Seven questions before recommending a course
Identifying a gap does not justify prescribing training. First, we need to understand what is preventing performance and what kind of intervention might change it.
A course is an appropriate response when a person lacks knowledge or practice that can be developed through structured learning. If the obstacle is a contradictory expectation, a poor tool, insufficient authority, or no opportunity to apply what was learned, adding more content will not address the cause.
The CDC frames needs analysis (opens in a new tab) precisely as a way to determine whether training is needed before designing it. In organizational development, that pause can reduce time-consuming interventions that leave the conditions affecting performance unchanged.
These seven questions provide a way to pause.
1. Is the gap confirmed, or is evidence missing?
A low rating does not always demonstrate a gap. It may reflect limited opportunities to observe, sources that saw different contexts, or an ambiguously worded expectation.
Before intervening, identify the behaviors, decisions, outcomes, or explanations that support the diagnosis. If the evidence is insufficient, the appropriate action is better observation.
2. Does the person know what is expected?
When the expectation is unclear, the problem is not necessarily a lack of capability. Two managers may request incompatible outcomes, a role may have changed without its criteria being updated, or a level may be described only with adjectives such as solid and advanced.
In these cases, the first intervention is to clarify the standard, provide examples, and agree on priorities. A course cannot compensate for a definition of work that the organization itself has not resolved.
3. Is knowledge missing, or is there no opportunity to practice?
Explaining a concept and applying it under pressure are different forms of evidence. If the person knows the procedure but has never encountered sufficiently complex cases, repeating the content adds little.
A gradually challenging experience may be more useful: observe someone else, solve a bounded part of the problem, receive feedback, and then increase autonomy. The CIPD review of evidence on learning cultures (opens in a new tab) highlights the importance of the environment, support, and opportunities to use learning at work.
4. Does the environment enable the expected behavior?
Review the tools, information, time, workload, dependencies, and authority. Someone may know how to prioritize while working in a system that changes priorities every day. They may understand an analytical practice but lack access to the necessary data.
If the environment blocks performance, the intervention must change those conditions or at least make the constraint explicit. Holding the individual solely responsible shifts a system problem into an individual activity.
5. Does the difficulty appear consistently or only in certain contexts?
A capability may appear strong in familiar situations and deteriorate under greater ambiguity, pressure, scale, or coordination demands. That variation provides information for designing the intervention.
When performance breaks down only in a particular context, recreate that condition through practice, simulation, support, or gradual exposure. A general program may teach the right material and still leave the person unprepared for the moment when the difficulty arises.
6. What support would transfer the learning into the work?
The activity ends with the course; development requires evidence afterward. Before enrolling someone, define who will provide feedback, what opportunity they will have to apply the learning, which resources they can consult, and how much time they will have to stabilize the new behavior.
The CIPD report on learning and skills (opens in a new tab) recommends assessing learning outcomes and transfer rather than limiting evaluation to inputs or satisfaction. Without conditions for transfer, even a well-designed learning experience may remain disconnected from performance.
7. What evidence would show that the intervention worked?
Define the change before selecting the solution. It might be greater autonomy, consistent application of a method, better quality at a certain level of complexity, or the ability to explain decisions and limitations.
The evidence must correspond to the original gap.
If the expected change cannot be described in observable terms, it is too early to recommend an intervention.
The seven answers will not always point to a single option.
Learn. Training and mentoring can provide knowledge, models, and feedback.
Practice. Deliberate practice and progressively challenging experience turn an explanation into situated application.
Enable. Changes to tools, authority, or role clarity address conditions that a course cannot alter.
Their purpose is to prevent course from becoming a generic label for every development action.
Keep exploring
A career is not a ladder: how to represent real mobility paths
How can a career be represented when progress may come through specialization, projects, lateral moves, cross-functional leadership, and returns?
The Inside Gig: when mobility no longer depends on job openings
The Inside Gig proposes mobilizing talent through internal projects rather than waiting for a job opening, prompting an examination of what turns an opportunity into real work.
What evidence an internal transition needs to stop being a gamble
Deciding on an internal transition requires four pieces of evidence. They must separate transferable capability, adaptation still needed, confirmed gaps, and entry conditions.
Developing a skill does not always increase organizational capability
Even when someone develops a skill, the organization may retain the same constraint if the opportunity, support, or authority to apply it is missing.
Lateral mobility can be development without being a promotion
Even without a change in hierarchy, lateral mobility can develop judgment by changing the problems, relationships, and decisions a person faces.
Actionable Gamification and the design of development
The most useful contribution of Actionable Gamification is not that it teaches us to turn learning into a game, but that it forces us to ask what sustains effort once novelty fades.