Strategic Foundation and Needs Analysis for Custom eLearning Development (The ‘Why’ and ‘What’)

The successful implementation of custom eLearning development begins not with content creation, but with rigorous strategic alignment and the selection of an appropriate instructional design framework. This initial phase, often referred to as Analysis, dictates the entire trajectory of the project, ensuring resources are focused on high-priority organizational challenges and yielding measurable returns on learning (ROL).

Defining Custom eLearning Development and Strategic Alignment

Custom eLearning development initiatives represent a decisive investment in targeted workforce capability. Unlike pre-packaged, off-the-shelf solutions, custom eLearning development involves designing and building online training that is uniquely tailored to the specific context, culture, and operational demands of the organization and its learners. Every constituent element, ranging from the instructional design structure to the intricate multimedia components, is specifically crafted to align with the company’s distinct goals and cultural requirements.

The mandate for custom eLearning development is inherently driven by the need to address specific performance gaps that generic training solutions cannot adequately resolve. Therefore, the core purpose of commissioning custom eLearning is to create content that is perfectly aligned with company-specific processes, developing skills critical to the industry, and directly applicable to unique organizational challenges. This strategic alignment requires that the learning initiative is perpetually calibrated against internal and external organizational drivers to ensure the training remains relevant.

The essential groundwork for this phase is the Learning Needs Analysis (LNA). This analysis is distinguished from a traditional Training Needs Analysis (TNA) by its ongoing, systematic nature, functioning as a comprehensive health check on the organization’s current and future capability needs. The LNA methodology systematically gathers data and insights about employees’ existing levels of skills, attitudes, and knowledge, then assesses these capabilities against future demands. The resulting identification of gaps must be carefully interpreted and prioritized within the context of the broader organizational strategy, providing the crucial baseline necessary for justifying the project and, ultimately, measuring its highest level of impact. The success of the entire custom eLearning development endeavor, including the calculation of Return on Learning (ROL), is directly dependent on the rigor and accuracy of this foundational needs analysis.

Custom eLearning Development

Selecting the Instructional Design Framework for Custom eLearning Development: ADDIE vs. SAM

The choice of Instructional Design (ID) model for custom eLearning development is not merely a project management decision; it represents a commitment to a specific workflow, risk profile, and, most critically, a pedagogical style. For custom, high-stakes eLearning development, which is characterized by complexity and constantly evolving requirements, the traditional, linear models must be carefully weighed against agile, iterative approaches.  

Comparative Analysis of Foundational Models

The ADDIE Model (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate) is systematic and repeatable, tracing its origins to a military system translated for technological application. While its structured nature ensures thoroughness, the primary drawback of ADDIE is its strict linearity, as the model “doesn’t allow backtracking” once a phase is complete. This rigidity makes it highly susceptible to large-scale failure if requirements shift late in the cycle, a frequent occurrence in complex custom development environments. 

The Successive Approximation Model (SAM), in contrast, was consciously created as an agile counter to ADDIE, leveraging an IT-based solution centered on rapid prototyping and continuous evaluation. SAM integrates five key phases—Preparation, Iterative Design, Iterative Development, Implementation, and Evaluation—with the design and development phases being cyclical and iterative. This structure is inherently superior for custom content creation because it builds quality assurance and stakeholder feedback directly into the workflow.

Strategic Recommendation: The Agile SAM Framework

 

Custom development demands adaptability and frequent integration of Subject Matter Expert (SME) feedback. The strategic preference is the Agile SAM framework, which mitigates the risk of catastrophic project failure by spreading risk across multiple iterations and prototypes. The modern iteration of SAM upgrades to AGILE principles: Align, Get set, Iterate & Implement, Leverage, and Evaluate, thereby linking iterative design directly to organizational impact assessment.  

Adopting SAM represents a pedagogical mandate, not just a procedural one. The framework promotes an atmosphere of problem-solving rather than simply following instructions, offering more autonomy to both developers and online learners. The structure of the course ultimately affects what and how individuals learn from it. A traditional, rigid ADDIE process tends to yield instruction that favors rote knowledge transfer, aligning with its military roots. Conversely, the emphasis on problem-solving inherent in SAM naturally drives the instructional design team toward approaches focused on application, critical thinking, and authentic challenges, which are prerequisites for achieving higher-order learning goals such as observable behavior change and organizational results. 

