Instructional design is an inherently social job. Instructional designers rely on a variety of relationships to get their jobs done, from faculty and subject matter experts (SMEs) to their supervisors, other departments within the institution, and even other instructional designers outside of the institution. Participants expressed the ability to interact, network, and collaborate with others as central to the feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction that they felt in their jobs.
All of the participants interviewed for this study articulated the social nature of their work. When asked about her job on a day to day basis, Leah explained, “there are two main components to my job … a big part of it, I would say is building and maintaining relationships with people.” Sadie identified that part of her responsibility in her instructional design is as a “peacekeeper,” and stated, “it's this potpourri of personalities and trying to work together, but I think the instructional designer assumes most of the responsibility on that end.” Levi described the collaboration between different departments as one of the most enjoyable parts of a recent project. Working relationships for the instructional designer took on many different forms, including faculty and subject matter experts, their team, other teams in the institution, and peers outside of the institution, and had strong influence over participants’ positive or negative feelings about their jobs.
Faculty and SMEs. Most prominent and central to the role of the instructional designer
was the working relationship that instructional designers had with faculty and SMEs. In this context, most participants worked with adjuncts who served as subject matter experts for the
institution. Participants accepted both the positive and negative interactions with faculty as just a part of the job. Gwen counted interactions and collaboration with faculty as one of the things she enjoyed most about her work, stating,
I like to talk to them [faculty]. I like to talk about – I like to make the plans, I like to brainstorm and figure out ways to translate these great face-to-face experiences to an online, um, experience that has similar impact. You know, that's the stuff I like.
Leah expressed a similar sentiment regarding the work that she does with faculty, “I like working with faculty, I like working with people who are really passionate about what they do. And you don't get to be a professor without … having some vested interest in whatever topic you're looking at.” Participants enjoyed the collaboration and work they got to do with faculty and SMEs, especially when those faculty and SMEs were passionate about their subject matter, and passionate about sharing it.
Even faculty who could be somewhat problematic or resistant to online learning offered opportunities for participants to feel satisfaction or pleasure when those faculty experienced a change of heart. For Maggie, it was a high point to see that:
What I really enjoy is when I'm working with a, a what we would call a problem child faculty who had a lot of resistance and you know, was very boisterous and bold and loud … when I get those ones and I can see the turn in the change occur almost like, you know, when you're in the classroom and you see the light go on with the, with the learner, it's the same when you're working with faculty.
Even when the interactions were negative, instructional designers generally accepted those challenges as a part of the job and opportunities to learn and grow, rather than obstacles they had to overcome. Faye explained,
Initially I was annoyed with the professor and wanted her to let go of her control of doing her way… however these feelings did morph into an appreciation of her commitment to her students, to evoking out of those students their creativity and giving them variety. Faye’s experience was similar to others’ in that, for instructional designers working in a coaching and design context, the desire is to reach a point where the course can be executed online in a meaningful and engaging way.
ID team. While participants expected difficult interactions with faculty to be part of the
job, they needed positive relationships with an instructional design team to experience high levels of satisfaction in their jobs. Levi, an instructional designer who also had some
management responsibilities, regarded his team as foundational to his own satisfaction with his work and in his job. He described one specific project the entire team was responsible for:
Sure we’ll talk to each other about a course we’re working on, but working together on the same project, saying, like, hey, you’re gonna take care of this part today and I’ll take care of this other part tomorrow. Um, having that connection was really enjoyable. Teams were the context in which participants did much of their work, and the shared experiences within an institution was not just enjoyable but important to maintaining morale and satisfaction. Tara shared that the work would be a lot more difficult without her team:
Within our team we try really hard to help each other out and so everyone's really appreciative of that and recognizes it and tries to really acknowledge it. It's huge. We probably wouldn't get by if we didn't do that.
Breanna, even though she was leaving her institution, still talked about the impact of her work on the team. She stated, “I care about it and … I still want it to be good… I don't want to have the people that … would have to take it over … they're friends so I don't want to …leave them in the
lurch.” Even as she was considering what she would be doing after she left her institution, she was present enough to care about what she was leaving behind and the potential impact on her team.
