How to Do an Instructional Analysis - Intellectual Skills

How do you know what to teach, train, or design into your elearning? In this video, I share one strategy for breaking down and clarifying what to teach. Enjoy!

My Learning Design YouTube Channel

This post is for the 11 people who actually read blogs, still. :)

I am resurrecting one of my old YouTube channels - Learning Design. I created it about 7 years ago and made a few videos for an old, now non-existent master's degree program, and some of the videos were fairly popular. I've just recently gotten interested in doing more video creation, and I plan to post my videos to there. I'll probably share them with you 11 people here, if I remember to...

Here is one of the videos that I snaked from my other channel and posted to Learning Design. Hope you enjoy it!

Episode 06: Learning Professionals in the Workplace

Sometimes learning professionals get put into the "training box" and aren't able to truly partner effectively with others in their organization. In this episode of the Learning Lounge Podcast, Sonya Overstreet shares her strategies for creating relationships that produce results for the organization. There are some GREAT insights from Sonya - definitely worth listening! A full description of the podcast is below. Enjoy!

Podcast Description

Instructional design and training are fast-growing fields, especially within workplace settings, but the role of a learning professional is so much more than just designing and delivering necessary employee training. In this episode, we talk with Sonya Overstreet about creative strategies for taking workplace learning outside the box.

Sonya Overstreet is a Learning and Development Manager and Certified Performance Technologist with over 20 years of experience in engineering, performance improvement, and workplace learning. She holds a Master of Science in Instructional Design and Performance Technology from our program here at Franklin University.Through her career, Sonya managed the development of technical training within a variety of industries. She has been responsible for executing learning and development strategies to ensure the building of employee capabilities, cultivating organizational knowledge management and promoting organizational performance. Sonya has presented papers at the American Society for Engineering Education, Industry and Education Collaboration and International Society for Performance Improvement conferences. Sonya holds a Master of Science in Instructional Design and Performance Technology. Her awards include Technology Rising Star 2017 from the Women of Color STEM Conference and the Excellence in Practices Operation 2016 from her organization.

Episode 05: Collaborating with Instructional Design Clients

Working with clients as an instructional designer can be tricky, but there are great strategies for building positive consulting relationships. In this episode of the Learning Lounge Podcast, Niccole Hyatt shares her experiences and advice for effectively working with instructional design clients. Enjoy!

New Article: Investigating Instructional Design Management and Leadership Competencies - a Delphi Study

This article was first published in the Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. 

Posted here with permission.

---

Investigating Instructional Design Management and Leadership Competencies - a Delphi Study

---

Joel Gardner

Franklin University

Joel.l.gardner@gmail.com 

Lewis Chongwony

Franklin University

Lewis.chongwony@franklin.edu

Tawana Washington

The Ohio State University

Washington.181@osu.edu

Abstract
Research in instructional design and educational technology journals typically focuses on the theories, technologies, and processes related to practice of instructional design. There is little research emphasis, however, on leadership and management of instructional design in higher education. Investigating the competencies associated with effective leadership and management of instructional design is critical as it would provide the field with guidance on how to more effectively prepare and train instructional design leaders and managers in higher education. In this study, we explored the competencies required for an instructional design manager to be effective in higher education settings. We used a Delphi study surveying managers and leaders of instructional design through an anonymous consensus-building process consisting of two rounds of surveys. Results identified eight major categories with 64 competencies as relevant for leading and managing instructional design in higher education. Managers and leaders surveyed identified communication, project management, and visioning and strategic alignment as integral competencies to be successful in leading and managing instructional design. We discuss the implications of this research and provide recommendations for research, practice, and education of future instructional design professionals.
Introduction

Instructional designers are playing an increasingly important role in improving teaching quality in higher education (Rubley, 2016). There are now roughly 13,000 instructional designers working in higher education (Intentional Futures, 2016). Some scholars assert that instructional designers are particularly well equipped to lead in higher education, noting that quality online instruction will be a key feature of the future of higher education (Ashbaugh & Piña, 2014; Brigance, 2011; Shaw, 2012). In higher education, as in most environments, a director or manager typically leads instructional designers. Many university-trained instructional designers will likely become managers who lead and direct the work of instructional design (Ashbaugh &  Piña, 2014; Merrill, 2007), and might therefore benefit from management and leadership courses within instructional design university curricula.

Numerous research studies show the impact--both positive and negative--that a manager’s or leader’s behavior and competency have on an employee’s engagement at work (e.g. Madlock & Kennedy-Lightsey, 2010; Wang & Hsieh, 2013; Xu & Cooper Thomas, 2011). This impact likely applies to employees serving in an instructional design role. However, the research on instructional design leadership and management is sparse. Da Silva, Diana, and Catapan (2015) conducted a search for recent articles related to instructional design and management and found few articles that discussed both topics, though project management--a component of management--was identified as a common theme in the instructional design literature. Recognizing a need to investigate instructional designer leadership competencies, Ashbaugh (2011) and Ashbaugh and Piña (2014) gathered the expertise of instructional design practitioners in a Delphi study. This study resulted in the 7 Ps of leadership for instructional design (7PL4ID), which includes the following characteristics: (1) Prescience – envision and promote a vision of the future; (2) Preventive or proactive thinking – strategize to anticipate future problems and opportunities; (3) Provision for unexpected and unknown – have backup plans and resources in reserve; (4) Personality – collaborate, communicate effectively, and show care for others; (5) Productivity – work hard and expect excellence from others; (6) Psychological/emotional toughness – make difficult decisions based on sound reasoning; and (7) Personal convictions—exhibit  consistent, moral behavior. However, this study appears to be focused on leadership by instructional design professionals broadly, and not specifically on positional leaders and managers of instructional designers in higher education. Researchers note a need to clarify and validate the specific competencies associated with effective leadership and management of instructional design (Ashbaugh & Piña, 2014).

In the related field of distance education, it is clear that leadership and management have not been adequately researched. A Delphi study involving international distance education experts identified research on management and change as important to moving the field forward (Zawacki-Richter, 2009). Beaudoin (2003) noted “it seems we have not yet paid adequate attention to new roles required of leaders” (p.1) in distance education. While some authors identify leadership theories that might apply to higher education (e.g., Dashtahi, Ekrami, Navehebrahim, and Sarmad, 2016; Nworie, 2012), the majority of the literature focused on management and organization in distance education have been interpretive rather than empirical in nature (Dashtahi et al., 2016), suggesting a need for more empirical research in this area.

Given that a manager likely impacts the success and engagement of instructional designers and that research on effective management and leadership of instructional designers is lacking, we conducted an exploratory study on what these competencies are. In this study, we used a Delphi study surveying managers and leaders. The research questions for this study include the following:

1. What competencies do managers of instructional designers believe are necessary for effectively leading and managing instructional design in higher education?
2. Which of these competencies do managers of instructional designers believe are most important for effectively leading and managing instructional design in higher education?