A fundamental requirement for demonstrating organizational impact is the alignment of the initial analysis with the outcome. The success of the entire program, measured at the highest level (Kirkpatrick Level 4, organizational results) , is inextricably tied to the rigor of the Learning Needs Analysis (LNA). If the LNA fails to define the baseline organizational capability needs accurately and targets the wrong performance gap, the subsequent custom eLearning solution, no matter how expertly executed, will not deliver measurable Level 4 results. The LNA effectively defines the organizational baseline against which the value of the custom eLearning development initiative is ultimately measured.   

Feature ADDIE (Systematic/Linear) SAM (Agile/Iterative) Strategic Value for Custom eLearning
Structure/Flow Linear, Waterfall (no backtracking)  Iterative, Cyclical Prototyping (Design, Develop, Evaluate loops)  SAM: Allows crucial flexibility, reducing risk in complex, tailored projects.
Risk Profile High risk of late-stage failure if requirements shift High forewarning; risk spread across iterations  SAM: Essential for managing client/SME feedback and unique technical requirements.
Instructional Focus Following instructions, systematic transfer Problem-solving, learner autonomy  SAM: Better suited for modern skill development (Cognitivist/Constructivist goals).

Instructional Design Blueprint for Custom eLearning Development (The ‘How to Learn’)

The Design Phase serves as the intellectual core of custom development. It is where the strategic needs identified in the LNA are translated into a rigorous, theoretically sound learning pathway, specifying learning objectives, sequencing, assessment methods, and media selection. 

Mapping Learning Theories to the Learning Experience Delivered by Custom eLearning Development

Effective custom eLearning development must be pedagogically comprehensive, integrating elements of three major learning theories to ensure complete skill development that moves beyond simple recall to contextual application.

  • Behaviorism: This theory emphasizes the manipulation of the learning environment to optimize knowledge transfer. Behaviorists posit that knowledge can be decomposed and simplified into basic building blocks, focusing on reinforcement and the elimination of irrelevant information. In custom eLearning design, this approach supports the inclusion of graded quizzes, immediate corrective feedback, and automated skill drills necessary for compliance training and the mastery of foundational procedures.
custom elearning development design blueprint

  • Cognitivism: Viewing learning as a mental activity and the mind as an information-processing tool , Cognitivism stresses efficient processing strategies. The instructional focus is on structuring, organizing, and sequencing information optimally to facilitate assimilation. Practical applications include the use of cognitive strategies such as outlining, concept mapping, framing, and mnemonics. Furthermore, the use of analogies and metaphors—such as comparing instructional design to the architect’s profession—aids the novice learner in conceptualizing and retaining major duties and functions.  

  • Constructivism: Distinguished from traditional Cognitivism, Constructivism posits that learners do not simply transfer knowledge from the external world but actively build personal, unique interpretations based on individual experiences and interactions. Knowledge, therefore, emerges in the contexts within which it is relevant. This framework mandates designing instruction around authentic, real-world problems (the Task-centered approach). Constructivism is necessary for custom solutions because company-specific challenges (e.g., leadership, process management) are often complex and ambiguous, requiring the ability to apply knowledge and make decisions in novel ways.  

 

Establishing Measurable Learning Objectives for Custom eLearning Development(Bloom’s Taxonomy)

Learning objectives must be established using criterion-referenced verbs aligned with the cognitive demands necessary to close the identified performance gap. Bloom’s Taxonomy provides the definitive structure for ensuring objectives progress logically from lower-order thinking (LOT) to higher-order thinking (HOT). 

The design sequencing must explicitly guide the learner through the six hierarchical levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy: 

  1. Remember/Understand (LOT): Basic recall and explaining concepts.

  2. Apply/Analyze: Using knowledge in practical problems and breaking down information (e.g., sorting jumbled terms, comparing/contrasting lists). 

  3. Evaluate/Create (HOT): Critically assessing the topic, stating evidence-based opinions, and generating new solutions or hypothetical assignments. 

By structuring content and assessment activities to mirror this progression, instructional designers ensure that lower-order questions are addressed at the beginning of a unit, leading toward higher-order application nearer the end. This structure facilitates the proactive identification and resolution of knowledge roadblocks for struggling learners before attempting mastery.

