53
THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY
THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY
INTRODUCTION
WHAT DO LEARNERS WANT?
Learner Preferences
Learner Profiles
Learner Preferences by Training Topic
Training Method Effectiveness
Use of Delivery Methods
WHAT DO LEARNERS THINK IS MOST EFFECTIVE?
HOW ARE WE DELIVERING TRAINING?
ARE LEARNERS GETTING WHAT THEY WANT?
DO LEARNER PREFERENCES MATTER?
RECOMMENDATIONS
Which Methods Are Best Suited for Each Topic?
Conclusion
Author
APPENDIX: TRAINING DELIVERY TOOLBOX
ABOUT THIS RESEARCH
About Training Industry, Inc. Research
04 32
36
43
47
51
06
09
45
Impact of Using Preferred Training Methods38
46
48
49
11
13
18
Effectiveness by Topic20
25
Multi-Modal Training: An Example 27
Use of Methods by Training Topic28
15
22
| 2THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
| 3THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
LIST OF FIGURES
Learners’ Preferred Training Methods
Most Preferred Training Methods by Topic Trained
Impact of Training Method on Learning
Top 10 Training Methods for Enhancing Learning by Topic Trained
Use of Training Methods
Most Used Training Methods by Topic Trained
Match Between Learners’ Preferences and How They Were Trained
Impact of Meeting Learners’ Needs on Training Effectiveness
Impact of Multiple Modalities on Training Effectiveness
Impact of Match Between Preference and Use of ILT on Training Effectiveness
10
14
21
19
26
29
35
40
39
42
| 4THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
Today’s learning environment has changed and is continuing to evolve. A sizable portion of the workforce is working in nontraditional ways, including through contract, temporary and virtual work. Further complicating the learning environment, employees are more distracted than ever: They receive hundreds of emails each day and are often interrupted by messages on their smartphones and
other devices. Perhaps due to these distractions and the proliferation of web-based information, learners have come to expect on demand access to job-relevant information. They have learned to rely on their social networks and informal sources of information for learning. All of these factors impact the ability of L&D programs to engage learners.
| 5THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
For tunate ly, numerous learn ing modalities, technologies and techniques are available to address the needs of the modern learner. From more traditional methods, such as classroom-based instructor- led tra in ing, to newer, less established methods, like virtual and augmented reality, training professionals have a toolbox full of training delivery techniques to engage learners (see Appendix). Each method offers a different learner experience that may be more or less appealing, and it is unclear how learners perceive these experiences and when each method is most effectively used.
This research sheds light on the training delivery strategies that learners most prefer. By focusing not only on how
learners want to learn, but also on the match between their preferences and what we’re actually using to deliver training, we’re better able to understand the causes and effects of delivery method choice. To investigate this topic, Training Industry, Inc. pooled the results of four consecutive research survey efforts focused on learner preferences. Combined, the sample totaled 1,001 learners who participated in 2,366 training programs within the previous 12 months. The results emphasize the importance of taking learner preferences into consideration when designing training programs and provide guidance on when and how to address preferences for improved training outcomes.
Training professionals
must consider learning
preferences when designing
and delivering training.
| 6THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
WHAT DO LEARNERS WANT?
Learners are active participants in their own learning experience, and they have their own beliefs about the best ways to learn. Understanding how they want to learn can, at a minimum, improve word-of-mouth reviews of training and increase voluntary consumption of content. More importantly, to the extent that learners prefer the methods that are best for enhancing their learning, training outcomes and ROI will be better when those methods are included in training design.
WHAT DO LEARNERS WANT?
More than half of learners prefer classroom-based, instructor-led training.
Different generations want the same things.
When their jobs are complex, learners prefer virtual and
informal modalities.
Learners with more direct reports prefer self-paced methods
of learning.
LEARNER PROFILE
55%Prefer ILT
32%Prefer OJT
29%Prefer
E-Learning
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 7THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
ILT
E-learning
On-the-job Training
Video
VILT
On-the-job Coaching
WHAT DO LEARNERS WANT? Learners prefer different methods for different training topics.
Compliance
5
4
3
2
1
Customer Service
Leadership Onboarding Sales Technical
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 8THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
| 9THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
LEARNER PREFERENCES
Our research shows a clear winner when it comes to how learners want to learn; more than half selected instructor-led training (ILT) as a preferred method of training (see Figure 1). This finding is unsurprising given its predominant use in education; classroom-based training is, for many, the paradigm for learning. Moreover, it lends itself to a number of classic, tried-and-true educational techniques including lecture, visual presentation and group work.
Still, that leaves a little less than half of learners who do not prefer ILT. How do they prefer to learn? The next most preferred methods were on-the-job training (OJT),
e-learning and virtual instructor-led training (VILT). Notably, each of these modalities is offered in locations that are convenient for learners. OJT is appealing because it is provided in the environment where learners need the information and skills, so it’s more likely to provide timely information when they need it and encourage them to practice applying skills as they learn. Both e-learning and virtual classroom training allow learners more freedom in determining the location where they will participate. E-learning takes that freedom of choice one step further than VILT by allowing learners to choose when and at what pace they complete training.
