Association e learning-2009_v1

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING
March 2009

The State of the Sector
written by Jeff Cobb and Celisa Steele

published by Tagoras
www.tagoras.com
info@tagoras.com
800.867.2046

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009
Copyright and Disclaimer
The Fine Print
© 2009 Tagoras, Inc. All rights reserved, including the right of reproduction in whole or in part in any
form.

*****

Purchase of Association E-learning 2009: State of the Sector entitles the purchaser to use of a single copy of
this document. If the purchaser is an organization, Tagoras authorizes the reproduction of no more than
ﬁve copies of this document, including electronically transmitting such copies, for use solely by
employees of the purchaser.

Quoting from this report on a limited basis for the purposes of creating articles, blog posts, and other
publications is considered within the realm of “fair use.”

Other than as provided for above, no portion of the material copyrighted herein may be reprinted or
published in any form without the prior written consent of Tagoras, Inc. To purchase additional copies of
this document, please visit http://www.tagoras.com/catalog/association-e-learning-2009.html.

*****

The contents of this document are based on data gathered from a variety of sources. While we deem these sources,
including subjective estimates and opinions of the report authors, to be reliable, Tagoras does not guarantee the
accuracy of the document’s contents and expressly disclaims any liability by reason of inaccurate source materials.

2!COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER

Table of Contents
Association E-learning 2009: State of the Sector
Executive Summary | 6

Introduction to Association E-learning 2009 | 9

The Overview | 11

! Participant Demographics 11

! ! Interviews 12

! Purpose, Beneﬁts, and Barriers 13

! Satisfaction with E-learning 16

! ! Satisfaction in Speciﬁc Areas 17

The Operational Perspective | 19

! Products: What’s Offered 19

! ! E-learning Products and Services 19

! ! The Appeal of Webinars 20

! ! Vignettes and Videos 21

! ! Process Examples 22

! Personnel and Tools: Who Gets It Done and How 23

! ! Job Titles 23

! ! Adequacy of Resources 24

! ! Where to Turn for Help 25

! ! Departments Responsible for E-learning 28

! ! Prevalence of Outsourcing 28

! ! The Cost of Expertise 30

! ! Authoring Tools 31

! ! Instructional Designers 31

! Summary 34

! Trends and Predictions 34

! Questions to Consider 35

3!TABLE OF CONTENTS

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 The Business Perspective | 37

! The Revenue Imperative 37

! Strategy 38

! Return on Investment 39

! The Impact of the Economy 40

! Product 41

! ! Continuing Education and Certiﬁcation 43

! Pricing 46

! ! Pricing Across Industries 46

! ! Pricing and Formats 46

! ! Pricing and Age of Program 49

! ! Pricing Strategy and Models 50

! ! Discounts 51

! Distribution 53

! ! Market Penetration 53

! Promotion 54

! ! Relationship with Marketing Department 56

! Summary 58



The Technology Perspective | 60

! End User Concerns 60

! Webinar Platforms 61

! Learning Management Systems 63

! ! LMS and LCMS Packages 65

! ! Gray Areas 65

! E-learning and AMSes 66

! ! LMS/AMS Integration 67

4!TABLE OF CONTENTS

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 ! E-learning Guidelines and Standards 68

! ! Key E-learning Standards in Brief 69

! Social Media and E-learning 70

! ! Social Media Tools 72

! ! Associations Speak About Social Media 73

! ! Providers Speak About Social Media 74

! Summary 75



The State of the Section | 77

Appendix A: Participating Organizations | 84

Appendix B: Survey Data | 85

Appendix C: Survey Methodology | 100

Appendix D: About Tagoras | 102

Case Studies

! Building Internal Capacity—and Interest: Community Associations Institute 27

! Cultivating Success: Southern Building Material Association 36

! More Demand for “Fresher,” Shorter Topics: International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans 45

! Certification Creates Demand; E-learning Assists: National Air Duct Cleaners Association 52

! Creating New Value—Globally: SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings 62

! Simple Satisfies (Association of Cable Communicators Chats) 71

5!TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary
Association E-learning 2009: State of the Sector
Association E-learning 2009: State of the Sector respondents who indicated that
represents a major effort to assess the state of e- their organizations will begin
learning in the association market and provide using e-learning in the coming
insight into how the role of e-learning in the sector six months, 75.5 percent are
may evolve in the coming months and years. from organizations with annual
budgets under $5 million, and
At the core of the report is a survey of associations 32.7 percent are from
conducted at the end of 2008. Nearly 500 organizations with budgets of
organizations responded to the survey, providing less than $500,000. The largest
extensive data about how they are using e-learning, cluster of these respondents (36
what tools and technologies they employ to create percent) also come from
and deliver e-learning, and the business practices organizations with fewer than
that support their e-learning initiatives. To 5 staff. This report
supplement this data, the report authors conducted represents a
in-depth interviews with 20 associations and 12 e- The Operational major effort
learning technology and service providers to the Perspective to assess
sector. the state of
Most of the associations e-learning in
surveyed or interviewed for the
The Overview this report use a combination association
Out of 488 responses to the survey, 61.1 percent of in-house and contract market.
were from individuals who indicated their resources to produce their e-
organizations are currently using e-learning. An learning offerings, and the
additional 26.2 percent indicated they plan to start majority of those offerings take the form of live
using e-learning within the coming 6 to 12 months, Webinars. Nearly 70 percent of survey respondents
and 12.7 percent indicated that they have no plans who currently use e-learning reported live Webinars
to start using e-learning in the coming 12 months. as one of their delivery formats. Recorded Webinars
(56 percent) and self-paced online courses (54.5
Not surprisingly, associations use e-learning mainly percent) followed in relatively distant second and
to deliver professional development to members, third places. No other formats were nearly as
and cost-effectiveness, convenience, and the ability popular, but a significant number of associations—
to reach more learners were among the biggest 40.4 percent of survey respondents—do make use of
benefits identified by survey respondents. Overall, member-only discussion boards.
organizations report that they are more satisfied
(78.8 percent) than not (21.6 percent) with their e- With respect to developing e-learning, organizations
learning initiatives. The only specific area in which that currently have programs are about evenly split
these organizations report being somewhat more on whether they do (43.5 percent) or do not (45.9
dissatisfied (35.5 percent) than satisfied (33.5 percent) make use of professional instructional
percent) is in revenue generation from their designers. Among the tools that organizations use
offerings. to develop e-learning, Microsoft PowerPoint tops
the list—not surprising since it is often the basis for
While the survey data indicate that there is a Webinar presentations as well as on-demand
somewhat greater tendency for larger associations courses.
already to have embraced e-learning, there is clearly
significant e-learning activity among smaller In most cases, association e-learning initiatives are
organizations. Additionally, it appears that smaller managed by an education department (which, at
organizations may lead the growth in new small organizations, may mean a single person who
programs in the sector for the coming year. Among wears many hats). Interviews conducted for this

6!EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 report suggest, however, that the individuals who Web, social networks (25 percent, combining public
wind up with responsibility for e-learning programs and private sites) came out on top, followed by
often do not come from an education background. blogs (16.5 percent) and wikis (10.1 percent). All
Moreover, there was a general sense among three tools—but particularly social networks (32.1
interviewees that opportunities for networking and percent) and blogs (25.7 percent)—show stronger
knowledge-sharing among peers in the sector is interest among respondents planning to implement
lacking. e-learning.

The Technology Perspective The Business Perspective
Among the Webinar platforms used by Most of the organizations interviewed for this
organizations, WebEx (27 percent) and report along with the vast majority of survey
GoToMeeting (23 percent) lead the pack with respondents currently using e-learning (86 percent)
Microsoft Live Meeting (14 percent) a distant third. or planning to use e-learning (77.4 percent) charge
or plan to charge for some or all of their offerings.
Just under half (49.1 percent) of the respondents The average price per content hour for
that currently offer e-learning report using a organizations currently offering e-learning is US
learning management system (LMS) or are planning $56.79 while the most common level of discount for
to within the next 12 months. Among those member course purchases was from 10 to 19
organizations, the majority (71.1 percent) report that percent.
they either have integrated or plan to integrate the
LMS with their association management system Interviews conducted for this report as well as a
(AMS). brief follow-on survey among the original survey
participants suggest that most organizations do not
Knowledge of and adherence have a formal e-learning strategy in place or a
On average, to common e-learning formal approach to pricing their offerings. Only 30.9
organizations guidelines and standards percent of respondents to the follow-on survey
using e- appears to be quite low in the reported having a formal, documented e-learning
learning reach sector. Adherence to the
18 percent of strategy, and only 20 percent indicated that their
Shareable Content Object organizations have a formal, documented process
their
Reference Model (SCORM), for setting prices.
membership
base with the most common set of e-
their offerings. learning standards, was On average, organizations using e-learning reach
considered very important or approximately 18 percent of their membership base
absolutely necessary by only with their offerings. Most organizations provide
27 percent of survey some form of credit—for example, continuing
respondents currently using education units or a certiﬁcate—to their learners.
e-learning.
With respect to marketing methods, e-mail
Social media is attracting marketing and word of mouth lead the pack by a
some interest in the signiﬁcant margin. Among organizations currently
association e-learning offering e-learning, 93 percent report e-mail as
community but leaves much either very important or absolutely necessary, and
room for growth. The 83.8 percent report word of mouth as very
dominant social tool in both important or absolutely necessary. The next closest
current (32.7 percent) and contender is banner ads on the organizations’ own
planned (45 percent) e- Web sites, which 49.8 percent report as very
learning initiatives is important or absolutely necessary. Notably, pay-per-
discussion forums. Among click advertising, search engine optimization (SEO),
the tools that many associate and promotional Webcasts—all mainstays of current
most closely with the social Internet marketing practices—do not appear to have

7!EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 much of a place in current association marketing
strategies for e-learning.

E-learning has arrived in the association sector but
remains immature. A range of factors—from the
current state of the economy to technology
advances to the rise of new generations—point to
growth and to a clear opportunity for e-learning to
transition into a more signiﬁcant, more strategic
part of the mix of services associations provide to
members. As this transition occurs, it is likely to be
accompanied by the following:

• Growth in implementation of learning
management systems and integration of these
with association management systems
• An increase in the amount of on-demand
educational content offered by organizations
• An increased focus on instructional design
along with development of in-house
instructional design capabilities or use of
contractors
• Relatively slow adoption of social media for e-
learning purposes until organizations develop
strategies and business models for products
that integrate social media with more
traditional content
• An increase in competition that will, in turn, be
a signiﬁcant factor in the adoption of more
sophisticated marketing practices

New, relevant resources and a more cohesive
professional network for e-learning in the sector
may be the most valuable byproducts of these
changes in association e-learning.

8!EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction to Association E-learning 2009
About This Report
To the best of our knowledge, Association E-learning It is important to note that we were purposely
2009: State of the Sector, represents the first major broad in defining e-learning. In our experience, a
effort to assess the state of e-learning in the significant number of organizations limit the term e-
association market and provide insight into how the learning to self-paced online courses and do not use
role of e-learning in the sector may evolve in the it for Webinars, Webcasts, or other forms of
coming years.† educational content delivery online. In an attempt
to ensure that survey participants took into account
Our hope is that the information here will be useful all forms of online education, the following
in providing points of reference and perspective to definition was presented prior to asking
organizations planning for e-learning initiatives or organizations whether they use e-learning to deliver
hoping to grow their current initiatives. We view it education:
as a starting point for continuing, in-depth research
about e-learning in the sector that we plan to E-learning, also known as computer-based
conduct over the coming years. training or online distance education, refers to
computer-enabled learning carried out by
At the core of the report is a survey of associations individuals or groups outside of a physical
conducted from November 20, 2008, to December classroom, either over the Internet or an internal
19, 2008. We received 488 responses to this survey. network. There are many methods of e-learning
Out of these responses, 61.1 percent were from such as Webcasts, self-paced tutorials, podcasts,
individuals who indicated that their organization is facilitated discussions, etc., but for the purpose of
currently using e-learning. An additional 26.2 this survey, any activity in which a user receives
percent indicated they plan to start using e-learning instruction via a computer counts as e-learning.
within the coming 6 to 12 months, while 12.7
percent indicated they have no plans to start using To add to the data collected through the survey, we
e-learning in the coming 12 months. also conducted phone or e-mail interviews with 20
associations and 12 providers of e-learning
technologies and services to the sector. These
interviews were conducted with the promise of
anonymity so that interviewees could feel
comfortable speaking as openly as possible. Only in
12.7%

12.7% Does your organization currently using e-learning to deliver education?
Over 60 percent of organizations surveyed currently use e-learning.

13.5% 61.1% Currently deliver e-learning
Planning to deliver e-learning in next 6 months
Planning to deliver e-learning in next 12 months
No plans for e-learning for at least next 12 months

† We conducted surveys focusing on e-learning in the broader nonprofit sector, including associations, from 2004 through 2006.
The current report represents a continuation of those earlier efforts in many ways, but is also much more comprehensive. The 2004
through 2006 survey results are available, free of charge, at www.jeffthomascobb.com/writing.

9!INTRODUCTION

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 few limited instances, and with the permission of the interviewee, are the
sources of quotations or other information revealed in the report. Our Partial data from the
frequent use of quotations from the interviews is purposeful—we heard online survey is
from many interviewees that they do not have sense of what their peers included throughout
are doing or where to go to find out what other organizations are doing. this report. See
Our hope is that the extensive use of quotations will help a voice for e- Appendix B for the
raw survey results.
learning in the sector emerge.

In addition to quoting frequently from the interviews, we have also The chapters on the
crafted brief case studies to highlight the efforts of some of the operational, business,
organizations we interviewed. These were done with the organizations’ and technology
permission, and we tried to be as diverse as possible in selecting the perspectives end with
organizations. The case studies span a range of industries and feature a summary of trends
associations of varying size and geographic focus. Our intention is to and a list of questions
continue to mine case studies from the more than 300 pages of interview for organizations to
ask themselves.
transcripts we have collected as well as from our ongoing conversation
with organizations and to share these, as they become available, with
purchasers of the report.

Finally, the two authors of this report have each worked in e-learning for
more than a decade and have worked specifically with associations for the
better part of that time. Throughout the report we provide our own
analysis of the information collected through the survey and the
interviews, and we draw on our own experience to offer perspectives that may not be readily apparent
from the data. Our approach to doing this is relatively conservative, based on the limitations naturally
imposed by a non-probability survey (see the chapter “Methodology”), but even more importantly, on our
sense that we are still in the early stages of e-learning in the association sector—a sector that is, by its
nature, quite diverse and fragmented—and that broad conclusions must be put forward cautiously.

The report is structured into 10 sections:

1.The executive summary
2.This introduction
3.An overview that discusses demographic data, the purposes of association e-learning, the barriers to
and benefits of e-learning, and satisfaction with e-learning
4.A chapter on operations and e-learning that looks at what’s produced, who produces it, using what
process, and with what tools
5.A chapter that takes the business perspective, looking at the strategy that drives e-learning initiatives,
expenses and income, marketing, and competition
6.A chapter on e-learning technology, including the end user point of view and the organizational
standpoint
7.The state of e-learning in the association sector based on our analysis of the survey data and
interviews
8.A discussion of the methodology used for collecting the data that is the basis of this report
9.A series of appendices that provide a list of participating organizations, the raw online survey data
(parts of which are cited throughout the report), the survey methodology, and information about
Tagoras (publisher of this report) and Jeff Cobb and Celisa Steele (authors of this report)

Our sincere hope is this report proves useful to associations as they assess their e-learning initiatives or
contemplate throwing their hats in the e-learning ring.

10!INTRODUCTION

The Overview
Demographics, Purpose, Benefits, Barriers, and
Satisfaction
This section provides demographic 0.5%
data, discusses the purposes for 5.3% 3.4%
which associations undertake e- 5.0%
learning, looks at the perceived 14.5%
beneﬁts of and barriers to e-
learning, and analyzes associations’
10.3%
satisfaction with e-learning
initiatives.
11.9%
Participant Demographics
11.9%
As the demographic data provided
at the end of this document
indicate, responses to the survey
were distributed across a broad
range of organizations—from those
37.2%
with a very small staff and
relatively small membership base
to those with more than 250 staff What is your
members and budgets greater than organization’s
annual budget? Less than $100,000 $100,001-$500,000
$50 million per year. Most organizations $500,001-$1,000,000 $1,000,001-$5,000,000
had budgets
between $1 million
$5,000,001-$10,000,000 $10,000,001-$25,000,000
The largest clusters of survey and $5 million. $25,000,001-$50,000,000 $50,000,001-$100,000,000
More than $100,000,000
respondents in the overall range
were nationally focused
organizations (39.7 percent),
organizations with annual budgets between
$1 million and $5 million (37.2 percent), and
1.8% organizations with staff of between 1 and 5
7.8% individuals (26.7 percent). The most common
membership size was between 1,000 and
26.8%
5,000 individuals.
19.8% Which best
describes the Out of the group of respondents that
geographic focus
of your indicated current use of e-learning, the
organization (i.e.,
which best
largest cluster was also nationally focused
4.3% indicates the areas (48.8 percent), had budgets between $1
in which you
actively solicit
million and $5 million (39.4 percent), and
membership)? had staff of between 6 and 10 individuals
Organizations with a

39.8% national focus were
the biggest group.
(17.2 percent). The most common
membership size was 1,000 or less.

Single community or municipality focus
Overall, organizations indicating they are
Multiple community focus in one state currently using e-learning were more likely
Single state or province focus than the group as whole to be nationally or
Multi-state or multi-province focus internationally focused (75.7 percent versus
National focus
International focus
66.6 percent) as opposed to focused on a

11!THE OVERVIEW

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 region, state, or locality. begin using e-learning within either 6 or 12 months.
The largest They were also more These groups tend to manage smaller associations,
groups of survey likely to have annual and thus their movement into e-learning tends to
respondents were budgets greater than $5 support the idea we will see significant growth in
from nationally million (42.5 percent new initiatives by small organizations.
focused versus 33 percent); have
organizations The great majority of survey respondents indicated
more than 10,000
with annual that their organization has been using e-learning to
individual members (50.2
budgets between deliver education for more than a year (83.7
$1 million and $5 percent versus 41.5
percent); and have more percent). A relatively small but still notable number
million, 1 to 5 staff
than 10 staff (67.6 percent (15.6 percent) of respondents reported using e-
people, and 1,000
to 5,000 individual versus 55 percent). learning for more than five years. Most (64.6
members. percent) of the respondents currently offering e-
While there is a learning indicated that they do offer some form of
somewhat greater credit for e-learning. (See the chapter “The Business
tendency for larger Perspective” for discussion of credit and e-learning.)
associations already to
have embraced e- INTERVIEWS
learning, there is clearly The organizations we interviewed in follow-up to
significant e-learning the online survey were less diverse from the
activity among smaller standpoint of geographic focus. All but one regional
organizations. It appears association serving four states were nationally or
that small organizations internationally focused. Nonetheless the group was
may lead the growth in quite diverse in terms of industries served, size of
new programs in the staff, size and type (i.e., individuals versus
sector for the coming year. Among respondents who organizations) of membership base, and experience
indicated that their organization will begin using e- with e-learning.
learning in the coming six months, 75.5 percent are
from organizations with annual budgets under $5 The providers we interviewed were also quite
million, and 32.7 percent are from organizations diverse, ranging from Webinar service providers,
with budgets of less than $500,000. The largest like KRM, CommPartners, and Boston
cluster of these respondents (36 percent) also came Conferencing, to high-end custom course producers
from organizations with fewer than five staff. like Enspire Learning, to learning management
system providers like LearnSomething, Certilearn,
Similarly, 82.3 percent of the respondents who and Results Direct. Each of the providers was able
indicated their organization will start using e- to offer a unique perspective based on their
learning within 12 months come from organizations approach to e-learning and the types of clients
with annual budgets of less than $5 million, and served.
43.4 percent of respondents report fewer than five
staff members. Finally, 17 out of the 42 association
management company representatives who
responded to the survey indicated that they will 15.6% 16.3%

How long has your organization been using e-learning?
The majority of respondents were from organizations that had been using e-learning for one to five years. 32.9% 35.3%
Less than 1 year 1 to 2 years
2 to 5 years More than 5 years

12!THE OVERVIEW

Purpose, Benefits, and Barriers learning for advocacy and issue education.
Respondents in this group were more likely to be
As part of our survey, we asked respondents to
from associations with a large membership base—
provide input on their organization’s purposes for
40.8 percent were from organizations with more
using e-learning as well as some of the benefits and
than 10,000 members as opposed to only 24.9
barriers they experienced.
percent of the all respondents being from an
Not surprisingly, most respondents using or organization with more than 10,000 members.
planning to use e-learning indicated professional
Cost-effectiveness, convenience, and the ability to
development for members and non-members as
reach more learners were among the biggest
their primary and secondary purposes. A much
benefits respondents associated with e-learning—
smaller portion use e-learning for staff training,
among both our survey participants and our
though this may be less a comment on e-learning
interviewees. More than 70 percent of survey
than on the amount of training available to
respondents who are using or planning to use e-
association staff in general.
learning indicated each of these benefits. (See the
We also asked organizations to indicate whether chart on the following page.)
they used e-learning for training chapters or
Somewhat surprisingly, in our opinion, the ability to
volunteers or as a tool for advocacy and issue
generate revenue ranked significantly lower. It was
education. Given that an organization may or may
selected by just over 30 percent of those already
not have chapters, make extensive use of
using e-learning and by just under 30 percent of
volunteers, or engage in advocacy, we found it
those planning to use e-learning in the coming 12
interesting that a relatively sizable group of
months. It is possible that a significant number of
respondents indicated that they use or plan to use e-

92.6%
Professional development for members
86.5%

64.2%
Professional development for non-members
44.4%

35.5%
Training for staff
20.6%

30.7%
Advocacy and issue education
26.2% For what
purposes does
your
organization
20.3% use or plan to
Training for volunteers use e-learning?
26.2% Check all that
apply.
Most
respondents
19.9% indicated
Training for affiliated organizations or chapters professional
27.0% development for
members and
non-members as
their primary and
8.4% secondary
Other Current e-learning purposes.
7.9% Planned e-learning

13!THE OVERVIEW

For your organization, what are the three key benefits associated with e-learning? Please check only the three that your organization
considers most important.
Cost-effectiveness, convenience, and the ability to reach more learners were among the biggest benefits respondents associated with e-learning.

78.9%
78.2%
78.2%
74.7%

73.0%

72.6%
Current e-learning
Planned e-learning

31.5%
29.0%
23.4%
21.5%
17.7%
13.5%

12.1%
8.3%
3.5%

3.2%
3.2%

3.1%
Other
Reduction of risk by diversifying product line

Ease of tracking continuing education for learners
Ability to generate revenues
Ability to reach more learners

Opportunity for learners to direct their own learning

Convenience for learners
Cost-effectivness versus other modes
Instructional effectiveness versus other modes

respondents equated the combination of a top-three benefit by many respondents. We expect
convenience and the ability to reach more learners to see risk reduction become more commonly
with more revenue, and thus did not single this out recognized as a strategic benefit of e-learning over
as a top-three benefit. Another explanation may be the coming year, particularly given the current
that, while most organization do need to break even economic environment. Additionally, as
on their e-learning initiatives, e-learning is not organizations become more sophisticated in their
envisioned as a significant overall revenue management of e-learning—and learning
contributor to the organization. management systems gain more traction in the
market—we also expect to see increased recognition
It is also noteworthy that neither risk reduction nor of tracking as a significant operational benefit of
ease of tracking continuing education were rated as implementing e-learning.

14!THE OVERVIEW

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 Concern about return on financial investment (41.6 We intended for organizations not currently using e-
percent) as well as about the technology skills of learning to answer this question about perceived
end users (45.5 percent) were among the major barriers, but, unfortunately, responses were not
barriers to pursuing e-learning among respondents collected owing to a technical glitch. It seems
with programs already in place. Notably, there reasonable to assume that these organizations
seems to be significantly less concern about would perceive the same types of barriers, though it
technology skills among those who plan to offer e- is also likely that more respondents from this group
learning (35.3 percent), perhaps reflecting an overall would indicate no perceived need for e-learning.
sense that end users are becoming more comfortable
with both the Web and with e-learning. Concern We explore the question of staff resources more in
about financial return is only slightly lower (39.5 the chapter “The Operational Perspective” and
percent), but clearly this group is concerned about discuss the issue of end user technology skills in
the amount of staff resources that will be required to “The Technology Perspective.”
develop e-learning (57.1 percent).

57.1%
Current e-learning

46.2%
45.5%

Planned e-learning
41.6%

40.3%
39.5%

38.7%
35.3%

33.6%

33.3%

33.0%
26.2%

24.4%
21.5%
20.4%

17.6%

8.2%
7.6%
7.5%

6.5%
6.5%

5.7%
5.0%

4.2%
4.2%

3.4%
Resistance from current trainers or facilitators

No perceived need for e-learning
Staff time required to support e-learning

Fear that stakeholders won’t use e-learning

Other
Staff time required to develop e-learning

Lack of management buy-in
Lack of expertise in e-learning
Concern about effectiveness of e-learning

Concern about end users’ technical skills
Concern that costs would exceed non-financial return
Concern that costs would exceed financial return

Lack of funding necessary to implement e-learning

What are the three biggest barriers your organization has encountered or expects to encounter while developing e-learning initiatives? Please check
only the three that your organization considers most important.
Concern about return on financial investment and the technology skills of end users were among the major barriers to pursuing e-learning among respondents with
programs already in place.

15!THE OVERVIEW

Satisfaction with E-learning 5.6%
21.6%
16.0%

Overall, how satisfied are you with your current e-learning initiatives?
Most associations reported they are either somewhat satisfied or very satisfied.

