One common question is “how long will it take to create this elearning?” It’s important to estimate the effort and time required for different tasks. Because I work for myself, I have to create good time estimates. If I don’t, I either bid low and lose money or bid high and lose a project.
In this post, I walk through my thought process for using industry benchmarks to create a time estimate for elearning development. I published the original version of this post over 10 years ago. In additional to updating links and other revisions, I’m adding notes on how AI may change your time estimates.
Benchmarks
The two primary sources I use for benchmarks are Bryan Chapman’s research and the ATD research.
Of the two sources, I usually go for Chapman’s data, since it’s broken down with more detail. I find it helpful to refer clients to these sources, especially if they think training development should take barely any time. Chapman’s research is from 2010, so it’s an older source. However, it’s still likely the most commonly referenced benchmark in the field.
The ATD research is updated every few years, but it also shows more variability and is trickier to compare. In the 2023 update of the research, Robyn Defelice makes a key point about these benchmarks:
The largest conclusion we can draw comfortably from the data is that development time still varies considerably for each type of learning product—and no matter what, the variables of the training development for each organization greatly differ. We do not advise that you use the results as stand-alone pieces for calculating project estimates because context is necessary to understand respondents’ situations.
–Robyn Defelice
IconLogic also has benchmarks for development, including breakdowns for different tasks. The biggest difference in their benchmark is the time to develop in an authoring tool, which is significantly higher than if you use Chapman’s data alone. This estimate says that Captivate and Storyline development generally take 2 hours per finished minute to produce, or a ratio of 120:1. That’s not including writing a script or recording audio. Chapman’s estimate is closer to 20:1 for the authoring/programming section, so there’s a pretty large discrepancy. That’s partly due to how tasks are classified, but I can’t completely reconcile the numbers. My own data matches IconLogic’s data more closely.
I also track my own time for every project I create so I can compare my actual numbers to the benchmarks. I use a time tracking template that lets me analyze my time on different tasks and projects. That’s the best situation, but it takes time to build up enough data to create your own personal benchmarks. Use the published benchmarks as a starting point, but start tracking your own time too if you haven’t yet. As Robyn noted, there are too many variables for any set of industry benchmarks to be as accurate as your own data.
Applying the Benchmarks
As an example, let’s say a client asks me to convert an existing full day training program to self-paced elearning. The existing training is working well, but the client needs it to scale to a larger audience.
The elearning version will be mostly linear with 25% interactivity but no branching scenarios. A “full day” of training means 6 hours of actual content. The content itself is in pretty good shape; there’s slides, a participant guide, and a facilitator guide, and it’s all fairly complete. The elearning version will not use video. The narration will be generated with an AI voice tool.
(In my original estimate, I specified professional voice over. Even a few years ago, I never used computer-generated voices for anything other than alpha versions of content. Now, they’ve improved enough that more of my clients are shifting to AI voices.)
I’m going to assume this can be compressed to about 3 hours of e-learning. That’s 50% of the original time, which is a standard estimate backed up by research.
This project a Level 2 by Chapman’s study, so the ratio for development is 184:1 (that is, 1 hour of e-learning takes 184 hours to develop). For 3 hours, that’s 184 * 3 or 552 hours total work. That’s the work for everyone on the team, not just me.
Chapman’s study provides this breakdown of tasks and the percentage of time for each (see slide 18).
- Front End Analysis: 9%
- Instructional Design: 13%
- Storyboarding: 11%
- Graphic Production: 12%
- Video Production: 6%
- Audio Production: 6%
- Authoring/Programming: 18%
- QA Testing: 6%
- Project Management: 6%
- SME/Stakeholder Reviews: 6%
- Pilot Test: 4%
- Other: 1%
Thinking Through the Numbers
I always weigh different factors to tweak these benchmarks. Chapman’s numbers are for everyone on the team, not just my role, so many of these estimate should be lower.
