The most well-known paradigm for developing education to increase human performance is the ADDIE model, established by Florida State University in the 1970s. The abbreviation ADDIE stands for Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation, which are the five major steps of the instructional design process.
Despite the acronym's prominence in the field of learning and development, businesses seldom adhere to the original definition of the ADDIE model. Organizations instead take bits and pieces from ADDIE and modify them for use with different models as they see suitable.
However, it is still critical for current learning and development professionals to understand ADDIE since modern learning and development (L&D) professionals must demonstrate mastery in all five phases.
In this post, we'll look at each phase of the model and then evaluate some of its flaws. Let's get this party started.
During analysis, you collect the preliminary data that will drive the subsequent instructional design.
Ideally, you should begin your analysis with a training needs assessment. This indicates whether or not training is a component of the solution to the performance problem.
Before beginning with ADDIE, you must conduct a training requirements assessment since you should only develop instruction if it has been established that instruction would assist fix the issue.
After determining that training is required, you proceed with learner analysis, job-task analysis, and instructional context analysis. Conducting these studies provides you with detailed information about the target audience, the behaviors they must exhibit in order to accomplish their jobs more effectively, and the resources accessible for the training experience.
Design is represented by the first D in ADDIE. This is instructional design, not graphic or visual design. When individuals talk about instructional design, they are referring to this step of the ADDIE approach.
During this step, you develop the instruction itself, guiding your design selections using the results of the study. During this phase, you will often spend a significant amount of time consulting with subject matter experts (SMEs). You use this raw data to create content that is most suited to the situation at hand.
The material you create during this step is determined by the channel you choose to deliver the learning intervention. For example, if you want to create eLearning activities, the result from this phase may comprise a script or a production-ready storyboard. If you want to carry out a face-to-face intervention, the output from this step may include material for a facilitator guide and participant workbook.
The material is transferred into the development phase once it is ready for it.
During the ADDIE creation phase, you create the final instructional components that will be distributed to end users. In some ways, this phase is concerned with translating the result of the design process into the final product. Here are a couple such examples:
• Facilitator guide content -> Formatted and printed facilitator guide
• eLearning course storyboard -> Completely functional eLearning course
• Animated video script -> Animation video with completed visuals and narrative
When creating an eLearning activity or video, you'll most likely need to use assets from a variety of sources, such as audio files (narration, sound effects, background music, and so on), photos, videos, raw text, and so on. Again, this is dependent on the sort of deliverable you are creating, but this is the phase in which you bring the finished result to life.
You give the instructional interventions to the target audience during the implementation phase.
In the case of eLearning, this entails adding the courses or activities to the learning management system (LMS), registering individuals from the target audience, and informing them that the courses are accessible and/or necessary. For face-to-face events or virtual webinars, this entails gathering the target audience at a convenient time and having a facilitator guide the encounter.
During evaluation, you measure the effectiveness of your training intervention on multiple levels. The most common framework for training evaluation is Kirkpatrick's model, which states that you should measure the following:
• Learner Reaction - How are employees reacting to the training intervention? Is it a positive experience?
• Skills and Knowledge - Are the employees becoming more skilled or knowledgeable as a result of the training program?
• Behavior / Performance - Are the employees performing better on the job as a result of the training?
• Organization - Is the organization operating more smoothly and / or profitably as a result of the employees' improved performance?
• This data gives you a rich overview of the impact that your intervention is making at the organization, but you can take it a step further and conduct a return on investment (ROI) analysis to determine whether the costs associated with the effort resulted in a net financial gain for the company.
If ADDIE was strictly followed, it would almost certainly result in enhanced performance.
ADDIE, on the other hand, falls short in extremely agile workplaces when there isn't enough time to go through each step one at a time. As a result, the model has been modified to be more iterative: stages can overlap, and you can quickly move from understanding the problem to constructing a prototype to establishing a comprehensive set of performance targets.
However, the greater issue is that both businesses and instructional designers fail to undertake sufficient analysis and assessment. These two components are critical for a successful performance improvement program, and disregarding them results in a significant loss of time and money.
The absence of analysis and assessment in modern training departments is problematic in the same way that it would be bad for a doctor to prescribe any medicine a patient requests and then never follow up with that patient to establish whether or not the drug was beneficial.
As learning and development professionals, we must assist in the reintroduction of aspects from this classic instructional design methodology into our everyday work.