CASA program · Structure

Structuring a role-based learning catalogue.

When learning is role-specific, the hardest interface problem is the first screen. This one asks a single question a person can answer about themselves, and uses the answer to do the filtering.

Client: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
program: CASA, 2015–2021
Role: Information architecture and interface design
Streams: Four, defined by span of responsibility
Platform: Editorial placeholder: Confirm which platform hosted the catalogue

A learning catalogue stream selection screen: four tall blue columns headed Leading and managing self, Leading and managing others, Leading and managing managers, and Leading and managing CASA, each with a one-line definition and a figure icon, beside the instruction Select your stream. — One question, four answers, each defined in a single sentence so nobody has to guess which one they are. The icons escalate from one figure to four, which reinforces the ordering without relying on the reader parsing the headings.

In 60 seconds

The problem: A large body of learning that is only relevant to some people, presented to everyone.
My role: Information architecture and interface design for the catalogue entry.
Scope: Audience segmentation, stream definitions, entry-point design and catalogue navigation. Editorial placeholder: Confirm platform scope
Where it got to: A stream-based catalogue entry. Editorial placeholder: Add measurable outcome
Built with: Articulate Storyline · Editorial placeholder: Confirm hosting platform

The situation

Role-specific learning creates a filtering problem, and most catalogues solve it badly. Either everything is shown and most of it is irrelevant, or the filtering depends on data in a staff record that is out of date.

The recovered evidence shows CASA using a third approach: ask the learner one question they can answer about themselves, and use the answer as the filter.

What was actually wrong

The four streams are not levels of seniority. They are spans of responsibility: leading yourself, leading others, leading managers, leading the organisation. That distinction matters, because it lets a technical specialist with no direct reports and a new team leader arrive at different content without either being told they are junior.

It also means the taxonomy survives a restructure. Job titles change; the question of how many layers of people you are responsible for does not.

What it looked like, and why

The opening screen of a Document Catalogue training module: a full-width photograph of filing cabinets behind the title, a Start Course button, and body copy explaining that the module covers searching, amending and creating controlled documents. — A separate artefact in the same archive group: a course about the controlled-document catalogue, opening by stating what the module covers and what it does not. The purpose statement above the fold is the useful decision here, because process learning is where learners most often start in the wrong module.Archive attribution uncertain. Grouped with the stream selector by filename only.

Where it got to

A single-question entry point that filters a large body of role-specific learning without relying on stale staff-record data
A four-stream taxonomy built on span of responsibility rather than job title, so it survives a restructure without being redefined
Editorial placeholder: Confirm how many courses sat behind each stream and how the catalogue was maintained

Catalogue size, course counts and platform adoption are unconfirmed and not claimed here.

Recognise any of this?

If your situation rhymes with this one, the useful next step is usually a short conversation about where the problem actually sits.

Tell me what is happening Other work

Or write directly: glenn@glennhammond.com