Analysis, Design, and Storyboarding
Analysis
Front end analysis is 9% of 552 or about 50 hours. The analysis involves other stakeholders, so it’s not just my time. This should also be much lower since it’s based on an existing training that is already working well. I’ll call my part of this analysis 15 hours. That analysis will include reviewing all of the existing training, feedback, and metrics, as well as meeting with SMEs and stakeholders.
My original estimate here was 30 hours, but that’s higher than I’d estimate now. I can use AI to help speed up the process of reviewing feedback and metrics. I also use AI to take notes during stakeholder calls, which reduces my time typing up minutes and noting key points.
Note that I’m being a bit idealistic for this example. I’m assuming that the existing course is working well. If the existing face-to-face training wasn’t working, this would require more analysis. I’m also agreeing with the client’s request for elearning as a solution and that 3 hours of elearning is actually the right solution. Real life is probably messier than this. A full-day training would probably be better converted to some form of blended learning rather than fully self-paced elearning. Just go with it for the purposes of the thought exercise here, OK?
Design
Instructional design is 13% or about 72 hours. I’ll call this 40 hours for me to create a detailed design document. Some of the additional time will be for the SME to answer questions and review the design document.
My original estimate here was 60 hours, which I think was too high. I would need to spend time going through the content in detail, and planning how to transform existing face-to-face activities to online activities takes time. AI can help brainstorm online activities, which speeds up that part of the process. The content is already organized for the face-to-face training, but I often move elements around for better flow when I convert training to online. A 3-hour elearning program would need to be broken into smaller chunks, so one goal of the design document is to identify where those divisions will happen.
Storyboarding
Storyboarding is 11% or about 61 hours. I’ll estimate 45 for my portion. I know from my own personal data that I tend to write faster than this benchmark.
I’m faster at storyboarding than I was over a decade ago. My original estimate was 55 hours, but between my increased experience and some improved efficiency with AI co-writing, I can reduce that time.
Development
Graphics
For graphics, the Chapman data assumes you spend 66 hours, more time on graphics than you do on storyboarding. Personally, I never end up spending that much time on visuals. The amount can vary based on the project though. If they have an existing template and a library of well tagged images, the amount is lower. If I have to spend a lot of time searching for stock images or creating custom graphics, the estimate needs to be higher. On the other hand, if I can generate AI images, the time is lower than searching for stock images (at least for many topics).
For this example, let’s assume I need to create a custom template and style. They have some existing images I can use, but many of the images in the existing slides are awful and need to be updates. I predict I can generate a lot of the images with AI, which reduces my time. I’ll need to create some custom diagrams. I decide to use 35 hours for creating the template and generating images.
My original estimate was 66 hours, the full amount from Chapman’s data. Like with storyboarding, I’m more experienced and efficient now than I was a year ago. I’ve also been using AI image generation tools long enough now to know how to get usable images with consistent styles.
Video and Audio
Since there’s no video, I use 0 for that value.
Audio will take some time to generate. I also need some time to generate closed captions. I’ll use 6 hours for this estimate (2 hours of work per hour of audio needed). That’s a number I would flag to revisit in the future as my experience and workflows with AI audio tools improve. I think it could be much lower than 6 hours.
My original estimate was 0, leaving it to the professional voice over artist. I also didn’t include time for closed captions in my original estimate, but I never deliver elearning without it now. AI makes creating captions faster. Chapman’s estimate is 33 hours for audio, which reflected the time for professional voice over and editing.
Building and testing
Authoring/Programming is 18% or 99 hours in the Chapman estimate. That seems low for building in Storyline, based on my experience, even assuming that we rely heavily on templates. IconLogic’s estimate is 2 hours per finished minute (120:1), or 360 hours. That’s a big discrepancy between the benchmarks. For my work, there’s some overlap between creating the template, generating graphics and audio, and authoring, so I can probably reduce this from the IconLogic estimate. I’ll split the difference and call this 180 hours.
