Powering the Modern

Learner Experience
Next-Generation Learning
Tools Come of Age
Contents
3 Foreword

4 Executive Summary

7 Section 1: What Is an LXP ... and

Why Would You Need One?

31 Section 2: The State of the Market

for LXP/LRS Why this paper now?
The Learning Experience Platform (LXP)
and the Learning Record Store (LRS) have
been touted by many analysts as the key
technologies that will dominate the learning
36 Section 3: Conclusions tech stack for years to come. Now they have
cleared the first stages of development and
are gaining widespread adoption.

This paper brings together original research

into the current state of the LXP/LRS market
40 References with other strands of research and opinion
to provide for the first time a comprehensive
view of these exciting developments and how
they are shaping the future of learning.

CREDITS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Authored by Contains exclusive Our thanks to Josh Bersin whose work was used with
Ben Betts original research from CiL permission in this report and CIL management consultants,
John Helmer FLPI Management Consultants who created the original research that forms the majority
Layout & Design Produced by of section 2. Thanks also to Laura Lee Gibbs (Learn Fox) and
Ollie Newton Learning Pool Donald H. Taylor for their respective contributions, as well as
Chloe Yelland www.learningpool.com many other referenced organizations who made this paper
possible. Except where referenced, this paper is copyright
Learning Pool Ltd 2019.
 3
Foreword
Learning Experience Platforms are hot. My 2019 L&D
Global Sentiment Survey ranks them sixth of 15 options
among worldwide trends in our field, with the most influential
core of respondents ranking them second. This is impressively high
for the first year on the survey and makes LXPs a certainty to move
higher in the rankings next year as interest spreads across the profession.

But hot topics are seldom well defined or dispassionately discussed. Having
chaired the Learning Technologies conference since 2000, I have observed two
decades of initially well-formed ideas in our field becoming surrounded with vacuous,
ill-formed speculation. This paper provides an excellently curated and very welcome
review of the key literature on LXPs.

Ben portrays LXPs as an evolution, rather than a sudden revolution, in learning technologies,
using the analogy of dogs evolving from wolves. And just as wolves and dogs are separated
only by handful of genes, for me the use of SCORM or xAPI is a key differentiator between the
LMS and the LXP. SCORM enables the efficient packaging and delivery of learning content. xAPI,
in contrast, enables data on learning experiences to be tracked. That difference is fundamental not
just to functionality but to philosophy. An LXP puts the individual and their learning experience at
the center of its focus. Other systems start with content as the presumed answer to learning and
performance needs.

With this emphasis, the LXP epitomizes how the role of L&D is changing—from a supply-side approach of
finding uses to content to the demand side, where L&D supports performance and capability. But this in
turn raises a question beyond the scope of this report: Is the profession ready? It is quite possible that LXPs
will provide the functionality to support a huge range of learning experiences at work which will go unused
by a profession sticking rigidly to its old ways. If we do this, we will be failing our profession, ourselves, and
those we should be supporting in their quest for engaging, high-impact learning.

Donald H. Taylor
Chair, Learning and Performance Institute

3
4
Executive
Summary
Background
The learning management system (LMS) was a product of
the late 20th century. But, almost as soon as it began to
achieve mainstream use, it began evolving new features and
capabilities to meet the changing needs of organizations, as
they were driven by macro changes in:
Typical
• Working patterns
features of
• Employee circumstances and expectations
an LXP
• Technological capabilities and affordances

• The theoretical underpinnings of workplace learning 1. Consumer-grade

interface and
However, at a certain point the classical model of the experience
LMS began to creak under the pressure of so much rapid
technological and social change. The learning experience
platform (LXP) emerged as a new and distinct style of
learning system. 2. Advanced search

The two systems are now identifiably different entities, the

main difference between them being that, while an LMS is 3. Personalization
designed principally to meet the needs of administrators,
the design of an LXP focuses first and foremost on needs of
the user.
4. Mobile friendly
These needs include, in the first instance, better discovery

5.
of content, reduced friction in content access, support
for self-direction, and a more personalized, social learning
Any content
environment.

LXP or LMS? 6. Curation

With the LMS firmly entrenched in the working processes of

most learning departments and unlikely to disappear from 7. Social features
including user-
the scene any time soon, buyers of learning systems now
face a choice between two very different types of platform. generated content
Or do they? Because, while some people will find that one or
other of the two systems meets their needs, possibly a much
larger number will find they get value from having both.
8. Skills framework
Some will choose to deploy different systems for different

9. Badging, assessment,
segments of the workforce, based on factors such as region,
differences of employment status, or how learning is to be
tracked and evaluated. certification
Others again will use LMS and LXP in tandem; each playing to
its characteristic strengths in what Josh Bersin describes as
an integrated corporate learning technology stack https://
10. Advanced analytics
joshbersin.com/2019/06/learning-technology-evolves-
integrated-platforms-are-arriving.1

Learning Pool Executive Summary 5

LXP and LRS
xAPI has made possible the granular tracking of learning
resources and experiences external to the LMS, bringing
into being the learning record store (LRS), a further
addition to the learning technology stack. An LRS
separates out the tracking function, making possible a
deeper integration of learning data with other business
data and systems. This means that the impact and value
of organizational learning can be assessed more quickly,
easily, and accurately, offering L&D teams the chance to
constantly measure and improve their learning estate
and deliver real business value.

The growth of the LRS has paralleled the emergence of

the LXP, and in many ways the two are natural partners.

Learning professionals who wish to enter a new world

of enhanced near- and real-time analytics and evidence-
based decision-making may well feel that the ability
to talk to the LRS is a core piece of functionality for a
modern LXP.

The market for LXP

and LRS
Learning Pool commissioned original, exclusive research
from CIL Management Consultants into the markets
for LXP and LRS. This shows that both have already
achieved significant penetration in the learning-systems
market in the USA and UK and are poised to become
mainstream in the next few years.

Headline results:

• LXP is a potential billion-dollar market

• More than 50% of companies likely to buy an LXP

say they will do so in the next 24 months

• One in four US companies suggest they already

have an LXP in some form or another

• LRS is also a potential billion-dollar market, but

a significant share of this will go to packaged
products (i.e. LMS + LRS or LXP + LRS)

• One in five US companies suggest they already

have an LRS in some form or another

6 learningpool.com
7
Section 1:
What Is an
LXP … and
Why Would
You Need One?
Evolution not
revolution
The learning experience platform (LXP) of disruptive innovation in his book
evolved out of the learning management The Innovator’s Dilemma.4 Disruptive
system (LMS). This might seem an obvious innovations are very different from
point, but it is an important one to make sustaining innovations; the box in Figure
at the outset, because it explains some of
1 where most organizational innovation
the difficulties people have had in recent
years in giving a clear definition of this happens, which could be described as
new product category. evolutionary change. In the example given
above, word-processing with a personal
Not all products evolve out of something computer would count as a disruptive
else. The technology we are using to write innovation. It is a revolutionary paradigm
this paper—word-processing software shift that changed the landscape of
running on a computer linked to a printer— competition and consigned the typewriter
did not come about through incremental to the status of museum piece.
improvements to the typewriter, it was a
completely different way of approaching This raises the question of whether LXP
the task, resulting from the introduction is a disruptive innovation, set to cast
of a new paradigm; personal computing. the LMS onto the trash heap of obsolete
This was a revolutionary change, not an technology systems or a sustaining
evolutionary one. innovation that will complement it,
and by doing so actually prolong its life.
The LXP, by contrast, evolved out of the Ultimately only time will tell. But the very
LMS in a process perhaps analogous to entangled nature of the LXP and LMS
the way domestic dogs evolved from concepts to date tend to suggest that
wolves.2 At two different points along LXP is probably a sustaining innovation.
the evolutionary timeline we can see
two distinct species, wolf and dog, but at The contention of this paper is that the
points in between there were no doubt LXP and the LMS can now just about
many varieties of wolf-like dogs and dog- be described as separate entities, each
like wolves, with interbreeding further with its own distinctive characteristics
confusing the picture and making it hard and capabilities. However, this wasn’t
to draw a clear line between the two. So it necessarily the case a few years ago.
has been with LXPs and LMSs—however,
this is beginning to change. In the two decades of their existence,
as Laura Lee-Gibbs, of Learn Fox, points
In understanding the distinction we are out,5 LMSs had begun to add many of the
seeking to make, it is useful to set it in features we now think of as associated
the context of the different types of with the more recent LXP concept,
innovation as defined by Greg Satell in the such as “user-generated content, social
Harvard Business Review.3 learning, the ability to design and route
learners through learning pathways,
Satell’s matrix draws on the work of e-commerce, mobile learning and more
Harvard Business School professor Clayton recently gamification.”
Christensen, who introduced the concept

8 learningpool.com
 At the same time, those systems
that were beginning to be described
as LXPs had diverse and overlapping
feature-sets, and there was not much
of a settled view within the learning
technologies community about what
the defining features of an LXP might
be.