Learner preferences are a modern take on learning styles. Learn more about why you should
emphasize preferences over styles here.
INSTRUCTOR-LED TRAINING
“Classroom-style, instructor-led training was effective because
I was able to ask direct questions to the
instructor.”
Voice of the Learner
55%
32%
29%
21%
18%
18%
16%
15%
15%
14%
12%
12%
12%
11%
10%
9%
9%
8%
6%User-generated Knowledge Bank
Adaptive Learning
Virtual Reality
Gamification
Formal Coaching
Podcasts
Blended Learning
Job Aids
Simulation
Mobile Learning
Books
Webinars
Informal Learning
Video
On-the-job Coaching
VILT
E-learning
On-the-job Training
ILT
| 10THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
More than half of learners prefer
classroom-based, instructor-led
training.
Figure 1.
Learners’ Preferred Training Methods
Percentage of learners who indicated a preference for each delivery method, N = 629
Key Takeaways
| 11THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Figure 1 demonstrates differences in the way learners prefer to learn. One explanation for these differences is that they are driven by systematic learner characteristics (e.g., age). If so, perhaps there are certain types or profiles of learners that can explain these differences.
For example, its widely believed that there are generational differences in the ways that employees perform work, interact with technology and, as a consequence, learn. Having grown up with technology,
it seems plausible that millennials would be more likely to prefer technology-enhanced training methods, but do the data bear out this hypothesis? Our results show that what learners want doesn’t differ across generations. There was almost no relationship between age and preferred modality1, and the order in which each generational group ranked delivery methods was nearly identical. Organizational characteristics also had little impact on preferences – learners tended to prefer the same training methods
regardless of their company’s size or profitability.
On the other hand, characteristics of the type of work participants performed were more likely to impact their learning preferences. The more direct reports that a learner had, the more likely he or she was to prefer methods that enabled self-paced and learner-driven access (i.e., mobile learning, coaching, user-generated knowledge banks, podcasts , gamification and simulations).
LEARNER PROFILES
1. There was a very slight negative relationship between age and preference for both mobile learning and VILT, such that younger learners tended to prefer those modalities slightly more than older learners. While these relationships were statistically significant, they were very small and unlikely to result in any practical implications for the way that we deliver training.
| 12THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Similarly, the more complex the learner’s job (as reported by the learner), the more likely he or she was to prefer VILT, e-learning, mobile learning and podcasts, likely driven by a desire to fit training into his or her demanding schedule. Further, learners’ preferences differed based on the industry and the department in which they worked. Learners who worked in jobs and industries with more defined routines (e.g., operations and manufacturing, customer service, and sales)
tended to prefer on-the-job training. Leaners who worked in jobs and industries that emphasize more technical, knowledge-based work (e.g., IT, HR and finance) tended to prefer virtual methodologies, such as VILT and e-learning. Many of these differences may be explained by the training topics typically provided to learners in these departments and industries. In the next section we explore differences across training topics.
| 13THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
USING E-LEARNING FOR COMPLIANCE
TRAINING
“Compliance training is effective when it is self-paced, keeps the viewer engaged by answering questions related to the mater ia l and isn’t too
lengthy.”
Voice of the Learner
Di f ferences in learner modal i ty preferences may be driven by differences in how they want to learn specific topics. Results show that preferred delivery methods differ across six common topic areas (see Figure 2)2. While ILT tops the list for each training topic, there were significant differences in the prevalence of this preference across topic, with ILT being preferred most often for leadership development and least often for compliance training. On-the-job training also differed across topic area. It was more likely to be preferred for onboarding, sales, customer service and
technical training, likely due to the hands-on nature of these topics. On-the-job coaching was preferred most often for leadership, sales, customer service and onboarding and least often for technical and compliance training. Finally, learners preferred informal training most for leadership development, sales training, customer service training and onboarding and least for both technical and compliance training. This finding is unsurprising given the formal nature of the content included in both technical and compliance training.
LEARNER PREFERENCES BY TRAINING TOPIC
2. Multi-variate analysis of variance (p <. 001)
Leadership Development
69%
30%
30%
24%
19%
19%
18%
16%
15%
15%Mobile Learning
Books
Video
Informal Learning
WebinarsOn-the-job Coaching
VILT
On-the-job Training
E-learningILT
Sales
54%
34%
26%
23%
21%
20%
18%
17%
15%
15%Formal Coaching
Webinars
Video
Books
Informal Learning
VILTOn-the-job Coaching
E-learning
On-the-job TrainingILT
Onboarding
62%
39%
27%
24%
22%
20%
18%
18%
17%
16%Simulation
Webinars
Informal Learning
Mobile Learning
Video
On-the-job CoachingVILT
E-learning
On-the-job TrainingILT
Compliance
44%
34%
24%
17%
16%
15%
14%
13%
12%
11%Mobile Learning
Informal Learning
On-the-job Coaching
BooksWebinars
VILTVideo
On-the-job Training
E-learningILT
Customer Service
58%
35%
27%
22%
20%
19%
17%
15%
14%
14%Books
Mobile Learning
Simulation
Informal Learning
On-the-job Coaching
VideoVILT
E-learning
On-the-job TrainingILT
Technical
53%
32%
30%
20%
17%
15%
15%
14%
14%
13%Informal Learning
Webinars
Books
Mobile Learning
On-the-job Coaching
VideoVILT
E-learning
On-the-job TrainingILT
| 14THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Learners’ preferred training method depends on the
topic of the training.
