Live events still rock & thoughts on the future of virtual events

Over the past week I attended two very different live events that epitomized where virtual events need to go in order to gain more widespread acceptance.

Geeks Celebrating Their Geekiness

The lovely Pamela Kucera & I geeking out

Last Friday, I attended the Philly Geek Awards, conceived and hosted by Geekadelphia and featuring awards for all kinds of local geek-related activities: tech start ups, film making, comic art, blogging, podcasts, viral videos, geek fashion, art, science, app development, game development...really, a veritable smorgasbord of geekery. There were mentions of Star Wars, Star Trek, Game of Thrones, and bacon (lots of mentions of bacon). At one point, a furry accepted an award. Besides the furry, let's just say I was with my people. It was a black-tie event, the equivalent of a geek prom. It was a blast.

Cosplay Kids Category Winners at BCC

On Sunday, I attended the Baltimore ComicCon. This is the 3rd year I've attended, and it continues to be my favorite of the ComicCons (no, I haven't been to San Diego) because of the emphasis on the writers and artists. I got to see Anthony and Conor from Kill Shakespeare, peek behind the big black curtain to glimpse Stan Lee, chat with the writer/artist for one of my son's favorite kids graphic novelists, and see more cosplay than I need to for the entire year.


What do both of these events have in common? They bring together busy communities for an opportunity to bond.

Granted, both of these events focused on people in creative industries...industries full of innovators, entrepreneurs and creators. They provided an opportunity for people who busy themselves making things a chance to look around and see what their peers are making. There is immeasurable value in that...in lifting up your head from your own work and seeing the success, hearing about the trials and failures, of others. I loved being a part of these events because they inspire me to look at my own goals and dream bigger.

Can virtual events recreate that experience of allowing creatives and creators to talk, share, bond and inspire each other? Yes. But they need to reach beyond their own user groups.

Right now, the most successful virtual events are focused on the communities and people engaged in virtual events. No surprise there, really, and its encouraging to see people eating their own dog food. But as a designer, I think about how these technologies could enable the extension of the communities that gather in person for events like the Philly Geek Awards and ComicCon on an ongoing basis. I don't think the live events will go away, nor do I want them to, but I see potential in extending out the connections made, information shared, and inspiration disseminated at these events on a more consistent and ongoing basis. We're not just a community for an annual event...we're a community all year round. We're not a community when we're face-to-face, we're a community that exists in interest and common goals no matter where we are.

Virtual worlds and event platforms can enable that type of interaction whenever you need it, not isolated to the scheduled dates and times. Pervasive community interaction already takes place in 2D tools like Facebook, but it doesn't capture the feeling of presence and engagement that 3D environments provide. It's really not possible to have a Facebook "event" and Twitter, although it provides the opportunity for live chats, is lacking the visual sharing that is such an integral part of creative communities.

Consider this a challenge to my creative friends. We push the boundaries and pride ourselves in creating new things. Shouldn't we be the ones to embrace the most progressive technologies for establishing and growing our communities?

And now for something completely different...10 women musicians you should listen to instead of Adele

For those of you who read my blog for emerging technology applications for learning, or for my reflections on being a female entrepreneur, be warned: this is a post from my inner (and not so secret) music snob.

I'm not a fan of Adele. She has a beautiful voice, to be sure. Her music is deeply emotional and soulful, absolutely. But I cannot stand the whiney, sometimes vindictive, passive aggressive lyrics that reinforce women as victims. I'll even give Adele herself a pass, I mean, she's only 23 and how much do you know about relationships, yourself, or anything really, at that age? 

So its not really Adele I don't like. Its the cult of Adele, the masses who are buying into the negative stereotypes of the roles of women in relationships. Frankly, I find it depressing. And then yesterday, the last straw that prompted me to write all of this down...I heard Adele's cover of The Cure's Love Song. Oh. Hell. No. For me, The Cure is the essence of my formative years of musical taste and my emotional development...along with New Order and The Smiths, they form the "holy trinity" of my musical identity. The Cure have a reputation for being "depressing" but with the exception of their Disintegration album, the rumors of their music being broody and melancholy have been greatly exaggerated. But hearing Adele singing Love Song? THAT was depressing. 

In recent years, I've become a much bigger fan of female musicians and have felt a stronger connection to their music. In the interest of not just complaining about how Adele fans are perpetuating negative stereotypes of women, I'd like to offer some alternative female artists to consider if you're seeking a soundtrack to your break up, your anger at the man who's done you wrong, or just some straight up girl power. 

