• Regulate CPAs in accordance with the law and the Institute’s Code of Ethics in the public interest.
• Ensure that CPAs are constantly up to date in all matters relating to their professional work.
• Maintain the highest levels of educational standards for new entrants to the profession.
• Represent the interests of members where appropriate.

The CPA’s Suzanne Shaw, outlined the reason for the emergence of non-formal and informal e-learning technologies in the Institute:

As one of [the bodies] in the Ireland that train accountants and regulate them throughout their professional life, our members are predominantly split three ways: practitioners; entrepreneurs; and employees of businesses.

All of them are at the coalface of the current economic climate and many of them use tools like LinkedIn, Twitter and Facebook to give one another practical advice about sustaining businesses and planning for a long-term environment. It’s a great way to get information out to people really quickly.

It seems that the CPA members are using Facebook and Twitter to share articles and information to keep each apprised of developments in their domain. Ms. Shaw again:

The beauty of social networking is it enables two-way communication or, if you want, one-to-many communication. The CPA uses it to gauge feedback on courses and products and adjust them accordingly.

One of the benefits of LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter is that they are "ready-made." The CPA’s experience is that they can concentrate on the business use of the technology without contributors having to worry about the technology per se. Despite being (by it’s very nature) a very traditional organization, the obvious business advantages of using these platforms for information-sharing seems to have eased the transition to using social media. There are a number of core uses of social media for learning in the CPA:

• The CPA recently set up a space on Facebook for new students to get and share information.
• In terms of professional use, with closed LinkedIn forums are used, so information can be kept confidential between members.
• CPA accountants are using Twitter as a way of relaying information or lobbying issues.
• Professional members make use of LinkedIn to keep in touch with each other, as well as business associates.

Interestingly, one of the main drivers of the growth in utilization of social media tools is that accountants’ clients are "pushing them to be more involved in online communication" according to Ms. Shaw.

It seems that once members are exposed to Web 2.0 technologies, they adapt their own information-sharing practices to include Twitter and Facebook. Ms. Shaw stated that:

Many share war stories and know-how in the forums. With CPE seminars taking place across the country, people not only meet up but can also keep in touch. Because people have hectic working lives and a home life to balance, they can’t get to every course or seminar, so they …use these tools to share notes and find out where the next course is taking place. Not every one can make it to the centre of Dublin after a day’s work, so we’ve started uploading video lectures. Students …are recording podcasts of lectures and sharing on places like Facebook. We estimate about 10% of our 5,500 members and students are using social media for continuous professional education. With Facebook, for example, they are truly engaging with one another. Many use it because they are that generation, others have begun dabbling. It can only grow from here.

Brutus, in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar tells Cassius that 

There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune

Act IV, Scene 3.

In a similar vein, I would suggest that there are trends in the uses and the adoption of technology. The current global economic environment as well as the emergence and broad adoption of easy-to-use Read/Write Web tools like Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn in society-at-large are profoundly re-shaping the ways people and organizations communicate.

As we know from Rogers’ writings on diffusion of innovation, people’s attitude toward a new technology is a key element in its diffusion. Roger’s Innovation Decision Process theory asserts that innovation diffusion is a process that occurs over time through five stages:

   1. Awareness
   2. Interest
   3. Evaluation
   4. Trial
   5. Adoption

The final phase of the diffusion process is characterized by large-scale continued use of the idea or technology, and by "satisfaction with" (Diffusion of Innovations, 2003, p.2) the idea. This does not mean that the the individual or organization that has accepted the idea will use it constantly, rather, it means that the diffused idea has been integrated into their schema or metal model as a valuable asset or resource.

Figure 1 Diffusion of Innovation curve
[Click to enlarge]

Individuals or organizations will typically go through these processes at varying speeds, depending on factors ranging from the cost, time, and effort required to implement the diffused concept, the return on the investment, how well it aligns with their previous experience with similar concepts, as well as the complexity of the idea or technology under consideration. By endorsing and supporting a range of well-tested, free-to-use solutions, that are currently very positively received in the public consciousness due to their apparent ability to elect presidents (Obama), overthrow despotic regimes (Obama again for Dubya Iran), and circumvent traditional media channels (Michael Jackson’s death). Such momentum is hard to ignore, especially when coupled with the economic imperative of clients demanding access to CPA members’ skills via social media.

