Abstract
The “perfect” orchestration of training participants, IT and process design is one of the ongoing challenges within blended learning service research and practice. Blended learning services (BLS) offer a great variety of options to design learning processes, overcoming many shortcomings of pure e-learning services and providing better scalability and more advantages for learners than pure face-to-face class teaching. Nevertheless, due to inconclusive results of blended learning design research in the literature, BLS designers can hardly find support for the systematic design of efficient and successful blended learning processes, which would enable a high degree of learning success with a balanced degree of delivery effort. Based on major determinants of BLS processes’ quality, the authors identify, develop, and evaluate design principles for high performance BLS using an action design research approach. They first derive a set of initial design principles, based on insights from literature and own exploratory case studies as well as workshops with experts from the field. They then improve the design principles iteratively in expert workshops as well as apply the design principles in four software training sessions. Finally, they present seven evaluated design principles for BLS, which are the core of a nascent design theory and contribute to a time-efficient and successful BLS delivery. Furthermore, these principles enable practitioners to systematically apply the design knowledge formalized within the principles in order to improve BLS design and delivery.



Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arbaugh JB (2001) How instructor immediacy behaviors affect student satisfaction and learning in web-based courses. Bus Comm Q 64(4):42–54. doi:10.1177/108056990106400405
Arthur WJ, Bennett WJ, Edens PS, Bell ST (2003) Effectiveness of training in organizations: a meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. J Appl Psychol 88(2):234
Bitzer S, Klein M, Schumann M (2011) Approaches to improve teachers’ use of groupware. Knowl Manag E Learn 3(2):271–289
Bitzer P, Soellner M, Leimeister JM (2013) Evaluating the quality of technology-mediated learning services. In: International conference on information systems, Milano
Colquitt JA, LePine JA, Noe RA (2000) Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: a meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. J Appl Psychol 85(5):678–707
Cuthbert PF (1996) Managing service quality in HE: is SERVQUAL the answer? Part 1. Manag Serv Qual Int J 6(2):11–16
Delone WH (2003) The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. J Manag Inf Syst 19(4):9–30
Evans C, Gibbons NJ (2007) The interactivity effect in multimedia learning. Comput Educ 49(4):1147–1160
Fitzsimmons JA, Fitzsimmons MJ (2011) Service management – operations, strategy, information technology, 7th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
Fließ S, Kleinaltenkamp M (2004) Blueprinting the service company: managing service processes efficiently. J Bus Res 57(4):392–404
Frost FA, Kumar M (2000) INTSERVQUAL – An internal adaptation of the GAP model in a large service organisation. J Serv Mark 14(5):358–377
Garrison DR, Kanuka H (2004) Blended learning: uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet High Educ 7(2):95–105
Gartner (2012a) ERP Training Best Practices. Worldwide
Gartner (2012b) Forecast: Enterprise software markets, worldwide, 2011–2016, 2q12 update
Graham CR (2006) Blended learning systems – Definition, current trends, and future directions. In: Bonk CJ, Graham CR (eds) The handbook of blended learning: global perspectives, local designs, Chapter 1.1. Pfeiffer, San Francisco
Gregor S (2006) The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Q 30(3):611–642
Gregor S, Hevner AR (2013) Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. Manag Inf Syst Q 37(2):337–355
Gregor S, Jones D (2007) The anatomy of a design theory. J Assoc Inf Syst 8(5):312–335
Greller W, Drachsler H (2012) Translating learning into numbers: a generic framework for learning analytics. Educ Technol Soc 15(3):42–57
Grönroos C, Ojasalo K (2004) Service productivity: towards a conceptualization of the transformation of inputs into economic results in services. J Bus Res 57(4):414–423. doi:10.1016/s0148-2963(02)00275-8
Grönroos C, Voima P (2013) Critical service logic: making sense of value creation and co-creation. J Acad Market Sci 41(2):133–150
Gupta S, Bostrom RP (2009) Technology-mediated learning: a comprehensive theoretical model. J Assoc Inf Syst 10(9):686–714
Gupta S, Bostrom RP, Huber M (2010) End-user training methods: what we know, need to know. ACM SIGMIS Database 41(4):9–39
Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Q 28(1):75–105
Hilton T, Hughes T, Chalcraft D (2012) Service co-creation and value realisation. J Market Manag 28(13–14):1504–1519