Latterly, however, LXP feature-sets

have tended to coalesce somewhat,
4 Types of Innovation in the process of which what has
become most notable about them is
not so much what they do as what
they don’t do—to the extent that
it is almost easier to describe the
difference between an LXP and an
Breakthrough Innovation Sustaining Innovation
LMS in terms of absences. The LXP,
Well

Mavericks Roadmapping by and large, believes certain features

PROBLEM DEFINED?

Skunk Works R&D labs are no longer valid or required, and

HOW WELL IS THE

Open innovation/prizes Design thinking streamlines its feature-set in the cause

Acquisitions of a better user experience, cutting
out the “features-bloat” that has come
to be associated with the LMS.

Having said all this, there are still many

hybrid systems around, and it is not
Basic Research Disruptive Innovation always easy with a given system to
Not Well

decide whether it is truly an LXP or an

Research divisions VC model LMS. Nevertheless, the fog has cleared
Academic partnerships Innovation labs
somewhat, and it is now possible to
Journals and conferences 15% / 20% rule
Lean launchpad form a clearer definition of each,
their distinctive characteristics and
strengths, and how each might best
be deployed within the organizational
Not Well Well context to support the learning needs
of a modern workforce.

HOW WELL IS THE DOMAIN But, before we undertake that

“compare-and-contrast” exercise, it is
DEFINED? worth talking a little more about the
Figure 1. Source: Greg Satell ©hbr.org process of evolution by which the
LXP emerged and the forces in the
business environment that drove it.

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 9

 The evolution of the
LXP
Probably no one has done more to document and We might imagine the LXP concept to be a very new
give a shape to this new product category than Josh one, whose age is counted in months, not years.
Bersin, the person who coined the term “Learning But the LXP pioneers are generally between seven
Experience Platform.” and eight years old and others have been around a
decade or more.
“Several years ago, as I saw the rapid growth of
platforms like Degreed, EdCast, and Pathgather, By 2017, learning management systems had begun
I coined the phrase “Learning Experience to add features that would later be seen as typical
Platforms,” and the name really stuck. Today of LXPs, a development which has been attributed,
this product category is quite real and rapidly philosophically speaking, to the influence of the
expanding.”(https://joshbersin.com/2018/09/ 70:20:10 observation.
the-learning-experience-platform-lxp-market-
expands/)6

The three vendor companies Josh Bersin cites as

LXP pioneers were all founded or came to market
between 2012 and 2013, which gives a rough
founding date for the product category, although
it should be noted that some of the companies
later added to that category have earlier
founding dates (e.g. Fuse, 2008).

10 learningpool.com
 In the same year, a slide from one of Josh Bersin’s decks began In November of the same year, Craig Weiss published a blog
to circulate widely in the world of learning technologies and post proposing the term “learning engagement platform”
became influential in establishing LXPs as a category distinct and saying that the LXP/LEP was a stronger product than
from LMSs (see Figure 3). the LMS in “an inevitably expanding niche.”9

Over the next couple of years Josh Bersin tracked the LXP Gartner’s Market Guide for Corporate Learning Suites,
market as it “exploded, expanded, grew up and evolved.” published 15 May 2018, recognized “learning experience
(https://joshbersin.com/2019/06/learning-technology- platforms” (LEPs) as a separate vendor category from LMS.
evolves-integrated-platforms-are-arriving/).7 In the same year, Gartner analyst Jeff Freyermuth placed
“learning productivity (experience) platforms” at the
This latest development, the growth of integrated “innovation trigger” point on the beginning of its hype curve
platforms, marks a significant change of focus for the LXP. for Human Capital Management Technology, indicating that
Having become a more or less fixed, identifiable entity with it is expected to reach mainstream adoption in the next five
a commonly accepted feature set, the LXP can now take its to 10 years.10
part within the new, reconstituted “stack” which includes the
LMS but also a number of other products (or modules of a
suite perhaps) to constitute a “modern integrated corporate
learning platform.” (https://joshbersin.com/2019/06/
learning-technology-evolves-integrated-platforms-are-
arriving/).

Although certainly the most prominent analyst tracking

the LXP space during this period, Josh Bersin has certainly
not been the only one. In January 2017, UK-based analysts
Fosway introduced a new category into its 9-Grid analysis of
learning systems,8 Next Generation Learning Environments
(NGLE), to acknowledge that a new type of system distinct
from the LMS was being seen in the market.

The Learning Tech Market Is Starting to Shake Out

Learning Experience Program Experience

Micro-learning Platforms
Platforms (Delivery) Platforms
Axonify, Grovo, Qstream, Practice,
Degreed, EdCast, PathGather, Intrepid, NovoEd, EdX, Everwise, Rehearsal, others ...
SAP Jam, Fuze ... OpenEdX

Assessment, Development, Delivery Tools Content Libraries

Video authoring, intelligent assessment, spaced learning, Lynda, Udacity, Coursera, EdX, Udemy, Pluralsight,
gaming, virtual reality, collaboration, simulations ... SkillSoft, CrossKnowledge, hundreds of others ...

LMS Platforms Learning Record Store

Traditional: Cornerstone, Saba, SuccessFactors, SumTotal GrassBlade, Learning Locker,

Modernized: Workday, Oracle Cloud Learning, Litmos, Docebo, others ... Saltbox, Watershed

Figure 3: Adapted from Josh Bersin, https://joshbersin.com/2019/06/learning-technology-evolves-integrated-platforms-are-arriving/

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 11

 The 2018–19 edition of Sierra Cedar’s long-
running HR Systems Survey includes LXPs,
describing them as “an emerging trend
in the Talent Management application
space.”11

Writing in June 2018, Michael Rochelle,

Chief Strategy Officer and Principal HCM
Analyst, Brandon Hall Group, hailed
the coming together of Degreed and
Pathgather as “groundbreaking” in the
industry: “This is just the beginning of a
movement that has been set in permanent
motion to transform how organizations
look at learning and improving individual
and organizational performance.”12

Despite some divergent opinions about

naming, it can now confidently be
asserted that the LXP is a significant new
product category in learning platforms,
a separate (although related) species
from the LMS, and a strong indicator of a
forward path for development of learning
technologies. (Later in this paper we will
show that it is also achieving significant
market traction.)

This state of affairs makes it possible for us

to look at the business drivers that have
produced this new entity and describe its
key features, which we will now do.

In Josh Bersin’s work we can see a

number of drivers for the emergence,
and subsequent enthusiastic adoption by
buyers, of LXPs. His commentary on the
rise of the LXP ties into other work on
changes in the behavior and expectations
of learners (notably his writings on the
“modern learner”13), as well as the needs
of L&D and HR professionals.

In order to fully understand what has led

to the emergence of the LXP, however,
it is also necessary to look more broadly
at macro changes in the business
environment that have helped to make
LXP not only a valid need of organizations
(i.e. not a “solution looking for a problem”)
but, in some senses, an inevitability.

12 learningpool.com
What has driven the Changes in
growth in learning working
experience platforms? patterns
The LMS was created for organizational
Drivers of LXP structures that were different from the
ones we see today. In the two decades
during which LMS was the dominant
paradigm of learning systems, powerful
WORK • On-demand economy forces—including globalization, free-
• Contingent and extended market liberalism, the development of
workforces the internet, and innovations in consumer
• Flexible working electronics—have changed the world of
• Accelerating product cycles work profoundly, putting pressure on the
• Agility: a new organizational default capabilities of the classic LMS.
paradigm
Some of the changes detailed below
have raised particular problems for the
EMPLOYEES • Greater workforce flexibility “traditional” LMS, which was designed
• Shortened tenure assuming full-time, office-based employees
expectations accessing the learning system via desktop
• Pressures of the always-on, computers supplied and supported by
wired world internal L&D and IT departments.
• Modern learners:
“overwhelmed, distracted, Growth of freelancing and the
impatient” “gig” or “on-demand” economy
• Generations Millennial and changes the landscape
Z becoming the dominant The number of freelance workers in the
workforce segment economy has risen dramatically since the
turn of the millennium. In the USA they
are growing three times faster than the
TECHNOLOGY • Mobility traditional workforce. More than a third
• Explosion of online content of US workers are currently freelance (UK:
• Growth in sophistication of 15%), with the numbers expected to rise to
data analytics close on 40% by 2020.14 These freelancers
• AI and automation are disproportionately from younger
age groups, do it by choice rather than
through necessity, and are more proactive
THEORY • ID shibboleths fall from grace in seeking out skills training than full-time
• New input from neuroscience workers. If this trend continues (caveat:
and psychology 2018 showed a small decrease) freelancers
• 70:20:10, JIT, courses not are expected to form the majority of US
resources, micro, nano, workers by 2027.
gamified

