CHAPTER 5

Successive Approximation Model 2

The second successive approximation model, SAM2, is an elaborated and extended version of SAM1 for situations in which development cannot be fully integrated with design. While there are many advantages to fully integrating design and development into a single cycle as is done in SAM1, it isn't always practical. Projects with large amounts of content, e-learning projects developed through programming rather than with quicker authoring tools, and organizations that need to begin development production only after design has been completed (such as when development is contracted out), are examples of when SAM2 may be needed.

Work in SAM2 is divided into three phases: preparation, iterative design, and iterative development. A brief overview of the process begins on the next page (see Figure 5-1). In subsequent chapters and the remainder of the book we will discuss and review the activities and milestones that occur throughout the three phases of the SAM2 process.

Figure 5-1. Overview of SAM2

As with SAM1, SAM2 depends on functional prototype development within design iterations. But SAM2 prescribes separate iteration cycles for development (from which design issues may arise, triggering the need for additional design work—note the return arrow from development phase to design phase in Figure 5-1).

PREPARATION PHASE

The preparation phase is the period for gathering background information before attempting to design the first solution. Backgrounding helps set the target, identify special issues, and rule out options. It prepares for the intensive design activities in the next phase by narrowing focus. This is the time for actively exploring the performance problem in broad terms—its context within the organization's needs, goals, and outcome expectations.

 

Background information to be gathered includes:

• previous performance improvement efforts (if any) and their outcomes
• programs currently in use (if any)
• available content materials
• organizational responsibilities for training
• constraints, such as schedule, budget, and legal requirements
• who is the ultimate decision maker
• what will define project success.

Key backgrounding objectives:

• Identification of the key players and their commitment to participate. Key players include: decision and budget maker, opportunity owner, subject expert, performance supervisor, recent learner, target learner, and organization's deployment manager.
• Identification of the organization's primary opportunity here and its dependency on specific behavioral changes.

 

In SAM, preparation work is done quickly at first, taking paths of least resistance. It's not because this work is unimportant—it's critically important to base decisions on accurate information and avoid the risk of making unverified assumptions, but the model prescribes performing analysis in the context of considering alternative solutions. It explicitly avoids exhaustive research that will be inevitably incomplete anyway and might not even prove useful.

At the start of the process, much time can be spent collecting information that could be relevant, but turns out not to be very helpful. We need to get to the right questions to research—quickly. Perhaps it's surprising, but identifying the right questions comes partly from the iterative design phase where the context of the questions makes them more specific.

Perhaps the clearest way to state this important concept is this: Most of the analysis work will be addressing the question, “Why isn't this design a good solution?” rather than the question, “What are all the possible solutions?” But before we start designing, if there are obvious things to avoid and obvious considerations to include, there's no reason to begin blindly. So we collect the information that's readily available and move on to the Savvy Start.

Savvy Start

The Savvy Start is a solutions brainstorming event in which the design team and key stakeholders review collected background information and generate initial design ideas. This phase of the design process begins with jumping into solutions stakeholders may already have in mind. While it's important to get these on the table as soon as possible, whether they are destined to become part of the final solution or eventually abandoned, this activity proves invaluable for many purposes, not the least of which is determining who is really in charge and what outcomes are essential to success. Brainstorming solutions is an amazingly efficient way of determining what the main performance objectives are and simultaneously dealing with the organization's hierarchy that can so easily obscure understanding needs and goals.

Further information is discovered by design and review of rapidly constructed, disposable prototypes. These prototypes promote brainstorming and creative problem solving, help the team determine what really is and isn't important, and help align the team's values.

 

Savvy Start highlights:

• Design cycles are used to evaluate the direction suggested by gathered information, assumptions, and early ideas.
• Prototypes are very rough and finished just barely enough to communicate and test ideas.
• Outcome performance objectives are listed along with the prototyped designs that will be used to help learners achieve them.
• Evaluation is done merely by discussion. Redefining and changing everything may be appropriate, including even the business problem to be addressed and the people to be trained.
• Rapid is the key!

ITERATIVE DESIGN PHASE

As in SAM1, design, prototyping, and evaluation are done iteratively in small steps. The major difference is that in SAM2, the project moves on to the development phase when design iterations have been completed, whereas in SAM1 the product is completed at the conclusion of these iterations (see Figure 5-2).

