Forum Discussion
elearning as an evidence package for legal team
I'm looking for some advice from others using Articulate Storyline and Rise.
Our organization is responsible for providing copies of completed training to our legal team when courses are involved in litigation or other legal matters. Historically, this was straightforward because our courses were primarily click-and-read, and we could provide a Word document containing the course script.
As our courses have become much more interactive, with scenarios, branching, knowledge checks, drag-and-drops, simulations, and other learner interactions, we're finding that a traditional script no longer accurately represents what the learner actually experienced.
For those of you using Storyline or Rise, what do you provide to your legal, compliance, or records management teams when they need a legally defensible copy of a course?
- Do you still create a script? If so, what does it include?
- Do you archive videos, screenshots, source files, SCORM packages, or something else?
- Have you developed a standard "evidence package" for each published course?
- If your legal team prefers a searchable document, how are you balancing that need with accurately documenting interactive content?
I'm especially interested in hearing from government, healthcare, financial services, or other highly regulated organizations, but I'd appreciate insights from anyone who's established a sustainable process.
Thanks in advance for sharing what's worked or what you've learned the hard way!
7 Replies
I developed a lot of courses for a company in the highly regulated medical-device industry. For reviews, I'd create Word documents that included a 2-column table. In each row on the left, I inserted a screenshot of a slide (or block). As needed, I added notes about interactions and would use extra rows to show that content. Reviewers entered their comments in the column on the right. I'd respond to comments by graying out the old row, and inserting an updated screenshot in a new row. (Even after Review 360 was implemented, we still used this method.)
One of the great things about this was, when everything was finalized, I could simply delete the right-hand column and the "old" rows to get a detailed version of the final course. That's what the legal folks would give when the FDA wanted to see what was in it. It wasn't searchable, but I never got any pushback about that.
Yes, this method is labor intensive. But it does provide an excellent record of the content.
Hi Judy, thanks for your response! We have an effective review process; what I'm looking for is what are others doing that need to provide their course to legal teams to defend in court. For example, an employee violates a security policy or sexual harassment policy, and our legal team takes our product to court as evidence that they were aware of and had acknowledged those policies. In the past with courses that were primarily text and/or narration, we provided a text version that could be used in court to describe what was seen and heard. Now with very interactive courses, a text version is not really indicitive of the participant's live experience. Are others providing video versions of the course along with word versions? What are you providing as evidence packages to your legal teams? I'm hoping to learn others' best practices.
Let me clarify: The legal team got a document with screenshots and notes about interactions. That showed the images and text that a user would have seen in the course. (For this company, it started as a review file. But such a document could be created just for legal purposes.)
The LMS tracked course completion, which usually meant passing a quiz at the end of the course.
That combination could be used to show that an employee or contractor had been given the content in the policy/procedure covered by the course.
In some cases, there was also a read-and-acknowledge attached to the actual policy/procedure document.
And, as I recall, we sometimes put an acknowledgement statement into a course.
Super interesting question! I agree with what SinaHa shared as a great first option, but I'm wondering if others here do anything different/more comprehensive to deal with some of the more interactive formats you mentioned, since of course a PDF isn't going to accurately display an interaction or video.
I would also be curious what your legal team's guidance is on the level of detail they need—requisite "I am not a lawyer," but my guess is that what they'd deem sufficient would vary from organization to organization based on the industry and risk tolerance. For some a PDF that just gives a record of what was in the course might be fine while for others they may need a much more high-fidelity record.
Curious to see how this conversation evolves, and generally curious what other compliance stuff like this L&D folks are managing regularly. Interesting topic.Thanks, Noele! Our legal team LOVES the text version, of course. lol It is the most convenient way for them to scan verbiage and pull out just what they want. Over time though, as our courses have really evolved into a much more interactive and immersive experience, we're concerned that a transcript could be interpreted as a complete representation of the course when it really isn't. We're confident that we'll have to put more effort into the evidence package that we provide them, and we're also confident that we have a sales job ahead of us to convince the legal team that this is the 'new best practice'. Having others in our industry back up what is now being used for their legal teams will give us some assistance with our 'sell'. Thanks for commenting on this thread!
Absolutely, that makes a ton of sense! Thanks for starting this conversation :)
SandyMyers, The simplest way to meet these requirements is to provide a PDF version of the course to those who need it. [Publish/Export as PDF]
