Kemp Design Model

Introduction

The Kemp Design Model—also known as the Morrison, Ross, and Kemp Model—is a flexible, systems-oriented approach to instructional design. Unlike prescriptive models that follow a linear sequence, Kemp treats instructional design as a circular, dynamic process where planning, development, and evaluation occur in parallel and influence one another. First introduced by Jerrold Kemp and later expanded by Morrison and Ross, the model emphasizes practicality, continuous alignment, and responsiveness to real-world design constraints.

The Kemp Model is particularly useful in environments where stakeholder needs evolve, learner variability is high, or delivery formats are uncertain. Rather than treating instruction as a linear build, Kemp positions the designer as a systems thinker—someone who balances multiple interrelated decisions to achieve a coherent instructional experience.

What Is the Kemp Design Model?

The Kemp Model offers a structured but non-sequential framework for instructional design. It identifies nine interdependent elements that must be considered in any instructional project. These elements are not steps in a process, but design dimensions that interact and inform one another.

Unlike more rigid models, Kemp does not prescribe a starting point. Designers are free to begin wherever the project demands—whether that means identifying objectives, analyzing the audience, or selecting delivery formats—and move iteratively through the rest.

The nine core elements of the Kemp Model are:

1. Identify instructional problems and specify goals – Clarify the need for instruction and define broad goals.
2. Examine learner characteristics – Analyze the learners’ prior knowledge, experience, learning styles, motivation, and other relevant traits.
3. Identify subject content – Define the content or tasks the instruction must address.
4. Specify instructional objectives – Translate content into measurable, observable objectives.
5. Sequence content – Organize content logically, taking into account prerequisite relationships and optimal learning flow.
6. Design instructional strategies – Select methods, activities, and media to support learning.
7. Plan instructional delivery – Determine formats, environments, and delivery logistics.
8. Develop evaluation instruments – Design assessments to measure learner progress and instructional effectiveness.
9. Select resources and support services – Identify the materials, infrastructure, personnel, and services needed to implement the program.

These elements are best viewed as a design ecosystem. Decisions in one area affect others, and strong design depends on maintaining alignment across all of them.

How Does the Kemp Model Work in Practice?

The Kemp Model works by allowing designers to adapt their approach based on project realities. It provides a structure for instructional thinking without imposing a rigid workflow.

In practice, this might mean:

• Starting with learner analysis and then adjusting instructional goals accordingly
• Beginning with prototype delivery in one format, then backfilling content sequencing and assessment tools
• Re-evaluating content and delivery plans mid-project due to technology or organizational changes

For example, a learning team creating a leadership program might:

1. Conduct focus groups to identify learning needs (learner characteristics and instructional problems)
2. Draft instructional objectives and content based on organizational priorities
3. Prototype delivery in a virtual classroom format
4. Test the experience with pilot participants and refine sequencing or strategy based on feedback
5. Adjust assessment methods to better align with observed learner performance

The Kemp Model supports this kind of iteration without breaking down. Its flexibility allows instructional teams to move forward in complex environments without waiting for all elements to be finalized.

When Is It Most Useful?

The Kemp Model is especially valuable when:

• Project constraints or goals are in flux
• Multiple stakeholders contribute evolving input
• Instruction must be customized across formats or audiences
• Designers need to begin development before all decisions are locked in
• Iterative development or rapid prototyping is required

It is also well-suited for L&D teams working in:

• Cross-functional design environments
• Agile or sprint-based development cycles
• Programs where user testing will shape the design as it evolves

Rather than forcing teams to pause until every piece is in place, the model allows them to make meaningful progress while remaining open to change.

When Is It Not Useful?

The Kemp Model is less suitable when:

• Designers lack the experience or maturity to manage open-ended processes
• The project requires strict sequencing, compliance documentation, or audit trails
• Stakeholders expect detailed project plans tied to predefined milestones
• Instruction must be rapidly developed under tight constraints with minimal revision cycles

In these cases, models with clearer procedural guidance—such as ADDIE or Dick and Carey—may offer more structure and predictability. The Kemp Model assumes that designers can manage ambiguity, make informed trade-offs, and maintain alignment across elements without a prescriptive process.

Theoretical Foundations

The Kemp Model is not grounded in a specific learning theory but draws from several traditions:

• Systems thinking, which informs the model’s emphasis on interdependence among components
• Cognitive psychology, particularly the importance of learner characteristics and content sequencing
• Instructional planning theory, emphasizing alignment between objectives, content, methods, and evaluation

Rather than being tied to one philosophy, Kemp reflects a pragmatic stance: instructional design should be structured, but flexible enough to accommodate real-world complexity.

Design Considerations

Using the Kemp Model effectively requires both strategic thinking and design fluency. Key considerations include:

• Anchor your design in purpose. Even though the model is non-linear, designers must still begin with a strong sense of the instructional problem and desired performance outcome.
• Revisit alignment regularly. As elements evolve—objectives, content, strategy—ensure they still support one another.
• Use rapid cycles for feedback. Incorporate frequent learner or stakeholder input to guide iteration.
• Balance flexibility with rigor. The model allows freedom, but decisions still need to be documented, tested, and justified.
• Communicate dependencies. When working in teams, be explicit about how choices in one area affect others.

The Kemp Model gives designers room to maneuver—but only if they remain intentional in how they manage the complexity.

Cautions and Limitations

The most common critique of the Kemp Model is that its flexibility can be overwhelming for less experienced designers. Without a predefined entry point or sequence, it can be difficult to know how to begin or how to coordinate team roles.

Additionally, because it offers no built-in pacing, prioritization, or project planning structure, the model may require supplemental tools to manage timelines, stakeholder engagement, or resource allocation.

In high-stakes settings—such as compliance training, certification programs, or highly regulated industries—the lack of formal sequencing and documentation may be seen as a risk. In such cases, the Kemp Model may be better used as a design lens or supplement rather than a stand-alone framework.

Conclusion

The Kemp Design Model offers a flexible, systems-oriented framework for instructional design that values responsiveness, iteration, and holistic thinking. It is not a checklist or formula—it is a map of considerations that must remain in alignment as projects evolve.

In contexts where instructional design must respond to uncertainty, shifting priorities, or emergent learner needs, the Kemp Model allows teams to stay on track without becoming trapped by process. For experienced designers who can manage complexity and think systemically, it provides the freedom to design for reality, not just theory.