“Rapid” is a hot word in the e-learning industry. The speed and ease with which you can create an online course is the big selling point for many software developers. Ease of use is always good, but for me and my clients, speed to audience is rarely the most critical factor. Over the years I’ve been developing e-learning courses the big ticket item our clients want is ability to easily edit content after the product is originally delivered. A lot of our work is for government agencies and once a contract ends, it doesn’t matter if that agency needs to change one word of a product, if the contract is over it’s a huge headache to get the work done. That’s why so many statements of work that come to us require use of non-proprietary products, and/or the requirement that said agency will have the ability to make edits to a deliverable at a later date.

To that end we often develop using off-the-shelf products with which our clients have the ability to update facts or figures in their training products without having to recontract. They may need some training, just as when they first opened Word or PowerPoint, but the ability is there, and the effort is similar to working in either of those programs.

One challenge that comes from keeping e-learning course content that easily editable is that it can be prohibitive to integrate other media, like video—and I’m talking professionally produced video, not webcam footage which I recognize is becoming more readily available to e-learning authors—into the course. For example we’re working with clients for which we’d like to have an actual presenter as part of their online course. For another we’re producing short, personal video stories, and for yet another, we’re capturing brief personal interviews. The purpose of each course is different, as is the audience and tone, but for all three projects we’re keeping one thing in common among the videos—they won’t include content—or even key personnel—that are likely to need to be updated. Our host will stick to generic content like the welcome, section transitions and historical examples. Our interviewees will be telling personal stories and sharing opinions. We shy away from including agency leadership in video (particularly not in an election year!).

We let the video do what it does best, add story or personality to support the facts or techniques being conveyed via the training course. By keeping the video elements evergreen we limit the likelihood of costly revisions, and give our clients a product that will better stand the test of time.

Online learning can take many forms, from simply reading a page to interactively participating in virtual classrooms or simulations. Also widely variable is how training is produced, the production time, price, and in the end, its effectiveness. Are you choosing the right method for teaching? Sometimes you can tell information to your learners, but other times you may see better results if you show.

Mind & Media recently launched a training community website for therapists helping couples deal with the challenges of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Learners attend a classroom session and then are granted access to the online community where they can expand on the one-time classroom experience. Sure the site will include manuals, and a discussion forum, where information is told, but also in the works is the development of role-play videos that will show great examples of how to conduct the therapy. They’re very real and relevant scenarios, too, created by the experts. No scripts, no actors, and no big bucks. Here’s why role-plays by experts beat scripted, acted scenes just about any day of the week when it comes to effective, affordable training.

For this training project we videotaped eight role-play scenarios in one day, ranging from 8- to 25-minutes. Pre-production was virtually non-existent—no locations to scout, no scripts to write, and no actors to find, screen, hire, and prepare to play doctor or patient. Mind & Media has a beautiful brainstorming room that served as our therapy office so that was kind of a lucky break, but the decisions about script and actors were as much about efficacy as about budget.

The trainers, who served as the actors, loosely developed the scenarios during their travel to our office. That was all the prep time they needed because they knew the content, techniques, and even typical patient behaviors like the back of their hands. The familiarity with the subject made the acting all the more realistic. While we were shooting one trainer told us of at time they had used professional actors for a similar project and they ended up with bad overacting by folks more interested in their careers than the task at hand. Not to say all actors would derail the project, but if your luck does happen to go bad on shoot day, how would you recover?

The production itself went fast, too. Quality assurance for each scenario happened on the fly since all “actors” were subject matters experts. They could prep a scene in a few minutes and complete it in one take. We rolled two cameras to capture the whole scene in real-time whenever possible. We did use a production assistant to keep track of details during any multi-take scenes to make sure we kept continuity, since there was no script or storyboard, but in general the group of trainers and production staff at Mind & Media, just worked smartly and kept things rolling. The scenes were so real that at times I felt uncomfortable watching the fictional husband and wife spar in front of their therapist!

While the trainers may conduct some role-plays during the classroom training, having video role-plays online may be even more effective. They’re not limited to just that one classroom, and if need be the learner just clicks rewind and watches it again, any time of day, any place with an Internet connection. And the bonus, since the videos will be rolled into the larger community learning site, is that viewers can watch the scenarios and then discuss them with peers and the trainers in the forum to keep the learning environment current and ever-growing.

I’m really excited to be supporting some of the leading minds in the treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Mind & Media has always strived to work on projects that affect positive change in this world, and the project with which we’ve been engaged over the past year has probably been the most positively impactful of any I’ve worked on. We’ve helped disseminate information to families dealing with PTSD, to therapists treating PTSD, and most recently to therapists helping couples cope when one partner is struggling with PTSD. Each project has been different in its own way, but they have all been equally rewarding to me personally.

