Sign inGet started
Skills / Learning-development

ADDIE Model

A system that fails to identify the performance gap before designing instruction will produce training that is efficient at teaching the wrong thing.

The ADDIE Model is the foundational instructional design framework used across corporate L&D, higher education, military, and government training worldwide. Developed at Florida State University and commissioned by the U.S. Army in the 1970s, its five phases — Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation — guide practitioners from identifying a performance gap all the way to measuring business impact. Each phase produces specific, named deliverables, making it the most repeatable and professionally recognized system for building training that actually closes the gap.

By Florida State University / U.S. Army · Free
Specimen 01 · Live diagnosisADDIE Model
Input

“We're a logistics company. Our warehouse supervisors are filling out safety incident reports incorrectly and missing required follow-up steps. It's…”

Diagnosis
Welcome.
Full transcript ↓
Calibrated referenceagent-skills.ai
The gap

Stop building training that misses the mark — five phases, defined deliverables, measurable results

ADDIE is a five-phase iterative system where each phase produces defined deliverables that feed directly into the next. In the Analysis phase, practitioners identify the performance gap, profile learners (demographics, prior knowledge, learning context), conduct task analysis, and inventory constraints — producing a Needs Analysis Report. The Design phase translates findings into a Course Blueprint with Bloom's Taxonomy-aligned learning objectives, an assessment alignment matrix, content sequence, and media strategy. Development builds the actual materials: storyboards, eLearning modules, facilitator guides, and job aids, with SME review cycles at alpha and beta stages. Implementation deploys the program via LMS configuration, facilitator preparation, and pilot delivery. Evaluation measures effectiveness using formative reviews within each phase and summative assessment via Kirkpatrick's Four Levels (Reaction, Learning, Behavior, Results) after delivery. Critically, the model is cyclical — Evaluation findings loop back into Analysis for the next iteration, making it both a production process and a continuous improvement system.

The problem

Most training fails not because the content is wrong, but because the design process was skipped. Subject matter experts dump content into slide decks, programs launch without measurable objectives, and organizations have no mechanism to evaluate whether behavior actually changed on the job. The ADDIE Model was developed because ad-hoc, intuition-driven training design consistently produces programs that look complete but don't close the performance gap they were built to address.

The solution

Work through each ADDIE phase with a structured guide that produces real, named deliverables — not just advice. Walk away with a Needs Analysis Report, a Course Blueprint with Bloom's-aligned objectives, an assessment alignment matrix, and a Kirkpatrick evaluation plan: the complete paper trail of professional instructional design.

You bring
  • A training topic, performance problem, or learning need you've been asked to address
  • Audience context: who the learners are, their prior knowledge, job role, and learning environment
  • Constraints: timeline, budget, and delivery modality (eLearning, instructor-led, blended, mobile)
  • Any existing materials, SME access, organizational data, or prior training history you have available
You get
  • A structured Needs Analysis Report capturing the performance gap, root cause, audience profile, and project constraints
  • A Course Blueprint with Bloom's Taxonomy-aligned learning objectives, instructional strategy, and content sequence
  • An assessment alignment matrix ensuring every objective is tested and every assessment item has an objective
  • A Kirkpatrick-based evaluation plan with specific instruments and data collection timing across all four levels
In action

Watch the methodology work.

Three specimens from a single real session: the same situation, unaided and calibrated, the full transcript, and the skill answering live in the channel where the work happens.

Fig.01The same situation, two ways
Specimens A · B
Specimen AVague
Unaided

“A compliance violation just surfaced and you're told: 'We need safety training for the supervisors — can you pull something together by next month?' You dig up a three-year-old PowerPoint, schedule a one-hour session, add a quiz at the end, and check the box. Six months later, the same errors appear on incident reports and no one can explain why the training didn't work.”

