Design Thinking for Innovation

Peer-graded assignment

Learning Launch

Challenge

I work for a physician membership organization. My department/team is made up of physicians,  instructional designers and multimedia developers and is responsible for providing educational products  to our members. My particular role in the team is graphic designer and instructional designer. Although  we develop e-learning, webinars, podcasts, videos and print material, the educational products we  develop most frequently take the form of face-to-face presentations/workshops.

A new topic (follow-up of lab test results) was proposed, based on membership input, to create a 3-hour  workshop. A workshop of that length is not the norm here, but the topic was considered to be of high  importance to the members so extra effort was needed. Due to the length, not only were PowerPoint  slides needed, but a printed workbook, posters and a variety of table cards for member participation.  Additionally, the whole flow of the workshop had to be planned to maximize membership engagement  in learning.

Since this was a new product, which would be presented repeatedly over the course of the program  cycle (3 years), it needed to really work well with a variety of audiences (i.e. physicians that have  different specialties and practice settings) to show our equivalent of ROI which we call ROL or “return  on learning”.

Selection

As this particular topic choice came straight from our members, we knew that we were safe on that  point. What we would need to work out the details for, would be the actual content and flow and  interactivity of the learning product. We typically have many “dry runs” of new presentation content in- house, but using a Learning Launch when approaching members with the product just made so much  sense. We already knew they wanted/needed the product, but we really needed to see how they’d react  to what we had produced and then get the feedback to make refinements to the products before  launching it as a piece of our larger scale workshop series.

Application

For our primary learning launch, we decided on an in-house, full-length workshop presentation to other  physicians in the organization who would understand the point and content of the workshop. Non- physicians were also in attendance so their focus would be more on the flow and process than on the  content. One person presented the entire workshop.

The workshop was presented in its entirety with all print material in use including a workbook, multiple  wall posters, interactive table exercises. This exercise provided us with valuable feedback about the

structure and flow of the workshop and resulted in some changes being made to the order the content  was presented. The print materials were well received and well used.

The second learning launch was to an actual membership group. The workshop was presented in its  entirety and all supporting materials were used. There were two presenters working through the  material with the group and while one person presented, the other observed the audience for cues and  insight into their reactions to the information. This was highly anticipated and we really wanted insight  into how the material would be received and we were hoping for as much granular feedback as  possible.

This particular group had expressed a very particular interest in the topic, so while we anticipated a  positive reaction to the workshop overall, we were very keen to see if the material answered their  questions and left them feeling more confident in their follow-up procedures. We were also especially  interested in how they would react to the supporting materials and if they would be as useful/helpful as  we had anticipated.

Insight

By using the learning launch, we were able to refine many aspects of the workshop presentation. In  particular, we received excellent feedback from the audience about the content. This reassured us that  we were on the right track and only very small refinements were needed. A few small sections were  added to the material reflective concerns and questions that had come up which seemed to reflect hole  in the content.

One area where the usefulness of the learning launch stood out was in the use of supporting print  materials, particularly some posters. The posters had been placed around the room for the audience to  walk around to and react to a statement by placing a dot along a scale at the beginning of the  presentation and again, at the end. This was to reflect their feelings/insights about a particular This data  would be collected by the presenters and analyzed afterwards to suggest participants’  learning/increased insight into the topic.

Interestingly, the design of the posters and the placement of the scale and text didn’t exactly hinder the  particpants’ use of the posters, but it did seem to confuse them a bit how the scale reflected their  thoughts and how to reply. This also greatly complicated the presenters’ data collection at the end. By  seeing how people “used” the posters, we redesigned them so they made more sense visually and  contextually and allowed for easier data retrieval for subsequent workshops.

Approach

Of the tools available, a learning launch was the more useful for providing us with the feedback and  information we needed to refine our product. If you look along the whole workshop development  timeline, this fit in the best at that moment in time.

The primary developer had already employed storytelling when the product was being developed and  that was helpful in the conceptualization, as was mind-mapping, but once the workshop and its assets  had been pulled together, we really needed a learning launch to find any possible problems or even  minor deficiencies.


