Before You Train People, Prepare Them to Learn
Organisations spend considerable time and money trying to create better learning opportunities for their people.
They search for experienced facilitators.
They invest in learning platforms.
They design competency frameworks.
They purchase courses.
They bring in external experts.
They create elaborate learning calendars.
And then, on a Monday morning, an employee receives an email:
“You have been nominated for a training programme tomorrow. Please attend.”
That one email may reveal what is wrong with the entire approach.
The organisation has invested in the training.
But has it invested in creating the conditions for learning?
A Great Programme Cannot Compensate for an Unready Learner
Imagine bringing an excellent facilitator into a room with 25 employees. The programme has been carefully designed. The facilitator understands the business context. The activities are practical. The examples are relevant.
But several participants do not know why they are there. Some believe they were nominated because their manager had to send somebody. Others are worried about the work accumulating while they sit in the classroom. A few have their laptops open because they are expected to respond to emails. Someone leaves midway for an “urgent call.” Another participant has already decided that the programme has little relevance to their role.
How much can even an excellent facilitator accomplish in that environment?
Probably far less than the organisation expects.
The problem is no longer the quality of training. The environment around the training is working against the learning.
We Prepare the Programme. Do We Prepare the People?
Consider how much preparation typically happens before a corporate training programme.
The L&D team identifies a facilitator. Meetings happen. Content is discussed. Dates are finalised. Logistics are arranged. Invitations are sent.
But one important preparation is frequently missing:
Preparing the learner.
Before someone enters a learning programme, do they understand:
Why am I attending this?
What problem are we trying to solve?
How will this help me perform better?
What will I be expected to do differently afterwards?
Will my manager support me in applying what I learn?
Was my perspective considered while designing this programme?
When these questions remain unanswered, training can easily become another organisational obligation.
Something to attend.
Something to complete.
Something to mark on the learning calendar.
And eventually, something to forget.
Sometimes Resistance to Training Is Created by the Organisation
It is easy to say:
“Our employees are not interested in learning.”
But before reaching that conclusion, organisations should examine the environment they have created.
If employees repeatedly experience training that has little connection to their work, why would they be enthusiastic about the next programme?
If they are expected to attend training while simultaneously managing their normal workload, how much attention can they realistically give it?
If programmes are selected without asking learners or their managers what challenges they actually face, why should employees feel ownership?
If nothing happens after the programme, why should they believe this one will be different?
Over time, employees learn something about training itself: It is an event to attend, not an opportunity to improve.
That is not necessarily a learner problem.
It may be a learning-culture problem.
Create Demand for Learning Before Delivering Learning
What if the process began differently?
Instead of simply announcing a programme, explain the business or performance challenge behind it.
Instead of only telling employees what they will learn, show them where those capabilities could help them.
Ask participants about the situations they struggle with.
Let managers discuss expectations before the programme.
Use those inputs to shape scenarios, examples and practice.
Tell participants what will happen after the programme and how they will be supported in applying what they learn.
Most importantly, protect the learning time.
If an employee is in a learning programme, allow them to actually be in the learning programme.
A participant who is simultaneously attending training, answering emails, joining calls and worrying about unfinished work is technically present.
But presence is not participation. And participation is not necessarily learning.
The Learning Environment Begins Before the Classroom
We often think of the learning environment as the classroom, facilitator, technology or LMS.
It is much bigger than that.
The learning environment includes what managers say about the programme.
It includes whether employees understand its purpose.
It includes whether learners had a voice in identifying their needs.
It includes whether their workload allows them to participate properly.
It includes whether experimentation is encouraged afterwards.
It includes whether managers ask, “What are you going to apply?” rather than merely, “Did you complete the training?”
All of these signals tell employees how seriously the organisation itself takes learning.
And this is why learner readiness cannot be treated solely as the learner’s responsibility.
Organisations cannot demand a learning mindset while simultaneously creating an environment that makes learning difficult.
Before the Next Training Invitation Goes Out
Before announcing the next programme, organisations could ask a few simple questions.
Do participants know why they have been selected?
Not just the name of the programme, but the problem it is intended to help them solve.
Have participants had any voice in the process?
Even a short questionnaire, manager conversation or pre-programme diagnostic can help learners see that the programme is being built around real challenges rather than assumptions.
Have managers been brought into the conversation?
A manager who treats training as an interruption sends a very different message from one who discusses the programme beforehand and asks afterwards: “What are you going to apply?”
Has learning time actually been protected?
If participants are expected to attend training while continuing to answer emails, take calls and manage routine work, the organisation has not really allocated time for learning. It has merely added training to an already full working day.
Do people know what happens after the program?
Practice, manager conversations, reinforcement, application tasks and follow-ups tell employees that the organisation expects learning to translate into behaviour.
None of these require another learning platform or a larger training budget.
They require something more fundamental:
Intentional preparation before learning begins.
Don't Just Buy Better Training. Build Better Conditions for Learning.
An organisation can buy an excellent LMS. It can hire an outstanding facilitator. It can license world-class content. It can create sophisticated learning pathways.
But it cannot purchase curiosity, attention, ownership or willingness to learn in the same way. Those have to be cultivated.
That means the work of L&D does not begin when the facilitator enters the room.
It begins much earlier.
Create relevance.
Build awareness.
Involve learners.
Align managers.
Protect learning time.
Explain what happens afterwards.
Give people a reason to care before asking them to attend.
Because sometimes the biggest problem with a training programme has nothing to do with the programme itself.
We spend so much effort preparing learning for people that we forget to prepare people for learning.
A Question Worth Asking
Before approving the next training programme, perhaps organisations should ask one question before discussing the facilitator, content, platform or budget:
Have we created the conditions in which our people will actually want and be able to learn?
Comments