In reading and researching LMS selection tips, the simplest and most obvious tip is sometimes overlooked. Of course, everyone researching a new LMS or LCMS will check to make sure that it is compatible with existing software. Having worked with vendors who claim their products are compatible, I have learned that the word "compatible" can be misleading. When two vendors are creating products, the emphasis is on the functionality of their own proprietary software. When the need arises for this product to work in conjunction with another product from a third party vendor, an uneasy alliance can ensue. While both companies try to maintain a working partnership, each is primarily concerned with the development of their own product. For example, it your student database or information system (SYS) is from Vendor A, and your Content is managed and deployed on software from Vendor B, the client must have assurance that upgrades and enhancements from Vendor B can be read and assimilated by the software provided by Vendor A. Sometimes a patch is required for the new upgrade to be compatible with the second software package. This is not always immediately forthcoming. For this reason, part of the process of selection should be determining the level of collaboration between your existing LMS and any proposed additional CMS or LCMS. It may actually be more cost effective in the long run to completely abandon existing systems in favor of one that handles all aspects of the clients needs. Many times, however, this is impossible.
Another area of concern is that of technical support. This is especially crucial when multiple platforms are involved. Man hours and resources are both finite in the education and corporate worlds. Determining the appropriate technical support liaison is critical for the success of the LMS/LCMS launch.
A third area of concern is future growth and development. While it is one thing to pick a system or combination of systems that meet today's needs, how will the panel determine the probable needs of the organization in 2 years, 5 years, or 10 years. Admittedly, this is the most difficult area for search committees to agree upon. Not only is it necessary for the committee to project the future needs of their organization, they must also project the potential technological developments of the prospective vendors.
The final, and possibly most difficult hurdle in the quest for the "perfect" LMS/LCMS system is that frequently the ultimate decision rests with people who neither use, nor understand the technologies being considered. The current financial climate has many administrators and trustees searching for the least costly solution, rather than determining the most cost effective solution for the long term. For this reason, extensive documentation of current needs, projected needs, system compatibility, and technical support must be provided.
While the primary emphasis of the articles used to draw these conclusions comes from the area of elearning, the same techniques should apply for traditional schools in selecting supporting technology for student information systems and course management systems.
Resources:
How to choose a learning management system. Retrieved August 20, 2010 from: http://wwwtrainingforce.com/content/choosing_a_lms.aspx
10 Things to Consider Before Choosing an LMS. Retrieved August 20, 2010 from:
http://www.mozealous.com/11-things-to-consider-before-choosing-an-lms/
Sharon stated "A third area of concern is future growth and development. While it is one thing to pick a system or combination of systems that meet today's needs, how will the panel determine the probable needs of the organization in 2 years, 5 years, or 10 years. Admittedly, this is the most difficult area for search committees to agree upon. Not only is it necessary for the committee to project the future needs of their organization, they must also project the potential technological developments of the prospective vendors."
ReplyDeleteThe future needs of an organization must be apart of the selection process. In fact, I think it is the most important factor and here's why. Having worked in several educational capacities, it is of utmost importance that they system serves the needs of all departments. This is most cost effective, as what may not be needed now, will be needed at a later date, and by a different dependent department. For example, being a program coordinator, who was responsible for overseeing the processing of course records for a national safety and disaster preparedness organization. Only 5 years ago course management involved data entry and transmittal of records through a registrar (for lack of better words) who issued certificates, and processed fees or tuition and then used this data to schedule instructors, and course needs. The evolution of a non profit educational environment turned, "fee-for-service" with sales goals, did not forecast the opportunity of marketing courses to its past students. Because of economic times, now there is an extreme importance of being able to utilize course records as the base of marketing leads. Had the system implemented 5 years ago, been thoroughly examined to meet the departments strategic goals, the need to purchase an additional system which would meet the learning management system needs, contact needs(a contact export component), they would not be exploring options for a new system which supports the overall organization, not just one department. The need for the systems to be integrated into other existing systems is very important, as there are learning, financial and production curves which can impact the first line of business, unexpectedly.
In her Blog, Sharon poses an interesting point of view related with the integration of an LMS or LCMS with existing software. It is unquestionable that when this kind of discussion is brought up, the vendor will always try to convince that the versatility of what is trying to be sold is absolute and in virtue of that it would compatible with any product in the market.
ReplyDeleteAs Sharon accurately says: when two vendors are creating products, obviously the main interest is on the functionally of their own proprietary software, but when it is under consideration, any type of technological integration that should result in that product “A” works with the product “B” of a third party vendor, it is probable that initially the strategic relationship could result in plenty of setbacks. It is really hard for the technologies to be compatible unless previous agreement had let the manufacturers work in shared developments.
The second area of concern that Sharon analyzes in her blog has to do with the technical support; this aspect normally results according to the agreements; the real problem emerges when multiple platforms are involved and the time to determine how this would function in this specific surrounding of integration. At the end, this aspect will end up being one of the most critical factors towards guaranteeing the most successful launch of the LMS/LCMS.
Also important is the third aspect to be considered and it is related with the flexibility of the system; this is the technical possibility, the way in which the integration of these systems would support the future needs. This aspect looks even more critical than the one mentioned in the previous considerations because within it, it would also be necessary to evaluate what the prospective technological developments from the vendor would be.
All the mentioned aspects and the fact that most of the time the persons that have to take the decision in regard to how to choose a learning management system, as Sharon said, “rests with people who neither use, nor understand the technologies being considered”, confirm that this kind of decision requires not just expertise but also careful analysis.
Sharon,
ReplyDeleteWhat a great comment about how difficult it can be to work with vendors especially if they are saying the software is compatible and how misleading that can be. Each vendor is definitely concerned with the development of their own product first and foremost. That was a great example you shared between SYS and software from Vendor B.
So many times we do not think about the future growth and development by determining the probable needs for years to come. We tend to live in an instant society of people who want instant gratification and do not play devil's advocate with what could go wrong.
You did a good job at summarizing the information in the article and I was able to understand the information you shared. I will definitely be coming back to visit your site! Great Job!