Publications

Baldwin and Ford’s 1988 classic model of training transfer emphasized three key influences: learner characteristics, training design, and the work environment. Of these, the work environment — including feedback, expectations, and leadership support — has proven to be the most decisive. Recent studies reinforce this finding. A 2025 industry survey revealed that 41% of managers and supervisors reported not knowing how to evaluate employee performance after training.

This lack of post-training follow-through undermines behavior change. According to Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation, Level 3 — on-the-job behavior — is where we truly begin to understand whether training “worked.” However, if no one is observing, reinforcing, or coaching those behaviors, they rarely take hold.

By treating learner rejection as valuable feedback and designing systems that respond to it, organizations can motivate effective training transfer.

Even great training fails when employees ignore or reject parts of it. While Learning and Development (L&D) teams focus on design and delivery, the real challenge is what happens next: whether employees apply what they’ve learned. Too often, they don’t—and not because of defiance but because of motivated rejection.

A frontline manager once told me, “I didn’t bother using the new coaching model—it felt too corporate.” In a soft skills workshop, participants dismissed active listening techniques as “unnatural.” In a call center program, agents adopted the escalation protocol but rejected scripted empathy statements as robotic. Learners weren’t ignoring the training; they made deliberate choices about what to transfer.

I propose reframing learner rejection as a motivational breakdown—not laziness—and prefer to focus on strengthening motivation to transfer before, during, and after training. This approach draws on Baldwin & Ford’s Transfer of Training Model (1988). To read more, click on the link

Training transfer—the ability to apply learning in real work situations—is often an afterthought and not a priority. Implementing a Dynamic Transfer Model can help.

Sarah, a high-potential manager, was eager to grow. She recently completed an intensive leadership development program in which she practiced cutting-edge coaching techniques designed to make her a more effective leader. Excited and confident, she returned to work and was ready to transform her interactions with the team.

But reality hit fast. Deadlines, meetings, and daily responsibilities pushed her new skills to the back of her mind. The weeks passed, and Sarah fell back into old habits—giving quick instructions rather than using the coaching techniques she had learned.

When asked about training, she sighed: “The course was great, but honestly, I haven’t had the time to apply what I learned.”

Sound familiar? To read more, click on the link below.

IL&D professionals are problem-solvers and not order-takers. At least, that’s the aspiration. In reality, even after a thorough diagnosis reveals a non-training issue, such as misaligned incentives, system flaws, or unclear expectations, we are often advised to proceed with training anyway.

This is a frustrating and familiar problem. However, instead of viewing these moments as setbacks, L&D teams can use them to reinforce their role as strategic partners—delivering value, maintaining credibility, and laying the groundwork for more effective performance solutions. To read more, click on the link.

U.S. companies invest nearly $100 billion annually in training, yet when budgets tighten, training is often one of the first line items to be cut. The reason: Executives still view training as a cost rather than a strategic investment. Often, they are not wrong. Too many learning leaders still rely on completion rates and satisfaction scores to demonstrate impact — metrics that do not tell the real business story.

This article offers a roadmap to change that perception. Built on years of practical experience, research, and field-tested frameworks, it shows how learning and development (L&D) leaders can shift the conversation by proving how training drives dollars, reduces risk, and strengthens organizational performance. To read more:

Uncover the importance of training design. Learn how a well-structured training process leads to real-world applications and impacts.

Despite the time, energy, and investment of money that organizations make in employee training, one sobering truth continues to emerge: most of what is taught never reaches the workplace. The culprit? Not poor facilitation or disengaged learners—but the failure to design training that actually prepares people to apply what they learn.

This article highlights a commonly overlooked but essential step in the learning process: training design. It is a deliberate design process that ensures that training leads to real-world applications, observable behavior changes, and measurable business outcomes.

Effective training design occurs when a business strategy becomes actionable and implementable. This is where planning meets performance. It is also a linchpin that connects intent and impact. To read more

Too much training. Not enough traction. Sound familiar? If you are like most L&D professionals, you have been asked to build a course or roll out a session for what turns out to be a non-training issue. The result? Wasted time, frustrated employees, and the same problem cropping up again in the next quarter.

It is time to hit the pause button when defaulting on training. This article introduces a practical, field-tested framework based on the classic Mager & Pipe performance analysis model. It helps learning and development professionals to ask the right questions, get to the root of the issue, and choose the right solution, whether it involves training or not.