Introduction
Using and producing
multimedia materials
Sue Browell
The author
Sue Browell is Programme Director, Postgraduate
Personnel/HRM Programmes, Newcastle Business School,
Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. She can be contacted on
0191 227 4356; fax: 0191 227 3682;
e-mail: sue.browell@unn.ac.uk.
Abstract
As one of a number of new learning technologies, multi-
media is increasingly being used in traditional training and
development events and also in open and flexible learning
modules. With a move towards more flexible working
practices, it is necessary to provide a more flexible
approach to learning, training and development, particu-
larly with regard to timing, location and the needs of the
learner. Multimedia provides that flexibility. Gives educa-
tors, and training and development specialists some
understanding of what multimedia is by providing a
number of definitions and considering the benefits of using
multimedia materials. Outlines developing and producing
multimedia materials, together with some of the complex
legal issues involved in production.
Industrial and Commercial Training
Volume 28 · Number 7 · 1996 · pp. 9–15
© MCB University Press · ISSN 0019-7858
9
As one of a number of new learning technolo-
gies, multimedia is increasingly being used in
traditional training and development events
and also in open and flexible learning mod-
ules. With a move towards more flexible work-
ing practices, it is necessary to provide a more
flexible approach to learning, training and
development, particularly with regard to
timing, location and the needs of the learner.
Multimedia provides that flexibility. This
article is intended to give educators and train-
ing and development specialists some under-
standing of what multimedia is and how those
involved in the learning process can begin to
develop their own multimedia materials.
What is multimedia ?
In many respects, multimedia is not a new
concept. In simple terms it describes the
simultaneous use of two or more different
forms of media, e.g. tape/slide[1]. Derived
from open and distance learning institutions,
it was originally used to describe course
delivery in terms of text, television, radio,
etc.
Currently, the term is being used to
describe the “integration of audio and video
with computers, the computer controlling the
way in which the different media are mixed
together on a VDU or television screen”[1] or
“workstations that support not just alpha-
numeric/graphic displays but also audio-
visual material stored on CD-ROM or hard
disk”[2].
Dahmer[3] defines multimedia as “some-
thing that combines the capabilities of tech-
nologies that used to be separate ... it can
combine things like text, graphics, sounds and
still or motion pictures in a smooth way to
present training or information”; and “print,
telecommunications, video and broadcasting,
and computers have merged – and the result is
what we now call multimedia”.
Stubley[4] also describes multimedia as:
“Graphics and sound, digital or analogue
video, animations, hypermedia, interactivity,
computer games, virtual reality, electronic
books, CD-ROM, HDTV, telecommunica-
tions – and many others – have all been terms
associated with the definition of ‘multimedia’
at one time or another.”
 Using and producing multimedia materials
Sue Browell
Benefits of multimedia
There are both advantages and disadvantages
in using multimedia as a teaching and learn-
ing medium and it will not be appropriate for
all situations. However, it is certainly benefi-
cial if one is wanting to use a lot of visual
material and/or create simulation. Little-
field[5] reports that Schank, author and
director of the US government-sponsored
Institute of the Learning Sciences, states that
one of the major advantages of multimedia is
that it can save time by offering realistic work
situations in a condensed form, i.e. simula-
tion. Being a simulation, it allows learners,
whether they be students or employees, to
“fail” in a safe environment and learn from
their mistakes, which is preferable to making
serious mistakes, in the workplace.
‘…Early research suggests that multi-
media “enriches the learning
experience and motivates
students”…’
Early research suggests that multimedia
“enriches the learning experience and moti-
vates students”[1]. Potentially, therefore, it is
a significant benefit. Laurillard[2] considers
that multimedia, “has the capability, given its
combined features, to support the learning
process very well”, but this is only possible if
the student is able to control the learning
process for themselves rather than be actually
driven by the program and technology. It is
important, therefore, to take this into account
in the design of materials so that the benefits
can be maximized.
Garai and Hill[6] have found from their
research that multimedia allows learners to
use their judgement and decision-making
skills in realistic situations and observe the
outcomes as a result of their actions. They
also found that the interactivity provided by
multimedia allows students to handle com-
plex ideas and concepts and to explore and
reflect on ideas and situations presented.
Overall, they found that multimedia could
potentially be used when learning and train-
ing was required in: product knowledge,
product development, process skills, personal
development, legislative issues, specialist
needs, interpersonal skills and attitudinal
change.