• Amanda Palmer: I'm going to start with my absolute favorite, the artist who I'm fangirl crazy for, and who grounds me whenever I need a kick in the pants. Her solo work is amazing, but go ahead and listen to the Dresden Dolls stuff as well. Oh, and of course, Evelyn Evelyn. There's no one who can rock the ukelele like AFP. For a start, try Astronaut. Then watch In My Mind. And then maybe a little Map of Tasmania (if you're not easily offended).
• Bitter Ruin: I "discovered" this band at an Amanda Palmer late night cabaret show last fall. Their music is so good, and Georgia's voice is so hauntingly beautiful, that they've made it into heavy rotation on my personal playlists. Plus Ben is adorable in the best possible way. Their new video, Trust, is a good place to start.
• Feist: You probably heard 1234 on the radio, but listen to more of Feist and you get the sense that you're in the company of your best girlfriend who understands just how you feel. My favorite is How My Heart Behaves. And she's got a new album coming out...so get that too.
• Florence + the Machine: Soulful voice, amazing lyrics, and the ability to capture the essence of complex but hopeful emotion. Cosmic Love makes me happy happy happy.
• Regina Spektor: Probably the most underappreciated musician on this list, Regina's voice is phenominal and makes you feel her lyrics deeply. Start with Fidelity then keep going.
• Neko Case: To be honest, I need to listen to Neko Case more than I do. Correction: I need to listen to more Neko Case songs than I do. I'm stuck on This Tornado Loves You. 
• Amy Winehouse: I'm so sad she's gone. Her songs represented themes as tragic as her life. Move beyond Rehab and listen to Tears Dry On Their Own.
• Zee Avi: If you haven't heard of Zee Avi, you're welcome. She's a powerhouse in a tiny package. Listen to Monte for a sample.
• Colbie Caillat: I had to include my guilty pleasure on this list. Seriously, she's mushy, chick pop wallowing goodness. My inner music snob is embarrassed to include her, but include her I must. I Won't will get Colbie added to your guilty pleasure list too.
• Patsy Cline: If you haven't listened to a Patsy Cline album, what is wrong with you? :) Seriously...this woman paved the way for heartbreak songs from the woman's point of view. No one does it better. No one. Listen to She's Got You right now. Do it. 

Honorable Mentions, individual songs:

Sia, Breathe Me

10,000 Maniacs, Verdi Cries

Kirsty MacColl, In These Shoes

Am I missing anyone? 

The F word as a strategic advantage

I want to talk about the "F" word. The one that makes many learning professionals cringe, the one that risks you or your ideas being taken seriously, the one that people want to say but imagine that by using it they will risk credibility and perhaps even look foolish. Yes, I'm talking about FUN.

We all want to have fun...I'd venture to say we all want to have more fun than we're having now. We dream of our work being more fun, of having fun on vacation, even just infusing a little fun into everyday tasks. Its true that fun is subjective; what someone may consider a chore, others might get great joy from (for example, driving...I love it! other people, not so much...).

Fun is also an attitude. You know that expression "you make your own fun"? Truer words never spoken. Everyone knows someone who's a killjoy...as soon as he or she walks into a room, all the air is sucked out. We also all know someone who is like a ray of sunshine, who we love to be around because of the energy and attitude that the person infuses into even the most mundane tasks. I had a cousin who could make even standing in line at the bank fun. We gravitate towards those people because we want to have fun, be happy, and enjoy life.

Source: http://historytech.wordpress.com/2008/03/24/video-games-and-social-studies/

What bothers me most about the concept of fun is how it is handedly dismissed in many professional environments. For years, I couldn't talk about games for learning to potential clients, or at least I didn't call them games. Why? As soon as they heard the word "game," they dismissed anything else I had to say. Most companies wanted "serious" training and the idea of learning through a game, or for learners to be having fun...*gasp*! Well it was just never going to fly, because learning was already devalued in most organizations as a cost center, and then start calling it FUN?? Anyone who wanted to be taken seriously was not going to start throwing around the F word.

Within the last 9 months, I've seen a shift in the market. I get requests for proposals from companies who are specifically looking for games for learning. Many are still tentative, nervous; they've heard about badges and gamification but they aren't sure what that means for their training initiatives or how game dynamics might improve learner motivation and engagement. Most organizations approach games very seriously, sometimes to the point of taking all the potential for fun right out of them.