We asked respondents from organizations who have implemented
e-learning to indicate their level of satisfaction. On the whole,
experiences with e-learning seem to be much more positive than
negative. Most associations report that they are either somewhat
satisfied (56.8 percent) or very satisfied with their e-learning 56.8%
initiatives. Only a small portion (5.6 percent) reported being very
dissatisfied. Very satisfied overall
Somewhat satisfied overall
Somewhat dissatisfied overall
Through further analysis of the data, we were able to identify ways Very dissatisfied overal
in which organizations that are very satisfied with their e-learning
initiatives most differ from the group that is very dissatisfied.

Very satisfied organizations had the largest percentage of respondents who indicated that their
association had been using e-learning for more than five years. These organizations were significantly
more likely than their dissatisfied counterparts to offer some form of credit for e-learning, to charge for all
of their e-learning offerings, and to indicate ease of tracking as a benefit of e-learning.

All respondents
15.6% Very satisfied
Have used e-learning for more than 5 years 25.9% Very dissatisfied
14.3%

8.3%
Indicate ease of tracking as benefit 16.7%
0%

16.1%
E-learning does not have to be self-sustaining 18.5%
7.1%
How satisfied
or dissatisfied
are you with 54.5%
your current e- Use self-paced courses 66.7%
learning 35.7%
initiatives in
terms of these
42.3%
specific items?
Very satisfied
Charge for all e-learning 53.7%
organizations 35.7%
were more likely
than their
dissatisfied 35.4%
counterparts to No credit offered for e-learning 35.3%
offer some form 57.1%
of credit for e-
learning, to
charge for all of 32.7%
their e-learning Use discussion forums 42.3%
offerings, and to
indicate ease of 7.7%
tracking as a
benefit of e- 34.4%
learning.
Use LMS 46.3%
14.3%

16!THE OVERVIEW

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 Very satisfied organizations were also much more percent of very dissatisfied respondents indicated it.
likely than very dissatisfied organizations to use a The very dissatisfied group was most concerned
learning management system (LMS)—the very that costs for e-learning would exceed financial
dissatisfied group had the lowest percentage of return.
LMS users out of any of the satisfaction groupings.
The very satisfied organizations are much more In general, the very satisfied organizations appear
likely to make use of discussion boards in their e- to be more mature in their e-learning. They have
learning, and their use of self-paced courses is been at it longer (more than five years in many
significantly higher than that of very dissatisfied instances), they have implemented more
organizations as well as the total pool of sophisticated technology (an LMS), and embraced a
respondents. Use of self-paced courses by very more diverse range of offerings (self-paced courses
satisfied organizations is on par with their use of and discussion boards along with Webinars).
Webinars (66.7 percent for each). Very dissatisfied Finally, they tend to charge for their e-learning and
organizations, on the other hand, report the lowest offer credit much more than their very dissatisfied
percentage of self-paced course usage (35.7 percent) counterparts.
and the highest percentage of real-time Webinar
SATISFACTION IN SPECIFIC AREAS
usage (78.6 percent).
We also asked survey respondents to indicate their
Very satisfied organizations show a high amount of levels of satisfactions with respect to specific to
concern about end user technology skills. While 45.5 specific aspects of their e-learning initiatives.
percent of the total respondent pool indicated this
as one of their top three barriers encountered while The only specific area in which overall
implementing e-learning, 52.8 percent of very dissatisfaction (35.5 percent) seems to outweigh
satisfied respondents indicated it, and only 35.7 overall satisfaction (33.5 percent) is revenue

How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with
your current e-learning initiatives in terms
of these specific items?

Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very Not
Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Applicable
Usage (e.g., number of course 13.2% 33.3% 10.7% 27.2% 13.6% 2.5%
enrollments)
Revenue (e.g., from course sales) 7.9% 25.6% 16.9% 24.8% 10.7% 14.5%

The financial cost of creating the 12.9% 28.8% 27.9% 17.5% 8.8% 4.6%
initiatives
The financial cost of supporting and 14.6% 27.1% 27.1% 18.8% 8.3% 4.6%
maintaining the initiatives
The staff time required to develop the 7.4% 33.9% 24.4% 24% 7.4% 3.3%
initiatives
The staff time required to maintain the 9.2% 32.9% 29.2% 19.6% 6.3% 3.3%
initiatives
Feedback from participants in the 23.8% 38.1% 17.6% 14.6% 3.3% 2.9%
initiatives

17!THE OVERVIEW

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 generation. Very satisfied organizations indicate
higher than average levels of satisfaction with
revenue—64.1 percent report being either somewhat
or very satisfied in comparison to 33.5 percent for
the total pool of respondents. None of the very
dissatisfied respondents reported being either
somewhat or very satisfied with revenue, but 71.4
percent reported being either somewhat or very
dissatisfied. This group also indicated high levels of
dissatisfaction with the level of staff time and the
financial costs associated with maintaining e-
learning initiatives.

It is also worth noting that organizations that report
being very satisfied with their e-learning initiatives
indicate usage (49.1 percent) and feedback from
participants (51.9 percent) as their two highest areas
of satisfaction. These organizations are reaching
their users and hearing positive things from them
about e-learning.

Having looked at the demographics of the survey
respondents and the purposes and benefits of,
barriers to, and satisfaction with e-learning, we’ll
now delve into deeper discussion of the operational,
business, and technology aspects of association e-
learning.

18!THE OVERVIEW

The Operational Perspective
Products, Personnel, Process, and Tools
Operations deals with the nuts and bolts of As the chart below illustrates, real-time Webinars
developing an e-learning program: what’s came out on top, with recorded Webinars and self-
produced, who produces it, using what process, and paced courses following next for both groups of
with what tools. In this section, we draw on the respondents.
online survey and our interviews to see how
associations are developing e-learning today. Organizations indicating they were very satisﬁed
with their current e-learning usage (e.g.,
enrollments) pursue self-paced offerings and real-
Products: What’s Offered time Webinars equally (68.8 percent)—a signiﬁcant
E-LEARNING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES increase in usage for the self-paced category. Among
this group, facilitated online courses (which
The online survey asked organizations currently excludes Webinars) dropped to 6.3 percent (from
involved in e-learning and organizations planning 19.1 percent), and use of member-only discussion
to engage in e-learning in the next 12 months which boards declined to 28.1 percent (from 40.4 percent).
types of e-learning products and services they offer
or plan to offer.

Which of the following e-learning products and services does your association currently
provide or will your organization add in the next 12 months? Check all that apply.
Real-time Webinars came out on top.

Real-time Webinars 67.1%
55.7%

Recorded Webinars 56.0%
47.0%

Self-paced courses 54.5%
47.8%

Member-only discussion boards 40.4%
40.0%

Audio or video podcasts 35.4%
34.8%

CD-ROMs and DVDs 34.3%
10.4%

“Off-the-shelf” courses 20.6%
16.5%

Facilitated online courses 19.1%
18.3%

Electronic study guides 15.5%
13.9% Current e-learning
Blended learning 14.8%

Offline with online assessments 14.8%
7.0%

Educational simulations or games 3.6%
4.3%

Other2.9%
4.3%

19!THE OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 For organizations indicating they were very All of these Webinars that have been done to date
satisfied with their current e-learning revenue, are volunteer members who speak for us for free
facilitated online courses went down to 10.5 percent and have a presentation that they’ve either
(from 19.1 percent), and recorded Webinars dipped developed for some other audience or something
to 42.1 percent (from 56 percent). In line with the like that, so we’re not putting an awful lot of
overall data, this very-satisfied-with-revenue group overhead on them either. It was a quick way to
reported real-time Webinars as the most popular ramp up and start the service.... It’s the crawl-
offering (63.2 percent). before-you-walk thing. Eventually we intend to be
doing everything, but right now we are an
Compared to the very satisfied, organizations association...so there is not a hell of a lot of
reporting to be very dissatisfied overall with their e- budget, and this [set of Webinars] is something
learning are: that is tangible that we can start with. But, for
sure, everything else is on the big master plan.
• Less likely to offer self-paced courses (35.7 This is a five-year strategy, and the Webinars are
percent versus 66.7 percent)
just the beginning of it.
• Less likely to offer electronic study guides and
blended learning (0 percent versus 18.5 percent Another advantage is that it’s possible to do a lot
for both) with a little in the Webinar world. At one of the
• Less likely to use third-party, “off the shelf” organizations where we conducted interviews, a
online courses (7.1 percent versus 18.5 percent) single staffer did 22 Webinars in a three-month
• More likely to offer recorded Webinars (71.4 period!
percent versus 50 percent)
Just because Webinars are seen as an entry point to
One interviewee attested to the popularity of live e-learning doesn’t mean all organizations start
Webinars over recorded ones: “We do see that our there: “We started online [with 20-25 asynchronous
events are so much more successful as live events courses] before we did Webinars,” one interviewee
rather than after-the-fact, and I’ve been surprised by commented, “which is really weird.” For others,
that. Our numbers for the live event are great; our there is a perceived first-mover advantage to taking
numbers for the recordings are pathetic.” a different tack:

THE APPEAL OF WEBINARS [O]ne of the first things they asked me to do was
Most organizations surveyed offer real-time to actually create a strategy for online learning,
Webinars. Why? Webinars are seen as a safe starting which is an indulgence for many people, but it
place—not too expensive or too time-consuming: was a necessary step for us, and I’m really glad we
took it. And I was quite surprised because actually
the first recommendation I had was to head into
Webinars, and they opted for the other option
Try a panel format for your Webinars, your instead [developing an asynchronous, stand-
online chats, or even your teleconferences. alone, non-instructor-led course], which I thought
was a very high-level risk, and they knew it and
“[We] pride ourselves on balanced and sound science, so
we’ve been using the Webcasts to try and really embody were willing to take it anyway.... They kind of
that principle. We’ve had sometimes opposing views where wanted to be the first in their association circle, if
the science is evolving, so you’ll have those two people, and
it has been heated at times. We’ll usually have a more you will, to head into that territory, and they
experienced moderator from the organizational perspective, were.
so a member who knows that subject matter and who can
moderate a balanced conversation and then a third person
will vary, but sometimes it’s a consumer researcher or a
One interviewee cautioned against succumbing to
marketer, someone to bring in an additional outside pressure to go big initially:
perspective that relates to the topic at hand....”
I think associations feel like to do e-learning that
they have to make a big investment, that you have
to have a full catalog right off the bat, and we’ve


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 found a lot of success with just sort of putting our mentoring program:
toe in the water and working with a company to “We post a new “The one thing that
create one course to see how that one course will video, about five we’re doing that I
do. That allowed us to get a feel for what e- minutes tops, every think is a little bit
learning would be like for our organization and two to three unique is that we are
doing free resources,
for our membership without having to outlay a lot weeks.” The videos
little short vignettes
of money.... I think everybody thinks that their e- are primarily one-
on hot topical areas
learning program has to be [like those of the top on-one interviews or things more about
associations], and I think e-learning can be with senior to public awareness or
customized for your audience based off your midlevel industry public safety, or, in
budget and resources. I think if more associations professionals. some cases, aditorials
knew that, then they would be willing to take a where we get
chance.... Another sponsors. And we’ve
organization has had some success in
A vendor agreed that associations often feel been using video people finding us
overwhelmed and get stymied: for consumer through those—going
education—and has to the Web site
We’ve had several clients that have decided to more planned for because they want to
work with us, we’ve gotten started, and we’ve the future. look at the free
worked closely with them to help guide them resources, and they
through the process and who have just basically I could spend 15 to get there and see our
stopped dead in their tracks because they are just 30 minutes with a courses listed there
so overwhelmed with the whole prospect of doing consumer who and decide to try one
it. I think they are scared because they don’t calls up and has a out.”
understand it. In a lot of cases the education folks question.... I love
are just so stretched that they feel that they don’t that they want to
have time to devote to getting things going.... I get informed before
think they kind of fear the unknown, the they decide to do this, so they know what they are
overwhelming feeling of what it’s going to take to buying, and, if they decide not to buy it, that’s
implement something new. okay, at least they’ll know. I’m all for educated
consumers—I’m a consumer myself...so I can
Given budget and time constraints and the totally relate to them. We’ve put together
nebulous fear of the unknown, Webinars seem brochures, there’s stuff on our Web site now, we
familiar and small enough to feel like a safe start. did a video that ran on public service, but I want
to try and upgrade that. We are doing a series of
VIGNETTES AND VIDEOS
videos this year that are going to be three to five
Two offerings not specifically included in the list of minutes, geared toward consumers....
online products for our online survey came to our
attention during the interviews: videos and Another organization whose members may not
vignettes. (We note, though, that Web video was have e-mail addresses but do have cell phones
included in a question about social media and that (“...and they’re not carrying six-year-old Nokias—
vignettes may be considered a particular type of they have razzle-dazzle cell phones”) is
self-paced tutorial.) contemplating branching into mobile learning,
delivering video to phones.
One organization we interviewed began posting
short educational videos to its Web site in 2004. Along with videos, vignettes popped up in our
These were primarily educational and aimed at the interviews as a product offering we hadn’t asked
membership—with the occasional promotional about specifically. In entertainment, vignettes are
video added to the mix. More recently, the brief scenes—think of a Burt and Ernie sketch on
organization has rethought its videos as a product Sesame Street. E-learning borrows the term for short
line, as an online professional development and educational pieces.


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 One association we spoke with is using free input. These might be the same people tapped
vignettes as a vehicle for driving public awareness to present at the organization’s in-person
and getting visitors to their site. conferences or courses.
• The SMEs provide content. Depending on the
The American Society of Association Executives has e-learning format and the association’s
developed a product line of for-fee vignettes (the resources and culture, review of the provided
introductory price is $79.95 per). These 90-minute content runs the gamut from rigorous to
self-study tutorials address association management nonexistent. The content may be thoroughly
topics. reworked and edited for on-screen, instructor-
less presentation. Or a SME’s PowerPoint for a
Of note is how well both formats—videos and
Webinar might only be reviewed cursorily—
vignettes—lend themselves to consumer education,
just as a presentation at an annual conference is
or external education, as well as the more
not put under the microscope by staff, the SME
traditional, membership-focused training.
may be relied on to present the content as she
PROCESS EXAMPLES sees ﬁt.
We included a question about the product
development process in our brief
follow-up survey on e-learning
strategy. The vast majority of “You take a PowerPoint that you already
respondents indicated that their use, you make a few tweaks to it...and you
organization does not have a formal publish it as an e-learning program.”
product development process for e-
learning.
“Our practice team will define the
Without a formal process, how are objectives and the learning outcomes. So
organizations developing e-learning? they will work with the authors, they will
From the interviews a typical if submit their lesson plan, we review it, they
informal e-learning process emerged. submit lesson one, we review it.... Our
instructional designer also reviews it...for
• A list of e-learning topics is generated through the opportunities to enhance the material.
committee or board input, staff knowledge—or For example, additional links, resources,
making it audio, making it puzzles, adding
intuition—about the topics most relevant to
questions, quizzes, more interactive
members, or, in limited cases, surveys of the
things....”
membership base.
• Subject matter experts (SMEs) for the topics are
identiﬁed based on board, committee, or staff

3.6%
30.9%

A product development process typically includes steps for determining which products or services
to produce as well as a detailed process by which products are created and taken to market. Does
your organization have a formal, documented product development process for e-learning?
65.5% A little over 30 percent of organizations reported having a formal process.

Formal product development process
No formal process
Not sure


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 • For e-learning where instructors or presenters initiatives?” Director of education—or what we
interact with learners, staff (or their proxy consider the equivalent (e.g., director of
vendors or contractors) train them on how to professional development)—was the most common,
use the relevant software (e.g., a Web with 62 responses.
conferencing system or a learning management
system). C-level job titles or the equivalent (vice president,
• As is common with place-based training, e- chief learning ofﬁcer, etc.) were reported 41 times,
learners are often asked to evaluate their and 36 respondents indicated the head of the
learning experience after completing it—or, in organization (executive director, CEO, etc.) has
the case of longer offerings, evaluations may be responsibility for the e-learning initiatives.
requested periodically throughout and at the Collectively these two groups of responses show
end of the training. In an ideal world, this that a big chunk put e-learning responsibility right
feedback is mined for ways to improve future at the top of the organization. Of those reporting the
offerings. CEO or executive director is responsible, the vast
majority (but not all) have annual budgets of less
Personnel and Tools: Who Gets It than $5 million and staffs smaller than 30. As would
Done and How be expected, the larger, more ﬂush associations, tend
to delegate responsibility for e-learning, but many
JOB TITLES larger associations still keep the responsibility very
For organizations currently engaged in e-learning, high up.
204 responded to the online survey question, “What
is the title of the person who holds top-level Interestingly, only two responses included the term
management responsibility for your e-learning e-learning in the responsible person’s title, and only

11.8%
17.6%

7.4%

6.9%

20.1%
5.9%

What is the title of the
person who holds top-
level management

30.4% responsibility for your
e-learning initiatives?
With 30.4% of the
responses, director of
education was the most
common title.

Executive director C-level
Director of education Director of membership
Other director (e.g., of IT or meetings) Manager or coordinator of education
Other


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 two included the broader (and older) term can work in education—if you can give
distance education. a presentation, you’re an educator.

From the interviews, we learned that, ADEQUACY OF RESOURCES
despite the prevalence of the director of From the interviews we learned, not
education job title, many of those in charge surprisingly, that most organizations—
of e-learning at their organizations do not whether large or small—felt they had more
have a formal background in education. to do than they had time or resources:
We talked with many people who came to
e-learning from communications, • “I did capacity planning...and I
marketing, public relations, and business. discovered I was one staff person
One interviewee noted this phenomena: short. I did make a request, but, of
course, I was turned down. But
My sense is that the vast majority of somehow the work gets done.... I
staff working in education departments don’t believe in throwing more things
have come from somewhere else. It may at people, you just dilute the quality or
have been in the membership you exhaust people—it gets
department or even from outside the frustrating.”
sector, which is fine—there is nothing • “We don’t have enough staff
wrong with that—but, if you go into an resources. All our courses should be
accounting department in an updated, but that’s a full-time job for
association, you have a CPA.... I think someone. Plus we’re launching new
our area is more fuzzy.... The education courses, so staff time is a major
staff are doing a great job, doing the best problem. Resources internally become
they can, but they’re not aware of very difficult to get, like the marketing
resources and tools that are available to thing, the IT thing—they all have
them. It’s almost like they are managing other jobs, and e-learning is just one
a product that could be any product.... I more added to their pile.”
don’t think they’re as perceived as • “I think everybody would always like
specialty experts as some of the other resources. I work for a really small
professions are. It’s almost like anyone organization [fewer than five staff], so

“It’s almost like anyone can work in
education—if you can give a
presentation, you’re an educator.”


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 you have to really carry your load twice. So, handholding behind the scenes, which I’ve heard
yes, it does take a lot of time, and it takes a lot from a lot of other people that that is real common,
of finessing and political skills and talking to and that’s what you need to do to make this stuff
people forever. Yesterday I had an hour and a succeed”—to technical troubleshooting.
half meeting with two presenters [for an
upcoming Webinar]. I think that could have Our end users aren’t very technologically
been more efficient; it could have been 10 advanced. It doesn’t seem to be age-based. We had
minutes, but that happens. It does help to have thousands of students go through one of those
a vendor, but we do do a lot of it. We do all the programs, and I got the sense that we needed some
promotion, e-mail promotions, we promote on customer support, and I’m happy that it went to
our Web site, we promote it in our an outside vendor this summer who supports us
newsletter....” with call centers. We had roughly 40 percent of
the people putting in calls, several thousand were
Even with the bulk of the must-do work getting calling. And they may have been calling about
done, the lack of resources limits organizations’ minor things, but the range was unbelievable.
ability to update their offerings or dabble in new
realms like social media and cuts into the time for Before outsourcing to the call center, this
essential strategic thinking. organization of eight full-time staff swelled its
ranks, for a time, to include eight part-timers just to
• “I’m a bit overloaded with everything that deal with customer service on its e-learning
everyone wants to be done and all the research products.
that has to be done. So if we started to run a
full-time blog or anything like that, it’s On the flip side, at least one interviewee was able to
definitely going to require, I think, another point out a reduction in staff time as a result of
person’s workload.” moving to online system for claiming continuing
• “It’s definitely time-consuming by the time you education as part of her organization’s e-learning
figure out what you are going to do, and you initiative: “In terms of staff hours spent processing
find your speakers, and you put together your this stuff [credit claims], we’ve gone from about 45
PowerPoint, and you promote it. It does take a to 50 hours a week of people processing paper to
lot of manpower.... We definitely don’t have the probably about 7 hours max, maybe 5.”
resources to do some kind of strategic planning
WHERE TO TURN FOR HELP
and thinking about our whole education
offering.” Since the staff responsible for association e-learning
are likely to not come from an e-learning or even
Given the near universal sense that there aren’t education background and since they are strapped
enough resources, what are some of the big time for resources, we asked our interviewees where they
sinks? For some, it is the sheer newness of e- turn for information and guidance on e-learning. A
learning complicated by simultaneous projects: few sources cropped up regularly:

It was certainly more than I had expected, but I • American Society of Association Executives
also take into consideration that we implemented (ASAE): http://www.asaecenter.org
an LMS at the same time, so there were many • American Society of Training & Development
different projects going on... [F]or me it was the (ASTD): http://www.astd.org
first time building a full online course—and not • eLearning Guild: http://
even having to necessarily focus on the content so www.elearningguild.com
much, given that it was already created—it was • Internet in general (e.g., Google searches on
certainly a learning process. relevant keywords)

For others, customer service and support have Coupled with that handful of concrete sources for
demanded a great deal of attention. This can range help, though, was a recurring sense that
from handholding—“There is a lot more organizations would like to be connecting with


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 other associations doing similar things: “Really for
myself, I need to do a better job of getting in touch “I don’t find that there are a lot of other
with other folks at my level at other associations.” people like me in the association world,
But that desire is tempered by a sense that there doing the kind of e-learning that I’m doing.
either aren’t great e-learning success stories in the They are either doing really grand stuff that
association world—“I have not encountered I’m never going to do, or they’re not doing
anything at all, and they think it’s
anybody that is soaring in distance education”—or
completely impossible, so they are not
that the lessons that other associations have
interested in it.”
learned may not be relevant—“I don’t find that
there are a lot of other people like me in the
association world, doing the kind of e-learning that
I’m doing. They are either doing really grand stuff
that I’m never going to do, or they’re not doing
anything at all, and they think it’s completely
impossible, so they are not interested in it.”

Another interviewee lamented:

We would love to be able to have a network of
associations that are not afraid to talk to each
other, that would share information, and we could
all learn from each other. But some of us are
competitors, and that’s understandable. The for-
profit world is a totally different world, and there
are for-profit entities out there selling e-learning.
That’s not us; we have our own set of issues and
things that we have to deal with. And there’s no
place really to go and have that discussion.

Interviewees mentioned other sources for advice
on e-learning but with much less frequency than
those noted above. These included:

• Coworkers
• Consultants
• Vendors
• Members
• Board members and committees

In this list of sources, the value of the input varied
greatly. For example, while some associations find
their committees and boards wonderful sources,
one interviewee said, “Our leadership, our board,
it’s helpful only in a small way to be honest, so we
don’t really look to our board for guidance [on e-
learning].” Another said, “We have a corporate
board, and they’re supposed to come up with
ideas of things that we could turn into e-learning
or Webcasts. Nine times out of ten, they’re way off
base, unfortunately.”


Building Internal Capacity—and Interest
Community Associations Institute
Dave Jennings at the Community Associations Institute (CAI) is consciously thinking
of how to engage the staff—and not just the education staff—in the organization’s e-
learning.

“Let’s say, if we have 55 staff here, we’d be getting a team of 7 or 8 staff people who
are interested in this, who want to be involved,” Jennings explained. “They may
work in any department in the building, whether it’s customer service or accounting,
but they might think that this is interesting and fun, they want to learn about it, they
want to help.”

The idea is to harness the staff’s enthusiasm and interest to build up internal
knowledge and experience. An interested staff member can develop her own idea for
a Webinar—or be assigned one—and then she runs with it: contacting the speaker,
dealing with contracts, getting the event produced. For Jennings, the advantage is
clear: “If we say a year from now, or even 6 months from now, that we are going to
do podcasts, the gap between where the staff thinks they are and what they think it
will take to produce a podcast right now might be a 100-point gap, but after 6 to 12
months of doing Webinars, that gap could shrink to 20 points. So we get a staff that
thinks they could do that—if they want to do it, then they can do it.”

Although CAI is happy to have good vendor relationships that work well now,
Jennings likes having the option in the future to do more internally, save time, and be
more efﬁcient. Involving all interested staff in the production of CAI Webinars is part
of his plan for getting there.

“[A]fter we’ve done 20 or 30 of these, a
major benefit to us will be having a staff
that is very comfortable producing
Webinars, and I think that will help us
create other products more easily.”
Dave Jennings, vice president, education

27!CASE STUDY

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 DEPARTMENTS RESPONSIBLE FOR E-LEARNING
Not surprisingly, 75.5 percent of associations
currently engaged in e-learning house that
9.6%
function in their education or professional
development department. Member services and 1.1%
1.9%
“other” were the only other substantial 1.9%
groupings, with 10 percent and 9.6 percent
respectively.
10.0%

Analysis of the text responses provided by
associations
currently doing
e-learning and
responding Which department or division of your organization holds primary responsibility for e-learning?
“other” to this Education or professional development, not surprisingly, came in first.
question reveals
that 8 out of 25 75.5%
said e-learning is the shared responsibility of
multiple departments or divisions, and two
reported that their organizations are too small to
have departments or divisions. Education or professional development
Member services
For those planning to do e-learning in the next Marketing
12 months and responding “other,” 6 out of 14 Technology
Don’t know
are too small to have departments or divisions,
Other
which perhaps suggests an uptick in the
adoption of e-learning among smaller
organizations—of those saying they are too small to have departments and
divisions, all reported annual budgets of less than $5 million.