Figure 2.
Most Preferred Training Methods by Topic Trained
Percentage of learners indicating a preference for each delivery method, N = 629
Key Takeaways
| 15THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
WHAT DO LEARNERS THINK IS MOST EFFECTIVE?
Assuming learners prefer the methods that work best for them, their preferences can offer guidance on the methods that are most likely to be effective. On the other hand, they may prefer methods for reasons that are not related to their learning (e.g., enjoyment of games or desire to complete learning at their own pace). Further, if they’ve never experienced a method, they may not understand its potential. In these cases, their preferences may not reflect how they would actually react to a training method. In order to understand whether learners prefer the training methods that are most effective for them, we looked at how impactful they thought each method that they’d recently experienced was.
WHAT DO LEARNERS THINK IS MOST EFFECTIVE?
TOP METHODS FOR IMPACTING LEARNING
Learners believe methods that enable applied practice are most impactful.
On-the-job Training
On-the-job Coaching
ILT
Job Aids
Simulation
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 16THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
WHAT DO LEARNERS THINK IS MOST EFFECTIVE?
On-the-job Training
On-the-job Coaching
ILT
Job Aids
Simulation
Gamification
User-generated
Formal Coaching
Video
E-learning
Books
Learners rank methods differently across training topic areas.
Compliance
5
4
3
2
1
Customer Service
Leadership Onboarding Sales Technical
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 17THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
| 18THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
ON-THE-JOB COACHING
“I went to a conference in which I took a few classes in leadership training specific to my field of work. The rest of my training has come from my supervisor’s guidance on my leadership in the office with my team. Her continual feedback is more effective than a formal class, because I
can apply it in the moment.”
Voice of the Learner
Figure 3 shows that in some cases, learners don’t prefer the methods that they think are most effective. While ILT was most often preferred by learners (see Figure 1), both on-the-job training and on-the-job coaching were considered better for enhancing learning. Learners’ explanations highlighted the important of applied practice for enhancing their learning.
TRAINING METHOD EFFECTIVENESS
63%
61%
56%
52%
51%
49%
46%
44%
43%
43%
42%
40%
39%
39%
39%
37%
36%
35%Webinars
Adaptive Learning
Virtual Reality
Podcasts
VILT
Mobile Learning
Books
Video
Gamification
Informal Learning
E-learning
Formal Coaching
Simulation
Job Aids
ILT
On-the-job Coaching
On-the-job Training
User-generated Knowledge Bank
| 19THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Learners believe methods that enable applied
practice are most impactful.
Figure 3.
Impact of Training Method on Learning
Percentage of learners rating each method as very useful for enhancing learning, N = 629
Key Takeaways
| 20THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Given that learners preferred different training methods for different training topics, it follows that certain training methods may be more effective for those topics. While there were no statistically significant differences across topics3, certain methods ranked higher within each area. For example, learners felt that ILT, gamification and user-generated knowledge banks were better for compliance training. They reported that compliance training tends to be “boring,” so gamification
makes sense as a mechanism to increase engagement. Learners also said that compliance training can be fairly “basic” and may not provide a “comprehensive view”; perhaps user-generated information can help to fill that gap. A note of caution is needed, however, as this method should only be used for compliance training if you are able to heavily monitor, regulate and moderate user-generated knowledge banks. Figure 4 depicts other differences across topics.
Learners also tended to prefer the methods that were most familiar. For example, while fewer than 15 percent of learners indicated a preference for job aids, simulations and formal coaching, approximately half of those who’d experienced them recently felt they were very useful for enhancing their learning. Thus, another cause of differences in method preferences stems from learners’ knowledge of and past experiences with those methods.
EFFECTIVENESS BY TOPIC
3. Multi-variate analysis of variance, n.s.
Leadership Development
66%
63%
60%
50%
49%
48%
48%
47%
46%
45%Informal Learning
Formal Coaching
Adaptive LearningGamification
E-learning
Video
Job Aids
ILT
On-the-job Training
On-the-job Coaching
Sales
61%
56%
55%
54%
50%
48%
48%
47%
45%
45%Informal Learning
Gamification
Formal Coaching
User-generatedE-learning
Job Aids
Simulation
ILTOn-the-job Coaching
On-the-job Training
Onboarding
66%
62%
55%
54%
51%
50%
48%
45%
45%
45%Video
E-learning
Mobile Learning
User-generated
Formal Coaching
Job AidsSimulation
ILT
On-the-job Coaching
On-the-job Training
Compliance
63%
56%
55%
53%
49%
47%
45%
43%
42%
40%VR
E-learning
Formal Coaching
SimulationJob Aids
On-the-job Coaching
User-generatedGamification
ILT
On-the-job Training
Customer Service
66%
64%
57%
57%
54%
52%
44%
43%
42%42%Podcast
Video
User-generated
Informal LearningSimulation
ILT
Formal CoachingJob Aids
On-the-job Coaching
On-the-job Training
Technical
65%
62%
56%
56%
56%
54%
52%
51%
49%
49%Mobile Learning
Informal Learning
Simulation
Formal CoachingJob Aids
Books
E-learning
ILTOn-the-job Training
On-the-job Coaching
| 21THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Percentage of respondents rating each modality very useful for impacting learning, N = 629
Learners rank training methods differently across topics, but
on-the-job training is considered effective regardless of topic.
