eLearning in Practice

Proprietary Knowledge and Instructional Design

Analysts: Cushing Anderson and Michael Brennan

Human Capital-Intensive Economy

The Department of Labor suggests that by the year 2015, nearly 80%
of all jobs will be “skill based” — up from only 30% today. While that
number may be hard to pin down, the truth is that nearly every job
created during the next 15 years will be more complex and involve
more skill and training than during any period in history. Some of the
most important skills for those positions may not even exist today.
If skills are to be an important part of the economy of the future, and
the training for those skills is not “on the shelf ” somewhere waiting to
be pulled down and transferred, what will an organization’s training
practice need to look like to be effective? Where will the training con-
tent — the road map of skills — come from to ensure employees are
ready for the jobs they hold (or aspire to)? What kinds of technologies
will assist companies to ensure the right content is provided to the
right employees without requiring a bureaucracy (and a budget) to
rival the Library of Congress?
The answers to these questions are not clear. What is clear is that for
decades the same type of reasoned thinking has solved such complex
learning problems. Organizations must address the basic elements of
every learning solution:
• Technology that enables appropriate learning
• Sound instructional design
• A process that ensures high quality
This white paper explains these concepts and highlights some of their
uses. The mix in the elements of an effective solution determines a
project’s success. The issues are complex, but success stories exist.

Transferring Knowledge from the Few to the Many

Because an organization’s success rests on employees with increasingly
complex skills around information and technology unique to the
organization, the competitive advantage of successful firms will be in
their ability to capture, prepare, and present their proprietary content
efficiently. Organizational knowledge acquisition and the transfer of
that knowledge are the combined killer capabilities that will define
success during turbulent times and ensure market leadership in every
economy.

5 Speen Street • Framingham, MA 01701 • Phone (508)872-8200 • Fax (508)935-4015

 Knowledge acquisition by the entire organization is increasingly the
single largest determinant of success for a company. The organization-
al capability (or competence) of knowledge and skill transfer can result
in perpetual competitive advantage. IDC has frequently reported that
CEOs cite skill and employee development as their top priorities to
ensure the survival of their organization. Hiring appropriately skilled
employees is harder and more expensive than ever before. By 2002,
there will be more than 800,000 unfilled technical positions in the
United States alone, an increase of 15% since 1999. Though develop-
ing employees internally can be a complex process, compared with the
alternative of locating, recruiting, and placing an industry expert to fill
in a critical spot on the team, the results are far more predictable.
Increasingly, training existing employees is becoming the only way to
achieve organizational knowledge and competence.
Most organizations are not limited by too few great ideas. Rather, they
are limited by how fast those new ideas are put into practice. If several
bright souls develop a “great new way,” the organization may still
struggle in transition for several cycles, either losing the advantage or
neutralizing it with an offsetting loss. Regardless of the industry in
which a company operates, technology, globalization, and hyperactive
capital markets have turned the economy from one seeking improved
efficiency to one demanding dramatic change. The transfer of
knowledge from those who have it to those who need it is the tipping
point of success in a changing economy.
The combination of organizational knowledge acquisition and the
ability to transfer that knowledge will be the competitive differentiator
for the next decade. In addition, the source of that knowledge resides
uniquely within an organization; therefore, proprietary content must
assume its role as the competitive differentiator in the knowledge
economy.

Proprietary Content: The Real Competitive Advantage

Content can be thought of in three basic types, depending on how
unique it is to the company using it.
• Off the shelf. This content is “ready to use” from the vendor. It
addresses important issues or subjects that are essentially the same
across businesses or even industries.
• Customized. This is “off-the-shelf ” content modified by
the organization or vendor. The modifications extend beyond
“look and feel” to put the original content in context for the
particular organization.

Copyright © 2001 IDC. Reproduction without written permission is completely forbidden. Printed on
recycled
External Publication of IDC Information and Data — Any IDC information that is to be used in advertising, press releases, or promotional materials requires materials
prior written approval from the appropriate IDC Vice President or Country Manager. A draft of the proposed document should accompany any such
request. IDC reserves the right to deny approval of external usage for any reason.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary –2–

Knowledge and Instructional Design
• Custom. This content is developed specifically for an organization.
It is most often based on proprietary information or circumstances
within an organization.
IDC research suggests there is an even split between the three types
of content used within organizations (see Figure 1). The telling fact,
however, is not use, but value.
For organizations whose competitive advantage rests on their propri-
etary knowledge and whose success will be determined by their ability
to acquire and transfer that knowledge, the value of proprietary con-
tent is equivalent to the value of success.

Figure 1
Relative Use of Content by Type
What percent of your training content is ... ?

Source: IDC’s Survey of eLearning Buyers, 2001

Capturing and Conveying the Knowledge

For organizations that rely on proprietary knowledge, the ease with
which they build and manage content that reflects their methodology
will likely determine their ability to take advantage of that knowledge.
In some firms, there may be only one or two people who know the
intricacies of a new methodology or some particular competitive advan-
tage. The challenge for such firms is to find ways to capture and transfer
that skill or knowledge efficiently to everyone who could benefit from
it. Their ability to affect that transfer ensures their competitive survival.
For instance, the ability to articulate a company’s new service offering
is critical to the sales team, marketing, outside investors, and even the
front office. However, if the positioning statement is created in a series
of offsite meetings with several vice presidents and some consultants, the
training department cannot simply search a site called Learn2Market.com
and expect to find a ready-made presentation that lays out the new vision
in a way that the whole organization will appreciate. The vice presidents
need to convey their understanding to the whole company and eventually
to the market.

–3– eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 If, in a software development company, the product development
team has developed an upgrade to an industry-leading piece of
software, the learning problem is mission critical. The company’s chief
competitive advantages reside in both its ability to transition old
customers and bring new customers onto the newest version. Consistent
conveyance of its new features to experienced and new users is both
the biggest problem and the biggest opportunity for the firm.
How well an organization captures, develops, and delivers its propri-
etary training will set it apart from its competition.

