While learning and development have become pillars of organizational strategy for many companies, true education of employees is often overlooked in favor of perfunctory compliance trainings and box-ticking activities. When companies approach learning as an afterthought or forced exercise rather than a meaningful investment in their human capital, both the workforce and business objectives suffer in the long run.
Today we will explore where companies commonly go wrong in their approaches to learning and development, drawing from research on organizational behavior and practical examples from a variety of industries.
Measuring Learning Through Compliance
A key area where companies often miss the mark is in prioritizing compliance-focused trainings over truly educative experiences. Research has shown that when employees perceive trainings as more about checking regulatory boxes than gaining useful knowledge, they are less likely to internalize the content or transfer learning to their daily work (Cullen et al., 2020). However, viewing metrics like completion rates and post-training test scores as the sole measures of learning effectiveness is a common pitfall.
Companies across industries routinely fall into this trap. Consider mandatory online modules at many financial institutions, which bombard employees with information mainly to reduce legal risks but provide little value. Workers see them as tedious checklists to complete rather than opportunities to enhance their abilities. Similarly, manufacturing plants may rely heavily on video trainings for safety procedures that fail to engage learners or translate lessons into practical skills.
When compliance overtakes learning objectives, companies undermine their own goals of developing a highly skilled and safety-conscious workforce. They also squander opportunities for knowledge retention and on-the-job application. Organizations must look beyond superficial metrics to gauge learning's true impact.
Focusing on Quantities Over Qualities of Learning
Closely related to the overemphasis on compliance is when companies prioritize the quantity of training content and hours completed over ensuring high quality and relevance. Research finds that cramming excessive information into brief sessions often backfires by overwhelming learners and reducing retention (Merriam et al., 2007). Yet it is common practice for learning calendars to be "maxed out" with mandatory trainings, leaving employees feeling overburdened.
For example, a healthcare provider may schedule nurses for a full day each month of online modules covering many topics with little connection to their daily work. Or a software company may load engineers up with new product trainings regardless of whether they are applicable to current projects. Both scenarios prioritize meeting output targets over optimizing what employees truly need to focus on.
Quality suffers further when off-the-shelf or outsourced content lacks customization to an organization's unique culture, business context, and employee roles. While third-party courses offer convenience and variety, a one-size-fits-all approach often leaves learners disconnected from real workplace experiences. Companies miss an opportunity to make learning deeply relevant when not matching content specifically to their business and personnel.
Limiting Learning's Reach Through Silos
Another roadblock companies create is siloing learning opportunities within narrow functions or divisions rather than fostering cross-pollination across the entire workforce. Research indicates that breaking down silos boosts overall organizational performance by encouraging knowledge-sharing, innovation, and new perspectives (Anthropic, 2022). However, many companies adhere to strict boundaries around who has access to what training resources.
For example, a manufacturing plant may limit safety training to operational teams while excluding managers and designers who could also benefit. Or a marketing department at a SaaS firm provides different training pathways for individual contributors versus people managers despite overlaps in skills needed. Learning silos prevent employees from gaining diverse insights across the business that could spark new solutions.
Rather than viewing learning as an isolated HR function, companies must recognize it as a lever for cohesive cultural and strategic progress company-wide. Breaking down silos encourages cross-functional collaboration that is critical in today's interconnected business landscape. Overall organizational goals are best served when learning flows freely.
Failing to Coach Application into Daily Work
Even with the highest quality training programs, research shows that new knowledge and skills fade quickly without active application and reinforcement on the job (Caffarella, 2002). Yet many companies stop short after classroom or online sessions without building in adequate support for learners to apply their new competencies day-to-day.
In industries from tech to retail, companies may educate employees on tools, methodologies or processes through training programs but then leave individuals to integrate changes independently with little follow-through. For example, a construction firm may train project managers in new budgeting practices yet provide minimal coaching during live project implementation phases. Research finds that application coaching boosts transfer of learning far beyond training alone (Salas & Cannon-Bowers, 2001).
Effective application requires structured plans, check-ins with managers or peers, constructive feedback opportunities, resources to address challenges, and recognition of skills put into action. Though time-intensive, such strategies reinforce new behaviors and thinking to drive better long-term outcomes than one-off training events alone. True learning transformation demands continuous guidance as well as content delivery.
Ignoring Feedback Regarding Learning's Relevance and Delivery
Finally, research underscores that learners are more engaged when training meets their authentic needs and interests rather than prescribed content arbitrarily chosen by others without input (Knowles et al., 2005). Yet companies too often design or select standardized learning agendas with little consideration for employee viewpoints.
For example, an automotive manufacturer may require all engineers to complete online marketing modules irrelevant to their roles without first consulting learners. Or a software consultancy might mandate instructor-led courses although traveling long distances strains schedules. Both scenarios could be avoided through a feedback mechanism to shape relevant and accessible learning journeys.
Regular pulse checks keep training responsive and improvement-focused for optimal uptake. They reveal if learning activities support career development goals or priority skills in a given role. Feedback also identifies preferred delivery methods whether online, in-person, on-the-job, or blended approaches. When companies operationalize feedback loops, learners feel invested in designing learning experiences best aligning with their needs.
Implementing More Strategic Learning Practices
The above errors demonstrate where companies commonly go astray in developing employees through learning. However, with strategic adjustments aligned to research principles, organizations can substantially optimize workforce education efforts and outcomes. Key policies include:
Base learning success not solely on compliance metrics but value-added skills and how content enables improved job performance over time.
Limit mandatory training focused narrowly on tick-box completion to high-priority content and instead empower self-directed exploration of optional resources.
Ensure quality by customizing off-the-shelf content to business contexts, matching learning to specific employee roles, regularly reviewing content for relevance, and utilizing blended delivery modes.
Break down barriers between functions by providing diverse institution-wide access to learning resources through centralized platforms.
Institute application coaching and reinforcement practices such as check-ins, feedback loops, resources for challenges, and recognition of skills being applied on tasks.
Gather regular learner-centric feedback to determine needs, delivery preferences, and perceived learning impact and continuously shape future agendas accordingly.
Instituting research-aligned strategic methods transforms learning from a disconnected compliance obligation to a driver of engaged talents maximizing performance at individual, team and organizational levels.
Conclusion
While checklists, cursory trainings and siloed learning paths offer convenience for overburdened companies, they ultimately undermine workforce capabilities and business objectives. Real and lasting learning lies at the nexus of authentic needs, continuous growth through application, and strategic alignment across an organization's diverse goals. Companies aiming to develop workforces performing at their highest potential must move learning beyond superficial measurements and solitary exercises toward integrated experiences empowering employees as a whole. Committing to strategic education frameworks anchored by research principles cultivates the human capital powering sustainable success in today's knowledge economy.
References
Anthropic. (2022). Breaking down organizational silos. https://www.anthropic.com/blog/breaking-down-organizational-silos
Caffarella, R. S. (2002). Planning programs for adult learners: A practical guide for educators, trainers, and staff developers (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Cullen, M. A., Edwards, B. D., Casper, W. C., & Gue, K. R. (2014). Employees’ adaptability and perceptions of change-related uncertainty: Implications for perceived organizational support, job satisfaction, and performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(2), 269–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9282-y
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (6th ed.). Elsevier.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001). The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 471–499. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.471
Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.