Figure 4.
Top 10 Training Methods for Enhancing Learning by Topic Trained
Key Takeaways
| 22THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
HOW ARE WE DELIVERING TRAINING?
The methods we use to deliver training depend on many factors. Methods vary based on the quantity and timing of resources that are required for their use, including those needed to develop, deliver and maintain content. Budget and resource restrictions can, therefore, place restraints on which methods are possible. The decision of which method to use must incorporate more than just learners’ preferences. So, what modalities are we currently using to deliver training?
HOW ARE WE DELIVERING TRAINING?
2/3 used ILT
Gamification User-generated Content
Virtual Reality Adaptive Learning
1/3 used on-the-job training
Fewer than 10% of learners have used:
74% of learners have received training via multiple methods.1/3 used video
TOP 3 METHODS EMERGING METHODS MULTI-MODAL TRAINING
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 23THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
ILT
E-learning
On-the-job Training
Video
VILT
HOW ARE WE DELIVERING TRAINING? The same five methods are used to deliver each training topic.
Compliance
5
4
3
2
1
Customer Service Leadership Onboarding Sales Technical
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 24THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
| 25THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Figure 5 shows the typical strategies used to deliver training. ILT is by far the most common; almost two-thirds of learners received ILT in the past year, which is a good sign, as ILT was their most preferred method. ILT’s popularity may stem, in part, from its ability to remove learners from their regular work environments, which can be distracting. It also makes it possible to deliver content in one formal event, making it an easy and efficient technique for enhancing learning. Other methods used include those that rely on on-the-job, experiential and informal social learning, as well as virtual and web-based learning methods. These modalities also align well with learners’ preferences; the four methods that learners
most prefer coincide with the top five methods used. This finding is unsurprising; these methods often provide content at the point of a learner’s need, which may enhance its application on the job. At the bottom of the list, few learners have participated in training delivered via gamification, user-generated knowledge banks, virtual reality and adaptive learning.
Results also point to the use of multiple modalities (multi-modal training) across training programs, a pattern that we’ve found consistently in previous research. Approximately 50 percent of training programs are delivered using between three and six modalities.
USE OF DELIVERY METHODS
63%
36%
34%
31%
28%
21%
21%
19%
18%
14%
14%
14%
13%
12%
11%
9%
9%
8%
7%Adaptive Learning
Virtual Reality
User-generated Knowledge Bank
Gamification
Podcasts
Formal Coaching
Blended Learning
Simulation
Mobile Learning
Job Aids
Books
Informal Learning
On-the-job Coaching
Webinars
VILT
E-learning
Video
On-the-job Training
ILT
| 26THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Percentage of learners who received training through each delivery method, N = 1,001
Almost two-thirds of learners participated in ILT in the past year.
Figure 5.
Use of Training Methods
Key Takeaways
Suzie is a new employee.
An employee manual preps her
for orientation.
Suzie attends orientation with other
new employees.
She receives on-the-job training through
interaction with peers and managers.
Training is reinforced when she accesses a
user-generated content repository.
| 27THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
MULTI-MODAL TRAINING: AN EXAMPLE
The prevalence of multi-modal training is not surprising when you think about how a single initiative can use more than one modality. Consider new employee training, for example. An onboarding program might provide new employees with an employee manual and ask them to read it before coming to a classroom
orientation. They could then interact with peers or their manager in a series of on-the-job training sessions. The program could further reinforce training by providing learners with access to a user-generated content repository, where they can ask questions, view answers to others’ questions or post their own content.
All of these strategies are methods for delivering content and enhancing learning, and each works together to meet learners where they are and at the time when they most need information.
| 28| 28THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
USE OF METHODS BY TRAINING TOPIC
Figure 6 depicts differences in the methods used across six common training topic areas. The top five methods were the same for all training topics. As expected, ILT was the top modality used across training topics. On-the-job training was second for all topics except compliance training, illustrating the convenient, efficient nature of this method. Interestingly, video ranked third across all types of training, likely due to its ability to augment
other kinds of training and the ease with which it allows for both visual and verbal content delivery. Also of note is that both e-learning and VILT were in the top five methods used in each topic area. Again, their prevalence probably arises from their ability to provide learners with convenient access to training and from their ability to efficiently scale across a dispersed workforce.
E-LEARNING VERSUS ON-THE-JOB TECHNICAL TRAINING
E-learning: “The training was somewhat ineffective as it was all taught online. Parts were hard to understand, but there was no one available to seek clarification from.”