Complex Problem, Multifaceted Solution

As any chief learning officer, vice president of human resources, or
training manager will attest, training an entire organization is
a complex task. Not only are there often many different objectives —
senior management has different needs than the fulfillment department
— but logistical considerations, technical availability, and the structure
of the content all add to the difficulty of developing an appropriate
training solution.
While the problem is complex, the solution to the problem involves
addressing the same elements that have been used to solve learning
problems for decades: sound instructional design, content that
supports the learner and the message, and delivery technology that
supports appropriate learning.
The elements of the solution may have remained the same, but there is
a new arrow in the quiver to help slay this beast: learning content
management.
While some companies employ elearning to realize cost savings
(e.g., reduction in travel expenses, opportunity costs of taking someone
offsite, and fewer instructors and administrators needed), others are
using the technology to take a new approach to learning. Some are using
learning management systems (LMS) that keep track of what large
audiences within organizations have learned in online and offline classes
and what individuals need to learn to perform better. While the
management and administration of these learning solutions has become
more convenient, nothing has been done to address the organizations’
ability to capture, develop, and deliver training.
Still, corporations need to efficiently turn their proprietary knowledge
into effective learning (and elearning) content. Furthermore, organiza-
tions need a mechanism for managing and delivering elearning content
in a digestible form to the end user, who can then immediately apply it
to perform better. The solutions to these problems are complex.
A capability that has been refined in the past 12 months into a useful
tool is the learning content management system (LCMS).

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary –4–

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Learning Content Management System Defined
IDC defines an LCMS as a system that is used to create, store, assemble,
and deliver personalized elearning content in the form of learning
objects. An LCMS contains four basic elements (see Figure 2):
• Learning object repository
• Automated authoring application
• Dynamic delivery interface
• Administrative application

Figure 2
Components of a Learning Content Management System

Dynamic delivery interface

Learner information/learner query

Appropriate learning objects

Administrative application
Automated authoring application s
D o g res
ob Cre e
ob live pr
j e a t j e r y d ent s/
file ts
ed ct ion cts o s t u r o
itin s a o for f ex p ec
g o nd f n ist m ark d ent ” obj
e k t u e
f e me ew dit ing Bo
o
y s tal
xis ta lea ing
o dif te “s
d
tin at rn M ele
g o a ing D
t
bje g a
cts s; Learning object repository

Source: IDC, 2001

Learning Object Repository

The learning object repository is a central database in which learning
content is stored and managed. It is from this point that individual
learning objects are either dispensed to users individually or used as
components to assemble larger learning modules or full courses,
depending on individual learning needs. The instructional output may
be delivered via the Web, CD-ROM, or printed materials. The same
object may be used as many times and for as many purposes as appro-
priate. The integrity of the content is preserved regardless of the deliv-
ery platform. XML serves this function by separating content from
programming logic and code.

–5– eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Automated Authoring Application
This application is used to create the reusable learning objects that are
accessible in the repository. The application automates authoring by
providing authors with templates and storyboarding capabilities that
incorporate instructional design principles. Using these templates,
authors may develop an entire course by using existing learning objects
in the repository, creating new learning objects, or using a combina-
tion of old and new objects. Authors may be subject matter experts,
instructional designers, media production artists, or communities of
practice leaders. The tool may also be used to rapidly convert
“libraries” of an organization’s existing content, typically adding
media, a customized interface, and instructional methodologies. An
author may reside within an organization or at an outsourced provider.

Dynamic Delivery Interface

To serve up a learning object based on learner profiles, pretests, or user
queries, a dynamic delivery interface is required. This component also
provides user tracking, links to related sources of information, and
supports multiple assessment types with user feedback. This interface
may be customized for the organization using the LCMS. For exam-
ple, content may be presented on Web pages emblazoned with the
company logo and a look and feel designed to reflect the desired cor-
porate image. The look and feel may also be localized to the region in
which users reside.

Administrative Application
This application is used to manage student records, launch elearning
courses from course catalogs, track and report student progress, and
provide other basic administrative functions. This information can be fed
into an LMS designed with more robust administrative functionality.
Because most firms that have developed an LCMS have the requisite
four elements mentioned above, each must differentiate its offering in
several ways (see items 1–3 in Table 1). While software capabilities will
often be used as competitive differentiators, true differentiation
will only come from knowledge and skills. For LCMS vendors, the
knowledge, proprietary skills, and services that they have and deploy
will ultimately set them apart from their competition. For these
companies, the knowledge of instructional design and content authoring
services will be the ultimate competitive differentiator (see item 4 in
Table 1).

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary –6–

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Table 1
Learning Content Management System Vendors: ShareBuilders, 2001

1. Unique features and functions

2. Ease of integration with other enterprise systems
3. Degree of customization of system interface and capabilities
4. Extent of supporting instructional design capabilities and services

Source: IDC, 2001

The LCMS Is Only Part of the Answer

The availability of tools to help create, store, assemble, and deliver
elearning content simplifies the complex task of delivering learning
solutions to an organization. While simpler, the solution is not
complete.
Missing is the critical element that makes the instruction both relevant
to the learner and able to change the learner’s work activities: instruc-
tional design (ID). This element can be expressed by the following
formula:
LCMS + ID = Maximum Leverage of Proprietary Knowledge

What Is Instructional Design?

The purpose of instructional design is to maximize the value of the
instruction time for the learner. We can think of instruction as a
concentration of life’s experiences into a shortened time frame: We
would eventually learn what we needed to know through “trial and
error,” but it is more efficient to take a class. Instructional design helps
that process.
A formal definition of instructional design follows:
… the systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and
instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction. It is the entire process of
analysis of learning needs and goals and the development of a delivery system to meet
those needs. It includes development of instructional materials and activities; and
tryout and evaluation of all instruction and learner activities.

— Adapted from “Training and Instructional Design,” Applied Research Laboratory,

Penn State University

The basic concept of instructional design is simple, but, in practice, it

can be a complex science.

–7– eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Instructional Design Models
Instructional design practitioners have typically tried to address particu-
lar circumstances. The solutions to these circumstances, or conditions,
result in uniquely applicable models of instructional design. For the
most part, there are four overriding considerations for instructional
design models:
• Context. Instructional design is normally directed toward one of
four contexts: K–12 education, higher education, business train-
ing, and government training.
• Expertise level. Instructional design models require different
degrees of expertise ranging from novice to expert. The designer’s
experience determines which level is appropriate. For example, a
novice might employ a model that provides step-by-step descrip-
tions when designing instruction. An expert could use a model
based on heuristics or combine methods from several models.
• Knowledge structure. The choice of an instructional design
model is affected by whether it is supporting procedural or declar-
ative instruction. Procedural models focus on examples and prac-
tice. Declarative models emphasize analogies and discovery-type
instruction.
• Purpose and use. Instructional design models can be used to pro-
duce material ranging from modules for lessons to courses in a
college curriculum or public health education for an entire popu-
lation. Some models of instructional design are even used to teach
instructional design.
In a business setting, with a limited instructional design staff, instruc-
tion can be either “procedural” or “declarative” and may be developed
at either a course or curriculum level. Corporations that need to
develop courses from existing material should concentrate on using
solid instructional design models that support those conditions.
Regardless of the ID model employed, a series of steps or phase of
each model ensures a thorough and effective learning process.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary –8–