Method
We used a Delphi methodology for this study (Brill, Bishop, and Walker, 2006; Hasson, Keeney, & McKenna, 2000). The Delphi method is an approach to building a consensus of experts’ opinions through multiple rounds of surveys (Hasson et al., 2000).  A Delphi study typically includes (a) an initial survey that collects qualitative comments, (b) a second questionnaire that seeks to quantify and statistically analyze participants’ responses, and (c) sometimes a third or even a fourth survey that seeks to further quantify and analyze those responses until consensus is obtained (Hasson et al., 2000). Brill et al. (2006) have noted that a Delphi study “is a particularly good research method for deriving consensus among a group of individuals having expertise on a particular topic when information sought is subjective and where participants are separated by physical distance” ( p. 8).
Participant recruitment
To gather participants for our study, we went to the Department of Education’s Database for Post-secondary accredited institutions and programs (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). We used a recent list of accredited organizations within the last quarter, which included 2,591 total instances of organizations seeking institutional accreditation during that period. We then cleaned the data to focus on four-year institutions, remove repetitions, and remove those with no website listed in the spreadsheet.
We then conducted a random sampling procedure to select 800 of these schools, assuming that only a percentage of the universities employ instructional designers. We collected the names and email addresses of potential participants by reviewing the institutional website to find whether instructional designers and their leaders existed. To focus the population, we included any school that was a bachelor-level or higher degree granting institution and that had an instructional design manager on staff.  This process yielded 148 potential participants. We recruited these participants through an email soliciting their participation in the survey. As an incentive, we offered participants the opportunity to be entered into a drawing to receive one of two $25 gift cards.


Instruments
We employed two instruments in this study. Our first survey (Round 1) gathered the expertise of the participants regarding their perception of the key competencies for leading and managing instructional designers based on questions posed. We designed the second survey (Round 2) to quantify and further analyze the importance of the identified competencies that emerged from qualitative analysis of round 1 survey.

Round 1
The purpose of the round 1 survey in a Delphi study is to gather the expertise of the participating experts (Brill et al., 2006; Hasson et al., 2000). Our goal was to identify the competencies that managers of instructional designers believe are necessary for effectively leading and managing instructional design in higher education. We designed the round 1 survey to collect qualitative comments in response to the questions posed.

When conducting a Delphi study, it is important to direct participants’ responses toward the stated goal of the study, which in this case was the research topics identified for the study. We did not want to focus the attention of the participants too specifically, so we attempted to use definitions of leadership and management that were somewhat general in nature and that reflected the definitions commonly seen in management and leadership literature. We used the following definitions. Leadership is influencing others to accomplish mutually agreed upon purposes for the organization. It entails possessing the ability to: (a) rally others to accomplish a common purpose, (b) forge a path for self and others to follow, and (c) inspire others to productive action. Management is the act/process of coordinating people and/or resources efficiently to achieve or to reach organizational goals. It involves five basic functions of planning, organizing, directing, staffing, and controlling. We made the definitions as open-ended as possible to enable the participants to share their expertise.

We solicited candidates by email using the email address identified in the candidate selection process. The email summarized the study and solicited the candidate’s participation in the study. The linked round 1 survey included the informed consent form and the survey items. After participants completed the informed consent form, we provided the definitions to give general guidance to participants on what the researchers meant by leadership and management in the context of this study and then posed the following questions:

1. What management knowledge do you believe a manager of instructional designers in higher education must possess in order to be successful?
2. What management skills do you believe a manager of instructional designers in higher education must possess in order to be successful?
3. What leadership knowledge do you believe a manager of instructional designers in higher education must possess in order to be successful?
4. What leadership skills do you believe a manager of instructional designers in higher education must possess in order to be successful?
5. What additional knowledge and skills must an instructional design leader know and possess in order to be successful?
   

We kept the round 1 survey open for a two-week period, emailing participants after a week to remind them of our request for participation.

Round 2
Our goal for the round 2 survey was to identify which competencies managers of instructional designers believe are most important for effectively leading and managing instructional design in higher education. We developed the round 2 survey to validate the importance of the themes identified in the round 1survey. We included the informed consent form on the initial page and created several items to gather more detailed demographic information about each of the participants. The round 2 survey then asked participants to rate the importance of each of the 64 individual competencies identified using the following scale: not important, somewhat important, moderately important, very important, and extremely important.

To solicit participation for the round 2 survey, we again emailed the 148 potential participants and opened the survey for a total of two weeks with an initial email inviting their participation and a follow-up email after one week.

The round 2 survey began with several demographic items. The other categories as determined by the first survey were teaching, learning, design, and technology expertise competencies (10 items); project management competencies (13 items); communication competencies (7 items); interpersonal and people skills competencies (6 items); inspiring, motivating, and empowering others (8 items); environmental and organizational awareness (5 items); visioning and strategic alignment (7 items) and organizational politics and relationships (8 items). In total, there were 70 items on the questionnaire.

Reliability and internal consistency of the scale used in our questionnaire representing various categories of competencies was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha (Cronbach, 1971). The items in the categories had high internal consistency as follows: teaching, learning, design, and technology expertise consisted of 10 items (α = .748). Project management consisted of 13 items (α = .840), while communication consisted of 7 items (α = .888). Interpersonal and people skills consisted of 6 items (α = .611); inspiring, motivating, and empowering others consisted of 8 items (α = .861); environmental and organizational awareness consisted of 5 items (α = .730); visioning and strategic alignment consisted of 7 items (α = .768) and organizational politics and relationships consisted of 8 items (α = .885). The overall internal consistency and reliability among all 64 items was (α = .942), greater than the recommended 0.70 (Nunually, 1978).

Results

Round 1 results
Round 1 survey had a total of 22 participants out of 148, for a response rate of 15%. Eighteen percent of these participants reported 0-2 years of managing and leading instructional design, 32% had 3-5 years, 23% had 6-8 years, 9% had 9-11 years, and another 18% had more than 12 years.

We conducted a thematic analysis of the round 1 survey results using constant comparative analysis to create the themes by iteratively (a) reviewing the gathered data, (b) identifying themes within the data, (c) developing categories based on these themes, and (d) coding and sorting the data to categorize specific comments into those themes. Following the advice of Brill et al. (2006), all three research team members completed individual analyses and then met as a research team to compare our findings and consolidate those themes into a comprehensive set, being careful to review the raw data to remain true to the comments of our experts.

For example, as we reviewed the data, we found that respondents included comments such as these relating to project management:  “Project management cycle,” “backwards planning ability to manage timing of projects,” and “Knowing how to manage large projects, assigning tasks as necessary to meet deadlines & goals; knowing how to coordinate and combine multiple small parts in order to make a cohesive whole.” As a research team, we grouped these comments into a project management theme and category. We then placed all responses relevant to that theme within that category. See Appendix A for a larger sample of the raw data and emerging categories.

This thematic analysis resulted in eight themes or categories: (1) teaching, learning, design, and technology expertise; (2) project management; (3) communication; (4) interpersonal and people skills; (5) inspiring, motivating, and empowering others; (6) environmental and organizational awareness; (7) visioning and strategic alignment; and (8) organizational politics and relationships. Within these categories, we identified 64 statements of competence drawn from the comments of the survey participants. Appendix B includes the resulting categories and the competencies associated with each category.

Round 2 results
Twenty-three participants responded to the round 2 survey, a response rate of 16%. Of this, 52% of respondents had 0-5 years of experience leading or managing instructional designers, and 17% had 6 - 8 years. Additionally, 31% reported over 9 years of experience leading instructional designers. Further, 61% of participants reported that they lead between 1 - 3 designers, another 17% lead 4 - 6 designers, and furthermore 22% of participants lead 7 - 9 designers. In terms of type of institution, 61 % work in public institutions and 39% work in private non-profit institution. Also, 44% of our respondents were female, 56% male. Regarding the highest level of education attained, 35% of respondents had doctorates, 52% had masters, 4% had bachelors, and another 9% reported other as their highest level of education.