Fun can be serious and challenging and look an awful lot like work, just ask any athlete. The attitude, the expectation that even when we face our most difficult challenges and most serious subject matter, that human beings strive to be happier and have more fun...these ideas don't have to be in conflict. Nathan Verrill recently gave the keynote at LEEF titled "Work is not the enemy of fun." He talked about how immersive games can be designed to address even the most serious social and business issues while fostering opportunities for fun to get (and keep) people's attention. Jonathan Richman made one of the most resonating points about marketing in a presentation at ePatient Connections last fall: you aren't just competing for attention with your competitors...you're competing with LOLCats. These presentations reinforced my opinion that in a world where there are so many distractions, competing media streams, and ways that we can choose to entertain ourselves, our business goals, and for learning professionals, our learning goals, must be addressed with strategies that account for human motivational drivers and the environmental context that we're operating in.

My conclusion? Fun is the new strategic advantage.

Organizations should be embracing fun. Organizations who close their eyes to this necessity the will suffer for it because employees and even customers will seek out fun where it exists. You want to attract and retain the best talent? Create a workplace that they are happy to jump into every day. You want people to be engaged in learning activities? Design relevant training that people look forward to participating in. You want to attract and retain more customers? Create a company that's a pleasure to do business with.

After all, who doesn't want to have more fun?

Learning, and the opportunity and risk of living publicly

We are in the age of living publicly.

Social media has enabled us to broadcast and publish our work, our thoughts, our pictures, and our "updates" not just to people we know, but to the entire world. This brings with it an enormous opportunity and also tremendous risk, sometimes at the same time.

Take, for example, Rebecca Black.

If you haven't yet seen the Friday video by Rebecca Black, or heard all of the news stories about her and the video, take a minute and watch it now.



Its not a good song or video (although I would bet you money you'll find yourself singing the catchy hook later today)...in fact, its pretty awful. BUT SHE'S 13. I never fancied myself a musician, but I did think I was a pretty fantastic writer when I was a teenager. When I look back on what I wrote? Wow, I was terrible. I'm thankful that all of my writing was confined to spiral notebooks and the broadest audience was my friends and family who encouraged me to keep writing, but never gave me false praise or soul-crushing criticism. I was allowed to practice and improve, and in some cases, realize that I wasn't all that good and I didn't have the passion to work harder to become good.

That's the beauty of learning. To really learn something, to become an expert, you have to practice. You have to have a safe place to try and experiment and fail and improve and stick with it and, eventually, get better. Becoming really good at something requires dedication and practice. Sure, some people start out with natural abilities or inclinations that might make learning something easier. But there are very few things that you can't learn and be really good at if you keep practicing.

Rebecca Black may have never become a great singer, songwriter, or musician. Maybe she would have (maybe she still will). But what impact has the public lambasting of her video had on her learning, her motivation, and her development?

Criticism is hard to hear. None of us really like to hear that we're bad at something...we thrive in environments where we get positive reinforcement. On the other hand, constructive feedback is necessary if we want to get better at something.

We live in an age that allows us to get instant, unfiltered feedback on anything that we do. It may be a realistic environment, but it can be hostile and often not constructive. Now, more than ever, we need the ability to practice, to find opportunities for constructive criticism in safe environments, and to refine and hone our skills before we put ourselves out in the public eye.

In learning terms, this means that coaching, mentoring, and communities of practice will play increasingly critical roles in our development. It means that immersive and experiential learning environments will become those safe havens where we can practice safely before we're ready for prime time. It means that we all need to develop the ability to manage our public versus private identities in ways that we haven't had to even think about in the past.

I hope Rebecca Black has a long, happy, and successful life in whatever she decides to pursue. At 13, she has learned, and illustrated to many, the power of social media. But with great power comes great responsibility...and we all need to be taking (and teaching) responsibility to ensure that the opportunities afforded by social media outweigh the risks. 

The right people

When we first started Tandem Learning, we used to have Wednesday night "rockstar" meetings. (I hear that this is a very start-up thing to do.) We would sit around as a group, talk about our strategy, make plans about what kind of company we wanted to be. We talked about our mission, vision, and values. We brainstormed the types of problems we wanted to help organizations solve. We matched our expertise and potential solutions with those problems. We dreamed about who we would become as a company.

One of the highlights of those meetings was a list of what we wanted. Here's that list (paraphrased, because I can't find the flip chart paper we put it on):

• Do good, meaningful work
• Work on cool stuff
• Only work with smart people we like

Seems pretty simple, right? But in reality, not so much. The first one has been easy...we all focus on the quality of our work. The second one? Well, sometimes what pays isn't what's cool, and sometimes what's cool violates the first bullet...and we definitely aren't sacrificing that.