QA Testing is 6% or 33 hours. Again, I think this is part of the difference in the IconLogic benchmark, since it doesn’t split testing out as a separate task. Generally a full review of a course takes me 2-3 times the length of the course, plus testing interactions throughout the process. For a 3-hour elearning course, that means I need 6-9 hours to do a single full review. I would do an alpha and beta review and revisions for the course, so I’ll estimate 20 hours for this section. (My original estimate was 17 hours; I would add more padding for reviews now.)
Project Management and Pilot
Project Management is also 6% or 33 hours. How much project management I do varies depending on the project and who else is on the team. I’ll assume 20 hours for this example.
The Pilot Test is 4% or 22 hours. I assume other people will be involved in that test, so I’ll estimate 6 hours for my part.
Total Hours: 367
Adding it all up, it’s 367 hours. How much padding I add to that estimate depends on a number of factors. If I’ve worked with the client before and I know they’re always responsive and very clear with feedback, I might use that estimate as is or round up to 370 hours. A 10% buffer (400 hours) or 20% (440 hours) is reasonable and typical for projects. A total of 400 hours would be a ratio of 133:1, which feels reasonable for this kind of conversion.
If the client seems unclear about what they want or I suspect that reviews and revisions will be time-consuming, I’ll add a larger buffer.
The above breakdown also helps me determine an estimate if I’m not creating the entire course. I often work in teams with other multimedia developers, so I might only be doing the analysis, design, storyboarding, and project management. Using this process, it’s easy to take those components and come up with a rough estimate for my portion of the course.
Adjustments from my original estimate
My original total was 450 hours, or up to 500-550 hours with a buffer. That means my updated estimate is 80-110 hours less than my estimate from 10 years ago. I have more experience now, but I also have more data from my own projects that lets me adjust from the Chapman benchmarks. I’m also starting to see improvements in efficiency by using AI for certain tasks.
| Task | Original Estimate | Updated Estimate |
|---|---|---|
| Front end analysis | 30 | 15 |
| Instructional design | 60 | 40 |
| Storyboarding | 55 | 45 |
| Graphics | 66 | 35 |
| Video | 0 | 0 |
| Audio | 0 | 6 |
| Authoring/Programming | 180 | 180 |
| QA Testing | 17 | 20 |
| Project Management | 20 | 20 |
| Pilot Test | 22 | 6 |
| Total | 450 | 367 |
Resources
Use these resources to create and compare your own time estimates (or to show stakeholders why you can’t create 5 hours of elearning in 3 weeks!).
- My time tracking template. Now that I have multiple years of data, most of my estimates are based on my own stats rather than these benchmarks. However, I still use the industry benchmarks for comparison and sharing with clients.
- Bryan Chapman’s research on how long it takes to create learning
- ATD research on time to develop training:
- 2023 research referenced above.
- 2021 research. Instead of looking at one hour, this study asked about how long it takes to create a “unit” of training. Most elearning modules created by study participants are about 20 minutes long.
- 2017 research on the time to create one hour of learning
- eLearning Development Time: How Much Time Does It Take to Create eLearning? by IconLogic
- IconLogic’s eLearning Production Time Calculator. This is a free resource, but it requires registration. Answer questions about factors that affect development. Using this estimate for a 3 hour course, I got a the total time is 562 hours, close to Chapman’s mid-range estimate for a Level 2 course (187:1).
- eLearning Development Calculator from eLearning Art. This is another free resource and a good way to check your estimate.
- Estimating Time to Develop Training: This post also refers to the Chapman and ATD data, but uses some different factors like team experience into the estimate.
- Estimating Infographic: What I like about this infographic is the estimates for other tasks, such as creating job aids.
- E-Learning Estimates Made Easy: Start with a Blueprint: Sarah Mercier explains her process for doing analysis before providing an estimate.
- AI2: Strategic Use of Actual Intelligence x Artificial Intelligence: Teresa Dussault explains how Build Capable used AI strategically to focus limited resources and SME time on the highest impact areas of a project.