10
Industrial and Commercial Training
Volume 28 · Number 7 · 1996 · 9–15
Using multimedia materials
The National Council for Educational Tech-
nology[1] suggests a number of issues that
should be considered and questions answered
before using multimedia for the first time:
• carefully identify curricular needs and
priorities;
• examine available materials;
• calculate the cost of hardware, software,
disks and other resources;
• estimate costs in staff time for developing
materials and staff development in use of
materials;
• will multimedia reinforce, replace, enhance
or extend the teaching and learning
process?
• will students gain new skills, knowledge
and/or experience from these materials?
• is the multimedia material educationally
valid and are the style and content compat-
ible with students needs, interests and
abilities?
• does the multimedia material aid concept
formation, reinforce skills and facilitate
assessment?
• does new technology demand changes in
current teaching and learning styles and
what support will students need from
lecturers/trainers?
• are the staff committed to the use of multi-
media and determined to make it work ?
• how can staff be motivated to take owner-
ship of the multimedia initiative?
By considering the above points, risks are
reduced and success in using multimedia
materials in teaching and learning is probably
much greater.
Resource implications
Using multimedia materials is now much
more affordable and available to all – educa-
tional institutions, businesses and the home
user. Many computers now incorporate CD-
ROM drives as “standard”.
Multimedia products and materials can be
obtained in four different ways:
(1) Purchase off-the-shelf products.
(2) Enter into a joint arrangement with an
external producer.
(3) Commission an external producer to
create materials for exclusive use of the
commissioner.
(4) Produce materials in-house.
 Using and producing multimedia materials
Sue Browell
Several organizations produce off-the-shelf
materials that can be incorporated into learn-
ing programmes. Well-known video produc-
ers such as Video Arts and other producers
too are now adding to their portfolio by pro-
viding multimedia materials. New companies
are also being established to provide materi-
als. The Open Learning Foundation, dedicat-
ed to research and development into new
teaching and learning methods, now has
several multimedia programs available for use
in higher education.
Garai and Hill[6] suggest that there are
four factors that will influence the purchase of
multimedia material, other than the obvious
one of cost:
(1) Learning design – content and learning
driven rather than media driven.
(2) Purchasing versatility – ability to adapt
material to in-house requirements.
(3) Platform versatility – multimedia product
compatible with a variety of systems and
platforms.
(4) User friendliness and attractiveness –
adequate instructions and movement
around the material.
In reviewing products, Garai and Hill[6]
suggest that good quality multimedia prod-
ucts are characterized by the following:
• clear training messages and learning
points;
• overall design;
• ease of use and clear navigation;
• short and easily assimilated modules;
• relevant and appropriate use of media
especially video;
• high levels of interactivity;
• platform versatility – ability to run on PCs
with different specifications;
• reputation of suppliers.
Therefore, it is important that these factors
are taken into account when either purchasing
materials or producing one’s own.
Producing multimedia materials
Authoring packages, scanners, cameras and
other software and hardware are now more
readily available and affordable, allowing for
the production of one’s own multimedia
resources. Those individuals with training
design experience and, in particular, experi-
ence of developing and producing open
learning materials such as those outlined by
Lockwood[7] and Rowntree[8], will be able
11
Industrial and Commercial Training
Volume 28 · Number 7 · 1996 · 9–15
to use their skills in multimedia production
even though there are some quite significant
differences between designing traditional
instructional sessions and designing multime-
dia.
Dahmer[3] suggests that three areas are
critical in creating multimedia material and
associated training:
Design models
Provide a structured method for ensuring a
training need exists and can assist in develop-
ing a multimedia program that meets an
identified need, e.g. instructional systems
design. Evaluation should be built into the
design process.
Multimedia development roles
The expertise required will depend on the
characteristics required in the final program.
If including original video footage then a
director will be required. Graphics and text
will only require a skilled author. To create
high quality programs, seven roles need to be
performed, although individuals may perform
more than one role:
(1) Project manager or producer to co-ordi-
nate the project and other team members.
Responsible for contracts, budgets,
ensuring objectives of the project are met
and quality.
(2) Director to manage production, editing
and post-production of video, audio and
graphic material.
(3) Subject matter expert who provides
expertise regarding the content and
ensures accuracy and appropriateness for
the audience.
(4) Author who uses an authoring system to
incorporate all the elements of the pro-
duction – video, audio, text, etc.
(5) Programmer who is involved in more
complex special functions and systems
that cannot be accommodated by the
authoring system or author.
(6) Technical specialist who identifies, selects
and integrates hardware and software in
order to produce the program.
