How to make a change in the Italian eLearning market: yes, we can! :-)
What can we do to make a change in the Italian eLearning market?
A change in the Italian eLearning market is possible, but it could be induced by cultural demands and/or the law.
In practice, if it changes the feel of the entrepreneur, if changes the mentaliy of simply obeying the laws to avoid fines and evolves towards the idea of investing in online education because it is an opportunity to reduce risks related to the ignorance of the staff and then also a opportunities to increase productivity the company, then, even in the absence of legislative reforms, the market will evolve through more attractive and effective solutions on a large scale and certainly more expensive.
The alternative is legal, or legislative innovation with the emphasis not on the formal level (or at least not exclusively on that), but above all from a substantive standpoint, setting up of effective monitoring parameters in the field of learned skills or that favors the introduction of more effective methodologies and complex than the mere passive use of the content. It could also reform the accreditation procedure of introducing more selective parameters and rewarding those solutions that represent a breakthrough in the field. In conclusion, from this quagmire we can emerge raising the bar of expectations, demands, because, in current circumstances, it makes no sense to expect spontaneous evolution from the demand side, because there is no reason to justify the higher quality demands and higher prices.
The question we might ask ourselves at this point is: because they continue to produce an e-learning substantially low quality, when instead we could devote to another market segment, represented by the voluntary training, where the budget is certainly wider and the ability to innovate is central to the design and development process? The point is purely practical: although quality is low (and consequently prices too), market prefers lowbudget e-learning because of high demand for standardized products.
It is , therefore, the amount to make a difference, and despite the low unit price, this type of production is the most popular because it makes e-learning economic on a large scale. That’s why, just like a virus, the poor quality online education has spread to Italy and continues to persist, except for the exceptions, not because in Italy there are no talented professionals, but because demand does not evolve, since It is still highly profitable for the most common solutions, even if of little educational value. And all this to the detriment of an entire category of professionals who obviously tries frustration at having to bend to this market logic and does not have the chance to show their talents and develop new products to a market grow, which would require greater competitiveness and overall quality.
I said before (see a previous article on the current situation in the Italian e-learning market) that there is the possibility of voluntary training, which should be for e-learning professionals a true paradise: high budget availability, high expectations and concrete against the training to bring about change in ‘ organization, needs analysis to be conducted in the field, claiming the high quality of the solution to be adopted. Everything a good professional dreams, when he wants to create a path e-learning worthy of the name. The point is that this formation is difficult to intercept because it is reserved for major players in the various sectors for reasons related to the size, brand, to the objective need to implement a strategy on a very large number of employees.
The big players may not delegate to the standardized e-learning their specific training needs. We talk about brand national and international significance that hardly interfaccerebbero with small companies or individuals freelance, which they are practically condemned to stay out of the reach of these opportunities. The big players prefer to communicate with e-learning companies that have a history, a brand and providing the guarantees ex ante for their needs.
The consequence of all this is that the freelance or the small e-learning company will be found, in all probability, to work as a subcontractor on projects of major international brand, on behalf of a large company of national e-learning, without having the ability to declare in his portfolio that s/he have developed professional experience at the service of the big brands. In practice, professional growth for freelances and small companies in these cases remain in the secret owing to the confidentiality due to the obligation of loyalty to the client. Menawhile the client who has been awarded the contract increases its prestige availing these freelances but leaving that the latters will always remain in the shadow of majors and avoiding them to make a change in their condition of brand positioning.
Wanting to make a summary (with all simplifications applicable), if we were to imagine a hypothetical portfolio of a e-learning specialist Italian, we will find numerous collaborations on mandatory training projects, whose demo is often absent because he is not allowed to provide it by his/her previous clients, or if you can view past works, they are represented by the various low-budget solutions, which certainly do not strengthen an idea of the great freelance skills. In the same portfolio could have been included other higher quality demo developed for large brand, but, for reasons of confidentiality, they can not appear. This bad habit severely penalizes the figure of ‘ elearning specialist in Italy.
As you exit from this situation? We will see later, but I can anticipate for now it is that there are two solutions and relate to the legal field and the marketing field. Currently, The fact that we see is the need for the e-learning professionals to know the regulations for the mandatory training in Italy which often oblige clients to interface well with the vast majority of the market demand. To volunteer training, however, the problem is more complicated and is primarily about the need to intercept big players and companies that want to really innovate.
Disclaimer. The survey has collected fifty-five answers: it follows that I can only consider it a mere exploratory activity, in order to understand a phenomenon whose profound characteristics must be thoroughly investigated with more suitable instruments and with the involvement of a much higher number of subjects . I have no pretense of scientificity, but only the desire to put a point of view, an analysis, however partial and limited, of the phenomenon, a platform on which to discuss with the colleagues the actual characteristics of the market, aware of being able to be denied at any time and happy to be able to accept further and more defined points of view, of which I have no availability today.