Skipping Analysis Hurts Business Results

Instructional Design is Not Content Beautification “Can you just make this look engaging?” That one sentence has probably cost organizations millions in wasted training. SME: “I’ve created 110 slides. Everything is covered. Just add some interactivity.” Instructional Designer: “What should the learner be able to do after this?” SME: “They should understand the process.” Instructional Designer: “Understand… or perform?” SME: “…Well, perform.” Instructional Designer: “Then why are we explaining the process instead of making them practice it?” SME: “…Can we just add a few quizzes and scenarios?” And there it is. The biggest misunderstanding in Instructional Design. Most stakeholders think: - Content = Learning - Interactivity = Engagement - Quizzes = Effectiveness Reality? - Content ≠ Capability - Clicking ≠ Thinking - Quizzes ≠ Behavior Change If your role as an ID is reduced to: Adding icons Breaking text into slides Inserting “knowledge checks.” You’re not designing learning. You’re formatting information. Instructional Design starts where content ends. It asks: What decisions will the learner make differently? What mistakes should they practice safely? What real-world situations should they navigate? I’ve seen beautifully designed courses fail. And I’ve seen raw, simple simulations drive real performance change. Because learning is not about how it looks. It’s about what changes after it. If your learner cannot perform differently after the course… The course didn’t work. No matter how “engaging” it looked. Curious—how often are you asked to “make it interactive” instead of “make it effective”? #InstructionalDesign #LearningExperienceDesign #LXD #CorporateLearning #LearningAndDevelopment #ELearning #LearningScience #Upskilling #FutureOfWork

I know these two people are going to say what is on their mind. This conversation does not disappoint. The real value of instructional design is not the shiny output, but the behind the scenes work that happens before you touch a tool. #PerformanceFirst #AnalysisMatters

As Instructional Designers there are things we are talking about that sound relevant but they aren’t as crucial as it seems and distract us from a laser like focus on outcomes. Here’s a short list to help sharpen focus: Content —> Usefulness Learning —> Doing Engagement —> Transformation Prize —> Continuous Improvement

What does Dhurandhar have to do with instructional design? . . . More than we might like to admit! Because right now, everyone seems to have an opinion about it - some agree, some strongly don’t - and yet, people are still watching it for hours. In today’s world, that’s not normal. We don’t usually stay. We skim, skip, switch tabs, scroll. So when something manages to hold attention like that, it’s worth looking beyond the content - into the design. What stood out to me wasn’t just what was being said, but how it unfolded. It didn’t feel like one long stretch. It felt like movement. That’s where "micro-learning" shows up - not as short clips, but as structured thinking. Ideas broken into small, complete units. Each one landing cleanly. Each one creating just enough curiosity for the next. You’re not enduring the length. You’re following the flow. And this is where things started connecting for me. While learning and working more deeply in instructional design, these aren’t just buzzwords anymore - they’re very real levers: • Cognitive load --> how much each scene "asks" of you • Chunking --> how the story is "broken" down • Attention cycles --> when to "hold", when to "release" You can almost see them at play here. As my foundation has always been mathematical, breaking things down seems instinctive - structure, sequence, clarity. But instructional design adds another layer: Not just asking, “Is this logically clear? Does this make sense?” But also, “Is this cognitively felt as clear? Does this flow? ” Because those are not always the same. That lens is quietly changing how I look at everything we are building. Where does attention drop? Where does curiosity rise? What makes someone continue… without effort? It’s a different kind of problem-solving. Less about delivering content, more about designing experience. And once you start noticing it, you can’t unsee it. Some things inform you. Some things hold you. The difference is rarely accidental. Because in the end - learning, like cinema, isn’t just about content. It’s about whether you stay till the next scene. ~ #InstructionalDesign #Microlearning #LearningExperience #MathEducation #EdTech #CognitiveScience

Good instructional design is not just about making content look better. It’s about making learning clearer, more usable, and more meaningful. For me, instructional design always starts with the learner. Every decision I make—whether it’s structuring a module, designing an activity, or choosing a tool—comes back to one question: What does the learner need to succeed here? That means: • Designing with accessibility as a baseline, not an afterthought (clear structure, alt text, captions, color contrast, multiple ways to engage) • Building with alignment in mind (objectives → activities → assessments all working together with purpose) • Prioritizing clarity over complexity (intuitive navigation, consistent weekly structure, streamlined content) • Creating practical, applied learning experiences (real-world scenarios, meaningful discussions, opportunities to apply—not just consume) I don’t design for content delivery—I design for learning outcomes. Because when courses are intentionally designed, learners don’t just complete them… they understand, apply, and carry that learning forward. What principle guides your design decisions most?

