Whats the goal? Many sign offs or you want to aggregate that?

You could create a bunch of SCORM read and signs as well. AICC wrappers in theory works as long as you have an AICC server running. SCORM will “localize” your problem to Docebo. AICC will demand another technology set being in between (#lessismore).

You could have many SOPs in a single course / sign off round - (I cant recommend that, that seems like it games the tracking need).

But the system supports uploading a document as a training material that can be put into a course and then an electronic signature if it is that simple?

Just know the electronic signature component will trigger a dual authentication path...so you may want to avoid it.

Honestly, I am also curious of how others solve read and signs. I think using the system for Policy Management types of needs (read and signs) - is doable, but it is a domain that boils down the experience. I was part of a large group that supported learning like this - and I can tell you I had 10s of thousands of records of people having a course open for less than 1 minute.

Make it too convenient, and people will not learn.

This could be done with SCORM or AICC but more simply done using the built-in tests.  The text to read could be the main part of the "question", followed by a "have read and understand" statement. The "answers" could be yes/no or agree/disagree with 100% of the points for yes/agree.  You could even give 2 attempts if you want to account for an erroneous no answer.

Thanks for the responses. We really need sign-off on each document so then when the documents change courses do not need to be retaken *and* one document sign-off can be tracked as complete across multiple courses.

@dklinger I think the SCORM option is best, although it does seem like an awful lot of work to capture a single click… I think I found a way to create them in Articulate - yet to be tested. It’s funny because the last LMS I implemented did almost nothing well, but it did have an in-built wrapper with an acknowledgement in AICC. But if I do get them at a training material level, I’m *hoping* that I can create “SOP Training Channels” as a way to push out documents for review outside of courses. Does that make sense?

@elamast What I’m trying to avoid is created a course/ document. There are 1000s and I’m hoping to be able to use the central repository version them and send them to multiple courses (that will also have an e-signature). And, to complicate matters, because they must be read before completing the remainder of the course, I need them to be pre-requisites, which if they are all courses necessitates either learning plans or enrollment rules… ugh!

@telias - It does make sense….but I really think this is a huge curation question - how are you going to keep up with aging documentation? Are you going to decentralize that to PowerUsers? As I think these scenarios through - especially SOPs and Policy signoff - I think they live so much better in Policy Management systems and Document Management systems. Those plus an SSO eases the pain for the learner. And it sounds like your older tools support an AICC approach (your repository) - an AICC wrapper is very cool because it then sounds like your older system could act as a server as well. And if it didnt? I would question why AICC?

BTW? I do agree with you - a SCORM template - even a light one for this - can seem like a lot of work for a signoff.

AICC Servers are still around - but you want to talk about an older finicky technology...there is one for you. “Modern Things” (technical saying) are going the way of skinny SCOs and working with dispatch controllers as well as xAPI.

Good luck with this one.

@dklinger All valid questions… It really comes down to the age-old question “What is training?”  The other alternative is to leave the SOPs & sign-off in their current location and *somehow* pull that information into Docebo. This was (and maybe still is) my preferred plan. I think it could be done via enrollment rules, but this conversation has me thinking that I really want them to track as training material completions - Maybe that is something that can be done via api? hmmm… Thanks, this has been helpful.