Figure 5-2. Iterative Design Phase of SAM2

With larger projects or teams, documentation and coordination are prerequisites to success. Note the additional activities along the bottom of the model diagram (Figure 5-2). Described in more detail below, the Savvy Start is an orchestrated brainstorming session in which rapid-fire iterations of evaluate-design-prototype cycles are completed. Project planning identifies tasks and who will hold responsibilities for them. Additional design is produced later through more iterations, but by a smaller team focused on covering additional content, resolving inconsistencies among designs, or solving problems that arose along the way. These later design needs may actually be identified in the development phase as issues or opportunities are discovered.

Project Planning

Project planning involves quantitative assessment of remaining project development details affecting timeline and budget. It involves careful consideration not only of cost and quality management, but also of related communication, risk, schedule, scope, and staffing implications.

 

Project planning highlights:

• Based on the designs created or selected in the Savvy Start, it's now possible to create a project plan that has integrity.
• The first step is to capture discussions and decisions by preparing and circulating a Savvy Start Summary Report.
• Initial Media and Content Style Guides can also be prepared, although they are likely to be incomplete until additional design cycles have been completed (see below). It's easy and efficient to capture preferences as they spill out.
• An initial draft of a Content Development Plan can be prepared, indicating responsibilities and estimates of what material will be needed.
• Content writing, media development, and programming can now be estimated for the overall project plan.
• The biggest risk lies with learning and performance objectives for which no solutions have yet been prototyped. There are likely to be some.

Additional Design

The Savvy Start session may take only a half-day, three full days, or sometimes even more. The length is as often determined by incidental factors, such as availability of people or meeting space, as it is by project parameters, such as quantity and complexity of content or variation in learner readiness. As intense (and fun) as these sessions often are and should be, they are more properly considered brainstorming sessions rather than design sessions.

Good ideas and preferences spill out, the need for research and more information becomes apparent, and attractive instructional approaches emerge that need to be thoughtfully reviewed and refined, if not modified extensively or even replaced on closer examination. Further, while the involvement of key stakeholders is essential to truly understanding boundaries and expectations, these people usually can't afford the time necessary to reach needed depth or cover all the content. Additional design work will be needed.

The additional design team will likely be smaller, and team members will likely be charged with preparing ideas in advance of meeting with others. It remains important, however, to follow the rule of breadth before depth. That is, it's important to consider all the content to understand whether a broad variety of instructional treatments will be necessary, or whether just one or a few will be appropriate for all content. With each iteration, design can become more specific and reach greater depth until all details are finalized.

Prototypes

Prototypes continue to be important to test and communicate ideas. A usable prototype is better than any description, specification, or storyboard. A prototype communicates specificity by example, making it easy for people to understand, ask questions, and make detailed comments. Multiple types of prototypes may be developed following the Savvy Start depending on the selected means of delivery.

Media prototypes integrate media elements to demonstrate the desired “look-and-feel.” Layout, colors, fonts, images, and samples of other elements are brought together to form a clear design example and set criteria for full product development.

Functional prototypes are usually derived from Savvy Start prototypes by enhancing or adding details to make them testable with learners. In the case of e-learning, increased functionality provides a better sense of interactivity and usability.

Integrated prototypes present the integration of functional and media prototypes along with representative content (i.e., feedback text, sound, video, and so on).

Special-purpose prototypes are created to test any technical or design components that must be finalized early in the process.

 

Additional design highlights:

• The same iterative process of design—prototype—evaluate is used following the post–Savvy Start. The key decision makers should review and approve the new prototypes before development commences. Trusting they will be happy with how things are evolving is not a good practice.
• Except for small projects and those with a very narrow focus, there isn't enough time to create functional prototypes for all behavioral objectives. It's therefore important to review all content and organize it by similarities so that the smallest number of necessary treatments and prototypes can be identified. You need a prototype for each type of content, but not for each instance of the same type of content.
• Post–Savvy Start prototypes can be created with a smaller team and, as is often necessary, even without some of the key people, although their participation is always preferred. Again, if key people are not involved, it's not safe to proceed without getting their approval. A surprise objection late in the process can be devastating.