Make no mistake; it’s not just the end goal I’m passionate about. I’m a geek for the technology and aesthetics of the communications in general, but to apply my years of geeking to efforts like the treatment of PTSD is amazing. Sure marketers or designers everywhere worry about web usability or word choice in when trying to sell a product or push an agenda, but all the same communications best practices hold true no matter what communication effort you undertake. It doesn’t have to be sexy, but it has to be clear, easy to use, and it must give the audience what they need.

For a public-facing presentation about reuniting with family members returning from a war zone, we got to put ourselves in the shoes of stressed out, nervous family members waiting at home. How could we write this content so it’s easy to understand? What questions could we answer, via video interviews with other families, that would show these folks they are not alone? What images would connect them to the material, and what, ultimately, do they want from this presentation? Not cool animation, not a widget, not a text message, nothing from the bag of new communications technology. They just want to know what to expect, what to look out for, and where to turn if things are not going well. Our work moves them from anxious to reassured, from unsure to confident. Positive change I remember long after the work ends. It was a pleasure to bring Returning From the War Zone: A Guide for Families to life for all the families that need it.

It’s been almost a year since the Obama administration launched their version of whitehouse.gov, featuring a blog and videos embedded from YouTube. The White House social media folks also manage an active Facebook page as well as a presence on six other social media sites. So connected!

Here we 11 months later and I’m wondering if the social media habits at 1600 Pennsylvania have trickled down to the Cabinet. “Look, Mr. President, I’m blogging, too!” So today I made visits to each of the 15 executive departments that make up the President’s Cabinet to see which were engaged in social media.

Here’s the list—following each I indicate which they employ: a blog, Facebook (FB), YouTube (YT), Twitter (TW), Flicker (FL), MySpace (MS), or others.

Participating in Social Media

• Agriculture: Blog, FB, TW, FL
• Defense: Blog, FB, YT, TW, FL, other
• Education: Blog, FB, YT, TW
• Energy: Blog, FB, YT, FL, other
• Homeland Security: Blog, YT, TW
• Housing & Urban Development: Blog, FB, YT, TW, FL
• Justice: Blog, FB, YT, TW, MS
• Labor: TW
• State: Blog, FB, YT, TW, FL
• Veterans Affairs: FB, TW

Still in the Stone Age

• Commerce: They have a Videos page that doesn’t include a single video for all of 2009!
• Health & Human Services
• Interior
• Treasury
• Transportation

I was impressed to see 10 of the 15 are making a concerted effort to change with the times and take advantage of new (free) tools to engage with and serve this country’s citizens. I’m really surprised to see a few still in the Stone Age, particularly Health & Human Services. Now, they do run Flu.gov, which is active on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, but still, there are other health issues in the world, eh?

If government is of the people, by the people, and for the people then what better way to support that mission than to engage directly with the people? Agencies employing social media are not just keeping up with the President, or chasing a trend, they are actually better prepared to meet mission. The immediacy of information exchange provided by social media allows agencies to more quickly disseminate and respond to information. It makes it easier for the people to interact, too. One great example is an exchange I saw on the Housing & Urban Development (HUD) Facebook page:

Diane H.: I just found out that my daughter is living with a couple that has section 8 housing. My daughter is not part of their lease. They are having her pay to live with them. They have been caught in the past for section 8 fraud. What can I do?…

HUD Response: Hello Diane If you suspect section 8 fraud, please contact HUD’s Office of Inspector General at 1-800-347-3735. Please let us know if this information helps. [plus a link to the hotline website]

Voila! Easy for Diane—as easy as saying hi to any other friend on Facebook—and easy for HUD to put her in touch with the correct authority. Government in action.

Or how about this one:

Tammy A: How does one get a list of HUD housing or apartments in their community?

Brian M: Try HUD.gov, I believe this is the link you want: http://www.hud.gov/renting/local.cfm

Here we have two Facebook users exchanging information via the HUD Facebook page—the HUD page is the vehicle but no HUD folks even got involved. The Facebook page serves as both information vehicle and community. Good stuff.

Now, come on Interior, how about some YouTube videos or weather tweets about my favorite national parks!

Over the 8+ years I’ve been with Mind & Media, we’ve been webcasting and putting video online for nonprofits with much greater frequency than we ever have for the Federal Government even though we do much more work for the latter. But the tide has indeed turned. Recently five different federal agencies have contracted with us to produce videos for different uses.