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Five Phases of Instructional Design
Smart people have been studying instructional design for centuries and
have yet to develop a simple formula. Sound instructional design
allows dynamic delivery of specific and targeted learning objectives
through appropriate learning experiences to the individual learner.
While there are many considerations for the development of an ID
model, each contains the essential elements or activities of five basic
phases (see Figure 3):
• Analysis
• Design
• Development
• Implementation
• Evaluation (formative and summative)

Figure 3
Typical Phases of Instructional Design

Analysis
Involves needs analysis, job analysis, and task analysis.
Output of this phase should include instructional goals.

Design
Involves outlining the strategy for how to reach the instructional goals
determined during the Analysis phase. Formative Assessment

Development
Entails building all forms of instruction necessary to execute the learning
strategy and any supporting documentation.

Implementation
Refers to the actual delivery of instruction in a way that ensures student
mastery of the learning objectives and transfer of necessary skills to the
job setting.
Assessment
Summative

Evaluation
Measures the effectiveness and efficiency of the instruction. Formative
assessment occurs within and between phases, while summative assessment
occurs at the end of the process.

Source: IDC, 2001

–9– eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 A Vendor’s Grasp of Instructional Design Sets It Apart
For companies seeking to leverage their proprietary knowledge,
using an LCMS as a tool only solves part of the problem. For most
companies, the application of an LCMS combined with expertise in
instructional design will fully leverage proprietary content. As with
any company, therefore, an LCMS vendor must differentiate
itself from the competition through its proprietary knowledge and
methodology — that is, its use of instructional design and services.

One Approach: Vitalect and Case Studies

Where the rubber meets the road with both instructional design and
technology is at the intersection of a solution and a real business prob-
lem. The following section highlights a vendor that is working to solve
complex problems associated with the capture, development, and
delivery of proprietary content. To help illustrate its success are brief
profiles of three companies, each with a unique business problem
involving proprietary content.

The Vendor: Vitalect and Its Capability

Vitalect is an “old-timer” in the LCMS industry, delivering its first
product in 1997. It has differentiated itself through continuous devel-
opment and improvement of its software systems and its capability to
service and support its clients. Vitalect’s solution meets IDC’s defini-
tion of a standard LCMS offering (see Figure 4).

Figure 4
Elements of a Vitalect LCMS Solution

Techniq Tutor
Dynamic delivery interface

Automated authoring application Administrative application

Techniq Author Techniq Tutor

Learning object repository

Techniq Platform

Vitalect modules are shaded

Source: Vitalect and IDC, 2001

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 10 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
In addition to its basic software capabilities, Vitalect has focused on
the important attributes of success in this market with:
• Unique features and functions. Focusing on the ease of information
capture and conversion, Vitalect has removed a significant obstacle
to the capture of proprietary knowledge. Its authoring tool is
browser based and Web hosted, permitting convenient access to the
tool and the learning object repository.
• Ease of integration with other enterprise systems. Through
partnerships and experience, Vitalect is building the integration of
its LCMS with enterprise systems, including LMS and human
resource management systems.
• Degree of customization of system interface and capabilities.
With its demonstrated willingness to support additional features
and capabilities, Vitalect integrates several types of collaborative
feature sets to ensure an appropriate solution.
• Extent of supporting instructional design capabilities and services.
As part of it range of service offerings, Vitalect has developed
methodologies and practices to support the capture, development,
and delivery of proprietary knowledge into effective instruction.
Vitalect is a software company, but its roots in instructional design and
development are reflected in its development methodology. Using a
typical five-step process for instruction development, Vitalect can help
ensure the effective development of appropriate learning experiences,
including the integration of assessment, navigation elements, anima-
tion, or even simulations.
What Vitalect can do is important, but what it does is more important in
demonstrating the impact of proprietary knowledge and instruction on
businesses. Below are case studies of three companies that are moving
toward the skill- and knowledge-based economy by helping their
customers know more: They aren’t “training companies,” but training their
customers is good business. Leveraging Vitalect’s tools and expertise makes
the transition smooth and lets each company focus on its core business.

InteQ: Selling Expertise to Scale

The Company
InteQ (www.inteqnet.com) is an IT management service provider
(MSP) that remotely monitors and manages IT infrastructures. InteQ’s
management expertise, ability to scale, and ability to satisfy its diverse
(and dispersed) clients are critical to its success.
InteQ provides three types of services:
• Subscription-based managed IT services
• Professional services to ensure uptime, performance, reliability, and
availability of the infrastructure

– 11 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 • Educational services to transform IT organizations into high-
reliability environments using established organizational,
management, and IT best practices
InteQ’s goal is to be the “one-stop shop for managed services, profes-
sional services, and best practices/educational services,” according to
CEO Santhana Krishnan.
To transform organizations and engage with customers, InteQ has
relied primarily on classroom training. Additionally, the company
hosts offsite sessions in which clients learn how to best manage an IT
infrastructure based on the Information Technology Infrastructure
Library (ITIL)®. ITIL is a public-domain, vendor-neutral framework
developed by the Office of Government Commerce in the United
Kingdom in the early 1990s. Its framework is contained in approxi-
mately 50 volumes of text that cover processes, technologies, and man-
agement of IT environments and staff. InteQ bases its management
practices and its consulting services on the ITIL framework and teach-
es clients the framework and its value as part of its transformation
service. Additionally, the ITIL framework provides InteQ and the
client with a common language for delivering ongoing services.
ITIL and business transformation are critical to InteQ’s business
success and growth.