However, a corollary to the curve described in Figure 1 (above) is the Gartner Hype Lifecycle illustrated in Figure 2 (below).

Figure 2 Generic Gartner Hype Cycle
[Click to enlarge]

I would suggest that Twitter, Facebook etc are well on their way to reaching what Gartner describes as the "Peak of Inflated Expectations" associated with this type of innovation. It remains to be seen if the CPA can take this flood in the tide of technology and progress their non-formal learning initiatives, or if they will be "bound in shallows and in miseries" if they are unable to leverage the potential of this phenomenon.

___________

References:

Kennedy, J. (2009). Number crunchers find social media a ‘tweet’ surprise. Silicon Republic. [Internet] 29 June. Available from: http://www.siliconrepublic.com/news/article/13271/ [Accessed 29 June 2009] 

Rogers, E. M. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.. Simon & Schuster International.

–

As you’ll know if you’re a regular reader of the E-Learning Curve Blog, I use a range of content authoring tools to create elearning courseware. Primus inter pares is Camtasia by TechSmith. About two weeks ago, I downloaded and installed the trial version of Camtasia 6, which is a little unusual for me; in the past I have just bought the upgrade as soon as it was released.

This time it was a different: I heard discomfiting rumors over the Net that the functionality profile had changed, specifically that FLV had been replaced with MPEG4 as the asynchronous video streaming format in v6 of the product. As someone who relies on Adobe Connect to deliver much of my content to learners this was not good news, as Connect’s support for MPEG4 isn’t great. With this bit of news in mind, I decided to download the Cam6 trial to evaluate the latest version of the product.

As part of the evaluation experience, TechSmith’s Adam Stevenson contacted me (and a lot of other users no doubt) to ask me to contribute my experiences using the trial version of the product. Info is collected on a daily basis using a simple Google Docs form, and it enables TechSmith to capture users’ experiences with the trial including rants, raves and anything else you want to tell them. I think that this is a very positive (and obvious and sensible) way for software development companies to be connected to their current and potential customer base. In my view, their approach enables the development of a virtuous cycle between user and software provider which has the potential to benefit both parties – and ultimately learners, who should be the focus of our activities.

In the past, my experience has led me to be cynical of “we care a lot” exercises by organizations – sometimes I get the feeling that my well-considered comments end up filed in the circular filing cabinet – you know, the one marked Trash, or worse in electronic limbo at the bottom of someone’s To Do list, never To Be Done.

So what’s different this time?

Check out this post by TechSmith’s Betsy Weber on the removal of FLV:

We’ve been listening to your feedback on our Forums, through our product feedback form, Twitter, Facebook, and via email. And, one of the things we heard after releasing Camtasia Studio v6 was that you wanted us to put back in support for the FLV video file format.

Well, I’m happy to report that we plan to release an update to Camtasia Studio as soon as possible and we will put back the FLV option. Our goal is to have Camtasia Studio v6.0.2 available to you by March. There will still be support for MPEG-4 in Camtasia Studio as well.

I think that, my friends is what we call a win-win situation.

–

As you’ll know if you’re a regular reader of the E-Learning Curve Blog, I use a range of content authoring tools to create elearning courseware. Primus inter pares is Camtasia by TechSmith. About two weeks ago, I downloaded and installed the trial version of Camtasia 6, which is a little unusual for me; in the past I have just bought the upgrade as soon as it was released.

This time it was a different: I heard discomfiting rumors over the Net that the functionality profile had changed, specifically that FLV had been replaced with MPEG4 as the asynchronous video streaming format in v6 of the product. As someone who relies on Adobe Connect to deliver much of my content to learners this was not good news, as Connect’s support for MPEG4 isn’t great. With this bit of news in mind, I decided to download the Cam6 trial to evaluate the latest version of the product.

