E-learning at the workplace can be seen as one way to train staff, and keep them up to date. However this is usually limited to one way transfer of (tacit) explicit knowledge. For Real E-learning we need somehow to capture the implicit knowledge and be willing to share it. We do have the tools, but it needs a mindset change and an openness amongst staff who regard their knowledge as their source of power, vital for maintaining their position.

Perhaps a good avenue for research is to explore story-telling by staff.

Very well said, Ian. Thank you.

Tacit knowledge has been discussed in various discourses, especially Knowledge Management, since Michael Polyani introduced the term in the late 1950s. Polyani used it in the sense that we can sometimes have knowledge (in particular, know-how) borne of experience that is not easily communicated or made explicit. Nonetheless, one of the pursuits of KM in its early years was how to "capture" such knowledge. Apprenticeship is used as a classic example of one way to acquire such tacit knowledge - through observation and practice. Mentoring is another proven pathway.

I have seen numerous attempts to "define" e-learning, some better than others & I've come to the conclusion that definitions are usually only useful for specific contexts. In some ways it's just a term, a construct, that has been adopted by many communities of practice. In some ways, all we need to do is to "make sense" of what is being said when this term is being used. Definitions are best left for formal documents like standards and reports.

For me, e-learning in the workplace can take place in all kinds of ways and doesn't have to be seen as part of a program of coursework, training or formal relationship & can happen informally through using a wide variety of tools & services available via the Web. I know I sometimes learn a lot through searching & I certainly learn from engaging with peers through social media.

I'm currently working through Ruth Colvin Clark/Richard E. Mayer: E-Learning and the Science of Instruction - proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. 3rd ed. 2011. They focus on e-learning for workplaces in an evidence-based way to extract principles of effective design of content and presentation. Their definition of e-learning incorporates "how", "what" and "why" there is e-learning (at the workplace). The "how" - the learning materials are digitized so they can be stored in electronic form, the "what" - the course (or whatever) includes content and ways to help people learn it, and the "why" - refers to the purpose: help individuals and organizations achieve educational goals and build skills related to improved job performance. In Chapter 13 (3rd ed.) the authors update the state of the art of experimental evidence of what works best in collaborative learning including Facebook and Twitter, but I haven't studied it yet. Might be worth a look or two.

Excellent, Micheal.

I've just eliminated a typo (thanks to Jon mentioning this privately). And I agree with Jon that definitions of such broad terms should keep the context in mind, in which they are used. Here we are talking about e-learning at the work place, so the definition should be a pragmatic one, I think.

Strictly speaking, e-Learning is any learning which occurs electronically - hence the "e" before Learning. In the early stages, e-Learning meant computer aided instruction and computer based training. With the advent of the internet and the World Wide Web, the scope of the definition grew to include any "learning" delivered by computer using any delivery method available, whether on your local computer or via a remote computer accessed over the internet, through a bulletin board service, local network, or company intranet.

With respect to the question, 'What is E-Learning in the workplace?', it has been my experience that the scope of the definition includes a formal electronic delivery system, such as a corporate Learning Management System (LMS), used by the training and development staff to deliver courseware electronically over the enterprise intranet. Courseware could be as simple as a boring page turner to something as complex as a serious game or simulation. Well designed e-Learning, in my opinion, includes links to external internet sites and allows for external research via Google Scholar and other sources of research data, such as the school library, EBSCOHost, ProQuest, or any of the other research data repositories.

With respect to the question, 'When does it happen?', when does "learning" ever happen? Any time a learner aquires information and internalizes it into "knowledge", learning has occured - whether via electronic means, in a physical classroom, or at the library while reading a book. I originally typed, "new information", but in reality, information exists which we don't use. The information is there, but for us, since we haven't taken it to heart or internalized it, it's not truly "knowledge" and we haven't "learned" it. Now, to go deeper, behaviorists would say, any time a behavioral change has occured, learning has occured - good or bad. For the purposes of this discussion, I believe that's a rabbit trail best not chased at this time.

I agree with Jon's explanation too. "Learning" doesn't have to happen through a formal means, such as an LMS. Learners build their learning using many tools and in many ways. Socialization, networking, discussons at the coffee pot (a technique recommended by those of us in the KM field, btw), individual Google searches, visiting the library and reading on our own, all are valid methodologies for "learning".

Thanks, Michael Commini, for sharing your views on learning (and e-learning). Many people use mobile devices (and students are expected more and more to BYOD - Bring Your Own Device) for obtaining information and create new ideas, hopefully. Will the idea of m-learning be changing anything mentioned up to now?

Good question, Michael B. I think ease of access to information will make it easier for learners to cheat on tests, so we'll need to re-think assessments. What is an assessment truly? Is it a formal, written instrument that we can "grade" and store away for retrieval at some later date or can it be a simulation through which we observe learners to determine how much knowledge transfer has occurred? Obviously, the answer depends on the situation but with information at literally at learners' fingertips, teachers are going to have to come up with newer ways to determin how well their students have "learned" the content (and retained it too). For example, I know of one teacher who went so far as to buy a cell phone jammer and install it in her classroom so her students couldn't hide their phones and text each other for the answers during tests. They also couldn't reach Google and Wikipedia (a horrible, uncontrolled pseudo-resource, imo). Still, students are anything if not resourceful and they continued to find ways to cheat. The teacher was forced to come up with more creative ways to determine if her students had truly learned. Unfortunately, her supervisor was not a progressive person and fought her every step of the way. A compromise was finally reached and she was allowed to administer oral exams. Not a good solution, if you ask me, for a classroom of 32 students. (And don't even get me started on lack of privacy in the grading process!)

When thinking of different ways to assess learners, I'm mindful of one my grandkids. When it comes to math, she suffers extreme test anxiety and freezes up. Yet, give her a math game on a smart phone and she's all over it, moving from level to level to level. Why? Pressure placed on her in the classroom is none existent in the game (or a different kind of pressure is exerted) and she moves through it with confidence, not caring if she fails because she knows she can try and try again until she succeeds. So, instead of testing her with a formal, written instrument, I assess her ability to move through the levels solving the various problems she encounters.To say this is a confidence builder would be an understatement. No, I'm not her teacher, in the formal sense of the word, but as a grandparent, we're always teaching in one way or another.