![\""Can](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide2.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nAt the University of Southampton, we\u2019ve developed a systematic approach to transform vague requests into realistic, evidence-based project plans. Here\u2019s how.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The challenge: vague requests and unrealistic expectations<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Colleagues often approach us with urgent deadlines and minimal detail. They might know the topic and desired duration, but not the learning outcomes, platform requirements, or compliance needs. Yet they expect a reasonable quote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Without understanding scope and complexity, any figure is guesswork. A simple text-based module might take 120 hours, while an immersive simulation could require 750 hours or more. The difference is huge – and stakeholders rarely appreciate this upfront.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Why systematic scoping matters<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Whether you\u2019re in higher education, corporate training, or healthcare, the underlying challenge is the same: you need to uncover true project complexity before making estimates. This isn\u2019t just about costing – it\u2019s about resource allocation, timeline planning, and quality assurance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Our framework draws on industry benchmarks like Chapman Alliance\u2019s 2010 study and recent data from ATD and Christy Tucker. For example:<\/p>\n\n\n\n These figures include compliance, accessibility, SME involvement, and review cycles – factors often overlooked in quick estimates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Several elements can dramatically increase development time:<\/p>\n\n\n\n These multipliers often surprise stakeholders – and they\u2019re why systematic questioning is essential.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We created a structured question set<\/a> covering:<\/p>\n\n\n\n This transforms the conversation from \u201cgive me a quote\u201d to \u201clet\u2019s define what\u2019s feasible.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n To support this process, we built an Excel-based calculator that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s not just a costing tool – it\u2019s an educational tool that helps colleagues understand what quality e-learning really involves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And perhaps most importantly, better working relationships – because transparency builds trust.<\/p>\n\n\n\n You don\u2019t need the full calculator to begin. Start with the 20-question framework<\/a>. Track actual project time honestly. Compare estimates to actual time taken. Over time, you\u2019ll build your own evidence base and improve accuracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The \u201cpiece of string\u201d problem is solvable – not perfectly, but well enough to change how we work and how we\u2019re perceived.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We\u2019re piloting this framework during 2025\/26. We are currently working on redeveloping the media production costing. If you\u2019d like to collaborate on sector-wide benchmarking, get in touch: Tamsyn Smith<\/strong> \u2013 T.M.Smith@soton.ac.uk<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n ‘How long is a piece of string?’ presentation delivered at ALTC25<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n This resource provides a comprehensive framework of 20 scoping questions designed to guide initial discussions between learning designers and subject matter experts (SMEs) when planning eLearning projects, particularly those with clinical or healthcare content.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The document systematically addresses critical project planning areas including strategic alignment, stakeholder management, learning design approaches, assessment strategies, accessibility requirements, technical specifications, and resource allocation. It incorporates evidence-based time estimates for different levels of content complexity (basic to advanced) and includes specific cost projections based on development hours.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Key features include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n This resource would be particularly valuable for learning designers initiating healthcare or clinically-focused eLearning projects, project managers establishing realistic timelines and budgets, or institutions seeking to standardise their eLearning scoping processes. The framework ensures comprehensive early-stage planning whilst managing scope, compliance requirements, and stakeholder expectations effectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This framework has been developed specifically for healthcare and clinical eLearning projects within a university setting. Users should adapt the questions to reflect their own institutional context, regulatory requirements, and content areas. Remove or modify healthcare-specific elements (such as clinical accuracy validation cycles) if working in non-clinical domains.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The development time multipliers and hourly rates provided are indicative and based on specific institutional rates and circumstances. Recalculate these figures to reflect your own staffing costs, institutional overheads, and local market rates for media production. Time estimates may also vary depending on your team’s experience and available tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Not all 20 question areas will be relevant for every project. Smaller-scale projects may require only a subset of these questions, whilst larger, more complex initiatives might benefit from the full framework. Use this as a starting point and select the sections most pertinent to your specific project requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ensure that referenced standards (such as WCAG 2.1 AA) remain current, as accessibility guidelines and regulatory requirements evolve over time. Replace or supplement these with any additional standards relevant to your jurisdiction or professional context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This framework should complement, not replace, existing institutional project management or quality assurance processes. Align the scoping questions with your organisation’s established workflows, approval mechanisms, and documentation requirements to avoid duplication or confusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This evidence-based Excel calculator provides comprehensive time and cost estimates for eLearning development projects within higher education and healthcare contexts. The tool generates detailed project costings by incorporating multiple variables including content duration, platform selection, authoring tool requirements, scenario complexity, assessment specifications, compliance levels, and media production needs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The calculator draws on peer-reviewed research and industry benchmarks (Chapman Alliance, 2010; ATD Research, 2023; Tucker, 2025) to produce realistic development time multipliers for different authoring tools and complexity levels. It automatically calculates platform-specific development hours (ranging from basic platform creation to advanced tools such as Articulate Storyline 360), applies appropriate compliance multipliers for WCAG 2.1 AA, PSBAR, and European Accessibility Act requirements, and generates risk assessments based on project specifications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Key features include automatic platform selection