(7) Instructional designer who provides
instructional expertise in designing and
developing programs using adult learning
theories, instructional design and evalua-
tion models.
Multimedia developmental phases
For complex projects, there are eight distinct
phases:
 Using and producing multimedia materials
Sue Browell
(1) Analysis and project planning – including
needs analysis, objectives and specifica-
tions for resources and equipment.
(2) Design and authoring – developing over-
all design, lessons, production sheets and
creating materials and incorporating
media.
(3) Pre-production – developing specifica-
tions for all material.
(4) Production – phase during which all
material is produced.
(5) Post-production – includes editing and
special effects.
(6) Mastering the final program on CD-
ROM or another platform.
(7) Integration and testing – debugging the
system, testing the system to ensure it
functions correctly.
(8) Distribution of material to learners with
supporting material.
Sidor[9] provides a slightly shorter model of
the major roles involved in the design and
development process, outlining four impor-
tant groupings:
(1) Instructional designers – includes
researchers, academics, trainers who
decide on the objectives and the interac-
tive exercises.
(2) Content/functional experts – write text
and tutorials.
(3) Multimedia development team – includes
manager, analysts, AV/video expert,
programmer, etc.
(4) Testing team – try out modules, refine,
establish any problems, redesign sec-
tions/exercises as necessary.
Time and cost in developing multimedia
materials varies considerably depending on
the experience of those involved, available
resources and complexity of the program.
Development costs are summarized by
Laurillard[2] under the following headings:
• pedagogic design;
• production design;
• prototype production;
• developmental testing;
• revision of materials;
• final production;
• quality assurance procedures;
• administrative support;
• technical support;
• travel associated with material collection
and collaboration between individuals;
• project management;
12
Industrial and Commercial Training
Volume 28 · Number 7 · 1996 · 9–15
• copyright costs for material used in
production.
Potentially, there can be significant costs
involved in producing in-house materials
particularly in relation to staff costs – acade-
mics/writers, producers, programmers, tech-
nicians, etc., and also equipment. However,
the costs of production can be offset by a
reduction in trainer costs associated with
delivery, and travelling and accommodation
costs associated with bringing employees
together for training courses, potentially from
all around the world.
Legal issues in producing multimedia
materials
Recently, it has been stated that, “Lawyers are
flocking to multimedia like miners to a gold-
rush” indicative of the current situation
regarding the legal aspects of multimedia[10].
While multimedia technology has enormous
potential for learning, the battle between
copyright owners and multimedia publishers
threatens to prevent and restrict its very
growth and development[11].
‘…Intellectual property, copyright,
clarifying author and owner all need to
be considered…’
In several respects, many of the legal issues
involved in multimedia production are similar
to those involved in producing more tradition-
al learning resources, in particular open/flexi-
ble learning materials. Intellectual property,
copyright, clarifying author and owner all
need to be considered. The difficulty is that
multimedia, using the National Council for
Educational Technology’s[1] definition
quoted on p. 8, is comparatively new and no
collective or universally acceptable legislation
is in place. The many individual components
of multimedia therefore all tend to be protect-
ed by various legislation. In the UK, the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is
an important act in protecting literary works
(including computer programs), musical and
artistic works, sound recordings, films, broad-
casts, etc. from being copied without permis-
sion, and therefore is of significance to those
involved in multimedia production. Interna-
tionally, the Berne Convention for the
 Using and producing multimedia materials
Sue Browell
Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and
the Universal Copyright Convention both
provide reciprocal protection for their mem-
bers regarding international copyright. As
such, they have an important role to play in
attempting to harmonize copyright law
throughout the world, both now and in the
future. EC directives and regulations are of
importance in improving harmonization in
copyright legislation within Europe.
Stubley[4] believes that the lack of such
harmonization is actually deterring some
multimedia publishers from launching new
products.
The key legal issues involved in multimedia
production are summarized by Brinson and
Radcliffe[12] in the introduction to their
book. Although aimed at an American audi-
ence, the principles are universally applicable:
• contracting with employees, independent
contractors and consultants for the cre-
ation of multimedia work;
• avoiding infringement of others’ intellectu-
al property rights;
• obtaining licences to use content owned by
others;
• complying with union rules;
• contracting for sale or distribution of mul-
timedia work;
• protecting intellectual property rights in
multimedia work.
Knowledge of copyright law is extremely
important for those involved in multimedia
production because multimedia often involves
a compilation of copyright images, copyright
music, copyright speech and copyright text
reproduced on a single digital disk capable of
being distributed to thousands of end-users.