Learning Pool
Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 13
Contingent workforces need flexible knowledge These contingent workers often need to be onboarded,
resources trained in relevant skillsets, and given the knowledge to
Large companies employ an ever-increasing number of these work in compliance with industry regulations, but trying to
freelance contractors, consultants, temps, and advisers, referred do this within the corporate LMS can be a struggle, when
to as the contingent or extended workforce. According to the direction of travel in the vendor community has been
Deloitte, “businesses have dramatically increased their use of toward closer integration with large talent management
contingent workers over the past decade as they struggle with and HR systems. This can mean that enrolling someone on
rising labor costs and the need for a workforce that can quickly the LMS who is not a full-time employee raises security
adapt to market conditions.”15 Whole cohorts of contingent issues and triggers all sorts of irrelevant processes creating
workers are now deployed to meet skills gaps and particular unnecessary friction.
strategic goals.
Often these audiences need far simpler “launch-and-learn”-
type environments without the need for complex LMS
administration. (A good example of this type of deployment
was when Learning Pool client the English Football
Association used the Learning Pool’s LXP for their Wembley
Stadium event staff.)

Neither can it be guaranteed that the model of learning

content delivery used by a traditional LMS is appropriate to
the needs of a contingent workforce. Lacking the knowledge
of internal systems and access to information stored across
the organization in multiple repositories, databases, and
file-shares, such workers need access to the information
required to do their jobs via a system that is content driven
rather than admin driven. They could be accessing such
information on home systems, tablets, and smartphones,
many of which will not be part of any BYOD scheme.

Their content needs can also differ. The necessity of

deploying contingent workers quickly and flexibly often
makes it impossible to develop hefty e-learning programs
for their specific needs, so they might have to lean heavily
on curated content from external sources, user-generated
content, micro-learning, video, etc.

Where contingent workers are used to supply skills gaps in

an organization, there is often a requirement for knowledge
transfer to full-time staff (and vice versa), driving a
requirement for user-generated content, often in the shape
of an ability to upload and share user-created video.

In regulated industries, having an audit trail for contingent

workers can be business-critical, so, even where content is
provided flexibly, its use still needs to be tracked scrupulously
and accurately. As we know, SCORM, the underpinning
tracking technology of the LMS, struggles with anything
that falls outside the classical model of content provision.
xAPI provides a more flexible style of tracking for diverse
content that sits outside the LMS.

14 learningpool.com
Flexible working A new organizational paradigm
Work has changed for full-time workers, Between 1983 and 2013, more than 90% of non-financial S&P companies dropped
too, many of whom are opting to become out of the index. With disruption from younger, tech-enabled competitors
rather less full time and/or to work from affecting all sectors to a greater or lesser degree, there has been a big drive for
home. Flexibility is now the most desired organizations toward digital transformation, adopting more agile structures and
non-monetary benefit for US workers: 51% processes.
say they would change jobs to have access
to it (the ability to work from home comes McKinsey talk of this as a new organizational paradigm (see Figure 4).
in at 35%).16 Only 44% of those questioned
say their company actually offers flextime, The Agile organization is nearly the new dominant organizational paradigm
and 24% offer the ability to work offsite part Rather than organization as machine, the agile organization is a living organism
of the time. Just over half of UK workers are
working flexibly in some way, and, of those
who don’t have access to flextime, 78% From organizations as ...to organizations as
would like it.17 “machines” ... “organisms”

The unmet demand showed by these “Boxes and lines” less

figures, against a background of declining important, focus on
Quick changes, action
unemployment, indicates that these trends
are only likely to continue. flexible resources

Top-down
Flexible and remote working, however,
hierarchy
carry a risk of isolation, which throws more
emphasis on the social aspect of learning,18 Bureaucracy
something that can be ill-served by an LMS
structured around self-paced e-learning
modules as the default mode of delivery but
which is a settled feature of LXP systems.

Accelerating product cycles Silos

Product development cycle times decreased Leadership shows Teams built
significantly over the 15 to 20 years to direction and around end-to-end
Detailed
2010, according to studies by the Product enables action accountability
instruction
Development and Management Association Figure 4. McKinsey & Company
(PDMA),19 and, with the key drivers of
technological innovation on exponential 84% of global senior executives interviewed by Forbes in 2017 agreed that
curves, there is no sign of this trend slowing “organizational agility” is essential to achieve digital transformation, with almost
anytime soon. a third considering themselves “highly agile.” Deloitte found that 80% of federal
IT projects in the USA were self-described as “agile” or “iterative” in 2017 (2011:
The impact of this need for speed, most <10%).20
acute in sectors such as retail, has been
felt for some time in the world of digital This new paradigm puts pressure on organizations to reskill more effectively and
learning. Putting pressure on lengthy to support continuous learning to keep up with the pace of technology-driven
production schedules for custom e-learning change.
content, it has been a significant driver of
developments such as rapid authoring and, With its emphasis on collapsing hierarchies and working in flexible, multi-
more recently, micro-learning, curation, disciplinary teams, agile working also tends to de-emphasize the importance of
and user-generated content. Arguably, job roles in learning and gives more focus to tasks and skills. It is probably no
it also contributes to fueling a culture of coincidence that we have heard less in recent years about L&D approaches such
self-directed learning as learners seek to as competency-based learning and much more about skills.
avoid the friction associated with learning
departments where access to learning has If the architecture of the classical LMS was designed for how organizations
to be requested and approved. were in the 1990s, surely a new organizational paradigm calls for a new learning-
systems paradigm.

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 15

Changes in
employees
circumstances and
expectations
Pressures of the always-on,
Changes in the organization have been accompanied,
wired world
and to some extent caused, by changes in the
employer–employee relationship. The dynamics of Meanwhile, since the advent of Web 2.0,
this relationship have altered radically since the 1980s social media, smart mobile devices, and
with the transition from a manufacturing economy to always-on internet, the pace of life has been
a knowledge economy.21 cranked up for these employees both at work
and at home. A more information-rich environment
Greater workforce flexibility has produced higher expectations around what we
Greater flexibility in patterns of working has both should all be able to accomplish with that information
positive and negative effects for employees. A and how quickly, but productivity doesn’t actually
more marketized environment for labor means that seem to have increased—perhaps because more
we see a very broad spectrum of difference in how information also means more distractions and
weighted the balance of power within employer– somehow more friction (since this wealth of “free”
employee relations appears toward either party. information has to be funded by highly interruptive
Where workers have highly valued, scarce skillsets advertising techniques).
that are critical to business success (e.g. data scientist,
financial “quant”), employers feel driven to confer
benefits and incentives that recall the paternalistic
companies of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. At
the other end of the spectrum, where workers have
low-value, “commoditized” blue-collar skills that are
readily available (cleaner, taxi driver), the employer’s
behavior is increasingly transactional, unengaged, and
can be the very opposite of parental.

Shortened tenure expectations

Since the 1980s, expectations around job tenure have
shortened for both parties, and, since the global
financial crisis, average wage levels have remained
flat or declined in real terms at the same time that
unemployment levels have fallen. Levels of employee
engagement are low,22 and it is probably fair to say
that today’s employees feel far less sense of obligation
toward their employer than in former times and are
more ready to move if the grass looks greener on the
other side of the fence.

16 learningpool.com
 Modern learners
are overwhelmed,
distracted, impatient ...
1% of a typical workweek
is all that employees have
to focus on training and
development. Yet people
still find the time to unlock
their smartphones on
average 9 times per hour
and we get distracted
every 5 minutes (on
average) by notifications
from collaboration tools.

Source: “Meet the Modern Learner” (2014). Bersin by Deloitte,23

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 17

Changes in
technological
capabilities and
affordances
As Moore’s Law (together with a group of additional should be the exclusive gatekeeper
eponymous laws, most notable Metcalfe’s) propelled of learning content within an
technological advance along exponential growth organization began to seem anachronistic.
curves, technology became the engine of radical and
often unpredictable change in business and society. Meanwhile the variety and “production value”
of online content had increased hugely. Where
Mobility the internet of the late 1990s was largely text-based
The advent of the smartphone placed an and struggled with images, much less video, we now
unprecedented amount of computing power and had real-time streaming of movies and a rich mix
information in the hands of ordinary people, a of content types with greater interactivity, much
development that went hand in hand with the more audio, and innovative forms like virtual and
extraordinary growth of social media. Tablets, with augmented reality.
their larger screens, made many applications mobile
that would previously have been restricted to desktop There was an explosion of online content, available
and brought an expanded range of media to mobile through free, freemium, paid-for, and subscription
computing. models.