Design Thinking for Innovation Peer - graded assignment Learning Launch Challenge I work for a physician membership organization . My department / team is made up of physicians , instructional designers and multimedia developers and is responsible for providing educational products to our members . My particular role in the team is graphic designer and instructional designer . Although we develop e - learning , webinars , podcasts , videos and print material , the educational products we develop most frequently take the form of face - to - face presentations / workshops . A new topic ( follow - up of lab test results ) was proposed , based on membership input , to create a 3 - hour workshop . A workshop of that length is not the norm here , but the topic was considered to be of high importance to the members so extra effort was needed . Due to the length , not only were PowerPoint slides needed , but a printed workbook , posters and a variety of table cards for member participation . Additionally , the whole flow of the workshop had to be planned to maximize membership engagement in learning . Since this was a new product , which would be presented repeatedly over the course of the program cycle ( 3 years ) , it needed to really work well with a variety of audiences ( i.e. physicians that have different specialties and practice settings ) to show our equivalent of ROI which we call ROL or “ return on learning ” . Selection As this particular topic choice came straight from our members , we knew that we were safe on that point . What we would need to work out the details for , would be the actual content and flow and interactivity of the learning product . We typically have many “ dry runs ” of new presentation content in- house , but using a Learning Launch when approaching members with the product just made so much sense . We already knew they wanted / needed the product , but we really needed to see how they ’d react to what we had produced and then get the feedback to make refinements to the products before launching it as a piece of our larger scale workshop series . Application For our primary learning launch , we decided on an in - house , full - length workshop presentation to other physicians in the organization who would understand the point and content of the workshop . Non- physicians were also in attendance so their focus would be more on the flow and process than on the content . One person presented the entire workshop . The workshop was presented in its entirety with all print material in use including a workbook , multiple wall posters , interactive table exercises . This exercise provided us with valuable feedback about the structure and flow of the workshop and resulted in some changes being made to the order the content was presented . The print materials were well received and well used . The second learning launch was to an actual membership group . The workshop was presented in its entirety and all supporting materials were used . There were two presenters working through the material with the group and while one person presented , the other observed the audience for cues and insight into their reactions to the information . This was highly anticipated and we really wanted insight into how the material would be received and we were hoping for as much granular feedback as possible . This particular group had expressed a very particular interest in the topic , so while we anticipated a positive reaction to the workshop overall , we were very keen to see if the material answered their questions and left them feeling more confident in their follow - up procedures . We were also especially interested in how they would react to the supporting materials and if they would be as useful / helpful as we had anticipated . Insight By using the learning launch , we were able to refine many aspects of the workshop presentation . In particular , we received excellent feedback from the audience about the content . This reassured us that we were on the right track and only very small refinements were needed . A few small sections were added to the material reflective concerns and questions that had come up which seemed to reflect hole in the content . One area where the usefulness of the learning launch stood out was in the use of supporting print materials , particularly some posters . The posters had been placed around the room for the audience to walk around to and react to a statement by placing a dot along a scale at the beginning of the presentation and again , at the end . This was to reflect their feelings / insights about a particular This data would be collected by the presenters and analyzed afterwards to suggest participants ’ learning / increased insight into the topic . Interestingly , the design of the posters and the placement of the scale and text did n’t exactly hinder the particpants ’ use of the posters , but it did seem to confuse them a bit how the scale reflected their thoughts and how to reply . This also greatly complicated the presenters ’ data collection at the end . By seeing how people “ used ” the posters , we redesigned them so they made more sense visually and contextually and allowed for easier data retrieval for subsequent workshops . Approach Of the tools available , a learning launch was the more useful for providing us with the feedback and information we needed to refine our product . If you look along the whole workshop development timeline , this fit in the best at that moment in time . The primary developer had already employed storytelling when the product was being developed and that was helpful in the conceptualization , as was mind - mapping , but once the workshop and its assets had been pulled together , we really needed a learning launch to find any possible problems or even minor deficiencies .