Anecdotally, we learned that even in organizations with an education
department, e-learning may be housed elsewhere: “We have a side of the
house where I actually did reside at one point; they do all the education—
they do face-to-face conferences, courses, everything.” But the organization
determined that the target market for e-learning matched the buyers of one
of its certifications and moved e-learning to that division instead. “So I went
to a place where the market made more sense than my residing where
education resided,” the interviewee explained. “And there’s sort of been this
imaginary dividing line between the two.”

Another interviewee said, “There’s a whole other educational area—you
could think of it as the conference area. They do conferences and high-level
Webinars. We do self-study learning, and we do Webinars that are less
technically oriented.”

PREVALENCE OF OUTSOURCING
Filtering the data on staff size, budget size, age of e-learning program, and
type of e-learning product (e.g., games and simulations) does not yield
percentages significantly different from the numbers reported above—the
vast majority of organizations, in all circumstances, use a mix of in-house
staff and outside vendors.


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 That said, organizations that charge for none of company again and pay the same amount again.
their e-learning offerings are more likely to develop He told me, whatever I recommend, whatever I am
those offerings completely in-house (29.4 percent comfortable with, and I said that I was always up
versus 17.6 percent of those organizations who for a professional development challenge myself,
charge for all their e-learning offerings), and let’s license it, I’ll learn to do it, and I’ll do the
organizations with staffs larger than 30 are more moderation, which is what we’ve done. And I
likely to develop entirely in house (19.4 percent think that’s a key in being able to generate revenue
versus 7.5 percent doing it all out of house). versus struggling to generate revenue from
Webinars.... However I think that there are some
The interviews support the commonsense thinking organizations...who couldn’t believe that we do it
that the main attraction of using outside vendors is ourselves, but clearly they were so nervous about
that they make the work easier for the association, it that for them hiring an organization to do it for
and the main downside is that they can be pricey: them was probably their best investment. So for
“We use a third party [for our Webinars]. They some people and some organizations that really is
make it an easy process for us, but it’s an expense a good fit; for us, it’s been much better to license
that we are not really recouping, so we are the system, leverage it across the whole year, and
definitely looking at other options.” For some the first Webinar paid for it and the rest of the
organizations, the staff are excited by the Webinars help us to hit various revenue marks
opportunity to learn new things and ready to take that we want to hit.
on more while saving the organization money—but
that decision is not for everyone. For organizations that do decide to use outside
vendors, many asserted that the choice should take
I said to the executive director, we’ve got two key into account the technology and the association’s
choices here—we can license the system [Web reality and relationship with the provider.
conferencing software for Webinars] for a year,
and we can get unlimited use for it, so we can use When I examined all the different vendors who
it for meetings, we can use it for Web conferences, provide Webinars and teleconferencing, I looked at
we can do all kinds of stuff with it, or we can hire the big players and the small players and those in
a company to do it once at the same price, and the middle, and we selected Provider X because
when we do the second one, we’ll have to hire that they were well priced, and they didn’t have too
many bells and whistles. Our members are on the
unsophisticated side, technology-wise, so too
many bells and whistles would have thrown them
as well as our staff. I didn’t feel 100 percent
12.8% 18.3%
comfortable, and the Provider X system was easy
for me to understand how to operate, and we have
had very few problems with our attendees not
being able to figure it out.

Are your e-learning offerings developed entirely in-house, using a mixture of in-house
staff and outside vendors, or completely using outside vendors?
The vast majority of associations use a combination of internal and external resources.

68.9% Entirely in-house
Mix of in-house and consultants or vendors
Completely outside vendors


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 THE COST OF EXPERTISE
We asked the organizations we interviewed if they typically pay the subject matter experts (SMEs) who
develop the content for their e-learning offerings. Most don’t, some do, and some use a mixed model that
involves paying some SMEs and not others.

For many organizations who don’t pay, it boils down to precedent—they don’t pay presenters for the
annual meeting—or the bottom line—they can’t afford to pay. “Free” expertise is a huge boon and not
only for e-learning: “[W]e have about 80 instructors, and we don’t pay them a dime to teach two-day
classes; we just pay for their trip. They get no honorarium and hardly any recognition. We try but right
now the organization doesn’t have a really good structure for recognizing and thanking them like you
would think it would, but that saves the organization $200,000 or $300,000 a year, that they’re not paying
any honorariums. That’s amazing to me.”

But associations in this free-SME camp realize the drawbacks of a
volunteer-only approach: “[This use of members as SMEs] limits us a
bit because there are some things that our profession wants to learn
about that the professionals within the profession don’t have the
subject matter expertise in, so we have not gone down that road yet
of finding those outside people and paying them for their subject
matter expertise, and that limits the kind of courses that we make
available.”

Organizations who do pay SMEs tend to do so because a little
payment can go a long way toward improving the experts’
likelihood of hitting deadlines and incorporating feedback or
because they’re asking the SMEs for something original rather than
recycled content: “I find we have to pay [our SMEs]. If I want to get
a finished product out, then the best way to do it is with payment. I
think that the industry has changed over the years with that. I see a
“[W]e have about 80 instructors, definite shift towards that. I will get a volunteer to review materials
and we don’t pay them a dime if that review is not too extensive or not too deep and they only have
to teach two-day classes; we to read a sentence here or there. But if I’m going to do development
just pay for their trip.... [T]hat from scratch then we have to pay.”
saves the organization $200,000
or $300,000 a year.... That’s Even when financial compensation is given to SMEs, it may be more
amazing to me.” of a token gesture than a true-market-value estimation of their time
and expertise. The figures we heard for a 60- to 90-minute Webinar
ranged from $200 to $300. One organization shared that it pays SMEs
$2,500 for a one- to two-hour self-paced course and $5,000 for a
three- to four-hour course—”so they have some skin in the game
too.” It should be noted that this association does have its SMEs sign
over intellectual property rights to the self-paced course as part of
the agreement.

In summary, you may not have to pay for your subject matter
expertise if service and volunteerism are well established in your
organization. On the other hand, you may need to pay to get
responsiveness and original, more thoughtful content.


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 AUTHORING TOOLS
Microsoft PowerPoint is king and queen of e-learning development tools, the only one with greater than 50
percent usage in our online survey of associations currently engaged in e-learning. And PowerPoint
remains on top no matter staff size, budget size, or age of e-learning program.

PowerPoint 60.4%
LMS or LCMS tools 24.8%
Adobe Flash 24.3%
Adobe Dreamweaver 14.9%
Articulate Presenter 13.5%
Adobe Captivate 8.1%
Camtasia Studio 7.2%
Adobe Connect 3.7%
Lectora (Trivantis) 1.4%
Which of
the Outstart Trainer 0.9%
following Toolbook (SumTotal) 0.9%
authoring ReadyGo 0.5%
tools, if any,
does your
WebEx 26.6%
association GoToMeeting 22.5%
use for Microsoft Live Meeting 13.5%
creating e-
learning?
Genesys 1.8%
Microsoft ReadyTalk 0.9%
PowerPoint Elluminate 0.9%
was the
indisputable Other 17.1%
front-runner.
0% 20% 40% 60%

If we look just at organizations that have a learning management system (LMS) or learning content
management system (LCMS), then the category for tools provided in the LMS or LCMS goes way up to
58.2 percent from 24.8 percent, ﬁnally—but just barely—beating PowerPoint out as the most popular tool
(PowerPoint comes in at 57 percent for this group). Despite the increase, it is interesting that use of LMS
and LCMS tools is not even higher among these organizations. This could be because the LMS does not
offer built-in course development tools or because the organization began its e-learning without an LMS
and stuck with the same course development tools even after an LMS was added. It could also be that the
LMS or LCMS tools are not as user- or process-friendly as other options: “The authoring part [of our LMS]
is not that clear, so we have the authors prepare the content in Word. Then we convert it into the authoring
system. I’m in the process of looking at authoring tools, to understand if there could a better route.”

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNERS
For those currently doing e-learning,
organizations are equally split between
using professional instructional 10.6%
designers (IDs) and not. But, if you
factor in the type of e-learning
produced, the split shifts. For
organizations offering blended 43.5%
learning, 73 percent use professional
instructional designers, and 62.8 Does your organization
percent of associations offering self- 45.9% make use of professional
instructional designers
paced and 59.2 percent offering (whether on staff or by
contract) when developing
facilitated e-learning use professional its e-learning offerings?
IDs. The responses were almost
evenly split.

Use professional IDs Don’t use professional IDs Not sure


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 As the stakes go up, the use of professional IDs
goes up too. For organizations offering continuing
education (CE) toward a credential, 50.4 percent
use professionals versus 40.5 percent who do not.
Compare that to organizations offering CE but not
toward a credential—only 33.9 percent use
professional IDs, while 53.2 percent do not—and to
organizations offering no credit at all—again only
33.9 percent use professionals, while 56.7 percent
do not.

Part of this increase may be attributable to the use
of assessments in e-learning tied to credentials.
When tying content to learning domains and
writing questions is key, organizations may see
more value in the added vetting a professional ID
brings.
“[A]ssociations are notoriously
The longer the organization has been involved in e- shortsighted when it comes to [investing in
learning, the more likely it is to use professional professional instructional design].
IDs. For e-learning programs less than a year old, Oftentimes they just don’t want to spend
only 35.7 percent use professionals; almost double the money for it, and unfortunately
the number (67.5 percent) of programs older than sometimes the programs suffer for that.”
five years use professionals

The use of professional IDs is also higher among
organizations using an LMS—71.3 percent—
compared to those without an LMS—23 percent.

From out interviews, we learned that the opinion
of instructional designers varies widely. Some
interviewees were not even familiar with the term,
others didn’t think they added value, others
thought they added value but weren’t something • “[Y]ou need a good instructional designer for
their organization could afford or support, and still online learning,” said one association
others believe them indispensable. interviewee, who happens to be an
instructional designer. “I do recommend,
• “We tried that [using professional instructional especially for individuals who may be in a
designers], and we didn’t get a lot from the one position like mine or have this responsibility in
that we picked. I wasn’t impressed at all.” This their association and they don’t have an
association interviewee continued, “I just felt instructional design background or don’t have
like I could have figured it out myself. It was an instructional design background in online
sort of like, let’s put some video out, and then learning, which is different, then they definitely
let’s have a couple of questions, and then let’s need to make sure that they hire someone to
put some more video, and then we’ll retest handle that or they are gong to end up with an
them. And I thought, I already know this. So I asynchronous course that’s just not going to be
don’t know if that’s an expertise as much as very good.”
common sense. So since then, we haven’t [used • One vendor we interviewed said, “We used to
professional instructional designers]. I have someone on staff devoted just to that
wouldn’t say that I would never do that, but [instructional design], but we couldn’t support
I’d rethink it probably.” that person, and that was back in the late 90s,


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 early 2000s. We would refer people to an
outside instructional designer, and, quite
honestly, associations are notoriously
shortsighted when it comes to that. Oftentimes
they just don’t want to spend the money for it,
and unfortunately sometimes the programs
suffer for that.”
• “Right now we don’t have the funds or the
support [to use professional instructional
designers],” said one interviewee who came
the association world from ASTD, so you can
imagine how sorely he feels the lack.

For organizations that opt to forego professional
instructional designers, that may not mean they
aren’t thinking about instructional design:

The real advantage with Staff Person X is that we
have so many acronyms of things that go on in
our world, and she understood the terminology.
Rather than trying to explain to an instructional
designer what all this terminology meant, she was
already there, and it was on-the-job learning how
to do instructional design. She’s really very self-
taught and has learned a lot of this stuff herself.
She’s taken us to something that we hadn’t been
able to do before.

Others echo the sentiment that e-learning is not
rocket science: “I’ve learned that regardless of what
the program is you have to be able to get the
information you need from the experts and deliver
it in a way that it needs to be delivered, what it is,
training program, doesn’t really matter. It’s all the
same for me.”



“When I came [to the association], there was already one
course being sold on the Internet as an e-learning course. It
was basically 400 PowerPoint slides from our face-to-face
course.... It has sold pretty well despite some of its
challenges.”

Summary slides to e-learning will rise. Whether using these
tools on their own or working with outside service
This chapter focused on operational issues—we
providers, we also expect to see a surge in the
looked at the types of e-learning products
amount of place-based conference content that
associations are offering, who’s responsible for
associations convert into on-demand online
leading their e-learning initiatives, and how they’re
learning.
getting it done, both in terms of tools, like
PowerPoint and Flash, and strategies, like Economic pressures to make the best use of already
outsourcing and whether to pay the price for tight resources are increasing. Associations will
professional instructional design. handle some e-learning in house to avoid additional
invoices, but they’ll also turn to vendors and
We’ll conclude with some trends and opportunities
consultants to draw on expertise and allow limited
we see and questions to ask of your organization as
staff to attend to other priorities—which is to say,
you begin to plan or continue to purse an e-learning
outsourcing is likely to remain part of a “healthy”
program.
resourcing mix. But we believe the use of e-
learning service providers and consultants will
Trends and Predictions
become more thoughtful as associations build
We believe in the next year more associations,
their own knowledge and experience and see
including ones with small budgets and small
outsourcing as a strategic choice rather than a
staffs, will throw their hats in the e-learning ring.
necessary one.
Tools have gotten cheaper, better, and easier, and
many organizations are ﬁnding success with Related to the previous point, as organizations seek
“simpler” e-learning formats, like teleconferences, to grow their e-learning offerings and create higher-
online chats, and Webinars. Your offerings don’t quality products, we believe interest in
have to be fancy or expensive to succeed. And with instructional design will increase. Organizations
the current economic recession, the travel-savings will make efforts to build capacity in-house as well
appeal of e-learning will only ring truer. as to contract with outside instructional designers.

PowerPoint is a mainstay of corporate training, and
there’s every reason to believe it will remain
prevalent in the association world too. We predict
the use of tools (like Articulate Presenter or Adobe
Captivate) that make it easy to convert PowerPoint



Questions to Consider leverage the resources of other functional areas
1.What is your process for determining the forms across the organization to deliver, market, and
of e-learning you offer and the topics you support your e-learning offerings?
address? Do you have a standardized process 5.How can you use outsourcing strategically for
for working with subject matter experts to e-learning to scale and complement your
create your e-learning products and services? internal skill set? What is the association’s
Have you documented these processes in a overall take on outsourcing? Is outsourcing
way that they can be shared with those who used elsewhere in the organization? How? If
need to know them? you have no Flash programmer, look for that
2.If you’re considering starting an e-learning skill in a service provider; if you have no
program, which format or formats are right for professional instructional designer and think
your audience, topic, budget, and human that is important, look for that in a vendor.
resources (including staff, contractors, and 6.Are you asking for—and getting!—valuable
vendors)? Is your audience tech-savvy and input from any outside service providers you
impressed by bells and whistles, or are they use? Look for vendors who provide more than
wary of new technology and need a lot of just a tool and can help support your overall e-
handholding? What are you capable of and learning initiative.
comfortable doing internally? As an example, 7.Has your leadership tried your (or other) e-
live Webinars may be more difficult to schedule learning and provided feedback? Getting your
for international organizations because time leadership’s buy-in and participation can be
differences leave a small slice of overlapping critical to making your e-learning program
work hours and because different regulations really work.
(and therefore topics) apply, but the extra effort
allows you to connect people who wouldn’t
otherwise get to interact.
3.If you already have an e-learning program, is it
time to branch out into new products, or do
you need to cut back to focus strategically on
the successful offerings? Think about how your
products fit together and fit with the rest of the
association’s work. Can your publications
become sources for e-learning topics, or vice-
versa?
4.Whether you already have an e-learning
program in place or plan to add one, what is
your approach to building capacity for e-
learning in your organization? Do you have a
good understanding internally of adult
learning principles and instructional design as
they relate to e-learning? How will you


Cindy Hartley
Director of member relations at the Southern Building Material Association

Cultivating Success
Southern Building Material Association
When Cindy Hartley launched a Webinar series for the Southern Building Material Association
(SBMA), a group that serves building materials dealers across four states, she knew success was not
guaranteed. “My industry does not tend to be the most technologically advanced,” explained Hartley.

“To help make sure that I was successful,” Hartley continued, “I went to our board of directors and
urged them to help, ‘Please join us for the first one. I need your input on how this worked, what you
think should be changed, what benefits you see in it. You are a member of our board of directors, and I
really want your support in developing this.’”

Hartley personally sent the board members registration forms for
Webinars and called them to remind them she needed their support
“I called [our board] on
and feedback on SBMA’s first foray into e-learning. Hartley said that
the telephone and said, ‘I
need you to support this. enlisting the board was a “tremendously helpful” part of getting the
We will never get started program off the ground, but she didn’t stop there.
if we can’t get the first
[Webinar] done....’” Hartley also embraced the enthusiasm of SBMA’s sister organizations
who contacted her when they saw the Webinar program and asked to
CIndy Hartley, director of member participate. “[T]hey asked how we were doing it. When they saw us
relations
put out the second and third ones, they asked if they could join in.” So
Hartley created a registration form the other organizations could use
and brand with their logo.

Now when SBMA delivers a Webinar, the attendees may include members from sister organizations
across the country. SBMA bills its sister organizations at cost for the attendees, but Hartley lets them
keep the profit. “We get participation,” said Hartley, “not a tremendous amount, but a little bit from all
over the place gives you enough to do these kinds of things when you are small.”

Given current economic conditions, the Webinar series has replaced the face-to-face trainings that
SBMA used to deliver across the region. Hartley does not expect that to be a permanent situation.
Eventually the organization will offer both place-based and online training, but in the meantime,
Hartley has found the right partners to ensure success of her current program.

36!CASE STUDY

The Business Perspective
Revenue, Strategy, Promotion, and Competition
Using the data from our online survey and our learning is thus a line of business rather than a cost
interviews, we concentrate in this section on the center for most organizations. At a minimum, it
business perspective of e-learning, which needs to operate on a revenue-neutral basis,
encompasses the strategy that drives an e-learning bringing in enough income to cover costs. For many
initiative, the expenses and income, the marketing organizations, it also need to contribute positive
of offerings, and the competition that can shape revenue to the bottom line.
programs.
As might be expected, our research suggests that the
The Revenue Imperative vast majority of association e-learning programs
must be at minimum self-sustaining, and most are
One of the key ways in which association e-learning
also charged with generating positive net revenues.
differs from online education and training in the
commercial corporate sector is that most
associations look to e-learning—and to education in
general—as a source of non-dues revenue. E-
16.1%

33.7%
Which of the following statements describes your financial goals for your current
e-learning offerings?
The vast majority of association e-learning programs must be at a minimum self-
sustaining.

Must be self-sustaining but profitability not required
Must be self-sustaining and profitable
Doesn’t need to be self-sustaining (costs subsidized)
50.2%

To meet their goal of financial sustainability, most
14.0% organizations charge for at least some of their e-
learning offerings, and a significant percentage
charge for all of their offerings.

42.3%

Does your association charge for its e-learning offerings?
Some 86 percent charge for at least some offerings.

43.7% Charge for all offerings
Charge for some offerings
Don’t charge for offerings

37!THE BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 All the association representatives had put an organizational e-learning
interviewed for this report indicated a goal strategy in place.
of breaking even on the direct costs
associated with e-learning. These costs Our conversations with the associations
include, for example, technology licensing interviewed for this report as well as our
fees as well as payments to vendors for own experience in the field for many years
Webinar or course development services. suggests that most organizations approach
In most cases, the interviewees also e-learning strategy in an informal, seat-of-
indicated a desire to cover indirect costs, the-pants way. As one of our interviewees
meaning primarily staff time allocated to e- put it, being given the time and resources
learning, but in many cases the to formally develop and document an e-
organization did not track these costs learning strategy is “an indulgence.”
closely and thus did not have a clear idea
We did not ask about e-learning strategy in
of whether they were being covered or not.
our original survey. We did, however,
Most of the organizations interviewed conduct a follow-up survey among
depended on revenue generated from sales organizations that have implemented e-
of e-learning programs to cover costs learning programs and asked these
associated with producing and delivering organizations whether they have a formal,
the programs. In a few instances, however documented e-learning strategy. Only 30
—particularly in fields tied to medicine or percent of the respondents said they do.
public health—organizations had
A comment from one of the respondents to
established or were attempting to establish
the survey seems typical of how e-learning
a practice of securing sponsorships or
strategy is handled at many organizations:
grants from corporations or government
entities to underwrite production and
delivery costs. In the medical field, it
We do Webinars as part of our training
remains to be seen whether future
for nonprofits. We do budgeting around
sponsorships will be impacted by recent
it. We talk about it. But there’s not
legislation by Massachusetts and other
really anything “documented” beyond
states to place restrictions on funding of
budgets and the workshop descriptions.
continuing medical education (CME)
Does your It's sad and surely not a best practice,
organization have programs by pharmaceutical and medical
a formal, but we're so busy putting on trainings
device companies.
documented that we don't have much time to be very
strategy for e-
planful.
learning?
Right at 60 percent Strategy
do not have a
formal e-learning In a 2005 survey of associations by Jennifer Our view is that a number of factors will
strategy.
DeVries of BlueStreak contribute to e-learning being viewed more
Learning, 89 percent of strategically in the coming years. Certainly
respondents stated that the current state of the economy will be
9.1% having an e-learning one factor. Organizational leaders will look
strategy was either to cut their own costs (which e-learning
30.9% critical or very important may or may not do) and to provide lower
to their professional cost options for members whose travel
success. But only 31 budgets have been slashed, or in some
percent of respondents cases, cut entirely. The current economy
aside, the growth of green thinking, the
60.0% Formal e-learning strategy
growing array of cheap and easy e-learning
technologies, and the coming of age of a
No formal strategy
Not sure generation that is comfortable doing


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 almost everything online will generate more convincing organizational leaders of the full benefit
demand and tear down remaining barriers. can be an uphill battle. One director reported:
Organizations will have to pursue e-learning more
strategically or risk losing learners—and members We have been able to earn back our investment for
—to competition that sees the opportunity in our asynchronous stand-alone course, which is
offering online educational products. not inexpensive to do. But I think that a lot of
people tend to look at return on investment in a
Return on Investment very narrowly specific financial way because
that’s the way most people think. I’ve been able to
Whether through sales, sponsorships, or both, the
work with my association to help them
timelines—and the corresponding amount of
understand that there are a lot of different ways to
pressure—that organizations indicated for
look at that, even financially. So for example, we
achieving a positive return on investment varied
are able to say that we have earned
significantly from organization to
back the broad scope of the
organization. As a rule, the
“[E]-learning is investment but what a lot of people
organizations with which we spoke
bringing in a lot of don’t think about is...the investment
expected their Webinars to operate
people into the that we made in the asynchronous
profitably or on a break-even basis
either from day one or within less organization that [e-learning] course was roughly the
normally weren’t same kind of investment we would
than a year. Among organizations
participating with make, in terms of expenses, for two
that had invested in more
the organization of our dozen or so live, in-person
sophisticated on-demand products, previously.” sessions per year. But the
many anticipated a two- to three-
asynchronous course...is always out
year horizon before their programs
there—and we estimated that it has
would achieve positive net revenues
at least a three-year shelf life for the
and indicated that senior
topic—so because of that we can say,
management and the board accepted
we reached 400 learners and
this as a necessary period for
growing, for the same investment
producing a return. In other
cost where we might have only hit
instances, the pressure to operate
57 people for one that was in-person.
profitably was much higher. “This
That’s when they realized that it’s
department, from the very
not just an upfront investment; it’s
beginning, has had to show it is a
a matter of reach, and it’s a matter of
profit center,” a director at one
final per-student, per-learner cost
organization said.
over time.
[I]t has to show revenue, it has to
One of the providers we interviewed
show gross revenue.... Whereas some of our other
expanded on this line of thinking, suggesting that
[educational offerings] were loss leaders, some of
senior management, and ultimately the board, at
our courses and face-to-face conferences, were
many associations tend to think too narrowly about
allowed to be loss leaders for two or three years
the strategic potential of e-learning:
until they built up an audience, we never once
were able to be a loss leader, and that’s very If I were a forward-thinking association executive
difficult. I would think about what this means to the
organization, not in dollars and cents
A tension between the need to generate a return—or
immediately, but in terms of...member retention,
at least break even—and the desire to serve learners
providing services to members that they are going
well was palpable in many of the interviews. Even
to value, especially with what is happening in the
in cases where programs have been successful from
economy and association memberships and
a financial standpoint, interviewees indicated that
spending are going to be looked at much more
critically, and as an association executive I want


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 to keep those members, and I want to Among the associations we interviewed,
keep them engaged, and I think there are there was clearly nervousness about the
many opportunities to keep them potential for a significant drop in
engaged through e-learning. And e- registrations for conferences and face-to-
learning might take many different face meetings. For most of the
forms; it might be providing services to organizations we talked to, it was too soon
them to help them maintain their to tell what impact, if any, the economic
certification; it might include some of downturn would have on these offerings,
the things that incorporate social media but some were already beginning to see a
to get members talking to one another negative trend in registrations for their
and helping one another. That’s the place-based events.
approach that I would take, but there are
not a lot of execs who can do that On the other hand, most of the associations
because they don’t have the support of and providers we spoke to indicated that
their board. A board wants to see money. the downturn would likely drive growth in
e-learning investment. For providers, in
The Impact of the Economy particular, this is a positive trend, as the
desire to cut risk related to room rentals,
Regardless of its broader strategic
meals, travel costs, and other expenses
potential, it seems likely that current
related to place-based education will
economic conditions will cause many
almost certainly lead to more spending on
organizational leaders to look more closely
Web-based solutions for delivering
at e-learning as an approach to cutting
education. In the short term, this spending
costs and possibly generating new
seems most likely to be directed at
revenues to replace revenues declining in
Webinars or at services related to capturing
other areas.
and productizing conference content.
As indicated in the initial chapter of this Significant investment in higher-priced
report, respondents to the survey indicated content development as well as learning
an increase in budgeting for e-learning management systems, on the other hand,
programs, even as budgets for education in seems likely to remain flat or decline.
general appear to be flattening out.