The complication is really the third bullet. We've all known what its like to work with amazing people...the problem is finding them, and when you do find them, convincing them that they want to work with you. We've been really picky here at Tandem, and we've been lucky. We've worked with some exceptionally smart and likable people, and we've met a lot along the way. Now that we're in a position to grow our team, we've had some serendipitous moments of mutual interests and good timing that are helping us honor that third bullet. And we couldn't be more excited.

We're going to be making more hiring announcements in the next few months, but we are thrilled that Tim Martin is joining the Tandem Learning team. We met Tim in 2008 when he was working for the eLearning Guild and we were planning our first conference as a vendor at DevLearn. Sometimes fate or circumstance presents opportunities, and we're ecstatic that Tim is coming on board.

You're only as old as people think you are

Today is my 36th birthday. Not too long ago, I probably wouldn't have told you my age--not because I thought I was old, but because its not much of an advantage to be a 36 year old CEO. But that's better than what I sometimes get when people guess that I'm 28 (on a completely vain level, bless them!) or 31 or some other younger age. While on some level it is a compliment, it also is invariably a hit to my credibility. Because unfortunately, whether we like it or not, we judge people's expertise in some part on their age.

I've been discredited for my age in client meetings, comments like "and all that before you were 25" after I gave my bio. I've seen others discredited or dismissed for their age, most recently keynote Jonah Lehrer at the Learning Solutions conference. And more subtly, you hear the tone of people's voices, see their body language, when some young whippersnapper comes on the scene and has an opinion or shows expertise.

So I'm 36, squarely in my mid 30s, and have been running my own company for 2 years after starting it (brilliantly) at the beginning of a recession. I have more than 15 years of experience in education and training, have my Master's degree, and wrote my thesis on technology in education and the need for media literacy in curriculum.  I've sold millions of dollars of project work in a year. I've managed a team of 16 people. I helped start a charter school. I've worked on both the client and vendor side, having started my career as a corporate training manager. I've been a teacher, I've been an instructional designer, I've been a project manager. I've spoke at conferences, and internationally. I'm a mom to 3 awesome kids.

And yes, I'm just turning 36 today. Its easy to dismiss someone because of their age or because they look young. Considering my role models are Mark Zuckerberg and these guys, I'm actually an old lady...

What makes a great instructional designer?

Yes, I'm officially late to the party, but there's been a great discussion going on courtesy of an initial blog post by Cammy Bean, and great follow up discussion and posts by smart folks including Sahana Chattopadhyay, Brent Schlenker, and Karl Kapp.

To sum up in my own words, there's not one flavor of "instructional designer" and most of us who call ourselves by that title have ended up here through a mix of accident and intention. Some of us come from business backgrounds, technology backgrounds, some of us from education and teaching. Some IDs were subject matter experts who were tapped to train others in their organizations. Very few, if any of us, went off to college saying "I want to be an instructional designer!" And likely as a result of the long and winding road to becoming IDs, we all have interesting and varied backgrounds that inform how we practice instructional design.

Sure there are some commonalities...we all know what ADDIE is and we're all familiar with Bloom's taxonomy. But our process, our day to day responsibilities, and certainly our perspectives, are very, very different.

I've been so bold as to claim "instructional design is dead" and I've tried to explain my perspective on why. But as much as there is variation and possibly role confusion to our collective detriment in our profession, there are brilliant people who I meet every day who exemplify the best of instructional design. Here's a few of the characteristics I look for whenever I go a-lookin' for a great instructional designer...

• Ability to conduct complex situational analyses in relationship to learning: if nothing else, IDs should be able to walk into a situation, assess if there is a learning need, what it is, analyze the intended audience, the resources available, and figure out what exactly needs to learned to address the existing knowledge or skill gap. No, its not easy. But if you can't do that, you're probably not an instructional designer by my definition - you're probably a writer or a developer. 
  

• Technology-savvy: this one might draw some debate, but I would argue that in the current business environment, any good instructional designer should able to make technology recommendations to support learning and justify the need and cost to the organization
  

• Talks business and doesn't throw around ID "lingo": this ties into Cammy's assertion that maybe instructional design might be better delivered through a business school. Business executives don't care about ADDIE or instructional models or even adult learning principles. They care about their business issues and how training initiatives will help address them. Good instructional designers don't talk about the theory much--its ingrained in their process.
  

• Understands the difference between practice and assessment: I can't tell you how many conversations I have with clients where I say something like "you COULD measure that, but then it would be assessment and not practice. What is the goal of the learning experience?" Its basic but telling...I've met way too many instructional designers that agree to measure everything at the expense of the actual intent of the training.
  