As part of the evaluation experience, TechSmith’s Adam Stevenson contacted me (and a lot of other users no doubt) to ask me to contribute my experiences using the trial version of the product. Info is collected on a daily basis using a simple Google Docs form, and it enables TechSmith to capture users’ experiences with the trial including rants, raves and anything else you want to tell them. I think that this is a very positive (and obvious and sensible) way for software development companies to be connected to their current and potential customer base. In my view, their approach enables the development of a virtuous cycle between user and software provider which has the potential to benefit both parties – and ultimately learners, who should be the focus of our activities.

In the past, my experience has led me to be cynical of “we care a lot” exercises by organizations – sometimes I get the feeling that my well-considered comments end up filed in the circular filing cabinet – you know, the one marked Trash, or worse in electronic limbo at the bottom of someone’s To Do list, never To Be Done.

So what’s different this time?

Check out this post by TechSmith’s Betsy Weber on the removal of FLV:

We’ve been listening to your feedback on our Forums, through our product feedback form, Twitter, Facebook, and via email. And, one of the things we heard after releasing Camtasia Studio v6 was that you wanted us to put back in support for the FLV video file format.

Well, I’m happy to report that we plan to release an update to Camtasia Studio as soon as possible and we will put back the FLV option. Our goal is to have Camtasia Studio v6.0.2 available to you by March. There will still be support for MPEG-4 in Camtasia Studio as well.

I think that, my friends is what we call a win-win situation.

–

• Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?
• Shouldn’t they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?
• And then shouldn’t the learning organization become a driver for the organization?
• And like in the world of libraries don’t we need to market ourselves in this capacity?

Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?
The short answer is “Yes, with an if…”. Long answer is “No, with a but…”. Yes, learning professionals should be at the forefront of orienting and guiding knowledge workers in the use of read / write Web technologies. Knowledge work is, at it’s heart, about problem-solving, and knowledge workers are employed to utilize their skills to find solutions to organizational challenges. We can say that knowledge workers are performing at their optimum when they:

• use their deepest skills
• work on many projects at the same time
• know how to allocate their time
• can multiply the results of their efforts through soft factors such as emotional intelligence and trust (Francis Fukuyama, Manuel Castells).

If Web 2.0 technologies enable knowledge workers to undertake these tasks, I believe that it is in the remit of the learning and development arm of knowledge organizations to support this.
However, given that any such learning interventions are undertaken within organizations, there is a corporate responsibility to ensure that any learning initiatives to support learning about Web 2.0 technologies be endorsed by board-level approval of the program with all that entails, which should include

1. recognition for the initiative
2. acknowledgement that it may be difficult to capture metrics on knowledge worker performance enhancement attained through these technologies by more traditional assessment techniques
3. that the learning programs themselves will probably be non- or informal in character, as these Web 2.0 technologies are by their very nature, non- and informal
4. implementing Web 2.0 technologies will probably require substantial investments of time, expertise and capital.

Finding solutions to these challenges is difficult, and many organizations may not understand that this domain is too new to be properly understood at this time.

Shouldn’t they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?
In my experience, the “throw it over the wall and see where it lands” approach is a non-starter. While learning professionals are typically highly-motivated individuals who expend personal time and effort staying “ahead of the curve” in terms of their own skills and competencies, a “viral approach” to learning in this domain can only have success if the learning professional in question is highly influential within an organization (and probably a C-level executive).

For a “footsoldier” to attempt to modify work practices within a large organization would meet high levels of resistance, particularly from managers who have no desire to change production processes that probably work very well, given the potential disruptions entailed in transitioning to a more collaborative environment.

Shouldn’t the learning organization become a driver for the organization?
Most learning professionals would say “Yes”, most execs would (probably) say “No.”

In my view, organizations function best when the organization’s business goals are aligned with their learning goals; ideally the two should support and drive each other. If learning professionals can persuade the executive team that a Learning organization is an Earning organization, then they will usually receive the support to operationalize innovative learning initiatives.

Like in the world of libraries don’t we need to market ourselves in this capacity?
Yes, yes, and yes again.

If you are familiar with the 1989 motion picture Field of Dreams, you’ll know the mantra of one of the lead characters is “if you build it, they will come.”

Yes, if you build it (the learning initiative) they will come.

…But only if they know it’s there.