Is the economic downturn
negatively impacting e-learning
technology providers?
“The short answer is no. The long answer is no.”


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 Even in cases where organizations do invest more in provide training for licensing and other things,
e-learning products and services, it is unclear at this but their entire training budget has been
point whether registrations for Web-based completely cut so they are piece-making different
programs will rise at all, much less to a degree subject matter expertise within their staff to
necessary to offset the potential decline in revenue provide the training that is required by law, which
from place-based programs. Recent data from the we know is not going to ensure the most qualified
American Society of Association Executives and trained staff working in these licensed
suggests that the trend for registrations may turn programs. We’re totally shifting our sales and
downward. marketing strategy from a high-level decision
maker to sell a large block of courses to a direct-to-
Based on this study, reports of a vast migration consumer, “in this economy you should be the
from face-to-face gatherings to online alternatives most trained and qualified person, and here’s what
appear to overstate the case. Of people who only we have to provide you” model.
attended in-person events last year, only three
percent say there’s a high probability they’ll only We just recently made that decision.... [R]eally we
attended virtual events this year. In fact, if there’s didn’t launch, launch full on with a full catalog
a migration at all, it’s going the other way: Nine until October, and we began making sales calls
percent of people who only attended virtual after our launch party at our annual meeting, and
programs last year say they’re likely to attend at that time directors were still willing to listen to
only a face-to-face meeting this year. us, and we were giving out promo codes, and they
wanted to go and look at the stuff and see how it
Another area that is likely to be impacted by the
would fit in. Now that we are making our follow-
downturn is bulk sales of courses to corporations,
up calls to that same batch of people, they are all
government agencies, or other organizations
telling us that they looked at it, and it’s great, but
interested in training a large group of employees.
they don’t have any money. So the difference
Training is traditionally one of the first budget areas
between October and January is huge. We were
cut when times are tight. Associations that sell to
kind of banking on [agency purchases], and as a
training departments will almost certainly see
result we are totally shifting our sales and
longer sales cycles or decisions by potential
marketing strategy.
purchasers to cut training purchases. One of the
organizations we interviewed related how the Finally, along with the possible impact on
decline in demand at government agencies had registrations and large sales, there is a less obvious
caused them to revamp their entire sales strategy: and potentially longer-lasting change that the
downturn could bring. There is already a tendency
[W]e wanted to talk with high-level decision
across the sector to price e-learning lower than
makers and get them to buy licenses to our course
similar place-based offerings. In the current
catalog for a broad distribution within their
economy, many organizations may be inclined to
agency, particularly because we have a lot of
lower prices even further as a show of support for
trainings that are fundamentally required for
members. Raising prices when conditions improve,
licensing reasons...and we felt like that would be a
however, tends to be more difficult. It is far too soon
great way to make a large chunk of change off of
to tell, but a general deflation of e-learning price
each sale without nickel and diming.
points—and a corresponding drop in margins—
may turn out to be one of the legacies of the current
We’ve priced our stuff at anywhere between $20
economy.
and $50 per course, which is extraordinarily
reasonable, but we price it that way because we
Product
want the volume, and our plan to achieve volume
was through this license concept, and across the As indicated in the chapter “The Operational
board training budgets have been cut within Perspective,” associations have embraced a variety
agencies to the level that we talk to agency heads, of formats for e-learning, with live Webinars being
and they know that they have a requirement to the most popular format by a significant margin.


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 Based on our interviews, product format decisions number of interviewees was how “tangible” or
tend to be driven less by formal assessment of “actionable” the content for an e-learning offering
member needs and more by internal resource is. Here is how one of the providers we interviewed
considerations and a general perception of what put it:
other associations are doing. In our brief follow up
survey on e-learning strategy, the vast majority (65.5 What we definitely have seen is tangible content,
percent) of respondents indicated that their meaning content they can walk away with and do
organization does not have a formal product something with, those are going to drive more
development process for e-learning. registrations than the more high-level, executive-
level content. But I think that’s always been the
Webinars are seen as requiring a case; I don’t know that that is necessarily a
Find hot relatively low amount of direct reflection of a change in times as much as a
topics. investment. They leverage an reflection of just people that are most likely to
educational model already attend a Webinar. What kind of content are they
“Hot topics
will always deeply familiar to associations— going after? If you can provide a Webinar with
sell. But an expert speaker, most typically very discernible output, you are going to have
other than a member volunteer, delivering a better attendance. Let me give you the most basic
that, I really
don't know.” presentation on a timely or example I can think of. For some reason,
perennially popular topic—and, regardless of the industry that you are presenting
as several of the associations we this to, if you were to promote an Excel Webinar
interviewed put it, all the other on how to use Excel to analyze data, it will do
associations are doing, and we great. It always does. For some reason people
need to keep up. think, “I’m going to go here. I’m going to get 10
cool things I can walk away from related to Excel,
Topics, rather than format, seemed to absorb the which is a tool that if I don’t use it I think I should
greater part of strategic thinking about e-learning know how to use it.” Very tangible topic.
products at the associations we interviewed. In
general, topic decisions are driven by a combination Finally, perhaps one of the most important demand
of committee or board input, staff knowledge—or drivers for e-learning over the long term is whether
intuition—about the topics most relevant to an organization offers some form of valued credit
members, or in limited cases, surveys of the for successful completion of a learning experience.
membership base. Few of the organizations with Credit may take many forms. It may be actual
which we spoke had a formal process in place for continuing education credit, as discussed in the next
determining the size of the potential market for a section, or it may be a certificate or validation that
product, the strength of demand in the market, or some form of compliance has been met. The key,
the purchasing process in the market. however, is less the credit itself and more the value
associated with the credit. Industries where certain
“Hot” topics were cited by all the organizations we
interviewed as one of the main drivers of demand
for e-learning. These tend to be topics related to Drive demand for your e-learning with key
compliance, regulatory, or public “emergency” type factors.
issues. A recall of tainted peanut butter, for
•Timely or perennially popular topics
example, was going on at the time we interviewed
representatives for the Institute of Food •Actionable content
Technologists. This sort of situation creates instant •Required or highly valued credit
demand for education. The current economic crises
The smaller or more competitive your market, the more
has also created demand for a range of topics important these factors become.
related to weathering the storm.

Aside from the topic being timely and relevant to
learners, another key demand driver indicated by a


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 types of compliance are required, where some form once accreditation is established. Even relatively
of certification is required or highly valued, or simple certificate programs that do not offer
where a certain number of continuing education continuing education credit can generate a
credits must be earned annually tend to have higher significant amount of operational overhead.
demand for all of their educational offerings, and e-
learning shares in this demand. As a matter of strategy, however, common sense
suggests that, all else being equal, a learner will
CONTINUING EDUCATION AND CERTIFICATION choose an educational experience that offers some
Whether to award some form of credit for e- form of credit over one that does not. For the most
learning is an important decision both operationally part, associations appear inclined to place strategic
and strategically for an organization. From an considerations ahead of whatever operational
operational standpoint, there is typically a burdens the awarding of credit may create. Among
significant amount of footwork to be done simply to the respondents to our survey, the majority of
be accredited for providing continuing education organizations that offer or plan to offer e-learning
credits—even for a certification or credential also award or plan to award some form of credit.
maintained by the association itself—and usually
there are reporting requirements to be followed Among the organizations we interviewed, most
award some form of credit—most commonly

Which type of credit does your organization currently offer or plan
to offer for e-learning? Check all that apply.
The majority of organizations offering or planning to offer e-learning also award or
plan to award some form of credit.

35.4%
No credit
33.3%

43.0%
Continuing education (CE or CEU)
41.2%

10.1%
Continuing medical education (CME)
13.2%

1.8% Current e-learning
Continuing legal education (CLE)

8.3%
Continuing professional education (CPE)
10.5%

31.8%
Certificate of successful completion
32.5%

31.8%
Credit towards a credential
25.4%

4.3%
Credit towards a degree
1.8%

5.4%
Other
5.3%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 continuing education (CE) or continuing education units (CEU)—for some
or all of their e-learning. While most of the organizations and all the “One of our goals is
providers interviewed agreed that credit is a key demand driver for e- to create programs
learning, offering credit comes with its challenges. that are so good
that people will
One organization we interviewed has chosen so far not to offer credit want to be there
because of the operational challenges noted above. A representative from an whether they get
organization that does offer credit noted internal challenges in putting credit credit or not.”
in place for e-learning.

[Credit] continues to be a challenge. Some of our leadership groups aren’t
sure if they are comfortable with e-learning. They might be okay with it in
addition to the face-to-face, as a supplement or a bonus or an add-on, but
there’s a lot of them who do not want it substituting for a face-to-face class.
So we’ve tried to lay the ground work with some of the committees and
leadership...to get them comfortable. So, at this point some of our stuff counts
but some doesn’t. Some of it’s kind of substitutable for a face-to-face
experience and some of it isn’t. So, we’re trying to get to the point where it
truly is a range of choices that interchange nicely together so people have a
full range of choices and it’s not perceived as compromising quality. Right
now it would be perceived as comprising quality. If we came out and said,
you can take this whole thing to get your certiﬁcation and never set foot in a
classroom, or not very much, there would be some people that would have a
problem with that so we’re trying to deal with that.

Aside from addressing leadership’s concerns about awarding credit for e-
learning, some association educators wrestle with their own concerns about
credit as one of the primary motives any educational activity—online or off.
One association representative said:

That’s one of our concerns...that some of our enrollment, or a lot of it in some
cases, is driven by people who may not value the learning or don’t want to be
there, but they want the credential. One of our goals is to create programs
that are so good that people will want to be there whether they get credit or
not. But the reality is a lot of the folks are there because there is credit
attached to it, and if there wasn’t, there would be fewer people there.

Credit and certiﬁcation are double-edged swords. Markets where their
importance is already established tend to be more competitive markets. So
there may be a large base of prospects, but organizations have to work
harder and smarter to convert them into customers. The market for
continuing medical education (CME) is perhaps the clearest example of this
phenomenon. Physicians are required to earn a minimum number of credits
per year to maintain credentials in their specialties. This requirement
essentially forces high demand for educational offerings, and as a result, has
attracted a large number of e-learning suppliers and products into the
market. Associations that hope to compete in this market have to offer
credit, but credit in itself is not enough to attract purchasers.


Barbara Swarthout (left) and Melissa Polito
Director of e-learning programs (left) and e-learning instructional designer at
the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans

More Demand for “Fresher,” Shorter Topics
International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans

In the fall of 2008, the International Foundation of Employee Benefits (IFEBP) launched its 60-Minute
Power Series, “a collection of nine live Webcasts that are along the lines of practical, how-to
information,” described Barbara Swarthout, director of e-learning programs.

Early data shows these 60-minute Webinars sell better than IFEBP’s 90-minute Webinars. What’s the
secret? Finding fresh topics that are in demand and marketing them the right way. “These Power
Series were very successful...we projected 450 registered sites, and we got 419 registered sites. So in
our book, compared to what we’d been doing on
the 90-minute side, these were extremely “[T]hese were extremely successful. We think
successful.” Swarthout continued, “We think it’s it’s because we bundle them and because there
because we bundle them and because there are are such different topics—they are more how-to
such different topics—they are more how-to topics; we have real-life scenarios.”
topics; we have real-life scenarios.” Learners can Barbara Swarthout, director of e-learning programs
buy three, six, or all nine Webcasts in a Power
Series—or individual sessions.

IFEBP works with volunteer subject matter experts (SMEs) for its 90-minute Webinars, which can
sometimes be adaptations of presentations the SMEs have already given elsewhere. But when
branching out to find unique topics for the Power Series, IFEBP realized that recruiting volunteers to
develop a presentation from scratch would be a big task. So they moved to a paid-SME model. “For
the 60-minute program we offer [the SMEs] $200 to do it, so I can request things a little bit easier than
with our 90-minute programs,” explained Melissa Polito, e-learning instructional designer at IFEBP.
“We ask them to put in workplace scenarios that people can work through, practical examples of the
material during the presentation. I also ask them for a quick reference guide that we put together on
the topic, so that the attendees can have that before the event.”

Although paying the SMEs clearly adds to the cost of the Power Series, if the early popularity
continues, this is the kind of expense it’s easy to afford.

45!CASE STUDY

Pricing System categories. The chart on the following page
contains data from industries where at least five
Given the wide range of industries that associations
respondents provided pricing information for
serve as well as the variability in product offerings
current e-learning offerings. The number of
from organization to organization, any
organizations that provided pricing information in a
generalizations about pricing in the sector have to
particular industry is indicated in parentheses
be taken with a sizable grain of salt. To attempt to
beside the industry name.
establish some benchmarks for average and median
pricing levels across the sector, we asked survey PRICING AND FORMATS
participants to think about their e-learning
Based on our experience and the interviews
offerings in terms of a dollar amount per hour of
conducted for this report, our sense is that the
content or per credit unit delivered. While this
average pricing for Webinars is probably a good bit
approach has limitations, particularly with respect
higher than the averages that encompass pricing for
to organizations that sell access to their e-learning
all types of e-learning. One provider indicated that
libraries on a subscription basis, our experience
$125 for a 90-minute sessions is the lowest price
suggests that it represents the most common way
charged by any of his company’s clients for a
that associations tend to think about content pricing
Webinar; another indicated an average price of $230.
for e-learning.
The lower-end of this range—which breaks down to
PRICING ACROSS INDUSTRIES approximately $83 per content hour—is in line with
what we heard from most of the organizations we
Determining how pricing breaks down across
interviewed. Not surprisingly, the organizations we
various industries is challenging because there is
interviewed that used a third party to manage their
not, to our knowledge, a uniform way in which
Webinars tended to charge more for them.
association identify the industry they serve.
Additionally, associations may serve multiple In distinguishing between Webinars and other
industries or focus on an issue rather than an formats, however, it is important to realize that
industry. In attempting to Webinars are often purchased on a per-site basis,
establish the industry of survey rather than on a per-person basis. In other words, an
respondents, we used an organization may purchase a Webinar and then
abbreviated and somewhat have several people gather in a room to log in to the
modified version of the North Webinar and participate. Conversations with
American Industry Classification vendors in the Webinar market suggest that an

Current e-learning
Planned e-learning
$73.97

Break down the
pricing for your
e-learning $56.79
offerings $52.24 $53.80
(excluding any
free offerings).
On average,
how much (in $40.00 $40.00 $39.00
U.S. dollars)
does your
organization $30.00
charge or plan
to charge
members per
hour of content
and per hour of
credit for an e-
learning
offering?
Average per content hour Median per content hour Average per credit hour Median per credit hour


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 average of four people attend a Webinar at any given site. So, on a
per-course or per-credit-hour and per-person basis, pricing for
Webinars may well be on par with, or even quite a bit lower than, for
other types of content.

On the other hand, a provider well versed in pricing for on-demand
product offerings felt that the $56.79 average pricing for a content
hour suggested by survey results sounded “about right.“ This
number also jibes with our experience in working with organizations
that offer on-demand e-learning products.

In general, the market seems to assign a pricing premium to content
that is facilitated, whether in real time or asynchronously. The
following table shows pricing levels when a particular type of
content is included in the associations product mix. When real-time
Webcasts and Webinars, facilitated courses, and member-only
discussion boards are present, pricing levels per content hour are
above the sector average. Conversely, on-demand content tends to
drive pricing levels below the sector average. (See the chart on the
following page.)
Average and median costs per
content hour and per credit, grouped
by industry.
In most, but not all, industries, pricing per credit
hour is slightly higher than pricing per content
hour.

$22.25 Average per content hour
$21.25 Median per content hour
Health care: physicians (10)
$29.70 Average per credit hour
$23.00 Median per credit hour
$45.89
Health care: non-physicians (29)
$25.00
$45.89
$25.00
$51.00
Construction (10)
$57.00
$52.63
$57.00
$46.25
Manufacturing (8)
$42.50
$55.00
$55.00
$48.63
Legal and financial services (16)
$39.50
$36.50
$32.50
$83.70
Education (25)
$77.50
$140.75
$80.00
$15.43
Real estate (7)
$15.00
$12.60
$10.00


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 It should be noted that these numbers say nothing credit may have the opposite effect. Organizations
about the overall financial performance of programs with a certification program in place report an
containing a particular content type. Underlying average price per hour of content of $46.89 as
costs and potential volume can vary dramatically opposed to $62.05 for organizations that do not
from one format to the next. A low-priced on- offer any form of certification. Similarly,
demand offering, for example, may become a cash organizations that offer credit towards a
cow for an organization after the initial investment certification or other credential report an average
for producing it is recouped because the ongoing price per hour of $47.66 while those that do not
incremental costs for supporting are so low. What offer such credit report an average price of $68.45.
these numbers imply, however, is that a perception
persists in the market that facilitated experiences While these figures may seem counterintuitive, the
are more valuable. We can only speculate why this explanation is most likely that markets where
is, but common sense suggests that facilitated certification exists, or where securing the ability to
formats feel more familiar both to providers and offer continuing education credit is seen as
participants and that people tend to assume that worthwhile, are likely to be more competitive
learning is more effective when human-to-human markets where both demand and the corresponding
interaction is involved. supply of content are higher. Particularly in the
early stages of such a market, a glut of competing
While facilitated formats may command higher suppliers tends to drive prices down.
pricing, it appears that the presence of a
certification program and continuing education

Pricing levels
Real-time Webinars $65.81
when a particular
type of content is
Facilitated online courses $61.28 included in the
associations
product mix.
Member-only discussion boards $61.19 When real-time
Webinars, facilitated
courses, and
member-only
“Off-the-shelf” courses $53.20 discussion boards
are present, pricing
levels per content
CD-ROMs and DVDs $52.03 hour are above the
sector average.
Conversely, on-
Self-paced courses $49.26 demand content
tends to drive pricing
levels below the
sector average.
Offline with online assessments $48.03

Blended learning $46.98

Electronic study guides $38.29

Recorded Webinars $34.43

Educational simulations or games $33.89

Audio or video podcasts $32.98


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 PRICING AND AGE OF PROGRAM reason for starting the program initially. As the
The survey data shows a roller-coaster pattern for organization attempts to move beyond its initial
pricing over the course of building an e-learning offerings, finding the right model can be difficult.
program. Pricing is higher in year one, drops in year We have seen, in our own experience, a tendency
two, rises again in years three to five, and then for organizations to start cutting prices when initial
drops back down again. demand falters.

We’re not inclined to make too much of these By years three to five, a program
numbers until we see how they change over time. has typically either found its
There are logical reasons, however, for why such a footing or has retrenched or shut
pattern might emerge. Typically, when an down. The possibility for
organizations starts an e-learning program, there is bolstering pricing emerges. Finally,
a certain amount of low-hanging fruit—areas of by the time an organization has hit
clear need that are likely a significant part of the the five-year mark, on-demand

$65.68
$62.09

$49.26 $48.11

Average
price per
content hour,
by age of the
e-learning
program.
The survey data
shows a roller-
coaster pattern.

Less than 1 year 1 to 2 years 3 to 5 years More than 5 years

formats tend to be a more significant part of the
product mix than in the earlier years in which live
Webinars tend to dominate. Among survey
respondents, 79.1 percent of organizations that
have been using e-learning for more than five
“We priced them pretty steeply at first; they years report offering self-paced online courses and
were $295 originally, when we came out
tutorials, and 76.7 report offerings on-demand
with a course three years ago. We have
Webinars. Among the same group, 67.4 percent
continued to drop the price, so now...one e-
learning hour costs $40 for a member and indicate that they offer live Webinars. As noted
$50 for a non-member. So if it’s a three-hour above, on-demand products tend to come with
course, you pay $120 if you’re a member....” lower price points. An increase in the percentage
of these products in the overall mix would thus
logically lead to decline in prices over all.

Again, it is premature to make too much of these
numbers, but it will be interesting to return to
them in future years to see if this pattern persists.


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 PRICING STRATEGY AND MODELS this particular content, so then we came up with
How are associations determining prices for their an education package. [We have a] page on our
products? Our interviews suggest that, at this point, Web site that shows you the 50 different ways that
pricing tends to be based on a combination of you can pay for this course. And all of that came
intuition and a general sense of what other out of...asking, “Who are the various possible
associations are charging. Providers also have students for this course, and what makes sense?”
significant influence. While most of the providers
we talked with said that they are not directly Two strategies that we have seen gain ground over
involved in setting the pricing, all of them indicated the years as some organizations have built out a
that they are typically asked about pricing by library of online offerings are bundled course
associations and that they do provide pricing offerings—grouping a set of related courses
advice. together as a single product—and subscription
pricing—giving a user or
As with the product development organization unlimited access to a
process, our follow-up survey of How do you set library of educational content over a
organizations that currently offer e- prices for your e- designated period. One association
learning indicated that most do not learning offerings? representative told us:
have a formal, document process for “I really don’t have a good
setting prices for their e-learning. I think the most expensive single
answer, and it’s somewhat
embarrassing.” course we have is $55. Then we will
Along with an informal process for also...do a bundle on safety, or we
setting prices initially, our can do a bundle on
conversations with associations also basic...techniques, group those
suggest that organizations tend to be together, and the guiding principle
highly reactive to the market we have there is those packages the
environment as they start to role out courses are about $10 to $12 a
their products. course. When we did the math, we
figured that if you bought an annual
I will tell you that we ended up subscription the price point ended
finding out pretty quickly that we up being roughly $5 to $6 a course.
needed to think of pricing in several That’s a pretty good bargain. But
different ways because we have, as I subscribers are 80 percent of our
said before, such a variety of business, so that is what we really
memberships. So we ended up with try to drive....the guiding principles
an institutional membership and an are to get that person the best value.
industry membership; we ended up People renewing that year after year,
with group memberships, so in other that’s the growth for us.
words it starts to scale. You can get an individual
access to the course or you can sign up in groups,
and then the groups break out in various ways.
3.6%
But then we also have a potential audience within 5.5%
20.0%
students at...schools who might be interested in

If your organization sells e-learning products or services, do you have a formal, documented process for
setting prices?
Only 20 percent have a formal pricing process.

Formal pricing process No formal process Not sure
Don’t charge for e-learning
70.9%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 As e-learning matures in the sector, we DISCOUNTS
expect to see much more course bundling, Discounts are a standard part of
subscriptions sales, and deep discounting association e-learning. Most offer lower
on bulk sales to large purchasers. In pricing for members than for non-
general, however, pricing currently seems members. Many also offer discounts to
to be an area in which there is signiﬁcant students or residents (in the case of
opportunity for improving e-learning medical associations), though we did not
program performance. Perhaps more than ask organizations to provide information
any other factor, pricing tends to serve as a about these discounts in the survey.
barometer for the perceived value of a
program or individual offering—both by The most common level of discount for
the potential learner and by the association member purchases among organizations
itself. One of the providers we interviewed currently using e-learning is from 10 to 19
commented that programs priced at more percent (24.9 percent). This was also the
than $200 tend to sell better than lower- most common range selected by
priced programs. It is beyond the scope of organizations planning an e-learning
our survey data or this report to fully initiative (26.1 percent), though many (27.3
explore the role of pricing in association e- percent) indicated they do not yet know
learning markets, but our general sense is what level discount they will offer.
that in many instances associations can and
should be pricing their e-learning at a
higher level that is more in line with the
actual value delivered.

Do members of
your association
receive a
discount on e- 12.7% 17.9%
learning
products and
services?
The most common
level of discount
for member
13.1% 2.6%
purchases among
organizations
currently using e-
learning is from 10
to 19 percent. 3.5%

10.5% 24.9%
$1 Learning
14.8% “Last year we did $99 for a 90-minute session.
Right now we are doing $59 for a 60-minute
session, and then a bundled price if they do the
entire series. Right now we have three series, two
of which are nine sessions total, and one of them
No member discount is four sessions. We were looking at it like $1 per
1% to 9% discount minute.”
10% to 19% discount
“I don’t think we did it this way on purpose, but it
20% to 29% discount
usually ends up being $1 per slide.”
30% to 39% discount
40% to 49% discount
50% or greater discount
Other discount


Certification Creates Demand; E-learning Assists
National Air Duct Cleaners Association
In 1995, the National Air Duct Cleaners
Association (NADCA) introduced the air
systems cleaning specialist (ASCS) certification,
which could be earned through a rigorous, 150-
question, multiple-choice examination. To help
candidates prepare for the exam, NADCA
developed a one-day, place-based prep class.
Although the certification took off, NADCA soon
realized that its approach to training wasn’t
working for all members, as John Schulte,
executive director, shared: “What we heard from
our members, the owners of the companies
(really, that’s our primary audience), they said,
look, I’d love to get my guy trained through your
ASCS course, but I have to send him down to
Florida. I’m on the West Coast, and there’s a
travel expense. I can’t really afford to train all of
my guys that way.” That type of feedback
combined with the fact NADCA has members in
30 countries led the organization to explore e-
John Schulte
learning. Executive director of
the National Air Duct
Cleaners Association
The association began with a full-day live
Webinar for a flat fee of $795 (meaning
companies attending could train more than one
staff person from the same site), and now it’s moving to an e-learning library of
resources so NADCA doesn’t have to deal with the hassles of scheduling an
instructor for every offering—
“It was a no-brainer for us to figure out if we
or the costs of paying an
could deliver this better [than place-based
training].” instructor every time—and
learners get on-demand
John Schulte, executive director convenience.