The Problem
InteQ’s training sessions (both classroom training at client sites and
offsite training) were well attended and high quality (based on session
evaluations and client feedback). However, InteQ felt it could
not scale its business as well as it needed to nor could it provide its
clients with the depth and quality instruction they would require in
the future.
“Our strategy was to convert [our business] into a ‘one-to-many’
model and make as many services as possible available online,” said
Krishnan.
InteQ established the following requirements for its “one-to-many”
implementation:
• The instructional accessibility of the ITIL information would be
critical to its usability. It needed to be both instructionally sound
and usable as a reference source with convenient and intuitive
navigation and supporting search capabilities.
• For efficiency, InteQ required that the instructional elements be
reusable across volumes to ensure consistent instruction and cost-
effective development.
• For usability, it needed to employ as much rich media as possible
to make the large volume of information engaging.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 12 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
• InteQ’s training content is continuously being revised and
improved. Therefore, whichever solution InteQ chose had to facili-
tate efficient updates and improved instructional design with a
minimum of rework.
• The approach had to work so well that it would be a considerable
competitive advantage and market differentiator for InteQ.
Ultimately, InteQ was looking for a company that had a platform
and an approach to education and the creation of an online learning
environment and that had a vision to continuously improve the ways
to educate a customer.

The Solution
InteQ knew that services and an effective software solution were
needed to solve its problem. At the same time, it had to be efficient
and effective in a short time.
Analysis of InteQ’s issues and requirements for success suggests the
importance of various components of a solution. Table 2 looks at the
LCMS infrastructure components.

Table 2
InteQ’s Solution Requirements: LCMS Components
Element of an Degree of
LCMS Importance Comments
Learning object ●●●●● Critical; with frequent updates
repository and multiple audiences,
efficient reuse was very important.
Automated authoring ●●●●● Because the content existed in
book form, conversion was very
important.
Dynamic delivery ●●●● In the future, InteQ will use objects
for multiple objectives and will
need dynamic delivery to ensure
an engaging learning experience.
Administrative ●●●●● Tracking learner progress and
application facilitating identification of skill
gaps or deficiencies were
important to InteQ’s business goals.
● = low importance ●●●●● = high importance
Source: IDC, 2001

– 13 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 The elements of the software product were very important to InteQ.
Instructional design elements were somewhat de-emphasized, primarily
because of the structure of the existing content (see Table 3).

Table 3
InteQ’s Solution Requirements: Instructional Design Considerations

Considerations for
Instructional Design Comments
Context Because of the “best-practice” nature of the
content, it was important to have a practical
application or explanation of the material. In
this context, the instructional design
methodology had to stress working knowledge
combined with a fundamental understanding
of the content.
Expertise level The material was already structured;
therefore, InteQ could focus its attention on
augmenting the material with additional
engaging experiences.
Knowledge type Procedural examples and practice are
required.
Purpose High-quality curricula were critical to InteQ.
While the material could be referred to “as
needed,” most people would take the course
end to end to receive certification.
Source: IDC, 2001

While the content resided with InteQ, the vendor it selected would
handle most of the development and implementation. As Table 4
shows, project quality control and administrative reporting were very
important to the company.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 14 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Table 4
InteQ’s Solution Requirements: Phases of Instructional Design

Phase of Instructional
Design Comments
Analysis Making dense, dry content both modular and
accessible was very important. Making sure
the content and instructional goals were
correctly developed helped ensure a quality
end product.
Design Adding audio and visual elements to the
course material increased its flexibility.
Development Design elements were to be primarily
handled by the vendor, though management
and project timeliness were also important to
InteQ. Additionally, InteQ had “real-life”
examples and case studies that it wanted to
include, requiring vendor flexibility and
adaptability.
Implementation InteQ was not interested in maintaining the
system on its own servers. The vendor needed
to be able to handle remote updates and
strong administrative reporting.
Evaluation The evaluation of the project and the content
was very important to InteQ. Maintaining a
high-quality product through a cycle of
revisions was critical.
Source: IDC, 2001

InteQ understood this was a complex and critical operation. The

company made sure it had high-level support (the CEO acted as a
“hands-on” manager for the first part of the engagement) but also
that it dedicated the appropriate resources to add rich elements to the
training. “We needed to make sure … the content was engaging,” said
Krishnan.
InteQ required a strong tool but less instructional design. It also
required a well-controlled development process to ensure quality was
maintained and the knowledge held by its cadre of experts could be
appropriately reflected in the curriculum.
In the end, InteQ chose Vitalect. “[Vitalect] would take us there and
continuously improve what they’ve built in order to meet the learning
needs of our customers,” said Krishnan.

– 15 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 The Results
Bottom line: It worked.
The measure must be “Are customers buying it? Are they finding it
useful? Absolutely,” said Krishnan.
Not only is it creating a revenue stream, but InteQ is also differentiating
itself from its competitors. In the confusing, competitive, and techno-
logically changing market in which InteQ competes, this is critical.
InteQ is the only company in the world that has converted ITIL into an
interactive online learning environment and is currently the only
company in the world accredited to deliver Web-based ITIL content
leading to ITIL certification. This has helped InteQ open doors to new
opportunities by offering clients a more complete range of services, thus
providing credibility to its approach and demonstrating the company’s
commitment to its clients’ success.
Not only is this a value for its customers — because of the design of
the instruction, InteQ found added benefit from this training with its
sales staff. This has become critical to InteQ’s ability to understand a
client’s environment and solution. “It is how we deliver IT service.
Every sales person has got to take this course online and get it. This is
important because our sales are consultative,” said Krishnan.

Cadence: Growth Is Contingent on Customer Knowledge

The Company
Cadence (www.cadence.com) is an electronic design automation
(EDA) company with products and services to help customers success-
fully design a wide array of electronic devices, such as microprocessors
and cell phones.
The electronic design process includes electronic equipment design and
integrated circuit (or semiconductor) design. In each case, the design
team specifies the desired functionality, verifies the functionality, and
creates a detailed implementation, at either a printed circuit board
or integrated circuit level. Figure 5 depicts the overall design process
for electronic equipment, including an application-specific integrated
circuit. Figure 6 illustrates the progression from a functional description
to the physical layout for a semiconductor.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 16 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Figure 5
Electronic Equipment Design Process

System-level design

Functional verification

Automated digital Custom integrated

integrated circuit design circuit design

Printed circuit board design

Source: IDC, 2001

Figure 6
Rough Progression for Designing a Semiconductor

Function Logic Layout Physical Layout

Compress 64Kbps
audio stream to
6.7Kbps
(GSM phone)

Algorithm/software Design Mask set

Source: Deutsche Bank, 2001

The electronics industry is in a state of radical transformation driven

by competition, technology advances, and a scarcity of talent. Most
importantly, the electronics industry is reshaping the electronic design
chain and the electronic supply chain. Cadence hopes to “become an
essential force in helping … customers transform the way they innovate
and bring products to market,” noted President and CEO Ray Bingham.