Applying Core Principles of Instruction for Custom eLearning Development (Gagne and Merrill)

The operational flow of the custom module is governed by established instructional principles that dictate the sequence and quality of the learning steps.

Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction (The Sequential Flow)

Gagne’s model provides a systematic framework for effective instruction, ensuring all necessary conditions for learning are met :  

  1. Gain Attention: The first step is to capture learner focus and interest.

  2. Inform Learners of the Objective: Clearly communicate the intended learning outcomes.

  3. Stimulate Recall of Prior Learning: Frequency is a critical element in retaining information; designers must actively encourage connections with previously learned material, often through the use of relevant examples and analogies.   

  4. Present the Content: Deliver the instruction.

  5. Provide Learning Guidance: Offer scaffolding or support structures.

  6. Elicit Performance: Require learners to practice the new skill.

  7. Provide Feedback: Deliver immediate confirmation or correction.

  8. Assess Performance: Measure mastery against objectives.

  9. Enhance Retention and Transfer: Provide mechanisms to ensure the skill moves from the training environment to the workplace.  

 

Gagnes Nine Events of Instructions for Custom eLearning Development
Merrills First Principles of Instruction MPI for Custom eLearning Development

Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction (MPI) for Custom eLearning Development (The Task Focus)

MPI is recognized for its focus on maximizing knowledge transfer by creating meaningful, engaging, and transferable learning experiences. It emphasizes five key principles:  

  • Task-centered approach: Instruction is structured around authentic, real-world problems that learners are likely to encounter in their jobs.  
  • Activation: Learners’ prior knowledge and experiences are explicitly engaged to create a foundation for new learning.
  • Demonstration: Clear models or examples that illustrate the desired learning outcomes are provided.
  • Application: Learners are given opportunities to practice knowledge and skills in authentic contexts, requiring them to actively apply what they have learned, solve problems, and make realistic decisions.  
  • Integration: This principle promotes the transfer of knowledge and skills to new situations, demanding that learners connect their learning to real-world contexts and apply it in novel ways, often through complex scenarios.  

The Integration principle is strategically vital as it functions as the direct bridge to demonstrating post-training behavior change. Kirkpatrick Level 3 measures the degree to which participants apply what they learned back in their environment. By intentionally incorporating activities that fulfill Merrill’s Integration requirement—such as complex branching scenarios or realistic simulations—the instructional design guarantees that the structure is optimized for transferring skills from the simulated environment into the actual workplace, significantly increasing the likelihood of observable Level 3 behavior change.

Furthermore, custom eLearning targets explicitly the company’s nuanced and often ambiguous challenges. This reality necessitates reliance on a Constructivist framework, implemented via Merrill’s Task-centered design. When dealing with complex decision-making, a purely Cognitivist approach focused solely on facts and procedures proves insufficient. A Constructivist design equips learners to handle ambiguity and adapt their knowledge based on context, accepting that individual interpretation is constantly open to change. 

Content Development for Custom eLearning and Cognitive Load Management (The ‘Crafting’)

The Development phase, often iterative under the SAM framework, focuses on the technical execution of the design blueprint. Success in this phase hinges on rigorous cognitive load control, seamless Subject Matter Expert integration, and adherence to technical and accessibility standards.  

1. Content Structuring and SME Integration

Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) are indispensable, providing the domain-specific content and critical knowledge necessary to create practical and relevant custom training. Successful custom development requires integrating SMEs early and effectively into the Iterative Design Phase, ensuring their highly specialized knowledge is accurately translated into instructional materials. Proactive strategies for empowering SMEs are necessary to ensure a smooth production process and the scalable delivery of effective learning.  

The structure of the content must rigorously adhere to the principles of Cognitive Load Theory, specifically the limited-capacity assumption ,which recognizes that the ability of individuals to absorb information at any one time is constrained. Therefore, content chunking is an imperative. This involves reducing the overall amount of information supplied to learners (“less is more”), structuring instructional content into clear levels of importance to maintain a logical flow, and breaking long media, such as videos or lectures, into short, manageable segments. This systematic organization is proven to promote learner retention. 

Mayer’s Principles for Multimedia Learning

The quality of multimedia development is paramount during custom eLearning development, requiring strict adherence to Mayer’s 12 Principles of Multimedia Learning. These principles are based on three core assumptions: the dual-channel assumption (processing of auditory and visual information occurs via separate channels), the limited-capacity assumption, and the active-processing assumption (learners must be actively engaged).  