To be a member of NADCA, at least one person on staff has to be an ASCS, and
NADCA membership is a common requirement for winners of six-figure jobs
awarded through formal bidding processes. Add to these requirements the
convenience of e-learning, and NADCA training is in demand. “Our certification
and our standard and therefore our membership have all been well adopted by end
users in our market.” Schulte elaborated, “So that all ties together—one drives the
other basically.”

Certification, or credit towards a certification—whether it’s your organization’s or
not—is a powerful driver of demand, as true for e-learning and as other types of
training.

52!CASE STUDY

Distribution government purchaser’s learning management
system. Many organizations that wish to purchase
E-learning is largely associated with the Web at this
e-learning from an association already have a
point in its evolution, and for the most part,
learning management system in place and prefer to
associations that offer e-learning distribute it via the
track all of their online learning through that
Web through some form of e-commerce transaction.
system. To accommodate this need, associations
Nonetheless, other forms of distribution continue to
either have to be prepared to hand over content files
be popular. As indicated in the chapter “The
to the purchasing organization or host the files on
Operational Perspective,” a significant number of
their own servers in a way that they can be accessed
associations still use CD-ROMs and DVD-ROMs for
and tracked by an outside system.
distributing educational offerings. Additionally,
while not covered by our survey, anecdotal Either of these scenarios is significantly easier to
evidence suggests that teleseminars remain a accommodate if the association has developed its
popular option. content according to major e-learning industry
standards. As suggested in the chapter “The
A form of delivery which we did not formally
Technology Perspective,” it appears that
address in our survey or in interviews with
associations are either unfamiliar with or do not
associations and providers is learning via handheld
place much importance on these standards. Our
devices such as mobile phones, MP3 players, or
sense at this point is that relatively few
portable video devices. Only one of the associations
organizations are thinking about distribution of
we interviewed indicated learning delivery via
their content through outside systems. As e-learning
handheld devices is something it already offers.
in the sector continues to mature, we expect more
One other organization indicated that it may
organizations to recognize this opportunity and for
introduce some form of handheld learning in the
there to be a corresponding growth in adherence to
future. We expect to see growth in this area over the
e-learning industry standards for content packaging
coming year, however, particularly among
and distribution.
organizations that serve members
who are highly mobile in their MARKET PENETRATION
day-to-day work and tend not to
One of the interviewees caveated, “There’s a whole
spend much or any time at a desk.
lot of, as you know, asterisks around this one,” but,
Another channel of distribution as with pricing, we sought through the survey to
that surfaced in interviews was establish an initial benchmark for the level of
the possibility of delivering of e- penetration that organizations appear to be
learning via a corporate or achieving with their e-learning programs. To help
limit the number of asterisks somewhat we focused
18.2% our question on the percentage of members served.

The average penetration numbers did not vary
significantly based on the age of the program. Older
programs indicated penetration numbers slightly
above the group average—19.4 percent for
What
percentage of
your 10.0%
membership
base would you
estimate
participates in
at least one e-
learning
offering from
your
organization
annually?

Average Median


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 programs three to five years old and 18.8 percent for reality for most organizations. At a minimum, these
programs more than five years old. The penetration numbers may serve as a starting benchmark, along
rate for programs less than a year old was 17.8 with the average pricing figures above, in
percent, and for those one to two years old, it was establishing the level of revenue that might be
16.6 percent. It is interesting that penetration expected from an e-learning product offering.
averages follow a roller coaster pattern similar to
that noted for pricing. The median across all groups Promotion
was 10 percent except for programs three to five When we asked during our interviews in what area
years old, for which the median was 15 percent. associations tend to fall short in achieving their e-
learning goals, marketing was by far the most
Naturally, penetration numbers can vary greatly
common response from both associations and
based on industries, formats, topics, and other
providers. In nearly all instances, what is really
factors. In our interviews, organizations indicated
meant is a specific aspect of marketing: promotion.
penetration ranges from 2 percent to 80 percent.
The chart below suggests
Nonetheless our own experience as well as the
which forms of promotion tend
overall input from the associations and providers
to be most popular among How important are
we interviewed suggest that the 18.2 percent each of the following
associations with e-learning methods for
average and 10 percent median are not far from
programs. promoting or
marketing your e-
learning offerings?
64.3%
E-mail marketing 28.7%
4.7%
2.3%
42.9%
Word of mouth 40.9%
14.6%
1.6%
15.5%
Banner ads on own Web site 34.3%
26.9%
23.3%
14.2%
Search engine optimization 22.8%
21.1%
41.8%
10.5%
Print mailings 24.2%
36.3%
29.0%
8.8%
Press releases 21.3%
32.6%
37.2%
7.9%
Conference exhibits 19.4%
37.2%
35.5%
3.0%
Promotional Webcasts 12.3%
21.6%
63.1%
Absolutely necessary
2.6% Very important
Banner ads on other Web sites 13.2% Slightly important
25.2%
59.0% Not at all important

2.6%
Pay-per-click advertising 7.0%
17.8%
72.6%
0%
TV ads 0.9%
3.5%
95.7%
0%
Radio ads 0.4%
4.0%
95.6%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 The prevalence of e-mail marketing is not surprising absolutely necessary. In our conversations with
—nearly any seasoned Internet marketer will put e- association representatives, most felt that search
mail at the top of the list of effective marketing tools was an area in which their marketing efforts could
for Web commerce. In conversations with be improved, though many noted that search within
associations and providers, however, it was clear their own Web sites rather than across the broader
that using e-mail effectively is something of a Web was the first place that needed attention.
challenge.
Promotional Webcasts were indicated as a
In many cases, e-learning programs are competing marketing method by only one of the organizations
with any number of other offerings for access to the we interviewed and were seen as very important or
organization’s e-mail list and for “mind share” important by only 15.3 percent of survey
within e-mails that are sent out. Associations are respondents. While pay-per-click advertising beat
increasingly concerned about sending too much e- out television and radio in the survey, it was seen as
mail to members. To avoid sending e-mail too very important or absolutely necessary by only 9.6
frequently, organizations often load up the e-mails percent of respondents—the only Web-based
that do go out with multiple promotions, thus marketing tactic to fall below 10 percent. Only one
reducing the likelihood that a promotion for a of the associations we interviewed indicated current
particular e-learning product or event will be or planned use of pay-per click advertising
noticed. approaches like Google AdWords.

While most associations seem to understand the Over time, it seems likely that e-learning programs
value of segmenting lists, our interviews suggest will need to learn to take better advantage of
that actual efforts to clearly define market segments approaches other than e-mail to market their
for e-learning and then implement segmentation as
part of e-mail campaigns are relatively limited.
“I don’t think we are very good and
Another significant part of promoting e-learning is effective in our marketing. That’s one of the
visibility of the available programs on the areas that I want to have a better
organization’s Web site. As with e-mail, this is also understanding of, because they [the staff in
an area in which e-learning must jockey for the marketing department] use my dollars.
position with other parts of the organization. I put in a budget, and I give them money.”
Getting on the home page, above the fold—that is,
the part of the page visitors can see without
scrolling down—was the prize sought by many of
the organizations we interviewed. The comments
of one of the education directors summed up the
situation: “When our piece on the front page of our
Web site is above the fold, we have an uptick in
sales. When there is something more important
organizationally and that’s above the fold, our
offerings. Aside from the already-mentioned
sales drop.”
competition with other parts of the organization for
Given the challenges that access to e-mail and Web use of e-mail lists, grabbing a prospect’s attention
site real estate present, it is somewhat surprising with an e-mail will continue to grow more
that pay-per-click advertising, search engine challenging over time. Learning to leverage search
optimization (SEO), and promotional Webcasts— as well as to use social media approaches for
each of which is a mainstay of current Internet bolstering word of mouth will need to be part of the
marketing practices—do not appear to have much marketing mix of programs that hope to grow.
of a place in current association marketing strategies
for e-learning. SEO fairs the best, with 37 percent of
respondents indicating that it is very important or


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 RELATIONSHIP WITH MARKETING and communicating about this in a new, fresh
DEPARTMENT way. It’s a new, fresh thing, and some of our own
While many association e-learning programs— internal limitations have hurt us there.
particularly those at small associations—do not
have the luxury of access to a marketing In other cases, interviewees indicated that would
department for help with promoting e-learning, our welcome more engagement and help with
interviews revealed some tension between e- marketing so they could concentrate more on
learning and marketing at organizations with a education:
marketing department.
For my situation I could literally
There was a sense that spend 100 percent of my time in
association marketing Your “membership marketing—that would be easy
departments do not have a good directory is no longer a to do. There is so much work to
understanding of how to position big secret—it’s not hard to be done. It’s never ending, and
and promote online educational gather large numbers of that’s true for other people too.
products—or, in some cases, any people in the industry So how do we carve out
products. “Our marketing together.” appropriate time for the
department has never marketed education stuff? If the education
products at all,” said one staff are spending all of their
education director. “They have time on marketing and
considered themselves strictly a promotions and chapter
communications arm, so they relations, who is spending time
would maybe communicate that managing the product,
there was a course but they improving the product, creating
didn’t really do any marketing, new products, insuring the
except for the annual [meeting]. integrity of the education and all
There were no postcards or that stuff?
brochures or design or anything.”
There is, of course, little to be
In some cases, the organizational representatives we gained by an adversarial relationship with the
interviewed wanted responsibility for marketing. marketing department or from stretching your
“Quite honestly we would like to own more of the resources too thin in an attempt to wear all the hats
marketing, we really would,” said one education that go with successfully marketing an educational
director. “We understand the product, we product or service. Our hope is that as e-learning
understand how it works...They [the staff in continues to establish its place in the sector, more
marketing] are trying to market something that they strategic coordination between marketing and
don’t know a whole lot about, and that’s not their education will emerge.
problem, but we think we could do it a little bit
better.” Competition
Many of the organizations we interviewed were
A representative from another organization aware of significant competition that already exists
concurred: in their market. Others saw relatively little
competition at present but were aware that the
I would say the biggest issue that we’ve had is
situation could change, as one interviewee
marketing. We’re a very traditional association in
explained:
the kind of services that we offer, kind of
membership affinity programs, your standard I think there are a number of associations, that if
destination school or conference. We found that they don’t do it then they will have competitors
our marketing team didn’t really understand how who will do it and will take the initiative and
to approach this from a different perspective, so maybe carve out a significant niche. I think it
we’ve had a lot of trouble getting the word out poses a fairly large risk for some associations if


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 they wait too long because an intense competitor us,’ which is going to continue to be a challenge for
who knows the industry and who can develop us and be in an increasing challenge for us.”
things rapidly could literally get things going
really quickly and inexpensively and the One of the providers we interviewed also noted the
associations have lost some of the things that used increasing entrance of proprietary training groups
to make them exclusive. Their membership into the association e-learning market. These groups
directory is no longer a big secret—it’s not hard to —which may often even include people who are
gather large numbers of people in the industry association members and have traditionally been
together. So I just think that as part of an subject matter experts for the association—are now
environmental scan or competitiveness analysis able to take advantage of rapid, low-cost methods
every association needs to at least ask the for producing and distributing educational content
question, should we be doing this? If we don’t that may compete directly with what associations
who else is already doing it? I bet that in many are offering. “It’s a growing threat,” said one
cases somebody is already doing it even if the provider. “It has been growing for the last ﬁve
association is not aware of it. years.”

Several interviewees saw e-learning as something Related to the entrance of proprietary providers into
that helps to make their organization more their markets, another area in which association e-
competitive. “I think most associations either have learning programs may face a threat is in the sale of
competitors or they will,” said one association Webinars. In the corporate world, Webinars are
representative, “and they may not even be aware of increasingly seen as a tool for lead generation and
them. [E-learning] kind of puts a stake in the brand expansion. As a result, it is common to see
ground that other competitors will see, and they can them offered for free. As businesses become more
decide how they respond to that or deal with it.” sophisticated in their Webinar marketing efforts,
they are coming to understand that the most
An education director at another association told us effective Webinars offer high educational value
that “for the time being we are pretty much it, if paired with a low-key sales pitch.
somebody wants to play in this territory, then this is
where you want to be” but also noted that “we’re Additionally, a sort of commodity market is
seeing an increasing competition from proprietary developing for freelance teachers seeking to earn
groups who sort of go, ‘Look, they are the only ones extra income or possibly even transform their
out there, and I bet that there is market space for teaching into an online business. A number of new
platforms make this transformation quite easy. To
maintain the ability to charge sustainable prices for
their Webinar offerings, it will be increasingly
important for associations to clearly articulate their
unique value in the markets where they operate.

“We charge $129 for our Webinars, and
there are free Webinars everywhere.”



An association’s brand and ability to articulate a clear value
proposition are critical to the success of an e-learning
program.

Summary Trends and Predictions
In this chapter we considered some of the issues We believe Webinar use will continue to grow, but
important to managing e-learning as a line of downward price pressure on Webinars also seems
business, including the status of e-learning as a likely. Many commercial business are already well-
strategic part of services provided by associations. versed in using free Webinars for lead generation,
We looked at how associations price their e-learning and platforms like WiZiQ are making it easy for
offerings, how they promote them, and what impact anyone with something to teach to jump in the
the current economy is having. game.

We’ll conclude this section with some trends and Related to the above point, but also to online
opportunities we see and questions to ask of your learning in general, an association’s brand in its
organization as you begin to plan or continue to niche and its ability to articulate a clear value
purse an e-learning program. proposition for its educational offerings will
become increasingly important.

Given factors that tend to restrict effective use of e-
mail for marketing association e-learning, the
attention paid to marketing tactics other than e-
mail is likely to increase in the coming year. Search
engine optimization and pay-per-click advertising,
in particular, will become a more important part of
the e-learning marketing mix.

Competition for learners will increase. Where it
doesn’t exist right now, it will start to appear.

Largely as a result of the current economy,
awareness of e-learning as a product-line
diversiﬁcation and risk-reduction strategy will
increase.



Questions to Consider
1.Do you have a formal strategy for e-learning,
and if so, is it understood broadly across your
organization? How does it contribute to the
overall strategy of the organization, and how is
that contribution measured?
2.Do your current e-learning offerings cover all
direct and indirect costs associated with them?
If not, what number of products, at what price
and volume of sales would cover all costs? Are
there areas where costs need to be cut to
achieve a realistic business model?
3.What are the factors that do or will drive
demand for your e-learning offerings? How
have you aligned your products to meet those
demand factors, and where could you make
improvements?
4.What value does your e-learning program offer
that is different from, or potentially superior to,
the value offered in your face-to-face
educational offerings? Is this value clearly
reﬂected in your positioning and promotion of
your e-learning offerings?
5.How large is your potential audience for any
given e-learning offering, and what percentage
of this audience can you expect to enroll in the
offering?
6.What are the key segments in your e-learning
audience? How do you know, and how much
do you know about what drives the demand
for e-learning in each of those segments?
7.What is your process for establishing the price
for your e-learning offerings? Have you
documented this process in a way that they it
be shared with those who need to know it?
8.How much do you currently know about your
competition, and when is the last time you
updated your knowledge?


The Technology Perspective
End Users, Systems, Standards, and Social Media
Technology is an essential part of e-learning. they typically take to ensure as few technology
Learners access the educational experience through issues as possible for their end users.
a technology-driven interface, and organizations
manage the details of providing access, presenting [Our] field is a little older, particularly the
content, and tracking usage through a variety of decision-maker level, which is typical, and the
back-end technology tools and platforms. In this lower-level employees don’t always work in a
section, we draw on the online survey and our professional capacity in which they have access to
interviews to examine the types of technologies a computer or know how to use it. We’ve made
associations are using for e-learning delivery, how some very intentional decisions in regards to
those technologies integrate with membership developing e-learning that is pretty flat and isn’t
management, and the issues that arise with end really fancy because we still have people using
users. dial-up connections. We’ve added in a lot of FAQs
and tutorials; we do little guided things over the
End User Concerns phone with people. At our conference we had four
terminals set up where people could come and sit
As noted earlier in this report, concern about end
and learn how to use it [our e-learning] and have
users’ technology skills was the most significant
the staff teaching them.
barrier that organizations currently offering e-
learning encountered when implementing their The age of the target audience was a factor noted by
initiatives. It was selected by 45.5 percent of survey many interviewees when it came to potential
respondents. Among organizations planning an e- technology issues. “[A]s with any association we
learning initiative, this concern ranked quite a bit have the varying membership types,” said an
lower—only 35.3 percent selected it—but was still education manager we interviewed, “the folks that
significant. have been in the profession for many, many years,
and we have the students and new professionals
At the core of potential technology issues is the fact
who are maybe a little more comfortable with
that associations as a group serve an incredibly
technology in an online learning format.” In
diverse range of end users. Just within the group of
general, a younger audience was viewed by
organizations that we interviewed for this report the
interviewees as equating to fewer issues, but level
potential learner base ranged from high school
of education and general use of computers on the
dropouts to PhDs, from people in their first job to
job were also very significant factors.
those already retired and serving as volunteers. And
across this range, as one of the providers we Organizations that feel their learners are likely
interviewed pointed out, there are any number of encounter technical issues often choose to work
possible variations in computers, Web browsers, with a vendor or vendors that can provide a high
and Internet connections—a level of variation level of support to end users. Particularly in the case
significantly less likely in more tightly controlled of live Webinars, where there is less time and room
corporate training initiatives. for error in ensuring that a learner can access the
educational event, many associations rely heavily
While our interviews suggest that end user
on support from another organization. One
technology skills are indeed a very real issue for
interviewee described attending a Webinar hosted
many organizations, the organizations we talked to
by a competitor who did not use an outside service
seemed to feel capable of addressing them—but
provider. “We were happy we were not the
only with significant effort in some cases. “It goes
presenter, as it was a mess! We determined our
with the territory” was the view of most
student constituents are too IT needy for us to not
interviewees, and most noted a number of steps
use a system with support.”

60!THE TECHNOLOGY PERSPECTIVE

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 In discussing on-demand offerings, one of the needed download or running scripts in a browser
interviewees described the level of end user page. Usually the only solution available in these
technology issues she had encountered as “almost cases is to work with the organizations where the
nil.” problems arise to figure out a way to get needed
software pre-loaded onto computers or make
I think when something is designed really targeted exceptions to network policy.
well...and you provide clear instructions for
people on how they need to get to the course and
how they need to access it, after that it should all “[W]e have had very few problems with our
be embedded; it should all be clear. We had made attendees not being able to figure it [how to
sure that there was an introductory section attend a Webinar] out. We have to really
upfront in the course that we told everybody to spell it out sometimes. We had some
start with. It told them all about how to navigate people staring at the computer screen not
through the course and what the different things knowing why they weren’t hearing anything
when they weren’t on the phone. So we’ve
were for and all that sort of stuff, so we were very
learned how to communicate the directions
clear with people. We’ve gotten very few calls. The
a little bit better along the way. They seem
most common call we get is the same one we get to be very comfortable now with all the
for our Web site, which is, ‘I forgot my log-in and technology involved. We have glitches but
password.’ So I think that a well designed course nothing major.”
—definitely you need a good instructional
designer for online learning, to help with that—
the system itself, should be easy to use. Webinar Platforms
In the survey, Webinar platforms were included in
Finally, a number of the organizations we spoke to
the authoring tool choices (discussed in the chapter
noted the issues that sometimes go with offering e-
“The Operational Perspective”). We’ve separated
learning to corporate and government audiences. In
out the Webinar platforms here, however, for ease of
many cases, IT departments at these organizations
comparison. Among the platforms used by
implement firewalls or policies on networked
organizations, WebEx (26.6 percent) and
computers that prevent users from accessing a
GoToMeeting (22.5 percent) lead the pack with
Microsoft Live Meeting (13.5
percent) a distant third.
WebEx and GoToMeeting are the Webinar platforms most used by survey respondents.
It should be noted that in many
cases, organizations choose to use
WebEx 26.6% a service provider to support their
Webinars and may identify with
GoToMeeting 22.5%
the service provider as much or
more than the platform itself. In
these cases, given that we named
Live Meeting 13.5%
platforms rather than service
companies, it is possible that
Adobe Connect 3.7% respondents simply did not select
a Webinar platform when selecting
Genesys 1.8% from the available list of tools. Key
examples of service providers and
the platforms they support are
Elluminate 0.9%
CommPartners (for WebEx and
Live Meeting), KRM (for Live
ReadyTalk 0.9% Meeting and WebEx), and Boston
Conferencing (for Live Meeting).
0% 10% 20% 30%


Creating New Value—Globally
SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings
Based in Pittsburgh, SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings provides training for
the industrial painting sector of the construction industry in the United States and,
“Students
increasingly, abroad.
are able to
Five years ago, the organization started offering a correspondence version of two of begin their
career path
its basic classroom programs—an introduction to the industry and a course on
with us
planning and specifying projects. Students would download a PDF version of the
much more
required text, complete their readings, and then take a proctored exam that was quickly than
then sent back to SSPC headquarters to be graded. they were
before. Also
The correspondence offerings were a success, but as their popularity increased so we are able
did the complexity of managing in-person exams—particularly outside the United to reach the
States. “As our overseas market grew we decided to move to something a little international
more sophisticated,” said Pamela Groff, technical materials development specialist audiences
at SSPC. For SSPC, that meant implementing a learning management system with more
content management capabilities. readily.”
Pamela Groff,
Working from their existing textbooks, SSPC created Web-based courses that technical
included all the content from the correspondences course as well as the materials
development
examinations that had previously been place-based. “It’s an asynchronous online
specialist at
experience for the students,” explained Groff, “They can do it whenever they want SSPC
all over the world. And the quizzes and final exam are graded automatically,
proving the students with instant feedback.”

The ability to manage the exams online has boosted operational efficiency for SSPC, cutting down on
both the labor and the time needed to process grades. This newfound efficiency has, in turn, translated
into higher value for many members. “Students are able to begin their career path with us much more
quickly than they were before,” noted Groff. “Also we are able to reach the international audiences
more readily.” Given that SSPC training of one or more employees is often required for companies to
qualify to bid on contracts, greater reach and convenience are significant benefits.

Since taking the initial two courses online, SSPC has added two more offerings—both of which
provide initial training toward a certification career path—to its online catalog and expects to bring
another nine programs online by the end of 2009. Groff envisions even more growth in the future.

When asked for advice she would give to peers hoping to implement a learning management system,
Groff strongly advocates talking with other associations to find out about their experiences. “We
talked to about six or seven other associations,” she said.

“Find out what you really need,” Groff continued, “Is it really necessary to spend half a million dollars
to develop a really customized LMS? Or is a basic system suitable for your needs? You have to decide
what kind of experience you are going to give to the student. Really decide what the tradeoffs are and
what’s feasible within your budget.”

As SSPC’s example suggest, the right decision can translate into significant value for both the
association and its members.

62!CASE STUDY

Learning Management Systems
While Webinars are often seen as a
relatively easy, low-risk way to enter the e-
learning market, implementation of a
learning management system (LMS) or
learning content management system
(LCMS) is usually a sign that an
organization has made the decision to
invest significantly in an e-learning
strategy—presumably because it sees the
potential for a positive return on that
investment. Like other complex software,
What’s an LMS?
these systems often come with significant
licensing fees, and the time and cost for
implementation can be substantial, A learning content management system, or
particularly if integration with other LCMS, adds to the capabilities just
systems is involved. mentioned by providing ways to author or
import learning content objects into the
Even people who are familiar with the system, edit them, assemble them into
term “LMS”—and our past surveys learning experiences, and repurpose them
indicate that many still are not—may not into other, different learning experiences.
really understand what a learning Some vendors distinguish between their
management system does. In its most basic LMS and LCMS offerings and charge
form, an LMS is a type of database separately for each. Others blend them into
software—not unlike, for example, a single, unified platform.
Does your
Microsoft Access—that is designed
organization specifically for registering users for course For the purposes of this report, the term
currently use a
learning experiences and then tracking and LMS should be understood to encompass
management maintaining data related to those course both LMS and LCMS systems unless
system (LMS) or
learning content experiences—for example, whether a otherwise specified.
management learner has successfully completed a
system (LCMS)
for delivery and/ course. Just under half (49.1 percent) of the
or tracking of e- respondents that currently offer e-learning
learning?
Just under half In the context of e-learning, LMSes have report using a learning management
report using a system (LMS) or planning to within the
learning
evolved into very sophisticated, powerful
management systems that can manage Web-based next 12 months. A significant number (33.3
system (LMS) or
planning to within catalogs of courses, present learners with percent) of survey respondents indicated
the next 12 months.
menus of content tailored that they do not use an LMS and have no
specifically for their plans to implement an LMS within the next
needs, and track learners’ 12 months. The majority (61.5 percent) of
progress towards organizations planning an e-learning
17.8% acquiring new initiative are unsure about whether they
34.4% competencies, will use an LMS.
credentials, or other
career-related goals. Not surprisingly, usage is a good bit higher
among organizations currently offering
self-paced courses, a
33.2% form of e-learning
Use LMS
14.7% Don’t use LMS, but plan to in next 12 months that can be greatly
Don’t use LMS, and don’t plan to in next 12 months enhanced by use of
Not sure


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 an LMS. Of these organizations, 65.4 percent report identify future leaders. We do want especially to
either already using an LMS or planning to within identify people in the membership who have, in the
the next 12 months. Organizations that offer past, taken certain assessments, so we could
continuing education that specifically supports identify them as possible future volunteer leaders.
earning a formal certification or license are also If there is a way that we can do that without a full-
more likely (38.9 percent) to have implemented an on, yearlong, massively expensive LMS
LMS than organizations that do not (26.4 percent). implementation, I’m all for it.
Finally, organizations that charge for all (38.3
percent) or some (37.4 percent) of their e-learning While it has become significantly less costly and
offerings are more likely to use an LMS than those time-consuming over the past several years to
that report not charging (13.5 percent). implement an LMS, our sense is that a certain
amount of trepidation about this particular type of
Close to a third of the organizations we interviewed software has drifted over from the corporate e-
were using a learning management system, and learning world. Many larger corporations have been
most that were not seemed to have at least a basic through multiple LMS implementations at this
knowledge of LMSes. Often an LMS was seen as point, and stories abound of six- and seven-figure
something the organization aspired to implement budgets accompanied by technical headaches. Most
but had deferred until it was clear the investment association education staff, already strapped for
could be justified. One education director explained: resources, are not eager to take on this kind of
challenge.
[T]hat’s one of my personal goals, to be able to get
into an LMS. That was actually my goal to do this Among the organizations we interviewed, those that
year. Part of it is that it wasn’t in the budget, but had made the decision to pursue implementing an
part of it as well is that I don’t think the LMS generally did so because they could see a clear
organization is ready for that just yet. I think we benefit to being able to more efficiently track and
need to do a little bit more with the Webinars and manage data related to e-learning. Over time—and
gradually get them [our learners] to that point, in some cases a very short time—the administrative
where they are ready to do the online learning. cost savings the system would make possible would
more than compensate for the initial investment.
In another case, implementation of an LMS was Particularly for organizations that offer continuing
something to avoid, if possible. “I’m hoping that education, certificates, and other forms of credit
there is a way that we can do it without a full LMS through their e-learning programs, a learning
implementation because that just looks like a huge management system can greatly increase efficiency
job,” said one interviewee. by automating processes or putting them in the
hands of the end user.
We do intend to capture the data, we do want to
do some talent management stuff, and we want to

“We do want especially to identify
people in the membership who have,
in the past, taken certain
assessments, so we could identify
them as possible future volunteer
leaders. If there is a way that we can
do that without a full-on, yearlong,
massively expensive LMS
implementation, I’m all for it.”