Originally published 3/18/2014. Updated 5/16/2019, 3/3/2021, 4/17/2025.
Thanks Christy,
It would be interesting to review again and see if any of the tools have helped reduce the time as they get ‘smaret’. Are you using AI in any/many ways? How would that impact the time (not forgetting quality).
Hi Ryan,
Yes, I included that information in this update to the post. For example, under the analysis section, I noted, “I can use AI to help speed up the process of reviewing feedback and metrics. I also use AI to take notes during stakeholder calls, which reduces my time typing up minutes and noting key points.” That shifted my estimate from 30 to 15 hours for that portion of the task.
Each section of the estimate includes my notes on how and why I’d change it or keep it the same. Some of that is that I’m more experienced and efficient now than I was when I originally published this post, but some of it is because of AI improving efficiency.
Pingback: Costing eLearning Projects – David R. Ludwig, Learning Journal OMDE 610
Pingback: Estimating cost, effort, and activities for ID Projects | Musings on Instructional Design
Pingback: My Top Blog Posts of 2022 - The Smart Business With An Edge!
Hi Christy,
What an excellent resource, you’ve curated so much together and added great value with your experience and insights – thank you.
I found this article personally challenging, as I don’t spend anything like this amount of time preparing my e-learning products (should I admit to that)?! I guess a major difference is that I teach safety, where the law, regulations and standards often dictate what has to be done, which dramatically reduces some tasks in your list.
That said, nobody like being told what to do, so perhaps this isn’t the best learning approach for a lot of people. I would value your views on this last point, please!
Best Regards, Simon
Hi Simon,
The range for development can be pretty wide. This estimate assumes I’m developing “level 2” elearning by Chapman’s definition. Nearly everything I do tends to be on the level 2-3 range. That means I usually have an interaction every 2-3 slides. This estimate also assumed I spent time creating a custom template and some custom images. My development estimate assumes I have objects animated to sync with the narration throughout. Most of my work includes at least some short scenarios too, which tends to bump up the time at least a little (and sometimes a lot).
Typical safety training tends to be basically a lecture with slides and a short quiz at the end. In Chapman’s definitions, that’s a “level 1” elearning. Chapman’s benchmark is 49:1 at the low end for level 1 elearning, or 79:1 at the high end. If you use the same template each time, and you don’t spend much time on the analysis because you just use the list from OSHA or whatever regulatory agency, I could see how your time could be as low as a third of my estimate here.
As for whether it’s the best approach or not, it partly depends if the organization is just meeting a legal requirement, or if they really need to change the behavior. If it’s simply compliance training, sometimes the answer really is to get it done as fast as possible and then move on to another project that matters more. If it’s something where you have real problems with behavior and need to change it, a scenario-based approach might be better. You might also be better with something more interactive, like a simulation that shows the consequences of decisions.
For example, I created bulldozer safety training once where one of the activities was a simulated dashboard with an icon lit up and an alarm sounding. Learners had to decide whether to stop the machine immediately or continue working and flag it for repair at the end of their shift. In that work environment, both of those options were sometimes correct, depending on the severity of the problem. We needed people to recognize the types of warnings so they could differentiate the “fix it now” problems from the “fix it later” problems. That training was a level 3 training, with a significant amount of multimedia development (including custom 3D models so users could practice a virtual walkaround).
You can also do things like having two characters talking about safety issues, preferably set in a real background like people will be working in. This example was built by someone else on the team, but I’ve built some similar safety training for this client. https://pcscustomtraining.com/wp/elearning/
Christy
Pingback: 4 Online Tools for Estimating Learning Development Time and Price | Scissortail Creative Services, LLC
Pingback: Project Management and LD | Pearltrees
Pingback: Praca w E-learning’u – czy to się opłaca? – E-learning – newsy, wiedza, konsultacje, wdrożenia
Pingback: eLearning Freelancer Invoicing Q&A - Experiencing eLearning
Thank you for this post, this is excellent. A few clarification questions:
1. Do you charge the same hourly rate for each task? Some require more effort than others it would seem.
2. You mentioned you don’t do the audio. Do you tell the client up front they are responsible for finding their own voice artist or do you find it for them and let them know it’ll be a separate charge for that voiceover artist?
