Last week I attended a webcast delivered by one of my colleagues, John Ragsdale. John is the VP of Technology Research, at TSIA. The topic he presented was Hot Technology Trends for 2012: Mobility, Video and Social Collaboration. During the webcast, John asked the following polling question:
Was the last training class you attended delivered via:
- In person classroom training
- Live training conducted remotely (virtual training)
- Pre-recorded video tutorial/training
How would you answer this question? It’s been awhile since I’ve been to work related training, but I did recently decide to brush-up on my math skills. Math has always been my worst subject. How can something that starts out with letters and ends up with numbers be logical? My brain just doesn’t work that way. So, off I went to the Khan Academy, to try and retrain my brain, but I digress. The Khan Academy is composed of pre-recorded video tutorials, so clearly, my answer to the question was option three. And so it goes – with 49% of respondents selecting pre-recorded video tutorial/training, 33% selecting live, virtual training and classroom training a distant third, at 18%.
So what does this portend about the future? Granted, it’s just one small poll, but regardless, it does speak to a shift. Let’s face it, education has changed little since the inception of the primary education system, in 425 AD, and we all know that the pedagogical structure for education, be it primary, secondary or otherwise, is largely classroom-based. After 1,500 years, I do think it’s time for a change and this poll speaks to that. In the vernacular of the current generation, classroom training is “so yesterday.” Well, it’s only “so yesterday” if we continue to think of it in the same archaic way, you know, four walls and all that.
So, why do Education Services (ES) organizations cling to four-walled, classroom training, whether offered publically in a company classroom, or onsite in a customer’s classroom? TSIA data shows that 56% of education services revenue is derived from public classroom and onsite training.
2011 TSIA Education Services Benchmark Survey
As said by Mark Felt (a.k.a. Deep Throat) to Washington Post reporter, Bob Woodward, during the Watergate investigation, “Follow the money.” Standard, four-walled, public classroom and onsite training have long been the cash cows for education services organizations. Preserving this revenue stream has been, and continues to be, the name of the game. Well it’s time for a game change.
So, what can you do to be a game changer – that person, or company who has redefined technology, politics, culture, the way we look at the world and the way we live in it – like Apple did with the music industry? The reluctance to move from “classroom-based training” has been the ability or inability as the case may be, to successfully monetize other forms of delivery.
While I know that education services organizations will contend that the best way to learn about technology products is in a typical classroom, I don’t buy it. I think that’s the rote response because it’s easier to continue in a “business as usual” mode vs. figuring out how to monetize other forms of delivery, like let’s say deploying learning content to mobile devices. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that all learning should be outside of a four-walled room, or converted to a mobile device, but it is important to at least get started, which few education services organizations have done. As shown below, there is a dearth of companies deploying mobilely, with only 15% of ES organizations doing so.
2011 TSIA Education Services Benchmark Survey
Perhaps it’s worth taking a page from the book of the gaming industry. There was a time when sales of video games were skyrocketing. Not so much anymore. In fact, sales have been declining fairly steadily, since 2009. According to Forbes, in December 2011, US sales for video game hardware, software and accessories declined 21%, as compared to December sales for the previous year. For 2011 overall, the decline in the US video game market was 8%, as compared to 2010, and 2010 was down from 2009.
Some of this decline in revenue is attributable to the movement to online and mobile gaming, and just as gamers are making this move, so are learners. When considering online and mobile learning, some of the monetization practices in the gaming space could be applicable.
Here is a brief description of three common online and mobile gaming monetization strategies.
- Freemium – a freeium is a business model by which a product or service (typically a digital offering such as software, media, games or web services) is provided free of charge, but a premium is charged for advanced features, functionality, or related products and services.
- Free-to-play - Free-to-play games are available at no cost to players and other means are used to generate revenue, such as charging money for certain in-game items, known as “virtual goods,” or charging to access any new game content.
- Pay-to-play (also known as premium play) – In pay-to-play models players must pay to get into the game, but they have access to all the features of the game.
Let’s take a closer look at each of these monetization strategies and imagine how each could be applied in an education services setting.
Freemium – could provide basic, introductory, low-level content that is of the “how to get started” variety. At some point, the learner is going to want/need that next level of information, so, much in the same way that a game is designed, the learner has to pay to get to that next level. A game type approach could even be used within the structure, such that some feat has to be accomplished, like passing an assessment that “grants” the learner a key to Level II content. The key, along with a fee, “opens the door” to the next level, and so on.
Free-to-play – like a freeium, free-to-play could offer introductory and perhaps even intermediate level content, at no charge. A charge is incurred for “in-learning” goods/services, such as lab exercises and associated lab time. Or, perhaps the learner has a specific work related scenario for which he/she would like individual help. This would be a perfect opportunity to charge for an expert’s time. Just as a fee is charged in gaming, to access new content, the same could apply to learning content. What about that next product revision that is releasing shortly? That’s new content for which you could charge an access fee. There are probably any number of “add-ons” that you could think of to further populate this list.
Pay-to-play – this is the all up and in model. It’s for the learner who wants access to everything, and wants it now, and for which a premium can be charged. This option could be a good fit for subscription-based pricing. The subscription could include access to all online and mobile content, product revision content, access to lab exercises and lab time, and so on.
It is important to note, as reported by the Social Times, using data from Flurry, a mobile applications analytics company, that within the mobile gaming industry, revenue from free-to-play surpassed pay-to-play in June, 2011, at 65% and 35%, respectively.
Why stop there? There is a fourth monetization option. While it may seem anathema, you could consider “in-learning” ads. It is common for game designers to make money by including in-game ads, or for companies such as Facebook to run ads in the borders around social games. While I know that education services organizations don’t want to get into the advertising business, it may very well be something that your company’s sales and/or marketing departments might consider.
Think about it, you could advertise your own company and include an ad about the next feature that you might want a learner to use, or promote a certification program that aligns with the training – talk about up-sell!! Or perhaps you have a business partnership with another company, such that using your product with their product creates value for the customer. The partner may be interested in placing an ad within the learning content. There is any number of possibilities about what you could “advertise.” Clearly, advertising that complements the learning experience and isn’t intrusive, would be best.
I know that what I’m suggesting may sound heretical. Will any of these gaming monetization ideas work for education services? Who knows, and we won’t know until someone tries. I do know that as said by Albert Einstein, “Problems cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them.” So let’s change our thinking. Let’s shift the classroom paradigm. Let’s imagine a classroom, but it has no walls. It is everywhere. It is on our smartphones, our tablets, our TVs, our PCs, You Tube, Hulu and yes, maybe even occasionally it is within four walls. But why let those four walls close in on us? It’s time to apply new monetization ideas to old world education services, so that we can move learning out of the classroom of today and into the wall-less classroom of tomorrow.