As cloud computing increased, and more and more Growth in sophistication of data analytics
applications became portable between the user’s Sophisticated analytics fueling a new type of
different devices, an expectation arose that work- advertising targeted with unprecedented accuracy
based applications such as the company LMS should became the currency of the digital economy.
behave this way, too. Learning platforms inevitably Meanwhile, learning systems depended largely on an
went in this direction, but there was a noticeable lag. industry-specific standard, SCORM 1.2, which tracks a
very limited number of data points. As data became
Explosion of online content routinely referred to as “the new oil” it seemed that
The success of community/blogging platforms like learning platforms were still in the steam age when it
WordPress and Drupal, both gaining substantial third- came to analytics. Attempts to update SCORM 1.2 had
party development communities as they grew, had only partial success, and it was not until the advent
the effect of driving down costs for and, in a sense, of xAPI (also known as Tin Can or the Experience
commoditizing content management. Social media API) that SCORM received a viable successor. Still,
platforms such as Facebook, Linkedin and especially there seems a lot of confusion about this area in L&D
YouTube normalized the phenomenon of user- circles, perhaps the legacy of an industry that has not
generated content that had started with blogs and historically been that hot on evaluation.
forums.
E-learning entrepreneur Donald Clark pinpoints this
Now that almost everybody participating in internet confusion in a recent blog post:
use was a publisher, and with mainstream media, once
known as “the fourth estate” no longer the gatekeeper
of news, the idea that the Learning Department

18 learningpool.com
 Everyone’s talking about
analytics, but few are
talking about the analysis
to show how this will
actually help increase
the efficacy of the
organization. Some are
switched on and know
exactly what they want
to explore and implement,
others are like those that
never throw anything out
and just fill up their home
with stuff—but not sure
why. One problem is that
people are shifting from
first to sixth gear without
doing much in between.24

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 19

Some of his recommendations are to:

• Focus on correlations with business data (e.g. “Did

the sales training actually increase sales logged in
Salesforce?”), something that an LRS can do using
xAPI
• Harvest data from simulation training using AI in a
diagnostic fashion (e.g. “What deep insights does
the data from simulation training give into trainee
behaviour?”)
• Use data to improve online learning, but with a
mindset that is not worried about exposing the
weaknesses of what has been developed

He also points out some of the difficulties with using data

and AI and machine learning for learning that indicate a
steep learning curve ahead for L&D professionals as this
becomes more a feature of their landscape.

AI and automation
Artificial Intelligence has had numerous “winters” but has,
more recently, emerged (particularly in the last decade)
as a critical technology driver that is starting to have
effects in almost every business to a greater or lesser
degree. Whether or not you believe in what writer and
journalist John Lanchester has called “an imminent artificial
intelligence job apocalypse,”25 it seems clear that many
new jobs are likely to be created and old ones reconfigured
as machines take over more and more routine thinking
tasks from humans.

AI is also taking on tasks that could never have been

affordably undertaken by humans (personalizing learning
recommendations for users of an LXP comes into this
category). Those who have to manage such automated
tasks and functions need at least an understanding of how
AI does what it does.

These new knowledge and skills needs will increasingly

become a focus for L&D. They also intensify the need for
learning systems that can support continuous learning and
effective reskilling at pace and at scale.

20 learningpool.com
 70:20:10, JIT, courses not resources, micro, nano,
Changes in gamified...

the theoretical In this slightly chaotic situation, views coalesced around some broad
areas of agreement:

underpinnings of • Informal as well as formal learning was important to the way adults

workplace learning
learn
• The 70:20:10 observation downgraded the importance of formal
instruction (the 10%) in favor of social learning (20%) and learning
Creating self-paced online learning required on the job (70%)
theoretical underpinnings, since the experience • “Just in Time” performance support, possible in a connected, always-
and charisma of human trainers could not be on world, obviated the need for much “just-in-time” learning and
leaned on, as it often was in the world of stand- could be delivered “in the flow of work”
up training, to produce a satisfactory result. • “A course” was no longer the default unit of instruction (“resources
However, the models that came from pre- not courses” became the mantra); instead, resources and experiences
internet distance learning did not seem sufficient from different sources and in different “modalities” could be
to cover this new situation. organized into personalized “learning pathways”
• Content should be smaller (micro-learning, nano-learning)
Instructional design orthodoxies fail • Designers had to work harder at engaging learners, drawing on
As the first decade of the new millennium insights from neuroscience, psychology and the consumer realm
wore on, more and more dissatisfaction was that propelled them in the direction of game-based learning and
expressed with a great deal of the academic widespread gamification
and other literature that formed the canon of • With so much free content on offer, varying greatly in quality,
instructional design. Learning styles, ADDIE, curation was now a core activity
Myers-Briggs personality types, constructivism,
the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve … one after The LXP, and the LXP-like features added to LMSs, can be seen in part as
another of these shibboleths have been subject the vendor response to customer demand driven by this thinking.
to fervent denunciation and equally fervent
counter-denunciation by their supporters.

With its roots in military training and perhaps

too much early influence from the behaviorist
theories of controversial psychologist B.F.
Skinner, training was seen to have a slightly shaky
intellectual foundation.

New input from

neuroscience, psychology
Further broadsides came from the rapidly
developing field of neuroscience, whose insights,
along with those provided by psychology, seemed
to contradict much of the received wisdom in
ID—although without necessarily replacing it
with a clear set of best practices. The result was
a lot of fervent debate, the frequent coining of
new buzzphrases that seemed to offer a (usually
illusory) sense of certainty, thousands of clickbait
blog posts, and a great deal of “neurobabble”
from conference platforms.

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 21

 Typical features 10 key features
of an LXP of an LXP
So if the LXP now exists as a settled entity, 1. Consumer-grade interface and experience
how should we describe its distinctive
features? 2. Advanced search

Drawn from numerous analysts, the list

3. Personalization
to the right seems to us to represent the 4. Mobile friendly
main characteristics of a modern LXP. Not
all solutions will do all of these things, and 5. Any content
emphasis varies between different solutions,
but almost all will at least pay lip service to
6. Curation
the majority of these as capabilities or have 7. Social features including user-generated content
them on the roadmap.
8. Skills framework

9. Badging, assessment, certification

10. Advanced analytics

22 learningpool.com
Consumer-grade interface and fit the bill on a platform where content In the context of LXPs, personalization
experience resources are numerous and diverse (see refers to letting learners choose their
This might seem like a big ask, given that “Any content” on page 24) and need to own focus areas, add their own content,
it pits what is essentially a niche business be found quickly and easily. And clearly and follow their own pathways. Every
system against interfaces provided by a self-directed learner will rely far more user logging in to the LXP should
companies the likes of Facebook and heavily on search than one who expects have a slightly different experience; a
Apple—some of the largest companies to be spoon-fed information. homepage tailored to their pathways,
in the world who employ the cream of their personalized recommendations
design and UX talent—but the key point Discovery of the organization’s learning (driven by AI in some cases), and their
about an LXP is that it is designed around resources has been identified by Josh social feeds.
the user not the administrator, and that is Bersin as “the original problem these
a very different design orientation, which products solved,”26 and great search is
of itself can make a huge difference. the lynchpin of discovery. It is a justifiable
Expect user-centered design and a user expectation of the user that search will
experience that feels to the learner like it be far more granular than it currently
is “for me” rather than solely to fulfill the is in many learning systems, taking the
requirements of the organization. user not just to the associated piece of
learning but to the particular paragraph,
In some cases this can mean eschewing video, or other component within it—
the user interface altogether in favor of “deep search” as some call it.
pushing resources out via other channels—
for example, through collaboration tools
such as Microsoft Teams or Slack. This sort Personalization
of fluid integration, which brings with Donald H. Taylor’s 2019 Learning &
it a degree of platform “invisibility,” is Development Global Sentiment Survey
very much part of the modern consumer has identified personalization as the
experience and therefore necessarily number-one trend in 2019,27 but it seems
influences the trajectory of LXP design. that people often use the word to mean
different things.