OJT: “On-the-job training was very helpful. I was able to ask all the questions I needed to ask without feeling silly because I didn’t know something, and someone was there with me to correct my mistakes while
I was learning.”
Voice of the Learner
Leadership Development
72%
44%
43%
37%36%
33%
29%
28%
25%
22%Job Aids
Books
Informal Learning
On-the-job Coaching
Webinars
E-learning
VILT
Video
On-the-job Training
ILT
Compliance
52%
33%
28%
21%
20%
15%
14%
12%
12%
10%Mobile Learning
Informal Learning
On-the-job Coaching
Books
Webinars
VILT
On-the-job Training
Video
E-learning
ILT
Onboarding
69%
45%
37%
33%
25%
23%
21%
20%
19%
15%Books
Mobile Learning
Webinars
Informal Learning
On-the-job Coaching
VILT
E-learning
Video
On-the-job Training
ILT
Sales
63%41%
32%
29%
27%
23%
22%
20%
17%
17%Mobile Learning
Books
Webinars
Informal Learning
On-the-job Coaching
E-learning
VILT
Video
On-the-job Training
ILT
Customer Service
63%
36%
34%
31%
26%
22%
17%
16%
15%
15%Webinars
Mobile Learning
Books
Informal Learning
On-the-job Coaching
E-learning
Video
On-the-job Training
ILT
VILT
Technical
58%
32%
25%
25%24%
17%
16%
15%
13%
12%Mobile Learning
On-the-job Coaching
Books
Webinars
Informal Learning
VILT
E-learning
Video
On-the-job Training
ILT
| 29THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
The same five delivery methods were the most commonly used across
all training topics.
Figure 6.
Most Used Training Methods by Topic Trained
Percentage of learners receiving each delivery method, N = 1,001
Key Takeaways
| 30THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
4. Multi-variate analysis of variance (p <. 05)
There were some differences in the methods used to deliver each kind of training4. Organizations were more likely to use ILT for leadership development and onboarding than for compliance and technical training. While leadership development and onboarding work well in a classroom environment, compliance and technical training may not be as well suited for a live, in-person format. Trainees’ availability may also matter; new employees tend to be available for in-person events, and leaders may need to be removed from their work environments to enable consistent focus. On the other hand, for both compliance and technical training, ILT may offer fewer benefits given the expense of removing trainees from the job.
| 31THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
E-learning and webinars were also used at different rates in each topic. E-learning was the second most frequent method used for compliance training, which makes sense: E-learning offers the ability to scale across geographic and business units and easily tracks completion rates, which can be critical for regulatory purposes. Leadership training was delivered via webinars more often than in other areas, possibly because leaders have less time to spend in training, and webinars allow them to opt in to professional development at convenient times and from their desks.
F i n a l l y, w h i l e co m m o n across all topics, the use of multiple delivery methods per program was most common in leadership development and sales training and least common for compliance training. This pattern may be due to the perceived value of leadership and sa les training in terms of impacting business results; when an organization can make a case that easily ties training to business performance, it may be easier to justify an investment in multiple methods for delivery.
| 32THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
ARE LEARNERS GETTING WHAT THEY WANT?
Because training del ivery method choice must incorporate more than how learners want to learn, we might not always be accommodat ing the i r preference. To explore this idea, we asked to what extent organizations are addressing learners’ needs and acting upon their desires.
ARE LEARNERS GETTING WHAT THEY WANT?
When multiple training methods were used,
learner preferences were more likely to be met.
85% of learners experienced at least one
preferred training method.
There’s strong alignment between how we deliver
training and how learners want to learn.
Fewer than half who prefer these methods have experienced them:
Be cautious of giving learners what they
want when it’s an underused technique
– they might not know enough about it.
RECOMMENDATION
Adaptive Learning
User-generated Knowledge Banks
Simulation
Virtual Reality
Formal Coaching
Mobile Learning
Gamification
Job Aids
What Learners Get What Learners Want
63%
55%
36%
32%
34%
29%
ILT
On-the-job Training
E-learning
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 33THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
| 34THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Figure 7 depicts the percentage of learners who both preferred and experienced each training delivery method. Eighty-five percent of learners have experienced training through at least one of their preferred modalities. Given the learners’ preference for ILT and its frequent use, it’s unsurprising that the learners who preferred ILT also tended to experience it. At the bottom of the list, only one-third of the learners who preferred virtual reality training had participated in this type of training in the past year. These results are likely due to the significant cost and newness of VR, which make it less likely to be offered regardless of preference.
These findings were consistent across training topic areas; however, learners were most likely to experience at least one preferred method when participating in leadership development and least likely when participating in compliance training5. This finding is probably because leadership development used multiple methods more often than compliance training. Unsurprisingly, learners were more likely to experience training through a preferred delivery method when multiple methods were used.
Eighty-five percent of learners received training through at least one of their preferred methods.
5. Eighty-nine percent of leadership trainees experienced at least one preferred modality, versus 79 percent of compliance trainees.
