TrainingEffectiveness
I was convinced I had nailed it. A training program that was interactive, relevant and packed with real-world application. It was well thought-out, taking into account the team’s business objectives and had a measurement plan designed to show impact. It was innovative and engaging. It even had take-away tools people could use on the job.
The feedback was glowing. Participants loved it.
But six months later, at a quarterly meeting with the leader of the team to review the data, I discovered the harsh truth: Nothing had changed. The problem the training was meant to solve was still there — the same mistakes, same complaints, same performance issues.
I had mistaken great training for effective training.
And I had completely dropped the ball on D4: Drive Learning Transfer — arguably the most important of “The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning.”
If you’re in L&D, I’m betting you’ve done the same.
Think about it: How much of the training you deliver gets used? Not just “how many people completed it” or “how much they liked it,” but how much of it actually changed behavior?
Being honest, the answer is probably not enough. And that’s because we focus too much on delivery and not nearly enough on transfer.
Roy Pollock, co-author of “The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning” and presenter for the
LTEN 6Ds workshop, recently posted something on LinkedIn that hit me hard:
“We’ve known for decades that learning transfer is critical, yet most organizations still struggle with it.” We’ve known this for more than 60 years, he pointed out, and yet we’re still here:
Tracking completion rates instead of behavior change.
Hoping managers reinforce learning instead of ensuring they do.
Acting like our job is done when the training ends.
And that’s why most training fails to make a real impact.
In 2006, a medication error at a Cleveland hospital led to the death of two-year-old Emily Jerry. A pharmacy technician, lacking proper training and oversight, prepared a chemotherapy IV bag with a saline solution 26 times too concentrated. The supervising pharmacist missed the error, and Emily received a lethal dose.
This tragedy was ultimately a failure of learning transfer — the training may have been delivered, but it wasn’t effectively reinforced, applied or monitored in practice. It also led to Emily’s Law, mandating stricter training and certification for pharmacy technicians in Ohio.
While not every failed training results in a life-or-death situation, it does represent wasted time, wasted money and a missed opportunity to drive real change.
Training means nothing if learning transfer isn’t baked into the process. It has to be a requirement, not an afterthought. Learning transfer must be a built-in, non-negotiable part of learning design — ensuring every future program prioritized application, not just delivery.
If you follow the 6Ds, you know that D1 — Define Business Outcomes starts with clarity on what the training is meant to change. This is where you, as the learning professional, draw a line in the sand:
Training is not just an event - it must include learning transfer, co-owned with managers.
Gaining leadership buy-in at this stage is critical. Leaders must commit to ensuring that managers understand and execute their role in making learning stick.
Set clear expectations for how the training should be applied before it even begins.
Equip managers to discuss training goals with employees before they attend — and confirm that learners have identified a real, job-related challenge to bring into training. This ensures the skills being taught are immediately applied to their work.
Ensure learners take the pre-training preparation seriously. No generic or hypothetical cases — learners must enter training ready to solve a real challenge.
Learning transfer doesn’t start after training; it starts before it even begins. Managers play a vital role in setting this expectation and making sure learners show up prepared to apply the training in real time.
This is your one chance to establish that learning is not complete at the end of the session. It’s only complete when it drives real behavior change on the job.
Learning transfer must be embedded within the learning experience itself. If learners don’t see the immediate value of applying new skills to their real-world challenges, the training becomes just another event, rather than a catalyst for change.
People learn best by doing, and the more personally relevant and urgent the training feels, the more likely they are to apply it back on the job. That means making the training itself an active process — one where learners aren’t just consuming information, but actively solving the problems they brought with them.
Use real-world examples that resonate with learners. This ties back to D1 — Define Business Outcomes, where you gathered insights from leaders on how these skills apply in real situations.
Ensure learners work through the real problems they brought to training. They should be actively solving their own workplace challenges in real time, not practicing with hypothetical cases.
Help learners create an after-training action plan on the spot. Give them the time and tools to document exactly how they will apply the training and ensure they share this plan with their manager.
If learners are working through real, meaningful challenges in training, they leave with a plan they’re already invested in. This makes post-training application feel natural, rather than something they have to figure out later.
Training doesn’t end when the session does — it only succeeds when new behaviors take hold on the job. Yet, too often, learning transfer stalls because managers aren’t given clear expectations or the right tools to reinforce what was learned. If we expect managers to drive behavior change, we must set them up for success.
Simply telling managers to “support the training” isn’t enough. They need structure, clarity and resources to ensure that learning becomes action, not just theory.
Create and share a post-training “watch list” for the manager. This is a list of observable behaviors — customized to that initiative — that managers should expect to see after training. Table 1 shows a sample watch list for a leadership training program.
An unexpected benefit of this approach is that second-line leaders — regardless of the training topic — may uncover insights about their own management styles. By taking a more structured, intentional approach to people development, they’re not just reinforcing training for their teams; they’re also reflecting on their own leadership behaviors, identifying gaps and refining their own approach.
When learning transfer becomes a cultural expectation, it raises the bar for everyone, leaders included. And when leaders improve, the impact cascades across the entire organization.
Recommend structured manager follow-ups at 30-, 60- and 90-days post-training, and give the manager a guide for those discussions. It can include short, targeted questions, such as: “What have you applied from the training,” “What’s working, what isn’t and why?” and “What barriers are you facing?”
Measure results - real ones. If training doesn’t change behavior or business outcomes, it failed. We need to track behavior change (observation, manager feedback), business impact (performance data) and learner self-assessments (ongoing check-ins).
If you’re reading this and realizing you’ve also let learning transfer slip — it’s not too late to fix it. Five years from now, instead of a similar post with the same revelation, let’s see a virtual victory lap for finally making D4 a non-negotiable standard in L&D.
We have the blueprint. “The Six Disciplines of Breakthrough Learning” has always had the answer. The only question is - are we finally ready to use it?
What will you do differently?
Jenny Allen is the founder of Nemawa Consulting. Email Jenny at jenny@nemawa.com or connect through www.linkedin.com/in/jennystrachanallen.
