Elearning Maintenance Strategies: Why You Need One
Coley O’Brien
Note: This topic was presented at the ASTD International Conference in June 2005 and the following article was originally
published on ASTD Learning Circuits in August 2005.
Introduction
Does your organization design or procure custom-built E-Learning? Is your desire to create eLearning solutions that are
widely successful? Do you aspire to be perceived as a strategic thinker within your business? If you answered yes to
these questions, then an eLearning maintenance strategy is something you should consider. The key steps to putting an
eLearning maintenance strategy in place are:
1. Selling the strategy as a critical component of your overall eLearning methodology
2. Determining how robust your strategy needs to be
3. Building the strategy based on your assessment
This article provides tips and tools to help you perform each of the three key steps. The tools are available electronically
and will give you a head start on your eLearning maintenance strategy. But before we uncover these three key steps, it’s
necessary to do some level-setting on what an eLearning maintenance strategy is.
Defining the eLearning Maintenance Strategy
Many eLearning projects focus almost entirely on what I define as the “original” course. All efforts are centered on getting
the course built, implemented and deployed with little, if any, consideration for the “life cycle” of the course. The life cycle
takes into account all of the maintenance issues and updates that occur between the original “go live” date of the course
and when it is finally removed from the deployment system and archived. The longer-term maintenance issues can range
from basic text and graphic changes, to editing complex animation and video, to wide-scale translation and localization
requirements. These changes can be very costly and time intensive if not planned for in advance. An eLearning
maintenance strategy will help you not only better anticipate these maintenance issues, but can influence the design and
development of the original course to help you minimize the negative impact maintenance can have over the course life
cycle.
An eLearning maintenance strategy is a project deliverable that looks both into the future and back to the past. When
building the original eLearning course, it helps ensure you’re considering future maintenance issues in your current
design. Once built, it provides a historical perspective of original design decisions to help you make more efficient and
effective maintenance decisions throughout the course life cycle.
Requirements of an Effective eLearning Maintenance Strategy
There are four critical success factors for building an effective eLearning maintenance strategy.
1. Focused time throughout the project lifecycle
You should start drafting your eLearning maintenance strategy the day you start the original course project. You
should continue updating your strategy document until the course is officially removed from your deployment system
and archived. An effective eLearning maintenance strategy will outlive all of your other project deliverables, including
the actual course. To make sure the necessary time is spent, it has to be recognized as a key project deliverable and
should be identified as part of the overall methodology. Hours required to build and update the strategy should be
allocated to key project resources.
2. Consistent and thorough documentation
An effective eLearning maintenance strategy requires a tremendous amount of detail. It also requires that details be
as up-to-date as possible.
3. Involvement from project leadership
This may be the single biggest factor in determining whether or not your eLearning maintenance strategy will be
effective. While the project manager, instructional designers and developers will be instrumental in building and
updating the strategy, it is up to leadership to ensure that it is sustained. If someone isn’t routinely asking to see the
updated strategy, it will likely fall by the wayside.
By Coley O’Brien
E-Learning Maintenance Strategies: Why You Need One
Page 1 of 6
4. Input from cross-functional stakeholders
To identify the necessary details of an effective eLearning maintenance strategy, you have to solicit feedback from
multiple stakeholders outside of the training function. These stakeholders are likely to have the biggest potential
impact (positive or negative) on future maintenance. It is important that you solicit their input early on and frequently
throughout the design, development and implementation.
Selling the Strategy
Meeting the requirements of an effective eLearning maintenance strategy are not easily achieved. In many cases, the
project team may be challenged to justify the time invested in creating and sustaining the strategy. Have you heard any of
these statements mentioned on your past eLearning projects?
•
•
•
•
•
We don’t have a lot of time for analysis, let’s just get the course built.
Let’s not spend too much time worrying about the details right now.
Let the vendor focus on maintenance issues, that’s what we’re paying them for.
We’ll have plenty of time to address maintenance issues after the course is up and running.
I don’t want my budget being spent to develop maintenance plans.
Maintenance strategies sound great in theory, but they take time to develop. You have to be willing to invest time during
the initial course development to save both time and money during future maintenance. You’ll also discover that
eLearning maintenance strategies are not much fun to build. To make them effective, it requires a lot of discipline on the
part of your design and development team.