×Vague — nothing concrete to act on.
Specimen BCalibrated
With ADDIE Model

“You've completed ADDIE's Analysis phase with a Needs Analysis Report that names the performance gap, distinguishes training-solvable causes from the form-design and motivation issues that need separate interventions. Your Course Blueprint has five Bloom's-aligned objectives, a sequenced content outline, and a media recommendation for 15-minute tablet modules. The Assessment Alignment Matrix confirms every objective is assessed. Three months post-launch, your Kirkpatrick Level 3 data shows incident report accuracy improved from 61% to 94% — and your report attributes the remaining gap to the form redesign recommendation that hasn't been implemented yet.”

Specific, grounded, and ends with one clear next step.
Fig.02A real session, unedited
In-app · assistant
ADDIE ModelClaude
ADDIE Model
Welcome. We're going to work through the ADDIE Model together — Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation — producing real deliverables at each phase.
We start in Analysis, because it's both the most important step and the most frequently skipped one. Before we design a single slide or write a single objective, we need to define the performance gap.
Describe the training need as a gap: what are people currently doing, and what should they be doing instead? Don't worry about the solution yet — just the problem.
We're a logistics company. Our warehouse supervisors are filling out safety incident reports incorrectly and missing required follow-up steps. It's creating OSHA compliance risk. Leadership wants training.
Good. Let me restate that as a performance gap so we can use it in the Needs Analysis Report:
Current performance: Supervisors complete incident reports with errors and omit required follow-up steps.Desired performance: Supervisors complete OSHA-compliant incident reports with full accuracy and execute all follow-up steps within mandated timeframes.
Before we scope a training solution, ADDIE's Analysis phase requires a root cause check — because training only closes a gap caused by knowledge or skill deficiency. Other causes need different interventions.
Are supervisors missing steps because they don't know what those steps are? Or because the process is unclear, the forms are confusing, there's no time, or they don't believe it matters?
Honestly, a mix. Some genuinely don't know the required steps. Others find the paper forms confusing. A few just don't prioritize safety reporting.
That's exactly the kind of analysis that changes what you build. ADDIE flags this as a multi-cause gap:
- Knowledge deficit (don't know the steps) → Trainable via instruction- Form confusion (environmental barrier) → Job aid or form redesign, not a training course- Priority gap (motivation/culture) → Requires manager reinforcement alongside training; training alone won't transfer
For the Needs Analysis Report, I'll scope the training to the knowledge and skill components. I'll flag the form redesign and manager reinforcement as parallel recommendations — otherwise your Kirkpatrick Level 3 evaluation will show poor transfer and everyone will blame the training.
Now let's complete the audience analysis. Tell me: How many supervisors? What's their typical tenure and education level? Do they have regular computer access? And what prior safety training have they had?
About 40 supervisors. Mix — some 20-year veterans, some promoted recently. Most have a high school diploma. They work the warehouse floor and share a few tablets. Prior safety training was years ago, mostly old PowerPoint presentations.
Here's your Audience Profile section for the Needs Analysis Report:
Audience Profile- Population: ~40 warehouse supervisors- Experience range: 2–20+ years; significant variance in baseline knowledge — design for low prior knowledge- Education: HS diploma typical; avoid jargon-heavy content, use scenario-based examples from their actual work context- Technology access: Shared tablets, warehouse floor environment → mobile-optimized, short-burst modules (15–20 min max) required; lengthy desktop eLearning is not viable- Prior training: Minimal and outdated; treat as near-zero baseline- Motivation risk: Documented priority gap among some learners — build in real-world consequence scenarios and flag need for supervisor accountability follow-up in the implementation plan
Constraint Inventory- Delivery: Must run on shared tablets; short modules preferred- No dedicated off-floor training time — design for shift-start or just-in-time deployment- A laminated job aid for on-the-job reference should accompany the course as a parallel deliverable
Ready to move into the Design phase and write your Bloom's-aligned learning objectives? Or do you want me to generate the full Needs Analysis Report document first?
Let's write the objectives — I want to see what Bloom's alignment looks like in practice.
Here are your learning objectives for the Incident Reporting & Follow-Up program, written to Bloom's Taxonomy standards:
Terminal Objective (the master capability):Given a real or simulated workplace incident, the supervisor will complete an OSHA-compliant incident report and execute all required follow-up steps within mandated timeframes, with zero critical errors on a practical scenario assessment.
Enabling Objectives (the building blocks):1. (Remember) Identify the four incident categories requiring mandatory reporting under company policy and OSHA 300 log requirements.2. (Understand) Distinguish between a near-miss, a recordable incident, and a lost-time injury, and state the reporting timeline for each.3. (Apply) Complete all sections of the company incident report form accurately using a provided scenario, with no omissions.4. (Apply) Execute the five-step follow-up protocol — including witness statements, corrective action documentation, and supervisor sign-off — within the 24-hour compliance window.5. (Analyze) Given a completed incident report, identify all errors, omissions, and missing follow-up actions before submission.
Each objective maps directly to an assessment item and a content section. Want me to build the Assessment Alignment Matrix next — so you can verify the design is coherent before development starts?
Reply to ADDIE Model
What the skill is doing
01Guided Analysis Phase Interview
02Bloom's Taxonomy Objective Builder
03Course Blueprint Generator
Fig.03The same skill, in the channel you already use
WhatsApp · live
9:41
AMADDIE Modeltyping…
Messages are end-to-end encrypted. No one outside of this chat can read them.
Today
We're a logistics company. Our warehouse supervisors are filling out safety incident reports incorrectly and missing required follow-up steps. It's cr…9:14✓✓
We're going to work through the ADDIE Model together — Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation — producing r…9:14
We start in Analysis, because it's both the most important step and the most frequently skipped one.9:15
Before we design a single slide or write a single objective, we need to define the performance gap.9:15
Message

