How will this be measured? What survey or magazine, for instance?

This marketplace is an experiment of the LEARNING CONSORTIUM – from The MASIE Center (http://www.masie.com)

Be interesting to see if people make stock buy and sell decisions based on a desire to make the “price” of an answer change as opposed to their actual opinion on a topic.

Ah…that is a great point! It has been one of hte fascinating aspects of these Predictive Marketplaces. We’ll see :) Elliott

Being a standup instructor, I thought that Classroom learning needed to be hire than google searching. So I put my money in that market and elearning

Broman50

Really think about this…..do you all think that the classroom is really going to be be the primary tool for EVERYDAY learning in the workplace???

If I need to know something today…right now…I can’t wait for a class.

I totally agree with you Ron! Classes are good for some training, but for everyday learning they aren’t the primary tool. I don’t think everyone is reading the word “everyday” rather focusing in on the word PRIMARY (especially since it is in all caps).

Thanks….I am all about driving learning to the desktop as much as possible. If we think that we are tied to our machines right now…just imagine what it will be like in two years.

To be honest…I question how relevant e-learning (in course format) will even be two years from now. We need to blur the lines between what we traditionally call documentation and training. These are one in the same thing and we should just call it knowledge. Driving that knowledge as close to the desktop and as close to the very second someone needs it is the way of the future (IMHO).

Content(format irrelevant) needs to be linked to whatever specific function the worker is performing at that very second!

Ron.

I bought some robot shares just because they were cheap, I have really no idea what is robot as a learning tool, and probably many others like me. But Elliott probably knows something that we don’t know, and if we can make him share his knowledge, the price of my shares will probably go up……

I’ve assumed that it’s some information aggregation search, like a personalised Google desktop. So I bought into them. If it’s a mechanical human then I’m out of them sharpish!

Of course, it’s a bot, my own knowledge spider who knows me well, not only because I have told him what I know, but he also monitors what I read and I have told him my challenges at work from which he has worked out my knowledge gap which he continuously tries to fill by feeding me relevant information as it becomes available. This is it, I think, just waiting for my shares to move.

More thought should go into some of these terms and definitions. elearning, for example – what is it, what isn’t it? Is it anything to do with a person using a computer to view training content?

good point on definitions – I think there will be even more informal learning from other people at the workplace or via virtual networks – but this aspect is covered in a variety of options.
maybe a distinction should be something like externally directed learning or self-directed learning

I think that this is a great idea but agree that the definitions are too blurred. For example if I think that learners will tap into their networks using ICT tools, is that Social Networking or E-learning?

Why is only in the definition of classroom training a ? all other have a ! or a .
Is this conditioning in thinking ?

The primary tool that will be used in everyday learning at work (on or away from the office)is not on the list.
In fact, it incorporates almost all the “tools” listed!
The tool that will be used in 2009, will be the delivery device that every worker has with them at all times when they’re on (or off) the job: their mobile phone.
Here in Europe, the new 3G /UMTS mobile phones are fantastic tools for instant access to learning and knowledge. One example is the new interactive English language training course with live video tutoring launched last month at the 3GSM World Congress in Barcelona. 3iMobile’s Professional English – Video Live Edition is the prototype of the future of learning.
Therefore, I place my bets on Video Phone Learning.

I happen to agree that mobile devices (phones plus other PDAs) will become increasingly useful in training in ways that the North American market doesn’t yet see. As this market goes along is it possible to add new stocks?

I agree with the comments regarding definitions and trying to figure out what technologies will be in widespread distribution by 2009. Robots, however you might define them, might exist by 2009, but will there be widespread adoption by 2009? I doubt it. Remember, whenever we choose a technology, a criterion of that selection inevitably includes “Does everyone already own one? or Can we afford to buy one for everyone?”

I agree the big miss on the list is cellphones and PDA’s. They are already widely adopted, 802.11n will be in place in a few months so vendors will have a myriad of inexpensive tools for the standard by 2009, and we will have had a chance to experiment with their best use by then. That’s where I’d be putting my money if I could.

Great comments! We added Phone/Mobile learning to the list. If there are other “stocks” that should be added, please send them to me at emasie@masie.com Elliott Masie

What are some thoughts/brainstorms about Predictive Marketplaces in the learning situation?

I think that it all depends on who participates, the context of their participation and the position within the change curve your organization is in.

As we are finding out with our experiments with blogging, you get the early adopters providing most of the content/activity and many others just ignoring it because they haven’t bought into the concept.

