The 10 Lies of Learning: Lie #9: Learning is Over Here in the Training Room; Work is over There in the Office

Continuing our countdown of the biggest lies in Learning & Development, we arrive at #9—the artificial separation of learning and work that has been hampering organizational effectiveness for decades.

Picture this: A fresh-faced employee emerges from a two-day training workshop armed with an entire new kit of new templates, methods, tools and more along with a head full of fresh concepts. They stride confidently back to their workspace, ready to apply their newfound knowledge.

And then… reality hits. You may already know of the “forgetting curve” – i.e. the pace of work, the lack of application opportunities, the absence of supportive feedback, and the pressure of deadlines all conspire to ensure that by the following week, about 70% of what they learned has vanished into the ether.¹

This is the epitome of the faux separation between learning and work – learning has to happen ‘over there’ in the ‘company meeting room’. Training happens at the pre-appointed time Mon-Wed, 9-4:00; lunch provided. Whereas work…well that happens elsewhere – at your desk or work station/area.

The Great Divide

This lie manifests in multiple ways:

Physical separation: The training room (or virtual equivalent) as a space apart from the workspace
Temporal separation: Training days have a schedule and agenda implying learning happens only within that appointed time period – “Now we’re learning; later we’ll be working”
Conceptual separation: Theory in the classroom, practice on the job
Responsibility separation: L&D owns learning; managers own performance

This segregation feels natural. It’s tidy. It lets everyone stay in their lane. L&D professionals design and deliver training; managers send people to training; employees attend training; everyone returns to “real work” afterward.

It’s also spectacularly ineffective.

The Science Says: This Doesn’t Work

The data on traditional training transfer—applying what was learned in training to the job—is bleak:

Research by Georgenson (1982) suggested that only 10% of training expenditure actually results in transfer to the job.²
More recent studies from the Association for Talent Development estimate that employees apply just 15% of what they learn in formal training to their jobs.³
A landmark study by Ebbinghaus back in 1885 (yes, that long ago) demonstrated that without reinforcement, people forget approximately 90% of what they learn within a month.⁴

The problem isn’t (just) that the training is bad. It’s that we’ve created an artificial boundary between learning and working that defies how human cognition actually functions. And we’ve known it since the 1880’s if not before!

What’s Really Happening

Would you get in a car with someone who had only completed the classroom portion of driver’s education?

Of course not. We intuitively understand that operating a vehicle requires practical experience, not just theoretical knowledge. Yet organizations routinely expect employees to master complex skills based on classroom or e-learning experiences alone.

The truth is:

Learning is not an event. It’s a continuous process that happens through experience, reflection, conceptualization, and experimentation.
The most valuable learning happens in the flow of work. Research from MIT and Deloitte found that companies that focus on integrating learning into the daily flow of work are more than twice as likely to report improved employee engagement.⁵
Context matters enormously. Skills learned in isolation from their application context are much harder to retrieve when needed. This is what cognitive scientists call “context-dependent memory.”⁶
Social learning is powerful. Learning alongside colleagues who are wrestling with similar challenges and can provide immediate feedback accelerates development dramatically.
Learning requires psychological safety. A training room might feel safe for experimentation, but if the actual work environment punishes mistakes, learning will remain theoretical rather than practical.

How Did We Get Here?

This separation of learning and work isn’t accidental. It derives from industrial-age thinking that treated workers like machines that could be “upgraded” through periodic maintenance rather than organisms that grow through continuous adaptation.

It was reinforced by:

Organizational structures that created L&D departments separate from operations
Budget allocations that distinguished between “training time” (a cost) and “productive time” (a benefit)
Credentialing systems that emphasized completion of programs over demonstration of capability
Scheduling convenience that made it easier to pull people from work for concentrated training

The problem isn’t malice or stupidity—it’s the persistence of systems designed for a world that no longer exists.

Breaking Down the Walls

Progressive organizations are dismantling this artificial boundary in several ways:

1. Apprenticeship & Mentoring

Formal apprenticeship programs show impressive results. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, 94% of apprentices retain employment after completing their programs, with an average annual salary of $70,000.⁷

Why? Because apprenticeship integrates learning and work by design. The novice works alongside the expert, gradually taking on more responsibility with appropriate scaffolding and feedback.