based on target audience (Blackboard Ultra for students, Totara for staff, Course Catalog for external professionals), dynamic cost breakdowns showing development hours and associated costs, scenario-based learning calculations with complexity ratings, and integrated risk assessment with mitigation strategies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The calculator is particularly suited for learning designers, project managers, and academic staff planning eLearning projects who require accurate budget estimates and timeline projections. It includes comprehensive maintenance documentation and lookup tables that can be updated to reflect changing institutional rates and industry standards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The calculator uses specific hourly rates and cost structures that reflect University of Southampton’s internal pricing model. Before using this tool in another institution, update all financial figures in the ‘Lookup_Tables’ sheet to reflect your own staffing costs, overheads, and media production rates. Annual licence costs for authoring tools should also be verified against current vendor pricing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The calculator includes platform-specific configurations (Blackboard Ultra, Totara, Course Catalog) that auto-select based on target audience. Adapt these platform options and their associated development time multipliers to match your institution’s learning management systems and hosting arrangements. Remove or add platforms as appropriate for your context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Whilst the calculator is based on Chapman Alliance (2010), ATD Research (2023), and Tucker (2025) benchmarks, development times vary significantly across institutions depending on team experience, available resources, and quality expectations. Validate the time multipliers against your own institutional data and adjust accordingly. Consider conducting pilot projects to calibrate estimates to your specific context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The compliance levels reflect UK higher education regulatory requirements (PSBAR, WCAG 2.1 AA) and European Accessibility Act standards. Modify these to reflect your jurisdiction’s accessibility legislation and institutional policies. Remove EAA compliance options if not relevant to your geographic context, or add additional regulatory frameworks as needed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The dropdown menu of authoring tools reflects tools available at University of Southampton. Update this list to include only tools available within your institution, and adjust the associated development time multipliers based on your team’s proficiency with each tool. Remove tools your institution does not licence to avoid confusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The calculator uses named ranges and complex formula dependencies across multiple sheets. After making any modifications to the ‘Lookup_Tables’ or ‘Calculations’ sheets, thoroughly test all formula outputs to ensure calculations remain accurate. The ‘Maintenance_Guide’ sheet provides detailed documentation of the calculator’s architecture to support this process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The scenario complexity levels (simple, moderate, complex) are defined by decision point counts that may not align with your institutional definitions. Review these thresholds and adjust both the categorical definitions and their associated development time multipliers to reflect your team’s typical scenario development workflows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This calculator focuses specifically on development time and cost estimation. Integrate its outputs with your institution’s broader project management frameworks, quality assurance processes, and approval workflows. The tool should complement, not replace, existing governance structures for eLearning development projects.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Solving the e-learning costing conundrum The impossible request Have you ever been asked, \u201cCan you just give me a quick quote for some e-learning?\u201d with no details about scope, audience, or complexity? If so, you\u2019ll know the frustration of the<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":901,"featured_media":9074,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-9068","page","type-page","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"Beyond](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide3.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nBuilding on research: evidence-based time allocation<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
![\"Building](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide4.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nWhat drives complexity?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
![\"What](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide5.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nOur solution: 20 essential questions<\/a><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
![\"From](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide6.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nThe calculator: From inputs to insights<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide7.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide8.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nBenefits we\u2019ve seen so far<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
![\"Before](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide11.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nGetting started<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"Your](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide12.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nKey takeaways<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
![\"Current](\"https:\/\/generic.wordpress.soton.ac.uk\/digital-learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/321\/2025\/11\/Slide14.jpeg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nWant to learn more?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Key research cited:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\nAssociated resources<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Essential scoping questions for SME discussion<\/a><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Advice for reuse<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Contextualisation is essential<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Adjust time and cost estimates<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Tailor the scope to project scale<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Update compliance and accessibility standards<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Integrate with existing processes<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
UoS eLearning cost calculator V2<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Advice for reuse<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Update institutional rates and costs<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Verify platform compatibility<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Review evidence sources and benchmarks<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Adapt compliance requirements<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Customise authoring tool options<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Test all formula dependencies<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Adjust scenario complexity definitions<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Align with existing project management processes<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n