We currently are developing and delivering training for a new software application we are implementing in our organisation ( a large university). Although we might like to offer future users a personalized approach, we don't have the leaisure to do so. We have over 700 learners to train on more than 15 different processes in a few months. Therefore we use "mass training" to offer the basic theory behind the processes and f2f training for practical application of the concepts. Everyone must perform the same tasks the same way, why should we provide personalized training?

We however offer them a practice environment where they can go on their own and practice what they have been train to do. This is where they can experiment and personalized their learning based on their level of knowledge.

Lets just assume that we do not provide the the "mass training" and instead we just provide them exercises to practice on their own in the practice environment. Our help line would be overloaded, people will be frustrated to have to wait online and therefore will be more reluctant to learn the new system. We can afford having a trainer teach 15 persons per day, but can we afford having 4 or 5 persons answering each and every day the same questions asked by 25 or 50 different indiuviduals, especially if those questions could have been avoided by a simple group demonstration? And for peer support, who can support when nobody knows about the new system?

In some instances, you just can't let people learn on their own if you cannot support their learning. It may be more pedagogically sound to personnalized training, but it's not always efficient from a managers point of view. In my mind, each situation is different and requires a specific solution.