Advanced search
Given that consumer
expectations around
the acquisition of
knowledge and
information are set
principally now by
Google, one of the most
advanced AI companies
on the planet, provision
of a consumer-grade
experience should
necessarily entail
sophisticated search.
Clunky, proprietary
engines as were seen in
the past on many LMS
solutions will no longer

An LXP chatbot, Flo, working within Slack to bring learning into the workflow

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 23

Mobile friendly Since the quality, relevance, and fit-to-
Rather than providing a mobile version of company message still had to be guaranteed
what is essentially a desktop application, the in some way, curation became a core
LXP belongs to an era of responsive design activity of learning departments. Curation
where by default the needs of mobile users is increasingly a function that can be
are factored into design from the beginning. automated through AI and tools such as
A “mobile first” approach lets “the tail wag Anders Pink. Handling curation as a core part
the dog” and makes key design decisions of the learning system is now a reasonable
based on the distinctive mobile context of expectation of an LXP.
use (e.g. on a small screen, in a crowded train
between stops, using gestures such as swipe, User-generated content (UGC)
pinch, and spread, etc.). This approach places With the organization and its development
the LXP more effectively in the context of partners no longer the sole source of content
users’ everyday lives, putting their learning on the learning system, users themselves
and knowledge needs into the flow of moved into the frame as an exciting new
working days alongside their need to know source of content generation. Pretty much
the latest sports results or whether or not it all the content on social media is user-
is going to rain that afternoon.28 generated, and people have gotten used to
the idea of this as a normal activity—even if
Any content all they do is post pictures of their cats and
Any LXP worth its salt will handle a wide holidays on Facebook.
variety of content types with ease within a
single interface, meeting a user expectation UGC is an exciting development for learning
that has grown up in the era of Google, because it plays to contemporary theory
YouTube, and other social media platforms that emphasizes the importance of “learning
for a seamless flow between search, by doing” and helps greatly with learner
discovery, and content consumption that engagement—not only regarding the person
embraces text, graphics, audio, motion who generates the content but also the
graphics, interactivity, virtual classroom, and person who views it. Seeing a colleague or
even virtual reality. somebody like themselves participating
in the learning can make it instantly more
The LMS and its tracking standard, SCORM, relatable. The LXP should support UGC and
were designed around a very limited set of make it easy and frictionless for the learner.
content types. As soon as video began to
be more widely used online it was clear that Social
model had to change. Alongside the behaviors that drive UGC, an
LXP will typically support a variety of other
Curation social behaviors such as sharing, rating,
Another assumption of the classical model conversational threads, creating groups and
was a single source of content, usually individual profiles, etc. LXP platforms from
the company or organization that owned different vendors will vary widely in which of
the system. Only the organization, via its these behaviors they support and promote.
representatives in the learning department,
would have the right to place content on Nobody says you have to have all of these
the system. Once the definition of learning features to be a proper LXP (so-called
content began to widen (e.g. it didn’t “feature-bloat” has afflicted the world of
necessarily have to be a module of self-paced enterprise LMS and is something to be
e-learning) and it became abundantly clear avoided in an LXP, as it will tend to degrade
that there was a whole world of valuable the user experience). Here there is a chance
learning content out there for free on the for individual LXPs to shape a distinctive
internet, economic realities dictated that use experience in what they choose to deploy.
be made of them.

24 learningpool.com
 Skills framework Advanced analytics
In order to offer a taxonomy around the SCORM 1.2 offers a fairly limited array of
notion of any content, curation, and user- data points to the administrator of an LMS.
generated content, it becomes important It can tell you whether someone took a
to offer a framework of sorts to organize course, completed a course, and how they
learning experiences into coherent scored on quizzes. But it can’t tell you, for
collections. This can form the basis of a instance, how much of a related video that
recommendation engine on the front end, learner watched before taking the quiz or
connecting together “like” experiences whether their passing a final assessment
regardless of source, and can form a subsequently showed any correlation in
powerful basis for analysis on the back end, improved sales figures.
allowing an administrator to understand
which skills are being focused on by the The LXP, especially when integrated
workforce and to identify any skills gaps with an LRS, has an enhanced analytics
that could exist in the organization. capability that enables you to look across
multiple content types, not all of them
Badging, assessment, launched from the learning system, and
certification to pull in data from other organizational
The chance to earn badges for particular platforms such as Salesforce to hugely
activities or fulfilling certain achievement enhance the possibilities open to the
goals is at the same time a social feature learning professional.
and an aspect of gamification. However,
taxonomically, it also sits within the perhaps
more serious category of certification and
evaluation.

It would be a mistake to think that

tracking, evaluation, and certification of
learning—something perhaps more usually
associated with the world of the LMS—is
inimical to a user-centered concept like the
LXP, designed to encourage self-directed
learning.

Feedback is a vital part of learning. The

training world, which has never previously
been that strong on evaluation, is waking
up to a new era of plentiful and readily
available data that offers the chance
to become more evidence based and
perhaps even to assume a more strategic
role within their organizations. As Donald
H. Taylor points out in the report on his
Global Sentiment Survey 2019, data is
the common theme across the top three
answers to the question of what will be hot
in L&D next year. With its capabilities for
advanced analytics, the LXP is set to play a
pivotal role in this explosion of data-driven
decision-making.

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 25

 LXP and/or/
versus LMS
It might be inferred from the All of which raises the question of
arguments advanced so far in this where this new entity sits in the mix.
paper that we believe the LMS has Does the buyer have to make an
had its day. That is not the case. Here either/or choice between an LMS and
are just a few reasons why it is unlikely an LXP, or do they need both? In other
that we will be writing obituaries for words, do the two systems have a
the LMS any time soon. complementary set of capabilities?

• While the use of freelancers and The decision is complicated by the

contingent workforces is no fact that, while the two are clearly
doubt advancing rapidly in the very different entities, the available
USA and UK, still the majority of systems on the market vary a great
work is done by full-time salaried deal, and to a degree shade into each
staff. other.
• While sentiment in the industry
has moved against so-called We have talked about the classical
“click-next” self-paced e-learning model of the LMS in this paper in order
as the default modality of content to draw a contrast with the LXP, but
delivery online, there is no doubt almost since its first inception the LMS
that it continues to be a vital tool began to add features and capabilities
in meeting large-scale training that drew it away from that model, so
needs, particularly in regulatory that today many LMSs have LXP-like
compliance, many of which features. There again, many LXPs have
could not be fulfilled at all by LMS-like features, and some will have
conventional means. grown out of an LMS code base.
• The growth in the propensity
toward self-directed learning In her blog post “LMS or LXP?”
does not alter the fact that large (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/
numbers of workers, probably lms-lxp-laura-lee-gibbs/) digital
the majority, are either content learning consultant Laura Lee-Gibbs,
to passively receive direction of Learn Fox, provides a common-
in their learning or at a stage of sense discussion of the topic. For
their careers where they need a her the defining difference is one of
lot of handholding to support an design orientation: “[The LXP] is a
externally imposed structure. paradigm shift from the compliance-
• The LMS has an entrenched led delivery of learning to that of
position within most organizations user-engagement-led curation of self-
(many have several), hosting directed learning.”29
large amounts of content and
with workflows and processes To put it more simply, the LMS is
well embedded around their use. designed for administrators, the LXP
Rooting the LMS out and replacing for learners.
it with something different could
be a major undertaking. Lee-Gibbs sums up these differences
• In many cases, the LMS will be in a useful diagram (see Figure 6
closely (perhaps even inextricably) opposite).
integrated with a talent suite or
other ERP system.

26 learningpool.com
 LXP—Learning Experience Platform
External Open Internal
Content Content Content

Learning served
up by skills-based
and usage-based

Mobile
First
recommendation
User Driven

Aggregate / Curate / Create / Target / Report

xAPI /
Open
APIs

BI Reporting Delivery Platforms Other apps

LMS—Learning Management System

Multi-mode training management
ILT / Webinar / Online / Documents

Learning served
up by business
Training rules
Management Admin Driven
First

Administration & Reporting

The traditional LMS

is adding mobile
apps, open APIs, and
Figure 6. Source: Laura the ability to suck
Lee-Gibbs/Learn Fox, 2019 in external & open
content

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 27

 Working through both sets of considerations, a given
buyer might decide they need both—or, more likely, wish
to add an LXP alongside an existing LMS configuration). In
such a mixed ecosystem, where content is hosted on the
LMS, the LXP might be thought of as a “learner experience
layer” pulling content from the LMS. We would consider this
pattern a “three-layer architecture” with the “experience”
layer presenting the core user interface, aggregating
content from providers sitting underneath pushing activity
data to a central “data” store.
Inspired by Laura Lee-Gibbs’s article (https://
www.linkedin.com/pulse/lms-lxp-laura-
lee-gibbs/), here is a set of considerations for
potential buyers when making their decisions
Learner Experience Layer
about what type of learning systems they need.

