At first glance, remote training—especially for new systems—seems like a win-win situation: reduced travel requirements, fewer logistics to arrange, etc. All the end users just jump on a Zoom call, learn the new tool, and voilà: trained users who are ready to go on a new system. Unfortunately, it’s not quite that simple, efficient, or effective. While online training delivery methods have dramatically improved recently, there are still some elements that cannot be replicated in a virtual environment.
First, it is very distracting to have any more than 8 or 10 people in a virtual meeting and ensure they are all engaged, so additional training sessions are required to cover the same content for different users. These additional sessions add to consulting costs, lengthen the project timeline, and ultimately delay the ability to reap benefits from the new system.
Second, the quality of training is not as good in a remote environment. Normally, there are two trainers in a physical environment to ensure end users get the appropriate amount of assistance. The trainers can travel the room, see a user’s screen, make sure people are on pace, and gauge reactions, I.e., whether the users understand the content and how to perform the new system tasks. Attempting to replicate hands-on help in a virtual environment necessitates additional screen sharing and/or multiple monitors for all users, repetition of content (for possibly only a single user), content delivery delays, and several other distractions. The same issues are true for user acceptance testing (UAT).