Good article up on the ASTD site about a mathematical model constructed by Caterpillar University to examine instructor-led training vs. e-Learning from a cost perspective.
Excerpt from the introduction:
"To help its managers better understand the relationship between cost and delivery methodology, Caterpillar University constructed a mathematical model to better calculate the key cost components. Its key finding: even when similar programs are compared, e-learning is less expensive to deliver almost regardless of learner population. For example, in all cases where there is a learner population larger than 100, e-learning has a clear cost advantage. As the population increases, this difference becomes more pronounced. Even with a population as small as 100 and a class as short as one hour, e-learning was still more than 40 percent less expensive than instructor-led training ($9,500 vs. $17,062 or $76/learner). When large populations are modeled (40,000+), the cost advantage of online learning is even greater, with savings as high as 78 percent ($1.1 million vs. $5 million or $99/learner)."
Cost Comparison: Instructor-Led vs e-Learning, by Paul Walliker of Caterpillar University
The challenge with these types of calculations is that every organization is different and has a different set of constructs and variables associated with its training program, so it is difficult to say these exact financial outcomes will apply in every situation. The business case really needs to be constructed from within the organization itself to get a better look at what the savings will be for their training program.
With that said, similiar studies done by Federal Express, IBM, and Xerox have also seen a 40% reduction in cost when using e-Learning.
Here is our own whitepaper on the subject, E-Learning Benefits and ROI Comparison of E-Learning vs. Traditional Training
Dave Boggs, SyberWorks