Professional Development Training: The Uncomfortable Truth About What Actually Works
I was at this corporate training session in Brisbane last week when the fella beside me started scrolling through emails. Fair dinkum, I couldn’t blame him. The facilitator was rabbiting on about “synergistic paradigm shifts” while showing us PowerPoint slides that looked like they were designed in 2003. After twenty two years running training programs across Melbourne, Sydney, and Brisbane, I’ve seen this same tired formula repeated everywhere from manufacturing plants in Adelaide to creative agencies in Fitzroy.
The thing that drives me mental? We’re throwing money at training that trains zilch but definitely enriches the training companies.
Training companies have the entire process back to front. They begin with what the training company wants to sell rather than what your people really need to learn. I’ve walked into numerous organisations where the L&D manager proudly shows me their “complete 47-module leadership program” while their best performers are walking out the door faster than you can say “employee engagement survey”.
The ugly little secret? About 73% of professional development initiatives fail to create lasting behaviour change. I made that statistic up, but it feels about right when you look at the evidence scattered across many workplaces.
I remember working with Sarah, an complete gun at a transport company. Fifteen years in operations, could untangle supply chain disasters that would send other people running. They invested big money sending her to a cookie-cutter management course. Everything she learned was theoretical nonsense with no relevance to her actual job challenges. The whole experience left her questioning whether the company understood her role at all.
The core issue? Learning has become mass production.
We’ve turned workplace learning into fast food – quick, low-cost, and ultimately unsatisfying. The same generic material gets rolled out to construction supervisors and banking executives. Imagine walking into a clothing store where everything comes in one size. Sometimes it works. Usually it doesn’t.
The next big flaw is when this training actually happens. Development programs run when it suits the organisation, not when employees are struggling with genuine problems. People get grouped together because they have similar roles, not because they face similar challenges.
I remember working with a manufacturing company in Geelong where they insisted on putting all their supervisors through communication training at the same time. Half the group were old-school managers who could sort out workplace drama with their eyes closed. The rest were recent promotions who broke into a sweat at the thought of performance reviews. Guess which group got the greatest value?
I’m about to upset some people: the majority of interpersonal skills training is totally useless.
These abilities are vital, but our approach to teaching them is fundamentally flawed. PowerPoint presentations don’t create better managers any more than recipe books create master chefs. It’s the equivalent of becoming a chef by memorising cookbooks.
Real professional development happens in the messy reality of real work situations. The training that genuinely works focuses on problems people are losing sleep over. Forget theoretical scenarios and paid actors pretending to be tricky customers. Actual problems that affected the bottom line.
L&D departments hate this because you cannot put it in a neat spreadsheet. They want neat learning objectives and tick-box assessments. But learning does not happen in neat boxes.
I don’t work with companies that want cookie-cutter programs anymore. If you want standard, hire someone else. My programs are built around the specific challenges your people face in your particular industry with your particular constraints.
Consider something like giving feedback. Everyone thinks they need feedback training. But a construction foreman giving feedback to a new apprentice about safety procedures is completely different from a marketing manager discussing campaign performance with their creative team. The context, the relationship, the entire communication approach is worlds apart.
The biggest issue might be what comes next – which is usually sweet FA.
Most training ends when people walk out of the room or close their laptop. There’s no reinforcement, no practice opportunities, no coaching support. It’s the equivalent of reading one book about photography and calling yourself a professional.
There’s a major retailer that invested nearly two hundred grand in customer experience training. Half a year later, secret shoppers couldn’t detect any difference in how customers were treated. The program itself wasn’t terrible. But there was zero follow-up support to help people apply what they’d learned.
This might upset some people, but most trainers have never actually run a business.
They’re experts at adult learning theory and instructional design. They can create compelling presentations and interactive exercises. But they’ve never had to hit a quarterly target or manage a difficult client relationship or deal with a team member who’s consistently underperforming.
You see this mismatch everywhere – advice that works in training rooms but nowhere else. The day-to-day reality of managing people and hitting targets is far more complex than any course curriculum.
The companies getting real value from professional development are doing a few things differently.
The first difference is crystal-clear objectives. Rather than woolly aims like “enhanced teamwork,” they focus on measurable problems like “reduce customer complaints by 25%”. Not “improved sales skills” but “increase conversion rates for existing customers by 15%”.
Second, they’re involving line managers in the development process. Your immediate supervisor has more impact on your professional growth than any external trainer ever will. But most organisations treat managers like they’re obstacles to development rather than partners in it.
The third difference is focusing on real results instead of happy faces on evaluation forms. What’s the point of five-star feedback if nobody changes how they work?.
Telstra has done some interesting work in this area, creating development programs that are embedded directly into people’s regular work rather than being separate events. Staff develop skills while tackling actual business challenges with expert guidance.
Don’t get me wrong – not every conventional training program is garbage. Technical skills training can be highly effective when it’s well-designed and properly supported. Health and safety programs genuinely protect people. Mandatory compliance education helps avoid costly legal issues.
But the soft skills development that most organisations desperately need? That requires a completely different approach.
The next generation of professional development mirrors old-school apprenticeships rather than classroom sessions. Staff developing skills through actual work projects with mentoring and progressively harder challenges.
This approach requires admitting that learning is chaotic, personal, and slow. You need to build coaching capabilities in your leadership team. Results are judged on impact, not on how many people attended training.
The majority of organisations aren’t ready for this shift because it requires admitting that their current approach isn’t working. Scheduling another seminar feels safer than overhauling your entire approach.
But the companies that figure this out will have a massive competitive advantage. They’ll grow capabilities quicker, keep skilled people longer, and see genuine returns on training spend.
Everyone else will continue scratching their heads about why costly training produces no results.
Your call.
If you loved this post and you wish to receive more information concerning Information on Training Providers generously visit the web site.