Irish Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning

Exploring the Potential Value of Microlearning in

Induction Training – An Action Research Study

Abstract
The quality of induction training an employee receives is critical in determining how well, if
at all, they settle into an organisation. Poor quality induction, which often overloads
employees with information or fails to provide information at the point of need, can leave
employees anxious and uncertain.
The research outlined in this paper explored the value, if any, of introducing microlearning
into induction training for new employees in a not-for-profit organisation in Ireland, with an
aim to inform practice and bring about change in the learning experience. While previous
research has considered the value of digital learning in induction, there is a scarcity of
research that explores the specific form this learning might take.
Two cycles of action research used qualitative data methods to gain an understanding of the
challenges of transitioning to new employment and examine employees’ experiences with
existing induction training. Following a pilot, where participants were given access to 21
microlearning lessons as part of their induction training, interviews were then employed to
determine whether microlearning might address some of the common challenges and improve
the transition experience. The findings suggest that the features of microlearning – that it is
available on demand, short in duration, media-rich, interactive, self-contained and self-
directed – could help to mitigate some of the common challenges of induction training,
enabling new employees to adjust quickly to their new work environment.
This research can support organisations who are seeking to improve their induction training
programme, offering microlearning as a digital learning solution.

Keywords: microlearning, induction training, onboarding, digital learning, workplace

learning
1. Introduction
Adjusting to a new work role is a major point of change in a person’s life and the induction
training offered can impact on an employee’s job satisfaction, work/family conflict, team
cohesion and organisational commitment (Bauer, Bodner, Erdogan, Truxillo & Tucker, 2007;
Zahrly & Tosi, 1989) as well as their feeling of belonging to an organisation or company.
The Irish not-for-profit organisation at the centre of this research recruits an average of 55
new employees every year. Employees are offered formal, one-day, classroom-based
induction training. This training is essential to introduce employees to colleagues and offer
“face-to-face opportunities for sharing” (Hanshaw & Hanson, 2018, p. 17). New employees
are often in place for a substantial period of time, however, before they can avail of the
training as it is only run four times per year, with an average wait time of seven weeks.
Furthermore, there is insufficient time in the one-day training to cover all of the required
information. Additional learning materials and information are supplied after the training in a
150-page employee handbook and on the organisation intranet, but new employees often find
it difficult to know where to access the information they need, which can lead to gaps in
knowledge and challenges in the transition process.
This action research study explored the value, if any, of supplementing the organisation’s
existing face-to-face induction training with digital microlearning to create a blended learning
programme. For the purpose of the research, value was defined as the usefulness or
importance of the microlearning in enhancing a new employee’s sense of belonging to the
organisation and enabling them to adjust to their new role and responsibilities quickly and
with confidence.
The overall aim of the research was to inform practice and bring about change in the learning
experience of new employees. To achieve this, the research had three primary objectives:
1. Gain an understanding of potential challenges employees face when transitioning to
new employment.
2. Explore employees’ experiences with the existing induction training.
3. Determine whether induction microlearning lessons might improve the transition
experience as part of a blended learning programme.
This paper begins with a review of the literature on induction training, identifying some of
the most common challenges in its design and delivery. It then considers how the attributes of
microlearning as identified in the literature could potentially address some of these
challenges. The paper then outlines the methodology used in the research, before presenting
the findings and discussing the implications of these. Finally, recommendations are made for
further research.

2. Literature Review
2.1 Induction training
Induction training is one of the most common types of organisational training programmes
(Klein & Weaver, 2000). It has been defined as “the process involved in familiarising a new
employee with the history, culture, products, services, organisation, safety rules, general

2
conditions of employment and the work of the sector or department in which they are going
to be employed” (Malone, 2005, p. 50).
An induction programme presents significant benefits to organisations such as a reduction in
the amount of time it takes for new employees to adjust and feel more at home (Ragsdale &
Mueller, 2005), and to reach full working capacity (Brodie, 2006; Derven, 2008). Two of the
main aims of an organisation’s induction programme are to give employees a sense of “what
the organisation is all about and why it’s important, as well as their place within it”
(Ashforth, Sluss & Harrison, 2007, p. 2) and to “lessen the fear or anxiety experienced by
new employees regarding settling into a job or performance” (Hendricks & Louw-Potgieter,
2012, p. 1). Through quality induction training, “organizations can improve the transition of
their new employees, build trust and commitment, reduce employee stress, and increase new
employee productivity” (Caldwell & Caldwell, 2016, p. 47). Each new employee’s transition
experience will be different, however, as “individual differences between employees in terms
of their background and personality traits, play a substantial role in organizational
socialization” (Bauer & Erdogan, 2011, p. 51).
The quality of training a new employee receives during induction is critical in determining
how well, if at all, they will settle into the organisation. A well-organised induction
programme will aid new staff in dealing with any anxiety or insecurity they might feel
(Wanous & Reichers, 2000) and, in doing so, help employees settle in faster and
feel more at home in the organisation (Dodds & Verest, 2002). Ashforth, Sluss and Saks
(2007) contend that how employees are inducted into a new organisation has “substantative
and symbolic value over and above what they actually learn” (p. 448). The design and
delivery of induction programmes, therefore, could be argued as just as important as the
content.
Ashforth, Sluss and Harrison (2007) suggest that “newcomers obtain more information – and
more useful information – from relatively active means” (p. 22), i.e. when they actively seek
information about their work environment and their role within it. Caldwell and Peters (2018)
agree that “proactive behavior was more strongly related to learning” (p. 459) with Morrison
(1995) finding that employees acquire more content through active rather than passive means.
Allen (2006), on the other hand, argues for induction tactics that are formal, sequential and
fixed “to reduce uncertainty and anxiety” among new employees (p. 240). Griffin, Colella
and Goparaju (2000) propose a balance between the two, suggesting that outcomes will be a
function of the interaction between new employees’ proactive measures and “tactics
employed by the organization” (p. 462).
Saks and Gruman (2012) describe how poor quality induction programmes frequently leave
employees uncertain and confused rather than motivated and encouraged. It can be argued
that unsuccessful induction training is due to “initial information overload on day one and a
lack of information and support thereafter” (SCIE, n.d., p. 2), with an excess of critical
information that employees “cannot reasonably assimilate in a short period of time”
(Caldwell & Caldwell, 2016, p. 51). While in-person contact is an important aspect of
induction training, where new employees can meet colleagues and feel part of the
organisation team, “there’s a fine balance between the personal touch of in-person
communication and information overload” (Fayad, 2014, p. 1).
Caldwell and Caldwell (2016) acknowledge also the dangers of providing information far too
late, leading to frustrations for new employees. It is recommended, therefore, that induction