My November issue of Streaming Media Magazine features an article, “The Government Video Boom”. So it’s not just us seeing that explosion, eh? In the story author Bill Greenwood tries to explain why the boom is happening now, but I don’t think you have to look any further than the new administration. When the White House is both promoting videos front and center on whitehouse.gov and also maintaining a YouTube channel the rest of the Federal Government won’t be far behind. Roll tape! But on what? And for what?

Our four new projects include:

• Using video to promote, and train staff on, new software
• Incorporating video into emotional presentations that are replacing static print documents
• Producing a recruiting video to be distributed via conference give-away
• Producing several videos, specifically for the public Internet (with a goal to get a video featured on whitehouse.gov).

They’re all excellent projects, and not necessarily because they employ video. It’s because they’re employing video in ways that take advantage of that specific medium and what it offers over others.

Many advances in technology, combined with plunging costs, have certainly made video an attractive option for many communications campaigns. But is it always the best way to go? Other mediums have gotten better and cheaper, too. If you need to get a message out, you have at your disposal avenues like: podcasting, screencasting, tweeting, slide sharing, and even email (how archaic!). All of those can be more cheaply and quickly produced compared to video. So why use video? Here are three reasons.

1. Authority: Use video so I can see the Secretary of agency X deliver news so it has credibility. That’s easy.
2. Demonstration: They are moving pictures after all, right? Video is a great choice to show how to do something. Or how something changes.
3. Story: This one is the biggie. With sound, image, pace and movement, video is great for capturing emotion, personality, and humanity—all of those elements that come in handy when you need to persuade or change perception. To change things.

That’s why we get hired. Not to make a video, but instead to educate, recruit, persuade, support, and ultimately to affect positive change.

I just got out from behind a van sporting two eloquent bumper stickers.

1. Warning: Driver carries only $20 worth of ammunition

2. Lost your cat? Try looking under my tires.

With as much sarcasm as can come across in writing I’ll say he seems like an awesome, friendly dude.

I actually can’t even figure out what he’s trying to do besides scare crooks and cats. I get paid to communicate so I realize I might give this more thought than the average bumper-sticker-reader, but I can’t help wonder why he used the time, why he made the effort, why he spent the money, to slap those stickers on his van. All communication takes time, effort, and often money so I can’t imagine extending any of the three just for the hell of it (or just to tell folks I’m kind of a jerk).

Sure, there’s a lot of communicating via social media that is essentially for the hell of it, but even those tweets and posts, I think, can be categorized as having the point of connecting with friends, sharing a laugh, or building a network. I’ll argue that all of those reasons, and more, are worth my time, effort, and even money.

But what about all of the organizations that are racing to social media platforms, often employing staff to lead an organized effort? Talk about time, effort, and money spent! Are the communications worth it all? Do they have more to offer than cat jokes? Building a community online can be valuable, but only if that community is basically doing what you want them to do. What action or change do you want to see? If you’re Health and Human Services I’m guessing you’d like to stem the H1N1 virus, for example. The Department of Energy might like to promote new advances in renewable energies. Now that’s something to talk about. But still what will they say and how will they say it? It’s not enough to tweet that X is awesome or to post Y on YouTube if those messages are not promoting a change in action or perception.

I recently received an RFP that include a requirement, “add interactivity to the site.” I’m not sure what to do with that if there is not some purpose or desired outcome dependent on those interactivities. A bit further down the RFP included that the organization would like to increase online donations. Aha, now we have purpose, so we can craft messages, features, and functions that support that. Whether it be indirectly, like supporing an online community which in turn might pursuade members of that community to donate money because they feel more connected and committed to the group, or more directly like allowing users to cast votes and opinions as to what the money they donate will be spent on, purpose driven messages and communications campaigns can inspire audiences to act in ways you want, not just hide their cats.

“Someone from HR will be going home with you this weekend to listen in and watch everything you do.How does that sound? Oh.Well then how about you give us all of your social media logins and just agree that we’ll track everything you do online. Of course, outside of the office, too. And outside work hours. All that.”

I’m happy to report that I don’t know this scenario depicts real life anywhere, but I can tell you it’s up for consideration. On his freesourceagency blog, Nathan Egan explains his (unnamed) client’s request to devise a plan for monitoring all employee social media activity. You can read my comment I wrote there, but I’ll sum it up here: Are you kidding me?!

