The future of instructor-led training

What is the future of instructor-led training?

Spoiler Alert: My crystal ball is in the shop for repairs, so I'm not sure, but I'll tell you where I've been and what trends I'm currently seeing.

The early part of my training career was spent in Silicon Valley, where typically no less than several dozen Training Providers competed for my time every week, offering me numerous opportunities to teach software training classes. That was every Monday through Friday. On Saturdays, I taught HTML to college students at Santa Clara University who thought it would be fun to learn how to build web pages on the weekends. Every evening from Monday through Thursday, I would conduct technical training at a local vocational school between 5:00 p.m. and 10:20 p.m. It wasn't until I started marketing my services outside of Silicon Valley that I realized I could travel worldwide, training Fortune 500 companies. A lot has changed since those days.

During this time, a massive amount of student-led training was created and published by firms like O'Reilly, Wrox, PeachPit, and many more. My Adobe Flash skills helped me enter the emerging world of eLearning. In addition to producing eLearning, I taught and consulted for the Learning and Development departments of more Fortune 500 companies that wanted to implement this learning methodology for their employees. Adobe Flash's ability to create engaging, self-guided learning was driving a great deal of eLearning initiatives. Flash allowed learning modules to include programmable, interactive buttons, quizzes like drag and drop, and fill-in-the-blanks and ushered gamification into eLearning. The ability of Flash to support video was a game changer. Companies realized that eLearning could be scaled by purchasing this training on CD and DVD. Eventually, I contracted with an Austrian company called Video2Brain, which produced DVD learning by providing software and programming instruction via eLearning in French, Spanish, and German. Advances in web development allowed for the delivery of this type of training online. Lynda.com, already a leader in this field in the United States, acquired Video2Brain, and eventually, Lynda.com was acquired by LinkedIn, which Microsoft acquired (phew, that was long).

A more recent trend is the acquisition of training companies by Private Equity firms. Perhaps a large part of the answer to the question: "what is the future of instructor-led training?" lies in how these private equity firms intend to add value to their acquisitions. Trainers are left to wonder, "What is the exit plan?" and, more importantly, for everyone involved, "What is the value-added plan for the next five or so years?"

To answer this question, I will compare investing and training, as both are areas where one seeks outside assistance. Just as investors look to professionals to advise and manage their portfolios, companies often seek specialized training from outside their organization. In short, they hire training provider firms who provide trainers/subject matter experts.

Today's investors have more choices in seeking investment help than ever, from managing their portfolios to hiring wealth advisors to purchasing a mutual fund managed by renowned experts like the Carlye Group, Baron Funds, and others. When choosing the latter options, the investor makes several concessions, namely that the Fund Manager has more expertise in selecting financial instruments (stocks, bonds, ETFs, etc.) and typically has a better track record than themselves. Likewise, a pharmaceutical company that needs technical training for its IT department might prefer a dedicated training company with more subject matter knowledge and training expertise. The pharmaceutical company's strengths are in pharmaceutical, not IT, and its related fields of programming and software development or any other area in which employees need training unrelated to pharmaceutical topics. Just like investors, companies needing training have many options to explore, including eLearning, video-based training, virtual training, and live instructor-led training.

What fuel will private equity firms use to add value to the training providers they acquire? The answers are many and varied, but I'll focus on just two: technological advancements (in the physical and virtual classroom) and the more intangible human touches.

Numerous technological advances will change how we train our workers, including hardware like virtual reality headsets, metauniverse environments where we can recreate an environment for workplace safety training, etc. Additionally, there are sweeping changes in software, specifically artificial intelligence. An excellent example is Gloat, a New York-based software company that has developed a tool that helps employees advance in the workplace by providing a customized path. For example, artificial intelligence tools map how employees might get closer to their long-term goals after registering and providing information like long-term goals and job descriptions. The generated map connects employees with training and mentoring resources. It details the work experience required to move toward their goal, current job openings within the company, and even jobs outside their current field. Countless other companies are producing software driven by artificial intelligence that takes on the role of mentor, coach, and trainer. Remember those CDs and DVDs I mentioned earlier? As AI improves, it will far exceed the videos I made many years ago. Training may be delivered by human-looking trainers generated with AI that can answer questions correctly and efficiently guide students in their learning journey. AI can discover what teaching methods best support the learner, detect where the learner has issues, and resolve them with a highly focused and customized approach.