The lack of a robust instructional design team was equally influential. Leah, one of the instructional designers who was transitioning to a new job, was in a position where she did not have an instructional design team around her. As she talked about her transition to a new
institution, she stated, “I'm looking forward to the opportunity to work on a team of instructional designers. I have had a partner for the past couple of years, but I haven't really felt like a, like a, like part of a team.”
In addition to their relationships with their teammates, the relationship that participants had with their supervisor was important, though often more tenuous. Participants who had negative experiences were more vocal about the problems that poor leadership caused for them personally and for their team. Wendy, Tara, and Sadie all expressed frustration with those in supervisory roles over them when their supervisors tended to not be supportive of those they supervised. Sadie noted, “It is an interesting place to be in when you work for a director who is saying, what can you do for me rather than, what can I do for you?” Tara experienced a change in leadership and described how a new supervisor who took a more remote approach to leading and managing the team affected her feelings of job satisfaction overall.
Alternatively, when instructional designers described positive relationships with their supervisors, not only did the instructional designers articulate a more positive experience, but they also felt more empowered to do their jobs. Elliot, Gwen, and Leah expressed various experiences where their direct supervisors made them feel appreciated and recognized the level
of work they were doing. Further, it was important to participants that their supervisor understood their experience and the nature of their work.
Instructional designers at other institutions. It was not only relationships with their own team that were important to participants; being a member of a community of practice was also important. Participants described the value they found in interactions with other
instructional designers as those interactions allowed for networking, exposure to new and different ideas, and opportunities to discuss best practices and even collaborate on projects. Maggie counted IDs at other institutions and previous colleagues as an excellent resource when developing training. She stated,
That's a great thing that I admire about the work that I do…there is a level of
transparency amongst the instructional designers, at least all the ones that I've been able to contact with and, and there is a real level of understanding that we need to remain and maintain this, this, uh this ability to share and be transparent with everything that we've got.
Participants in this study described their interactions with instructional designers at other institutions in terms of engagement and learning from one another, thriving, and growth. Breanna, Elliot, and Angie all described various opportunities where they were involved in collaborative learning groups with instructional designers from other institutions, and expressed the value they found in both the opportunities that emerged as well as the intellectual growth that occurred. Instructional designers did not really address low satisfaction with their interactions with IDs at other schools or campuses, though Angie wondered if her community of practice was not as effective at affecting change within the college system as it could be. However, even those concerns were minor in the grand scheme of the discussion.
Other departments within the institution. In addition to their relationships with their
teams and other instructional designers at other institutions, participants developed and maintained strong relationships with other departments within their institution as well. Part of this context was within the work that they did. Depending upon the organizational structure of the institution, participants were either part of a centralized instructional design team for an online department or a part of a specific academic department. In this study, participants represented both structures. It is important to understand the organizational structure in light of the relationships that participants formed with additional teams in the institution.
Relationships and work with other departments presented the opportunity to add more value to the work that participants offered to their institution and helped validate their role. Levi counted working with other departments on projects as “enjoyable” and “fulfilling,” especially when those projects met a specific need of the institution and created a positive experience for the students. Elliot described the value in working with other teams in the institution, taking into account the publicity that it brought to instructional designers and the value they add to the institution. When talking about his own work, he described working with departments on instructional projects other than his own as “fun” and “interesting.” He went on to say,
Also in terms of promotion, in terms of reaching faculty, in terms of, you know, getting faculty interested in certain parts of our campus, we [instructional designers] may not be known but the library is, and so, you know, if we're doing a collaboration with the library, it increases the chances of getting that engagement with them just finding out about us and the things that we offer.
Interactions with other departments were not always positive, especially when those departments established processes and procedures that hindered instructional design teams from
accomplishing what they needed to accomplish in terms of supporting faculty and students. Participants attributed these challenges to a perceived lack of understanding of what their job entailed or a lack of regard for timing, processes, and procedures. Tara described interactions with one specific department that frequently went rogue or would disrupt the work of the instructional design team by following their own internal protocols that operated independently of established dates and timelines. At her institution, Wendy’s interactions with the tech
department were often fraught with frustration as the department further separated itself from the day to day operations of the school. She described the situation and interactions this way: “They don't understand how things work in an academic setting… They're in their, their own, like, cube farm and they're oblivious to like the rhythms of, like, an academic school.”
These observations by instructional designers highlight the importance not only of the people with whom they work on a daily basis but of the context, specifically the institutional context in which they did their work.