Importance of competencies
We used descriptive statistics to determine the relative importance of each of the 64 competencies identified in the first survey. The results ranged from the highest mean (M = 4.81) to lowest mean (M = 2.95) out of five possible points. Table 2 summarizes the top ranked competencies, with communicate effectively in writing and in speaking across all levels of management; and accept change and help to implement it at the institution rated highest at M=4.81.

Table 2. The 15 top ranked leadership and management competencies.




The lowest rated competency was solve technical problems (M = 2.95). This was followed by understand personality styles; and create a budget with M = 3.43 and 3.52 respectively. Draw on experience teaching in higher education; and know classroom design principles followed with M = 3.57 and 3.62 respectively. Table 3 summarizes the lowest ranked competencies in this study.

Table 3. The 5 lowest ranked leadership and management competencies.



The competencies in the communication category rated highest with M = 4.68. This was followed by project management, visioning and strategic alignment competencies at M = 4.33 and 4.29 respectively. Organizational politics and relationships; environmental and organizational awareness; and inspiring, motivating, and empowering others followed. See Table 4 below. Appendix Bincludes all competencies rated in this study and their relative ranking by survey participants.


Table 4. Overall Rating of Competency Categories



Interpretation and discussion
Our first goal was to determine which competencies managers of instructional designers believe are necessary for effectively leading and managing instructional design in higher education. While our results are preliminary, they have identified eight categories of competency and several individual competencies.

When comparing the instructional designer competencies espoused by the International Board of Standards for Training, Performance, and Instruction (Koszalka, Russ-Eft, & Reiser, 2012) with the competencies in this study, there are some clear similarities. For example, there are clear similarities in the categories of Professional Foundations, Design and Development, Evaluation and Implementation, and Management competencies. However, the way in which these competencies are applied is likely different due to the clearly different context in which the skills are applied. Two categories identified in this study – (1) environmental and organizational awareness, and (2) visioning and strategic alignment – are not reflected in the IBSTPI competencies. If many of the graduates of instructional design programs become leaders and managers, then educators might consider including these competencies in their associated graduate program goals. Appendix C provides a comparison of IBSTPI instructional designer competencies and those identified in this study.

Our second goal was to identify the competencies that managers of instructional designers believe are most important for effectively leading and managing instructional design in higher education. We identified Communication, Project Management, and Visioning and Strategic Alignment as the top three competency categories for the study. We were surprised by the relatively low ranking of the Teaching, Learning, Design, and Technology Expertise categories, as compared to the ranking of the other competencies. Still, participants gave it an overall ranking of 3.9, just below the threshold for very important, indicating that these lower-ranking competencies are still important in instructional design leadership and management.

In reflecting on the results of this study, we believe it is important to compare what we have found with what has been written previously regarding instructional design leadership, specifically comparing these results with the 7PL4ID model (Ashbaugh & Piña, 2014). Table 5 provides a comparison of the 7PL4ID model (Ashbaugh & Piña, 2014) and the results of this study. The term Prescience has similar meaning to the Visioning and Strategic Alignment category, and Preventive or Proactive Thinking in the 7PL4ID is related to our Environmental and Organizational Awareness category. Personality, as described by Ashbaugh and Piña (2014) aligns with the Communication, Interpersonal Skills and People Skills, and Politics and Relationships categories. Also, 7PL4ID’s Productivity appears to relate to Inspiring, Motivating, and Empowering Others, as well as Project Management. There did not immediately appear to be a relationship with the Provision for Unexpected and Unknown, Psychological/Emotional Toughness, or Personal Convictions categories described in 7PL4ID. The category of Teaching, Learning, Design, and Technology Expertise, our lowest-ranked category, did not immediately appear to align with 7PL4IDs. 

Table 5. Comparing the 7PL4ID and the results of this study.




Implications for practice
Universities and employers of instructional designers may benefit from considering these competencies when hiring and developing instructional design leaders and managers. Although the instructional design-specific competencies were rated lower than other competencies by those surveyed in this study, the competencies were still rated as very important by the participants.  This implies that design, technology, and learning-specific competencies should be considered when hiring managers and leaders of instructional design.

Implications for educators of instructional designers
In instructional design programs, the focus of educators is typically to prepare graduates to design instructional interventions (Koszalka, Russ-Eft, & Reiser, 2012).  However, instructional designers often assume a director or manager role in higher education and might benefit from formal leadership and management training in their studies. If we do not concern ourselves with the development of leadership and management capacities, we acquiesce leadership to others who may have less expertise in learning, instruction, processes, and systems for supporting and improving learning. We as a field should assume a greater role in leadership and decision-making in higher education.

Limitations
This study includes several limitations. We only studied the perspective of managers of instructional designers and not the views of others, including their managers or the people they lead.  Another limitation is the low response rate of the first survey. The sample size of participants also limited our ability to draw conclusions with certainty based on the results.  This survey only provides a snapshot of the overall competencies deemed important to effectively lead and manage design by instructional design leaders and managers. How they are applied may change from person to person and potentially change over time. These results are limited to instructional design leadership in higher education settings, and the results may not be generalizable to other environments such as business or government. Further research would clarify the importance and impact of these competencies in other settings.

Future work
Our goal was to identify the competencies that instructional design leaders and managers believe are important for leading and managing instructional designers in higher education. More research is needed to further clarify these competencies, including the situations, contexts, and strategies in which these competencies are employed. Analyzing the job descriptions of leaders of instructional designers would yield greater understanding of these competencies. It would be meaningful to investigate the competencies identified by those who manage and are managed by leaders of instructional designers. In addition, further research related to the importance of design, teaching, and learning competencies in leading instructional designers is warranted. Research of this kind would help clarify this and other studies on leadership and provide more evidence related to training in instructional design leadership and management competencies instructional design programs.

Conclusion
Leading and managing instructional design in higher education requires different skills than traditional instructional design skills. In this study, we have investigated these leadership and management skills. More research on the competencies associated with leading and managing instructional designers is warranted. In instructional design and distance education in higher education, we must be aware of these competences so that we can effectively prepare our students and employees to lead.

---

References
Ashbaugh, M. L. (2011). Online pedagogical quality questioned: Probing instructional designers’ perceptions of leadership competencies critical to practice (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest (UMI No. 3460621)

Ashbaugh, M. L. & Piña, A. (2014). Improving instructional design processes through leadership-thinking and modeling. In B. Hokanson & A. Gibbons (Eds.), Design in educational technology: Design thinking, design process and the design studio (pp. 223-248). New York, NY: Springer.

Beaudoin, M. F. (2003). Distance education leadership for the new century. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 6(2), 2003.

Brigance, S. K. (2011). Leadership in online learning in higher education: Why instructional designers for online learning should lead the way. Performance Improvement, 50(10), 43-48.

Brill, J. M., Bishop, M. J., & Walker, A. E. (2006). The competencies and characteristics required of an effective project manager: A web-based Delphi study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(2), 115-140.

Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. American Council on Education, Washington, DC, pp. 443-507.

Dashtahi, A. K., Ekrami, M., Navehebrahim, A., & Sarmad, M. R. (2016). Application of leadership theories in higher distance education leadership. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 1(1), 1087-1097.

da Silva, A. R. L., Diana, J. B., & Catapan, A. H. (2015). Management and instructional design: Building intersections. US-China Education Review, 5(2), 133-138.