There are plenty of reasons why such a move by any organization, save for maybe the CIA, is a bad one, but the mere idea of it exemplifies just how new/scary/confusing/alarming the social media landscape can feel to those not dug into it. I recognize that Joe Employee flaming his company at a 20-person barbecue is not quite the same as if he flames said company via his blog or other web-based communication. I guess that can be scary, but it’s still just one voice. Mr. Company Owner, do you have that little faith in your products, services, or people? What are you afraid of? Corporate secrecy can be handled by NDAs. Corporate culture and morale should be handled by leadership. Playing Big Brother to your employees is no way to handle anything. How about a little trust or respect? It might earn it in return.

I just read in Federal Computer Week that USA.gov director Bev Godwin was named the White House’s Director of Online Resources and Interagency Development. Worth noting that the source cited was, “several blog posts.” I guess that’s as good as an anonymous source, eh? According to FCW, Godwin will be on the New Media Team rallying the federal government into using social media. I can’t say I remember other administrations having such a team. It’s an exciting time to be a participant in this government and an exciting time for communications and new media companies!

The inclusion of “Interagency Development” in her title to me, indicates an emphasis on using social media internally to perform work. Certainly noble and necessary (good article also in FCW about that), but I’m interested in how agencies can use social media to engage the public and better serve their missions. For example USDA could support a social network site where schools, students, healthcare workers, nutritionists, etc. share information about diet and exercise, show off their field day events, and generally support healthy living. Compare that to printing a bazillion “Healthy Eating” leaflets to be stuffed in kids’ backpacks. Money can be spent more wisely!

Maddie at Socialfish pointed me to some social networking stats that Nielsen posted recently. The two charts showcase growth of social media sites from September 2007 to September 2008. You can see which are growing the fastest and which are simply the largest in terms of audience. I’m not surprised to see Facebook (FB) sixth on the list of fastest growing but also second on the list of sheer size. What a great place to be! And by that I mean both what a great place to be for FB, but also FB is a great place to be for you and your organization.

Not only does FB have a huge and growing audience but the company also has a great FREE offering to support organizations. They’re called FB Pages, with a capital P. This is not a post about what FB is or how to use it, so I’ll just jump right to what a FB Page can do. It’s like giving your organization the same presence on FB that any person would have. So step one, you can connect with friends which is the basis of FB functionality. In the case of a FB Page, they would be “fans” of your organization instead of “friends”, but the purpose is the same. Step two, here are some things you can do with your FB Page:

• Grow a fan base. When a fan joins it’s reflected in their newsfeed which encourages others to join. Oooooh viral.
• Send messages to fans
• Promote events (physical or virtual) to fans, which they promote via their pages when they RSVP
• Host forums for fans to connect with each other and your organization
• Share photos and videos
• Promote other sites (your formal website)

Here are some other pros of FB Pages:

• They are indexed by search engines
• They are viewable by non-facebook users
• Fan demographic data is captured and made available to you.
• Pages can be set to automatically accept fan requests which limits the need for administration

Which leads to the one big con:

• You cannot administer/moderate wall or discussion board posts before they go live. Once they are posted, you can delete anything you’d like, but you can’t hold comments in moderation like you can with a blog, for example.

That one downside will keep many organizations away from FB Pages. As much as I agree that transparent communication with your audience, both positive and negative, will build a great brand and great relationships, many CEOs or SESs will not love the threat of the unhappy customer. So pay an intern to sit and watch your page all day! Just get out there and connect.

Usability expert Steve Krug just rolled through DC to conduct his one-day website usability testing seminar. I attended along with about 35 other folks who love to discuss the placement and colors of buttons. We’re a rare breed perhaps. Most of our discussion and the shared examples centered around e-commerce and marketing websites, which I guess is to be expected. The folks that get really hyper about creating a very usable website are those who make money with that website. Better bring in the usability experts before you lose a sale, right?

Do owners of other types of sites give usability some, if not equal, attention? Do government agencies worry about the usability of their sites? They don’t sell, but they do have a mission to meet. They provide information or push an agenda for the public good. And they serve the government itself. Take USAJobs.gov as an example. The big story these days is the retiring government work force and the challenge associated with hiring the new breed. Well if USAJobs is a pain to use (and I’m not saying it is), then there go your applicants. Want to fight rising health care costs? Then let’s make sure Health.gov is easy to use.

The mission for government agency websites is to make information easily available, or to persuade viewers to take a certain action. So purchases may not be on the line, but usability should still be a concern. Why make the effort, and spend the money, to stand up a site that your audience can’t easily use? No matter the scope of your web effort, focus on usability from the early stages of design and information architecture, and then conduct usability testing during the production process. As Steve showed us, it doesn’t have to be expensive or derail the time line; on the contrary, usability testing can both save money and keep a web design project on track.