For example, many Learning Management Systems are developing technology that seeks to control the marketplace for e-Learning products by positioning themselves between purchasers and content creators. Many of the assumptions and evolving standards built into their infrastructure reflect "first generation" learning design and evaluation principles.

For example, the simple assumption that people need to be educated through formal "courses" or other pre-determined programs can eliminate the potential for a more flexible, "just in time" performance support " approach. Similarly, old-fashioned methods of evaluation where the system is in control of evaluating what is learned through "knowledge testing questions" or "on-line" time monitoring can have very negative impacts on employee motivation and the learning that results.

These old methods of evaluation - which have had a positive effect in the area of technical skills training because they are very appropriate in this arena -- can become an enormous problem when e-Learning is applied to "soft skills" and general management development.

To assess portal and Learning Management System flexibility ask the providers to ensure that innovative, flexible learning applications can be used through their system. Get them to demonstrate flexibility through specific examples. Make sure that your portal learning management decision is not going to lock yourself out of some of the most interesting learning design and content development activities now underway in the e-Learning field.

Universities pursue learning as an end in itself and the best do a wonderful job at this. Corporations, on the other hand, usually have a very different agenda and need to approach learning in a very different way. Why therefore, build your e-Learning activities around old university models with an emphasis on content learning, accreditation and instructor dominated courses?

Second generation e-Learning presents an alternative by allowing and encouraging "learner-led learning" where the instructor is always present but invisibly inside, allowing the learner to create understanding through concrete, job-based application of what is being learned. In buying e-Learning systems think performance support. Think about how the system can help people create and share usable knowledge, not just learn content for its own sake.

The second and third generation systems now appearing in the marketplace sell learning solutions that can self-organize around business and learner needs. In contrast to the first generation course based models, the system fits and mobilizes itself to meet the needs of the learner. The learner is not forced into a "one size fits all" educational mould.

In purchasing e-Learning systems and applications ask whether the system can self organize around your performance support needs instead of the reverse.

In the e-Learning world it is possible and desirable to pursue multiple paths at the same time.

Many organizations are moving too rapidly in putting all their eggs in one basket -- looking for the big system application that will meet all their needs. Time will tell, but this is probably a big mistake.

While big corporations like to find big solutions, there is much merit in moving forward in a more experimental mode, making sure that you don't lock yourself out of crucial second and third generation developments. The biggest danger of unfavorable "lock-out" at the moment is probably posed by the large-scale Learning Management Systems that are seeking to control the e-Learning marketplace by acquiring an overly dominant position.