Intentional Futures. (2016). Instructional design in higher education: A report on the role, workflow, and experience of instructional designers. Retrieved from https://intentionalfutures.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Instructional-Design-in-Higher-Education-Report.pdf

Hasson, F., Keeney, S., & McKenna, H. (2000). Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(4), 1008-1015.

Koszalka, T. A., Russ-Eft, D. F., Reiser, R. (2013). Instructional design competencies: The standards (4th ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Madlock, P. E., & Kennedy-Lightsey, C. (2010). The effects of supervisors’ verbal aggressiveness and mentoring on their subordinates. Journal of Business Communication, 47(1), 42-62. doi:10.1177/0021943609353511

Merrill, M. (2007). The proper study of instructional design. In J. V. Dempsey & R. Reiser (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (2nd ed., pp. 336-341). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Nworie, J. (2012). Applying leadership theories to distance education leadership. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 15(4), n4.

Rubley, J. N. (2016). Instructional designers in higher ed: Changing the course of next-generation learning. Washington, D.C.: Chronicle of Higher Education.

Rivard, S. & Huff, S. L. (1988). Factors of success for end-user computing. Communications of the ACM, 31(5), 552-561.

Shaw, K. (2012). Leadership through instructional design in higher education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 15(3), n3.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education. (n.d.) The database of accredited postsecondary institutions and programs. Retrieved from https://ope.ed.gov/accreditation/

Xu, J., & Cooper Thomas, H. (2011). How can leaders achieve high employee engagement?. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(4), 399-416.

Wang, D. S., & Hsieh, C. C. (2013). The effect of authentic leadership on employee trust and employee engagement. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41(4), 613-624.

West, R. E. & Borup, J. (2014). An analysis of a decade of research in 10 instructional design and technology journals. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 545-556.
Zawacki-Richter, O. (2009). Research areas in distance education: A Delphi study. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3), 1.


Appendix A: Raw Data Coding Sheet – Delphi StudySurvey 1 with Coding (Questions 1 and 3).

Question 1: What management knowledge do you believe a manager of instructional designers in higher education must possess in order to be successful?

Project management cycle

How to budget, how to set priorities, how to create workflow processes, how to track workflow processes

people skills; operational knowledge; understand how academic technology can be used to educate someone

I don't believe that the management knowledge required is distinct to IDs in higher education. Managing people requires the manager to be proficient with institutional structures, policies, culture, mission/vision, and the vertical in which they operate (higher ed here). It also requires the manager to know the direct reports they are managing: what their goals are, how they fit within the model, where they want to grow and develop, how they function with the team, and what their strengths are. A manager should understand motivational techniques, basics of human resource management, and a variety of performance improvement strategies.

backwards planning ability to manage timing of projects

Deep knowledge of ID practice (design skills and theory), project management strategies,

Understanding the principles of sound pedagogy

skills needed by staff, workflow solution for instructional design process, monitor progress, understanding of workload

collaborative leadership styles; servant leadership styles; knowledge of how resources are located at the central and sub-unity levels

 (So much depends on the definition of "instructional design" you're employing. In higher education, there are different ways of understanding this work. The term is not used synonymously in all contexts.) In addition to the usual things all managers need? How to motivate people to orient themselves to instructional design work in ways that align with the mission of my center; how to identify the right instructional designer for the task at hand; how to identify appropriate professional development opportunities for instructional designers (not always a simple matter)

how to organize work teams, how to match skills with needs

Knowing how to manage large projects, assigning tasks as necessary to meet deadlines & goals; knowing how to coordinate and combine multiple small parts in order to make a cohesive whole.

The manager must know how to manage technical employees, who tend to be more independent workers than in some other fields. The manager should have an equal or superior knowledge of instructional design to also be an educator.

Question 3: What leadership knowledge do you believe a manager of instructional designers in higher education must possess in order to be successful?

Strategic thinking, visioning, leading others, leading change and goal/objective attainment

motivational theory, leadership styles, personality styles

Visionary; delegation; persuasion; strategy; communicator; change agent

To be successful leaders, managers must have knowledge of ID theory and practice, knowledge of scholarship in teaching and learning, awareness of industry trends and technologies, knowledge of where instructional deficits lay in the industry, and knowledge of their own biases in decision making.

motivational techniques

Importance of short- vs long-term planning, not much you can teach here: intuitive observation of good leaders and awareness of strategies that work or not

Knowing team's strengths and weaknesses

how to get buy in, what motivates people,

collaborative leadership; servant leadership; motivation;

theories of motivation and how they align with instructional development work

organizational awareness

Understanding motivational principles and team dynamics. I think that the manager of instructional designers needs only know the basics of leadership.

I think that the manager of instructional designers needs only know the basics of leadership.

---

Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Volume XXI, Number 1, Spring 2018
University of West Georgia, Distance Education Center

Podcast 01: Interactive Media in Higher Education

Some of my coworkers and I recently started the Learning Lounge Podcast. Our goal is to talk about learning, training, and instructional design issues, strategies, and best practices.

Our first episode hosts Bradd Birmimgham, , the Director of Interactive Media Services at Franklin. Bradd has worked with experts and faculty from all over the globe to create instructional media for over a decade. We discuss his experiences working with faculty and design teams, and he shares some best practices for media development. Enjoy in audio form here and below or on YouTube here and below.

Why You Should Study Human Performance Technology

I am teacher, trainer, and instructional designer at heart. However, over the last 5 years, I have been exposed to the principles of Human Performance Technology (HPT). This holistic approach to improving competency and performance is powerful, and I recently created a video to explain why you should study HPT.  What do you think? Should an instructional designer, trainer, or teacher understand and use these principles?

New Article: Applying Project Management Strategies in a Large Curriculum Conversion Project in Higher Education

My Franklin University colleagues and I have published an article on Project Management and Instructional Design in the Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. The journal has generous copyright policies, and I am grateful to have the opportunity to share the full article here!

Joel Gardner

Franklin University

joel.gardner@franklin.edu 

Patrick A. Bennett

Franklin University

patrick.bennett@franklin.edu 

Niccole Hyatt

Franklin University

niccole.hyatt@franklin.edu 

Kevin Stoker

Franklin University

kevin.stoker@franklin.edu 

Abstract

Higher education is undergoing great changes that require universities to adapt quickly, and making these changes can be difficult. One discipline that can aid in executing change is project management, which has developed a set of clear processes and strategies for completing initiatives quickly and effectively. Several authors have identified project management competencies as key in the practice of instructional design. However, in our experience it can be difficult to operationalize project management, particularly in instructional design projects that are large in scope and require a quick turnaround. In this case study, we describe our response to an immediate need to convert 53 courses from a 15-week to a 12-week format. We share the project management processes, strategies, and technologies we used to plan, organize, and lead this large course conversion project. We share our experiences working with organizational culture, collaborating with busy faculty, and hiring part-time designers and content experts. Finally, we share our own best practices for managing and leading large, multi-course instructional design projects.