Kim J, Kwon Y, Cho D (2011) Investigating factors that influence social presence and learning outcomes in distance higher education. Comput Educ 57(2):1512–1520
Kirkpatrick D, Kirkpatrick J (2005) Transferring learning to behavior: using the four levels to improve performance. Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco
Kleinaltenkamp M (2013) Nutzungsprozesse – Die vernachlässigte Seite der Wertschöpfung. In: Schmitz G (ed) Theorie und Praxis des Dienstleistungsmarketing. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–25
Ladhari R (2009) A review of twenty years of SERVQUAL research. Int J Qual Serv Sci 1(2):172–198
Lehtinen E, Hakkarainen K, Lipponen L, Rahikainen M, Muukkonen H (1999) Computer supported collaborative learning: a review. The JHGI Giesbers reports on education 10
Leimeister JM (2012) Dienstleistungsengineering und -management. Springer Gabler, Berlin
Leimeister JM (2015) Einführung in die Wirtschaftsinformatik. Springer, Berlin
Lewis RC, Booms BH (1983) The marketing aspects of service quality. Emerg Perspect Servic Market 65(4):99–107
Lin HF (2007) Measuring online learning systems success: applying the updated DeLone and McLean model. CyberPsychol Behav 10(6):817–820
Lindgren R, Henfridsson O, Schultze U (2004) Design principles for competence management systems: a synthesis of an action research study. MIS Q 28(3):435–472
McLaughlin CP, Coffey S (1990) Measuring productivity in services. Int J Serv Ind Manag 1(1):46–64
Melville N, Kraemer K, Gurbaxani V (2004) Review: information technology and organizational performance: An integrative model of IT business value. MIS Q 28(2):283–322
Menschner P, Peters C, Leimeister JM (2011) Engineering knowledge-intense, person-oriented services – A state of the art analysis. In: 19th European conference on information systems, Helsinki
Ozkan S, Koseler R (2009) Multi-dimensional students’ evaluation of e-learning systems in the higher education context: an empirical investigation. Comput Educ 53(4):1285–1296. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.011
Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL (1988) Servqual. J Retail 64(1):12–37
Patton MQ (2005) Qualitative research. Wiley, New York
Petter S, DeLone W, McLean ER (2012) The past, present, and future of “IS success”. J Assoc Inf Syst 13(5):341–362
Pintrich PR, De Groot EV (1990) Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. J Educ Psychol 82(1):33
Rasch T, Schnotz W (2009) Interactive and non-interactive pictures in multimedia learning environments: effects on learning outcomes and learning efficiency. Learn Instr 19(5):411–422
Ray G, Muhanna WA, Barney JB (2005) Information technology and the performance of the customer service process: a resource-based analysis. MIS Q 29(4):625–652. doi:10.2307/25148703
Romme AGL, Endenburg G (2006) Construction principles and design rules in the case of circular design. Organ Sci 17(2):287–297
Sein M, Henfridsson O, Purao S, Rossi M, Lindgren R (2011) Action design research. MIS Q 35(1):37–56
Seyda S, Werner D (2012) IW-Weiterbildungserhebung 2011. Vierteljahresschrift zur empirischen Wirtschaftsforschung, Köln
Sims R (2003) Promises of interactivity: aligning learner perceptions and expectations with strategies for flexible and online learning. Distance Educ 24(1):87–103
Smith SM, Woody PC (2000) Interactive effect of multimedia instruction and learning styles. Teach Psychol 27(3):220–223
Thurmond V, Wambach K (2004) Understanding interactions in distance education: a review of the literature. Int J Instr Technol Distance Learn 1(1)
van Aken JE (2004) Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: the quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. J Manag Stud 41(2):219–246
Vollmar M (2013) Berufliche Weiterbildung in Unternehmen 2010. Wirtschaft und Statistik, H 4:276–287
Wegener R, Menschner P, Leimeister JM (2012) Design and evaluation of a didactical service blueprinting method for large scale lectures. In: International conference on information systems, Orlando
Weiss JW, Thorogood A, Clark KD (2007) Three IT-business alignment profiles: technical resource, business enabler, and strategic weapon. Comm Assoc Inf Syst 18(1):33
Wu J-H, Tennyson RD, Hsia T-L (2010) A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Comput Educ 55(1):155–164
Zeithaml VA, Parasuraman A, Berry LL (1985) Problems and strategies in services marketing. J Mark 49(2):33–46
Zeithaml VA, Berry LL, Parasuraman A (1988) Communication and control processes in the delivery of service quality. J Mark 52(2):35–48
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Accepted after two revisions by Prof. Dr. Becker.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
About this article
Cite this article
Bitzer, P., Söllner, M. & Leimeister, J.M. Design Principles for High-Performance Blended Learning Services Delivery. Bus Inf Syst Eng 58, 135–149 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-015-0403-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-015-0403-3