Critical principles that guide development decisions include:

  • Multimedia Principle: Learners retain information best from a combination of words and pictures. Visuals must be incorporated strategically to clarify meaning and enhance comprehension, not merely for decoration.  
  • Coherence Principle: Learning effectiveness is maximized when unnecessary or extraneous information is excluded.  
  • Signalling Principle: Learning is enhanced by adding visual or auditory cues to draw attention to vital information.  
  • Redundancy Principle: This principle prohibits using both on-screen text/graphics and simultaneous spoken narration, as doing so overloads the visual channel. To apply this, developers should minimize on-screen text in narrated presentations, focusing instead on high-quality graphics and images that complement the spoken word. Adherence to the Redundancy Principle streamlines development efficiency by redirecting resources that might otherwise be spent on transcribing narration into creating more effective, illustrative graphics, thereby accelerating the Development Iteration.  
  • Contiguity Principles (Spatial and Temporal): Corresponding words and pictures must be placed near each other on the screen (Spatial) and presented simultaneously in time (Temporal) to minimize the effort required to cross-reference information.
Mayers Principles for Multimedia Learning and Custom eLearning Development

Technical Tool Selection and Standards Alignment

The selection of authoring tools and underlying technical standards dictates the flexibility, integration capabilities, and longevity of the custom solution. Tool selection must be based on a comprehensive assessment of content needs, the technical expertise of the team, and required LMS compatibility. 

Accessibility Mandate (WCAG 2.1)

A crucial standard for custom eLearning development is adherence to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA. Accessibility is not merely a compliance issue; it is a foundational requirement for maximizing the addressable audience and ensuring successful information processing. If content is inaccessible, learners cannot effectively interact with the material, thereby inhibiting Gagne’s ‘Gain Attention’ and ‘Present Content’ events. Inaccessibility results in poor learner reaction (Kirkpatrick Level 1) and prevents learning (Level 2). WCAG guidelines are structured around four core principles (POUR) :   

  • Perceivable: Provide text alternatives for all non-text content (images, multimedia) and offer captions and transcripts for time-based media. Content must be distinguishable, using sufficient contrast and allowing for text resizing.   
  • Operable: Ensure all functionality is available via keyboard and provide users with enough time to read and interact with content (e.g., options to pause or extend time limits). Navigation must be clear, predictable, and consistent.   
  • Understandable: Information and the user interface must be comprehensible. This involves using clear language and ensuring web pages operate in predictable ways.
  • Robust: Content must be compatible with a wide array of user agents, including assistive technologies.

Implementation and Deployment (The ‘Launch’)

The Implementation phase ensures technical readiness, quality assurance, and, most critically, establishes the robust data collection infrastructure necessary for meaningful evaluation and the calculation of ROL.

1. Technical Integration and Tracking Standards (LMS/LRS)

The tracking standard chosen during implementation is the primary factor determining the scope and granularity of performance measurement possible in the Evaluation phase.

  • SCORM (Sharable Content Object Reference Model): This is the most widely recognized, albeit legacy, standard.20 SCORM packages and delivers content within a Learning Management System (LMS), tracking basic metrics such as completion status, scores, and time spent.20 Its major limitation is that it is restricted entirely to the LMS environment, making it incapable of tracking complex learning that occurs outside its digital walls.
  • xAPI (Experience API): Explicitly developed to overcome SCORM’s limitations, xAPI enables the tracking of learning experiences beyond the traditional LMS.20 xAPI records detailed data about any learning activity, formal or informal, and stores this information in a dedicated Learning Record Store (LRS).20 For custom eLearning development programs aimed at high-stakes organizational change (Level 4), specifying xAPI/LRS compatibility is a mandatory technical requirement, as it allows for the advanced tracking of behavior and performance metrics that occur post-training.18 Failure to adopt xAPI fundamentally limits the evaluation ceiling to Level 2 (Learning).
  • LTI (Learning Tools Interoperability): LTI streamlines the integration of third-party tools (e.g., specialized simulators, unique collaboration platforms) seamlessly with the LMS, reducing the need for costly custom development for integration purposes.
Feature SCORM (Legacy) xAPI (Modern) LTI (Integration Focus)
Purpose Content packaging & basic tracking 20 Tracks all learning experiences, formal and informal 20 Tool and system integration 20
Tracking Scope Basic (completion, scores, time spent) 20 Advanced (any defined activity, complex behaviors) No direct tracking; links tools
Data Storage LMS (Limited) 20 Learning Record Store (LRS) (Flexible) 20 No data storage; focuses on linking

 

About Check N Click's eLearning Services

Check N Click specializes in custom eLearning development, with a specific expertise in Customer Education programs. Contact us today and book a free call to explore how we can help with our expert Instructional Design, eLearning, and Customer Education brilliance.