I believe that it is the responsibility of learning professionals both in an individual as well as in a departmental capacity to broadcast what they do and they services they offer at every opportunity. Without resorting to spin, lies, and weasel words, the only way your voice will be heard in the bustle of the marketplace (whether internally within an organization or externally facing) is to “say it loud, and say it proud” about your learning and development offerings and services.

Use what ever resources are at your disposal to do so, and don’t forget that as a trainer, you’re probably in a position to influence a wider range of individuals in your workplace than those in any other department, except perhaps for Human Resources and ICT.

–

• Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?
• Shouldn’t they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?
• And then shouldn’t the learning organization become a driver for the organization?
• And like in the world of libraries don’t we need to market ourselves in this capacity?

Should workplace learning professionals be leading the charge around these new work literacies?
The short answer is “Yes, with an if…”. Long answer is “No, with a but…”. Yes, learning professionals should be at the forefront of orienting and guiding knowledge workers in the use of read / write Web technologies. Knowledge work is, at it’s heart, about problem-solving, and knowledge workers are employed to utilize their skills to find solutions to organizational challenges. We can say that knowledge workers are performing at their optimum when they:

• use their deepest skills
• work on many projects at the same time
• know how to allocate their time
• can multiply the results of their efforts through soft factors such as emotional intelligence and trust (Francis Fukuyama, Manuel Castells).

If Web 2.0 technologies enable knowledge workers to undertake these tasks, I believe that it is in the remit of the learning and development arm of knowledge organizations to support this.
However, given that any such learning interventions are undertaken within organizations, there is a corporate responsibility to ensure that any learning initiatives to support learning about Web 2.0 technologies be endorsed by board-level approval of the program with all that entails, which should include

1. recognition for the initiative
2. acknowledgement that it may be difficult to capture metrics on knowledge worker performance enhancement attained through these technologies by more traditional assessment techniques
3. that the learning programs themselves will probably be non- or informal in character, as these Web 2.0 technologies are by their very nature, non- and informal
4. implementing Web 2.0 technologies will probably require substantial investments of time, expertise and capital.

Finding solutions to these challenges is difficult, and many organizations may not understand that this domain is too new to be properly understood at this time.

Shouldn’t they be starting with themselves and helping to develop it throughout the organizations?
In my experience, the “throw it over the wall and see where it lands” approach is a non-starter. While learning professionals are typically highly-motivated individuals who expend personal time and effort staying “ahead of the curve” in terms of their own skills and competencies, a “viral approach” to learning in this domain can only have success if the learning professional in question is highly influential within an organization (and probably a C-level executive).

For a “footsoldier” to attempt to modify work practices within a large organization would meet high levels of resistance, particularly from managers who have no desire to change production processes that probably work very well, given the potential disruptions entailed in transitioning to a more collaborative environment.

Shouldn’t the learning organization become a driver for the organization?
Most learning professionals would say “Yes”, most execs would (probably) say “No.”

In my view, organizations function best when the organization’s business goals are aligned with their learning goals; ideally the two should support and drive each other. If learning professionals can persuade the executive team that a Learning organization is an Earning organization, then they will usually receive the support to operationalize innovative learning initiatives.

Like in the world of libraries don’t we need to market ourselves in this capacity?
Yes, yes, and yes again.

If you are familiar with the 1989 motion picture Field of Dreams, you’ll know the mantra of one of the lead characters is “if you build it, they will come.”

Yes, if you build it (the learning initiative) they will come.

But only if they know it’s there.

I believe that it is the responsibility of learning professionals both in an individual as well as in a departmental capacity to broadcast what they do and they services they offer at every opportunity. Without resorting to spin, lies, and weasel words, the only way your voice will be heard in the bustle of the marketplace (whether internally within an organization or externally facing) is to “say it loud, and say it proud” about your learning and development offerings and services.

Use what ever resources are at your disposal to do so, and don’t forget that as a trainer, you’re probably in a position to influence a wider range of individuals in your workplace than those in any other department, except perhaps for Human Resources and ICT.