This technology solution has been employed by investment firms as well. We have had the opportunity to buy and sell financial stocks, mutual funds, and more for quite some time. We have more information available to us as investors than ever before. Free information abounds on thousands of websites, including research via the SEC directly, and even more information is available via paid subscriptions. Perhaps nothing is more technology-driven in this area than Robo Investing, a digital platform provided by investment firms that provides automated algorithm-driven financial planning and investment services with little to no human supervision. Like learning a new skill by reading books and watching videos, robo investing is less expensive than working with a real live person. When first introduced, robo advisors and robo-investing experienced a surge of interest. More recently, however, a study by Parameter Insights ( a provider of data-driven research for wealth management firms) indicates a decline in investors using robo-investing, with the most significant decline seen in high net worth investors who went from 38.3% in 2021 to 14.5% in 2022.

It would seem that high net worth investors were willing to give Robo investing a try but ultimately returned to their long-standing preference towards either wealth advisory firms or mutual funds managed by renowned experts with proven track records as well as a high value of assets under management; firms like BlackRock Funds, The Carlyle Group, Baron Funds and individual fund managers like Warren Buffet. Most investors may not have a monthly lunch with Warren Buffet but have regular in-person meetings with their wealth advisors to discuss financial planning, which brings us to private equity's potential second approach to add value to training provider firms: that human touch. Each of the Fund managers mentioned above chooses their investments after careful vetting by their team using criteria you would expect, such as historical performance, risk management, market position, competition, quality of the management team, etc. In addition, they meet and maintain personal relationships with management. They look at the people running the company: where does their motivation come from? Are they adequately compensated? How do they perform under stress? How do they treat their employees? What is the company culture? What are their priorities and so on? This more personal approach is the polar opposite of robo-investing. I would suggest they also use their innate instincts to make some of these value judgments. Qualities like honesty, the ability to learn from your failures, integrity, and the ability to make and take ultimate responsibility for final decisions are frequently found in managers of funds with assets over $350 billion. These qualities are not easily quantifiable and require an instinctive, natural talent to identify. Is that the secret sauce for training providers as well? I believe that trainers need to lean into what makes them human in the classroom, much like these successful investors, who lean into personal relationships to determine the viability of their investment. Perhaps this will be part of the fuel private equity adds that eventually distinguishes live, instructor-led training from other, less expensive forms of training that have seen rapid adoption, such as video training. Outstanding investment fund managers maintain a high-engagement relationship with the firms they invest in, likewise with private equity firms and the management team of the companies they acquire, and are often very "hands-on." Due diligence may include assistance with other potential acquisitions, securing board members, and acquiring new customers, but equally important is identifying an outstanding management team and ensuring they grow in maturity and knowledge to propel the company forward.

I believe the future of instructor-led training lies somewhere between these two extremes: advancements in technology and the qualities that make us human: creativity, compassion, empathy, curiosity, and finally, language skills that incorporate those qualities. The private equity market has demonstrated that technical training meets its investment criteria. Their confidence in adding value indicates an excellent investment opportunity. I guess I'll just have to wait until I get my crystal ball back.

On a more practical, low-level instructor-centric perspective, here are some suggestions for leaning into those aspects of training that AI, eLearning, and video training can't easily mimic.

• Be a lively and dynamic presenter. If your slide deck is full of words, it's a document, not a presentation.
• Use off-the-cuff humor that relates to the subject being taught.
• Have your learners follow along as you perform the task taught – allow them to make mistakes in real time.
• Let your learners lead the training! Tailor your approach to each learner – meet them where they are at and move them forward!

To learn how to execute these techniques and more, contact me on LinkedIn and check out my book, 75 Practical Tips for Technical Trainers at https://www.amazon.com/Practical-Tips-Technical-Trainers-neuroscience/dp/B09YQ95ZV7/ref=sr_1_1