3
training has phased implementation (Derven, 2008) and that employees are provided online
access to information on a timely basis (Caldwell & Caldwell, 2016).
Digital learning has been suggested as a solution to address some of these issues in induction
training, as “employees can learn independently” (Fayad, 2014, p. 2), reducing costs, giving
on-demand access to information and increasing employee competence. The question
remains, however, what type of digital learning poses the most suitable solution. Hendricks
and Louw-Potgieter (2012) suggest that receiving critical information in smaller and more
manageable sessions has the potential to make it easier for new employees to internalise and
apply learning. Microlearning, therefore, can be explored as a potential digital solution to
address the challenges in implementing quality induction training and this is further
examined below.

2.2 Microlearning
While the concept of teaching and learning on a micro level is not new in itself, the term
microlearning has only been in use since about 2002 (Hug & Freisen, 2009). In more recent
years, microlearning has been identified as a growing elearning trend, particularly in the
digital workplace (Gartner, 2016). Emerson and Berge (2018) describe microlearning as “a
strategy that can help deliver the right information to the right learners, at the right level of
detail and at the precise moment they need it” (p. 128), while Buchem and Hamelmann
(2010) call it a “pragmatic innovation” (p. 5) enabling flexible learning that can be easily
integrated into everyday activities, supporting individual learning aims and needs.
Hug and Friesen (2009) contest that there is different methodology in use when designing
microlearning. Emerson and Berge (2018) concur, highlighting that it is “much more than
just small chunks of just-in-time learning delivered in media-rich formats” (p. 130). Hanshaw
and Hanson (2018) suggest that effective microlearning is about “creating small chunks of
learning that activate prior knowledge, and providing opportunities to think about and apply
new information” (p. 17). There is consensus in the literature that microlearning provides
concise yet coherent and understandable information; is accessible and available for learners
to use at any time in any place on all mobile devices; is self-contained, with a clear focus on a
single learning objective; is self-directed; uses media-rich formats and is action-oriented
(Bersin, 2017; Bruck, Motiwalla & Foerster, 2012; Buchem & Hamelmann, 2010; Emerson
& Berge, 2018; Gabrielli, Kimani & Catarci, 2005; Hug, 2005, 2010; Jahnke, Lee, Pham, He
& Austin, 2019; Paul, 2016; skillshub, 2018).
The recent popularity of microlearning is often attributed to a shrinking human attention
span, generally referenced to one of two studies (Microsoft, 2015; National Center for
Biotechnology Information, 2015), however conclusive scientific evidence on this has so far
proved elusive. Microlearning does, however, align with the human model of processing
information in small manageable chunks as identified by Sweller (1988) in Cognitive Load
Theory, thereby enabling better retention (Bruck, Motiwalla & Foerster, 2012). Emerson and
Berge (2018) discuss how “supplying clear and concise well-designed single learning topics
for staff to fit in-between tasks when they can spare 15 minutes” (p. 127) means employees
can expand their knowledge incrementally for effective knowledge retention. Microlearning
has the potential, therefore, to circumvent the information overload identified as prevalent in
many induction training programmes.
Microlearning has been described as accessible and available for learners to use at any time
in any place, on their terms (Paul, 2016), being delivered “independent of time and space”
(Hanshaw & Hanson, 2018, p. 2). Indeed, Gabrielli, Kimani and Catarci (2005) call it “the