– 17 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Many of Cadence’s customers, are, in fact, customers of each other.
The company’s goal is to be the essential link in the electronic design
chain. Cadence’s vision is to “add value by making it easier for each
member of the chain to connect with another …. [Cadence solutions]
will enable [customers] to streamline their total design process and
gain business flexibility [and create] a design chain that’s more flexible
than ever,” explained Bingham.
To execute on this vision, Cadence improved its products and added
subscription-based pricing. This move links Cadence’s success more
closely with the design efficiency and therefore the financial success
of its customers. “[Customer] success is the true measure of ours,”
said Bingham.
The breadth of vision, complexity of the process, and critical nature
of the solutions necessitate deep and equally complex skills and
capabilities on the part of customers. To support this need, Cadence
has developed technical courses to support customers’ use of Cadence
products and best-practice methodologies throughout all phases of the
design process.

The Problem
The education problem has three faces:
• New and increased product complexity
• Education to drive customer success
• Scale of education delivery
With the introduction of new techniques and methodologies
(integrating what is called “synthesis, placement, and routing,” for
instance), customers face increasingly complex design requirements.
At the same time, the economics of these new solutions are such that
failure to adopt a new technique is competitively disastrous.
Therefore, customers have increased their demand for EDA services
to support their adoption of these new, complex methodologies. In
addition to methodology services, Cadence relies on educating
customers to ensure their engineers are as productive as possible across
the entire design process.
Growth with new customers and in the way customers use the
complete product line and integrate best-practice methodologies is a
strategy for success that ensures closer relationships across the entire
supply-chain ecosystem.
In the past, the Cadence education team relied on live, in-class
instruction for all of its training. As competitive pressures increased,
customers demanded alternative delivery methods to reduce both time
away from their work and the cost of training, particularly travel costs.
Customers also demanded a more “efficient” use of training time.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 18 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
“For an engineer to spend five days away from the office, going through
a lot of the details that they might not need at that point in their design
[was frustrating customers],” said Bonnie Willoughby, group director
of Worldwide Education for Cadence. “When we started, all we used
to deliver our training was black-and-white slides to convey highly
technical material.”
Cadence Education Services (ES) also needed to increase its own delivery
productivity: It needed to find a way to deliver effective training to more
geographically dispersed customers with little additional resources, all
while maintaining high quality around the world. Its classroom facilities
were at more than 80% utilization — frustrating customers with what
was perceived as an inflexible class schedule. For Cadence to grow, it
needed to find a different way to train its thousands of customers.
Cadence ES felt there were several elements to an effective solution:
• Decrease design engineers’ time to productivity through focused,
readily available training.
• Develop a modularized training program to help engineers solve
their design productivity issues.
• Provide customers the training when and where they need it and
on their terms.
• Deliver a high-quality solution with good return on investment.
• Leverage its existing training content and methodology while
expanding the complexity of the training to meet the needs of
both inexperienced and advanced users of the software.
• Deliver the solution quickly and ensure high customer satisfaction.
Ultimately, Cadence ES needed to find both the tools and the expertise
to turn its proprietary content into a valuable asset to its growing
business.

The Solution
As with all shifts toward the knowledge economy, the transition can be
rough. Cadence tried to develop self-paced courses on its own, but the
results did not live up to its customers’ demands. Even with content
experts, the design engineers themselves, developing the course material,
the complexity of the task was daunting.
At the same time, a tool alone was not going to solve Cadence ES’s
problem. “We were looking for a partner that would be there not only
with the software and infrastructure but also with the services and
support,” said Willoughby.

– 19 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Analysis of Cadence’s issues and requirements for success suggests the
importance of various components of a solution. Table 5 looks at the
LCMS infrastructure components.

Table 5
Cadence’s Solution Requirements: LCMS Components
Element of an Degree of
LCMS Importance Comments
Learning object ●●●●● While not critical in the near term,
repository the ability to reuse and repurpose
content will be critical as Cadence
develops various levels of content.
Automated authoring ●●●●● The ability to convert existing
content is very important.
Dynamic delivery ●● At this point, dynamic delivery is
less important because of the
modularity of the course design.
Administrative ●●● The ability to track and monitor
application progress through modules was
important for Cadence’s customers.
● = low importance ●●●●● = high importance
Source: IDC, 2001

The software solution was important, but its overall value to the
success of the project was less important than the instructional design
considerations (see Table 6).

Table 6
Cadence’s Solution Requirements: Instructional Design Considerations
Considerations for
Instructional Design Comments
Context In a business environment, there is less need
for theory and a more critical need for
practical application. In this context, the
instructional design methodology had to stress
working knowledge and practical application.
Expertise level Cadence was unable to develop a malleable
knowledge delivery vehicle. An instructional
design expert will likely be required.
Knowledge type Early modules require procedural examples
and practice. As the student’s capability
increases, discovery of methods becomes
important. The methodology used needs to be
able to support both types of instruction.
Purpose A key consideration for Cadence was the
ability to develop modular courses that focus
on specific activities in the design process.
Source: IDC, 2001

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 20 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
The company that was going to work with Cadence ES on its solution
had to be capable of integrating the group’s deep, existing content
knowledge with a superior understanding of how to develop engaging
learning experiences within technical subjects.
Additionally, because instructional design is critical to the success of
this initiative, Cadence had to be careful about how it divided respon-
sibilities for the development of its training (see Table 7).

Table 7
Cadence’s Solution Requirements: Phases of Instructional Design

Phase of Instructional
Design Comments
Analysis Analysis of the content was likely to be
handled by Cadence. Analysis of content
structure and requirements would have to be
completed jointly.
Design The vendor would have to be able to supply
advanced online design capabilities.
Development Development would have to be a joint effort
between Cadence and the vendor to leverage
Cadence’s expertise.
Implementation While Cadence would manage the delivery
system, the vendor would best solve the
hosting and maintenance issues.
Evaluation Cadence would be responsible for the
evaluation of the learning experiences.

Source: IDC, 2001

For Cadence, the tools and services were both important. The company
chose Vitalect because of what it saw as the right balance between tools,
instructional design capabilities, and process methodologies.
Vitalect helped Cadence put its education content into templates and
onto its Web site. Also, Vitalect partnered with Cadence to determine
where to add audio, animation, and other instructional elements to
make the self-paced content engaging.
To support those decisions, Vitalect provided the professional
scripts and talent along with the necessary graphic artists to ensure a
consistent and professional-looking product.
Cadence believes it has one of the most interactive and engaging
technical training solutions on the market. Built into the instruction
are extra notes and links to facilitate the curiosity of more advanced
users. Because the EDA work experience is “hands-on,” labs are used
to both practice and test the learner’s new skills. Advanced exercises
support growth for more experienced users.