Virtual Reality
Simulation
User-generated Knowledge Bank
Adaptive Learning
Job Aids
Gamification
Mobile Learning
Formal Coaching
Blended Learning
Books
Informal Learning
Podcasts
On-the-job Coaching
Webinars
VILT
E-learning
On-the-job Training
Video
ILT 85%
75%
68%
61%
58%
56%
54%
52%
51%
50%
50%
46%
44%
43%
42%
41%
39%
39%
33%
15%
25%
32%
39%
42%
44%
46%
48%
49%
50%
50%
54%
56%
57%
58%
59%
61%
61%
67%
Percentage of learners who both preferred and received the delivery method
Percentage of learners who preferred but did not receive the delivery method
| 35THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
N ranges from 66 to 445
Only one-third of learners who preferred virtual reality received training using it in the
past 12 months.
Figure 7.
Match Between Learners’ Preferences and How They Were Trained
Key Takeaways
| 36THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
DO LEARNER PREFERENCES MATTER? Our study shows that L&D
efforts are generally aligned with learner preferences; the majority of learners experienced at least one of their preferred training methods. If giving employees what they want improves their learning, it should also improve training outcomes. This final question investigates whether this statement is true.
DO LEARNER PREFERENCES MATTER?
JOB SATISFACTION
The largest driver of effectiveness was whether or not it was provided through at
least one preferred modality.
More effective training leads to greater…
WORK CLARITY
PERCEPTION OF SUPERVISOR SUPPORT
WORK CENTRALITY
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 37THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
| 38THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
6. Multiple regression analysis, p < .05 7. Multiple regression analysis, p < .05
Our findings provide strong support for the importance of matching learner preferences to the training methods used6. The largest driver of training effectiveness was whether or not it was provided through at least one preferred modality (see Figure 8). Other outcomes were also impacted; when learners were trained through
their preferred methods, they reported that their work requirements were clear, that work was an important part of their lives, and that they felt a proper balance between their work and personal lives.
In addition, the sheer number of training methods used to deliver a specific program improved training
effectiveness7 (see Figure 9). The more methods through which an organization delivered training, the more likely the training was to be effective. This outcome can probably be attributed to the increased likelihood of addressing learners’ preferences when multiple methods are used.
IMPACT OF USING PREFERRED TRAINING METHODS
At least one preferred method used 50%33%
Training Effectiveness
No preferred methods
| 39THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Training programs delivered through at least one preferred
method are 50 percent more likely to
be effective.
Figure 8.
Impact of Meeting Learners’ Needs on Training Effectiveness
Key Takeaways
Percentage of training programs rated very effective, N = 629
Number of Modalities Used
5.0
4.8
4.6
4.4
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.45 10 15 20
Eff
ecti
ven
ess
0
Effectiveness
| 40THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
N = 629 training programs
Figure 9.
Impact of Multiple Modalities on Training Effectiveness
By providing training through multiple
methods, we’re more likely to address learner
preferences and increase training effectiveness.
Key Takeaways
| 41THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
8. Multiple regression analysis, p < .05 9. Moderated regression analysis, p < .05
Interestingly, using certain methods tended to result in increased training effectiveness, regardless of whether or not a learner preferred them; these methods include mobile learning, formal coaching and job aids8. Each has the potential to provide just-in-time content and address learners’ needs as they occur. In contrast, the positive impact of using ILT depends on learners’ preference for it; when learners preferred ILT, it was more likely to be effective9 (see Figure 10).
One f inal outcome that we shouldn’t overlook is the positive
impact of effective training. Learners who felt their training was effective reported being more sa t i s f i ed w i th the i r jobs, clearer about their work requirements and more supported by their supervisors, and they considered their job to be a more important part of their lives. Thus, by providing training through learners’ preferred del ivery methods, we have the potential to create considerable ripple effects throughout employees’ work experiences.
Providing training in ways that learners want to learn has ripple effects, improving their work lives and business outcomes.
Preferred Not Preferred
ILT not used ILT used
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.1
4.0
Eff
ecti
ven
ess
| 42THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
ILT is most likely to be effective when learners
prefer it.
Figure 10.
Impact of Match Between Preference and Use of ILT on Training Effectiveness
Key Takeaways
N = 629 training programs
| 43THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
RECOMMENDATIONS
This research focused on three main questions: What do learners want? Are we addressing those preferences? And, how do the answers to those questions impact training outcomes? Answers and recommendations are summarized below.
| 44THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS
Do preferences impact training outcomes? Yes.Training programs delivered through at least one preferred method were
more likely to be effective. This effectiveness, in turn, increased learners’ job
satisfaction, work clarity, work-life balance, perceived supervisor support
and emphasis on work as an important part of their lives.
What do learners want? It depends. Learners prefer different methods depending on the type of training they
are receiving, the complexity of their jobs and their previous experience
with various training methods. However, the majority of learners expressed
a clear preference for at least one of three kinds of training: ILT, on-the-job
training and e-learning.
Are we giving them what they want? For the most part.The vast majority of learners received training through at least one
preferred modality, though their organizations were unlikely to address
certain preferences (e.g., preference for virtual reality training). Learners
were more likely to have their preferences met when multiple methods
were used to deliver training.