You should consider an LMS if your Online Content Providers

needs are:

• Static—content won’t change much

• Readily taught
Data and Insights Layer
• Easily assessed
• Required to keep workers safe and legal

The ideal implementation of the three-layer architecture

You should consider an LXP if your would involve the LXP providing the front door to all training
needs are: opportunities, whether or not they reside on the LMS. The
LMS itself is then treated no differently to any other content
• Dynamic—content constantly changes provider, it just happens to be the home of your content.
• Reliant on gaining experience
• Difficult to assess The reality of unifying the experience layer may be beyond
• Required to keep your organization growing most organizations in the short term. While we would all
love to connect our various systems together with seamless
APIs, it seems more likely that some of our initial integrations
will involve linking off from an LXP to an LMS at some
point, keeping both user experiences, although somewhat
relegating the LMS interface to only deliver on certain
requirements. In such cases the three-layer architecture can
be expanded to include both LXP and LMS-based activities,
with the LXP acting as a unified homepage—see Figure 7 for
an expanded example of an LXP plus LMS ecosystem from
Learning Pool.

28 learningpool.com
 Learner Experience Layer

Search and Nudges LXP—Signposting &

LMS Activities LXP Activities
in the Flow Search

Authoring Content Layer Integrations

Off-the-Shelf
Adapt Custom Content Carefully Curated 3rd-Party Content
Editable Content

Data and Insights Layer

LRS Automation BI Tools

Figure 7.

Learning Pool Section 1: What Is an LXP … ? 29

LXP and LRS HR system improve; her sales figures as
recorded in Salesforce go up. The means of
“Integration” is an important word in bringing all this data together to tell such a
understanding the full power of an story is the LRS and is also external to the
LXP—in fact, the ability to integrate with LMS, although it can be integrated within it.
other systems might be considered a
key capability of the LXP. To understand The LRS enables two things that couldn’t
why this is so important it is necessary to previously be done within a SCORM-only
consider a technology driver we haven’t environment: tracking of the full range of
yet touched on in this paper, which is learner experiences and activity within
the growth and spread of Application a 70:20:10 continuum, and correlation of
Programming Interfaces, or APIs. activity data with business information
to link training investment to outcomes
APIs have been around for a long time, at both the organizational and individual
but Web APIs in particular received a levels—an end-to-end, personalized,
big boost from the rise of social media learning ROI evaluation system.
platforms in the Web 2.0 era, allowing
cloud-based applications to integrate and It will be seen straight away that the LRS is
share information across the internet. At a natural partner for the LXP, both having
this time, the average LMS was an installed been designed around a modern learning
solution, and cloud-based LMSs were only environment where learning comes in many
just beginning to be seen, which opened shapes and sizes and from many different
the way to more integration with other sources.
systems.
Would it be possible to operate an LXP
The implications for tracking of learning— without an LRS? Well, yes. But having
which previously was always done within proper tracking of the rich mix of learning
the LMS, using SCORM—were profound, but experiences provided by an LXP, and taking
the industry had to wait for the introduction advantage of the expanded analytical
of a learning-specific type of API, known as capabilities it offers, is liable to entail quite
xAPI, in 2013 before it could wean itself off a bit of bespoke integration work using
its dependence on SCORM and embrace other means. Having a defined standard
this new uber-connected world. and set of protocols as represented by xAPI,
specifically created for the tracking and
The Experience API (xAPI) evaluation of learning, makes the process
In the classical model of the LMS, launching, a lot simpler to implement and probably
consumption, and tracking of learning considerably less expensive.
content usage by the learner all take place
within a single closed system. xAPI, by It is the position of this paper that an LXP
contrast, allows tracking of learner activity, that did not talk the language of xAPI would
which could be consumption of content be missing an important trick.
but could also include a wide variety of
learning experiences on platforms external
to the LMS.

It also allows other data concerning the

learner to be correlated with this experience
data, from which causal relationships can
be inferred—e.g. learner takes an e-learning
module on negotiation skills and attends
a sales workshop; her assessment scores
as recorded by her line manager in the

30 learningpool.com
31
Section 2:
The State of
the Market
for LXP/LRS
LXP and LRS cross LXP penetration in companies > 250 employees
LRS penetration is estimated at 25% in the UK and 19% in the USA.

the chasm UK
100% 80%
Original, exclusive research commissioned by
Learning Pool shows that LXP and the closely
related product category of Learning Record
Store (LRS) have already achieved significant
penetration in the learning systems market
in the US and UK and are poised to become
mainstream in the next few years. 20% 11%
9%
Headlines
• LXP is a potential billion-dollar market
• More than 50% of companies likely to buy USA
an LXP say they will do so in the next 24
100% 73%
months
• One in four US companies suggest they
already have an LXP in some form or
another
• LRSis also a potential billion-dollar market,
but a significant share of this will go to
27% 17%
packaged products (i.e. LMS + LRS or LXP
+ LRS) 10%

• One in five US companies suggest they

already have an LRS in some form or Survey Not using Using LXP In-house Outsourced
respondents LXP
another
Figure 8. Source: CIL Survey

Methodology LRS penetration in companies with > 250 employees

Learning Pool instructed CIL Management UK

Consultants to conduct research into the 100% 75%
markets for LXPs and LRSs in the UK and USA.
The output report is based quantitatively on
651 survey responses, of which 57% came from
the USA.

Results 25% 8%
3% 13%

Current level of penetration of LXP

and LRS technologies
USA
The research suggests that both the LXP and
LRS markets are probably past their first phase 100% 81%

of development. According to the survey,

current penetration of LXP is estimated at
20% in the UK and 27% in the USA.

19% 7%
5%
7%

Survey Not using Using LRS In-house Within Standalone

respondents LRS LMS/LXP

32 learningpool.com Figure 9. Source: CIL Survey

A caveat should be entered here, however. Outsourced LXP market size ¹,²
Although care was taken to define what
was meant by LXP and LRS in the survey,
respondents may have accidentally or willfully Estimated c$134m if
included looser definitions in claiming that market size 141
education
they used these technologies already. Further from 2016, 125 is taken out
qualitative research will be useful in confirming likely to
have grown
these estimates.
since
Drivers of customer adoption
c£39m if
Adoption of the two technologies has been
40 education
driven by customer needs, with a large part of is taken out
the market currently using in-house-developed
tools (which may be less fit-for-purpose than
those provided by outside suppliers). The
majority of customers look to lower their cost UK E-learning Other LXP US LXP
of delivery, enhance end-user experience, Systems systems

and increase employee engagement and

empowerment when adopting an LXP. Source:
2016 2019 2019
CIL report CIL report CIL report

Current market size and potential,

Notes: 1) Based on reported LXP usage by survey respondents. Respondents that use LMS systems as
LXP and LRS markets their LXP (e.g. Docebo, Grovo, LinkedIn Learning, Learning Pool) have been omitted from the market
sizing. 2) Excludes companies that have developed an internal solution.
CIL estimate the UK LXP market to be worth
£40m, representing 25–30% of the e-learning Figure 10. Source: CIL Survey
systems adopted in the UK. The estimated US
market is currently worth $141m. Given the
needs identified in the survey, CIL estimate
the market opportunity for LXP or LXP-like
solutions to be £135m–£165m in the UK and
$1bn–$1.3bn in the USA.

Outsourced UK LRS Outsourced US LRS

CIL estimate the UK LRS market to be worth market size ¹ market size ¹
£41m, £13m of which is bundled within LMSs £m $m
and LXPs. CIL estimate the US market to be
worth $117m and to have a larger share of
c£39m if c$111m if
packaged sales. Based on the survey, CIL education 117 52
education
estimate the LRS market opportunity to be is taken out is taken out
£140–£190m in the UK and $0.9bn–$1.2bn in
the USA. 41 13
65

28

LRS market LRS sold LRS LRS market LRS sold LRS
bundled with standalone bundled with standalone
LXP or LMS LXP or LMS

Notes: 1) Based on reported LRS usage by survey respondents. Users of an open source solution have
not been included in the sizing calculations.

Figure 11. Source: CIL Survey

Learning Pool Section 2: The State of the Market for LXP/LRS 33

 “When are you most likely to purchase an LXP?”
How fast will the market get there on UK n-81¹, US n=138¹
LXP?
64% of US “How likely are you to Majority within the next 3 UK
respondents purchase an LXP in the years
future?” US
thought it was likely
their organization
would purchase an n=181 n=216
51%
LXP and, of those
responding “yes”
to this question,
40%
nearly three-
64%
quarters suggested Likely 46%

this purchase 34%

would happen in 26%

the next two years.
Unsure
The UK response 36% 28%
17%
was somewhat
8% 11%
more muted, with Unlikely 18%
46% saying they 4%
5%
4%
5%
3%
were likely to purchase an LXP, but, again, more 1%
than half of those saying “yes” thought it likely to Within the In the next In the next In the next In the next I don’t know
happen in the next two years. next year 1–2 years 2–3 years 3–4 years 4–5 years

Notes: 1) Question only answered by respondents who indicated they were likely to purchase an LXP
Again, a caveat should be entered here: in the future.

organizations tend to be over-optimistic when

Figure 12. Source: CIL Survey
identifying the timescales for future purchases.
The key point, however, is that there is intent to
purchase in the next few years.