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 LMS AND LCMS PACKAGES
While overall usage of learning management systems across the sector is
still relatively low, we were able to collect enough data to give some
insight into the specific platforms that associations seem to be using.
Among our respondents, the open source platform Moodle proved
popular. Among proprietary systems, the Intralearn LMS (whether offered
through Intralearn itself or through its partner Certilearn) made the
strongest showing—8.2 percent of respondents selected the Intralearn
LMS, and an additional 1.2 percent selected LearningServer from
Intralearn.

GRAY AREAS

Neither the Webinar platform nor the LMS categories fully capture all the
options currently available for e-learning delivery in the association
market. For example, a number of respondents indicated use of the
iCohere platform, which is positioned as a tool for “creating collaborative
learning communities.” The iCohere platform has some of the
functionalities typically associated with a learning management system
and Webinar capabilities but does not, in our opinion, fit neatly into either
category.

Additionally, some of the firms that specialize in capturing conference
content and converting it into on-demand e-learning have systems that
compare well, on some levels, with traditional LMSes, but are not
marketed as products distinct from the firms’ services. It may be that some
of these will be added to the LMS list in future surveys.

Angel LMS 0%
Avilar Web Mentor 1.2%
Blackboard 5.9%
Education Director 2.4%
ForceTen 0%
GeoExpress 2.4%
GeoMaestro 1.2%
Intralearn LMS (Certilearn) 3.5%
Intralearn LMS (Intralern) 4.7%
Isoph Blue 5.9%
LearnCenter 1.2%
LearningServer (Intralearn) 1.2%
LearnPro Plus 1.2%
LearningSpan 2.4%
Moodle 8.2%
Outstart Evolution 1.2%
Plateau 0%
Saba 1.2%
Sakai 0%
Of named LMSes and
TopClass 3.5% LCMSes, Moodle came
TotalLMS 4.7% out on top at 8. 2 percent.
Custom or proprietary 5.9%
Not sure 22.4%
Other 25.9%


E-learning and AMSes
At the heart of nearly every association is a
membership database of some sort. In smaller
13.6%
organizations, this may take the form of a simple
Excel sheet or a Microsoft Access database. As
organizations grow, they often adopt one of the
more sophisticated association management
systems (AMSes). Data related to educational
programs and certiﬁcation very often ﬁnds a home
in these systems, thus creating a need for all or
parts of data generated in other systems to 31.8%
54.5%
eventually make its way back to the AMS.

In our survey, we asked organizations using or
planning to use e-learning to indicate whether they
use an association
management
system, and if so, Does your organization currently use an
which one. association management system (AMS)?
The majority of associations surveyed do.

Use an AMS Don’t use an AMS Not sure

Aptify 6.7%

Association Anywhere 2.2%

ClearVantage 2.2%

CRM for Members (ProTech) 0%

iMIS 42.2%

IRMembership 0%

Members360 0%

netFORUM 17.8%

Office Manager 2.2%

Personify (TMA Resources) 4.4%

TIMSS (TMA Resources) 8.9%

Wild Apricot 0%
Of named AMSes, iMIS
and netFORUM were
used most frequently. Other 26.7%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 Among the organizations we interviewed, nearly all had some form of membership management software
in place, and most had a process—whether manual or automated—for pulling data from their e-learning
activities into the member database. In the case of Webinars, this most often took the form of manually
exporting registration and attendance data from the Webinar system as an Excel workbook or delimited
text ﬁle and importing it into the membership management system. Organizations that had implemented
a learning management system were much more likely to have also implemented some form of automated
integration.

LMS/AMS INTEGRATION
In our survey, we asked respondents who indicated
that their organization used or planned to use both
an LMS and an AMS system whether the two
systems were integrated. Most either had already 28.9%
integrated or planned to integrate the two systems.

46.7%

Are your learning management systems (LMS) and your association
management system (AMS) integrated? In other words, is log-in
information, data about users, data about course activities, or other types 24.4%
of data shared or will it be shared between the two systems?
Some 46 percent of survey respondents indicated their association’s AMS and
LMS are integrated.

“Most people have that [integration] as an item on AMS and LMS integrated
their short list that they need to talk about,” said No, but plan to integrate them in future
No, and don’t plan to integrate them
one of the providers with whom we spoke, “how
this is going to communicate with their AMS.” “I'd
say that all of our e-learning clients have integrated with their AMSes,” another provider told us.

As a general rule, integration between a learning management system and an association management
system happens at three levels:

• Single sign-on
A user who is logged into the association’s AMS (usually perceived by the end user as being logged
into the organization’s Web site) can navigate to the learning management system and access her
courses or other content without having to log in again. This is the most fundamental level and is
generally a prerequisite for other types of integration to occur.
• E-commerce
A user purchases a course using an e-commerce system that is provided as part of the AMS, or is
already integrated with the AMS, and details of the purchase are automatically passed to the LMS.
When the user next accesses the LMS, the system knows to present the newly purchased content to
the user.
• Learner activity data
As a learner access courses and other materials in the LMS, the system accumulates a variety of data
about the learner’s activities—for example, how much time she spends in a course, what her scores
are on assessments, and whether she has completed a course. It is often useful for the AMS to know
about some or all of this data—particularly data related to course completion and issuance of
continuing education credit or certiﬁcates.


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 An important aspect of any type of integration that don’t agree with and acknowledge this point of
between software systems is that there needs to be a view:
clear understanding of which system’s database will
be the authority, or database of record for the types I’ve [sometimes] forced the hand and told
of data to be shared among systems. In general, you [prospective clients] that they need to look at their
don’t want it to be possible to change data in AMS as being the center of their universe, and
multiple places. If this happens, member records some people will agree, but some will say that they
can get out of synch and create a mess that is hadn’t really thought of it that way. That’s one of
difﬁcult—sometimes impossible—to clean up. In the fundamental pieces of the decision making
nearly all cases, it makes most sense for the process, but, again, I want to hear the potential
association management system to serve as the association that we’ll be working with say back to
database of record for everything other than data me that the AMS needs to be the center of the
that is generated by the learner’s activity in the LMS universe because we want to be a part of a
system. business solution...and the core is that the AMS
has to be the center of the universe, or they are
One of the providers we spoke to was very insistent going to end up creating a scenario for themselves
that “the AMS needs to be the center of the that doesn’t allow them to continue to grow.
universe; it has to be the center of everything
membership. So whatever they [associations] are E-learning Guidelines and Standards
using to have people sign up and go to their Knowledge of and adherence to common e-learning
conferences needs to talk to the AMS. And whatever guidelines and standards in the sector appears to be
they are using for e-commerce needs to be part of quite low. Adherence to the Shareable Content
the AMS or talk to the AMS. And the learning Object Reference Model (SCORM) was considered
management system component needs to talk to the very important or absolutely necessary by only 27
AMS.” percent of respondents currently using e-learning.
Adherence to Section 508 guidelines for users with
From this provider’s perspective, the ultimate
disabilities was selected as very important or
success of a learning management system as part of
absolutely necessary by only 17.3 percent of
an organization’s strategy depends heavily on how
respondents in this group.
it interfaces with the AMS—so much so that his
company is reluctant to work with organizations Medbiquitous standards, which apply primarily to
healthcare education, faired better than the more

70.2%
AICC (Airline Industry 2.3%
3.3%
CBT Committee) 1.9%
22.3%
65.1%
IMS Global 6.1%
3.3%
Learning Consortium 0.5%
25.0%
67.3%
3.3%
1.4% How important is
Medbiquitous 0.9% adherence to
27.0% guidelines from
each of the
45.0% following sources
SCORM (Shareable Content 7.8% for your e-learning
11.9%
Object Reference Model) 15.1% initiatives?
20.2%
51.2% Not at all important
Section 508 (Section 5.6% Slightly important
11.7% Very important
508 of the Rehabilitation Act) 5.6% Absolutely necessary
25.8% Don’t know



KEY E-LEARNING STANDARDS IN BRIEF
The Airline Industry CBT Committee, more commonly known as AICC,
was one of the first groups to establish standards for how computer-based
training (CBT) should communicate with computer-managed instructions
systems (CMI) designed to track training activities. First established in 1993,
the AICC CMI Guidelines for Interoperability (http://www.aicc.org/pages/
down-docs-index.htm) form the basis for much of the subsequent work that
has been done to ensure that an e-learning course created for use in one
learning management system will also function properly in other systems.

A central focus of the IMS Global Learning Consortium is how learning
content can be tagged so that it can easily be discovered and reused,
whether in a single system or across multiple, disparate systems. The various
IMS specifications (http://www.imsglobal.org/specifications.html) are at the
root of terms like reusable learning object as well as the most current
approaches to interoperability. It should be noted that IMS standards are
based on the extensible markup language, or XML, specification created by
the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). XML is the language used for
tagging learning content objects.

The Shareable Content Object Reference Model, or SCORM, is perhaps
the most widely recognized set of standards in the e-learning world. It unites
standards from AICC, IMS, W3C, and other sources to create a general
model for defining, packaging, and managing learning objects. An LMS that
is SCORM-compliant should provide the ability to import, launch, and track a
lesson or course that has been developed according to the SCORM model.
Additionally, an LCMS, or an LMS that features content management
capabilities, should be able to recognize and manipulate the shareable
content objects, or SCOs, which comprise a piece of learning content.

Medbiquitous (www.medbiq.org) is an organization focused on leveraging
XML to establish a set of interoperable standards exchanging educational
content and tracking learner activities and profiles as part of healthcare
education and competence assessment. We included Medbiquitous as part
of the survey based on our knowledge that many healthcare associations are
already active in e-learning.

Section 508 (http://www.section508.gov) refers the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
and subsequent amendments designed to address the accessibility of
electronic and information technologies, including the Web, by people with
disabilities. Federal agencies are required—with some limited exceptions—to
meet standards defined under Section 508 when purchasing electronic and
information technologies, which means that any entity hoping to sell to the
federal government must ensure that its products comply to the standards.
Requirements aside, many developers and consumers of e-learning feel that
compliance with Section 508 is simply the right thing to do. For additional
information on Section 508 as it relates to e-learning, see http://www.access-
board.gov/sec508/e-learning.htm.


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 general standards. They were selected as either very important (33.3 percent) or absolutely necessary (11.1
percent) by groups that identified themselves as serving physicians.

Among respondents planning e-learning initiatives in the coming 12 months, “don’t know” received the
majority of responses for every selection other than the Airline Industry CBT Committee (AICC) standard,
which was marked as “not important at all” by 52.2 percent of respondents, which may be a factor of
respondents assuming the airline in the acronym makes the standard irrelevant for other industries when
in fact AICC is broadly applicable and one of the progenitors of SCORM.

The generally low importance or lack of knowledge of standards is most likely a byproduct of relatively
low adoption of LMS systems, which tend to be at the center of e-learning standards, as well as a tendency
in the sector not to use professionally trained designers and developers, a group which tends to follow
standards in creating e-learning. Not surprisingly, organizations offering self-paced online courses—a
group more likely to have a LMS and use professional instructional designers—were significantly more
likely to indicate that SCORM was very important or absolutely necessary (40.2 percent).

Social Media and E-learning
A report issued by Principled Innovation in January 2009 states, “While association executives’ awareness
of social media is high, it is not widely adopted.” The same statement applies to association e-learning
initiatives. Social media seems to be attracting some interest in the association e-learning community, but
with a lot of room for growth. The dominant social tool in both current (32.7 percent) and planned (45.0
percent) e-learning initiatives is discussion forums. The next most popular tool for both current (25.4
percent) and planned (28.4 percent) programs are podcasts.

Discussion boards, while clearly social in nature, are identified with the “old” Web by many, and much
podcast usage is arguably broadcast rather than collaborative in nature—and thus not
terribly social. With respect to blogs, social networks, and wikis—arguably the tools that
most people most closely associate with the social Web—adoption rates by current
programs are relatively low. The chart below shows the adoptions level for these tools
across the broader association sector, according to the January 2009 Principled Innovation
report, and the adoption levels specifically for e-learning, as indicated by our survey.

31.0% Sector-wide For e-learning

25.0% 24.0%

16.5%
14.0% Use of social
networks,
10.1% blogs, and
wikis by
associations.

Social networking Blogs Wikis


Simple Satisfies
Association of Cable Communicators Chats
You don't have to use cutting-edge
“The chats are more popular than the
technology to deliver valuable online Webinars, which was surprising.”
content to your constituents. Simple,
Michelle Butler, associate executive director
affordable solutions can satisfy
associations and their members. Every
other month, the Association of Cable Communicators (ACC), a three-staff
association whose members work in communications, public relations, community
relations, and government relations in the cable industry, hosts very successful hour-
long online chats using the inexpensive ParaChat software.

“The way that we modeled the online chats were almost like panels,” explained
Michelle Butler, associate executive director at ACC, “so I line up three to four
experts to market as being a part of this particular topic.” The panelists start the
chats by introducing the topic at hand and then invite questions from the
participants. Butler reported that the whole event is very interactive: “It’s getting to
the point now where other members will share their experiences on the particular
topic as well.”

To prepare for the chats, Butler develops a short list of questions to send to the
panelists. They prepare responses in advance and have that text to draw on during
the chat. Butler, as moderator, chimes in with questions to keep the conversation
going if it lags. ACC then posts the cleaned-up transcripts from the chats in its online
education portal.

These free chats are marketed to the members, but technically anyone can join—
Butler views these sessions as a way to recruit new members and increase the
stickiness of the ACC membership. The chats are proving even more popular than
ACC’s Webinars. “The chats are in the 30 to 40 range [for attendees], sometimes a
little big higher,” Butler reported, “and the Webinars are more in the 20 to 30 range.”
Whatever the exact numbers, members ﬁnd both the online chats and the Webinars
valuable beneﬁts.

Michelle Butler,
associate executive
director of the
Association of
Cable
Communicators,
and a screen shot
of one of ACC’s
popular online
chats

71!CASE STUDY

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 SOCIAL MEDIA TOOLS Out of the respondents that currently offer some
Among the range of social media tools† currently form of social media in their e-learning initiatives,
used in association e-learning initiatives, social 71 percent indicated that they either review
networks (25 percent, combining public and comments before they are published or actively
private) lead the pack, followed by blogs (16.5 monitor for inappropriate content.
percent) and wikis (10.1 percent). All three tools—
but particularly social networks (32.1 percent) and Overall, it was clear in our interviews with both
blogs (25.7 percent)—show stronger interest among associations and providers that there is a great deal
respondents planning to implement e-learning. of interest in social media as well as a general desire
to figure out what it might mean for the future of e-
In addition to asking about use of specific types of learning programs. As might be expected, some are
social media tools, we also asked survey already in the process of making plans and taking
participants for any additional information they tentative steps. Others are more reluctant to add a
were willing to provide about how they monitor new element to their fledgling e-learning initiatives,
social media usage by learners—for example, how and providers, in particular, are wrestling with how
comments are handled and whether they have social media fits into their business models. What
formal rules of engagement for their participants. follows are a variety of quotes from individuals
interviewed. We feel that these, better than any
†For individuals seeking a primer on social media tools and how they can be used in e-learning, we recommend our free e-book,
Learning 2.0 for Associations, available at http://www.tagoras.com/catalog/association-learning20.html.

Blog 16.5%
25.7%

Discussion forums 32.7%
45.0%

Microblogging tools 2.4%
4.6%

Photosharing sites 2.4%
5.5%

Podcasts 25.0%
Which of the 28.4%
following social
media tools does 16.1%
your organization Private social networking site 22.9%
currently use or plan
to use as part of
Public social networking site 8.9%
your online learning 9.2%
offerings? (Please
only indicate tools
that are or will be Slidesharing sites 2.0%
1.8%
explicitly a part of
your e-learning
initiatives. For Social bookmarking tools 0%
1.8%
example, if your
organization has or
plans to have a wiki, Virtual worlds 1.2%
but does not use it 3.7%
or plan to use it as
part of its e-learning Web video sites 7.3%
offerings, do not 9.2%
select that item.)
Social networks (25 10.1%
percent, combining
Wiki 11.9%
public and private) lead
the pack.
Don’t use social media tools 47.6%
8.3%

Current e-learning Not sure 0%
46.8%
Planned e-learning

Other 6.9%
2.8%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 analysis we can offer, help to paint a picture of how conferences a year, and we go through the
social media currently fits into association e- annual process of trying to build up interest.
learning. They get really engaged during the conference,
and about a month later it dwindles off and
ASSOCIATIONS SPEAK ABOUT SOCIAL MEDIA you have to start the process over again.”
• “I think our industry is not a Facebook-type • “We’ve got a new social network site...a Ning
industry. One of the interesting things—a lot of site...that was unveiled a couple of months ago.
industries are probably this way, but I think We’ve got about 90 members so far. These past
[our] industry is especially this way—it’s a lot two Webinars and teleconferences we have
of family-owned businesses. It’s a lot of people talked about that and tried to lead people to
that do this for life. So you get to a conference, continue the discussion online. It’s a little bit of
and 70 percent of the people there you’ve seen a challenge, and we have hired a social media
every year for 20 years. So something like guy to help us better promote the activity.
Facebook or Ning...they are helpful, but that’s We’re now going to focus on a couple of special
just something on top of what interest groups that are basically
you do anyway. I think the younger and more familiar with that.
challenge for us in that is trying “I think our industry So we’re going to focus on them and
to figure out how the electronic is not a Facebook- get them going and get them into
applications fit into something type industry.” some discussions and have them do
that they are already doing. regular postings and always have
Some of them have said that if something of interest on there. And
they need to talk to Joe, then then hopefully it will expand to the
they will just e-mail or call Joe. other types of members that we
Why do they need anything have. But we definitely are cross-
else?” promoting it all the time.”
• “Across the board within our organization • “So the plan was...publish it [a handbook for
we’re looking at social media. Right now we members] as a wiki and see if people changed
are working on a new Web site redesign that it enough that we would want to then publish
will hopefully incorporate many different it again with all their changes. So there was an
levels of social media. We are certainly looking incredible amount of enthusiasm for the idea
at wikis. We’ve used wikis a couple of times but when it came to figuring out how to pay for
just within our own department with it and actually finding the time to do it, it
volunteers. That was received with mixed started to slow down a lot. So much so at this
reviews. For us, it’s making sure that we’re point that I’m not quite sure what’s going to
providing a network of communication for our happen with it, if it’s going to get pursued or
members, something that is going to be easy not.”
for us to manage but giving members • “The very first level thing that we are doing,
additional channels to communicate with each which is kind of basic, is we’ve created a Ning
other and hopefully with experts that are either community for registered users of our courses
on staff or previous volunteer faculty. So that is to continue to network and learn through a
certainly something that we are looking at, user community, and we’re scheduling live
seeing what’s out there and what other chats with SMEs who’ve helped us in the
organizations are doing.” development of the courses, utilizing that to
• “We’re thinking of podcasts because with get people’s feedback about courses. Now I say
Webinars a lot of the people we target are on all that—that’s our goal. It’s built, but we
the go. They’re not at their desks, so we are haven’t actually hit the send button to invite
thinking of maybe podcasting smaller, 10- anyone yet. I don’t know why we haven’t done
minute blurbs that they can do on demand, it yet. I think we are tweaking some things, but
which would fit their schedules better. I’d like that’s the goal.”
to start a blog because we have three


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 • “We just acquired and installed some social • “E-learning and...communities, the edges are
networking software. The initial thrust of its fuzzing on all of that, and they all can be used
purpose is to promote collegiality between to build on one another. If you have a
members, try to nurture the neighborhood so community of practice, you want to provide
to speak. We haven’t really done anything with learning from it so you can offer Webinars and
it from an education standpoint just yet.” courses. Or if you have Webinars and courses,
• “E-learning has become a renegade. We’re tired you can take those and ratchet them up one
of asking, ‘Please, please can we go out to level and start creating ongoing learning
LinkedIn? Can we go to YouTube?’ We’re just communities. So it’s a fluid area that I think is
going to do it. We already have two groups...set going to move toward an undifferentiated
up in LinkedIn. We’re going to go out to arena where it’s always available learning in
YouTube with a video.... So, we’re going to beg both structured and unstructured modes.”
forgiveness if and when that happens, but we • “Online content seems to be headed in two
feel we need a presence there, and we’re opposite directions. One of those directions is
starting to put a presence there.” towards doing more with really immersive
learning experiences. People recognize that in
PROVIDERS SPEAK ABOUT SOCIAL MEDIA many cases that’s the
• “Associations are still just having a hard time best and most efficient
getting their hands around the whole idea. The way of training people— “I’m trying to
biggest challenge to online education in any figure out
highly engaging learning
what’s the
form is, ‘How can I pay for this? How can I experiences, highly
social media
make money off of it?’ And people just don’t motivated learning that has real
see how social media is going to make them experiences. On the value to a
any money. That’s the big one right now, and I other end of the professional
think especially in this economy. I think what spectrum, particularly as development
they need to do is step back and think about we become more program.”
what it’s really about. It’s really about comfortable with
providing services and opportunities to your different types of social
members that will eventually, down the line, media, people are
turn into higher retention and higher loyalty to looking for quick ways
the association, potentially bigger sales in of getting information
different areas.” out—through wikis,
• “I’m one of the people wandering around through quick and dirty Web video. I think that
Rome just looking at all the monuments just there is a huge trend in that direction. So
wondering where I should go. I’m trying to there’s kind of the fast and cheap direction—
figure out what’s the social media that has real and for a lot of things that’s exactly how you
value to a professional development program. should approach training—and then there’s
How do you use blogs? Not only how do you also the really rich direction. A lot of very
use them, but how do I wrap it up and package middle ground kind of informational,
it?” interactive PowerPoint type e-learning—I don't
• “I would say over the next year we’re not see people asking for that nearly as much.”
expecting much to happen with social media • “I don’t see [social media] as a logical extension
because of the economy. People are going to for the LMS. If the AMS is the center of the
focus on the basics. And if they don’t already universe, and your AMS is surrounded by your
have those things, if they’re not already part of intranet, you can have a fairly sophisticated
their mainstream, then they are going to stick social media type component that’s plugged
to basics. I think we are going to see a year of into your AMS, and you can have the LMS
stagnant growth in those areas, at least in the plugged into your AMS. I think that’s a better
association world.” model than asking an LMS vendor to also be an
expert at the latest, greatest social media.”



Don’t expect social media for e-learning purposes to take off
in the short term—but do expect to see serious
experimentation with wikis, blogs, photo-sharing sites, and
blogs as extensions of place-based conferences.

Summary experimentation will occur. In particular, the
blending of tools like wikis, blogs, photo-sharing
Technology platforms for e-learning were the focus
sites (e.g., Flickr), and microblogs (e.g., Twitter)
of this chapter. We examined concerns about end
with conference-based education is likely to gain
user technology skills, looked at the role that
ground. A smaller set of more innovative
learning management systems play in association e-
organizations will fully embrace the possibilities of
learning initiatives, and discussed how new social
social media in an effort to transform their Web sites
media technologies factor into e-learning efforts in
into high-value learning communities for members.
the sector.