Where possible, train employees using
at least one of their preferred methods.
By doing so, you can improve the
impact of training on employees’ lives
and on business outcomes.
Consider the topic and the type of
work that learners do when choosing a
training method. If you’re unsure of the
best method, choose ILT, on-the-job
training and/or e-learning in order to
address as many learners’ preferences
as possible.
Use multiple methods to deliver
training whenever possible to increase
the likelihood of addressing learners’
preferences.
ON-THE-JOB TRAINING
Gamification
User-generated information*
Job aids
Simulation
Formal coaching
Job aids
Job aids
Simulation
Job aids
Videos
E-learning
Books
COMPLIANCE ONBOARDING
CUSTOMER SERVICE
SALES
LEADERSHIP
TECHNICAL
*only recommended if you have the resources to moderate and curate information, given its regulatory nature
ILT
ON-THE-JOB COACHING
SECTION-AT-A-GLANCE
| 45THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Learners generally agreed that on-the-job training, on-the-job coaching and ILT were most effective for impacting their learning. Other methods that learners identified as effective varied by topic.
WHICH METHODS ARE BEST SUITED FOR EACH TOPIC?
| 46THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
We know that learners have options in the way they learn – if they don’t like the way training is delivered, they can access information in other ways (e.g., Google and YouTube), where they run the risk of misinformation. We must empower their access to training content by
making it available through multiple methods and choosing the ones with which they are most likely to engage. In doing so, we can increase the likelihood of meeting their needs and, ultimately, improve business outcomes.
CONCLUSION
1 | Technology
2 | Retail
3 | Manufacturing
4 | Health Care
5 | Construction
6 | Banking/Finance
7 | Education
8 | Government
IT 32%
Customer Service 12%
Sales 10%
Operations 10%
Finance 8%
HR 8%
Other 20%
8%1-100
16%101-500
20%501-1,000
23%1,001-5,000
11%5,001-10,000
11%10,001-50,000
10%50,000+
| 47THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
ABOUT THIS RESEARCH
All research findings described within this report are based on Training Industry, Inc. research data collected in 2017 and 2018. This sample
totaled 1,001 learners working full time who had participated in training within the past year.
Unless otherwise noted, all results reported were statistically significant (p < .05). All analyses were conducted using RStudio 1.0.153 and
included correlational analyses, multiple regression analyses, and both univariate and multi-variate analyses of variance (ANOVA and
MANOVA, respectively).
Below are general demographics of participants in this research.
(representing ~65% of respondents)
DepartmentTop 8 IndustriesCompany Size
| 48THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
Amy DuVernet, Ph.D., CPTM, is the director of training manager development at Training Industry, Inc., where she oversees all processes related to training manager professional development, including program development and evaluation. Dr. DuVernet has published extensively in leading peer-reviewed journals and presented at national conferences, workshops and educational webinars on topics such training methods, career development and training
evaluation. She holds a Ph.D. in industrial/organizational psychology from North Carolina State University.
AUTHOR
| 49THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
ABOUT TRAINING INDUSTRY, INC. RESEARCH
New insights create new ways for L&D to
do business. Training Industry, Inc. provides
data-driven analysis and best practices for the
corporate training professional by capturing
the perspectives of learning professionals,
learners and training companies across a
diverse array of industries. Our informational
resources are shared with more than 185,000
monthly website visitors and 135,000 email
subscribers.
The Training Industry, Inc. research team
of experienced analysts relies on rigorous
survey practices, including targeted sampling
and advanced analytics. These practices are
based on validated principles of measurement
to answer both qualitative and quantitative
questions across a variety of research designs,
including market research, buyer personas,
learner impact analysis, competency models
and organizational assessment tools. Our
expertise and audience reach allow us to
provide learning professionals with in-depth
market intelligence and thought leadership
insights to reveal where the corporate training
market is now and where it is headed in the
future.
Our research harnesses the collective
wisdom of learning professionals and their
unique perspectives on the business of
training to inform our continuing professional
development programs, including events,
classes, certificates and the Certified
Professional in Training Management (CPTM™)
certification program. We circulate these
insights throughout the training market
using content marketing, including webinars,
infographics, email marketing, and our award-
winning magazine and website.
Copyright ©2018, Training Industry, Inc. All rights reserved. The information and insights contained in this report reflect the research and observations of Training Industry, Inc. No portion of this report may be duplicated, copied, republished or reused in any way without the prior written permission of Training
Industry, Inc. For more information or to request permission, contact [email protected].
Recommended citation: Training Industry, Inc. (2018). What Learners Want: Strategies for Training Delivery. Retrieved from https://trainingindustry.com/research/.
| 50THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
TERMS & CONDITIONS
Copyright ©2018, Training Industry, Inc.
All rights reserved. Printed in the United
States of America. Except as permitted
under the United States Copyright Act of
1976, no part of this publication may be
duplicated, copied, republished or reused
in any way, or stored in a database or
retrieval system, without the prior written
permission of the publisher except in
the cases of brief quotations embodied
in critical articles and reviews. For more
information or to request permission,
please contact:
Training Industry, Inc.
