Global organizations and e‐learning: Leveraging adult learning in different cultures

Abstract

This article examines a number of issues regarding the leveraged use of global training within multinational organizations. Given a common purpose and using technology that may minimize cultural differences, is it possible for these organizations to overcome some of the cultural barriers to adult learning? In examining this concept, this article discusses issues of cultural differences, adult cognition, technology, developing global courseware, and measuring its impact.

Critical success factors: How one multinational company develops global e-learning

“…In addition to identifying CSFs for global e-learning, researchers have also suggested solutions for addressing the CSFs they identified (Bentley et al, 2005;Gayeski et al, 2002;McPherson & Nunes, 2006;Nathan, 2008;Nathan & Gayeski, 1992;Newton & Doonga, 2007;Stewart & Waight, 2008;Van Dam, 2004). The solutions had a common theme: all revolved around asking source and target stakeholders the right questions about culture, language, learner style, learning context, learning content, technology, and resources in a collaborative fashion.…”

“…A good deal of information is available in the literature concerning the global issues and considerations multinational organizations need to address when implementing e-learning in multiple countries and cultures (Bentley et al, 2005;Gayeski, Sanchirico, & Anderson, 2002;Nathan, 2008;Nathan & Gayeski, 1992;Newton & Doonga, 2007;Stewart & Waight, 2008). What is not well known is how multinational companies determine which GICs should be treated as critical success factors (CSFs) when developing customized global e-learning programs in a specific situation or operating environment.…”

Designing functional virtual learning communities using the Bola Ola method

“…Rarely do technologies powering Web 2.0 or VLCs resolve cultural challenges including differences in values and structures such that learning activities and goals may fail (see also Khalil & Seleim, 2009; Zhu et al, 2009; Olaniran, 2009). However, learning theories suggest that learning and knowledge is dependent on how individuals are culturally and socially trained or predisposed (Biech, 2008;Nathan, 2008;Rao, 2011). Consequently, deliberate effort by instructors is needed to address cultural sensitivity in e-learning within VLCs beyond mere awareness of these differences.…”

“…The notion of control in a learning environment, particularly in VLCs, extends to the identified cultural effect. For instance, in high-power distance cultures, learners prefer a teacher-centered method of learning where teachers are identified as experts and are thus afforded the appropriate status power of directing how students learn and what they learn (Nathan, 2008;Rao, 2011). The approach to learning and the influence of culture on learning is established early on and subsequently reinforced over time for developing learning preferences and patterns among learners (Rao, 2011).…”

“…Unfortunately, the constructive ideology fails to take into account the fact that national culture dimensions play a significant role in learning online. Scholars have examined the different roles culture plays in learner preferences (e.g., Edmundson, 2009;Nathan, 2008;Olaniran, 2009;Rodrigues, 2005). Given the need for cultural sensitivity in VLCs, the next section will examine culture using the dimensions of cultural variability provided by Geert Hofstede.…”