I think that this type of predictive marketplace would fit into the same category. Unless you are past the tipping point of change, the value of the information you get from it is skewed to the point of view of the early adopters only.

Now, in this particular case…with this singular market, I think that we are getting a clearer picture of the thoughts of those early adopters (honestly…that is what the consortium is, isn’t it). So…from that perspective, I am watching these results with great interest.

Maybe I don’t get the model of buying stocks as a representation of a ‘vote’, as in an opinion survey, but I see a conflict in that the purpose of buying stocks is to make a profit. At a horse track, some people bet on #7 because the silks are blue and they like the color blue. In the stock market, some people buy a stock because they like the environmental posture of a company. There is a difference between “betting on” (akin to “voting for”) something you hope wins vs. betting on the thing that you can buy for the right price because you think it will go up in value. In this exercise I can do that without worrying about what will actually be the dominant training method in ’09. I’ve not had the ‘a-ha’ moment yet that shows me the difference between this and an opinion survey. Can someone enlighten me?

An important concept of ‘crowd wisdom’ is apparently independence – that people are not influenced by the people around them to ensure their ‘vote’ is their opinion. If we’re all watching stocks rise and fall and making decisions accordingly, are we not being influenced by the crowd around us?

I think that, in this case, because there is no true end-point (unless this question sits on the marketplace until 2009 and is tied to a very specific measurement device)we do run the risk of people just buying into the items that they think they will make money on.

I am still looking forward to the results of this market, because I am putting faith into the fact that that people are using it to really buy into the items that they feel will be dominant in 2009. I am hoping that people are not treating this short-lived market in a day-trading fashion.

If, indeed, people are treating this market as a day-trading index to make quick virtual cash for their portfolios, then I would have to conclude that the results are of little value.

As for being influenced by what is around us…I think there is still independence, to a certain extent. Even whenever you have a “vote only” type of situation, people are influenced by what others do and say. Early adopters make up their minds vote quickly and express their opinions to others. They then affect the voting of others. I can’t think of anything outside of something like guessing jelly-bean counts where there is absolutely no outside influence on people before they vote.

Thanks, RonSober – When you have to vote before seeing the current results there is less influence. If, before casting my vote on what will happen to the housing market in the next 3 months, I happen to see that 70% of people think the house market will do “XYZ”, then to fulfill my human need to be part of the ‘winning’ group, I might be persuaded to vote that way.

For example, I continue to be amazed that ‘Google Searching’ is a contender in this market. How could that be? Or are people buying ‘Google Searching’ because Google is a good stock bet? Would any manager actually choose, as the “primary tool for everyday learning”, to have each employee go and spend time searching Google? It strikes me that this prediction market is predicting something that is vogue and sexy – all things GOOGLE – without proper consideration of the question. Again, I stand ready to be enlightened.

Good points!

From a Google perspective…one of my big “ah-ha” moments of this last year came at the Learning2006 Conference. Elliott Masie asked a group of 1,800 learning professions “If you are at your desk and need to learn about something, what is the first thing you do?”

He then asked…“Do you take a class?” – nobody put up their hand.

He then asked…“Do you go to your LMS and look for an e-learning module?” – Relatively few people put up their hands.

Finally, he asked…“Do you go to Google?” – almost the entire room of people raised their hands.

This really made me think. 1,800 people who are responsible for creating and delivering learning to people would not go to a class or look for an e-learning module. They would hit Google…search for what they need to learn and go from there.

Now…nobody is saying that Google search is a training tool…but it is an excellent conduit to knowledge. If I had a Google-type of tool on my desktop that allowed me to mine the collective learning content of our entire organization, tap into the expertise of my peers and possibly connect me with others that I can learn from, then all of a sudden “search” becomes a massively powerful learning tool.

Let’s take this one step even further. I am a fan of the Performance Support side of things. Rather than even have to go to a search engine to find the knowledge I am looking for…I want to have the learning driven as close to the function I am performing right at that time. If I am in a sofware application, I want to hit a Panic Button that takes me directly to the knowledge chunk pertaining to exaclty what I am doing in that application. If I am on the cell-phone, in my car, watching TV or even playing a video game, I want the same function.

This type of function is kind of like “search, taken to the next level”.

Sorry for the soapbox on that one…whew!

Ron.

