Why Most Workplace Training Programs Are Missing the Point: A Honest Assessment from the Trenches
We’ve turned workplace learning into a compliance exercise instead of skill building.
I’ve been running workplace development programs across Australia for seventeen years now, and honestly? Most of what passes for training today is complete garbage. In the old days, you learned by working alongside someone who actually knew what they were doing. Messy, sure. But it worked.
We’ve replaced actual learning with digital bureaucracy. It’s mental.
Here’s what nobody wants to admit: most workplace training fails because we’re trying to fix people problems with technology solutions. Just recently I watched a company spend four hours teaching people to use software that any teenager could master in ten minutes. Everyone was talking about seamless integration while people wrestled with basic functions.
The Issues Everyone Pretends Don’t Exist
Australian businesses are dumping money at training like it’s confetti at a wedding. The numbers I keep seeing suggest businesses spend hundreds of billions in employee development. That’s a massive number. Yet studies show people forget most of what they’re taught within days.
Spent time with a large mining operation in WA. Outstanding business, safety standards that put most companies to shame. But their mandatory compliance training? Absolute joke. Online courses that people completed while doing other work. The real learning happened during smoko breaks when the old-timers shared stories about near misses.
That’s when it hit me. We’re teaching people how to pass tests, not how to do jobs.
Production environments often have better methods to skill development. Been to plants in regional Victoria where people develop skills through real projects rather than academic exercises. Nothing beats seeing young workers pick up skills from experienced mentors.
Good luck convincing head office when they’ve spent six figures on digital platforms.
Simple Solutions We Keep Overlooking
Person to person knowledge transfer trumps everything else. The evidence is undeniable across all sectors. Match knowledge holders with eager learners and the results are incredible.
The big banks like Westpac have figured out peer learning in their retail operations. Nothing complicated, just experienced staff paired with new hires working on actual customer issues. The results speak for themselves: better retention, faster skill development, higher job satisfaction. Simple stuff that works.
Yet most organisations still default to classroom style sessions where someone talks at people for hours about theories they’ll never use. Why? The metrics are easy. Administrators love the data : attendance records, certificates, completion rates.
All that accumulated wisdom walks out the door when veterans retire because we’ve ignored informal learning.
I made this mistake myself early on. Thought I could systematise everything, create standardised modules that would work for everyone. Invested ages creating what seemed like ideal orientation training. Professional slides, interactive elements, even some dodgy role playing exercises.
Total disaster.
Turns out people learn in various ways, need different things, and respond to different approaches. Who would’ve thought?
The Emotional Intelligence Obsession
EQ development programs drive me mental. Most tender documents mention EQ requirements. Like you can teach someone to understand human emotions through PowerPoint slides.
Don’t get me wrong, EQ matters. Obviously it matters. But the way we’re approaching it in corporate training is backwards. Emotional skills come from practice with actual people. Not via computer tests that assign you colours or animal types.
Saw an organisation waste big cash on feelings workshops. Professional trainer, premium facility, elaborate resources that got ignored. Follow up surveys showed zero improvement. Turnover actually increased.
Know what would’ve made a difference? Teaching those managers how to have actual conversations with their people. How to actually hear what people are saying. How to recognise their limitations.
But that’s harder to package into a neat training module.
Technology’s False Promise
Technology vendors keep claiming their platforms will transform how people learn. Individual learning journeys, responsive materials, targeted knowledge delivered instantly. Sounds brilliant in theory.
Truth is: these solutions address fake issues while missing real challenges.
Saw an organisation deploy an AI system designed to diagnose learning needs and suggest appropriate courses. Cost them six figures and took eight months to deploy. The platform kept suggesting Excel courses to people who’d been using spreadsheets for twenty years whilst missing obvious knowledge gaps in customer service protocols.
At the same time, top performers were organising casual learning meetings over sandwiches. No technology required.
Genuine breakthroughs in training aren’t emerging from tech companies. Innovation comes from businesses that build environments where knowledge sharing happens naturally.
What I’m Seeing That Actually Works
A few organisations have figured this out, which keeps me optimistic.
The hardware giant does product training incredibly well. Instead of formal modules, they get suppliers to run hands on sessions with staff. Actual merchandise, genuine inquiries, authentic challenges. People acquire expertise to assist shoppers, not tick regulatory boxes.
Traditional apprenticeships mixing classroom learning with workplace experience outperform university style programs. Technical colleges working with actual companies offer meaningful employment opportunities.
It’s consistent: training linked to actual jobs, mentored by experienced workers, with direct practice opportunities.
Yet somehow we keep defaulting to classroom style delivery because it’s familiar and measurable.
What Nobody Wants to Hear About Training Satisfaction
Here’s something that’ll upset the training industry: engagement scores often have nothing to do with learning effectiveness. I’ve run sessions where participants rated the experience highly but couldn’t demonstrate any behaviour change six months later. Conversely, run training that participants hated initially but that genuinely improved their capabilities.
The best learning often feels uncomfortable because it challenges existing assumptions and requires people to change established habits. But uncomfortable experiences don’t generate positive feedback scores, so we avoid them.
We’ve designed workplace training for participant satisfaction rather than actual learning outcomes. Comparable to rating exercise programs on fun factor instead of physical results.
The Way Forward
No magic bullets exist for these challenges. Honestly, I’m not sure anyone does. Workplace training emphasises processes and measurements rather than its core purpose: building useful capabilities.
Maybe the answer isn’t better training programs. Maybe it’s creating workplaces where learning happens naturally through the way work gets organised and relationships get built.
Could be we need reduced classroom time and increased collaborative learning on genuine projects.
Possibly optimal growth occurs when we quit micromanaging education and begin trusting individuals to learn with proper guidance.
Or maybe I’m just getting old and nostalgic for simpler times when learning meant watching someone who knew what they were doing and gradually getting better at it yourself.
Whatever the case, existing methods don’t serve most employees effectively. And pretending otherwise won’t fix it.