–

Now read on…

Aligning with their stated aim to become a major force in so-called webtop software, Adobe released two new products on Monday: Acrobat.com and Acrobat 9. Product manager Erik Larson has stated that Acrobat.com is another big step towards bringing more desktop-like experiences to the Web.

It is [Adobe's] intent to blur a lot of the lines of the past.

Acrobat.com is a combination of three online services:

• Adobe ConnectNow (a “lite” version of Acrobat Connect 7 for web conferencing and desktop collaboration)
• Adobe Buzzword (and online word processor)
• Adobe Share (online file sharing)

In my view, this represents a serious attempt by Adobe to compete with many of Google’s Web 2.0 tools like Google Docs, YouTube and Picasa, as well as solutions like Microsoft Office Live Workspace, WebEx, and GoTo Meeting, usually associated with organizational collaboration.

Buzzword
Buzzword is the default word processor in the suite. it enables multiple collaborators to edit and comment documents. As well as providing a pretty nice WYSIWYG editor, tabs along the bottom of the UI represent the people who have accessed the document most recently, as well as their status (author, reviewer, etc.).

Uniquely for a web-based word processor, Buzzword paginates documents, supports a range of fonts, and lets you generate a pretty good equivalent to a PDF document. However, this is still in beta, so you will likely encounter some frustrations if you are used to creating documents in a desktop environment (i.e. during cut-and-paste operations) and there is no easy way to export a document to a blog or other Web publishing system other than via the previously mentioned cut-and-paste.

However, I have found this to be the case in similar apps such as Windows Live Writer (which I’m using to create this post); the software is still buggy – I’m happy to live with this in a beta app, though some might not be.

Adobe Share
This is a file-sharing application that focuses on document sharing.
You get one gigabyte of free storage, and it enables you to embed a Flash preview of your documents into any Web page (quite similar to FlashPaper). Adobe say that this enables anyone to download and print a PDF of the file (though I have yet to test this myself). I guess that you could describe this tool as ‘Flickr on steroids’, given Share’s facility to make available a range of document types in an environment that those familiar with that tool can easily appreciate.

ConnectNow
I love ConnectNow. I’ve long been an advocate of online communication and collaboration tools as a powerful solution to the challenges organizations face, particularly if employees work in distributed teams, as well as for hosting training and non-formal learning interventions. I have to declare an interest here: the organization I work for relies heavily on Adobe Connect Pro (currently version 6) for training and informational purposes and I think that it’s a great system, not least because it uses the Flash plug-in, so no large player downloads or quirky clients to be installed.

Even in it’s cut-down form, making this functionality publicly available is going to be very popular (no more excuses not to talk to the relations in New Zealand!).
ConnectNow allows up to three people have free online meetings, with

• screen sharing
• desktop video
• voice conferencing
• IM-type chat
• white-boarding

Note that significant portions of Connect’s functionality have been removed, including the recording facility, as well as the asynchronous meeting playback facility. You can also forget about hosting your on-demand e-learning content on the system, because that’s been excised too, though that doesn’t mean that you can’t use the tool for synchronous learning, such as small-group online mentoring and so on.

Interestingly, ConnectNow (kind of) replicates Connect Pro’s ability to integrate with telephone conferencing system via a fee-based toll line (currently only available in some territories like the US, UK, Germany etc). Now that the Flex-based UI uses Adobe Flash 9 rather than Flash 6, the screen looks great – a small thing, but it’s attractiveness will certainly enhance users’ enjoyment of the product.

Other commentators have suggested that the business model is clearly pay-for-what-you-use:

while right now the service is just a free beta, restrictions on things like file space and number of users will presumably be addressed by monthly subscriptions – moving Adobe from a licensor of desktop software to a web-based software-as-a-service company. We’ve already seen that with Photoshop Express, and with Acrobat.com, Adobe now has all of their major applications available in a Web-based version too.

I would assert that while this may be the plan at the moment, the ubiquity of other free-to-use applications (not to mention the competition in this increasingly hot marketspace) will force Adobe to either make these tools available gratis or include so many extra features to entice paying users that Acrobat.com will becomes a professional-level hosted solution, which presumably is not the consumer market that Adobe are attempting to dominate.

