L&D Is Not McDonald's—But Leaders Aren’t Wrong Either

If you’ve worked in learning and development for long enough, you’ve heard this analogy:

"We need training to be like McDonald's—so people know exactly what they’re getting no matter where they go!"

Or its slightly more artisanal cousin:

"We need training to be like Starbucks—so everyone gets a consistent experience!"

And let’s be real—for most L&D professionals, these analogies land like a sad McBurger that lost half its toppings in the wrapper before you even took a bite… served with a side of soggy fries and a stale cherry pie that’s somehow still lava-hot in the middle.

Because nothing makes an instructional designer feel valued like being told their craft should function like a drive-thru cheeseburger or an assembly-line latte.

And as a self-admitted food snob, I’d rather throw my MacBook into oncoming traffic than aspire to mass-produce a bland, mediocre experience when I could be crafting something truly effective.

But let’s apply the framework of inversion—a powerful tool that helps us hold two perspectives at once.

Instead of rejecting the analogy outright, let’s flip the assumption and try to understand what leaders actually mean when they compare training to McDonald's or Starbucks.

?? What pain point are they trying to solve with this analogy?

?? Hi, leaders! I see you there! ??

The Real Meaning Behind the McDonald's and Starbucks Comparisons

When leaders say, “Be like McDonald's,” they don’t actually mean:

?? Make everything the same, no matter what.

?? Strip away creativity, problem-solving, and expertise.

?? Force-feed employees the same reheated content on repeat.

What they mean (even if it’s not always phrased in the most L&D-friendly way) is:

? Scalability – We need a learning model that works at scale. ? Reliability – We need to trust that when people engage with training, they get a quality experience. ? Efficiency – We can’t afford to reinvent the wheel every single time.

And on the surface, that’s not unreasonable.

But here’s where the analogy falls apart.

The Starbucks Paradox: Standardized… Yet Completely Customizable?

If training should be like Starbucks, let’s examine how that actually works:

Yes, Starbucks has a core menu that’s available around the world. But what do people actually do with that menu?

? “Two extra shots, hold the syrup, substitute oat milk, extra hot, but not too hot, and can you draw a fun little smiley face on the cup?” ?

Wait… wasn’t this supposed to be consistent and standardized?

Exactly.

Even within a “standardized system,” customers (learners) expect customization.

Learning professionals don’t push back on consistency because we dislike standards—we push back because we build training based on research. Our job is to identify the real pain points of learners and design experiences that create sticky, behavior-driven results.

The goal isn’t just to make training consistent—it’s to make it effective, ensuring it works for both the company and the learner in their specific environment.

L&D Isn't Fast Food—It’s a Restaurant Group

Instead of thinking of training as a McDonald's burger or a Starbucks latte, let’s shift the analogy: L&D is like a well-run restaurant group.

? The core process is standardized – Great chefs follow foundational cooking techniques. L&D teams establish strong learning principles and design best practices.

? But the menu is tailored to the audience – A steakhouse in Texas might offer different cuts than one in New York. Likewise, leadership training for senior execs shouldn’t be identical to frontline manager training.

? Quality control matters, but flexibility is built in – Just like a chef might adjust seasoning based on the dish, learning designers fine-tune content based on business needs, learner engagement, and feedback.

Or, for my tech friends:

• Leaders think they’re asking for a scalable SaaS platform—reliable, repeatable, and efficient.
• Designers hear it as “crank out generic PowerPoints at scale” and panic.
• The solution is a modular, adaptable system—one that allows for standardization where it makes sense and customization where it’s necessary.

Best Practices ≠ A Locked Template

At its core, this is an analogical reasoning issue. Leaders and learning professionals are talking past each other.

• Leaders: Best practice doesn’t mean “never change”—it means “this is what worked before—let’s start here.”
• Designers: A repeatable model doesn’t mean no creativity—it means designing for scale while keeping flexibility where it matters.

The key is trust.

If we’re paying professionals professional money, we should trust them to be professional—starting from a proven framework but making the right adaptations when needed.

And Here’s the Real Benefit for Designers

If you reframe standardization and best practices, you can actually use them to your advantage.

?? By applying repeatable models where they make sense, you free up time, budget, and creativity for the projects that truly need a deep design focus.

When we stop reinventing the wheel for every single project, we create space to innovate on the ones that truly matter.

And here’s a hot take for you:

If You’re Afraid of AI, Understand That AI is Already Doing This for You.

AI thrives on standardization. It:

• Automates the predictable, repeatable parts of training.
• Helps scale content without sacrificing quality.
• Adapts to your existing standards—the ones you train it on.

This means it frees up your time to focus on:

? What actually needs customization.

? What solves real pain points.

? What addresses the “jobs to be done.”

? What incorporates spaced repetition and real learning science.

And when you start looking at it that way, you realize:

We work in an industry that hasn’t fundamentally changed in over four decades (or longer). Many of the models we still use? They were built by people who are no longer around to defend them.

Maybe it’s time to take what makes sense, use it for what it’s worth, and then innovate for modern learners.

So What’s the Takeaway?

?? We’re not here to mass-produce training—we’re here to create a repeatable, scalable, high-quality process that ensures every learning experience is designed for impact.

Leaders get their reliable system. Designers keep their creativity and expertise. And nobody has to settle for a soggy, sad learning experience.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go get a triple-shot oat milk latte, extra hot, hold the corporate analogies. ???

Check out the Deep Thoughts and Whatnots podcast for the audio version—complete with expanded humor ??—on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.