Because of these factors, you will likely need to sell the concept of the eLearning maintenance strategy at various levels
within their organization. These levels could include the training department, project sponsors, and senior leadership. To
do so, you can look at some basic factors to build a business case for including these strategies in your methodology.
eLearning Outcome Continuum
One way to sell the importance of your strategy is to position it in terms of better managing expectations, costs and risks
associated with your eLearning project. The graphic represents a continuum of possible outcomes based on what type of
eLearning maintenance strategy you have in place.
For example, when it comes to overall expectations for the course life cycle, you are more likely to overlook or underdeliver on the course life cycle expectations. However, by having a robust maintenance strategy you are more likely to
meet or exceed those expectations. When it comes to costs, exceeding or meeting planned budgets is a more likely
outcome without a plan. With a robust strategy, you have a better chance of minimizing or significantly reducing the
overall costs. Effectively managing risk is often overlooked in not only eLearning projects, but all projects. Without an
eLearning strategy, you are likely accepting all risk and may be able to transfer some risk. A robust strategy enables you
to mitigate or even avoid risk.
By Coley O’Brien
E-Learning Maintenance Strategies: Why You Need One
Page 2 of 6
There isn’t anything here that you didn’t learn in a basic Project Management 101 course. But selling the benefits of an
eLearning maintenance strategy as it relates to expectations, costs and risk is all you need to get people’s attention about
the value of the strategy. However, once you have sold them initially, you will inevitably be challenged to quantify some of
these components. This is where defining your eLearning maintenance strategy will help.
Determining How Robust Your Strategy Should Be
Not all eLearning courses require the same maintenance strategy. Criteria such as the complexity and shelf-life of the
content, target audience, available budget, and organizational priorities are all factors. You can use some basic
diagnostics to determine what type of maintenance strategy will be most effective for your team. I have provided two
diagnostics, one simple and one complex.
Simple Diagnostic
This chart provides a simple way to quickly assess how robust your eLearning maintenance strategy should be. It looks at
three key components of maintenance:
1. Frequency or number of updates during the course life cycle
2. Amount of time available for each update, typically in months or weeks
3. Budget available for updates, as a percentage of the original course budget
To the right of these key components are mutually exclusive qualifiers. You should assess if the ranges of the qualifiers
are appropriate for your typical projects and adjust accordingly.
Here is an example of how you would use this simple diagnostic. You anticipate that the original course you’re building will
need to be updated approximately 10 times during the course life cycle. You estimate having 3-4 weeks during each
update. You estimate having only about 5% of the original course budget available for maintenance. Placing an “X” in
each of the appropriate qualifier boxes and drawing a line that connects each box, the diagnostic would tell you that a
more complex strategy is somewhere between strongly recommended and a must have.
By Coley O’Brien
E-Learning Maintenance Strategies: Why You Need One
Page 3 of 6
Complex Diagnostic
This complex diagnostic requires a much more detailed assessment, looking at 15 components organized across 3
categories. Each component is framed by a key question.
1. Design
1.1. Design complexity – How complex is the course design?
1.2. Media required – What type of media is used in the course?
1.3. Stability of content – How often will updates be required?
1.4. Update time – How much time will you have to make future updates?
1.5. Translation – How many languages may be required for future translation?
2. Resources
2.1. Vendor involvement – How many vendors will be involved with the course?
2.2. Budget – What percentage of overall budget can be dedicated?
2.3. Experience of team – How experienced is your design and development team?
2.4. Deployment – How knowledgeable is your team on the deployment system?
2.5. Content availability – How difficult will it be to obtain future SMEs and content?
3. Organizational Impact
3.1. Legal – How much involvement will Legal require to review and aprove?
3.2. Level of importance – How important is the course for the target audience?
3.3. Sponsorship strength – How would you rate the overall sponsorship of the course?
3.4. Procurement – How much involvement will procurement (purchasing) have?
3.5. Demand increase – What is the potential for demand to increase in the future?
To assist with this more complex assessment, I have created an automated diagnostic using Microsoft Excel  that
quantifies the answer to each key question and provides a recommendation regarding how robust the eLearning
maintenance strategy should be. An example of a completed diagnostic is provided.