Contact Us!
Image representing Quality Assurance during Custom eLearning Development

Quality Assurance (QA) and Testing

Due to the agile nature of SAM, QA is not a single end-phase gate but is embedded throughout the Iterative Development cycles. Rigorous testing must encompass technical fidelity, instructional effectiveness, and full accessibility compliance.   

Deployment protocol typically includes Alpha testing (internal technical checks), Beta testing (limited subset of target learners), and a comprehensive Pilot test. The Pilot phase is crucial for utilizing formative assessment strategies. Formative assessment involves the continuous process of collecting evidence of learning over time to check for understanding. This process allows the design team to capture in-the-moment feedback, identify instructional roadblocks, and immediately adjust the instruction before mass deployment. Formative checks act as necessary instructional risk mitigation, allowing for real-time refinement that aligns perfectly with the iterative evaluation philosophy of SAM.

Internal Marketing and Product Launch Strategy

The technical deployment must be supported by a strategic launch plan to ensure learner adoption and organizational momentum.  

  • Facilitator Training: If human facilitators are involved, their training must be comprehensive, covering the entire curriculum, learning outcomes, methods of delivery, and testing procedures.   

  • Learner Motivation: Procedures must be developed to properly introduce the lesson and motivate students, ensuring that the initial interaction supports Gagne’s ‘Gain Attention’ requirement and sets a positive tone for the custom solution.  

 Comprehensive Evaluation and ROL (The ‘Impact’)

The Evaluation phase is the definitive step for justifying the investment in custom development. It must provide a verifiable “Chain of Evidence” that connects the learner’s experience directly to measured organizational outcomes.

The Kirkpatrick Four-Level Model (The Chain of Evidence)

The Kirkpatrick Model is the established standard for assessing program impact, moving systematically from satisfaction to business results.  

  • Level 1: Reaction: Measures learner satisfaction—whether participants found the training engaging, favorable, and relevant to their jobs. This is typically measured via post-course surveys.  

  • Level 2: Learning: Gauges the degree to which participants acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment established in the objectives. This is measured through summative assessments, demonstrations, and exams.  

  • Level 3: Behavior: The cornerstone of custom development validation, this level measures the degree to which participants successfully apply what they learned when they return to their real working environment. This relies heavily on instructional activities based on Merrill’s Integration principle  and often requires data collection via xAPI/LRS to track performance records and observational data outside the LMS.  

  • Level 4: Results: The ultimate metric, Level 4 measures the degree to which targeted organizational outcomes occur as a direct result of the initiative and subsequent support. This requires measuring Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), financial metrics (such as increased sales or reduced errors), and calculating the overall Return on Learning (ROL).  

Kirkpatrick Four Level Model for Custom eLearning Development

Achieving Level 4 results is predicated on success at Levels 1, 2, and 3. If organizational results are suboptimal, the designer must systematically backtrack through the Chain of Evidence to diagnose the point of failure: Was the behavior applied (L3)? Was the knowledge mastered (L2)? Was the training favorably received (L1)? This diagnostic discipline is crucial for budget justification and targeted revisions. 

Formative and Summative Assessment Strategies

Assessment instruments must be meticulously aligned with the corresponding learning objectives across all levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy.

  • Formative Assessment: This continuous, low-stakes process is used to check for understanding and adjust instruction dynamically throughout the course or during the pilot. Examples include embedded short checks, reflection prompts, and synchronous Q&A sessions.   
  • Summative Assessment: Used to gauge final achievement (Level 2). To validate mastery and the ability to transfer skills, summative tests must target Bloom’s higher-order thinking (Analyze, Evaluate, Create). This involves using complex instruments such as open-ended thesis statements requiring supporting evidence, problem-solving scenarios, or asking the learner to create a hypothetical assignment to test someone else’s understanding.   