The same skill, where the work happens.

No new app to learn. The methodology runs over the WhatsApp Business API, so the answer lands as a reply in the thread you’re already in — same rigour, zero context-switch.

Reads the situation, names the pattern, returns one concrete next move.
Delivered in seconds, inside a conversation that already exists.
Specimen · WhatsApp Business API · live
Capabilities

What it does, specifically.

Each capability is a distinct move drawn straight from the source methodology — not a generic assistant guessing.

CapabilityC-01

Guided Analysis Phase Interview

A structured conversation that surfaces the performance gap, separates training-solvable causes from environmental or motivational barriers, profiles the target learner population, and inventories project constraints. Produces a formatted Needs Analysis Report ready for stakeholder review and sign-off before any design work begins.

Based on ADDIE's Analysis phase activities: needs analysis (performance gap definition), audience analysis (demographics, prior knowledge, learning context), task analysis, and resource/constraint inventory — the required inputs before any design work begins.
CapabilityC-02

Bloom's Taxonomy Objective Builder

Generates measurable learning objectives at the appropriate cognitive level (Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, Create) for any training topic and audience. Each objective uses a precise Bloom's action verb and describes an observable, assessable behavior with performance conditions and criteria.

ADDIE's Design phase requires objectives written with Bloom's Taxonomy action verbs to ensure measurability and downstream alignment; learning objectives are the anchor for all subsequent assessment item design and content sequencing decisions.
CapabilityC-03

Course Blueprint Generator

Produces a complete Design Document including learning objectives organized by module, instructional strategy per section, media modality recommendations (eLearning vs. ILT vs. blended vs. job aid), assessment strategy, and content sequencing rationale — the master specification the development team builds from.

ADDIE's Design phase output is a Course Blueprint or Design Document that translates Analysis findings into a full learning architecture; building materials without this document is the most common source of scope creep and misaligned content in training projects.
CapabilityC-04

Assessment Alignment Matrix

Creates a three-column table mapping every learning objective to its corresponding assessment item and content section, ensuring every objective is assessed, every assessment question has an objective behind it, and no content exists without a rationale. Functions as the quality audit before development begins.