• Measures success by performance improvement: so, we all know there are things like SCORM and knowledge assessments aren't going away any time soon. But whenever possible, good IDs fight to measure how learners' behavior changes as a result of a learning experience. Its a really telling interview question, to ask a prospective ID how they prefer to assess the success of their learning programs.
  

• Passionate: Its not much of a surprise that I'm a learning geek, and I think other learning geeks are pretty cool. In any profession, passion for what you do usually makes you a little bit better at it, because you care more. Don't let this be confused with ID snobs...the main difference between snobs and geeks? Geeks always want to learn more about what they are interested in...snobs already think they know everything. Guess who makes a better instructional designer?
  

• Fights for a place at the table: You know what's the most annoying phrase I hear from instructional designers? "I can't." MAYBE that's true. But more often, these instructional designers aren't fighting to be heard, aren't positioning themselves as essential leaders in their organizations, or simply haven't tried to make the business case to implement innovative, large-scale solutions that they have identified as solutions to their organizations' problems. Any time I hear "I can't," all I see are red flags.
  

• Has a little "sales lizard": its a special set of skills to be able to see the right design and the right tools to address a learning need. It takes another whole set of skills to be able to sell the right solution to stakeholders and business execs.
  

• Sees the forest and the trees: Some instructional designers are really great at designing a specific solution for a specific problem, but have a hard time looking at the big picture to see if the specific solution is the right solution. 
  

• Knows when to hold 'em: look, we all have to eat. And sometimes, you have to know when to just shut up, put your head down and give 'em what they ask for. Good instructional designers know when all of their knowledge, expertise, selling ability, data, evidence, etc., is just falling on deaf ears. No, we should never settle for designing ineffective or crappy solutions, but neither should we be expected to bang our heads against brick walls. Business savvy, I believe is what the kids are calling it...

So, do I think you need a degree in Instructional Design to be a good ID? No. Do I think some formal training helps? Yes. I like Cammy's suggestion that ID programs might be better delivered with a business degree. But ultimately, its not the degree that makes the ID...its the vision, the leadership, the creativity, the flexibility, and the ability to apply all of their "formal" knowledge about learning in varied and ever-changing business contexts. 

We're hiring!

I've heard there's a recession going on, but wow, are we suddenly busy. Its time for us to start thinking about how we can grow Tandem in a way that builds long-term value. Its true, there is a balance between hiring freelancers to support our projects and figuring out the right time to hire. We have been very conservative over the past 8 months in an effort to weather through the unpredictable economy and keep our finances and overhead costs in check. We've developed great partnerships with other small companies and we have an extremely talented pool of people that we contract with on an as-needed basis.

But at some point, we have to start thinking about adding value to our company through strategic hires.

If you read my blog, you probably get that we're not a "normal" company. We like to think that we're a little unusual in that we like to stay out ahead of the crowd. I also think we have exceptionally high quality standards, as our reputation is only is good as our body of work, but specifically our last project. We're fiercely independent, protective of our brand and reward creativity and initiative. We're highly opinionated and not afraid to speak our minds, nor are we afraid of a little calculated risk. We're competitive and loyal and treat each other like family.

And now we're hiring. We'll be posting specific job descriptions on our website, but we're always looking to work with people who can add value to our company so don't let the job descriptions prevent you from dropping me a line if you're interested.

What if everyone thought like a leader?

The last few weeks have been full of discussions of leadership training. Virtual worlds can provide some excellent opportunities for leadership development and I love talking about the possibilities.

What bothers me about leadership development training is that it shouldn't be for just a select few--its how EVERY employee should be trained. Don't we want everyone to think more critically about how to do their jobs? Don't we want to have organizations full of insight, team building, mentoring, and feedback-sharing?

I remember my frustration with gifted education when I was teaching. Not that there was anything wrong with the gifted education programs--on the contrary. Every student deserves to be treated like they are gifted. All of the research showed that if you taught to the highest common denominator instead of the lowest, ALL students improved. Why shouldn't we be creating individual education plans for all students? Why wouldn't we set high expectations for everyone? Why shouldn't we be pushing everyone to reach their highest potential?

I understand that leaders need people to lead. But the truth is, good leaders DO have high expectations, DO push us to be better, DO encourage us to think critically and take on responsibility.

How different would your organization be if you trained everyone to think like a leader?

