It is easy to use. It does provide certain functions that is easily managed from my end but there are room for improvements such as platform performance, UX/UI, some features missing, add-ons not available unless asked, etc Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Overall, my experience has been positive, but there are a few areas where I feel the platform could be improved.
One key area is the learning artefacts. I was under the impression that the artefacts provided would be ready made or more unique learning content. However, I noticed that some of the content is sourced from YouTube or other platforms that are already easily accessible. It would be more valuable if the platform could provide more curated or exclusive learning content that we would not easily find elsewhere.
I also understand that some technical glitches are unavoidable. However, when employees face issues, I often need to provide screenshots or evidence, or arrange a call with the employee to understand and troubleshoot the issue. This can slow down the turnaround time, particularly when we need to resolve issues quickly. I would be interested to know if this is a common experience for other users or if there are ways to improve the troubleshooting process.
From a content creation perspective, I feel there is an opportunity to give trainers more flexibility. When creating a training from an uploaded workfile, the current flow is quite limited and largely presents the content like an article or document.
It would be useful to have more control over how the module is structured and presented, including the ability to add quizzes, assessments, knowledge checks or interactive elements between sections and not have a quiz/assessment done separately. At the moment, if a PDF is uploaded, the learner can essentially go through the document and reach the end to complete the training, which limits the learning experience and assessment capability.
I would also like to see the ability for users with Trainer access to create a training from scratch, rather than being limited to uploading existing content. For example, trainers could use insights or content from other learning platforms as a starting point and build a more customised learning module within the platform.
I believe this would give trainers much more ownership over the learning experience and allow us to create content that is more relevant to our organisation, rather than simply uploading existing materials.
The AI Content Builder is currently quite limiting. For companies that have their own L&D or content development resources, it would be useful to have more control to build and customise content internally instead of having to go back to Disprz for every change.
From my experience, there has been a lot of back and forth with the technical team to explain requirements, and at times the final output is not satisfactory. This affects the turnaround time and can be frustrating when the changes seem relatively straightforward from a user perspective.
There are also some UI and usability issues where I feel a better understanding of the user journey could help. I experienced this with the older version of the AI Content Builder, where there were multiple rounds of discussion and some requested functions were eventually confirmed as unavailable.
Giving Trainer users more control to create and customise learning modules themselves would make the platform much more useful, especially for organisations that already have the internal capability to develop learning content. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.