Introduction
There has been a tremendous amount of discontinuous change in the U.S. system of higher education over the last several decades. The shifts have included ever-increasing scrutiny by accrediting and regulatory bodies, falling enrollments due to fewer high school students heading to college, and astounding price increases to the cost of tuition. For example, the cost of higher education tuition has increased by 1,225% over the last several decades, which is twice that of increases in medical care costs during the same period (Jamrisko & Kolet, 2014). Additionally, the National Student Clearing House (2017, June 16) reports that the number high school graduates attending college has fallen over the last five years by more than 2.5 million students. Higher education is in a time of great transition and institutions that do not become more agile risk abject and total failure. As Bryson (2011) noted, the survival of an organization is predicated on how well it responds to the shifting ecosystem. The problem of decreasing attendance is so dramatic for some institutions that Frey (2013) estimates that 50 percent of all private institutions of higher education within the United States will collapse by 2030 due to insolvency.

On top of all of this, institutions of higher education do not change easily. In fact, the long-held traditions of colleges and universities make needed change even more difficult. Zemsky (2013) suggests that although colleges and universities may experiment with new non-traditional models, they may not adopt sustainable change, so the same old education models are applied to new opportunities. New models and approaches, such as project management methodologies, are needed to help maintain quality while at the same time reduce expenses.

Project Management
One discipline that can aid in executing change is project management, which has developed a set of clear processes and strategies for completing initiatives quickly and effectively. It appears that change is more rapid and discontinuous in nature today than at any other time in history. These types of abrupt changes require strategic and agile responses, and project management is one method of approaching change that can speed sustainable change and encourage positive organizational behavior interventions. Project management includes a set of clear principles and strategies for completing projects on schedule, per scope, and within a predetermined budget (Project Management Institute, 2013). A project is as a unique activity that has a predetermined start and end date. The overall practice of project management involves the creation of a project plan that breaks down the defined project into the related tasks to accomplish the goals of the project, sequencing the tasks, assigning resources, and working to adjust task start and finish dates to align with resource availability. This upfront planning process allows for the creation of a project schedule, a project budget, and a project team consisting of the required human resources to complete the project. Project management is successfully applied in a variety of fields and contexts (Project Management Institute, 2013).

Project Management in Instructional Design 
Project management is key in the practice of instructional design (Greer, 1992; Koszalka, Russ-Eft, & Reiser, 2012), a field which is inherently project-based. The International Board of Standards for Training, Performance, and Instruction (IBSTPI) identified planning and managing instructional design projects as a key competency for instructional designers, (Koszalka, Russ-Eft, & Reiser, 2012), and many authors have promoted the notion that programs preparing instructional designers for their work should include instruction on effective project management (Merrill, 2007; Williams Van Rooij, 2010). At our University, we have employed project management strategies in a variety of instructional design projects, including course design for University programs and curricula, corporate clients, government clients, and other institutions of higher education.

Responding to Change at Franklin University 
Franklin University has a long history of adapting to changes in industry and the higher education ecosystem. Our University was an early developer of fully online programs in the late 1990s and has successfully provided online education for nearly 20 years. In the early stages of our online development, Our University was granted permission from the U. S. Department of Education (ED) to have an overlapping winter and summer trimester to support the development of online programs and employ a 15-week summer term. However, during the 2016-2017 academic year, the ED communicated that it would no longer support the overlapping of terms. This meant that the summer term would be shortened to 12 weeks in length. Because this direction was given just 7 months before the next summer trimester, it created a serious potential problem for many of our students who would need to take key 15-week courses during that summer to graduate from our University in a timely manner. Our university had more than 85 15-week courses, all of which were online and several with face-to-face versions. This included major area courses in many high-enrollment programs such as accounting.

To respond quickly to the requirements of the ED, we created a project team to plan for and execute a new strategy: converting all 15-week courses to 12-week courses. Furthermore, University leadership mandated that the required 15-week courses for Summer 2017 be redesigned immediately. That meant that our institution would need to convert 53 of the 85 courses from 15 to 12 weeks between January 2017 and April 2017.

In this case study, we describe how we responded to an immediate need to convert 53 courses from a 15-week to a 12-week format. We share Our University’s model for delivering online education using adjunct faculty. We then discuss the project management processes and strategies we used to plan, organize, and lead this large course conversion project. We share our experiences working with organizational culture, collaborating with busy faculty, and hiring part-time designers and content experts. We also share the technologies we used to effectively manage this large course conversion project. Finally, we share our own best practices for managing and leading large instructional design projects.

Method 

Instructional Design and Centralized Curriculum at Our University
In this section, we provide an overview of our course design and delivery approach at our University. Adjunct faculty, who are actively employed experts in the field related to the courses, teach the majority of our courses. This aids us in achieving our goal to provide instructors and courses that are relevant and current to the needs of employers. To aid in controlling and assuring the quality of each course, we employ a centralized curriculum in which each course is developed and deployed within our Learning Management System (LMS) BlueQuill, and each section of the course contains the same structure, assignments, rubrics, and point allotment. Per our design process, teams comprised of an instructional designer, faculty member, content editor, and sometimes external content expert create each course.  This team and process has become an integral component of curriculum development, revision, and improvement.

This design approach creates a sense of "our course" among the team and ultimately provides a more robust experience for the student. It allows the faculty member and content expert to focus on the content, or discipline, while the instructional designer focuses on the best way to distribute the information throughout the course, and the content editor conducts a series of checks to ensure that the course is ready for publication. A management team employs project management strategies to oversee, support, and lead the design project.

Project Management Applied to Instructional Design
As noted above, several authors have written about the relationship between instructional design and project management (Greer, 1992; Koszalka, et al., 2012 Merrill, 2007; Williams Van Rooij, 2010). Williams Van Rooij (2010) found that project management is a critical contributor to the success of instructional design, and the generic ADDIE process for designing instruction does not fully encompass critical project management components (Williams Van Rooij, 2010). We have found this to be true in our instructional design work, and below we describe how we integrated both the ADDIE process within an overarching project management process to execute this course conversion project.

According to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK), there are five process groups or phases of project management, which we highlight here and describe in greater detail below: initiating, planning, executing, monitoring and controlling, and closing (Project Management Institute, 2013). These groups generally occur sequentially, though executing and monitoring and controlling occur simultaneously. For this project, the five phases were led and managed by the management team, which included the vice president of implementation, the executive director of design services, the department chair of instructional design, and the director of implementation, who acted as project manager. The instructional designer who led the design teams performed the executing phase. The executing phase encompassed the five phases of the ADDIE model: analyzing, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating, which were the responsibility of the instructional designer (see Figure 1). In this manner, we integrated project management principles and instructional design processes.

Figure 1. The relationship between general phases of instructional design and the project management process groups at our University. The ADDIE phases helped guide each individual course design project, and the project management process groups guided the overall course conversion of the identified courses.

Process Groups. Our implementation of the course conversion process paralleled the project management process groups defined by the PMBOK. In this section, we define the five PMBOK process groups (Project Management Institute, 2013) and describe how we implemented them in this course conversion project.

Initiating.
The initiating process group consists of those processes performed to define a new project or a new phase of an existing project by obtaining authorization to start the project or phase (PMBOK 2013). In this phase, typical activities include identifying who will be affected by the project and ensuring that all stakeholders are aware of the project scope and agree to its implementation. As we began to grapple with this project, we first met with multiple stakeholders to help clarify the needs and constraints for the project. We held several meetings to present the current situation, listen to stakeholders’ concerns and ideas, gather feedback on the proposed plan, and determine the goals and outcomes for the project.