By Coley O’Brien
E-Learning Maintenance Strategies: Why You Need One
Page 4 of 6
It is important to understand how the diagnostic calculates the recommendation so that you can customize it to better
meet your team’s needs. There are 3 influencing factors that you may want to customize:
1. Weighting
The weighting is on the far left column and impacts the value of your overall score. I have assigned a unique
weighting for each component within each category, with the most important being assigned a weighting of 5 and the
least important a weighting of 1. It is not necessary to assign unique weighting values. You may determine that of the
5 components within a category, 3 are of a greater equal value (perhaps a weighting of 3) and 2 are of a lesser equal
value (perhaps a weighting of 2). Adjusting these weightings directly in the tool will alter the potential range and
overall rating at the top.
2. Ranking
The ranking is indicated across the last 3 columns on the right and determines the spread of the overall score. I have
assigned a unique ranking for each qualifier within each component, with the least impactful qualifier being assigned a
ranking of 1 and the most a ranking of 3. You may want to use a ranking system with greater spread, perhaps a “1, 3,
5” ranking. Similar to adjusting the weighting, you can change these values in the category row and it will alter the
potential range and overall rating at the top.
3. Range interpretation
The range interpretation at the top of the diagnostic is the most important factor when it comes to your recommended
strategy. The tool is currently designed for an even range spread across the three recommended needs and levels of
detail. With consistent weighting of 5 to 1 in each category, and a ranking of 1 to 3 for each qualifier, the minimum
score is a 45 and the maximum score is 135. Dividing the 90-point spread evenly into thirds determines your low,
medium and high ranges. The ranges are also adjusted by a point to ensure mutual exclusivity. You can adjust the
formulas in the spreadsheet to alter the range if you want to base the recommendation off of an uneven range
distribution. However, as opposed to adjusting the calculation, I think the more efficient alteration is to just apply good
common sense based on the overall score. For example, your assessment may result in an overall score of 103,
which would provide a recommendation within the middle range (e.g., a 1-2 page strategy overview is recommended).
But, because your score is on the high-end of that middle range, you may want to err on the high side and
recommend the more robust strategy.
Building Your eLearning Maintenance Strategy
Once you’ve determined the required strategy having used either the simple or complex diagnostic, it’s now time to draft
the strategy. The template includes 6 key sections:
1. Project Summary
Provides two tables for documenting a high-level summary of the initial course and anticipated maintenance
requirements over the course life cycle. These summaries should include points around the purpose, goals, target
audience, sponsors, stakeholders, complexity, timelines and resources.
2. Maintenance Roles and Responsibilities
Provides a table for documenting key roles for both internal and external project team members and basic contact
information.
3. Archive Information
Provides a table for documenting information about key project documents.
4. Needs / Design
5. Tools / Resources
6. Organizational Impact
By Coley O’Brien
E-Learning Maintenance Strategies: Why You Need One
Page 5 of 6
The last three sections are all structured similarly. You’ll notice that the sections are the same as the categories in the
complex diagnostic. Each of these sections has a dedicated page for each of the 5 key components within that section.
Each page is then broken up into 3 focus areas:
1. Key Questions
Includes 4-5 key questions that require greater detail than what was asked on the complex diagnostic.
2. Maintenance Impact
This area asks for specific examples of how your answers to the key questions could impact your maintenance in the
future.
3. Strategy
This area asks for specific strategies that you will implement to manage the impacts.
Customizing the Template
The template is designed for a more a complex strategy and should be customized to best meet your organizational and
project needs. To create a less robust strategy you would simply remove the template components that are not applicable.
The template has been created using Microsoft Word  and includes a number of tables to make is easy to add and
remove information.
Final Thoughts
The table below includes some final thoughts regarding wrong and right approaches to building effective eLearning
maintenance strategies.
Wrong Approach
Right Approach
1
Too academic
Focuses on key components that meet business needs
2
Too cumbersome
Feasible given your methodology
3
Has no clear owner or contributors
Has defined roles and responsibilities
4
Limited to design and development issues
Includes broader business impacts and stakeholder concerns
The tools provided should help you begin to build effective eLearning maintenance strategies and can be customized to
best meet your organizational and project needs.
By Coley O’Brien
E-Learning Maintenance Strategies: Why You Need One
Page 6 of 6