My conference recap: Innovations in E-Learning

I paid $300 to go to the Innovations in E-Learning conference, run by George Mason University and DAU, in Washington, DC. I got a hotel room at the conference hotel through Priceline for $60 a night. But without question, the experience I had at the conference both in sessions and with the other attendees was priceless. I didn't attend any of the workshops on Wednesday, but came in Wednesday evening to meet in person two of my favorite people in my Twitter network. Dinner (sushi & Sapporo) was excellent but the conversation and face-to-face time was even better, worth the entire trip.

Thursday was my first official day at the conference and it was kicked off with a keynote by Vint Cerf, who was one of the two guys who really did invent the Internet. He started out a bit slow (I'm pretty sure he insulted Twitterers as "twits" early in the presentation) but as he progressed through his presentation, things got more and more interesting and frankly, more and more surreal. Google Mars was very cool, but the Interplanetary communication plan, IPN (InterPlaNet), that's he's working on in his spare time made me feel like whatever I accomplish in my life, its never going to be as cool as Vint Cerf. And it was only 10 am.



Next up was Mark Oehlert's (@moehlert) pinch hit for Intellagirl (@intellagirl) Sarah Robbins, who couldn't make it to present. I did my best not to pipe up too much, but the topic was on virtual worlds and sometimes I have some opinions on that topic. Good thing Mark is smart, both in what he said about virtual worlds, but also in not making eye contact with me to give me an opening to talk.

One of the things I find fascinating about conferences is how much interesting conversation happens outside of the conference. I took the next session "off" and instead hung out with a group of smart friends to talk about various aspects of the morning's keynote, mobile learning, and other various geeky topics before heading over to lunch.

The keynote after lunch was...Will Wright. Um, yeah. He's developed such little games as SimCity, The Sims, and Spore. As a simulation and game developer, I'm not sure if there's too many people that rival Will Wright in sheer idolness for me. And his keynote? I don't know when I have spent an hour thinking more about simulation, game design, and learning. He made my head spin, not only from the pace but also from the sheer brilliance of the information he was sharing. I hear that his keynote will be up online soon. When it is, I'll provide a link.



I then had the pleasure of sitting in on Aaron Silvers (@mrch0mp3ers) session that focused on a case study of how Yammer was subversively integrating into his current organization. Some great observations and lessons learned about how social media adoption CAN be viral, but that sometimes viral demands an executive push.

Final workshop of the day was supposed to be on blogging for educators and learning, presented by Robert Scoble (@scobleizer). Honestly, I'm not sure how we all fit in the room with all of the names that were dropped, but we did get a sneak preview into how Scoble works at filtering his information and news streams to determine what is worthy of him to post about. That said, I was annoyed with his lack of focus on learning, oh, and his COMPLETE lack of focus on blogging. It does appear that Twitter and FriendFeed have taken over the relevance of blogging, at least to some extent. Who knew blogging was so old-fashioned ;)



After the workshops, there was a reception to announce the winners of the GameJam contest, awarded by Dr. Alicia Sanchez, Will Wright, and Dr. Brenda Brathwaite (who had presented a workshop on Wednesday). So there I was, having made fun of a certain friend for idol-geeking out all day...and I had to not only introduce myself to Will Wright and Robert Scoble, but also ask for pictures with each of them. Me=shameless.

Dinner and drinks congregated old friends and new ones to talk more about the mind-blowing awesomeness of the day. Its absolutely fascinating when you think you can't possibly take any more information in...you hear the perspectives of shared experiences and suddenly the learning continues.

Day Two started with Gen. Frank Anderson presenting about how the DAU is implementing innovations in learning. They train A LOT of people. Not that I didn't already know it, but it made it all the more impressive that an organization as large as DAU had people with titles like Innovation Evangelist and that they are actively looking at how to incorporate virtual worlds into their curriculum delivery mix. It was also pretty cool to see the Tandem Learning logo up on one of General Anderson's slides, even more so because it was unexpected.



The next session, I just couldn't decide what to do. There was an impromptu meeting in the coffee shop; a few people were gathering to talk about overcoming institutional obstacles to implementing new technologies. What it ended up being was a rich discussion of how innovators and internal evangelists across verticals (government, enterprise, academia, K12, and yep, even vendors) all share similar obstacles. The result was the formation of the Black Swan Society--a group focused on helping each other address the issues facing innovation and organizational adoption of (and adaption to) technologies and processes that more accurately affect how we work, communicate, and learn. I encourage you to come contribute to the conversation.