We’ll conclude this section with some trends and Questions to Consider
opportunities we see and questions to ask of your 1.If you already have an e-learning program or
organization as you begin to plan or continue to are planning one, how formal an approach do
purse an e-learning program. you have for supporting end users? Have you
developed frequently asked questions (FAQs)
Trends and Predictions that are readily available to end users? Is there
While our survey data suggests lingering concern a clear process for channeling end user issues
about end user technology skills, we expect that
and escalating them until they are resolved?
this concern will continue to decline and perhaps
2.How much weight have you placed on
even drop sharply in the relatively near term. End
user comfort with the types of technology used for developing your e-learning offerings according
e-learning is increasing, but our interviews suggest to industry standards? Does your organization
that organizations are increasingly prepared to have a clear understanding of the pros and
address the points of discomfort that that remain. cons of adhering (or not adhering) to major
standards like SCORM and Section 508
As on-demand content becomes increasingly 3.How might social media tools enhance the
common and associations realize the operational
value of your e-learning offerings? Are there
efﬁciencies that learning management systems can
potentially new pricing models or entirely new
offer, we expect to see more widespread
implementation LMSes. business models that social media could make
possible?
While we do not expect to see widespread
adoption of social media for e-learning purposes
in the coming year, a signiﬁcant amount of



LMS SELECTION courses with a tool that creates SCORM content
If your organization is considering implementing an and then import this content into the LMS, you
LMS, review these recommendations and questions. can be reasonably certain that it will “play”
correctly in the system, and(b) the ability to
4.Has the LMS been implemented before at an
export any content you create in your system in
association? How many times? What were the
a SCORM-conformant way. This matters
issues, and how were they addressed?
greatly if someday you want to change LMSes
Association needs with respect to issues like
and take your content over to a new system.
handling e-commerce, credit, brandability, and
8.Has the system ever been integrated with an
integrating with membership management
association management system or, if
systems are different from those of corporate or
applicable, other types of enterprise software
academic LMS users. All else being equal, it
your organization uses)? With your specific
pays to go with a system that has already been
system? How is integration achieved, how
successfully implemented at one or more
much does it typically cost, and what are the
associations.
issues that typically arise? What levels of
5.Don’t get bogged down in feature lists and
integration are available—i.e., single sign-on
bells and whistles. Make sure you have
between the two systems, e-commerce
thought through and reached internal
integration, passing course completion and
agreement around the overall user experience
credit data from the LMS to the AMS? Even if
you are trying to deliver. Literally map it out
you don’t plan to integrate your AMS and LMS
on paper, and then ask vendors to describe and
initially, you should select a system that
demonstrate clearly how their LMS supports
provides well for this capability down the road.
that experience. And don’t hesitate to ask how
9.How are course completion, credit, and
they would improve on the experience—a good
presentation of transcripts and certificates
vendor should be a valuable partner in this
handled in the system? One of the biggest
process.
benefits an LMS can offer is to make
6.Make sure you understand how content gets
administration of continuing education easier
imported into the system and, if applicable,
for your organization and the end user. If
how content can be authored in the system. Are
continuing education or certificates are or will
these easy, intuitive processes, or is there a
be part of your online program, dig into this
steep learning curve? Be sure to spend time
aspect of the system in great detail.
going through the steps in detail.
10.What are the available financial models? Is
7.Is the system SCORM-conformant? The
there any flexibility around charging based on
Shareable Content Object Reference Model is
your actual use of the system? Is it possible to
the main set of standards that apply to learning
pay on a per-enrollment basis? Do fees cap out
management systems. It is not perfect or
at some point, or do they always continue to
uniformly implemented, but it is nonetheless
grow as more users enroll in courses?
important to know about and adhere to. The
11.How brandable is the end user environment?
main questions it addresses are (a) the ability to
Can the LMS environment easily be made to
launch and track SCORM-conformant content
look and feel just like, or at least very similar
in your system, so, if you or a vendor author
to, your overall Web site environment?


An Assessment
Even given the level of statistical error that may be Our view is that we are still in the relatively early
present in a non-probability survey, the evidence stages of e-learning growth in the sector. In terms of
the online survey offers, along with input from the bell curve often used to illustrate technology
interviews and our own experience make it quite adoption life cycles, we would place e-learning in
clear that e-learning has established a strong the lower third of the early majority phase.
foothold in the sector.
At this point, while many organizations have
Common sense provides additional evidence to implemented some form of e-learning—and,
suggest e-learning will grow substantially over particularly live Webinars—most have done so in a
time. Our global economy—a ﬂat economy, as relatively piecemeal fashion. General strategy
Thomas Friedman has put it—already provides an development for e-learning as well as approaches to
environment in which the rapid acquisition of new particular aspects of strategy, like product
knowledge and skills has become mandatory for development and pricing, have not yet become part
many workers and organizations. On top of this, the of standard operating practice at most
current recession will force organizations to organizations. E-learning does not represent a
consider more educational alternatives that do not substantial portion of the revenue mix at most
involve travel and the growth of green thinking will associations, and few seem to view it as part of
strengthen and sustain this trend. strategic goals like risk management or as a tool for
streamlining operational areas like the
A growing array of cheap and easy technologies administration of continuing education.
will continue to put sophisticated e-learning
development and delivery options in the hands of In short, e-learning has arrived, but remains
even the smallest organizations. And last, but immature. As we see it, there is now a clear
certainly not least, the coming of age of a generation opportunity for e-learning to transition into more
that is comfortable doing almost everything online signiﬁcant, more strategic part of the mix of services
will generate more demand and tear down associations provide to members. We feel all the
remaining barriers. factors above will lead more associations to embrace
this opportunity—and more vendors to enter or
That is the future—and it is coming fast, in our expand their presence in the market. Another
estimation. But where do things stand at present?

Association
E-learning

This image is reproduced from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DiffusionOfInnovation.png under a Creative Commons license
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5.

77!THE STATE OF THE SECTOR

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 important factor will be the increasing pressure MORE INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN
many associations are feeling to clearly demonstrate Interest in instructional design will rise. The
their value to members and potential members. The maturing of e-learning will lead to a higher level of
current economy has contributed to this pressure, professionalism around the development of online
but, more importantly, advances on the Web have learning experiences. Organizations will make more
changed the strategic playing field for associations. effort to implement sound instructional design
With it now dramatically easier for groups to self- practices for e-learning in-house and use of contract
organize, communicate, and share knowledge, e- instructional designers is also likely to
learning becomes one of the tools rise.
through which associations can
differentiate and establish value. It is dramatically A LITTLE MORE SOCIAL MEDIA
easier for groups to
Integration of social media into e-
As e-learning begins to mature in the self-organize,
learning will occur at a relatively
sector, we expect to see a number of communicate, and
share knowledge slow rate. Unlike courses or
related developments—most already Webinars, most social media is
noted in various parts of this today than ever
before. relatively difficult to monetize on a
document: standalone basis. Until organizations
development strategies and business
MORE LEARNING MANAGEMENT
SYSTEMS models for products that integrate
Implementation of learning social media with more traditional
management systems and content (what we call learning 2.0),
integration of these with association social media for educational
management system will rise. Given purposes will remain in the realm of
the current economy, growth in this experimentation and one-off
area will be limited in the coming projects.
year, but to realize the full value of MORE COMPETITION
offering e-learning, most
Competition will increase and will
organizations will benefit from more
be a significant factor in driving
sophisticated abilities to manage
higher levels of marketing
learning in a centralized location, to
sophistication for online learning
track e-learning activity, and to feed
products. As noted in the chapter
data back into their membership
“The Business Perspective,” the fact
management system.
that high-quality e-learning can now
MORE ON-DEMAND CONTENT be produced relatively easily and at
Publishing of on-demand content low cost will mean that enterprising
will rise, driven by a number of individuals and organizations will
factors. A significant factor is that it begin entering into or expanding in
has become increasingly easy to all markets where the sale of
mine content from live, place-based educational products represents a
events and make it available online. Organizations viable business. This trend will
can do this on their own or work with a growing impact some associations more than others, but all
number of companies that provide this service. Live associations will benefit by developing more
events aside, production of on-demand content has sophisticated approaches to search marketing and
simply become much easier, and as a result of other forms of online promotion.
services like YouTube, members are more and more
PROFESSIONAL NETWORK?
accustomed to the idea of accessing rich content
whenever and wherever they feel like it. A further development that we hope to see over the
coming one to two years is the emergence of a more


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 cohesive professional network for e-learning in the organizations have fully made the leap and
sector. This sort of network has long-since emerged said, ‘Let’s go for it. Let’s just dig into the
in the corporate and academic sectors, but as many online resources.’”
of our interviewees attested, there is no clear place • “I’d say there’s probably some percentage [of
for association e-learning professionals to turn for associations] that do it [e-learning]
knowledge, support, and peer networking. This exceptionally well and are going to continue to
report and all the interactions that helped produce it do it exceptionally well. That’s probably a
are, we hope, one step in that direction, but as with fairly small percentage in my view. I think the
nearly all aspects of e-learning in the association vast majority, in my view, are folks that have
sector, there is still much work to be done. done it in a scattershot manner and have mixed
and matched things to try things out. I think at
Voices from the Sector this point, the ones of that group that are good
strategists and good thinkers are going to make
While we certainly have our views, it seems most
this into a long-term online asset. Those that I
appropriate to end this report with comments from
think have gone through change are not
our interviewees. We asked all of our interviewees
necessarily going through the same critical
to tell us how they view current state of e-learning
thinking, are going to continue to take this on
in the association sector. Here is some of what they
in a scattershot manner.”
told us.
• “We’re finding that many [associations that]
E-LEARNING PROVIDERS ON THE STATE OF have come to us have already had their initial
THE SECTOR experience, and now they want to get more
• “I’d like to find out what it is sophisticated in what they are
that is holding [associations] doing.... I would say that it [e-
back. Because it’s been 10 years learning in the association space]
since I went to [a conference is definitely maturing, that
“I don’t think we are
session on association e- anywhere near maturity people have had their initial
learning] down in Orlando and when it comes to e-learning, mini-event, their initial
at that time we thought we’d especially in the association experiences. Now they want to
better move on this quickly— space.” provide a more positive
the corporate world is taking experience; they are getting
advantage of this, associations more particular in the kind of
are traditionally a couple of content and how it’s presented.”
years behind, so we had better move on this • I don’t think they [associations] are doing all
quickly. And we’re still waiting.” they could with it [e-learning]. I think that most
• “I don’t think we are anywhere near maturity of them are pretty much stuck either in the
when it comes to e-learning, especially in the 24/7 mode or just getting into the Webinars but
association space. I think we are at a real base not getting into them along with an LMS. A lot
camp level where there has certainly been a of them do Webinars, and they sell the
heck of a lot of effort and content that’s just Webinars through their own Web site, but they
been thrown up against the wall online, just don’t have an LMS platform where they are
doing stuff online without really having an really gathering the information and tracking
idea to the effect or whether or not it’s the best and recording things.... They are kind of
way to deliver their resources. So it’s kind of scattered, some of them, even some of the very
like association have got one foot still in their large ones. And especially now with the new
old ways of doing things, but they’ve got one things, podcasting and different things, they
toe in the online space. Some may have actually are even more scattered than they were before,
put a whole foot in the online space, but I don’t and they really need to look at coming together
think anybody has really made the leap. I and putting it in one place.”
shouldn’t say anybody—of course somebody • “We were surprised that a lot of associations
has—but I don’t think the majority of have not yet started using Webinars. We were


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 really just blown away by that. Those who are succeed wildly, to make the sorts of strategic
using them seem to keep doing them and like alliances and partnerships they need, to protect
them. I think it’s the wave of the future. I think their intellectual property as subject matter
we are going to see it more portable. I think we experts, authors, and publishers, putting them
are going to see it more on PDAs and iPhones at risk of being rendered irrelevant or at the
and that sort of thing. I think we are going to service of emerging parties who do. They’re
see more asynchronous events.” unaware of many emerging competition,
• Even within the corporate training space where threats, and trends. Most associations are
people have been doing forms of e-learning for running blind in these regards, from a strategic
20 years almost, I think that there’s still so standpoint. They’re missing out left and right
much potential for technology-based training. on business opportunities and opportunities to
It’s certainly the direction that people are make the difference in the world they’re out to
going.... I don’t see that changing. As long as make, and quickly losing certain competitive
we can actually create learning experiences that edges on which they’ve been able to rely as
rival or beat what people can get in a classroom more-or-less a given.”
then I think that there’s going to be a lot of • “It’s a blossoming field. Booming might be
opportunities.” overstating it, but it’s growing, and people who
• It’s an uneducated audience in understanding are doing it are looking at how they can grow
how to leverage a learning management it, and people who aren’t doing it are feeling
system properly and do different things. like they are left behind. So I think it’s a very
Associations have [an LMS] for one thing, but exciting time to be in this industry, to be where
they don’t realize that it can do all these other we are. We’re just very excited about where we
things.” are.”
• “Many associations are doing the e-learning • “What’s clear is that there is a huge increase in
equivalent of building their own Barnes & interest. That there’s no question about. In the
Noble and then selling only their own books in last three years there has been a big, big surge
it. Others are creating all sorts of e-learning in people contacting us, in our client base, so
product, without sufficiently informed there is definitely a momentum growing where
business, technology, marketing, or staffing this is something that people are now taking
plans to capitalize fully on their investments. for granted that this is needed and the way in
They don’t know how to leverage e-learning to which learning is delivered.... Part of what
obtain the sort of distribution they need to excites me about it is that there is no end in
sight; we are not graying and maturing; there’s
energy and growth in this whole domain.”

“Many associations are doing the e-learning
equivalent of building their own Barnes &
Noble and then selling only their own books
in it.”


• “It kind of depends on what we are comparing
it [association e-learning] against. I would say
it’s pretty much on par with probably where
higher education is, but definitely behind
where corporate e-learning is. In some ways. I
think that corporate e-learning is behind
associations in some ways too. I definitely
think that there is more that associations could
be doing that they are not, primarily because
they are either not aware of certain options that
exist and/or they have certain preconceptions
about those options that they haven’t overcome
yet, for whatever reason. Maybe there is a
perception that there are more costs involved
then there are or that there are more headaches
involved then there are or for whatever reason
it may be.”
“I think e-learning is a scary concept, and I • “I look around—we have some competing
think associations are a little risk-averse, so organizations—and I guess my initial thinking
they keep going back to the same well is I don’t know why associations wouldn’t offer
without considering the possibility of a low- e-learning. If you are at the point where you
level investment to put their toe in the water are deciding, ‘Should we have e-learning?’
of e-learning.” you’re not even in the game. And when I say
the game I’m not talking about the e-learning
game, you’re not even in the association game.
ASSOCIATIONS ON THE STATE OF THE
SECTOR In my mind, most organizations, if they have
some kind of training objective, a learning
• “I will start by saying that I think that e-
objective, if they see themselves as providing
learning, it’s become such a huge world, it
training for their constituents, their audiences,
encompasses so much that I think we sort of
at least their consumers if nothing else, and
feel lost at times in this huge area called e-
they don’t have e-learning then they are way
learning that we are in the process of entering. I
behind. If I
think that has been a challenge. There is a lot
started working
out there that is called e-learning.... I don’t “I think it [the state of e-
with a group like
think that we are at a place yet that when I or learning] really depends
that tomorrow I
[my colleague] says e-learning and our bosses on the association.”
would instantly
say e-learning we necessarily mean the same
start figuring out
thing—we are still going through that process
how we would
of narrowing down what it means to us.”
do it.”
• “My sense is that [associations] are embracing
it [e-learning]. People are looking—much like • “I believe that most organizations are doing
more things that might broadly be called e-
us—for opportunities to do this, but I think it’s
learning, and I think that’s bound to only
still very much in its infancy for the majority of
increase in the future. Are we taking full
associations. I know that some are doing it and
advantage of it? I don’t think so. I think a lot of
have it mastered and are probably making lots
our e-learning programming is taking an old-
of great money and have a solid infrastructure.
fashioned lecture and storing it on the Web.
My sense is that’s still the minority.... I think a
We do that a lot, so I’m not saying that we’re
lot of people feel like they are in the same boat,
better, but I’m saying that that’s not the fullest,
where they just don’t know where to turn,
best use of the e-learning channel in my
where to start, who’s a good vendor to go to, or
opinion.”
this or that.”


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 • “I think e-learning is a scary concept, and I
think associations are a little risk-averse so they “I think a big difference exists
keep going back to the same well without between trade associations whose
members are companies and other
considering the possibility of a low-level
associations whose members are
investment to put your toe in the water of e-
individuals.”
learning. I think the big boys in associations are
doing e-learning. All the top 25 I’m sure are
doing it. The top 50, they are all doing e-
learning, and they are doing something really
robust. I think everybody thinks that their e-
learning program has to be like that, and I
think e-learning can be customized for your
audience based off your budget and your
resources. I think if more associations knew
that, then they would be willing to take a
chance, and I don’t think they know that.”
• “I have a lot of friends in the association world.
I just went to the annual holiday trade show
and conference in December, and I got the
feeling that everyone there was doing more of have people who are, I think, maybe a little bit
it [e-learning], and they value it highly. So I ahead in their online interests—the video, the
think it’s only going to increase. It’s on Web 2.0 stuff, that kind of stuff. There are really
everyone’s radar. If they’re not doing it, they strong arguments for cost savings too. It’s not
are getting ready to do it, and if they are doing the same as a classroom experience, but when
it, they are liking the results.” you are a national association, it’s really hard to
• “There is a heavy learning curve to it [e- make those classroom experiences, regional
learning], obviously, and there’s the technical meetings work beyond the once-a-year
side. So I do think some people are intimated conference. At least in my experience it is. So, I
by that side quite a bit. But I do think it is being think that people are really enthused by it.”
embraced now. Within [our industry] the • “I think that [our members], by virtue of
nature of our product is a little technical so we initially their own training and then
subsequently their own independence as they
mature into their positions, have not been
“[E-learning is] on everyone’s radar. willing to change their habits. It’s a given that
If they’re not doing it, they are continuing education is essential to a
getting ready to do it, and if they are [member’s] success, and given that he or she
doing it, they are liking the results.” therefore will be pursuing some form of
continuing education, one would think that the
sheer convenience of being able to access that
education online or via some electronic method
that allows them to participate, to learn,
broaden and sharpen their knowledge, from
the convenience of their home, driving to work
or so forth, that they would be very supportive
of that. Our [members], many of them, still like
tapes. Those that have advanced to a CD player
in their cars—that was their big step up.”
• “I think a big difference exists between trade
associations whose members are companies
and other associations whose members are


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 individuals. I think the individuals look for • “I think [associations] are “I think if we
that opportunity for continuing growth on a kind of in the middle of it; don’t position
personal level, but when it comes to the we’re in a learning curve.... ourselves and
management level of a company and industry I keep telling the others start making
information, [e-learning is] not where they go. that they’ve got to do this, our audience,
It’s not where they think to look for their the generation that is our members,
information. It’s a strange gap between your coming is not going to go aware of this [e-
learning],
personal growth and your company to seminars, they are not
they’re going to
improvements.” going to be gone from their
go somewhere
• “I think it [the state of e-learning] really families for two or three else.”
depends on the association. I think so many days to go learning while
associations are more developed than others. I their children are doing
think we are really on the new side of it. I think other things.... And they are much more
a lot of them are light years ahead of us. knowledgeable, they have grown up with this
Although I’ll talk to some, and they’re not technology. If associations cannot use it and
having the success that we’re having on the cannot grow it, then they will die because these
Webinars. So I think it just really depends on people can go to the Internet and get what they
the organization and where they’ve been and need; they will find a way, and if you won’t
where they are planning to go.” help them, then they can easily find another
• “I think if we don’t position ourselves and start way. But associations are going to have to grow
making our audience, our members, aware of and develop in this area or they are not going
this [e-learning], they’re going to go to survive. I totally believe that.”
somewhere else. I think there’s a market out • I think it’s much easier to do it [e-learning]. I
there. We just don’t know how to tap into it or remember the first time I did one of these
do it effectively.” things and on the chat on the bottom [of the
• “I think there’s a ton [of e-learning] out there. I screen] all the people were saying that they
think there’s tremendous resources out there. couldn’t get connected. Things like that. The
I’m concerned that a lot of people in the original problems that everyone had with
association industry aren’t aware of those.” technology, those are basically all gone, so that
• “I don’t know that much about other is a big deal. The costs have come down a lot so
associations. I certainly know a lot of them do you can do these things without having to
it [e-learning]. I don’t really spend a lot of money and therefore you can
follow association activity provide the service to your members. So I think
closely enough to know which more membership organizations are embracing
groups are doing it really well, it. I also think that more members are
but I certainly hear about a lot embracing it because it’s not so hard—you just
of people doing it. I sort of feel click on something, and you go forward.”
like we are ahead of the curve a
little bit.”


Appendix A: Participating Organizations
With Thanks and Gratitude
We are grateful to the hundreds of organizations Technology and Service Providers
that took the time to participate in the 2008
• BlueStreak Learning
Association Sector E-learning Survey. And we are
• Boston Conferencing
particularly grateful to representatives from the
• Certilearn
following organizations for making the time either
• CommPartners
to review survey questions, participate in face-to-
• Enspire Learning
face or phone interviews, or provide input by e-mail
• iCohere
—and, in some cases, all three.
• Impact Media Solutions
• KRM
Associations • LearnSomething
• America’s Health Insurance Plans • Results Direct
• American Academy of Physical Medicine and • StreamCenter
Rehabilitation • Type A Learning Agency
• American College of Emergency Physicians
• American Health Information Management
Association
• American Institute of Chemical Engineers
• American Nurses Credentialing Center
• American Physical Therapy Association
• American Speech-Hearing-Language
Association
• Applied Systems Client Network
• Association Executives of North Carolina
• Association of Cable Communicators
• Community Associations Institute
• Institute of Food Technologists
• International Foodservice Distributors
Association
• International Foundation of Employee Beneﬁt
Plans
• National Air Duct Cleaners Association
• National Association of College & University
Food Services
• National Association of Counties
• National Fraternal Congress of America
• National Glass Association
• National Recreation and Park Association
• SSPC: The Society for Specialty Coatings
• Southern Building Material Association
• Toastmasters International

84!APPENDIX A: PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS

Appendix B: Survey Data
Responses for All Questions
Please note that whenever data was not collected, the results are marked N/A, or not applicable.

All Respondents
The following questions, in addition to the demographic questions at the end of this appendix, were asked
of all respondents.

USE OF E-LEARNING
E-learning, also known as computer-based training or online distance education, refers to computer-
enabled learning carried out by individuals or groups outside of a physical classroom, either over the
Internet or an internal network. There are many methods of e-learning such as Webcasts, self-paced
tutorials, podcasts, facilitated discussions, etc., but for the purpose of this survey, any activity in which a
user receives instruction via a computer counts as e-learning. Does your organization currently using e-
learning to deliver education? (488 responses)

Yes 61.1%
No, but plan to start in the next 6 months 13.5%
No, but plan to start in the next 12 months 12.7%
No, and do not plan to start in the next 12 months 12.7%

RESOURCE ALLOCATION FOR ALL EDUCATION
Do you expect the total resources (monetary and personnel) allocated to all educational initiatives (including
but not only e-learning initiatives) at your organization in 2009 to be more, less, or the same as those
allocated in 2008? (404 responses)

More than 2008 39.4%
About the same as 2008 48.8%
Less than 2008 11.9%

Currently Using E-learning
The following questions were asked only of organizations currently using e-learning.

RESOURCE ALLOCATION FOR E-LEARNING
Do you expect the total resources (monetary and personnel) allocated to only e-learning initiatives at your
organization in 2009 to be more, less, or the same as those allocated in 2008? (351 responses)

More than 2008 48.8%
About the same as 20008 41.1%
Less than 2008 10.1%

85!APPENDIX B: SURVEY DATA

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 TIME USING E-LEARNING
How long has your organization been using e-learning? (289 responses)

Less than 1 year 16.3%
1 to 2 years 35.3%
2 to 5 years 32.9%
More than 5 years 15.6%

CURRENT PARTICIPATION BY MEMBERSHIP
What percentage of your membership base would you estimate participates in at least one e-learning
offering from your organization annually? (211 responses)

Average Median
18.2% 10%

OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH E-LEARNING
Overall, how satisfied are you with your current e-learning initiatives? (250 responses)

Very satisfied 21.6%
Somewhat satisfied 56.8%
Somewhat dissatisfied 16.0%
Very dissatisfied 5.6%

SATISFACTION IN SPECIFIC AREAS
How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your current e-learning initiatives in terms of the specific items
below? (244 responses)

Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very Not
Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Applicable
Usage (e.g., number of course 13.2% 33.3% 10.7% 27.2% 13.6% 2.5%
enrollments)
Revenue (e.g., from course sales) 7.9% 25.6% 16.9% 24.8% 10.7% 14.5%
The financial cost of creating the 12.9% 28.8% 27.9% 17.5% 8.8% 4.6%
initiatives
The financial cost of supporting and 14.6% 27.1% 27.1% 18.8% 8.3% 4.6%
maintaining the initiatives
The staff time required to develop the 7.4% 33.9% 24.4% 24.0% 7.4% 3.3%
initiatives
The staff time required to maintain the 9.2% 32.9% 29.2% 19.6% 6.3% 3.3%
initiatives
Feedback from participants in the 23.8% 38.1% 17.6% 14.6% 3.3% 2.9%
initiatives


Currently Using E-learning or Planning to Use E-learning
The following questions were asked both of organizations currently using e-learning and those planning
to within the next 12 months.

PURPOSE OF E-LEARNING

For what purposes does your organization use or plan to use e-learning? Check all that apply.

Currently Using Planning to Use
(296 responses) (126 responses)
Professional development for members 92.6% 86.5%
Professional development for non-members 64.2% 44.4%
Training for staff 35.5% 20.6%
Training for afﬁliated organizations or chapters 19.9% 27.0%
Training for volunteers 20.3% 26.2%
Advocacy and issue education 30.7% 26.2%
Other 8.4% 7.9%

KEY BENEFITS
For your organization, what are the three key beneﬁts associated with e-learning? Please check only the three
that your organization considers most important.

Current E-learning Planned E-learning
Instructional effectiveness versus other modes of training or education 13.5% 17.7%
Cost-effectiveness versus other modes of training or education 74.7% 78.2%
Ability to reach more learners 73.0% 78.2%
Opportunity for learners to direct their own learning 21.5% 23.4%
Convenience for learners 78.9% 72.6%
Ability to generate revenues (e.g. from online product sales) 31.5% 29.0%
Reduction of risk related to educational products by diversifying product 3.5% 3.2%
line
Ease of tracking continuing education for learners 8.3% 12.1%
Other 3.1% 3.2%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 THREE BIGGEST BARRIERS
What are the three biggest barriers your organization has encountered or expects to encounter while
developing e-learning initiatives?† Please check only the three that your organization considers most important.