In addition, the production of original multi-
media material is protected by copyright and
it must be determined who owns the copy-
right in new material[13].
Browell[14] outlined some of the copyright
issues involved in multimedia production in a
recent article, but the key issues are summa-
rized below:
(1) During the production planning period,
time should be devoted to ensuring that
copyright is cleared for materials intend-
ed to be used in the production, and cost
implications of determining copyright
clearance taken into account[15].
13
Industrial and Commercial Training
Volume 28 · Number 7 · 1996 · 9–15
(2) Material still within copyright requires
the permission of the owner before it can
be used. This may incur fees[13].
(3) Multimedia productions and many indi-
vidual components – music, sound
effects, lyrics, complete songs, literature,
illustrations, photographs, graphics, text,
software, video, film and television clips –
are protected by copyright and cannot be
used without permission/payment of a
fee. Failing to deal with ownership issues
during production may result in not
having full ownership of the final piece of
work and/or legal implications[12]. The
facts contained in written material are not
copyright but the way they are
“expressed” is covered by copyright.
(4) Photographs from magazines, brochures,
books, etc., once digitized, can be easily
copied, distributed and altered. Many
photographers are reluctant to release
their photographs for inclusion in multi-
media works because they are concerned
that they may be digitized and redistrib-
uted to others without permission. Digital
editing software can alter photographs to
the point where it is almost impossible to
prove that a derivative version came from
the original photograph.
(5) Sounds from a video or a TV programme
generally may not be used in other com-
mercial productions without prior per-
mission[16].
(6) As well as seeking permission from copy-
right owners, other parties may be also
involved, e.g. in a TV clip there is copy-
right in the novel, short story or play,
copyright in the film, video or television
series, there may also be union reuse fees
and if a film, video or television clip con-
tains music or choreography you may
have to pay separately for those. Writers,
directors and performers may also be
involved in the copyright process.
(7) There are copyright issues relating to
computer authoring systems in multime-
dia productions.
(8) Clip art and copyright-free materials are
available through a number of companies
removing the necessity to trace copyright
owners, arrange copyright clearance and
fees – a subscription/fee is paid directly to
the supplying company for the material
used. Such material can take the form of
video clips, photographs, line art, sound
 Using and producing multimedia materials
Sue Browell
effects, maps, music and text, all of which
can be used in multimedia
productions[4].
(9) If the multimedia work is to be repro-
duced (copied), modified, distributed or
displayed then the copyright owner must
be consulted as this affects their rights.
The legal issues involved in multimedia pro-
duction are complex and potentially very
costly if not correctly observed and imple-
mented, supporting Tinsley’s[17] observation
that:
It was interesting to see how the legal profession
regarded the multimedia challenge, and one
could be forgiven for thinking that this could be
one of the biggest earners for the legal profes-
sion this century.
Publishing and distribution
The relationship between multimedia devel-
opers/producers and publishers is very
changeable and is still continuing to evolve.
Publishing and distribution is based on the
traditions from the book publishing, televi-
sion, film and software industries and, as
multimedia is so relatively new, there is cur-
rently no universally agreed industry frame-
work to use as a guide.
At the end of 1993, the first US case relat-
ing directly to CD-ROM and online products
occurred with ten freelance writers “suing
both the companies who commissioned origi-
nal work from them and the organisations
making it electronically available, arguing that
rights for print publishing are distinct from
electronic publishing and should be rewarded
separately”[4].
Therefore, if involved in producing original
material for publication and distribution, it is
important to consider these issues.
Conclusion
The author’s own experience in education,
and involvement with training and develop-
ment specialists, indicates a move away from
traditional formal training courses and deliv-
ery to a much more flexible mode of learning
with an emphasis on facilitation, open learn-
ing and new learning technologies. Much of
this is associated with changes in the organiza-
tion – such as the flexible firm, the learning
organization – requiring employees to be
actively involved in and responsible for their
14
Industrial and Commercial Training
Volume 28 · Number 7 · 1996 · 9–15
own learning; and also “flatter” organizations.
Several job advertisements and features in the
professional personnel press provide evidence
of organizations becoming much more aware
of the benefits of flexible learning provision
and new learning technologies.
‘…There is a need therefore for all those
involved in the teaching and learning
process to be aware of developments
taking place with regard to new learn-
ing technologies…’
There is a need therefore for all those involved
in the teaching and learning process to be
aware of developments taking place with
regard to new learning technologies, to update
themselves and take advantage of the benefits
for both learner and provider/facilitator.