I had to get on the road after the first unofficial meeting of the Black Swan Society...but my head was full. Perhaps this conference, more than any other I've attended, represented for me the best of what conferences can be. Brilliant and inspirational keynotes, engaging workshops, challenges to my pre-existing assumptions, strengthening my network, meeting amazing people who are facing my same challenges AND with different perspectives, and a plan for continuing the conversation after the conference.

And I got to meet Will Wright...

I'll say it again...instructional design is dead

I've been perusing blog posts written by other instructional designers and their thoughts on learning conferences and this one from Ellen Wagner struck a particular chord.

You see, I don't go to learning conferences to learn anything. Wow, yep, I said it. I go to the learning conferences to talk to other people who are in the learning space, sure, but mostly I go to talk to people about what I've been learning by rubbing elbows at OTHER conferences. What are these other conferences? Virtual worlds conferences. Serious games conferences. Design conferences. Next week, for example, I'm going to GDC. I'm so excited about the sessions that I don't know if I have time in my schedule for a bathroom break. To be honest, I'm not interested in networking too much at GDC. I don't think I'm going to sell any training there. But I know for a fact that I'm going to learn. A LOT. And the anticipation of being at a conference where people will be talking about user design, user engagement, gender issues, generational barriers, narrative and motivation...yeah, I might need a moment. Whew.

So listen up instructional designers and learning conferences! Instructional design is dying a slow death. Young talent are going in other directions. The kids get gaming and use technology without thinking about it...its not a question of if, its a question of how. And how to do it better. And how to make it more effective. Instructional design should not be lagging behind the curve...we should be leading the way. We need experienced mentors but we also need young leaders. More importantly, we need people with vision. This is what learning conferences should be about: inspiration and innovation and brave new ideas. They shouldn't be about trying to play catch up with the sexier industries.

If you're on the slow boat to the ADDIE model, it might be time to change boats. I'll be taking the speedboat to GDC next week, thank you very much. And I'll thank you not to suck my wake.

Anniversary

I've been Twittering, posting on Facebook, Yammering, and IMing all day about it, but in case you didn't hear, today is officially the one year anniversary of Tandem Learning. More accurately, its the anniversary of the first day that I didn't have another form of income (I had already filed to register as a company as of Jan. 31), but that's as good of a starting point as any. 

It's been a long, strange first year. I can't believe everything that has happened. I couldn't have done this without the ridiculously awesome support of my family. I couldn't have done this, and wouldn't have wanted to because it wouldn't have been nearly as fantastic, without my fellow Tandemites. 

I could be mushy and reflect on everything that happened over the past year. I prefer to quote our unofficial motto: We told you so.

Happy anniversary to us. May there be many more. 

Doing good

Last night me and most of the other Tandemites attended a (the second) Refresh Philly meeting. High level, about 100 design and development professionals in Philadelphia showed up to learn from each other and figure out how to use our collective talents to make Philly a better place. 

Also this week, a discussion about mission and vision statements prompted me to look up the vision statement that my team had created at my last gig. (It reminded me how much I truly miss those peeps!) We had spent a lot of time thinking about what would make us truly fulfilled in our work, and as a result, a significant amount of our team's vision was focused around how we could give back to the community.

Sure, we're all in business to make money. But truth be told, a lot of us want more out of our lives than that. We want to build community, we want to contribute, we want to leave the world a better place than we found it. 

It's not easy to balance the demands of work with giving back. But its important. 

I'm thrilled for the opportunity contribute to Refresh Philly (or as one of the Think Brownstone boys referred to it, a chance to be one of the Super Friends in the Hall of Justice). What is your super power? Can YOU use it to help save the world?

Rock stars

I've been talking about rock stars for months...then received this post from Seth Godin a couple days ago, who's quoting Bob Lefsetz.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Baby, you're a star

I've been working on multimedia learning programs for years and years, and have been to countless audio recording sessions. Yesterday, for the first time, I was behind the microphone. It was nerve wracking! I think to a certain extent, anyone who's "confident" enough to start a company has enough vanity in them to want to be a star. And to a certain extent, it was cool to have the experience of recording audio.

There's a self awareness that comes with hearing yourself on tape, or seeing yourself on video. Its what makes it a good way to help people change their behavior, and many organizations record role play learning activities to evaluate performance.

I felt a little bit of that self consciousness yesterday. I think I preferred to be outside the recording booth. And I don't think I'll be listening to myself narrating the navigation of our demo any time soon...

We're special

We've been neck deep in rebranding and prepping for our big PR launch. New logo, new website, new marketing materials, and an e-version of our demo all in process this week. We had to create descriptions of "who we are" and "what we do." We've had to seriously think about how we differentiate ourselves from other learning companies, or technology companies. We've had to figure out what makes us special.