ADDIE's Design phase requires alignment verification across the objectives-assessments-content triangle; misalignment — teaching one thing and testing another — is among the most common and consequential instructional design failures.
CapabilityC-05

Kirkpatrick Evaluation Planner

Designs a summative evaluation strategy across all four Kirkpatrick levels: Level 1 Reaction (learner satisfaction surveys), Level 2 Learning (pre/post knowledge assessments), Level 3 Behavior (on-the-job transfer indicators and supervisor observation tools), and Level 4 Results (business impact metrics tied to the original performance gap).

ADDIE's Evaluation phase uses Kirkpatrick's Four Levels as the standard summative framework; Level 3 transfer data and Level 4 results require organizational measurement infrastructure that must be designed before training launches, not retrofitted after delivery.
CapabilityC-06

Storyboard & Development Toolkit

Generates eLearning storyboard templates, facilitator guide outlines, job aid structures, and SME review checklists to structure the Development phase — ensuring all materials are traceable back to approved Design Document specifications and that review cycles catch errors before production is complete.

ADDIE's Development phase builds materials specified in the Design Document; storyboarding is the standard bridge between design specification and authoring tool execution, with alpha (internal) and beta (SME) review cycles as quality gates before implementation.
Tested

Graded before it shipped.

Every skill is scored against independent scenarios for methodology fidelity before it goes live — not vibes, a rubric.

What it produces
OutputD-01

Needs Analysis Report

A structured document capturing the performance gap (current vs. desired behavior), root cause analysis (knowledge gap vs. environmental barrier vs. motivation issue), audience profile with demographics and learning context, project goals, and constraint inventory. The deliverable that justifies the training investment and scopes the entire project.

OutputD-02

Course Blueprint

The master Design Document: learning objectives organized by module, instructional strategy per content section, media modality decisions with rationale, assessment strategy, and sequencing logic. The specification document the development team builds from — prevents scope creep and keeps stakeholders aligned.

OutputD-03

Bloom's Objective Matrix

A table mapping each training topic to specific, measurable learning objectives at the correct Bloom's Taxonomy level, with precise action verbs, performance conditions (the context in which the behavior is performed), and criteria for acceptable performance.

OutputD-04

Assessment Alignment Matrix

A three-column table matching every learning objective to its assessment item and corresponding content section — the design quality audit that ensures training coherence before a single development hour is invested.

OutputD-05

Kirkpatrick Evaluation Plan

A phase-by-phase evaluation strategy covering all four Kirkpatrick levels, with specific instruments (surveys, assessments, observation checklists, business metric dashboards), data collection timing, responsible parties, and success benchmarks — designed before launch, not after.

The source

Grounded in the original work.

Every answer traces back to a real source and the practitioner who wrote it — not a secondhand summary. Here is the source of record.

Source authorA-01

Florida State University / U.S. Army

The ADDIE Model was developed at Florida State University in the early 1970s under a U.S. Army contract to create a systematic, repeatable approach to training development across any subject domain. It has since been adopted as the foundational framework by the Association for Talent Development (ATD), embedded in university instructional design programs worldwide, and remains the most widely taught ID framework — underpinning corporate training programs, eLearning products, military curricula, and university course design across every industry.

Status · Inspired by Florida State University / U.S. Army’s work — not yet claimed. Are you Florida State University / U.S. Army?
Primary sourceS-01

ADDIE Model — Instructional Systems Design

by Florida State University / U.S. Army

Original research commissioned by the U.S. Army; core framework of the ATD Certified Professional in Talent Development (CPTD) credential and university-level instructional design curricula globally.

Read the original ↗
Citationinstructionaldesign.org
In the build queue

Be first to run it.

ADDIE Model is being built right now. Leave your email and we’ll tell you the moment it goes live.

Notify meEmail
At launchI have a training need I need to design — can we work through the ADDIE phases together? I want to start with Analysis so I know I'm solving the right problem before I build anything.