–

Now read on…

Aligning with their stated aim to become a major force in so-called webtop software, Adobe released two new products on Monday: Acrobat.com and Acrobat 9. Product manager Erik Larson has stated that Acrobat.com is another big step towards bringing more desktop-like experiences to the Web.

It is [Adobe's] intent to blur a lot of the lines of the past.

Acrobat.com is a combination of three online services:

• Adobe ConnectNow (a “lite” version of Acrobat Connect 7 for web conferencing and desktop collaboration)
• Adobe Buzzword (and online word processor)
• Adobe Share (online file sharing)

In my view, this represents a serious attempt by Adobe to compete with many of Google’s Web 2.0 tools like Google Docs, YouTube and Picasa, as well as solutions like Microsoft Office Live Workspace, WebEx, and GoTo Meeting, usually associated with organizational collaboration.

Buzzword
Buzzword is the default word processor in the suite. it enables multiple collaborators to edit and comment documents. As well as providing a pretty nice WYSIWYG editor, tabs along the bottom of the UI represent the people who have accessed the document most recently, as well as their status (author, reviewer, etc.).

Uniquely for a web-based word processor, Buzzword paginates documents, supports a range of fonts, and lets you generate a pretty good equivalent to a PDF document. However, this is still in beta, so you will likely encounter some frustrations if you are used to creating documents in a desktop environment (i.e. during cut-and-paste operations) and there is no easy way to export a document to a blog or other Web publishing system other than via the previously mentioned cut-and-paste.

However, I have found this to be the case in similar apps such as Windows Live Writer (which I’m using to create this post); the software is still buggy – I’m happy to live with this in a beta app, though some might not be.

Adobe Share
This is a file-sharing application that focuses on document sharing.
You get one gigabyte of free storage, and it enables you to embed a Flash preview of your documents into any Web page (quite similar to FlashPaper). Adobe say that this enables anyone to download and print a PDF of the file (though I have yet to test this myself). I guess that you could describe this tool as ‘Flickr on steroids’, given Share’s facility to make available a range of document types in an environment that those familiar with that tool can easily appreciate.

ConnectNow
I love ConnectNow. I’ve long been an advocate of online communication and collaboration tools as a powerful solution to the challenges organizations face, particularly if employees work in distributed teams, as well as for hosting training and non-formal learning interventions. I have to declare an interest here: the organization I work for relies heavily on Adobe Connect Pro (currently version 6) for training and informational purposes and I think that it’s a great system, not least because it uses the Flash plug-in, so no large player downloads or quirky clients to be installed.

Even in it’s cut-down form, making this functionality publicly available is going to be very popular (no more excuses not to talk to the relations in New Zealand!).
ConnectNow allows up to three people have free online meetings, with

• screen sharing
• desktop video
• voice conferencing
• IM-type chat
• white-boarding

Note that significant portions of Connect’s functionality have been removed, including the recording facility, as well as the asynchronous meeting playback facility. You can also forget about hosting your on-demand e-learning content on the system, because that’s been excised too, though that doesn’t mean that you can’t use the tool for synchronous learning, such as small-group online mentoring and so on.

Interestingly, ConnectNow (kind of) replicates Connect Pro’s ability to integrate with telephone conferencing system via a fee-based toll line (currently only available in some territories like the US, UK, Germany etc). Now that the Flex-based UI uses Adobe Flash 9 rather than Flash 6, the screen looks great – a small thing, but it’s attractiveness will certainly enhance users’ enjoyment of the product.

Other commentators have suggested that the business model is clearly pay-for-what-you-use:

while right now the service is just a free beta, restrictions on things like file space and number of users will presumably be addressed by monthly subscriptions – moving Adobe from a licensor of desktop software to a web-based software-as-a-service company. We’ve already seen that with Photoshop Express, and with Acrobat.com, Adobe now has all of their major applications available in a Web-based version too.

I would assert that while this may be the plan at the moment, the ubiquity of other free-to-use applications (not to mention the competition in this increasingly hot marketspace) will force Adobe to either make these tools available gratis or include so many extra features to entice paying users that Acrobat.com will becomes a professional-level hosted solution, which presumably is not the consumer market that Adobe are attempting to dominate.

–