Key takeaways
- Catalog, assignment, completion. That is the minimum I will file.
- 360Learning and Docebo describe that job on their own sites.
- An AI headline does not replace the catalog.
- A performance product can sit beside an LMS. It does not become one.
Learning system software is where a company keeps a course, assigns it, and sees who finished. I look for those three objects. Everything else, including the AI paragraph in the hero, is secondary.
The catalog has to exist
- CatalogA course I can open
- AssignmentA team, not a slide
- CompletionA report I can export
360Learning describes an AI-driven learning platform built around courses people can create and take. Docebo describes an AI-first learning platform for employees, partners, and customers. Both are on the learning guide because the page is about learning, not about a review form that happens to allow an attachment.
Assignment and completion
I want to assign a course to a team and see a completion report an HR person can export. If the only “learning” is a link in a review, I stop and read why an LMS is not a review.
What I do with the AI claim
Both vendors lead with AI. I note that they say it. I do not score it. I ask what the model is allowed to publish to the catalog without an editor, because an unreviewed course is a compliance problem, not a feature.
Price stays blank until the page speaks
I do not have a public price from those homepages that I am willing to print as the contract. The guide leaves the price as a question for the seller. I would rather show a blank than a number from a roundup I cannot open on the vendor’s site.