6601 Six Forks Road Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: (866) 298-4203
email: [email protected]
The reader understands that the information and
data used in preparation of this report were as
accurate as possible at the time of preparation
by the publisher. The publisher assumes no
responsibility to update the information or
publication. The publisher assumes that the
readers will use the information contained in
this publication for the purpose of informing
themselves on the matters that form the
subject of this publication. It is distributed and/
or sold with the understanding that neither
the authors nor any sponsoring companies
are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or
other professional service. If expert advice is
required, the reader should seek the services
of a competent professional. The publisher
assumes no responsibility for any use to which
the reader puts this information.
The information and insights contained in this
report reflect the research and observations
of Training Industry, Inc. All views expressed
in this report are derived from respondent
survey data and do not necessarily reflect
those of the companies or organizations
they may be affiliated with, including Training
Industry, Inc. All trademarks are those of
their respective companies.
| 51THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
APPENDIX: TRAINING DELIVERY TOOLBOX
There are many methods, or modalities, available for delivering training. Each offers different features that you should consider when determining which to use. These features also make them more (or less) appealing to learners.
Modern learning systems incorporate both informal and formal mechanisms in order to meet the needs of learners throughout their careers. Delivery methods differ in where they fall on the formality continuum. Some modalities
prescribe strict learning activities and pathways, while others enable organic and informal learning. For example, webinars are relatively formal; they present information to learners in a predetermined order. User-generated knowledge banks, on the other hand, are less formal. These information repositories allow learners to search for information, respond to posts from others and create their own posts. In this way, learners are able to make choices about what is most relevant and useful for them.
Modalities also differ in the way learners access and consume content. Some training modalities, such as job aids, make content readily accessible at the time and location that learners need it, whereas others, such as ILT, require access at predefined times or locations. The frequencies and patterns with which learners consume content can vary from one-time events to multiple sessions and can be self-paced or predetermined.
Classroom-based training facilitated by an instructor
VIDEO
PODCASTS
WEBINARS
BOOKS
JOB AIDS
SIMULATION
VIRTUAL REALITY AND AUGMENTED REALITY
GAMIFICATION
ADAPTIVE LEARNING
VIRTUAL INSTRUCTOR-LED TRAINING (VILT)
INSTRUCTOR-LED TRAINING (ILT)
E-LEARNING
MOBILE LEARNING
INFORMAL SOCIAL LEARNING
ON-THE-JOB TRAINING (OJT)
ON-THE-JOB COACHING (OJC)
FORMAL COACHING
USER-GENERATED KNOWLEDGE BANK
Online training facilitated by an instructor
Online learning, typically delivered as a self-paced course
Learning that occurs on a mobile device, such as a smartphone or a tablet
Learning that occurs through interactions with subordinates, co-workers, supervisors and other individuals
Learning that occurs while working, typically through supervision of a manager, coach or mentor
Personalized guidance and direction provided via one-on-one interaction at work, during the workday, and typically by a manger or a peer, often centered around specific situations or focused on short-term goals
Personalized guidance and direction provided via one-on-one interaction with a professional, often an external consultant, and typically with a broad, long-term career development focus
Learning through information posted by others to company forums, knowledge bases or social media
Content delivered via pre-recorded videos; often paired with another type of delivery method, such as e-learning or ILT
Content delivered via pre-recorded audio files; often paired with another type of delivery method, such as e-learning or ILT
A live online learning event, shorter in duration than a course
Content delivered via printed or virtual written materials
Performance support tools or devices that allow easy access to the information needed to perform a task
Practice within the context of a real-world scenario
Learning through interaction within a three-dimensional virtual environment that mimics reality (VR) and/or enhances reality by providing digital information that overlays what learners already see (AR)
The application of gaming designs and principles to learning or training to make them more engaging and entertaining
Content personalized for the learner using technology
TRAINING DELIVERY TOOLBOX
There are many methods, or modalities, available for delivering training. Each offers different features that you should consider when determining which to use. These features also make them more (or less) appealing to learners
| 52THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
High Predetermined time and location Event-based
High Predetermined time
Event-based
Moderate Learner-driven Self-paced
Moderate Learner-driven Self-paced
Low Learner-driven As needed
ModeratePredetermined
location Variable
Moderate Predetermined location Variable
High Predetermined time and place Prescribed
Moderate Learner-driven Self-paced
Moderate Learner-driven Self-paced
Moderate Learner-driven Self-paced
High Predetermined time Event-based
Moderate Learner-driven Self-paced
Moderate Learner-driven As needed
High Variable Variable
High Variable Variable
Moderate Variable Variable
Moderate Learner-driven Variable
FORMALITY ACCESS CONSUMPTION FORMALITY ACCESS CONSUMPTION
LEARNER EXPERIENCE
Note. This list is not intended to be exhaustive but instead to cover the most common delivery methods. Attributes describe the typical form of each, though there are exceptions.
| 53THIS REPORT IS BROUGHT TO YOU BY ©2018 Training Industry, Inc.
