NIMFAH_
Get in touchContact

Learning Experience Design  ·  Scenario-based onboarding

The first fifteen minutes decide the whole shift.

Onboarding that trains last-mile delivery associates to decide under pressure — not to recite a checklist. Designed, art-directed and built end to end.

Play the scenario →Four decisions, two minutes, right here on this page.Read the design document ↓23-page PDF: brief, objectives, architecture, measurement.Take the job aid ↓One page: the triage, the four triggers, the escalation template.Open the storyboard →Ten annotated screens, developer-handoff standard. Excel download.
Role
Sole designer and developer — brief, objectives, branching architecture, storyboard, art direction, Rise and Storyline build, accessibility, measurement plan
Client
MileOne Logistics — a realistic fictional carrier
Audience
New delivery associates and newly promoted dispatch coordinators
Duration
37–48 min · Rise 19–24 · Storyline 8–12 · field guide 10–12
Tools
Storyline 360 · Rise 360 · Figma · Illustrator · Photoshop · Audition · NVDA and VoiceOver

MileOne Logistics is fictional, created for this project. All scenarios and data are illustrative. No metrics here are reported outcomes.

01The Problem

The gap isn't knowledge. It's deciding.

A last-mile operation loses more ground in the first fifteen minutes of a shift than in the eight hours that follow. Most new associates can recite the pre-shift checklist. What they can't do yet is decide under competing pressure — and that is the one thing a checklist cannot teach and a knowledge check cannot measure.

So the design problem wasn't "build a pre-shift course." It was: how do you let someone practice the first fifteen minutes of a bad morning forty times before it counts?

Fix

I can resolve this myself, right now, safely, within policy.

Flag

Someone else has the authority or the information. Tell them now, completely.

Note

This doesn't change today's plan, but it goes on the record.

Three dispositions, not two. A two-way model makes every right answer "escalate," which is useless as training and untrue to the job. The third creates the middle path where most real pre-shift discoveries actually live.

02The Scenario

Four decisions. Fifteen minutes. Try it.

A working miniature of the Storyline build — the same four decision points, the same three tracked dimensions, the same categorical-safety interrupt. Scoring and feedback are taken from the design document.

Safety70
Service70
Time left15 min

Decision 01 of 04  ·  7:11 a.m.  ·  Van 4412

Rear right is at 61. Spec is 80. Yesterday, same tire, you wrote down 78.

The station compressor is working and there's nobody waiting for it.

What do you do?

03How It's Built

A state machine wearing a story.

The four decision points are not authored preferences. Six objectives had to be assessed, each one needing an interaction that teaches it and a piece of evidence that measures it, and the scenario is what that requirement produced.