4
most typical form of anytime-anywhere learning” (p. 46). As well as being able to access
support as needed, microlearning offers employees access “to useful chunks of knowledge
during periods when they may otherwise be unoccupied” (Hartley, 2010, p. 31), such as
“during time breaks or while on the move” (Gabrielli, Kimani & Catarci, 2005, p. 45).
Buchem and Hamelmann (2010) reinforce this, stating that microlearning “can be easily and
flexibly integrated into everyday activities to support on-demand and in-between
learning” (p. 4). By delivering microlearning across mobile devices, learning becomes even
more accessible, adaptive and learner centric (Coakley, Garvey & O’Neill, 2017), offering
learners “the flexibility to learn on the device of their choice” (Alexander et al., 2019).
Hanshaw and Hanson (2018) also explore how the flexible delivery in microlearning allows
learners to complete training on their own schedule. Microlearning could, therefore, be
considered ideal for just-in-time and on-demand performance support, offering an alternative
to a scheduled face-to-face training session.
In their study investigating the use of microlearning in a professional setting, Hanshaw and
Hanson (2018) discuss the users’ preference for self-selecting learning opportunities. This fits
with Knowles’ (1978) first assumption about adult learners that they are self-directing,
independent and responsible for their own learning needs (Jordan, Carlisle & Stack, 2008).
Emerson and Berge (2018) highlight how the focused nature of microlearning engages and
empowers learners to retain more information “because they decided, with guidance from
their supervisors, what they needed to learn to perform their jobs better” (p. 127).
Microlearning, therefore, has the potential to support learners’ sense of autonomy and to
facilitate self-directed learners (Buchem & Hamelmann, 2010). It also allows learners to
“access very specific pieces of information instead of a complete body of knowledge”
(Gabrielli, Kimani & Catarci, 2005, p. 48), which Hanshaw and Hanson (2018) contest will
accelerate professional development, being “highly personalized, and self-directed” (p. 7).
The interactive nature of microlearning is also discussed in the literature, with Paul (2016)
advocating the need to “give employees something to do” (p. 39) to trigger curiosity and
enhance motivation. Gabrielli, Kimani and Catarci (2005) call for different interaction styles
in microlearning design that support individual learners.
The features of microlearning identified in the literature, that it is suitable as on-demand and
just-in-time learning support, that it is self-contained, self-directed, media-rich and
interactive, and that it offers learners the opportunity to learn in short bursts, have potential
value in induction training, meeting learners at the point of need thus supporting their
transition to new employment and improving the induction experience. The scarcity of
literature looking specifically at microlearning in induction training highlights the
requirement for research into this topic.

3. Methodology
3.1 Theoretical perspective
The move to new employment is experienced differently by each individual depending on a
whole host of personal attributes, prior experiences and context. Meaning, therefore, “is
constructed by human beings as they interact and engage in interpretation” (O’Leary, 2004,
p. 10) and these meanings are in a constant state of revision (Bryman, 2016). As Gray (2013)
states, “multiple, contradictory but equally valid accounts of the world can exist” (p. 20) and

5
therefore a constructivist perspective was taken for this research. As “the researcher’s intent
is to make sense of (or interpret) the meanings others have about the world” (Creswell, 2014,
p. 8), an interpretivist approach was also taken, fully acknowledging the subjective nature of
the researcher’s interpretation.

3.2 Methodology
Action research was chosen as a methodology for three primary reasons. First, the purpose of
action research is to “influence or change some aspect of whatever is the focus of the
research” (Robson, 2011, p. 188). As this research involved the design, development and
implementation of microlearning, with an aim to improve practice, it fulfilled a practical need
as well as exploring a research question. Second, action research involves a “commitment to
involving people in the diagnosis of and solutions to problems” (Bryman, 2016, p. 387).
Participants were involved at three stages of this research to inquire together with the
researcher “into issues of mutual concern and to learn in action together” (Donnelly, n.d., p.
2). The final reason for choosing this methodology is that it is a cyclical and reflective
process, involving “a feedback loop in which initial findings generate possibilities for change
which are then implemented and evaluated as a prelude to further investigation” (Denscombe,
1998, p. 58).

3.3 Research design

The research consisted of two cycles, based on Norton’s stages of action research (2001).
3.3.1 Cycle one
At the beginning of the first cycle, 71 employees who had begun employment with the
organisation in the previous 18 months were invited by email to participate in an online
questionnaire. Forty-eight employees completed the questionnaire within the given two-week
timeframe. The questionnaire acted as a user needs analysis, exploring gaps in knowledge
among new employees and preferred media for digital learning. The data gathered was used
to develop a framework for induction microlearning, outlining the proposed content and
design.
This first research cycle ended with a focus group interview with volunteers from the same
cohort of participants. The primary objective of this focus group was to elicit feedback on the
framework described above. The focus group also explored participants’ experiences of
transitioning to the organisation and what they felt would best support new employees to
adjust to their new role quickly and with confidence. Only four employees volunteered to
take part in the focus group, which was a sufficient number but did not allow for selection.
However, there was one male participant and three females, which exemplified the female-
dominant workforce, and there was also a good reflection of the hierarchical make-up of
employees. Participants had been with the organisation for an average of five months. A
focus group interview was chosen for this stage of the research as it had the potential to
generate interesting findings as participants interacted and listened to the views of others
(Bell, 2005). A flexible, semi-structured approach was taken to enable specific questions and
themes to be explored but to leave scope to pursue “interesting tangents that may develop”
(O’Leary, 2004, p. 164).
After analysis of the data from the focus group, the framework was revised resulting in
content being categorised into six sections, each containing eight to 12 microlearning lessons.
Two of these sections were designed and developed for a pilot phase, comprising 21
microlearning lessons, each with a single learning objective and taking no more than seven