3. LMS Development. Should one just send an hourly invoice for this at the end of each development run? That’s been my approach recently as I have the hardest time scoping this bit of work out accurately.
Thank you for any answers:-) I appreciate how responsive you are.
1. Do you charge the same hourly rate for each task? Some require more effort than others it would seem.
I charge the same rate for everything (if I’m charging hourly). Yes, some tasks require more effort than others, but it’s still my time. Even if I’m doing tedious or repetitive work like setting up a voice over script with file names, it’s still my time. If I’m working on those easier tasks, I can’t also spend time working on the harder tasks.
2. You mentioned you don’t do the audio. Do you tell the client up front they are responsible for finding their own voice artist or do you find it for them and let them know it’ll be a separate charge for that voiceover artist?
Most of the time these days I do fixed price projects and include subcontracted voice over in that cost (both what I will pay a VO artist plus my time to project manage it). I usually work with VO artists who charge $0.20-$0.25/word, so I can get a rough estimate based on time using 150-180 wpm and the expected final time.
Regardless of whether I charge by project or hourly, I always help the client select the voice over artist. I usually give them a few choices and let them pick who they like best. If we’re getting auditions, I manage that part of the process too.
When I charge hourly, I either pay the VO artist myself and then include that on an invoice for reimbursement, or the client pays the VO artist directly. I leave it up to the client to decide.
3. LMS Development. Should one just send an hourly invoice for this at the end of each development run? That’s been my approach recently as I have the hardest time scoping this bit of work out accurately.
I 100% agree that scoping LMS work is the hardest part. I have pretty good time estimates from past data on every other part of the process, but LMS work is so different from one client to the next. Sometimes for LMS work I just send hourly invoices as we go, but I have also sometimes used blocks of hours or retainers (e.g., I’ll spend up to 7 hours a week doing LMS administration for $XXXX per quarter).
Hope that helps!
Pingback: My Top 10 Posts for 2020 - Experiencing eLearning
Pingback: Tananyagfejlesztés időbeli tényezői | E-learning mindenkinek
Thanks for posting a great article with excellent detail.
Pingback: 10 Crucial Steps in the eLearning Development Process | Teps Agencies
wow nice bolg article…… It is all very lucrative including looking at the various levels of development.
Pingback: 10 Crucial Steps in the eLearning Development Process - Seotomize
Pingback: Convert Training to Online - Experiencing eLearning
Pingback: Time Tracking Template for Instructional Design - Experiencing eLearning
Christy,
Thank you for all the detail and comprehensive time analysis for your benchmarking methods. I found this incredibly valuable as an instructional designer that is handling the whole process including training team members. The bucket is quite large and trying to micro-manage the basis for e-learning for test out options and digging deep on the types of learning methods that are best suited, software support (Captivate 17), Snip It, and Audacity. I am building the e-learning mechanisms and found your time table analogies extremely valuable as I am trying to determine the scripting, building, and developing the learning matrix based upon the workflow. Your list of resources I will definitely be checking out as I am trying to be as efficient as possible with the items I would like to see implemented.
In your opinion what advantages does Storyboard have over Captivate? Any advantages for one over the other? Also, the compatibility with certain types of LMS (Learning Management Systems) that seem to work the best with one or the other?
Many developers prefer Storyline over Captivate. I think Captivate is better for software training, especially interactive software simulations. Just about anything that can be created in Storyline can be created in Captivate, with the exception of the slider and dial interactions. Captivate can do more than Storyline, including creating interactive video, VR, and responsive training. Captivate is also much cheaper: around $360/year compared to $1000/year for Articulate 360 (the suite including Storyline). There’s no significant difference in how they work with an LMS.