Objective-to-evidence map for the First 15 curriculumSix learning objectives, each traced left to right across four stations: its level in Bloom’s taxonomy, the course interaction that teaches it, the assessment evidence that measures it, and the workplace behavior it supports. Every one of the six traces completes all four stations. An objective whose row cannot complete is not measurable and is cut rather than shipped.ObjectiveBloomInteraction that teaches itEvidence that assesses itWorkplace behavior supportedLO1Classify five mixed discoveriesas Fix, Flag or NoteApplyRise L2 process block → sorting activity,eight real discoveries → L4 checkSort pattern · KC4 score · all four dashboardcards visited before roll-outReaches a disposition on every pre-shift discoveryinstead of proceeding by defaultLO2Distinguish a degrading vehiclecondition from a stable varianceAnalyzeRise L3 labeled graphic → tabs (pressure,fluid, load, lights) → Decision Point 1DP1 choice and points · KC2 · remediationflag if the Safety floor tripsAirs up and logs a cold variance; flags a 19-psiovernight drop as a suspected leakLO3Select and justify the safestaction under competing pressureEvaluateDecision Point 3, priority conflict, withconsequence layers → Rise L5 scenarioDP3 choice · Safety and Service deltas ·debrief justification promptProtects the medical receiving window undervolume pressure instead of absorbing firstLO4Compose a four-fieldescalation messageCreateRise L5 accordion with a worked example→ scenario block → DP2 compositionDP2 message variant scored against thefour-field rubric · Module C reflectionEscalations arrive complete and actionable;no follow-up call neededLO5Sequence a route protectingcustody and delivery windowsApplyRise L3 flashcards, custody categories →dashboard manifest card → DP3DP3 sequencing choice · Time budgetconsumed · Service scoreMedical tote sequenced first; volume absorbedafter commitments are protectedLO6Appraise an access instructionagainst safety policyEvaluateRise L4 accordion, access-note red flags→ Decision Point 4DP4 choice and Safety delta ·documentation sub-choiceDeclines to enter a dwelling; delivers to thesafest compliant point and documents it
Every objective traced to an interaction, a piece of assessment evidence, and an observable workplace behavior. The point of the picture is that none of the six rows stops early — if a row cannot complete, the objective is not measurable, and it gets cut rather than shipped.
Branching map of the First 15 scenarioA shift-start dashboard leads to four decision points, each offering four branches, which converge on a performance debrief. Two branches are categorical safety violations — drive on the under-inflated tire at decision one, and follow the access note into the dwelling at decision four. Each interrupts the scenario, runs a two-screen micro-lesson, and returns the learner to the same decision with that option disabled and points capped. The preferred route, one option at each of the four decisions, is traced through in gold.Preferred routeCategorical gate — interrupts, then returnsThe other fourteen branchesDashboard4 cards · gatedDP1Vehicle7:11AAir up · log · flagBAir up and rollCDrive and monitorDPark and waitDP2Label7:13AException · photo · flagBLoad, sort laterCSet asideDCall, no trackingDP3Priority7:14AResequence · confirmBAbsorb and pushCWait for volumeDResequence, silentDP4Access7:19APlan non-entry · flagBFollow the noteCMark undeliverableDDecide at the gateSTOP · 1Cmicro-lesson · 40sre-decide · capped 15STOP · 4Bmicro-lesson · 40sre-decide · capped 15Debrief5 layers
Four decision points, sixteen branches, two categorical gates that interrupt and return, and one preferred route traced through a structure visibly larger than it. The scoring model was verified by enumerating every reachable run — which is how the gate that could raisea learner’s safety score was found, three drafts after it was written.
Branching
38 slides across 7 scenes · 4 scored decision points · 12 tracked variables
Scoring
Points assigned per choice, so a native results slide reports to the LMS while custom Safety, Service and Time variables drive the coaching
Safety gate
Below 55, a Critical Risk layer interrupts, a two-screen micro-lesson runs, and the learner re-decides with a remediation flag set — so the LMS can tell a first-pass result from a second one
Consequence
Delayed on purpose. Top up the tire and go, and the warning returns at stop nine, on a bridge approach — then the station lead talks to you
Debrief
Replays the learner's path and shows how each choice moved each dimension. Fast-and-exposed gets different coaching from careful-and-costly, because those two people need opposite advice
Rise 360
Six lessons before the scenario for the model; a field guide after, built to reopen on a phone in a van at 6:55 a.m.
Accessibility
No timers anywhere · nothing signaled by color alone · explicit focus order on every slide · captions and transcript · reduced motion set before the story starts
Standards
WCAG 2.1 AA · SCORM 1.2 and 2004 4th Edition · optional xAPI decision-path statements
Measurement
The scenario records a path string for every learner, so the plan surfaces which distractor a cohort picks most. That is a curriculum instrument, not a report

SB-06  ·  S3.4-DP1-CriticalRisk  ·  one of ten storyboard screens

Layout
A LAYER, not a slide. Base dims to Ink at 85% over 300ms, no other motion. 2px Crimson #9E2B2Brule at y=180. "STOP." display serif 48px Paper at x=64 y=216.
Audio
One low sub-bass note, −26 LUFS, once, no tail. No voice — the absence of a narrator is more serious than a narrator.
Dev notes
Set three layer properties explicitly, because the defaults are wrong. On exit, apply the chosen option’s authored Safety cost — −20 here, −25 at DP4 — and clamp to 0–100. An earlier draft set varSafetyScoreto a flat 60 instead, which meant a learner who arrived already below 60 gained points for committing the violation. A gate that can raise your score is not a gate. The re-trap that the flat value was there to prevent is handled by a guard, not by the number — varFloorFired for the accumulation floor, varRedecidedHere for the gate itself. Keeping those separate from varRemediationFlag matters: the flag is the record and has to survive a retry, so a guard sharing it would stop firing on every attempt after the first.
A11y
The crimson rule is decorative; the word STOP. carries the meaning. Dismissible only via Continue; Escape must not close it.
04What I'd Do Next

Three honest next steps.

Test
Whether ninety-second triage survives real use. Five think-aloud sessions with associates inside their first three weeks, at a real station, before the shift.
Improve
Decision four is the weakest branch. Access notes vary too much by station for one scenario to carry — replace the single note with a pool of three, swapped by a random variable.
Scale
The dashboard, the three-dimension scoring, the remediation pattern and the debrief are a reusable shell. Swap the content layer and it's a warehouse shift start, a clinic opening, a field-service morning.

The instructional model was the hard part. The tooling wasn't. What I'd want a hiring manager to take from this is that I can be handed a messy operational problem, find the actual performance gap inside it, build a model simple enough to fit on a wallet card — and tell you plainly which parts still need testing.

AccessibilityDesigned to WCAG 2.1 AA. Contrast verified for every color pair, all interactions keyboard-operable with a visible focus indicator, nothing conveyed by color alone, narration captioned and available as a transcript, no timed interactions. Tested keyboard-only and with NVDA and VoiceOver.

Designing learning that holds up under real conditions.

Available for learning experience design and instructional design roles.

← LXD/ID