. Just 9% of respondents to the i4cp study said that Web 2.0 technologies play a major role in the learning function in their company, and 32% said they play a minor role.

The study included a survey of 743 respondents, most of whom are learning or HR professionals. About 87% of respondents predicted that, in the next three years, their organizations were more likely to use Web 2.0 technologies in the learning function than they currently do. Meanwhile, a minuscule 2% predicted that their firms would use these technologies to a lesser degree.

There's clearly a great deal of work to do before most learning functions have successfully integrated such technologies into their organizations. Only about 18% of responding organizations that use Web 2.0 for learning said that such technologies contributed to the effectiveness of the learning function to a high or very high extent. And the survey found that in no case did a majority of companies use a specific Web 2.0 technology to a high or very high extent.

But some technologies are a lot more commonly used than others. Instant messaging is the most common Web 2.0 technology, followed by shared workspaces, social networking, RSS feeds and podcasts. Wikis, blogs, mash-ups and virtual worlds make up the bottom of the list. Again, no one technology is used to a high or very high extent by more than half of the respondents. It turns out, though, that some of the least-used technologies are the ones that may contribute most to the effectiveness of the learning function. As an example, Web services are used to a high or very high extent by only 22.7% of companies, yet this technology is the most positively correlated to the extent that it contributes to the effectiveness of the learning function. While none of the technologies were negatively correlated, blogs and virtual worlds were the least positively correlated.

So if these technologies can help make learning more effective, why don't companies use them more?

The biggest obstacle is concern about confidential information leaks. Companies are also wary of the spread of inaccurate or incomplete information. Other obstacles include the risk of damaging the company's brand/reputation, increased legal issues, loss of management control and loss of productivity. For companies that strive to control messaging and information, commercially available tools are especially anxiety-producing. It's not surprising that companies get nervous when the flow of information involves a third party.

These barriers to adoption highlight the difficulty learning professionals are facing in grappling with this new technology. Learning has traditionally been a one-way street, with content providers pushing information out to learning consumers. The advent of Web 2.0 technologies, or the "two-way Web," blurs the lines of content control, and the list of concerns reflects that. Learners can now access content on their own terms, look for alternatives and even provide content of their own. Companies struggle with keeping information flowing while ensuring an authoritative stamp on the content provided. Learners can become confused if they receive content and are unsure if the source is legitimate.

The majority of concerns over Web 2.0 technologies can be mitigated rather easily through policy implementation. Many of the respondents to the i4cp survey who offered best practices recommended clear procedures that include specific permissions and restrictions. The nature of these technologies means that they cannot be too tightly controlled, otherwise they will never flourish. Too much policing will drain the usefulness right out of the tool. Sensible, proper guidelines can help maintain a level of consistency and accuracy. Employee training needs to take place, and the use of these tools should be included in the daily workflow. Employees who have never used these technologies may see them simply as added work to an already full plate. Companies who use these tools successfully note that it takes time for adoption to take hold. If learning professionals are too quick to pull the plug because a tool is not catching on, an opportunity can be missed.

i4cp's Recommendations

• Create a business case for using Web 2.0 technologies, and garner support from early adopters, usually IT. Support from a C-level advocate can make all the difference.
• Plan strategically for the technology roll-out. A system full of glitches delivered to a group of users with no training is destined to fail.
• Develop clear and consistent guidelines for usage. Without directions or parameters, users will either abandon the tool or use it improperly. Not only can this render the tool ineffective; it can actually cause more harm than good.
• Don't control too tightly. The very essence of these technologies is that they are informal. Too much constraint will choke off any of the benefits of using them.
• Give it time. People need an adjustment period to adapt to new tools. It can take time for technology to take root. Identify early adopters and individual power users to help champion the cause to the rest of the organization.