The successful transition of skills from the learning environment to the workplace (Kirkpatrick Level 3) is dependent upon the confluence of instructional principles. Gagne’s final event, “Enhance Retention and Transfer” , and Merrill’s final principle, “Integration”, are structurally focused on achieving this critical step. Therefore, the instructional designer must ensure that Gagne’s final events (performance elicitation, feedback, and transfer) are explicitly built around Merrill’s application and integration activities, ensuring the course is fully optimized for real-world application.  

Establishing Revision Cycles and Continuous Improvement

The final phase of evaluation under the SAM model is designed to feed directly back into the Analysis/Preparation phase for the next content version. A formalized Revision Cycle must be established. Data derived from Kirkpatrick Levels 3 and 4 provide the definitive justification for content overhaul, resource allocation, and technological upgrades. This final feedback loop ensures the learning program remains adaptable and aligned with shifting organizational needs, technical standards (e.g., cmi5, HTML5), and measurable business impact.  

About Check N Click's eLearning Services

Check N Click specializes in custom eLearning development, with a specific expertise in Customer Education programs. Contact us today and book a free call to explore how we can help with our expert Instructional Design, eLearning, and Customer Education brilliance.

Contact Us!

Real-World Impact: Custom eLearning Outsourcing Case Studies for Customer Education

Consider a global technology company facing the daunting task of enabling over 500 international channel partners on a newly launched platform—all within a tight deadline. Lacking the internal bandwidth to create compelling, interactive learning, they turned to an outsourcing partner specializing in eLearning development.

Working alongside certified instructional designers and multimedia experts, the company rolled out a comprehensive digital training course in less than 3 months. The results spoke for themselves: support tickets from partners dropped significantly, and certification completion jumped by 40%. By bringing in an external team, they not only accelerated readiness but also delivered a polished, scalable learning experience that left a measurable mark on business outcomes.

Here is a summary of how our eLearning Outsourcing model has delivered high-impact results for clients with critical, time-sensitive needs in customer education:

Rapid Scaling and Building Learning Ecosystems from Zero

When urgency demands building an entire training infrastructure quickly, Check N Click delivers the complete solution.

  • From Zero to 70+ Courses: For an Austin-based SaaS Enterprise, we built a robust learning ecosystem from scratch, growing their portfolio to over 70 video courses, learning paths, and certifications, which over 11,000 unique learners have consumed.
  • Scaling for Global Giants: We helped one of the world’s largest software companies scale their operations over eight years, expanding their B2B and B2C training programs from 6 initial courses to a comprehensive curriculum. This strategic partnership contributed to an annual revenue increase of over $40 million generated from education passes.
Driving Revenue, Retention, and Partner Enablement

Training isn’t just a cost center; it’s a critical lever for business performance, especially when customer and partner success is on the line. As a specialized eLearning Vendor, we focus on content that drives bottom-line results.

  • Boosting Customer Retention: For a cloud-based machine data analytics company, our custom customer learning and development program led to a 15% decrease in customer churn and a 25% increase in Customer Lifetime Value (CLTV) within six months.
  • Partner Proficiency for Market Reach: We provided a scalable, structured partner enablement program for a media management platform, solving challenges like inconsistent product understanding and lack of certification. This resulted in increased partner proficiency and a scalable training process for global expansion.
Optimizing Quality and Accelerating Content Deployment

When deadlines are tight, quality cannot be sacrificed. Our rigorous eLearning Outsourcing process ensures high fidelity, instructional soundness, and accelerated deployment.

  • Process Optimization for Analytics: For a leading analytics company facing unrealistic deadlines and a learning curve with a new demo tool (Navattic), Check N Click implemented a structured process. This resulted in the delivery of timely, high-quality deliverables and increased efficiency in product demo creation.
  • Instructional Design for Technical Training: We rapidly improved the eLearning and training strategy for a machine data analytics company, creating visually-pleasing, technically accurate, and instructionally sound courses. Our team delivered 12 self-paced courses, 11 ILT courses, and 115 videos, with over 3,100 users certified.
  • Standardizing Client Communication: We transformed client-facing materials for a global technology leader, implementing standardized checklists, templates, and a style guide. This reduced last-minute revisions, improved efficiency, and enhanced overall client satisfaction.

For additional case studies, visit our case studies page.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Custom eLearning development, particularly for strategic corporate objectives, is an integrated process requiring the synergistic application of project management discipline, cognitive science, and technical foresight.

