Required Trainings across increasing number of groups

@Catherine H. Walker Hi, Catherine … One thing I’ve learned over about 10+ years of managing multiple LMS platforms is that consistency is important. Have a design and stick to it. Admins have a lot of work, yes, but if it’s the SAME work, fewer errors will happen. And when new admins come along...well, it’s just easier for them to get up to speed.

In reading over your requirements, it seems like there isn’t anything that is not met by your current process.

I’m not sure I can intuit your registration process from the information given, but if self-registration is involved, perhaps using the approach where they have to provide a registration code (Admin > Advanced Settings > Registration Code Usage).

Another idea would be to use an additional field for these persons, and from there you could build a group… groups are good things 😃

Perhaps the question you should ask is, how can I automate the current process even more?

Happy to discuss further.

Thank you so much @KMallette!

If I said these variations would require the creation of 48 groups and 48 Learning Plans...would you bat an eye?  We’re new in our use of this model, so it’s hard to say if this is reasonable admin work or not.

I don’t mind the work, but suppose I was hoping for a smarter approach, if possible!

Thanks again for your insight.

Yes, 48 is a lot… best wishes!!!

Can I ask a few clarifying questions, @Catherine H. Walker?

1. Your original post said, “We have been running compliance-type trainings for several years and use the following model to ensure completion”, but later you said, “We’re new in our use of this model”. I’m not sure which part is new, is it just the part about manual group assignments?
2. It sounds like the main advantage of using learning plans is this badge set-up? I mean, I know that it can offer some clarity to the user as well, but to me at least that comes across as secondary and probably easier to work around.
3. Is there a particular reason why you need to use a webhook to maintain systems access? And can you elaborate on what service you’re using for that part, is it something like Okta? 

I think there might be a smarter way, but it’s hard to know for sure at this stage, and what @KMallette said earlier about the value of consistency rings true. I wouldn’t want to advise changing your approach unless I was confident that it was worth the time and effort.

Thanks @Ian!

To clarify:

1 - we’ve used the automated group logic for several years, but not automated + manual combinations with so many permutations.

2 - The main advantage of the learning plans is that it’s very clear to the learner when they’re done with what’s been assigned to them (they get an email notif tied to learner completes Learning Plan).  And it’s also clear to the admins that they’re done (which ties into #3 below).

3 - The webhook ties into Okta, so that if someone doesn’t complete their required trainings, they are blocked from several things in Okta (to act as motivation).  It really reduces the amount of time spent “chasing” down learners.

HI @Catherine H. Walker I do not have a solution for you. However, I am incredibly interested in how you are using your groups and learning plans to manage required training. Would you be willing to share you experience with me in a virtual meeting? I am looking to build this across an organization of 4000. Right now, I am piloting one department through the build who had a skeleton structure of something similar they had built in another database. Though, the process is foggy, and I’d love to hear from someone who has done it.