– 21 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 The Results
Because Cadence was reaching capacity of its classroom training, being
able to provide high-quality elearning supported additional growth
consistent with its overall business goals. And just as importantly, the
project was completed on time. Even with an aggressive development
schedule and tight deadlines, Cadence and Vitalect delivered a high-
quality product.
Cadence puts a high degree of emphasis on responding to customer
demands. To support that value, all of Cadence’s performance-related
incentive programs are based on customer satisfaction ratings.
Therefore, not coincidentally, the most significant result for Education
Services is customer satisfaction with the new learning system. “With
the latest survey, we had one of the highest customer satisfaction
ratings in the entire company,” reported Willoughby of Education
Services. This is good news for customers and for Cadence.
A somewhat unexpected benefit for Cadence was the value of the
learning modules for its internal staff. While internal training was not
initially a high priority, Cadence found that the learning modules
improved the productivity of design engineers, trainers, and sales
and support staff.
Because of Vitalect’s Internet capability, the solution can be licensed to
every customer worldwide with little added infrastructure, facilitating
Cadence’s global reach and growth projections.

Synchronicity

The Company
Synchronicity drives its growth by enabling design productivity and
control in the electronic systems market. The company focuses on
managing the design process early in the supply chain (see Figure 7).
Synchronicity has forged technology and other partnerships with EDA
leaders, including Cadence, Mentor, and Synopsys, joining the EDA
and the intellectual property (IP) elements of the design phase of the
electronic systems market. Synchronicity is looking to provide the
standard software for connecting members of development supply
chains by constructing key links and repositories of virtual design
objects and intellectual property shared between design partners.
By focusing on design management, team collaboration, design reuse,
and IP distribution, Synchronicity helps its clients achieve dramatic
design efficiencies and control.
The Synopsys IP Catalyst Catalog illustrates this effort. Showcasing IP
cores (base designs used as part of more complicated products) from
over 40 IP partners, engineers select a core based on many criteria for
every piece of IP listed in the catalog. Synchronicity provides the
storage and processing functions to automate the rating and lifecycle

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 22 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Figure 7
Integrated Circuit Supply Chain

Electronic
Design/R&D Production Sales/ systems
distribution market

Suppliers IP Semiconductor Foundries Third-party

suppliers processing distributors
materials Semiconductor
capital
equipment Synchronicity facilitates
Synchronicity joins these
elements of the IP distribution through
design phase its IP Gear® products

Notes: EDA = electronic design automation

IP = intellectual property
Source: IDC, 2001

management of the IP to enable companies to improve their design

productivity.
Increasing the complexity of this environment, design and IP compa-
nies often use contractors for verification of design specifications. This
staffing decision increases the number of users and the control risk of
design “check-in” and “check-out.” Synchronicity products manage
this process using tools that act as “version-control” systems.
This complex environment of managing the design chain is making
companies realize that they need more effective tools for the future.
Synchronicity’s 10,000 licensed users are developing high volumes of
IP that need to be shared and distributed with methods more sophisti-
cated than simple tar and compress, which, unfortunately, is still used
in many environments.

The Problem
For Synchronicity, the education problem involves both the scale and
complexity of the product.
Offering more than 100 scheduled classes per year with between 10
and 12 students per class was effective, but the battle was getting too
big for its small staff of trainers. Mark Simon, manager of Customer
Training at Synchronicity, said, “Teaching volumes of users was
objective ‘A’ for us.”
For Synchronicity, the movement of one customer to a Web-based train-
ing format can have a dramatic impact on the Customer Training team.
When one large chip design company purchased “thousands of seats of

– 23 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 our design product… we were stretched thin with our trainers,” said
Simon. The company had no excess capacity — no way to respond to a
client with a large or unanticipated demand.
At the same time, Synchronicity’s core products are Web-based work-
flow products that recognize the complexity of the integrated circuit
and systems design environment. The company’s training offering
needed to reflect that understanding and offer a solution that was
equal to the task faced by its clients.
Synchronicity believes the following tactics contribute to an
effective solution:
• Develop a high-quality alternative to instructor-led training (ILT).
• Facilitate responsiveness to large clients operating a global business.
• Ensure the material is engaging and supports a complex environment
with real-life examples.
• Provide targeted training on subjects in smaller chunks —typically
two hours — to accommodate work schedules and learning
demand.
• Enable clients to integrate Synchronicity elearning into their own
LMS and to take advantage of new learning technologies.
Synchronicity was “paranoid” about quality, according to Simon. “If it
is not high quality, and if it is not effective and gets their attention,
then it is not going to work for us,” he explained.

The Solution
Simon and Synchronicity felt the best way to solve their learning
problems was to begin elearning development with the introductory
classes that have the largest enrollment. This approach would provide
the largest, most immediate impact on the training staff and support
the most customers right away. “We are doing Web-based training to
try to solve our numbers problem,” said Simon. “We are going to
attack the solution for 100 people [in the foundation class] before we
attack the solution for the two people in the [advanced] class.”
Analysis of Synchronicity’s issues and requirements for success suggests
the importance of various components of a solution. Table 8 examines
the LCMS infrastructure components.
While the software solution was less important in this early-phase
project, instructional design and project management considerations
were more important (see Table 9).
Synchronicity needed a partner capable of integrating Synchronicity’s
content knowledge and existing content and adding a vision of the
future of learning technology to ensure lasting content.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 24 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Table 8
Synchronicity’s Solution Requirements: LCMS Components
Element of an Degree of
LCMS Importance Comments
Learning object ●● While not critical in the near term,
repository the ability to reuse and repurpose
content will be increased as
Synchronicity develops additional
content.
Automated authoring ●●●●● The ability to convert existing
content is very important.
Dynamic delivery ●● At this point, dynamic delivery is
less important.
Administrative ●●● Being able to track and monitor
application progress through modules was
important for Synchronicity's
clients as they integrate this
content into existing systems.
● = low importance ●●●●● = high importance
Source: IDC, 2001

Table 9
Synchronicity’s Solution Requirements:
Instructional Design Considerations
Considerations for
Instructional Design Comments
Context The instructional design methodology had to
stress working knowledge and practical
application and focus on the procedural
relationship of one function to another.
Expertise level Synchronicity had no capacity to develop this
system on its own. Synchronicity planned on
working jointly to ensure a high degree of
engagement and relevance.
Knowledge type Procedural examples and practice are most
appropriate. As the student’s capability
increases, flexibility combined with elements
of version control becomes important. The
methodology used needs to be able to support
both types of instruction.
Purpose Synchronicity’s learning solution had to focus
on specific control activities.
Source: IDC, 2001

– 25 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 Additionally, because control of instructional design is critical to the
success of this initiative, Synchronicity had to manage the develop-
ment of its training (see Table 10).

