We can define thee-learning as a product of technical thinking that applies to learning processes and transfers new efficiency and standardization processes to them within training. The advantages can be obvious, first of all by getting one cost reduction compared to traditional corporate training, but also obtaining a greater availability of expandable fruition times and a multiplicity of delivery tools and, last but not least, the possibility of assessing and 'measuring' the results obtained in a short time.

However, considering e-learning as an optimization and rationalization of learning and training processes would end up being an excessive reduction of the problem, becoming only a mere 'industrialization' of learning processes within companies and public administrations where uses.

If we interviewed some people who had the opportunity to experiment with online courses, we would most likely have negative comments among the answers, regarding the rarefaction, if not the absence, of relations with teachers or content tutors, with colleagues who have followed the same course individually, or we may even hear people who have 'undergone' the course as a bureaucratic imposition disconnected from the essential objectives of the person and the company itself.

Relationship problems within e-learning can be strongly contained, if not eliminated, by providing the course with specific spaces in which they can become accessible direct discussions with the teachers, with content tutors, and also with other colleagues who elsewhere but at the same time, are following the same training course.

Furthermore, if you look closely, the problem of the real effectiveness of a training course is not exclusive to e-learning, but we find it exactly the same also in traditional training, when this is not carried out in optimal conditions.

The central point of the training, whether traditional or digital, is of a completely different order. Any company, private or public, that puts in place products or services, realizes two types of values, a value object-economic (which materializes in the final product or service offered) and an intrinsic value that is related to active involvement of intelligences, people, attentions that operate within it, interacting with each other constantly with different roles.

This second production of value, a value that we can define as relational, is of great importance for growth of the business system and its production of value and meaning coincides precisely with the active involvement of the people who work in the company. Often the relational value, in its immateriality, is little observed and valued despite its enormous potential. In fact, the value of a company that knows how to enhance and promote its relational value, enhances and promotes the active involvement of its members, rather than dividing the individual job description into a series of circumscribed and repeatable actions (as happened in the Taylor system) . This allows the company to be able to produce the new and manage change. Ours, in its entirety, is a society of continuous change, along an acceleration on a geometric scale, and every company that can survive internally as a bearer of innovations, is a company capable of managing the change itself, from which it is conveyed and which carries itself.

The awareness of the production of a double value, object and relational, and its effective management coincides with the effectiveness of the company and the well-being of its members. Relational knowledge also affects the internal training systems of the company. Through the awareness of the double value and its correct management, the company activates an internal culture capable of promote participation active of the members that make it up, and it is a virtuous circle that benefits the company and its employees.

Relationship is a polysemantic term to which we prefer to attribute the meaning of 'attributing and receiving meaning'. Attribute and receive are linked to the strictly recursive structure of the two elements, where, as occurs in all systemic phenomena, in a circular causality, each is the cause and effect of the other.

A primitive man who sees a sheep does two essential cognitive operations. A first work on the external world where he attributes a new meaning to the external world when the individual understands that the sheep is a herbivorous animal, different from the lion, tameable. The second cognitive operation operates on the internal dimensions for which he makes him, as a nomadic hunter, a sedentary shepherd. Both cognitive operations define and determine the other. But the relational knowledge of himself as a shepherd allows man a new system of relationship with the external world in which he lives, with the other men with whom he speaks, with himself, endowed with a new identity essence. The double cognitive operation produces two effects, one linked to a new definition of the external world, and the second, relational, produces, as a value, sense and meaning.

Learning is the most valuable ability and skill we have.

The same happens in the company that is committed to promoting and managing double value, where a person actively involved in a permanent training circuit, the current need of every growing company, is the bearer of a new relational sensitivity within the company. and outside of it. As the company is itself the bearer of the new, and recalled by the need for the new produced in the market in which it operates in the same circular causality, and conveyed by a highly competitive system, so still every person involved in this virtuous cycle is itself recalled. continuous improvement and active bearer of continuous improvement, following the same type of recursive relationship.

The essential objective of any training is to be able to value the relational knowledge that each person has within himself. Probably every rich, vital and continuously growing company has within it an unmeasured (and perhaps not measurable) form of internal e-learning without e-learning, in continuous information exchanges, in the process of continuous communication of knowledge that they are shared jointly, where the exchange of knowledge and techniques is also an exchange of meaning and sense. This form of value is a form of value that must be valued and shared.
Relational value is a value of meaning and meaning, because new knowledge and skills determine actions and awareness endowed with meaning and meaning. A virtuous corporate circuit produces meaning and meaning and this enhances the person and the process of constant growth to which it is referred, not so much or only by the growing competence needs of a growing company, but also by growth needs with a sense and meaning that is proper to each person who activates a relational mode rich, effective and healthy.

The fact that the economic reward is not the element that actively moves people within a company, whether private or public, is a fact known in the literature since the very distant times of Majo, when it was discovered, with a a certain surprise that, far from the apparent 'scientific' perfectionism of Taylorism, new elements that had not been seen before, such as the almost imponderable, intervened in the effective production process 'human factor'.

To bring about innovation it is necessary to be able to positively leverage the emotions of the people involved, do it, indifferently, with traditional training or with its evolution which is the e-learning, determining a situation in which the active person not only autonomously decides on the times of his learning process, but has the ability to actively intervene also on the contents of the training itself.

When we talk about tout curt training, or e-learning which is its most current evolutionary form, "it is a cognitive infrastructure on which the production of value, in economic and sense terms, of the organization circulates”(P. Zocchi - The sense of organization - E-book).

E-learning must be considered more an evolution of training than an innovation of the same. Where innovation is an autopoietic process that manifests itself through the introduction of new methodologies, techniques or tools. Evolution, on the other hand, is an active product of the subjects involved, that is, of the active subjects who operate in the ecological system in which the company operates and lives.

If innovation is our recent technological past, evolution is the present and the future.

Share on:

Share on LinkedIn