Planning.
The planning process group consists of those processes performed to establish the total scope of the effort, define objectives, and develop a course of action (Project Management Institute, 2013). In our experience, planning is the most important part of the work for the project manager, and inadequate planning is very often the cause of a project’s failure. For this project, this planning included identifying the courses that were to be converted. This included prioritizing those courses running in the coming summer trimester that had a high enrollment and potentially impacted students’ ability to complete their degrees in a timely manner. This planning also included defining team members’ roles, identifying the project’s scope, and developing a communication plan.

A key part of our planning for this project was clarifying the role of each of the design team members. These team members included an instructional designer, a content editor, a lead faculty member, and in some cases, a subject matter expert hired to provide content expertise for the course. We defined each team member’s role, including when and how they would contribute to the process. Along with this planning, we identified a clear deadline for when key parts of the design process were to be completed. We also identified a deadline by which all courses needed to be completed.

An important part of the planning process is identifying the scope of the project. This includes clarifying the project goals, what to deliver, the criteria for success, and the cost of resources spent. We compared our capacity as an organization with the specific needs of the project and prioritized which courses to focus on for the summer start date. To help control the scope of each individual course and keep the project to a manageable size, we clarified that the goal was to convert the courses to a different format, not necessarily to fully redesign the courses. Our goal was to finish all conversions, despite the potential to further improve some of the courses. We estimated that it would take around 60 hours to convert a single course and directed our designers to spend about this much time on each course.

Finally, we also created a communication plan that considered all of the key stakeholders for the project. These stakeholders included students, faculty, designers, adjuncts, and the registrar’s office. A key aspect of this communication included our initial kickoff meeting with all stakeholders in which we described the purpose of the project, the timeline, and the process to complete the project and further built stakeholder buy-in. We discuss more elements of our communication plan under the Monitoring and Controlling section later on.

Executing.
The executing process group consists of those process groups performed to complete the work defined in the project plan to satisfy the project specifications (PMBOK, 2013). As noted above, the executing phase is where all of the course conversion work took place. In this phase, the instructional designers employed the instructional design process with the faculty and content experts. In some cases, edits and changes to these courses took place within a Microsoft Word course manuscript design document, which captured all of the content and assignments for the course. In other cases, these edits and changes were identified on a marked up PDF copies of the courses to be changed. To employ project management for these courses, we created major milestones for the courses’ development so that we could track the designers’ progress in developing the courses. The instructional designers attended biweekly meetings to provide updates on their progress meeting these milestones. Instructional designers also tracked their time spent on each course project so that we could effectively monitor how long each course took to complete and make adjustments as needed.

In addition to the work accomplished by the instructional designers, our content editing team played a key role in the execution of this project. Content editors reviewed the completed course manuscripts and put them into the LMS. They also conducted quality checks on each course to ensure that all of the course components and functionalities such as discussions, synchronous sessions, point allocations, and rubrics met the course quality standards we had previously created. Ultimately, content editors reviewed the courses for accuracy, consistency, and accessibility. Again, these activities were reported biweekly and each content editor tracked time spent for each task daily.

A key component of these course conversions was the collaboration with adjunct faculty who served as content experts. Because our full-time faculty were required to convert many of these courses rapidly, we needed to hire additional experts to support the design process. Typically, these content experts were adjuncts that teach the specific course that they supported and have the familiarity with the content and course flow. Using this model, we were able to develop multiple courses simultaneously without overwhelming one particular lead faculty member. For example, one faculty member had to convert 13 courses, which would be impossible given the complexity of the work and the other responsibilities that the faculty member had to maintain during the same period. We anticipated and, therefore, budgeted for 21 courses, but ultimately had 34 courses supported by a content expert.

Monitoring and Controlling

Communication. One key method for monitoring and controlling is communication. As noted above, we created a plan for communicating the project and its status to all stakeholders. Specifically, we held planning meetings with all stakeholders to gather their insights and develop an understanding of the project needs. We held a kick off meeting with all involved and communicated the project purpose, scope, and plan. As noted above, we held biweekly meetings with the instructional designers to communicate any updates and to facilitate peer-sharing and collaborative problem solving. We also checked in with faculty regularly through emails or phone calls, particularly when issues needed to be resolved. We also met monthly with the academic deans to discuss any concerns, and to answer questions. At the end of the project, we conducted lessons learned meetings to gather insights from team members on what went well and on how we could improve on the work with future course conversions.

Tracking and Reporting.
 Another method for monitoring and controlling is tracking and reporting. We held biweekly status meetings to monitor the work of our instructional designers and content editors. In these meetings, the project manager followed up with each team member on the status of each course, including which milestones were completed. This meeting served to hold team members accountable for their assigned work and gave us the opportunity to identify issues and problems early so that we could respond to them quickly and keep the course designs moving forward.

We also tracked employee work using the time tracking software Replicon. Instructional design faculty and content editors entered the time spent on each project into this tool, which allowed us to create reports on the time spent for each assigned course conversion so that we could plan for future course conversions.

Quality Reviews.
In addition to the tracking described above, we also instituted quality reviews to monitor and assure the quality of the courses implemented into the LMS. These quality reviews included review of the faculty member, the instructional designer, and a comprehensive peer review of the final course by two content editors. Components of the review included: a review of the overall flow of the course; a check of course functionality such as links, assignments dates and discussion functions; a review of all images for appropriate use of alternative text; a review of course syllabi to ensure inclusion of required policies and other components; and standard review of the updated course materials.

Closing.
 As noted above, the closing phase of a project is when the project officially ends. To close out this course conversion project, we held two lessons learned sessions – one with our instructional design/content editing experts, and one including all faculty and college leadership - to identify opportunities for improvement for future projects. Opportunities we identified included setting clearer deadlines, building in time for course review, and staggering due dates for a more balanced flow of work. We then communicated the successful completion of the project to all project stakeholders, including a final report of the project’s success. We documented the changes made to each course and any additional notes for each course conversion in our records in SharePoint. Finally, we held a luncheon with key project stakeholders to celebrate the successful completion of the project.

PMBOK Knowledge Base.
In addition to the five process groups noted above, PMBOK has 10 knowledge areas, which we describe briefly in column 1 of Table 1 below. These knowledge areas can be emphasized or deemphasized depending on the industry, the project and products, and the project context. In our instructional design projects, we tend to focus on seven of the knowledge areas, while paying less concern to three of the knowledge areas. Specifically, we do not typically focus on project integration management because our processes are well established, and there is little need to manage their integration. Project risk management was not a focus, because there was little choice in this project – we were required to complete the changes - though the project did have some inherent risks. Finally, project procurement management was not emphasized because the majority of our resources for the project were internal, aside from identifying and compensating content experts. Table 1 below briefly describes the 10 PMBOK knowledge areas and summarizes how we applied these areas in this course conversion project.

Table 1. The 10 PMBOK Knowledge areas and how we applied them in this project.

