Courseware Satisfaction

Published 15 July 08 02:20 PM | JeffHora 

I am kicking off a discussion about what comprises satisfaction with Microsoft Learning courseware. This is an obvious topic of interest, if only because Microsoft is concerned about the quality of all of its products.  Courseware is no different.

I think of our customers in several different groups. First is the training center which is the Microsoft Certified Partner for Learning Solutions (or CPLS) whose business is at least partly made up of delivering Instructor-Led classes. Next are Microsoft Certified Trainers (MCT's) who are the technical training professionals who deliver our Official Microsoft Learning Products (OMLP) every day. Then there are the actual students who attend and consume the training and the businesses for whom they work. Satisfaction that is triangulated across these stakeholders has some common themes and some that are different due to the value focus of each party.

Without stating any assumptions other than the customer segmentation mentioned (which, as an assumption, can also be challenged...), I am interested in whatever it is about Microsoft Learning courseware that satisfies the needs and requirements of whomever is involved, across all of these stakeholders.

Much of the time when discussion focuses on satisfaction and quality, it can quickly crystallize around what's going wrong. While this is a valid portion of the feedback I get about our courseware, and certainly contributes to dissatisfaction, I would like to include the feedback about what goes right (or at least, could go right or better) and focus on what brings satisfaction to the experience with the training.

Please comment freely.

Filed under: ,

Comment Notification

If you would like to receive an email when updates are made to this post, please register here

Subscribe to this post's comments using RSS

Comments

# Mike Bishop said on July 26, 2008 11:39 AM:

I'm not a fan of MOC.  As a student I just think it's inefficient.  Not enough meaty material covered in the time allotted.  I know the materials aim to vary the media throughout the course.  But I think this just leads to too much message competition and too much wasted time switching media.  It's OK though because there are plenty of 3rd party training providers to turn to.

# Thomas Lee said on July 27, 2008 9:28 AM:

You note three customer segments:

1. CPLS - we just want good high quality courseware. Built on time, delivered on time, and with a download that is easy and simple. Courses like 5177/8/9 (downloads only partly available, gigabytes of semi-rednndant downloads badly organised, incomplete material requiring the CPLS to custom print material) do nothing to help. We also want the bugs/errors/mistakes fixed quickly. We do NOT want to be in the business of courseware re-engineering (althought that is too often needed).

2. MCT - we want accurate courseware, that's easy to deliver and easy to prep for. The latest coursess (6434 aside - and  I'm biased as I helped develop it) are thin, and hard to get ready to teach. The DLC, as noted above is something MSL should be ashamed at. As an MCT, I want courseware that helps the delegate and makes me/us look good. The current material is simply not acceptable in all cases - with 5177/8/9, We've had to re-engineer the course before it was fit for purpose.

3. The End Customer. This is actually two segments (the buyer/customer and the delegate). And to some degree, this segment is shielded by the first two from the poor quality of MOC these days. The MCT/CPLS can (actually has to) do work to hide the problems. But the latest courseware is so thin as to be anorexric - and as for 'the content is on the CD' well - the CD is just a bunch of links the delegate can find using Google (often Google is better).

So MSL have a lot to do. Cutting the number of courses you'll  produce back to only 20, and hoping^Wassuming the community will fill the gap seems a triumph of hope over experience. Yes, you will get some good courses this way - but the current CWLib is also not great quality overall. And I'll ask the hard question: can people who let the current  courseware gete this bad actually deliver quality?

I want great MOC courseware - EVERY MOC title should be as good, and preferably better, than 6434. When that day comes, I'll be happy.

# K. Brian Kelley said on July 31, 2008 8:05 PM:

I'm speaking as a student. The MOC courses I've taken recently have been very light on hands-on work. You're really only scratching the surface for a class like Exchange Server administration.

I realize there's a lot of material to cover in a short time, but I think back to my Exchange 2003 class where there was a hard sell on ISA Server. A lot of time where ISA server kept coming up. Why? I'm there to learn how to administer Exchange. Mention ISA Server as your recommended config for a webmail deployment, but don't keep beating a dead horse. Meanwhile, there were only a few quick labs on recovery solutions. This wasn't well-balanced, IMO.

Leave a Comment

(required) 
(optional)
(required) 
Page view tracker