What if the workshops I’ve delivered for 15 years haven’t really changed anything? Not the kind of question you want to ask mid-career. But here we are.
For nearly 15 years, I’ve facilitated corporate training in my areas of expertise. I know how to make a session engaging. I’ve seen strong evaluations, NPS scores, testimonials.
But has it actually changed anything? Do participants leave and apply what they learned? Do their leaders and peers see a positive change?
Here’s the truth. Most of the time, I have no way of knowing.
I don’t get to observe participants weeks later. I don’t hear how they handled a tricky stakeholder, or led a kickoff, or gave a tough presentation. And if I do hear from them (or reach out directly), the results are self-reported. They may think they’ve improved. But would their peers say the same?
Then, a few years ago, a coworker said something to me I haven’t been able to let go. We’d just taught a 2-day presentation skills class where on the second day, participants delivered a 5-minute presentation on video and in front of their peers for feedback.
The growth was visible. The slides were better than the day before. The delivery was more engaging and to the point. And even in front of a camera, participants looked visibly comfortable (usually).
Afterward, my coworker said out loud what I was quietly thinking too: “I wish every class were like this. You can see they learned something.”
The moment changed something for me. It forced me to look back: When have I seen real signs that people carried the learning with them? My answer:
- The business analysis session where people wrote real requirements for feedback.
- The PM Essentials class, where we executed a mini-project end to end.
- The leadership program where people left with a development plan they built.
Those weren’t just interactive—they were immersive, practical, and observable in real time. And this has reshaped how I think about training. Here’s what I believe now:
Training isn’t the same as learning. And learning isn’t the same as change.
Why the Question is Trickier Than It Seems
Training is often a go-to solution—for good reason. It feels efficient. It’s relatively inexpensive. It doesn’t require systemic change. You can book a room, bring in a facilitator, check the box, and feel like progress was made.
And from the outside, it often looks like it worked. Participants stay engaged. They contribute to discussions. They rate the session highly. You might even hear a few excited takeaways in the hallway afterward.
But if we’re honest—especially in the soft skills space—it’s incredibly hard to know if it changed anything.
As one TrainingIndustry.com article put it, “There is a noticeable lack of research on training designs that drive proven behavioral change in soft skills training.” That’s not just a research gap—it’s a problem for anyone trying to invest wisely.
And as a facilitator, it’s difficult to get clients to pay for follow-up coaching, or even follow up internally with on-the-job support.
Whether due to budget, priorities, or time, most training is a one-and-done event. No reinforcement. No feedback loops. No accountability.
That’s not because leaders don’t care. It’s because training is often sold—and bought—as a fast, low-friction fix.
The Real Problem: We Don’t “Get” How People Really Learn
Right now, I’m reading a great book by Nick Shackleton-Jones called How People Learn. (If you’re in the L&D space, I highly recommend it.)
A key takeaway that resonates with how I’ve recently shifted my thinking:
We treat training like content transfer.
But real learning doesn’t work that way—especially when it comes to soft skills. And especially when participants have been “voluntold” to attend.
People don’t change because they saw a great slide or heard a compelling story. They change when they connect emotionally to the material. When they see themselves in it. When they feel discomfort or curiosity. When they try something, get feedback, and try again.
Learning From My Experience (Finally)
Reflecting on the workshops that have led to practical change—for example, an email with specific examples of how the person has implemented a technique or practice—I’ve observed that real learning tends to follow a chain:
Motivation → Emotional Connection → Practice → Feedback
- Motivation can be present already (ideal) or created through experience—not through a Powerpoint explaining why something is important.
- Emotional connection is what makes the topic feel personal, not theoretical.
- Feedback builds confidence—but only if it’s useful, not just “talk to your neighbor” busywork.
- Follow Up (whether delivered by a third party or internally) ensures that behavior is actually changing and learning is applied in a way that achieves outcomes.
Most training skips or compresses these steps. We try to manufacture motivation with icebreakers, simulate relevance with generic examples, and leave reinforcement entirely to chance.
No wonder even the best participants walk away saying, “That was great!”—and then default to old behaviors under pressure.
The problem isn’t that people can’t learn. It’s that we rarely give them the conditions to.
Over my career, the training I lead has naturally drifted into this more effective flow—but now I understand why it works. And I’m leaning into it…hard.
Designing Learning that Works
Over time, I’ve stopped asking, “What content do you want to cover?” and started asking something else:
“If this training worked exactly as you hoped, what would be different afterward?”
It moves the focus from slides to behavior. From delivery to outcomes. And it forces both facilitator and sponsor to get honest about what success really looks like.
A few other shifts that make a difference:
- From “What should be on the evaluation?” → “How will we know it worked 30 or 90 days from now?”
- From “What should we include?” → “What has to be practiced in the room to build confidence?”
- From “What’s a good icebreaker?” → “What will create urgency and emotional relevance fast?”
And here’s a big one:
- From “Will it be interactive?” → “Will it challenge people to do real work—and give them real feedback?”
The best sessions I’ve led in the last few years looked less like presentations and more like live practice labs. They’re harder to facilitate, harder to standardize, and harder to prepare for. I find myself spending a lot of time in front a flip chart with a marker, adjusting the lesson to interests, then talking from prepared remarks. It’s tough work.
But over the past year, I get follow-up emails, Teams messages, even public posts after every class about how people are applying what they learned. It’s something I can (finally) observe.
It’s unflattering to say but: The less I “teach”, the more people seem to learn.
What to Try Today
The next time someone asks you to schedule a training—or you catch yourself suggesting one—pause and ask:
“What outcome are we actually hoping for?” “How will we know it worked?”
Let the answers shape everything else.
Even if you move forward with training, you’ll design it differently. You’ll make it less about covering content, and more about creating change.