PMBOK Knowledge Area	Our Application
Project Integration Management – Managing the holistic processes and components related to a project	Coordinated the design and management processes of the course conversion project
Project Scope Management –Defining what the project includes and does not include.	Met with project stakeholders to identify courses we needed to convert Worked with design faculty to determine the level of design for each course (in this case, a conversion in length)
Project Time Management – Managing the time spent on the project and ensuring timely completion.	Developed an estimate of time needed to convert each course Estimated the overall project time needed Defined the deadline for completion of courses, as well as milestones for key tasks
Project Cost Management – planning and tracking the budget to control the cost of the project.	Identified external support needs based on project and the existing internal resources Contracted with part-time employees to fulfill those needs in excess of our capacity Gave all employees parameters for how much time to spend on each course conversion
Project Quality Management – defining and measuring the quality of the products to meet the project quality standards and scope.	Created course production standards for each course Conducted quality assurance reviews of each course using production standards
Project Human Resource Management – Organizing, managing, and leading the team to deliver the project in scope.	Held kickoff meetings to communicate expectations Consistent periodic meetings to track progress, address issues, and provide support Frequent email communication with individuals and stakeholder groups to keep the project on track
Project Communication Management – Planning and executing the communication of the project and project-related information to all stakeholders.	Held kickoff meeting to communicate the project parameters and plans Communicated the status of the project to University leadership every two weeks Email communication to solve problems and share status to staff, faculty, and faculty leadership Biweekly meetings with instructional designers to communicate status, problem solve as a group, and provide support
Project Risk Management – Identifying anything that could be an obstacle to the success of the project.	Identified risks, including potential impact on students, potential lack of faculty commitment, inability to secure needed content expertise
Project Procurement Management – Managing the acquisition of resources needed to complete the project.	Identified content experts and coordinated their compensation
Project Stakeholder Management – Identifying stakeholders and understanding their role within the project.	Met with multiple groups of stakeholders multiple times to establish the project, build support, communicate status, and address issues Held lessons learned meetings to gather insights and signal closure of the project Communicated completion at close of project to leadership

Technology for Facilitating Project Management
As alluded to above, we used several technologies for this project. In this section, we describe these technologies and share how we used them in the management and execution of this course conversion project:

1. Microsoft SharePoint is a document management and storage system that the University has employed. Microsoft OneNote collects notes or data about a particular topic that fosters collaboration while interfacing with all Microsoft Office products. We created a specific project page within SharePoint to house all documents for this project and used it as a central location for storing course manuscripts, documenting what actions we took, and noting any changes that we might need to make in the future.
2. Replicon is a web-based software that can be used to track projects, hours on tasks, the work of team members, and reporting on that tracking. We used Replicon to track the number of hours worked on each course within the project, which helped us to validate the estimates that we established for the work that the team would complete. In addition, Replicon helped us assign future work to the team by reporting the completion time for each course.
3. Microsoft Excel is a software that creates spreadsheets. We used Excel to track the status of each project and to create reports with the project status. This allowed us to quickly report our progress to all levels of stakeholders. Note that these reports were effective because the project manager was responsible for updating the spreadsheets daily if not multiple times per day.
4. In many cases, we also used a course manuscript, which is a template built within Microsoft Word that provides consistency among all courses. Essentially, the template provides a structure for all instructional designers, which allows them to focus on the creative elements of the course design. Additionally, the content editors can work more efficiently with the manuscript because they know which elements go where in the LMS. By implementing the manuscript, the content editors were able to significantly decrease their build time, which decreases the overall budget for the project.
5. BlueQuill is the Learning Management System that we employed for this project. We implemented and taught all courses within BlueQuill.  The LMS is built internally by our University and is available commercially.

Results
This course conversion project was successful. We completed 53 course conversions on time. To be specific, when we began the project, we estimated that it would take instructional designers an average of 60 hours to convert each course. Based on our tracking, our instructional designers averaged 48.9 hours per course. The PMBOK acceptable standards for estimation are to conclude at -10% or +20% (PMBOK, 2013), and we were roughly 8% under on hours, which is within that standard. In addition, our content editors averaged six hours per course.

Our observation was that using these project management principles encouraged positive interactions with the faculty and content experts. In addition, we were in the middle of a merge of two groups of instructional design and management team members. Looking back, we needed a project of this scope and urgency to bring the team together, and it helped to build a sense of unity and commitment among design team members, many of whom had not previously had an opportunity to collaborate with one another on projects. This project provided purposeful opportunities for the teams to create what Haslam, Reicher, and Platow (2011), refers a social identity as the team self-stereotyped leading to the creation of combined team values, norms, and beliefs surrounding the project. This is a far superior approach to providing long-term team cohesion. This is what Haslam, et al. (2011) define as we leadership.

This successful project also helped to build relationships with college faculty members. As in many universities, some groups of faculty members were uncertain about the effectiveness or usefulness of instructional design support for their courses. Because of the university-wide impact of this project, we worked closely with several of these faculty members, and informal feedback was very positive. In addition, based on the successful execution of this and other projects, we believe that other leaders and managers within the University trust and rely on our expertise more fully.

Recommendations and Reflections 

Recommendations
We recommend the following to leaders and managers of instructional designers. First, we recommend meeting with all stakeholders early and often. This includes faculty, faculty leadership, instructional design management and team members, and any other key stakeholder. Your goal should be to collaboratively clarify the needs of the project, establish support from all stakeholders, identify obstacles and potential strategies before the project begins, communicate the status of the project regularly, gather feedback, and report on the conclusion of the project.

We also recommend communicating early and often. We accomplished this through regular meetings with the instructional designers, stakeholders, and college leadership. These meeting help to the project manager stay transparent with all stakeholders throughout the process. In addition, hold lessons learned sessions at the end of each project so you can learn from and apply those lessons in the future.

We also recommend holding biweekly status meetings in which the team members report on their progress. Our project manager typically leads this meeting, though the director or manager could manage it. We have found that these meetings promote collaboration and peer problem solving and help to identify common issues that can be addressed by the team. In addition, the meeting creates a sense of urgency and a need for team members to show progress since the last meeting. Meeting every two weeks works well because as the research indicates, activities to create a single deliverable should be no more than 80 hours (Project Management Institute, 2013).

We also recommend harnessing technology to facilitate instructional design projects. Technologies can help you organize, track, store, and monitor the work and the instructional products of the instructional designers. When used appropriately, they also allow for sophisticated reporting on the number of hours worked and the progress made.

Wherever possible, we also recommend employing a full-time project manager to manage and monitor instructional design projects. In our experience, project managers who employ key PMBOK principles can provide a significant increase in the productivity and results of an instructional design project. Where this is not possible, we encourage directors and managers of instructional designers to employ these key project management strategies.

To decrease the amount of time needed to bring a substantial number of courses to fruition, we recommend considering external subject matter experts that teach the subjects to assist in the instructional design process. We also recommend employing part-time, contact instructional designers and content editors to increase capacity when needed. Documenting processes and developing clarity on standards makes this possible, and without that kind of clarity this would not work as effectively.

Reflections
It is worth reflecting on the centralized course design strategy taken by our University. In our context, a centralized instructional design model and standardized curricula in which instructional designers, not faculty, design and develop courses seem to have facilitated our ability to respond quickly as an organization and to convert these courses quickly. We completed all course conversions in a short 12-week period. However, this centralized, standardized model may not necessarily make sense in all higher education contexts.

This paper illustrates how we have combined the disciplines of project management and instructional design, specifically combining the ADDIE process with the PMBOK principles. As noted above, in this approach, a project manager is responsible for the overarching project management, and the instructional designer manages the specific timeline for all course design elements. This works well for us, but it may not work for other universities that have different contexts and constraints. Still, we believe that using these PMBOK principles is a critical component of effectively managing instructional design projects, as well as any other major response to the higher education environment today.