ITERATIVE DEVELOPMENT PHASE

The iterations that are so advantageous to the design process are equally powerful for development activities. They allow stakeholders to continue to have a means of evaluating decisions and making corrections within project constraints. The importance of this advantage cannot be overstated. Because a functional product becomes available quickly, before time-consuming refinements are made, stakeholders can get an invaluable glimpse of the design becoming real (see Figure 5-3).

Figure 5-3. Iterative Development Phase

Design Proof

At the beginning of the development phase, a plan is made to produce a design proof, which is typically the product of the first cycle. Projects with large amounts of content will require a cycle for each type of instructional approach. Approval or disapproval will determine whether:

• Additional design work or design rework is needed. If so, the process returns to iterative design to produce needed designs.
• Another development iteration is needed to make corrections.
• Iterative development can proceed to producing an alpha version of the final product.

 

The design proof is essentially a visual, functional demonstration of the proposed solution that integrates samples of all components to test and prove viability. It has greater functionality or usability than the design prototypes and is built with the same tools that will produce the final deliverable. In this way, it not only tests the viability of the design, but also of the production system.

If technology is involved, the design proof needs to run on the equipment and network to be used by learners and demonstrate functional communication with the learning management system, if one is to be used.

Design proof evaluation is a critical event in the process. Design proofs are used to scout out potential problems so they don't become last-minute crises. It's the big opportunity for the design team and the stakeholders to check how the course will function as a whole. At this point, it is possible to get the clearest sense of what the overall solution is becoming while still having time to note corrections that are clearly needed.

 

Design proof highlights:

• The first production cycle produces the design proof, which provides an opportunity to confirm all design decisions by actually presenting and testing a functional application on the intended delivery platform.
• Design proofs test:
  • design viability
  • whether the design is in a form that communicates requirements effectively
  • the suitability of development tools and processes.
• Design proofs combine sample content, including examples of all components, with design treatments. Text and media are polished and representative of the final quality to be expected for all similar elements.

Alpha

The alpha is a complete version of the instructional application to be validated against the approved design. All content and media are implemented. If problems exist, and they well might because it is often important to begin evaluation before all issues can be rectified, those known problems are listed. No major, undocumented issues are expected to be found, but it's nevertheless common for them to surface despite everyone's best efforts.

Evaluation of the alpha release identifies deviations from style guides, graphical errors, text changes, sequencing problems, missing content, lack of clarity, and functional problems.

 

Alpha highlights:

• The second production cycle (or set of cycles for large projects) produces the alpha from approved designs.
• Full content development integration occurs in this cycle. Samples no longer suffice.
• The alpha is nearly the final version of the complete instructional program to be validated against the approved design. All content and media are implemented.
• Completion and approval of the alpha signals the beginning of the validation cycles.
• Review of the alpha is expected to find only minor deviations from style guides, writing issues, graphical errors, and functional problems.

Beta

Because errors are nearly always found in alpha releases, a second cycle, called the validation cycle, is scheduled as part of the process to produce a second final product candidate, the beta release. The beta is a modified version of the alpha that incorporates needed changes identified during evaluation of the alpha. If all goes as expected and corrections are made carefully, the beta review should discover few errors, and those errors discovered should include only minor typographical errors, or corrections in graphics.

 

Beta highlights:

• The alpha release is modified to reflect errors identified in its evaluation. The resulting beta release is viewed as a first gold release candidate. There should be no functional errors at this stage.
• The beta release should be evaluated by not only subject matter experts, but also by actual learners representative of the target population.

Gold

Construction of the gold release is the final phase of development. At this point, while no project ever reaches perfection, the courseware becomes fully usable within the parameters of previously approved project guidelines.

 

Gold release highlights:

• If problems are identified, they must be rectified before the beta release can be given the gold crown. A modified version of a beta, “beta 2” (sometimes called “gold candidate 2”) and, if necessary, a succession of numbered candidates is produced until all problems are resolved.
• When the beta performs as expected and no additional problems are identified, it simply becomes the gold release without further development and is ready for rollout implementation.
• Hopefully, but all too rarely, rollout signals the beginning of an evaluation study to determine whether targeted behaviors are actually achieved and whether these new behaviors secure the performance success expected.