Instructional designers (IDs), this might sting a little. “Without forgiveness, there is no future.” — Desmond Tutu Sit with that for a second. Not in a spiritual sense. In a professional one. Because a lot of instructional designers are stuck, not because of skill gaps… …but because they’re carrying old versions of themselves (I do sometimes too). The stakeholder you didn’t manage well The course you rushed and still think about The moment you knew better, and didn’t act And now? You hesitate. You overthink. You play smaller than you should. That’s the real cost. Truth? You cannot grow in this field if you’re still judging past-you with present-you’s knowledge. That’s an unfair standard. That version of you had less context. Fewer reps. Less pattern recognition. Of course it wasn’t clean.🙋🏾♂️ ✅ Good IDs improve their courses. ✅ Serious IDs improve their judgment. So do the work: 👉🏾 Extract the lesson. 👉🏾 Write it down. 👉🏾 Apply it forward. Then … LET. IT. GO. Because if you don’t… You’re dragging yesterday’s mistakes into tomorrow’s work. >>> If you can relate, drop a ⭐️ in the comments. If you have the time, freely share your wisdom about how you’ve grown as an ID. ❤️ >>> Resonated? Follow me 👣 for more. >>> Thanks to the Maestro team for sharing this great quote in a recent edition of their newsletter: Abstract. Not subscribed? Do yourself a favor, go to their website and do so today. 😉

Instructional Designers, you might be seriously underestimating NotebookLM. In just a few minutes, this short video completely changed how I think about what’s possible with it. If you’re creating learning content, this is one of those tools that can quietly become a massive advantage. Worth a watch. It might shift your entire approach to how you create.

Why “Make It Interactive” Is One of the Most Misused Requests in eLearning One of the most common requests Instructional Designers hear: "Can you make it more interactive?" On the surface, it sounds right. Interactive = engaging. But in reality, this request is often misunderstood. Because not all interaction leads to learning. We’ve all seen courses with: • Click-to-reveal tabs • Drag-and-drop activities • Random quizzes • Animations on every screen It feels interactive. But does it improve performance? Not necessarily. True interaction is not about clicking. It’s about thinking. Good Instructional Designers focus on: • Decision-making scenarios • Real-life problem solving • Consequence-based learning • Situations where learners must apply judgment That’s where learning actually happens. Because the goal is not to keep learners busy. The goal is to make them think, decide, and act better at work. So next time someone says, “Make it interactive,” The better question is: “What kind of thinking do we want the learner to do?” #InstructionalDesign #ELearning #LearningExperience #LearningAndDevelopment #PerformanceSupport #LearningStrategy

Are you a new instructional designer? This is for you. 🫵🏾 🤔 There will ALWAYS be something you’d change about a past eLearning project. Always. A cleaner interaction. A tighter script. A better assessment. And if you’re not careful you’ll convince yourself: 👉🏾 “If I just tweak it one more time, it’ll finally be perfect.” It won’t. Perfection in our work is a mirage. And chasing it quietly drains you in ways most new instructional designers don’t see: 1️⃣ It rewrites your memory of your own work. “If I had only done…” Now the entire project feels like a miss, even if it delivered real business value. 2️⃣ It keeps you stuck instead of shipping. You delay progress chasing polish. Meanwhile, the business needed “good and live,” not “perfect and late.” 3️⃣ It trains stakeholders to expect endless revisions. If you don’t draw the line, no one else will. Now every project becomes a moving target. 4️⃣ It erodes YOUR confidence over time. You stop seeing yourself as someone who delivers and start seeing yourself as someone who ALMOST gets it right. 5️⃣ It steals energy from your next opportunity. You’re mentally stuck in the past, instead of improving forward on the next project. At some point, you have to decide: 👉🏾 “This is strong. This solves the problem. This ships.” That’s not settling, it’s professionalism. Stop downplaying and undermining your expertise. You’re more than enough! >>> What is the 1 thing that keeps you guessing the completeness of your projects, time and time again? Feel free to share your wisdom in the comments. 👇🏾📝 >>> If this resonated, 👣 FOLLOW ME for more. I write at the intersection of instructional design, company culture, encouragement, and leadership. >>> 🌟 STAY ENCOURAGED 🌟 #IDProThomas #NewIDCareerTips #InstructionalDesign

One of the most common mistakes I see in instructional design isn’t about content. It’s about where we aim the solution. A problem shows up at the surface (performance drops, turnover increases, errors happen) and the immediate response is: “Let’s train the people closest to the problem.” So we build training for the end user. But what if the issue didn’t start there? What if the problem is upstream? - How people are brought into the role, - How expectations are set, - How leaders reinforce (or don’t reinforce) behaviors, and - How systems support (or hinder) execution Training at the point of impact can help. But if the SOURCE of the problem lives elsewhere, it becomes a temporary fix and not a true solution. Instructional design isn’t just about building content. It’s about understanding the system the learner operates in. Because if we don’t design with the system in mind, we’re not solving problems. We’re just moving them around.