6
minutes to complete. The first 10 lessons gave an overview of the organisation including its
goals and values, and how it currently operates. The next 11 lessons related to HR, IT and
finance practices that employees require knowledge of within their first few weeks of
employment. The lessons employed a wide variety of media including videos, whiteboard
animations, screencasts, infographics, labelled graphics and flashcards, with each lesson
containing high levels of interactivity such as active selection, drag and drop matching and
sorting activities, multiple choice questions and checklists. Each lesson ended with an ‘email
a question’ button, enabling learners to directly contact the relevant colleague if they required
more information, With microlearning, “the organization of content is a key component for
facilitating user navigation” (Leung, 2019) and this was carefully considered to enable
learners to easily identify the lessons they wished to access.
3.3.2 Cycle two
For the second cycle of research, employees who had started in the organisation within the
previous six months were invited by email to take part in a pilot, and eight volunteered. Five
of the eight were selected who offered a balance of genders, pay grades and work roles,
which ensured that various perspectives were represented, adding to data reliability. The
three volunteers not selected were given access to the microlearning as part of their
continuing professional development.
During the pilot, participants were given access to the 21 microlearning lessons through the
organisation learning management system (LMS) across multiple devices for a two-week
period along with instruction that each lesson was a separate entity and they could be
accessed in any order. Participants were then interviewed on a one-to-one basis in semi-
structured interviews with a view to evaluate the content, design and delivery of the
microlearning and explore the potential value of this to new employees. “The interview
process demands a high level of engagement with others” (O’Leary, 2004, p. 162), which
suited the collaborative and in-depth nature of action research.

3.4 Ethical considerations

The research was approved by the ethical committee of the not-for-profit organisation in
question in the first instance and also by Technological University Dublin, who supervised
the research. Participation in all stages of the research was voluntary and responses were
confidential. Participants were all adult professionals and the researcher was not in a position
of power over any participants. This is not a traditionally vulnerable group, however, there
was the potential for some vulnerability with new employees in terms of how confident they
felt in the organisation and this was taken into consideration.

3.5 Data analysis

The qualitative data collected across the data set suited the exploratory nature of the research.
Thematic analysis was chosen as the most appropriate and effective method of analysis and
three discrete stages of analysis were carried out on each set of data (Rapley, 2016). First, a
period of familiarisation permitted note-taking of initial thoughts and ideas on the content.
Second, the data was categorised and coded and the primary themes for each dataset
identified. Third, focusing on the primary themes, the information was further analysed and
consolidated. The data from the literature, questionnaire, focus group and one-to-one
interviews was then triangulated to draw out comparisons, similarities and disparities to
identify the main themes and explore concepts and meanings. A reflective journal was kept
by the researcher as part of the action research process.

7
3.6 Limitations
As colleagues of the researcher, participants may have initially been wary of saying anything
negative about either the existing training or the microlearning developed, and endeavours
were made to create an environment in interviews that was conducive to open
communication. Participants were assured of the confidentiality of the information they were
providing and the need for total honesty and transparency.
As an employee of the organisation, the researcher’s own subjectivity was inevitably part of
the interviewing process. There was a potential also that the interpretation and analysis of
data might be impacted by the researcher’s own subjective experience and bias as a once-new
employee within the organisation. Efforts were made to ensure that any impulses to “impose
theories and concepts which may exhibit a poor fit with participants’ perspectives” (Bryman,
1988, p. 66) were rejected. Methodical protocols were developed in a manner that was
“consistent, logical, systematic, well-documented and designed to account for research
subjectives” (O’Leary, 2004, p. 60).

4. Findings and Discussion

As the purpose of the online questionnaire was solely to explore appropriate content for the
microlearning, the findings presented here focus on the themes that emerged after analysis of
the data from the focus group at the end of the first cycle of research and the one-to-one
interviews that followed the pilot phase at the end of the second cycle of research.
To determine the value, if any, of introducing microlearning into the induction training
programme, the data was analysed with consideration given to some of the features of
microlearning as identified in the literature – that it is available on demand, short in duration,
media-rich, interactive, self-contained and self-directed – and if and how these might address
any challenges experienced by new employees and therefore impact on the transition
experience of new employees.

4.1 Available on demand

The four focus group participants and four of the five interview participants had all
undertaken the existing face-to-face induction training, on average 6.5 weeks after starting
employment with the organisation, similar to the general average for new employees.
Participants described this gap between starting employment and accessing induction training
as a challenge, saying that it left them anxious, uncertain, and feeling “at sea”. In particular,
participants highlighted the difficulties in understanding the culture of the organisation, with
one commenting, “it was just really, really challenging to understand all of its functions and
the organisation as a whole” (Int 5, 08/02/2019).
Participants agreed that they relied heavily on their manager or team for information,
claiming that the success of this was solely dependent on how willing colleagues were to
help, rather than it being a formal process. Most participants found colleagues supportive, but
understood this as the luck of the draw, with one commenting, “I was really lucky because
my team was really good and actually sat down and showed me loads of really practical
things… so it’s not like a standard thing, just I was lucky on my team” (FG 2, 29/11/2018).
Another participant, however, was less fortunate, “My boss just kinda went here is what you
have to try and find out, so it was kinda like treasure hunting round the building” (FG 3,