Concern that costs would exceed financial return 41.6% 39.5%
Concern that costs would exceed non-financial return 7.5% 7.6%
Lack of funding necessary to implement an e-learning initiative 20.4% 40.3%
Concern about the effectiveness of e-learning 21.5% 17.6%
Concern about end users' technology skills 45.5% 35.3%
Staff time required to develop the e-learning offerings 38.7% 57.1%
Staff time required to support e-learning 26.2% 33.6%
Lack of expertise in e-learning 33.3% 46.2%
Lack of management buy-in 6.5% 4.2%
Resistance from current trainers or facilitators 8.2% 3.4%
Fear that stakeholders will not use the e-learning offerings we develop 33.0% 24.4%
No perceived need for e-learning 5.7% 5.0%
Other 6.5% 4.2%

† We intended for organizations not currently using e-learning to answer this question about perceived barriers, but,
unfortunately, responses were not collected owing to a technical glitch.

FINANCIAL GOALS FOR E-LEARNING
Which of the following statements describes your financial goals for your current e-learning offerings or
your planned e-learning initiatives?

Current Offerings Planned Offerings
Must be self-sustaining, but profitability (positive net revenue) is not 33.7% 38.3%
required
Must be self-sustaining and profitable (positive net revenue) 50.2% 52.5%
Doesn’t need to be self-sustaining because costs will be subsidized 16.1% 9.2%

CHARGING FOR E-LEARNING
Does your association charge or will it charge for its e-learning offerings?

Currently Charging Planning to Charge
Yes, we charge/will charge for all of our offerings 42.3% 32.2%
Yes, we charge/will charge for some of our offerings 43.7% 45.2%
No, we do not/will not charge for our offerings 14.0% 8.7%
Not sure N/A 13.9%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 PRICING OF E-LEARNING: PER HOUR
Assume that you were to break the pricing for your e-learning offerings (excluding any free offerings)
down into a price per hour of content delivered. On average, how much (in U.S. dollars) does your
organization charge members per hour of content for an e-learning offering? If you do not know the exact
dollar figure, please provide your best estimate.

Average price per hour of content $56.79 $52.24
Median price per hour of content $40.00 $40.00

CREDITS FOR E-LEARNING
Which type of credit does your organization currently offer or plan to offer for e-learning? Check all that
apply.

Currently Offered Planning to Offer
No credit is/will be offered 35.4% 33.3%
Continuing education units (CE or CEU) 43.0% 41.2%
Continuing medical education (CME) 10.1% 13.2%
Continuing legal education (CLE) 1.8% 5.3%
Continuing professional education (CPE) 8.3% 10.5%
Certificate of successful completion 31.8% 32.5%
Credit towards completing or maintaining a 31.8% 25.4%
certification, licensure, or other credential
Credit towards a degree at a college or 4.3% 1.8%
university
Other 5.4% 5.3%

PRICING OF E-LEARNING: PER CREDIT
Assume that you were to break the pricing for your e-learning offerings (excluding any free offerings)
down into a price per unit of available credit. On average, how much (in U.S. dollars) does your
organization charge members per credit unit for e-learning? If you do not know the exact dollar figure, please
provide your best estimate.

Average price per hour of content $73.97 $53.80
Median price per hour of content $39.00 $30.00


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 MEMBER DISCOUNTS
Do or will members of your association receive a discount on e-learning products and services?

Current Discounts Planned Discounts
No, pricing is the same for members and non-members 17.9% 8.0%
Yes, most or all members receive a 1% – 9% discount 2.6% 3.4%
Yes, most or all members receive a 50% or greater discount 13.1% 6.8%
Don’t know yet N/A 27.3%
Other 12.7% 3.4%

MARKETING
How important are each of the following methods for promoting or marketing your e-learning offerings?
(260 responses)

Not Important Slightly Very Absolutely
at All Important Important Necessary
E-mail marketing (e.g., e-newsletters) 2.3% 4.7% 28.7% 64.3%
Print mailings (e.g., direct mail) 29.0% 36.3% 24.2% 10.5%
Conference exhibits 35.5% 37.2% 19.4% 7.9%
Banner ads on your own organizational Web site 23.3% 26.9% 34.3% 15.5%
Banner ads on other Web sites 59.0% 25.2% 13.2% 2.6%
Promotional Webcasts 63.1% 21.6% 12.3% 3.0%
Search engine optimization 41.8% 21.1% 22.8% 14.2%
Pay-per-click advertising (e.g., Google AdWords) 72.6% 17.8% 7.0% 2.6%
Word of mouth 1.6% 14.6% 40.9% 42.9%
Press releases 37.2% 32.6% 21.3% 8.8%
Television advertising 95.7% 3.5% 0.9% 0.0%
Radio advertising 95.6% 4.0% 0.4% 0.0%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 DEVELOPMENT OF E-LEARNING
Are your e-learning offerings developed or will they be developed entirely in-house, using a mixture of in-
house staff and outside vendors, or completely using outside vendors?

Entirely in-house 18.3% 16.8%
Using a mixture of in-house and consultants or vendors 68.9% 71.0%
Completely using outside vendors 12.8% 12.1%

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNERS
Does your organization make use or it will it make use of professional instructional designers (whether on
staff or by contract) when developing its e-learning offerings?

Yes 43.5% 31.2%
No 45.9% 17.4%
Not sure 10.6% 51.4%

E-LEARNING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
Which of the following e-learning products and services does your association currently provide or will
your organization add in the next 12 months? Check all that apply.

Self-paced online courses, tutorials, or presentations (excluding 54.5% 47.8%
recorded Webcasts or Webinars)
Facilitated online courses (excluding Webcasts or Webinars) 19.1% 18.3%
Real-time Webcasts or Webinars 67.1% 55.7%
Recorded or on-demand Webcasts or Webinars 56.0% 47.0%
Audio or video podcasts 35.4% 34.8%
Member-only discussion boards 40.4% 40.0%
Electronic study guides 15.5% 13.9%
E-learning programs combined with classroom-based learning 15.5% 14.8%
(blended learning)
Ofﬂine formats (e.g., journal articles or classroom-based 14.8% 7.0%
seminars) with online assessments
Educational simulations or games 3.6% 4.3%
CD-ROM or DVD-based education 34.3% 10.4%
Third-party “off-the-shelf” courses 20.6% 16.5%
Other 2.9% 4.3%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 AUTHORING TOOLS
Which of the following authoring tools, if any, does your association use or plan to use for creating e-
learning?

Adobe Captivate 8.1% 4.7%
Adobe Dreamweaver 14.9% 11.2%
Adobe Flash 24.3% 9.3%
Articulate Presenter 13.5% 0.9%
Camtasia Studio 7.2% 4.7%
Lectora (Trivantis) 1.4% 0.9%
Outstart Trainer (Outstart) 0.9% 0.0%
PowerPoint 60.4% 29.9%
ReadyGo 0.5% 0.9%
Toolbook (SumTotal) 0.9% 0.9%
Tools provided in your learning management system (LMS) or learning 24.8% 10.3%
content management system (LCMS)
Other 17.1% 11.2%
Don’t know yet N/A 64.5%

WEBINAR PLATFORMS
In the survey, Webinar platforms were included in the authoring choices above. They have been separated
out here, however, for ease of comparison.

Adobe Connect (formerly Breeze) 3.7% 2.8%
Elluminate 0.9% 0%
Genesys 1.8% 0%
GoToMeeting 22.5% 15.0%
Microsoft LiveMeeting 13.5% 8.4%
ReadyTalk 0.9% 0%
WebEx 26.6% 11.2%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 SOCIAL MEDIA TOOLS
Which of the following social media tools does your organization currently use or plan to use as part of
your online learning offerings? (Please only indicate tools that are or will be explicitly a part of your e-
learning initiatives. For example, if your organization has or plans to have a wiki, but does not use it or
plan to use it as part of its e-learning offerings, do not select that item.)

Blog 16.5% 25.7%
Discussion forums 32.7% 45.0%
Microblogging tools (e.g., Twitter or Jaiku) 2.4% 4.6%
Photo-sharing sits (e.g., Flickr 2.4% 5.5%
Podcasts 25.0% 28.4%
Private social networking site (only approved users can join) 16.1% 22.9%
Publicly available social networking site (anyone can register) 8.9% 9.2%
Slide-sharing sites (e.g., Slideshare.net) 2.0% 1.8%
Social bookmarking tools (e.g., Delicious or Diigo) 0.0% 1.8%
Virtual worlds (e.g., Second Life) 1.2% 3.7%
Web video sites (e.g., YouTube or Blip.tv) 7.3% 9.2%
Wiki 10.1% 11.9%
We do not use/plan to use any social media tools 47.6% 8.3%
Not sure N/A 46.8%
Other 6.9% 2.8%

USE OF A LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Does your organization currently use or plan to use a learning management system (LMS) or learning
content management system (LCMS) for delivery and/or tracking of e-learning?

Yes 34.4% 11.0%
No N/A 16.5%
No, but we plan to start in the next 12 months 14.7% N/A
No, and we do not plan to start in the next 12 months 33.2% N/A
Not sure 17.8% 61.5%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 LMS AND LCMS PACKAGES
Which of the following LMS and/or LCMS packages does your organization currently use or plan to use?
Check all that apply.

Angel LMS (ANGEL Learning) 0% 0%
Avilar Web Mentor 1.2% 0%
Blackboard 5.9% 4.3%
Education Director (Results Director) 2.4% 4.3%
ForceTen (Outstart) 0% 0%
GeoExpress (GeoLearning) 2.4% 0%
GeoMaestro (GeoLearning) 1.2% 0%
Intralearn LMS (Certilearn) 3.5% 4.3%
Intralearn LMS (Intralearn) 4.7% 4.3%
Isoph Blue (LearnSomething) 5.9% 4.3%
LearnCenter (Learn.com) 1.2% 0%
LearningServer (Intralearn) 1.2% 0%
LearnPro Plus (LearnSomething) 1.2% 0%
LearningSpan 2.4% 0%
Moodle 8.2% 8.7%
Outstart Evolution 1.2% 0%
Plateau 0% 0%
Saba 1.2% 0%
Sakai 0% 0%
TopClass (WBT Systems) 3.5% 0%
TotalLMS (SumTotal) 4.7% 0%
Custom/Proprietary 5.9% 4.3%
Not sure 22.4% 60.9%
Other 25.9% 13.0%

USE OF AN ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Does your organization currently use an association management system (AMS)?

Yes 54.5% 50.0%
No 31.8% 37.5%
Not sure 13.6% 12.5%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 AMS PACKAGES
Which of the following AMS packages does your organization currently use? Check all that apply.

Aptify (Aptify) 6.7% 0%
Association Anywhere (ACGI) 2.2% 0%
ClearVantage (Euclid) 2.2% 0%
CRM for Members (ProTech) 0.0% 0%
IMIS (Advanced Systems International) 42.2% 7.7%
IRMembership (IRM Systems) 0% 0%
Members360 (Afﬁniscape) 0% 7.7%
netFORUM (Avectra) 17.8% 15.4%
Ofﬁce Manager (internet4associations) 2.2% 0%
Personify (TMA Resources) 4.4% 0%
TIMSS (TMA Resources) 8.9% 0%
Wild Apricot (Wild Apricot) 0% 0%
Other 26.7% 69.2%

LMS/AMS INTEGRATION
Are your learning management systems (LMS) and your association management system (AMS)
integrated, or will they be integrated? In other words, is log-in information, data about users, data about
course activities, or other types of data shared or will it be shared between the two systems?

Yes, the two systems are/will be integrated 46.7% 38.5%
No, the two systems are not/will not be integrated, but we 24.4% 23.1%
plan to integrate them in the future
No, the two systems are not/will not be integrated, and we 28.9% 23.1%
have no plans for integration
Not sure 0.0% 15.4%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 ADHERENCE TO GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS
How important is adherence to guidelines from each of the following sources for your e-learning
initiatives, or how important do you anticipate adherence will be?

Current E-learning Initiatives (223 responses) Not Important Slightly Very Absolutely Don’t
at All Important Important Necessary Know
AICC (Airline Industry CBT Committee) 70.2% 2.3% 3.3% 1.9% 22.3%
IMS Global Learning Consortium 65.1% 6.1% 3.3% 0.5% 25.0%
Medbiquitous 67.3% 3.3% 1.4% 0.9% 27.0%
SCORM (Shareable Content Object Reference Model) 45.0% 7.8% 11.9% 15.1% 20.2%
Section 508 (Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act) 51.2% 5.6% 11.7% 5.6% 25.8%

Planned E-learning Initiatives (92 responses) Not Important Slightly Very Absolutely Don’t
at All Important Important Necessary Know
AICC (Airline Industry CBT Committee) 52.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 47.8%
IMS Global Learning Consortium 33.0% 2.2% 3.3% 0.0% 61.5%
Medbiquitous 34.1% 1.1% 2.2% 0.0% 62.6%
SCORM (Shareable Content Object Reference Model) 30.8% 3.3% 4.4% 3.3% 58.2%
Section 508 (Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act) 28.3% 4.3% 7.6% 1.1% 58.7%

DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR E-LEARNING
Which department or division of your organization holds or will hold primary responsibility for e-
learning?

Currently Responsible Planning to Be Responsible
Education or professional development 75.5% 48.7%
Member services 10.0% 14.2%
Marketing 1.9% 3.5%
Technology 1.9% 1.8%
Don’t know 1.1% 19.5%
Other 9.6% 12.4%


Respondent Profile Data
The following questions were asked of all respondents.

GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS
Which best describes the geographic focus of your organization (i.e., which best indicates the areas in
which you actively solicit membership)? (400 responses)

Single-community or municipality focus 1.8%
Multiple-community focus within one state 7.8%
Single-state or province focus 19.8%
Multi-state or multi-province focus 4.3%
National focus 39.8%
International focus 26.8%

TYPE OF ORGANIZATION
What type of organization is your association? Please check all that apply. (398 responses)

501(c)(3) nonprofit organization 47.0%
Trade association 23.4%
Professional society 19.3%
For-profit organization 3.5%
Other 5.5%

ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT COMPANY
Do you work for your association through an association management company? (398 responses)

Yes 10.6%
No 89.4%

CERTIFICATION PROGRAM
Does your organization offer a formal certification program? (399 responses)

Yes 34.8%
No 65.2%

CONTINUING EDUCATION
Does your organization offer continuing education that specifically supports earning a formal certification
or license, whether or not the certification or license program is your own? (399 responses)

Yes 52.6%
No 47.4%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 BUDGET SIZE
What is your organization’s annual budget? (379 responses)

Less than $100,000 3.4%
$100,001 - $500,000 14.5%
$500,001 - $1,000,000 11.9%
$1,000,001 - $5,000,000 37.2%
$5,000,001 - $10,000,000 11.9%
$10,000,001 - $25,000,000 10.3%
$25,000,001 - $50,000,000 5.0%
$50,000,001 - $100,000,000 5.3%
More than $100,000,000 0.5%

INDIVIDUAL MEMBERSHIP
How many active individual members does your organization currently have? (391 responses)

1,000 or less 24.0%
1,001 to 5,000 24.3%
5,001 to 10,000 10.2%
10,001 to 25,000 11.3%
25,001 to 50,000 7.2%
50,001 to 100,000 3.8%
More than 100,000 2.6%
We have only organizational members 16.6%

ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBERSHIP
How many active organizational members does your organization currently have? (390 responses)

Less than 100 21.0%
101 to 200 11.5%
201 to 500 11.8%
501 to 1,000 13.8%
1,001 to 5,000 11.8%
More than 5,000 5.4%
We have only individual members 24.6%


ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 CLASSIFICATION
Which of the following classiﬁcations most closely aligns with the audience served by your organization?
(390 responses)

Accommodation and food services 1.3% Libraries 0.3%
Administrative and support 0.3% Management of companies and enterprises 1.0%
Agriculture, forestry, ﬁshing, and hunting 2.1% Manufacturing 4.1%
Arts, entertainment, and recreation 2.1% Mining 0.0%
Construction 4.6% Publishing and broadcasting 1.0%
Education: higher education 4.6% Real estate, rental, and leasing 3.3%
Education: K-12 4.6% Retail trade 2.3%
Education: other 3.1% Social services 2.8%
Finance and insurance 3.8% Telecommunications 1.3%
Health care: physicians 6.7% Transportation and warehousing 1.3%
Health care: nurses 2.1% Utilities 1.0%
Heath care: other 11.3% Waste management and remediation services 0.0%
Human resources 1.3% Wholesale trade 1.0%
Information technology 0.5% Other 32.3%

STAFF
How many paid staff does your organization currently have? (401 responses)

1 to 5 26.7%
6 to 10 18.2%
11 to 15 14.2%
16 to 30 10.7%
31 to 50 8.5%
50 to 100 9.7%
101 to 250 7.7%
251 to 500 3.2%
More than 500 1.0%


Appendix C: Survey Methodology
The Details
For the 2008 Association E-learning Survey that informants who wished to enter into the drawing
serves as the basis for much of this report, the and receive the summary was collected through a
population of interest was defined as trade and Web form connected to a database entirely separate
professional associations as well as other nonprofit from the survey database and not integrated with it
organizations that solicit membership. An exact in any way.
tally of this population was not known since a
comprehensive directory could not be located. The survey was available from November 20, 2008,
Accordingly, the trade and professional association to December 19, 2008. The total response rate for the
portion of the population was estimated at 88,000 survey was 518. Subsequently, 488 responses passed
based on input from staff of the American Society of the screening criteria (see section below). Since
Association Executives. This estimate is viewed as participation was voluntary, the responses
conservative as it does not include organizations constituted a non-probability sample (that is,
that view themselves as associations but may not be informants were neither randomly selected nor
classified as trade or professional associations in randomly assigned to form the sample).
public records. Accordingly, the findings are not generalizable
(inferable) to the broader association population.
A major challenge for this survey was compiling a We view the findings as a valuable baseline (and
list of informants for each organization. catalyst) for continued research on e-learning
Accordingly, a list of 40,000 individuals maintained products, services, and trends.
by Boston Conferencing (a major Web conferencing
provider in the association market) and a list of 162 With regard to the response rate, two factors should
individuals maintained by Jeff Cobb (the survey be considered. First, potential informants may have
team leader) were combined. Other membership been disinclined to respond to an invitation from a
bases were considered (for example, the American Webinar vendor e-mail list. But we felt the potential
Society of Association Executives and the for bias was very small relative to the potential to
Association Forum of Chicagoland), but it was not reach a large pool of potential respondents.
clear if these membership bases were fully Additionally, it should be noted that the e-mail list
representative of the broader population of interest. was not a customer list. While it no doubt includes a
number of Boston Conferencing customers, we felt
SurveyMonkey.com (a hosted online survey tool) the size of the list was more than sufficient to ensure
was used to create and publish the questionnaire. that no significant bias towards Webinars or
Subsequently, invitations were e-mailed to 40,162 Webcasts as a form of e-learning would be
potential informants. It should be noted that introduced.
sending questionnaires, invitations, and follow-ups
to postal addresses was not possible in light of Regarding the second factor, the Boston
budget limitations. Conferencing list in some cases contained multiple
contacts for a single organization. Therefore,
Survey participation was anonymous. To encourage multiple informants (duplicates) for an organization
informants to be forthcoming in their responses, we were possible, even though only one response was
made it clear in our communications that we would desired. The number of duplicates was unknown;
not request any identifying information from moreover, screening for (and removing) duplicates
informants. To encourage participation, we offered from the 40,000 item list exceeded project resources.
potential informants the opportunity to receive a Accordingly, two controls were implemented:
summary report from the survey and to be entered
into a random drawing to receive one of two Flip 1.Informants were instructed in the e-mails
video cameras. Each of these opportunities was inviting survey participation as well as on the
entirely optional. Contact information for home page of the survey itself to ensure that

100!APPENDIX C: SURVEY METHODOLOGY

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 only one person would respond from the might. If the identifying characteristics in
organization. different responses from the same IP seemed
2.Criteria were developed to identify the most significantly divergent, both responses were
eligible informant (see section on screening retained.
criteria below).
Assuming responses were not retained for either of
It should be noted that inviting multiple informants the above reasons, the next series of questions asked
increased the chances of getting at least one were:
response from an organization (which was more
desirable than potential overweighting from • Does the title of person in charge of e-learning
multiple responses). match the title of the person filling out the
survey? If one or more of the respondents
If you have questions about this survey and its indicated the title of the person in charge of e-
methodology or are interested in gathering data learning at an organization, the response of the
specific to your potential audience for e-learning, person with this title was the one retained.
contact Jeff Cobb at jcobb@tagoras.com. • Is one response significantly less complete than
the other? It was clear in the majority of cases
Screening Criteria that one respondent from an IP address had
One important goal in collecting responses was to begun the survey, abandoned it, and then a
ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that only one different respondent from the same IP address
response was received from each participating completed the survey with a different
association. This goal had to be balanced with respondent ID.
ensuring participant anonymity to elicit responses • Is e-learning or online learning in the title of the
that were as candid as possible. All e-mail person filling out the survey? If the above
correspondence related to the survey as well as the criteria did not produce a clear decision,
survey home page indicated that only one person preference was given to responses submitted
from an organization should complete the survey. In by someone with e-learning or online learning in
addition, we captured Internet Protocol (IP) their title.
addresses for all responses and then filtered the • Is education in the title of the person filling out
responses to eliminate duplicate responses from any the survey? In the absence of an online learning
given IP address. The following criteria, in the or e-learning title, preference was given for
following order, were used for elimination: respondents with education in their titles. This
criterion was based on the fact that the vast
1.Does the IP address appear to be associated majority or respondents to the survey indicated
with an association management company that the education department holds
(based on at least one respondent from the IP responsibility for e-learning.
address indicating yes on in response to a • Who has the higher ranking title? In the
absence of other clear title indicators,
survey question asking the respondent whether
preference was given to the respondent with
she works for an association management
the highest ranking title.
company)? Because association management 3.
companies typically manage multiple
associations, multiple answers from a single IP
were retained in these instances.
2.Do the responses from the same IP address
have similar identifying characteristics—
particularly industry focus, budget size, and
membership base size? While different
organizations will not typically share an IP
address, it is not out of the question that they

101!APPENDIX C: SURVEY METHODOLOGY

Appendix D: About Tagoras
Publisher of The Report
Tagoras is a market research firm and consultancy directly with a wide range of nonprofit clients and
focused on the design, marketing, and management developed a deep understanding of the business,
of digital learning and knowledge. We work with technical, and instructional issues that impact
associations, philanthropies, and small-to-mid-sized nonprofit learning initiatives. In 2005, Isoph was
businesses to help these organizations better acquired by LearnSomething. Jeff continued on with
understand and leverage the opportunities made LearnSomething until the fall of 2008, when he
possible by the new Web—what we like to call the embarked on the research and consulting activities
learning Web. Our emphasis is on what achieves that now form the core of Tagoras.
results, not on new gadgets and theories. Association
E-learning 2009: State of the Sector represents the first Jeff is an award-winning teacher, a frequent speaker
in a line of research in the e-learning world, and author of the e-book
we plan to publish Learning 2.0 for Associations as well as the popular
on e-learning in the Mission to Learn blog. He serves on the Professional
association sector. Development Council of the American Society of
Association Executives as well as on the advisory
About the Authors board for Philantech, provider of the PhilanTrack™
online grant proposal, reporting, and management
All the research and writing for this report was
system. He has previously served on the research
done by Tagoras principals Jeff Cobb and Celisa
committee of the eLearning Guild and the editorial
Steele.
board of Innovate, a leading resource for information
JEFF COBB about technology and education.
Jeff has nearly two decades of
CELISA STEELE
experience in the world of
Celisa has led the development and deployment of
education and technology. After
successful online education sites with numerous
starting his career as a research
nonprofit organizations ranging from smaller
analyst for the Investor
groups like the Frameworks Institute and the
Responsibility Research Center,
Alliance of Chicago Community
he first became involved with
Health Services to large national
computer-assisted approaches to
and multinational organizations
learning in the early 1990s as an
like the American Red Cross,
instructor at the University of
the American College of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In
Radiology, the Society for
1997, he joined University Access, a company
Human Resource Management,
focused on developing online learning experiences
and WebJunction, an initiative
for colleges and universities and ultimately went on
of the Bill & Melinda Gates
to lead the academic division of the company. He
Foundation.
became senior vice president of business
development when the company merged with IEC, Celisa is a managing director at Tagoras, and she
a leading developer of computer-based training for was a cofounder and chief operating officer of
Fortune 500 companies, and re-branded itself as Isoph, one of the leading providers of e-learning
Quisic. services to the nonprofit sector. Prior to Isoph, she
worked in creative services at Quisic, a developer of
In 2001, Jeff left Quisic to found Isoph with the
high-end online course content for major
specific aim of helping nonprofit organizations
universities and Global 2000 companies. Before
develop successful online learning initiatives.
joining Quisic, Celisa worked in curriculum
Serving as Isoph’s chief executive officer, he worked

102!APPENDIX D: ABOUT TAGORAS

ASSOCIATION E-LEARNING 2009 development for the not-for-proﬁt Family and
Children’s Resource Program (FCRP), part of the
Jordan Institute for Families at the School of Social
Work at the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill.

A veteran of the e-learning world, Celisa served on
the research committee of the eLearning Guild and
has served multiple times as a judge in Brandon
Hall’s annual e-learning awards.

103!APPENDIX D: ABOUT TAGORAS

Association e learning-2009_v1

More Related Content

Similar to Association e learning-2009_v1

More from Association Executives of North Carolina

Association e learning-2009_v1