The analysis confirms that the successful execution of custom development requires a strategic departure from traditional linear models. The Agile SAM framework is recommended as the required project management methodology, as its iterative nature minimizes risk and maximizes responsiveness to critical SME feedback and organizational requirement shifts.  

From a pedagogical standpoint, the instructional blueprint must be grounded in Constructivist principles and centered on Merrill’s Task-centered approach. This ensures the content targets complex, authentic challenges necessary for skills transfer. The transition from knowledge acquisition (Kirkpatrick Level 2) to on-the-job performance (Level 3) must be explicitly engineered by integrating Merrill’s Integration principle and Gagne’s final events, thereby optimizing the training for behavior change.  

Technologically, the organization must adopt xAPI and a Learning Record Store (LRS) as mandatory tracking standards. Relying solely on SCORM will prevent the tracking of Level 3 behavior and Level 4 organizational results, thereby undermining the ability to calculate Return on Learning definitively. Furthermore, mandatory adherence to WCAG 2.1 Level AA is essential, as accessibility determines the fundamental capacity of the target audience to perceive and process the information, serving as a non-negotiable prerequisite for instructional success.  

Ultimately, the validity of the entire custom development endeavor rests upon the strength of the Learning Needs Analysis (LNA) conducted in Phase I, as it establishes the precise baseline against which Level 4 results are measured. Only by maintaining this unbroken Chain of Evidence—from the identified capability gap through design principles and robust xAPI tracking—can the organization realize and justify its investment in bespoke learning solutions.

About Check N Click's eLearning Services

Check N Click specializes in custom eLearning development, with a specific expertise in Customer Education programs. Contact us today and book a free call to explore how we can help with our expert Instructional Design, eLearning, and Customer Education brilliance.

Contact Us!
The Custom eLearning Development Process: From Conception to Launch

Building a custom eLearning solution is anything but generic—it’s a thoughtful, multi-stage journey that transforms learning goals into engaging, impactful experiences. Here’s how the process typically unfolds:

1. Comprehensive Needs Analysis

Every successful eLearning project starts by clarifying the ‘why’ behind the initiative. This phase goes beyond checking boxes; it’s about a deep dive into organizational objectives, learner challenges, and the desired business outcomes. Stakeholder interviews, learner surveys, and analysis of existing competencies often play a role here. The outcome? Crystal-clear priorities and a blueprint for what success should look like.

2. Instructional Design Planning

Once the needs are mapped, the focus shifts toward designing a targeted learning strategy. Instructional designers develop a framework that details learning objectives, content sequencing, and interactive components—think scenarios, quizzes, and simulations. The goal: architect a learning path that’s not only informative but also compelling enough to keep learners engaged and progressing.

3. Custom Content Creation

With the design established, attention turns to creating original content. This often involves weaving together text, graphics, animations, and video specifically tailored to the learners’ context. No cookie-cutter content here—each element is crafted to speak directly to the audience, leveraging relevant examples, branding, and cultural nuances.

4. Course Development and Quality Assurance

At this stage, everything comes together within a digital learning environment—whether using platforms like Articulate Storyline, Adobe Captivate, or custom development tools. Interactive elements, branching scenarios, and accessible design are integrated, with extensive testing conducted across devices and browsers. The aim is to ensure flawless performance and a frustration-free experience for every learner.

5. Implementation, Launch, and Support

With the course finalized, it’s rolled out to the intended audience, typically via a Learning Management System (LMS) such as Moodle, Cornerstone, or Workday Learning. But the journey doesn’t end at launch—ongoing support, data monitoring, and iterative updates are key to keeping the content fresh and the impact high.

Each step in the process is designed to maximize relevance and engagement, ensuring custom eLearning delivers not just knowledge, but measurable results for both learners and the organization.

Implementation and Post-Launch Support

Following technical integration and content packaging, the implementation stage encompasses deploying the course to the LMS or LRS environment, configuring appropriate access, and conducting system-level checks to confirm full operability across all target devices and browsers. The course is validated in situ to ensure that tracking (via SCORM, xAPI, or LTI) is functioning according to specification—and, critically, that data pipelines are established to facilitate meaningful ongoing reporting and analytics.