8
29/11/2018). There was a general consensus among participants, however, that there was a
limit to how much support a new employee could expect from colleagues:
You don’t want to ask too many questions because, you know, [you] don’t want to look
as if you’re a bit silly but also you feel that other people are busy and they’ve got things
to do, jobs to get on with. (Int 5, 08/02/2019)
Participants also said they were unsure where to go for information or even who to ask.
The feelings of anxiety and confusion in the time before they were able to access the existing
training and the reservations about relying too heavily on already-busy colleagues for support
during this time indicate that new employees are not being fully supported or receiving
training at the point of need. If one of the aims of induction is to reduce the fear or anxiety
experienced by new employees, having an average wait time of seven weeks before
employees can access this training is counterproductive. All of the focus group and interview
participants agreed that the ideal time for induction training was in the first week or two of
employment. Participants felt they would have had ample time during this period to
undertake training before becoming too engaged with the requirements of their role, with a
few stating they would have actually welcomed having something to do, “You are not quite
twiddling your thumbs, but there is a time before you are useful and you would like to have
something to do” (FG 4, 29/11/2018). One participant pointed out the high level of
motivation among new employees, “As a new employee you are engaged, you are interested,
you want to learn, you’re in a new post, you know, it’s the perfect time for people to access
[training]” (Int 3, 07/02/2019).
One of the beneficial features of microlearning identified in the literature is that it is available
on demand. Interview participants who had accessed the microlearning during the pilot
agreed that having induction microlearning to do “in your own time and your own
headspace” (Int 4, 07/02/2019) would be valuable in bridging the gap between employees
starting work and accessing face-to-face training, with one remarking, “I definitely think it
would add a lot of value because often there can be a delay of a month or two before people
get to attend the [existing] induction” (Int 3, 07/02/2019). There was broad agreement that
this would be motivating for new employees, with one participant commenting:
I would suggest that it is available very early on because even if people have covered
some of it by the time they go to the face-to-face induction training, I think it’s only
reinforcing that and then it’s kind of embedding it a little bit more. (Int 1, 05/02/2019)
It is evident from these findings that having microlearning available on demand in the first
weeks of employment would meet new employees at the point of need, reducing anxiety and
supporting their adjustment to their new role. The responsive design of the microlearning
created for this research means lessons are accessible on any mobile device, extending
opportunities for learning. This appealed to participants, one of whom commented, “the
beauty of it is that it is accessible anywhere” (Int 2, 05/02/2019). Furthermore, the short
duration of microlearning also makes it conducive to mobile access and this is now examined
further.

4.2 Short bursts of learning

Participants in both the focus group and the one-to-one interviews offered mixed opinions on
the existing face-to-face induction training. A number highlighted the importance of the
opportunity to meet new colleagues and build relationships, with four particularly enjoying

9
meeting with the organisation CEO. All of the participants stated, however, that they found
there to be too much information covered in the one-day face-to-face training, with one
summing it up, “I definitely feel the induction process needs reviewing – a full day of
presentations is an information overload” (FG 4, 29/11/2018). Other participants described it
as a “tsunami of information”, “dense”, “draining”, “confusing” and even “tedious”, finding
it difficult to absorb and retain all of the content or even understand its relevance to them.
Participants were particularly negative about the training support materials, finding them
overwhelming, “there was so much reading… it’s hard to decipher at that early stage what’s
really important and what’s relevant and what’s a bit overwhelming then, what you don’t
need to know” (Int 1, 05/02/2019). This supports the findings from the literature, where
information overload is identified as a common issue in induction training.
The five participants who accessed the microlearning were unanimous in their praise of its
design, describing lessons as engaging and commenting favourably on the easy navigation
between them, the tone and, in particular, the length of time each lesson took to complete.
Participants were positive about the fact that lessons were “short and snappy” (Int 1,
05/02/2019), finding the experience neither dense nor overwhelming when compared with
the existing training. One participant remarked that “the information was always very
succinct, it was very clear, you know, and you could pause and go back as well which is
nice” (Int 3, 07/02/2019) while another liked that “you could whizz through it” (Int 2,
05/02/2019). Three participants highlighted the appeal of knowing that each lesson would be
short from the outset, with one commenting, “People can commit to it from the minute they
start it because they can see when it is going to end… you can commit to five minutes, you
can’t to half an hour” (Int 2, 05/02/2019). Another participant agreed saying, “You can check
the duration and say well, okay, I have 10 minutes now I can actually do, like, one part or I
can continue and do three” (Int 3, 07/02/2019).
The short duration of microlearning would, therefore, seem ideal to alleviate the issue of
information overload. The fact that participants were very positive about the focused nature
of microlearning, and especially that, as a learner, they knew each lesson would take no more
than seven minutes to complete before they started, would indicate that this is a feature of
microlearning that learners find particularly motivating. This would be of significant value in
induction training, enabling new employees to process information while retaining their
interest.
The issue of information overload could, however, easily be replicated in microlearning if the
volume of content remains overwhelming for learners, no matter how the design works to
counteract this. Following the pilot, the majority of interview participants cautioned against
developing the additional lessons proposed by focus group participants, suggesting those
already developed for the pilot were sufficient for new employees: “So there is the right
amount of information there because what you want to avoid is information overload” (Int 2,
05/02/2019). There was only one dissenting voice who said she thought the other lessons
should all be developed as planned, “I mean, I would like to have all that information but
that’s just, you know, me personally, I like to get as much information as I can” (Int 3,
07/02/2019).
It is possible that the participants in the focus group were too far removed from the
experiences of new employees, having been with the organisation for an average of five
months. Interview participants, on the other hand, had been with the organisation for an
average of only 10 weeks and therefore had a more recent experience of the induction period.
Given the time-bound nature of induction it is important to focus training only on what is

10
required to effectively induct the new employee into the organisation rather than
overwhelming them with information they might not yet need.