The multimedia industry is a young indus-
try and changes and developments are occur-
ring continually. At present, legislative control
remains far from clear but legal issues are
changing rapidly in this area and will continue
to evolve and develop as the multimedia indus-
try itself evolves and develops. If involved in a
shared/joint multimedia project then there
ought to be an equal share of profits, shared
ownership and joint licensing arrangements.
However, if such a project involves people in
different countries, then it is advisable to
consult international intellectual property
lawyers as the differences in laws between
countries is horrendously complicated.
Multimedia materials are only part of the
overall learning, training and development
scene and therefore should not really be
considered in isolation. Indeed, it has been
suggested that multimedia will be only ever be
seen as a supplement to rather than a replace-
ment for conventional forms of open learn-
ing[18]; but, nevertheless, the production of
multimedia materials raises some interesting
issues for all those involved. Further work is
still required in the area of evaluating the
appropriateness of learning technologies and
outcomes, although there are some initial
findings[19].
Finally, the question Rowntree[8] poses is
applicable to open learning, traditional train-
ing and development delivery and multimedia
production and summarizes many of the
 Using and producing multimedia materials
Sue Browell
issues raised in this article and the use of new
learning technologies in general:
How can I combine media for maximum inter-
est and effectiveness ?
References
1 National Council for Educational Technology, “Man-
agement of IT and cross-curricular Issues”, Directory
of Information, Vol. 3 Sec. 6.37, 1993.
2 Laurillard, D., Rethinking University Teaching: A
Framework for the Effective Use of Educational
Technology, Routledge, London, 1993.
3 Dahmer, B., “When technologies connect”, Training &
Development (USA), Vol. 47 No. 1, 1993, pp. 46-55.
4 Stubley, P., “Multimedia publishing”, Information UK
Outlooks, The British Library, Issue 6, 1994.
5 Littlefield, D., “Using multimedia to help employees
avoid errors”, People Management, Vol. 1 No. 13,
1995, p. 16.
6 Garai, H. and Hill, D., “The potential for multimedia in
training”, Open Learning Today, No. 29, 1996,
pp. 4-6.
7 Lockwood, F. (Ed.), Materials Production in Open and
Distance Learning, Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd,
London, 1994.
8 Rowntree, D., Teaching Through Self-Instruction. How
to Develop Open Learning Materials, (revised ed.),
Kogan Page, London, 1990.
9 Sidor, K., “New learning technologies: multimedia in
management education”, presentation at the Interna-
tional Teachers Programme, INSEAD, France, 1994
(unpublished).
15
Industrial and Commercial Training
Volume 28 · Number 7 · 1996 · 9–15
10 Hoffis, S., “Introducing multimedia”, ITs News.
Journal of the Library Association Information Tech-
nology Group, No. 30, 1994, pp. 9-15.
11 Foremski, T., in Tinsley, J. (Ed.), “Copyright – or
wrong?”, Professional Photographer, Vol. 34
No. 11, 1994, p. 24.
12 Brinson, J.D. and Radcliffe, M.F., Multimedia Law
Handbook – A Practical Guide for Developers and
Publishers, Ladera Press, Menlo Park, CA,
1994.
13 Charlesworth, A., “Tooling up on the law. Multime-
dia”, Times Higher Education Supplement, Issue 5,
1994, pp. xiv.
14 Browell, S., “Training and development specialists and
the law”, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol.
20 No. 2, 1996, pp. 25-32.
15 McCracken, R., “Electronic property maze. Multime-
dia”, Times Higher Education Supplement, Issue 4,
1994, p. iii.
16 Williams, G., “Sound legal advice”, Amiga World, Vol.
10 No. 8, 1994, pp. 31-3.
17 Tinsley, J., “Copyright – or wrong?”, Professional
Photographer, Vol. 34 No. 11, 1994, p. 24.
18 Littlefield, D., “Open learning by PC or paper?”,
Personnel Management, Vol. 26 No. 9, 1994,
pp. 55-8.
19 Draper, S.W., Brown, M.I., Edgerton, E., Henderson,
F.P., McAteer, E., Smith, E.D. and Watt, H.D., Observing
and Measuring the Performance of Educational
Technology, a report by the University of Glasgow’s
Institutional Project in the Teaching and Learning
Technology Programme – Teaching with Independent
Learning Technologies, 1994.