It’s clear that “Digital Learning Asset Framework” is not a very good name.
What’s not clear is what would make a better name.
When this initiative began, we went for a temporary name that was merely descriptive to the effort. Unfortunately, it has not yet been replaced…and it’s a mouthful!
Also, it can also be misleading to those outside of L&D. “Asset” is particularly troublesome. When we use that word, it is not meant in the financial sense (such as “asset allocation”), nor is it meant to be depreciable on anyone’s balance sheet.
The “Learning” part also leads to common misunderstandings in the Learning & Development field. We are using a literal interpretation of the term. This is so frequently misused in L&D as to be downright confusing to professionals who use “Training” and “Learning” interchangeably.
Use of the word “Digital” is less than ideal as well. As several people have pointed out, while the scope of this initiative was only digital media, the core principles and the framework structure itself could be extended to other forms of training delivery, such as instructor led trainings. So the “Digital” part is true for now, but it may not always be a necessary limitation.
As for “Framework,” the connotation is a bit academic. It doesn’t sound nearly as practical and real-world as it is. Capturing the business logic isn’t an esoteric exercise, it is a way to do science that the business cares about, a way to structure knowledge and validate it so we can do good work. Alas, it doesn’t quite sound that way.
So with version 1.1, we would very much like to introduce a better name. Something that has some marketing flair and communicates clearly. Perhaps an acronym of some sort that’s better than “DLAF”?
Do you have a suggestion? We’d love to hear it! Please add it in the comments below.