The thing that's funny is that I think that stuff is obvious. But I know its probably only obvious to me. Its a challenge to figure out how to convey just the right amount of humor without being unprofessional, the right amount of confidence without being cocky, the right amount of marketing spin without sounding like a used car salesman.

I know we're smart, hard-working, committed to excellence. I know that we have great ideas, experience, and dedication. I know that we're special.

In a couple weeks, we'll see how well we were able to convey this to the rest of the world.

The agony of defeat

You can't ALWAYS win. Even with the best product, the most charming personality, the most accurate and fair pricing, the best plan, the most talented team...even with all those things, sometimes you still don't make the sale, or get the project, or get to hire the person you wanted. Sometimes you just don't win.

If you're competitive like I am, that doesn't make you feel much better. Of course you should have gotten the projects! Why wouldn't he want to work here? How could they possibly think that another company would do a better job?

But at the end of the day, really, all those things happen. Disappointment, and yes, sometimes even losing, is inevitable. I'm not saying that you should roll over and accept that sometimes you'll lose--oh no. But when the time comes that you're faced with losing, the question is: what are you going to do about it?

I would argue that the best course of action is to try again, and do better next time. Or in some cases, realize that maybe, sometimes, things work out the way they should. Even when you lose.

Facing your fears

I've met a lot of entrepreneurs over the past few months. Before I started Tandem, a fellow entrepreneur said to me that no matter what he thought of the person personally, he always felt a kinship with and respect for any fellow entrepreneur that he met.

I didn't really understand what he meant at the time. Or at least I didn't know why he felt that way.

Now I do. I think there's a certain type of person that can do this, start a company from nothing, and be ambitious about it. I think it takes a person who can be scared to do something, but do it anyway. It takes a person to have enough faith in him or herself, to believe that things will work out because they will make them work. I think it takes a person who has a certain confidence, maybe a bit of arrogance, and not a small amount of optimism.

I think it takes a certain type of person who believes they can make something out of nothing. I feel that kinship now.

Competitors defined

One of the tricks successful businesses use is gathering competitive intelligence. Industry conferences are one source, as are relevant associations and organizations that collect and disseminate industry news. Another great source, if you can get them to talk, are your prospective clients. One way or another, you need to find out who else you'll be bumping into in the lobbies and what their story is.

I have a philosophy about competitors (if you haven't noticed yet, I have a philosophy about lots of things...). They are only competitors if you allow them to be. Sure, you may be selling similar products or services. But are you really? What you are selling are your ideas, your expertise, your customer service--basically, you are selling your talent and the talent of the other people of in your company. That's what your competitors are selling too. All the more reason to aim to hire rockstars and not accept mediocrity.

If you don't think you're better than your competitors, close up shop and cut your losses. If your ideas or talent aren't as good, your only hope is to be able to position yourself better. That may work for awhile. Eventually, though, the truth will be revealed.

Bottom line, you need to believe you're better than everyone else, walk the walk and talk the talk. If you're always chasing a competitor, you'll always be behind. Better to let them be chasing you.

And ultimately, YOU define who your competition is. Don't let others define this for you. Know what the differentiators are and be able to explain them. And whenever possible, play nice on the playground. It's always better to be able to give a wink and a nod to those other companies waiting in the lobbies.

Recruiting Trail 2008

This week began some serious conversations on expanding the Tandem Learning team. We're focused now on building the custom side of the business as much as we can, and we're thinking ahead to the product development teams as well.

I've noticed a pattern in people I've been talking to. Some people are currently miserable with where they are, and Tandem seems like an opportunity that has some huge potential benefits for them.

But there are a few that are interested but not looking. Some of these people are really the ones I want. How do you convince someone to take a risk when they are comfortable and relatively happy in their current job? I think the triggers differ for each person, and a lot depends on what their underlying motivations are in general. Money, recognition, relationships are all powerful motivators. For a start up, having the opportunity to start something yourself that you can truly point to as your own accomplishment is another big motivator for some people.

Let's be honest. Some people just don't have the stomach for this kind of risk. If you think about it too much, I don't know anyone who would probably do what I'm doing. And yet, I have no doubt that this will work, that we will be successful. Personally, I can't imagine why someone WOULDN'T want to do this.

And so with that in mind, I'm continuing to check in with people who I'd like to work with, who I think will help guarantee all of our success. I hope as I'm having these conversations that I'm able to figure out what each potential rockstar needs to stop thinking about the risk and focus on the reward.