Table 10
Synchronicity’s Solution Requirements: Phases of Instructional Design
Phase of Instructional
Design Comments
Analysis Analysis of the content was likely to be handled
by Synchronicity. Analysis of content structure
and requirements would have to be completed
jointly.
Design The vendor would be expected to supply
advanced design capabilities and ensure reuse
and future value of the resulting courses.
Development Development would have to be a team effort,
though Synchronicity would maintain strict
change and project management control.
Implementation Synchronicity believed the vendor would best
provide the hosting and maintenance of the
delivery system.
Evaluation Synchronicity and its clients would both
directly and indirectly evaluate the learning
experiences.
Source: IDC, 2001

Learning tools and services were both important to Synchronicity. It

chose Vitalect because of the balance between capability and its com-
pany vision of the future of learning. Vitalect’s ability to deliver a
standards-compliant course was critical. “We wanted to make sure the
Web-based training was a standard format that can integrate with
SmartForce or DigitalThink or whatever, if that is the direction my
clients want to go. Vitalect’s basic technology was solid,” said Simon.
Vitalect took Synchronicity’s basic ILT content, FAQs, and quizzes and
put together the “first draft” of the courses. Synchronicity then worked
with Vitalect and a learning project manager to coordinate changes and
ensure all appropriate design requirements were integrated into the
evolving course.

The Results
Synchronicity represents an important and common, yet relatively
unglamorous, aspect of Web-based training. Synchronicity didn’t need
a lot of instructional design, and it only used a small part of the
capability of Vitalect’s tools. But that solved Synchronicity’s business
problem: increase organizational capacity and provide delivery options
to customers.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 26 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
Synchronicity believes that ILT is often the best way to teach complex
material, but its customers were demanding alternative delivery.
Vitalect helped Synchronicity develop a high-quality alternative to ILT
while increasing Synchronicity’s responsiveness to urgent customer
requirements. “We are a small enough company that we hear directly
from our customers, and the feedback has been good,” said Simon. “In
training, you know if they use it — they tell you!”
Still in the early stages of its implementation, Synchronicity expects to
see most of its training remain instructor-led. Simon estimated that up
to 25% of Synchronicity training will be Web-based. Slow growth will
help ensure the material is engaging and includes real-life examples.
For Synchronicity, the relationship with Vitalect is successful because
Vitalect could produce the quality content and support Synchronicity’s
growth and advancement in this young industry. With its tools and
methodologies, Vitalect can facilitate future technologies and integrate
with a customer’s LMS.

Customer Testimonials Are Predictive of Success

While a vendor or a research firm can make grand pronouncements
about the value of a solution, ultimately, customers must be served. A
customer’s view of the solution should be the most important criterion
for selection:
It was their knowledge, their know-how, and advice that helped us make our courses
modularized. — Cadence

Vitalect is going to be engaging with the platform in the same way we are going to be
engaging the customer with the content. — InteQ

The bells and whistles really matter… you really want the cool things around it, you
want to see the levers and everything, and that’s what Vitalect has. — InteQ

IDC Opinion and Conclusion

As a company and its competitors move toward a knowledge economy,
skills required for success will increasingly reside not in standard “off-
the-shelf ” courses but in custom, proprietary content from within the
organization itself. For an organization to truly leverage its own skills
and institutional knowledge, it must be able to deliver its proprietary
knowledge to employees, customers, and suppliers.
The only way to achieve organizational competence is to transfer the
knowledge from those who have it to those who need it. That transfer
is likely the tipping point of success in a changing economy and will be
the competitive differentiator for the next decade.
Companies have recognized the importance of training employees, cus-
tomers, and suppliers, but the tools to increase the effectiveness of the
capture, development, and delivery of that training have only recently
become available.

– 27 – eLearning in Practice: Proprietary

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 For organizations that rely on proprietary knowledge, the ease with
which they build and manage the content that reflects their propri-
etary knowledge and methodology will likely determine their ability to
take competitive advantage of that knowledge.
Many companies have tried to develop effective elearning solutions.
But, without strong tools, instructional design assistance and a
solid development process, the chances of success are small. So, most
organizations must work with partners to help lay the groundwork
necessary to achieve success.
Even with the availability of tools capable of storage, authoring, delivery,
and administration of effective, easy-to-create learning objects, organiza-
tions must consider the mix of several elements to ensure the
development of an effective learning experience for target learners:
• Technology that enables appropriate learning
• Sound instructional design
• A process that ensures high quality
This mix is often the key differentiator between vendors and their
offerings, and it is the significant determinant to a project’s, and a
company’s, success. Choosing a vendor with the right tools and the
right capabilities helps minimize risk and maximize reward.
As complex as the process is, success stories exist. The key to success
is the proper application of the elements of a solution and the right
assistance in its development.

eLearning in Practice: Proprietary – 28 –

Knowledge and Instructional Design
 NORTH AMERICA EUROPE, MIDDLE EAST, AND AFRICA
Corporate Headquarters IDC New Jersey IDC Austria IDC Poland/ProMarket
5 Speen Street 120 Wood Ave South, Suite 509 c/o Loisel, Spiel, Zach Consulting Wrobla 43
Framingham, MA 01701 Iselin, NJ 08830 Mayerhofgasse 6 02-736 Warsaw, Poland
508-872-8200 732-632-9222 A-1040 Vienna, Austria 48-22-754-0518
43-1-50-50-900
IDC Canada IDC New York IDC Portugal
36 Toronto Street, Suite 950 2 Park Avenue IDC Benelux (Belgium) Av. Antonio Serpa, 36 Piso 9
Toronto, Ontario Suite 1505 29 Avenue Louis Gribaumont 1050-027 Lisbon
Canada M5C2C5 New York, NY 10016 B-1150 Brussels, Belgium Portugal
416-369-0033 212-726-0900 32-2-779-46-04 351-21-796-5487