However, Captivate is harder to learn. Many people find it slower to develop in Captivate than in Storyline. If you’re paying developers hourly, you might save the difference in purchase price with the cost of speed to both learn the program and develop in it. In particular, working with fluid boxes in Captivate adds additional time to development, maybe up to 30%.
Articulate 360, the suite that includes Storyline, also includes a Review tool. I find that Review tool saves an immense amount of time over spreadsheets and other review systems. The suite also includes Rise, which works well for certain types of projects.
Although it’s a few years old, I think Diane Elkins’ comparison table here is pretty accurate. I would put Captivate above Storyline for software simulations, but otherwise I agree with her assessments. http://elearninguncovered.com/2016/02/updated-e-learning-authoring-tools-comparison-2/
It’s also helpful to understand how the different tools handle responsive design. http://elearninguncovered.com/2017/02/four-ways-e-learning-authoring-tools-handle-responsive-design/
I used Captivate as my primary tool for years, but I’ve been doing much more in Storyline since Articulate 360 came out. The few features I was really missing in Storyline have now been added, so I would now default to using Storyline for most projects. Software training is the exception, where I’d prefer either short videos in Camtasia or simulations in Captivate.
Great article putting the research against your actual experience. Very valuable. Thanks Christy.
I’m glad you found it helpful.
Pingback: time to create one hour of training
Pingback: Project Schedule and Estimating Activity Duration – Carol J Swaen
Pingback: 8 Years of Blogging – Experiencing E-Learning
Pingback: Time to develop e-learning resources – ElearningWorld.org
Pingback: Estimating time to develop training – Part 2
Pingback: 2016 Blog Review: 10 Years and Counting – Experiencing E-Learning
Pingback: Research other industry resources on the cost of developing training/learning – Sowmya Jakkula LTMS 510
Thanks a lot….Very nicely explained all the processes with the proper numbers.
Christy, this is an invaluable posting. Most often we are asked how much time incrementally we feel it would take for development. What I specifically enjoyed reading about was your breakdown of time on task. Often I am not only asked how much time on task incrementally that I feel a resource is needed for, but also how much time from the provider that they can expect to contribute. It is all very lucrative including looking at the various levels of development, but having some static baselines are a great asset.
Pingback: 2015 Year in Review | Experiencing E-Learning
Great article Christy. Lots of valuable information and resources – thank you so much for sharing this.
Thank you Christy, this article was very informative. And also thanks for sharing your resources, the time management tools could be particularly useful for my own work in the future.
Chris
Glad you found it helpful!
Thank you for your very informative article, Christy Tucker!
Pingback: Kevin's ID&T blog SITE
Hello Tucker ,Your blog is very informative and your explanation is step by step It is very interesting. Thank you for sharing it
Pingback: Time Estimates for E-Learning Development | eTraining Pedia
Christy, thanks for all the detail. When I come up for air on my own projects, I’ll have to blog on this same topic. My numbers are so different from yours. Here’s a suggested blog post for you though: I’d like to see a post from you on what you do in the front-end analysis (which you budgeted 20 hours for above). My clients tend to feel that they’ve done this analysis and I almost never get a chance to sit with learners and really dig down to needs. So it’s a three-pronged post: what do you do in your analysis and how do you organize it, what’s the deliverable (course outline?), and how do you sell the client on doing it? I’d like to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks in advance. Kevin
A version of this post sat in my drafts folder for about a year, so I understand not having the time to blog. I’ll look forward to seeing your numbers though. My guess is that your numbers are higher since you’re doing more graphic design and more development. Because I do more projects where I’m only doing design and writing and not development, I don’t trust my numbers for Captivate development as much as for earlier stages.
As for selling the client on doing analysis, I don’t actually break it out for clients this way. I roll it into the design document stage. That’s both analysis and early design, and it gives clients a deliverable at the end. My design document is an overview of the course including a high level outline and plan for activities. I’ve never had a client push back on having an outline and plan at the beginning of the process.