4.3 Media-rich and interactive

Interview participants commented specifically on the wide variety of media used in the
microlearning, describing lessons as stimulating, engaging and visually appealing. “I really
like the design… I like that there was a real variety in terms of the format… it was very
engaging, there was good variety, it was visually very attractive” (Int 3, 07/02/2019). Four of
the five participants also remarked positively on the levels of interactivity in each lesson,
saying they found this both useful and a fun learning experience: “the quizzes and the little
bits of, like, interactive learning pieces reinforce your learning and help you to retain
information better” (Int 4, 07/02/2019). One participant highlighted the satisfaction she felt as
a learner completing activities, “There was a variety of ways to sort of think about things and
remember, you know, and then be delighted you got it right” (Int 5, 08/02/2019).
The use of different media in microlearning can help to eliminate monotony in training
programmes and effectively motivate and engage learners. This is important in workplace
learning to increase employee satisfaction, potentially leading to improved employee
retention. The high level of interactivity, a prominent feature of microlearning, further
enhanced participants’ experience and supported the retention of learning, which would
reduce the feelings of uncertainty and confusion common among new employees.

4.4 Self-contained and self-directed

The fact that microlearning lessons are self-contained, providing specific and targeted
information to support learners to achieve one learning objective at a time, was deemed a
positive attribute by participants. Two participants also stated that they liked having the
option to occasionally skip a lesson that wasn’t relevant to them, which the self-contained
nature of microlearning allows for. These same two participants concluded that this feature of
the design allowed for self-directed learning, another notable feature of microlearning as
described in the literature. One participant highlighted that “when you put people in control,
they can leave and join as they see fit”, saying “I don’t think it’s as overwhelming for them”
(Int 2, 05/02/2019) while the second of these participants felt that this “gives you some
responsibility for your own learning. And I think that’s really important. ...it gives you some
autonomy in your learning” (Int 4, 07/02/2019). However, in spite of these comments, a
striking finding from the research was that four out of the five participants in the pilot phase
accessed all of the microlearning lessons in either one or two sessions, in a linear and
sequential fashion, as they would with a singular online training resource. Furthermore, these
four participants didn’t skip over any content, even those lessons they claimed were less
relevant or interesting to them. Only one participant said he dipped in and out of lessons as
needed or when he had time available, meaning that, when presented with the opportunity to
self-direct, only one participant did so. This would imply that the self-contained nature of
microlearning, allowing for self-directed learning, is not relevant to this cohort of learners.
From the findings, it is possible to identify a number of possible reasons for this lack of self-
direction. As noted earlier, participants felt that new employees have both the motivation and
time to learn so it may be that they are eager to avail of all of the information available or that
they simply have little else to do. Alternatively, it may be that, as a new employee, they lack
either the confidence or the knowledge necessary to be able to identify exactly which lessons
are relevant to them so they try them all. Indeed, two of the five participants highlighted that,

11
as well as not knowing who to ask for information, as a new employee they had difficulty
even knowing what to ask, “I wouldn’t have known the questions to ask. You know that thing
about not knowing what you don’t know?” (Int 5, 08/02/2019). A third possibility is that new
employees are concerned about appearing disinterested if they skip lessons during a time
when they are eager to make a good impression. This lack of self- direction, for whichever
reason, supports Allen’s (2006) claim about the need for fixed and formal induction to avoid
uncertainty.
All five participants did state, however, that they would come back to specific lessons as
needed and they appreciated that the self-contained nature of microlearning, combined with it
being available on demand, allowed for this option, with one commenting, “I would be very
happy to go back in and look at a couple of things that I needed just to look at it in greater
depth or whatever, you know, you’re free to do that” (Int 5, 08/02/2019). The fact that
microlearning lessons are self-contained could, therefore, be of value as individual lessons
can be easily identified and selected for repeat access for just-in-time learning, thus enabling
learners to self-select what is meaningful and relevant to them based on their individual real-
world needs. If microlearning is organised in a way that allows learners to choose to either
easily select lessons as standalone elements or access them sequentially as a larger repository
of induction learning assets, this would cater to all learners, no matter their learning needs or
preferences, as well as those who wished to revisit specific lessons. Having options would
enable new employees to feel more supported and less anxious in their first weeks of
employment, which would be instrumental in enabling them to quickly adjust to their new
role. To enable learners to return to lessons on demand, the microlearning should remain
available to employees for the whole of the induction period and perhaps beyond.