“What was the main driver for your decision to use an LXP?”

% Response Drivers
Decision-making driver
For LXP, the key market drivers
UK, n=67 US, n=123
are to lower the cost of delivery
To lower cost of delivery 20.0% 21.1% while improving user engagement
and experience via self-directed
To enhance our end-user experience 16.9% 21.1% learning.

To increase employee engagement 15.4% 16.3% For LRS, the key market drivers are
To give employees the ability to select what to deliver more learning data to
13.8% 12.2% prove the ROI for learning and find/
training to take and when to take it
fix issues with content.
To allow us to author our own content 7.7% 3.3%

To track more data 6.2% 3.3%

To push mandated training to employees more

6.2% 4.9%
effectively

To be able to deliver training content remotely 4.6% 5.7%

To match training performance to employee

4.6% 2.4%
performance

To deliver interactive training content / allow

3.1% 9.8%
employees to interact more with their training

Other (please specify) 1.5% 0.0%

Figure 13. Source: CIL Survey

34 learningpool.com
 “What has been the most significant benefit to having an LRS?” It is particularly interesting to note that the
above concerns correlate well with other
recent surveys, in particular Donald H. Taylor’s
n=54
2019 Global Sentiment Survey.30 This survey
found that the top six topics predicted to be
Increased range of data available 24
hot in workplace learning for 2019 were as
follows:
Ability to prove ROI from e-learning
13
investments
1. Personalization/adaptive delivery
Data analytics capabililties within
2. Artificial Intelligence
10
the platform 3. Learning analytics
4. Collaborative/social learning
Using learner data to drive further
6 5. Micro learning
automation
6. LXPs
Using learner data to power
content recommendations
Clearly, the LXP is moving to occupy a central
Other 1 position in the thoughts of L&D professionals,
not only as a thing in itself but also as regards
their general preoccupations.

n=69
Next steps
A desirable next phase for this research
would be to conduct qualitative interviews
Increased range of data available 23
with sample organizations to get a deeper
understanding of the LXP and LRS markets and
Ability to prove ROI from e-learning
investments
23 adjust the findings accordingly.

Data analytics capabililties within

the platform
12 Learning Pool is also now interested in working
alongside analysts with knowledge of the UK
Using learner data to drive further
7 and US markets to further interrogate and
automation
interpret the results contained in the report.
Using learner data to power
4
content recommendations

Other

Figure 14. Source: CIL Survey

“To what extent do you agree that the following will be a focus of your organization over the next 3 years?”
Data-analysis-related needs, % agree

n=239 n=338

Tracking if, and what, training has Tracking if, and what, training has
81% 84%
been completed been completed

Identifying issues with our training / Identifying issues with our training /
69% 78%
development content development content

Linking employees’ training Linking employees’ training

performance to their work 68% performance to their work 78%
performance performance
Tracking other data about training Tracking other data about training
(e.g. time taken to complete/partial 67% (e.g. time taken to complete/partial 74%
success) success)

Figure 15. Source: CIL Survey

Respondents were asked about other needs, only data-analysis-related needs are shown here for clarity.

Learning Pool Section 2: The State of the Market for LXP/LRS 35

36
Conclusions
 Riding the hype
curve
As Donald H. Taylor points out in his
introduction to this paper, LXPs are hot.
And therein lies a danger, he says, since
hot topics don’t always get well defined
or dispassionately discussed. And that
is certainly the case with this particular
hot topic, the main subject of our report,
learning experience platforms.

Although it now seems widely accepted in

the world of organizational learning that
there is such a thing as an LXP (even if we
can’t quite decide on the correct name
for it) there is as yet no fixed and agreed
definition for what it should do, let alone
a consistent feature-set. This paper is a
modest contribution toward helping such a
definition coalesce; however, in the current
absence of such a thing, and a plethora of
aspirational claims for the benefits LXPs
will bring to learning departments and
their learners, it is not surprising that an
analyst such as David Perring of Fosway
Group should have concerns about the LXP
concept being over-hyped.31

Other commentators, notably Dani Johnson

of Redthread, have pointed to the confusion
produced by this new introduction to the
learning-systems market at a time when
there is also a proliferation of new-point
solutions.32 It was all so much simpler when
all we had to think about was the LMS!

This paper has been an attempt to dispel

some of the smoke, to turn down the heat,
and perhaps shed a little clear light on what
the LXP brings to the table.

So now it is perhaps time to nail our colors to

the mast and lay out our vision for the LXP.
It won’t be everybody’s vision, but we feel
that we can at least say it is the result of a
considerable amount of research, practical
development, numerous conversations at
all levels of the market, and a lot of hard
thinking.

Learning Pool Section 3: Conclusions 37

Our vision for linkage that is surely not entirely coincidental.
The two are united in Learning Pool’s LXP

powering the solution, which naturally pairs with Learning

Locker, our LRS. Obviously, buyers can choose

modern learner other LXPs and other LRS products. However,

even where buyers choose ways independent

experience of the standard xAPI to collect and analyze

their data, we believe that advanced analytics
are an essential component of the LXP vision.
Much of the confusion in the market, we feel, LXP brings not only a greater diversity of
comes from visioning the LXP too narrowly as content types but a greater diversity of
merely a content discovery layer. Many in the field learning activities, not all of which involve
of workplace learning—including David Perring and interacting with content, and which xAPI
Nick Shackleton-Jones, but certainly not limited to was built to be able to record. Further, unlike
those two commentators—feel that we place far the classical LMS, always conceived as a
too much emphasis on learning content as the be- unitary system, LXP belongs the world of fluid
all and end-all. The term “learning” has become a integrations, driven by APIs, and thus in a
synonym for learning content. Having only recently world of real-time data. You might conceive
and partially escaped a fixation on courses as the of this multiplicity of platforms, tools, and
mode of learning, we risk replacing that with an systems as a stack or as an ecosystem, but
equally narrow fixation on content. This ignores whichever metaphor or mental model you
the arguably much greater importance of other choose, it needs to recognize the distinct
elements in learning, including experiences, difference of this way of operating from the
practice, feedback, performance support, etc. classical, unitary, destination-platform era for
which LMS was conceived. Data and analytics
So if we think of the LXP only as a better way of function differently in this new world and
connecting learners with content—albeit a much need to be an absolutely fundamental part of
wider and more diverse pool of content—we risk the vision.
massively missing the point about what this new
entity could bring. It is true that one of the virtues of the LXP as an
idea, one that has captured the imagination, is
In this paper, we feel we have established two that LXPs are as attractive for what they don’t do
important points: as for what they do, avoiding the features-bloat
of many enterprise LMSs. However, this makes it
1. Our extensive survey of drivers in Part 1 too easy to overlook the dynamic flexibility that
shows that the development of LXP has been linkage with an LRS can bring. Unfortunately, this
substantially demand driven. In other words, very flexibility makes LXP a harder idea to grasp
it has taken shape according to what those in some ways, as it adds complexity. An LMS
who work every day with learners saw as is a simple enough thing to understand (partly
clear and pressing needs, needs that existing because we are very used to it), but the rigidity in
learning systems were not meeting. Also, that model is not in line with how learning really
as many of those drivers come from macro happens.
forces external to the world of learning, LXP
can hardly be portrayed as an artifact of a Learning is a complex thing. The LMS-plus-content
particular market niche. It would be truer to model made it seem simpler than it really is and,
say that, before it arrived, the learning market as a result, proved unsustainable. With the LXP, as
had an LXP-shaped hole. we have visioned it here, learning systems have
perhaps evolved to a level of sophistication where
2. The original research we commissioned, they finally stand a chance of doing justice to
detailed in Part 2, shows not only that LXP that group of highly diverse, individual, and often
has achieved substantial traction in the buyer slightly mysterious processes which take place
market but also that the LRS is on a roughly every day in every workplace under the label of
parallel adoption path, indicating a level of learning.

38 learningpool.com
3 key considerations for powering a
modern learning experience

How will you judge your success, your impact? What measures
MAKE DATA and KPIs are really important? Remember that learning is not
CENTRAL about what people know but about what they do. How can
1
TO YOUR you gather data about what they do, how they perform, and
STRATEGY make a causal link with data to the activities they undertook
to get there?

Focus on the experience over all, and, at a more granular level,

DON’T BE the discrete experiences that change learners and which,
taken together, constitute a learning path. Remember the
HYPNOTIZED 2
importance of practice, feedback, challenges, and some of the
BY CONTENT key elements of learning that used to lie outside the capabilities
of digital learning but increasingly don’t.