IDC Irvine IDC Texas IDC Benelux (The Netherlands) IDC Russia
18831 Von Karman Ave, Ste 200 100 Congress Ave, Suite 2000 A. Fokkerweg 1 c/o PX Post, RDS 186
1059 CM Amsterdam Ulitsa Zorge 10
Irvine, CA 92612 Austin, TX 78701 The Netherlands Moscow 125525
949-250-1960 512-469-6333 31-20-669-2721 Russian Federation
IDC Mountain View IDC Washington 7-501-929-9959
IDC Central Europe (ECE)
2131 Landings Drive 8304 Professional Hill Drive Male Namesti 13 IDC South Africa
Mountain View, CA 94043 Fairfax, VA 22031 Praha 1 110 00, Czech Republic c/o BMI-TechKnowledge
650-691-0500 703-280-5161 420-2-2142-3140 3rd Floor, 356 Rivonia Blvd.
PO Box 4603, Rivonia, 2128
IDC Central Europe (Germany) South Africa
Nibelungenplatz 3, 11th Floor 27-11-803-6412
ASIA/PACIFIC 60318 Frankfurt, Germany
IDC Asia/Pacific (Hong Kong) IDC Malaysia 49-69-90502-0 IDC Spain
Ochandiano, 6
12/Floor, St. John’s Building, 33 Garden Road Suite 13-03, Level 13, Wisma KiaPeng IDC Central Europe (Switzerland) Centro Empresarial El Plantio
Central, Hong Kong No. 3, Jalan Kia Peng Niederlassung Züerich 28023 Madrid
852-2530-3831 50450 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia WTC, Leutschenbachstrasse 95 34-91-7080007
6-03-2163 3715 CH - 8050 Züerich
IDC Asia/Pacific (Singapore) Switzerland IDC Turkey
71 Bencoolen Street, #02-01 IDC New Zealand 41-1-307-1000 Tevfik Erdonmez Sok. 2/1 Gul Apt.
Singapore 189643 Level 7, 246 Queen Street Kat 9D; 46 Esentepe
65-226-0330 Auckland, New Zealand IDC Egypt Istanbul, Turkey
64-9-309-8252 39 Iraq Street 90-212-275-0995
IDC Australia Mohandesseen, Cairo, Egypt
Level 4, 76 Berry Street IDC Philippines 20-2-336-7355 IDC U.K.
North Sydney 7F, SEDCCO 1Bldg British Standards House
NSW 2060, Australia Rada Street Corner IDC France 389 Chiswick High Road
Immeuble La Fayette London W4 4AE
61-2-9922-5300 Legaspi Street 2, Place des Vosges, Cedex 65
Legaspi Village United Kingdom
IDC China 92051 Paris la Defense 5, France 44-20-8987-7100
Makati City, Philippines 33-14-904-8000
Room 611, Beijing Times Square, 632-894-4808
88 West Chang’an Avenue, Beijing, IDC Hungary
P.R. China, 100031 IDC Taiwan Ltd. Nador utca 23, 5th Floor
86-10-8391-3456 10F, 31 H-1051 Budapest, Hungary
Jen-Ai Rd, Sec 4, 36-1-473-2370
IDC (India) Limited Taipei 106, Taiwan, R.O.C. IDC is the foremost global market
Cyber House 886-2-2731-7288 IDC Israel intelligence and advisory firm helping
B-35, Sector 32 - Institutional 4 Gershon Street
Gurgaon - 122002 IDC Thailand Tel Aviv 67017, Israel clients gain insight into technology
Haryana, India 27 Soi Charoen Nakorn 14 972-3-5611660 and ebusiness trends to develop sound
91-124-6381673 to 80 Charoen Nakorn Road, Klongtonsai IDC Italy business strategies. Using a
Klongsan Bangkok 10600, Thailand Viale Monza, 14
IDC Japan 66-2-439-4591-2 combination of rigorous primary
10F The Itoyama Tower 20127 Milano, Italy
390-2-284-571 research, in-depth analysis, and client
3-7-18, Mita Minato-ku IDC Vietnam
Tokyo 108-0073, Japan 37 Ton Duc Thang Street interaction, IDC forecasts worldwide
IDC Nigeria
81-3-5440-3400 Unit 1606 House 2, ‘C’ Close, 403 Road, 4th Avenue markets and trends to deliver
District-1 Hochiminh City Vietnam New Extension, Festac Town dependable service and client advice.
IDC Korea Ltd 84-8-910-1235 Lagos, Nigeria
Suite 704, Korea Trade Center More than 700 analysts in 43
234-1-883585
159-1, Samsung-Dong, Kangnam-Ku countries provide global research with
Seoul, Korea 135-729 IDC Nordic (Denmark)
Jagtvej 169B local content. IDC’s customers
82-2-55-14380
DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark comprise the world’s leading IT
45-39-162222 suppliers, IT organizations, ebusiness
LATIN AMERICA IDC Nordic (Finland) companies and the financial
Jarrumiehenkatu 2 community. Additional information
IDC Miami IDC Colombia FIN-00520
Latin America Headquarters Carrera 40 # 103-78 Helsinki, Finland can be found at www.idc.com.
8200 NW 41 Street Bogota, Colombia 358-9-8770-466
Suite 300 571-533-2326 IDC is a division of IDG, the world’s
Miami, FL 33126 IDC Nordic (Sweden) leading IT media, research and
305-267-2616 IDC Mexico Box 1096 Kistagången 21
Select - IDC S-164 25 Kista, Sweden exposition company.
IDC Argentina Av. Nuevo Leon No. 54 Desp. 501 46-8-751-0415
Trends Consulting Col. Hipodromo, Condesa
Rivadavia 413, 4th Floor, Suite 6 C.P. 06100 Mexico, D.F.
C1002AAC, Buenos Aires, Argentina 52-5-256-1426 Sponsored by Vitalect
54-11-4343-8899 01-206SERVIC3077
IDC Venezuela
IDC Brasil Calle Guaicapuro September 2001
Alameda Ribeirão Preto, 130 cj 41 Edif. Torre Seguros Alianza
01331-000 São Paulo Piso 6, Ofc. 6-D, El Rosal
SP Brazil Caracas 1060, Venezuela
55-11-253-7869 58-2-951-3270
International Data Corp. Chile IDC
Luis Thayer Ojeda 166 Piso 12 5 Speen Street • Framingham, MA 01701
Providencia, Santiago 9, Chile (508) 872-8200 • Fax (508) 935-4015 •
56-2-231-0111
www.idc.com