5. Recommendations
The action research methodology used allowed for two cycles of research and this cyclical
process will continue beyond the scope of this paper. While the qualitative data collected thus
far suits the exploratory nature of the research, data was gathered from only a small number
of participants. Furthermore, context is of vital importance in qualitative data (Braun &
Clarke, 2013), and the social and historical context of each of these participants impacted on
their experiences, their evaluation of the microlearning and the value they felt it might bring
to other employees.
A third cycle of research could be employed to give further insight into the value of
microlearning as part of an induction training programme. In this cycle, new employees could
be given access to the existing microlearning lessons from their first week of employment.
The employees’ line managers could then be interviewed after a period of time to explore
how quickly and easily they felt the new employees had settled in to their new work role
when compared with previous employees who had only accessed the existing face-to-face
training. Furthermore, in an effort to determine what, if any, additional content is required,
learning analytics could be used in this next research cycle to monitor which lessons were
accessed most and least frequently, and to track questions asked through the ‘email a
question’ button at the end of each lesson.
A further recommendation would be to explore the benefits of including a chat function with
the microlearning lessons on the organisation LMS to enable learners to interact with one
another from their first week of employment. While other colleagues may not always have

12
the time available to support new employees, findings have shown that these employees have
ample time in their first few weeks to support one another. Not only would the chat function
go some way to replicate the relationship-building found in face-to-face training, it could also
enable social constructivist learning through interaction (Vygotsky, 1978).

6. Conclusion
This research sought to explore the value of introducing online microlearning lessons into the
induction training programme of a not-for-profit organisation in Ireland in an effort to inform
practice and bring about change in the learning experience of new employees. The research
explored the challenges currently experienced by new employees in the organisation and
examined if and how microlearning might affect the transition experience.
Employers should be cognisant of the importance of the quality of the induction training they
offer in order to effectively and efficiently assimilate and socialise employees into their
organisation. The findings from this research would suggest that microlearning offered as
part of a blended learning experience, available on demand from the first week of
employment, would be of great value to new employees, bridging the gap before employees
can access face-to-face training and cutting back on the reliance on colleagues for
information, thus supporting staff and reducing anxiety. The short, media-rich and highly
interactive nature of microlearning also adds value by enabling employees to both enjoy the
training experience and retain learning. Finally, the self-contained nature of microlearning,
while not initially appearing to be of particular value to these research participants, does give
learners options in how they access lessons and the ability to return to specific lessons at a
later time, allowing for the possibility of self-directed learning. The features of microlearning
would, therefore, seem to be of value in the transition experience of new employees,
empowering and supporting them in their learning and can be considered by organisations
seeking to improve their induction training programme.

References
Alexander, B., Ashford-Rowe, K., Barajas-Murph, N., Dobbin, G., Knott, J., McCormack,
M., ... & Weber, N. (2019). EDUCAUSE Horizon Report 2019 Higher Education
Edition(pp. 3-41). EDU19.
Allen, D. G. (2006). Do organizational socialization tactics influence newcomer
embeddedness and turnover? Journal of management, 32(2), 237-256.
doi:10.1177/0149206305280103
Ashforth, B. E., Sluss, D. M., & Harrison, S. H. (2007). Socialization in organizational
contexts. International review of industrial and organizational psychology, 22, 1.
doi:10.1002/9780470753378.ch1
Ashforth, B. E., Sluss, D. M., & Saks, A. M. (2007). Socialization tactics, proactive
behavior, and newcomer learning: Integrating socialization models. Journal of
vocational behavior, 70(3), 447-462. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2007.02.001
Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. M., & Tucker, J. S. (2007). Newcomer
adjustment during organizational socialization: a meta-analytic review of antecedents,

13
 outcomes, and methods. Journal of applied psychology, 92(3), 707.
doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.707
Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (2011). Organizational socialization: The effective onboarding
of new employees. APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 3, 51-
64. doi:10.1037/12171-002
Bell, J. (2005). Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers in social
science, education and health. UK: Open University Press.
Bersin, J. (2017, 27 March). The disruption of digital learning: Ten things we have learned
[Blog post]. Retrieved from http://joshbersin.com/2017/03/the-disruption-of-digital-
learning-ten-things-we-have-learned/
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for
beginners. London: Sage.
Brodie, J.M. (2006). Getting managers on board. Human Resources Magazine, November,
105–108.
Bruck, P. A., Motiwalla, L., & Foerster, F. (2012). Mobile Learning with Micro-content: A
Framework and Evaluation. Bled eConference, 25.
Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and Quality in Social Research. London: Routledge.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Buchem, I., & Hamelmann, H. (2010). Microlearning: a strategy for ongoing professional
development. eLearning Papers, 21(7).
Caldwell, B. G., & Caldwell, C. (2016). Ten Classic Onboarding Errors–Violations of the
HRM-Employee Relationship. Business and Management Research, 5(4), 47-55.
doi:10.5430/bmr.v5n4p47
Caldwell, C., & Peters, R. (2018). New employee onboarding–psychological contracts and
ethical perspectives. Journal of Management Development, 37(1), 27-39.
doi:10.1108/JMD-10-2016-0202
Coakley, D., Garvey, R., & O’Neill, Í. (2017). Micro-learning—Adopting Digital
Pedagogies to Facilitate Technology-Enhanced Teaching and Learning for CPD.
In Empowering 21st Century Learners Through Holistic and Enterprising
Learning (pp. 237-242). Springer, Singapore.
Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. London: Sage.
Denscombe, M. (1998) The Good Research Guide for Small-scale Social Research
Projects. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Derven, M. (2008). Management onboarding. Journal of Training and Development, April,
49–52.