2. Learning in the Flow of Work

Josh Bersin coined this term to describe learning that occurs within the work environment, not separate from it.⁸ Examples include:

Learning resources embedded within work tools
Micro-learning moments that address immediate needs
Performance support tools that guide workers through complex processes
Social collaboration platforms that enable peer learning during work

3. Deliberate Practice

Coined by psychologist K. Anders Ericsson, deliberate practice involves focused effort to improve performance with immediate feedback.⁹ Organizations that build deliberate practice into work processes—not just training—see significant performance improvements.

4. After-Action Reviews

Pioneered by the U.S. Army and now used by high-performing organizations globally, after-action reviews embed reflection into work processes.¹⁰ They encourage teams to ask:

What was supposed to happen?
What actually happened?
Why were there differences?
What can we learn?

This simple process transforms everyday work into a learning laboratory.

A Case Study: Medical Residency

If you need proof that integrating learning and work is effective, look no further than medical residency programs. These intensive training periods combine:

Direct patient care (real work)
Supervision from experienced physicians
Deliberate skill development
Regular feedback sessions
Gradual increase in responsibility

The result? Physicians who can function independently in highly complex environments. Imagine applying similar principles to developing managers, software engineers, or customer service representatives.

Think that’s too unique an example? Know that flow of work learning can surely work for your organization too! I worked with a business services organization to establish a “social learning network” program – essentially a new infrastructure connecting co-workers and colleagues to one another to problem solve and trade best practices in near real time across all of the globe’s time zones. This resulted in the system supporting, on average, 3 or more new business pursuits every day. Considering any new sales initiative was worth $500k or more, this program easily paid for itself.

What This Means for You

If you’re an L&D professional:

Stop designing isolated learning events. Start designing learning journeys that blend formal instruction, on-the-job application, coaching, and reflection.
Partner with operational leaders to identify real work that can serve as learning opportunities.
Rethink your role from “training provider” to “learning ecosystem architect.”

If you’re a manager:

Don’t outsource employee development to the training department.
Create conditions for learning within your team: psychological safety, appropriate challenges, feedback mechanisms.
Model learning behaviors by openly sharing your own development journey.

If you’re an employee:

Don’t wait for formal training to develop yourself.
Seek feedback constantly from peers, managers, and customers.
Reflect deliberately on your experiences to extract learning.

The Path Forward

The organizations that thrive in the coming decades won’t be those with the most sophisticated training departments. They’ll be those that most effectively integrate learning into the fabric of work itself.

In practical terms, this means:

Emphasizing coaching and mentoring over classroom training
Designing work processes to include learning components
Creating feedback mechanisms that operate in real-time, not just at review time
Building learning resources that can be accessed in the flow of work
Measuring learning effectiveness in terms of performance improvement, not hours of training

In our next installment, we’ll explore Lie #8: “Compliance learning is enough.” Until then, take a look at your organization: where are the artificial boundaries between learning and work, and what might be possible if they dissolved?

Click here to follow Josh on LinkedIn:

Josh LeFebvre on LinkedIn

Josh is the founder of Kay/Allison - a firm solving corporate learning and talent development challenges.  He provides strategic advisory, interim/fractional leadership, and complex project management services in the learning and development field.  His 25 years of experience has demonstrated a focus on business impact and clarity punctuated by thoughtful analysis and plain-spoken recommendations.  He is a long standing collaborator with Smartfirm and can be reached through our team or directly at joshlefebvre@kayandallison.com.

References

[1]: Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. Translated by Henry A. Ruger & Clara E. Bussenius (1913), originally published in New York by Teachers College, Columbia University.
[2]: Georgenson, D. L. (1982). The problem of transfer calls for partnership. Training & Development Journal, 36(10), 75-78.
[3]: Association for Talent Development. (2019). State of the Industry Report.
[4]: Murre, J. M. J., & Dros, J. (2015). Replication and Analysis of Ebbinghaus’ Forgetting Curve. PLOS ONE, 10(7).
[5]: Bersin, J., & Zao-Sanders, M. (2019). Making Learning a Part of Everyday Work. Harvard Business Review.
[6]: Smith, S. M., & Vela, E. (2001). Environmental context-dependent memory: A review and meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(2), 203-220.
[7]: U.S. Department of Labor. (2020). Apprenticeship Toolkit: Advancing Apprenticeship as a Workforce Strategy.
[8]: Bersin, J. (2018). A New Paradigm For Corporate Training: Learning In The Flow of Work. Josh Bersin Blog.
[9]: Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363-406
[10]: U.S. Army. (2011). Leader’s Guide to After-Action Reviews (AAR).