Accept that learning is a personal thing, experienced—and

therefore in some senses owned—by the individual. Make it
PERSONALIZE 3 feel like it’s theirs and use the power of technology to serve
not coerce. Balance the needs of the individual with those of
the organization. Look for win-wins,

Learning Pool Section 3: Conclusions 39

References
1  Learning Technology Evolves: Integrated Platforms Are 10  6 Trends in the Gartner Hype Cycle for Human Capital
Arriving. Blog post by Josh Bersin on joshbersin.com, Management, 2018. Article and graphic on gartner.com,
published June 29, 2019, updated July 3, 2019, retrieved contributor Sharon George, published October 30, 2018,
July 9, 2019 https://joshbersin.com/2019/06/learning- retrieved September 10, 2019 https://www.gartner.com/
technology-evolves-integrated-platforms-are-arriving/ smarterwithgartner/6-trends-in-the-gartner-hype-
cycle-for-human-capital-management-2018/
2  How Accurate Is Alpha’s Theory of Dog Domestication?
Article by Brian Handwerk on smithsonian.com, published 11  The Sierra Cedar 2018–2019 HR Systems Survey. White
August 15, 2018, retrieved July 9, 2019 https://www. paper published September 12, 2018 on sierra-cedar.
smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/how-wolves- com, retrieved July 9, 2019 https://www.sierra-cedar.
really-became-dogs-180970014/ com/2018/09/12/the-sierra-cedar-2018-2019-hr-
systems-survey-white-paper
3  The 4 Types of Innovation and the Problems They Solve.
Article by Greg Satell on hbr.com, published June 21, 2017, 12  Degreed and Pathgather, a Groundbreaking Combination
retrieved July 9, 2019 https://hbr.org/2017/06/the-4- for Transforming the Learner Experience. News release
types-of-innovation-and-the-problems-they-solve by Richard Pachter on the Brandon Hall website,
published June 25, 2018, retrieved July 11, 2019 http://
4  The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause www.brandonhall.com/blogs/degreed-pathgather-
Great Firms to Fail, Clayton M. Christiansen, Cambridge, groundbreaking-combination-accelerating-learner-
MA: Harvard University Press, 2016 (reprint edition) empowerment/

5  LMS or LXP? Blog post by Laura Lee-Gibbs on linkedin. 13  Meet the Modern Learner: Engaging the Overwhelmed,
com, published May 10, 2019, retrieved July 9, 2019 https:// Distracted, and Impatient Employee. Slideshare from the
www.linkedin.com/pulse/lms-lxp-laura-lee-gibbs/ Bersin by Deloitte Research Bulletin, 2014 by Todd Tauber
and Wendy Wang-Audia on slideshare.net, retrieved July
6  The Learning Experience Platform (LXP) Market Expands. 9, 2019 https://www.slideshare.net/eraser/meet-the-
Blog post by Josh Bersin on joshbersin.com, published modern-learner-120102116
September 27, 2018, updated November 24, 2018, retrieved
July 9, 2019 https://joshbersin.com/2018/09/the- 14  Freelancing in America: 2018. Slideshare by Edelman
learning-experience-platform-lxp-market-expands/ Intelligence, commissioned by Upwork and Freelancers
Union, on slideshare.net, published October 22, 2018,
7  Learning Technology Evolves: Integrated Platforms Are retrieved July 9, 2019 https://www.slideshare.net/
Arriving. Blog post by Josh Bersin on joshbersin.com, upwork/freelancing-in-america-2018-120288770/1
published June 29, 2019, updated July 3, 2019, retrieved
July 9, 2019 https://joshbersin.com/2019/06/learning- 15  Global Business Driven HR Transformation: The Journey
technology-evolves-integrated-platforms-are-arriving/ Continues. Report published 2011 by Deloitte, chapter on
“Contingent Workforce” by Michael Gretczko and Tom
8  Fosway 9-Grid Learning Systems. Report published January Joseph https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/
2017 by Fosway Group https://www.solics.de/default- Deloitte/global/Documents/HumanCapital/dttl-hc-
Solics/doc/Fosway-9-Grid-Learning-Systems-FULL- hrtransformation-8092013.pdf
REPORT-2017.pdf
16  State of the American Workplace. Report published
9  Learning Experience Platform – WRONG. Blog post by February 2017 by Gallup Inc., download only https://
Craig Weiss on elearninfo247.com, published November www.gallup.com/workplace/238085/state-american-
16, 2017, retrieved July 9, 2019 https://elearninfo247. workplace-report-2017.aspx
com/2017/11/16/learning-experience-platform-wrong/

40 learningpool.com
17  UK Working Lives. Report by Dr. Daniel Wheatley and 25  Good New Idea. Article by John Lanchester on lrb.co.uk,
Jonny Gifford, published June 2019 by the CIPD https:// published July 18, 2019, retrieved July 19, 2019 https://
www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/work/trends/uk- www.lrb.co.uk/v41/n14/john-lanchester/good-new-
working-lives idea subscription required

18  Flexible Working Demands a Training Strategy Rethink. 26  Learning Experience Platform (LXP) Market Grows
Article by Samantha Caine on personneltoday.com, Up: Now Too Big to Ignore. Blog post by Josh Bersin
published February 6, 2018, retrieved July, 9 2019 https:// on joshbersin.com, published March 8, 2019, updated
www.personneltoday.com/hr/flexible-working- March 9, 2019, retrieved July 9, 2019 https://joshbersin.
demands-training-strategy-rethink/ com/2019/03/learning-experience-platform-lxp-
market-grows-up-now-too-big-to-ignore/
19  Accelerated Product Development. Article by Fred
Langerak on the Wiley International Encyclopedia of 27  Global Sentiment Survey 2019. Report by Donald H. Taylor,
Marketing Online, published December 15, 2010, retrieved published January 2019 by Donald H. Taylor, download
July 9, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444316568. only https://donaldhtaylor.co.uk/research_base/
wiem05004 global-sentiment-survey-2019/

20  Agile by the Numbers. Deloitte Insights article by Dr. Peter 28  It should be noted that, while responsive design has
Viechnicki and Mahesh Kelkar on Deloitte.com, published now become mainstream, there is e-learning content out
May 5, 2017, retrieved July 9, 2019 https://www2. there that might not scale particularly elegantly to mobile
deloitte.com/insights/us/en/industry/public-sector/ or tablet use. While this would not be a problem with
agile-in-government-by-the-numbers.html#endnote-5 Learning Pool’s LXP, most of our content being written
in Adapt Builder, which is responsive, the LXP is an
21  The New Employer–Employee Social Contract. Article by omnivorous beast where content is concerned, and this
Sarah Fister Gale on chieflearningofficer.com, published could be something to watch out for with other systems.
May 8, 2017, retrieved July 9, 2019 https://www.
chieflearningofficer.com/2017/05/08/employer- 29  LMS or LXP? Blog post by Laura Lee-Gibbs on linkedin.
employee-social-contract-2/ com, published May 10, 2019, retrieved July 9, 2019 https://
www.linkedin.com/pulse/lms-lxp-laura-lee-gibbs/
22  State of the American Workplace. Report published
February 2017 by Gallup Inc., download only https:// 30  Global Sentiment Survey 2019. Report by Donald H. Taylor,
www.gallup.com/workplace/238085/state-american- published January 2019 by Donald H. Taylor, download
workplace-report-2017.aspx only https://donaldhtaylor.co.uk/research_base/
global-sentiment-survey-2019/
23 Meet the Modern Learner: Engaging the Overwhelmed,
Distracted, and Impatient Employee. Slideshare from the 31  Learning Hack #004: Burning Platforms, with David Perring
Bersin by Deloitte Research Bulletin, 2014 by Todd Tauber of Fosway Group. Podcast on johnhelmerconsulting.com,
and Wendy Wang-Audia on slideshare.net, retrieved July published October 21, 2019, retrieved October 22, 2019
9, 2019 https://www.slideshare.net/eraser/meet-the- http://johnhelmerconsulting.com/learning-hack-004-
modern-learner-120102116 burning-platforms-with-david-perring-of-fosway-
group/
24  Why “Learning Analytics”? Why “Learning Record Stores”?
Blog post by Donald Clark on donaldclarkplanb.blogspot. 32  The Wild, Wild West. Report published November 2, 2018
com, published April 12, 2019, retrieved July 9, 2019 by Redthread Research https://redthreadresearch.
https://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.com/2019/04/why- com/2018/11/02/learning-technology-landscape-the-
learning-analytics-why-learning.html wild-wild-west/

Learning Pool References 41

Innovation. Passion. Learning.