14
 Dodds, B., & Verest, M. (2002). E-learning in support of induction training at De Lage
Landen. Journal of Industrial and Commercial Training, 34, 70–75.
doi:10.1108/00197850210417564.
Donnelly, R. (n.d.) Action Research for Teachers: Part 1.
Emerson, L. C., & Berge, Z. L. (2018). Microlearning: Knowledge management
applications and competency-based training in the workplace. Knowledge
Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 10(2), 125-132.
doi:10.34105/j.kmel.2018.10.008
Fayad, A. (2014). Why Employers Can’t Ignore Onboarding with Tech. eLearn, 2014(9), 1.
doi:10.1145/2666679.2664491
Gabrielli, S., Kimani, S., & Catarci, T. (2005). The design of microlearning experiences: A
research agenda. In: T. Hug, M. Lindner, & P. A. Bruck, (Eds.), Microlearning:
Emerging concepts, practices and technologies after E-learning: Proceedings of
Microlearning Conference 2005: Learning & Working in New Media (pp. 45-53).
Innsbruck, Austria: Innsbruck University Press.
Gartner ( 2016, 26 August) Top 10 Technologies Driving the Digital Workplace. [Blog
post]. Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/top-10-
technologies-driving-the-digital-workplace/
Gray, D. E. (2013). Doing research in the real world. London: Sage.
Griffin, A. E., Colella, A., & Goparaju, S. (2000). Newcomer and organizational
socialization tactics: An interactionist perspective. Human resource management
review, 10(4), 453-474.
Hanshaw, G., & Hanson, J. (2018). A Mixed Methods Study of Leaders’ Perceptions of
Microlearning for Professional Development on the Job. International Journal Of
Learning And Development, 8(3), 1. doi:10.5296/ijld.v8i3.13198
Hartley, D. (2010). Is There Macro Value in Microlearning. Chief Learning Officer 9(7) 30-
43.
Hendricks, K., & Louw-Potgieter, J. (2012). A theory evaluation of an induction
programme. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 10(3), 1-9.
doi:10.4102/sajhrm.v10i3.421
Hug, T. (2005). Microlearning: A New Pedagogical Challenge (Introductory
Note) Proceedings of Microlearning 2005: Learning & Working in New Media
Environments.
Hug, T. (2010). Mobile learning as ‘microlearning’: Conceptual considerations towards
enhancements of didactic thinking. International Journal of Mobile and Blended
Learning (IJMBL), 2(4), 47-57. doi:10.4018/jmbl.2010100104
Hug, T., & Friesen, N. (2009). Outline of a Microlearning Agenda. eLearning Papers, 16,
1-13.2017.

15
 Jahnke, I., Lee, Y. M., Pham, M., He, H., & Austin, L. (2019). Unpacking the Inherent
Design Principles of Mobile Microlearning. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1-
35. doi: 10.1007/s10758-019-09413-w.
Jordan, A., Carlile, O., & Stack, A. (2008). Approaches to learning. Maidenhead: Open
University Press.
Klein, H.J., & Weaver, N.A. (2000). The effectiveness of an organizational level orientation
training program in the socialization of new hires. Journal of Personnel Psychology,
53, 47–66. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb00193.x
Knowles, M. (1978). The adult learner: A neglected species (2nd Ed.). Houston: Gulf
Publishing Co.
Leung, J. (2019). The EdHub Library: A Microlearning Design Approach for Teacher. C2C
Digital Magazine, 1:(10)4.
Malone, S. (2005). A Practical Guide to Learning in the Workplace. Dublin: The Liffey
Press.
Microsoft (2015). Attention in the Digital Age. Retrieved from
http://www.sparkler.co.uk/microsoftattention/microsoft-attention-report.pdf
Morrison, E. W. (1995). Information usefulness and acquisition during organizational
encounter. Management Communication Quarterly, 9(2), 131-155.
doi:10.1177/0893318995009002001
National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2015). Attention span statistics. Retrieved
from http://www.statisticbrain.com/ attention-span-statistics/
Norton, L. (2001). Researching your teaching: The case for action research. Psychology
Learning & Teaching, 1(1), 21-27. doi:10.2304/plat.2001.1.1.21
O’Leary, Z. (2004). The essential guide to doing research. London: Sage.
Paul, A. M. (2016). Microlearning 101. HR Magazine, 61(4), 36–42.
Ragsdale, M.A., & Mueller, J. (2005). Plan, do, study, act model to improve an orientation
programme. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 20, 268–272. doi:10.1097/00001786-
200507000-00013
Rapley, T. (2016). ‘Some Pragmatics of Qualitative Data Analysis’ in Silverman, D (ed.)
Qualitative Research, 4th edn. London: Sage, pp. 331-345.
Robson, C. (2011). Real world research: A resource for users of social research methods in
applied settings 3rd edition. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.
Saks, A. M., & Gruman, J. A. (2012). Getting newcomers on board: A review of
socialization practices and introduction to socialization resources theory. In C. R.
Wanberg (Ed.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of organizational
socialization (pp. 27-55). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
SCIE. (n.d.). Induction: A basic guide to the principles of good induction.

16
 skillshub. (2018). The Essential Guide To Microlearning: How To Make A Big Impact
From Short Sessions. Retrieved from https://www.skillshub.com/wp-
content/uploads/2017/10/Micro%20Learning%20Report.pdf
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive
science, 12(2), 257-285. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wanous, J.P., & Reichers, A.E. (2000). New employee orientation programs. Journal of
Human Resource Management Review, 10, 435–451. doi:10.1016/S1053-
4822(00)00035-8
Zahrly, J., & Tosi, H. (1989). The differential effect of organizational induction process on
early work role adjustment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 59-74.
doi:10.1002/job.4030100105

17