The SAM model (Successive Approximation Model) is an iterative development model for digital training. Instead of planning the entire production in detail from the start, the model is built on quickly producing a prototype, collecting feedback and successively improving the solution. That is why SAM is often described as an agile alternative to the more sequential ADDIE model.
The model was developed by Michael Allen, PhD in educational psychology and a well-known figure in e-learning. The core of SAM is close collaboration between the client, subject-matter experts and the development team, where feedback is used throughout the development process to create training that meets the organisation’s goals and the users’ needs.
The SAM model’s three main phases
Preparation phase
The first phase is about creating a shared understanding of the project. Here purpose, target group, learning objectives and the overall frames for the production are defined. Scope, timeline, resources and budget are also established so that the project has a stable foundation before development starts.
Iterative design phase
In this phase the first version of the training is developed. The focus is on quickly creating a working prototype that can be tested and evaluated. By involving the client, subject-matter experts and other stakeholders early, improvements can be made before full production begins. The design phase consists of three steps.
a. Savvy Start
The project group gathers to discuss goals, ideas and possible solutions. The purpose is to create a shared picture of the training, identify any challenges and agree on the overall design.
b. Design proof
Based on the decisions in the Savvy Start, a first prototype is developed. It shows, among other things, course structure, navigation, interactions and the overall design. The prototype is reviewed by the project’s stakeholders, and the feedback that comes in is used as input for continued development.
c. Design iterations
The prototype is improved step by step based on the feedback collected. The work is repeated until the design meets the project’s requirements and is ready to form the basis for the final production.
Iterative development phase
When the design is approved, development of the complete training begins. During this phase as well, work continues with tests and feedback to ensure that content, functionality and user experience maintain high quality. When the training is finished, final tests are carried out before it is launched.
The SAM model vs the ADDIE model
The biggest difference between SAM and ADDIE is the way of working.
ADDIE mainly follows a sequential process where analysis, design, development, implementation and evaluation are carried out in a set order. SAM instead builds on iterations where prototypes are developed, tested and improved continuously throughout the project.
That means problems can be discovered earlier and that changes can be made before the entire training is fully developed. At the same time, ADDIE can be a better choice in projects where the requirements are well defined from the start and where extensive changes are not expected.
Both models have their strengths and limitations. Which method fits best depends on the project’s goals, complexity and way of working.
The SAM model’s strengths…
1. Iterative development
The step-by-step development makes it possible to continuously improve the training based on feedback. The model can be adapted to both smaller projects and larger development efforts.
2. Early prototypes
By producing a working prototype early, clients and users can evaluate the solution before large resources are invested in the final production.
3. Close collaboration
SAM builds on tight collaboration between the development team, subject-matter experts and the client. That creates better conditions for the training to meet the organisation’s needs.
4. Early discovery of problems
Shortcomings in content, design or functionality can be identified and addressed before they become costly to correct later in the project.
5. Focus on the user
Recurring tests and feedback make it easier to develop training that works well for the target group and helps achieve the desired learning objectives.
…and some situations when it is not optimal
SAM does not fit every type of project. If the requirements are already very clear and detailed from the start, a more sequential way of working can be more efficient. That applies, for example, when design, functionality and reporting are fixed before development starts and only minor changes are expected.
Very large projects with many dependencies and a large number of stakeholders may also require more extensive planning before development begins. In such situations, a more structured way of working can give better control over the project’s different deliveries.
Examples of when SAM fits particularly well
A company is going to produce a digital onboarding programme for new employees. Instead of developing the entire training at once, a prototype with a smaller number of modules is created first. After the target group has tested the training, content, interactions and design are adjusted based on the feedback collected. Only then is the rest of the training developed. In that way the risk of costly rework is reduced while the finished training better meets the organisation’s needs.