Let me ask you a couple questions pertaining to the Learning2006 example:

1. If your higher-ups said to you, “Go and take this training class”, would you have gone?

2. If your higher-ups said to you, “Go to the LMS and take this elearning module”, would you have gone?

We don’t ask our employees what they did when they needed some knowledge – we tell them what to do to ensure they A) get exactly what they need, and B) do in the shortest amount of down-time. (I know you know that already.) Searching Google not only doesn’t deliver either, it becomes dangerous for A) what they will learn, and B) how much time they will waste.

I agree completely that a ‘searchable knowledge base’ of relevant info is a crucial tool for any company in the future and will become a standard methodology for keeping workers trained.

That said, I’m thinking ‘Google Searching’ should call a board meeting and restate it’s business objective, perhaps even change its name to something like ‘Google-style Search Mechanism’ – but then that might put it in direct competition with ‘Performance Support’ who have a much better marketing plan – :).

Mark

Good pts.

I agree that predictive markets can lead to people betting on ideas they believe will yield high returns b/o sex appeal/trendiness.

Like you, I’m interested in seeing the outcome of this survey. It’s opening my mind to a number of new and useful ideas.

One thing I’m curious about:

Is anyone investigating the learning process (or learner habits) as the Internet and Web evolve and make so much information instantly available?

For example:
- how do learners know what to look for
- how do they know where to start
- what steps do they go through to find it
- what patterns do they find more useful given different types of problems to solve.

Personally, I’m discovering that I use different combinations of tools and techniques for different types of problems, and I was wondering what others are finding.

I think a prediction market encourages everyone to act on what they realistically expect to happen as opposed to what they hope will happen. As a result, the market should give a more realistic prediction of what actually will happen.

For example, in a sports market, like the Stanley Cup Playoffs, I may be a big fan of the New York Rangers and really want them to win the Cup, but is that realistic? Am I willing to lose money over it?

Personally, I would have to say no. I’d love it if they won, but I really don’t think they can do it. I think Detroit or Ottawa is more likely to win, so I’ll buy stock in one of those teams even if I’m not a fan because my desire to make (or at least not lose) money in the market outweighs my wish for my team to win.

The market removes hopes and dreams and wishes from the equation and focuses on facts as they are known by the participants. By mixing all those facts as known by all those participants, we wind up with a fairly accurate prediction.

Cisco to buy WebEx for $3.2B, and how it may impact future training…

What Cisco gets:

Apps to drive network traffic use.

Why:

WebEx owns it’s own hi-speed network for passing many-channel video over the internet.

How this impacts training:

One more step toward offering something I’ve been referring to as multiple/parallel internets. Term is a misnomer at best.

Who are the players:

MSFT, Google, Cisco.

What do/will they offer:

Many video/voice channels (possibly like TV) over the web to the masses (sometimes called ‘The Triple Play’, i.e. video, voice, & IP over the internet).

How do/will they deliver it:

MSFT with Telcos; Google on its own activated dark-fiber; Cisco with WebEx.

How will users receive and consume it:

Could be desktop, laptop, set-top box, wireless device.

Status:

Build-out has been going on for about 5 yrs and may reach built-out/adoption tipping pt in 2 yrs or less.

It’s not easy to summarize, but here are a some links:

Google buying dark fiber:
http://www.engadget.com/2005/09/20/googles-buying-more-fiber-wifi-pages-and-new-software-found/

IDC: Microsoft and the New Telecom Order:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/7/7/5/775cb839-a749-49a7-b735-edaf05ca1501/idc_telecomorder.pdf

MSFT: IPTV
http://www.microsoft.com/tv/default.mspx

It is interesting to note that the items can be categorized in many ways. Here’s three ways – instructional materials (e-learning, classroom training), non-instructional materials (performance support, social networks, Google) and delivery means (phone/mobile, Podcasts).

Of the two learning modes vs. delivery means, I’ve seen research that claims most learning is non-instructional and by a substantial margin.

Hence, if traditional training is to rise in value and trainers secure their role, learning needs to be less instructional and more performance support, such as knowledge bases. That almost excludes classroom training and pushes toward just-in-time, if not a concept we coined at the International Knowledge Management Institute – “Just-for-You Learning”.

These prices look too high to me. At the moment the prices add up to nearly 900, but since only 3 will pay off at 100 each, the prices should really only add up to about 300. Looks like irrational exuberance in the ‘everyday workplace learning’ market.

I’m going to sell until prices are back down to more reasonable levels.

What source is going to be used as the metric for this market? How will the correct answer be determined?