I’ve been involved in e-learning for more than 20 years and one constant truth during this time is that the LMS is dying.
But it’s dying slowly – much like you and I are. It’s aging, showing its wrinkles, but still very much alive. Despite ongoing advancements, the LMS is still clinging on, although perhaps more out of necessity than choice. For many users of e-learning the LMS is the first point of entry to learning; the front-of-house of our industry. So I thought it was worth thinking a bit about how that first impression has evolved over the years and where it might go next…
The Corporate LMS: Two Interfaces in One
The LMS is unique in that it has always needed two interfaces: one for administrators to upload, sequence, and assign content, and another for employees to actually use. The admin side is often clunky – no worse than any typical B2B software (looking at you, Salesforce) – but the learner-facing side is something else entirely. It’s expected to meet consumer-level standards.
It’s a bit of an outrage that LMS vendors don’t get more credit for managing this balancing act. They have to design two interfaces, yet they’re rarely acknowledged for it. Unlike most internal software (like accounting or sales tools), the LMS has to cater to both worlds.
The Three Phases of LMS Design
We’ve spent over 20 years iterating on what the learner interface should look like. In my view, there have been three major eras (so far):
Version 1: Minecraft for Learning
Fifteen years ago, most LMSs were built around “blocks” – literal rectangles that contained widgets. These blocks could display your calendar, upcoming courses, or whatever else you needed. If you wanted more functionality, you added more blocks. As long as you were happy with rectangles, you could configure your LMS to your heart’s content.
This era lasted far longer than it probably should have. In fact, many organizations are still using block-based LMSs today.
Version 2: The Netflix Era
Fast forward to the latter half of the 2010s, and we entered what I’ll call the Netflix Era. Instead of blocks, LMSs began to adopt a more consumer-friendly design—horizontal scrollable playlists, similar to what you see on streaming platforms. Configuration took a backseat as UI/UX professionals prioritized a clean, cohesive look.
This shift brought consistency. Walk past any booth at a learning tech conference, and most LMSs look similar: a banner, scrollable playlists, and a navigation bar on the left. The problem? Choice overload. Just like on Netflix, learners are presented with too many options. Except, unlike TV viewers, employees aren’t visiting the LMS for fun. They were there to tick off a requirement for their job.
Version 2.5: The Recommendation Engine
To address this choice overload, LMSs started incorporating recommendation engines. By analyzing more granular details beyond job titles, the system could suggest content more relevant to individual learners.
However, this approach comes with its own set of challenges. For recommendation engines to work well, content needs to be properly tagged with relevant skills. But this doesn’t always capture the full scope of what’s covered in the course content. To go deeper requires a heavy human-led lift, or, more-likely, a sophisticated automation process, probably powered by some sort of AI (but even the best generative models struggle with consistency still in this regards).
But let’s not forget that many learners are only visiting the LMS because they have to. No amount of playlists or recommendations will change the fact that they’re not there for a casual scroll – they’re there to complete mandatory tasks.
Version 3: Into the Future
We are still very much still at v2.5 or below for the most part. Today, its easy to look forward and suggest that the next step in this evolution may involve conversational interfaces. Capabilities like generative AI could make LMS search boxes more intelligent, leading to smoother, more intuitive experiences. A learner might ask, “What should I learn today?” and receive personalized suggestions.
But there’s a catch. Most LMSs haven’t yet indexed all of their content properly. If the LLM powering the search hasn’t consumed all relevant material, the results may vary wildly. And, again, most employees aren’t coming to the LMS to “chat.” They’re there because they’ve been told to be. Adding conversational elements might solve some problems, but it could also feel unnecessary for people who just want to get in, do their training, and get out. The roll of smarter search and chatting probably revolves more around your broader expectations of learner journeys than the tech itself.
An Alternate Version 3: No Interface at All?
Here’s a more radical thought: maybe the future of the LMS is no interface at all.
Most employees visit the LMS to complete assigned tasks. So why are we still designing LMSs as destinations? Perhaps the solution is to integrate learning more seamlessly into the tools people already use, or will start using shortly, bypassing the LMS interface entirely.
The Role of SCORM and Generative AI
A lot of this boils down to technical limitations. Much of our compliance-oriented content is still loaded in SCORM format, which was designed for interoperability between content and systems. Back in the day, content was expensive to produce – £20,000+ per hour of learning – so you needed a system like SCORM to ensure that content could be used across platforms.
But we’re entering a new era with generative AI. Tools are emerging that can create multimedia content instantly, reducing production times from days to minutes. This isn’t “rapid authoring” – it’s instant answers. As the cost (or even the need) of creating content falls, the need for complex interoperability will fade away.
We already have standards like xAPI for tracking learner progress. The obsession with launching interoperable content via SCORM could give way to a simpler model: create anywhere, access anywhere.
The Death of the LMS?
So, what happens when the cost / need of creating content drops to zero? The LMS as a centralized hub may no longer be necessary. Why purchase a system just to house content when learners can get answers anywhere and access experiences directly?
You’ll still need an LMS-like system for regulatory content creation, business rules, versioning, and tracking progress. But these are administrative functions, not end-user features. There’s no reason learners should have to visit a new interface just to complete a course. We might be looking at a future with just one interface for LMS – and that would be an administrators view only.
The Future of E-Learning: A World Without LMS User Interfaces?
The next generation of e-learning interfaces might not be an “interface” for users at all. Instead, we’ll likely see learning integrated into the tools and workflows employees already use. As AI continues to evolve and content creation becomes faster and cheaper, the need for a standalone LMS as we know it will diminish.
So, is the LMS really dying? Yes – but like everything else in enterprise tech, it’s dying slowly, and it’s not quite ready to say its final goodbyes.