It is worth reflecting on the flexible nature of project management and instructional design principles. Because of the pragmatic nature of the practice of the fields of project management and instructional design, we have found it useful to use the principles and processes such as those found in PMBOK and in processes such as the ADDIE process because they can be applied in myriad ways. We might emphasize, for example, project communication management in this project, but give it less emphasis in a project that has fewer stakeholders. In another example, we might conduct an analysis differently for a course conversion than we might for a new course designed for a new program. These are principles to apply in a pragmatic manner based on the context in which the work is taking place.

We have found that this flexibility has enabled us to respond quickly to the demands placed on our design team and our University. Project management tools and clean design processes have helped to facilitate our response to the demands of accrediting and governmental bodies quickly. These principles can also be applied in a variety of ways to help facilitate other kinds of change.

Conclusion
In this paper, we describe how we employed project management principles to succeed in a large course conversion project. This project was a response to a specific direction from the Department of Education to shift how we schedule our courses at our University. Higher education will continue to experience this kind of pressure and change, among many other kinds. We will need to respond to those changes quickly and effectively, and in our experience, project management is a key tool for managing and directing those responses.

---

References

Bryson, J. M. (2011).  Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: A guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Frey, T. (2013, July 5).  By 2030 over 50% of Colleges will Collapse. Retrieved May 19, 2016, from http://www.futuristspeaker.com/business-trends/by-2030-over-50-of-colleges-will-collapse/

Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. D, & Platow, M. J. (2011).  The new psychology of leadership:Identity, influence, and power. New York, NY, Psychology Press.

Jamrisko, M., & Kolet, I. (2014, August 18).  College Tuition Costs Soar: Chart of the Day. Retrieved November 16, 2016, from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-08-18/college-tuition-costs-soar-chart-of-the-day 

Koszalka, T. A., Russ-Eft, D. F., & Reiser, R. (2013).  Instructional designer competencies: The standards. Retrieved August 15, 2017 from http://ibstpi.org/instructional-design-competencies/.

Merrill, M. D. (2007).  The future of instructional design: the proper study of instructional design. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (Second ed., pp. 336-341).  Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

National Student Clearing House.  (2017). Current term enrollment estimates – spring 2017. Retrieved July 24, 2017, from https://nscresearchcenter.org/currenttermenrollmentestimate-spring2017/. 

Project Management Institute.  (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide).  Newtown Square, Pa: Project Management Institute.

Williams Van Rooij, S. W. (2010).  Project management in instructional design: ADDIE is not enough.  British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(5), 852-864.

Zemsky, R. (2013).  Checklist for change: Making American higher education a sustainable enterprise.  New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.

Summit Notes: Essential Institutional Capacities to Lead Innovation

I recently attended the WECT 2017 Summit on Essential Institutional Capacities to Lead Innovation. It was a very good conference that shared some best practices in higher education for innovations to improve student success. Below are some of the notes I took during the conference.

Michelle Weise - Sandbox Collaborative – Southern New Hampshire University

Michelle discussed some of the things that her university has been doing to promote design thinking and collaborative, creative problem solving at her university and as a service for other universities. They created the Sandbox Collaborative, which is a space where people can really think through their design needs and consider solutions for their work. They pulled together a variety of research-based tools and techniques from research and other organization. The space looks very open, beautiful, different, and inviting. It seems to be the kind of space that would be interesting and exciting to be in. The space and group serves as internal consultancy focused on performance improvement for the university (the current needs) and to help look at over the horizon solutions and opportunities (the future). In my experience, it is very difficult to maintain and optimize what is already existing while simultaneously planning for new, innovative systems and approaches.

She noted that they started in “stealth mode” which allowed them to develop and grow and innovate. If you are under scrutiny of others and have the existing culture and patterns imposed on you, you may have a difficult time being able to move forward and will likely lose many of your innovative ideas. Autonomy is critical in the initial phases.

Jeff Borden - St. Leo University – Innovation Incubator

Jeff talked about their innovation incubator, which has been a place for innovating and creating great solutions for the university. They eventually created LionShare, which is a system that pulls together all kinds of student behavior data and provides the students with a variety of supports and tools that provide just in time support to students that is strong up-front and decreases over time. “For technology to work, integration is the key.”

Does your university support innovation? Will they put money behind it? Will they support it?

If an organization or individual is rewarded for innovation, then innovation will happen.

Some reflections: to me, it seems that implementing the innovation is a major issue. Jeff addressed it with the need to consider stakeholder engagement, but there is much more to it than that. What if we never put enough resources toward solving the problem? What if we don’t beta test? What if we ignore cultural or international issues? What if we don’t use foundational project management strategies effectively?

Breakout Session 1: Identify the Talent You Have, What You Need, and Where to Discover Candidates

MJ Bishop

Dr. Bishop shared some key results of a couple of powerful studies that look closely at centers for teaching and learning.

Bishop, M., & Keehn, A. (2015). Leading academic change: An early market scan of leading-edge postsecondary academic innovation centers.

The results of the study included the following insights:

• Institutional culture is one of the biggest challenges to innovating, along with lack of resources.
• Innovation centers seem to be regularly undergoing reorganization. (7 of 10 interviewed were undergoing a major revision).
• Building collaboration was a key thing organizations were doing (collaboration within campus organizations).
• There seems to have been a shift from faculty success to student success.
• Most teaching/learning centers started between 2001 and 2010.
• Most leaders of these centers have had faculty experience.
• Most report to the provost or academic affairs.
• In most, the mission and reporting function changed a lot over the last several years.

Outreach to department chairs and financial incentives were the most effective methods for increasing faculty engagement with the center.

Christina Anderson

Christina asked a few questions that really help us gain a focus with the changes we are working to make within an organization. Some good questions here:

• What are you trying to change?
• Why?
• How will you know it’s been successful?
• When does it need to happen?
• Who needs to be involved?

There are certainly some foundational project management/goal setting/change management principles embedded in these questions.

Jay Hollowell

Sometimes we are pushed into a swimming pool of sharks. (If you don’t know the joke, it is funny J). This is often the cause of innovation –we do it as a reaction to something in the environment. We can also do it proactively without a push into the shark pool - either way, we must react and adapt and innovate.

Near the end of the presentation, we met as a table and discussed the following question. I have added in our responses.

How must higher education institutions change to better support learning?

• Redesign the tenure process to go the teaching track or research track. This will help facilitate improve teaching and learning.
• Bring in additional roles such as mentors to help students move through a learning path as opposed to different courses. Western Governors seems to do this. There could be other supplements including having students provide that kind of support.
• Incentivize faculty to design courses more effectively so that the students start effectively.
• Faculty learning communities – faculty teach the same course and come together and have a  conversation about the course and what they are doing, struggling with, what is working. Faculty seem to struggle with the concept of community and dialogue can help instill the idea of sharing experiences and expertise.
• Hire more full-time faculty.
• Quality onboarding of new faculty. Be more intentional in onboarding. Focus on teaching them how to teach online and face-to-face. Create an experience of up to 12-18 months. Use quality standards and rubrics, peer evaluations, and others.
• What role should the teaching and learning center plan in today’s learning design infrastructure?
• We focus a lot of effort on instructional design to help support the teachers Simplicity is often key – focus on the basics of ID, teaching effectiveness. 

Again, this was a great experience. I have found, though, that very often the context of sitting in a conference is not that I am acquiring the content that is being shared, but that I am thinking alongside the presentations. These presentations often spur ideas and insights that are meaningful but that are not at all related to the presentation content! That was the case at this conference - many ideas for improving myself, my work, and creative endeavors, and the university for which I work.

Thanks, WCET, for a great experience!