Support does not end at launch. Sustained post-implementation processes include:

  • Monitoring and Troubleshooting: Regular audits are conducted to confirm continued compatibility with evolving browsers, corporate firewalls, and assistive technologies. Initial learner access, performance, and engagement metrics are closely monitored to identify and quickly resolve any technical glitches or content access barriers.
  • Iterative Optimizations: Data gathered through SCORM or xAPI tracking feeds actionable intelligence back into the course lifecycle. This enables targeted revisions—whether updating out-of-date scenarios, refining navigation based on real usage, or addressing accessibility gaps.
  • Content Maintenance: Scheduled content reviews are built into the support plan, ensuring compliance with changing regulatory, policy, or product requirements.

This ongoing cycle—monitoring, data-driven optimization, and proactive maintenance—ensures that custom eLearning solutions remain robust, relevant, and measurable long after initial deployment.

Ensuring Consistency Across Geographies and Teams

A defining advantage of custom eLearning development is its built-in capacity to deliver a consistent learning experience, regardless of where learners are located or which teams they belong to. Unlike classroom training, which can vary depending on facilitator expertise, time constraints, or regional nuances, custom eLearning modules systematically standardize both content and delivery.

This uniformity means that critical knowledge, core competencies, and even subtle points of company culture are communicated identically—whether an employee is onboarding in Singapore, participating in regulatory training in Berlin, or upskilling remotely in Toronto. By centralizing subject matter expertise and institutionalizing best practices into a single version-controlled program, organizations eliminate variations that can occur with instructor-led approaches.

Such standardization is indispensable for distributed workforces or enterprises spanning multiple time zones, ensuring that operational procedures, compliance expectations, and foundational skills are understood and applied universally. In effect, custom eLearning serves as an equalizer—maintaining both the integrity of the curriculum and the organization’s standards at scale.

What Drives the Cost of Custom eLearning Development?

Determining the budget for custom eLearning is far from a simple equation. The final price tag depends on several interrelated factors, each of which wields strategic influence over the form, function, and effectiveness of the project.

  • Course Duration and Depth: The greater the scope—more modules, hours, or deeply layered content—the higher the development time and cost.
  • Complexity of Content: Advanced instructional approaches (think scenario-based branching, complex simulations, or intricate interactivity) require more sophisticated design, extensive SME input, and iterative testing cycles.
  • Level and Type of Multimedia: Integrating high-end animations, custom video production, audio narration, and branded graphics can dramatically escalate both timelines and expenses. For example, a course that mimics Duolingo’s interactive language activities will outpace a simple slideshow in cost and effort.
  • Integration Requirements: Connecting your new solution with existing Learning Management Systems (LMS) like Moodle, Blackboard, or Cornerstone—especially if there are bespoke data-tracking needs—may add notable time and complexity.
  • Accessibility and Localization: Ensuring Section 508 or WCAG compliance (and/or translating for global audiences in multiple languages) requires specialized design knowledge and additional testing, which can increase costs.
  • Depth of Learner Assessment: Formative and summative assessments—ranging from basic quizzes to robust, adaptive testing engines—each come with their own design and development requirements.

Simply put, custom eLearning is an investment in organizational capability and behavioral change—one that pays dividends in performance improvement, learner engagement, and measurable business outcomes over time.

Industries Where Custom eLearning Yields Maximum Impact

While the versatility of custom eLearning development means it can support organizations in virtually any sector, certain industries experience outsized benefits due to the complexity, sensitivity, or evolving nature of their training requirements.

For example:

  • Healthcare organizations must deliver up-to-date compliance training, onboarding for specialized roles, and ongoing skill development to meet stringent regulatory standards and deliver safe, effective care.
  • Financial services firms, from multinational banks to nimble fintech startups, rely on custom learning to manage risk, instill ethical practices, and stay ahead of shifting regulatory frameworks.
  • Manufacturing depends on custom eLearning to accelerate onboarding, communicate process changes, and uphold rigorous safety standards as technologies, equipment, and protocols evolve.
  • Technology companies require rapid development and deployment of training to ensure teams possess the latest technical skills in fast-moving digital environments.
  • Educational institutions and training providers turn to bespoke online modules to deliver differentiated learning experiences at scale, meeting diverse learner needs.

In each of these sectors, off-the-shelf solutions often miss the mark, while custom eLearning provides precisely the knowledge transfer and cultural integration needed to address unique organizational realities.