My Thoughts

Why Your Company's Training Budget is Being Wasted

I walked into a training room last month and watched twenty middle managers stare at their phones while a consultant explained "synergistic leadership paradigms" for the third consecutive hour.

The presenter was charging $3,000 per day. The attendees were collectively earning about $50,000 in wages during those eight hours. Add venue costs, catering, and opportunity cost, and that single day probably cost the company close to $80,000.

For what? A PowerPoint presentation anyone could've downloaded online for free.

The Training Industrial Complex Has Lost the Plot

After seventeen years of watching companies throw money at training programs that don't work, I've developed some strong opinions that might ruffle a few feathers. Most corporate training is expensive therapy for executives who feel guilty about not developing their staff.

There. I said it.

The problem isn't that training doesn't work – it's that we're doing it completely wrong. We've turned professional development into a box-ticking exercise rather than genuine skill building. Companies book time management training courses because it sounds responsible, not because they've identified specific time management problems affecting productivity.

I see this pattern everywhere: Sydney offices sending entire departments to generic leadership workshops while their actual problems are communication breakdowns between specific individuals. Melbourne manufacturers investing in "innovation training" when their real issue is outdated equipment and processes.

The disconnect is staggering.

Cookie-Cutter Solutions for Unique Problems

Here's where I'll probably annoy some people: most off-the-shelf training programs are useless. They're designed to appeal to the broadest possible audience, which means they're too generic to solve anyone's specific problems.

Take emotional intelligence training. Sounds valuable, right? Except most EI courses teach the same basic concepts about empathy and self-awareness that any reasonably mature adult already understands. What they don't teach is how to handle the passive-aggressive team member who undermines every meeting, or how to give feedback to someone who takes everything personally.

Those specific scenarios require targeted solutions, not philosophical discussions about emotional quotients.

I made this mistake myself about eight years ago. Organised a two-day communication workshop for our entire Brisbane team because we had "communication issues." Spent $15,000 on a highly-rated facilitator who taught us about active listening and proper email etiquette.

The real communication issue? Our project manager was withholding critical information from the sales team because of a personal grudge dating back three years. No amount of listening skills training was going to fix that relationship dynamic.

The Follow-Up Fantasy

Let's talk about the dirty secret nobody mentions: follow-up. Training companies love to talk about "embedding learning" and "sustainable change," but when did you last see a trainer return three months later to check if anything actually stuck?

Never. Because they know what would happen.

78% of training content is forgotten within six weeks without reinforcement. That's not a made-up statistic – well, actually, I can't remember where I read it, but it sounds about right based on what I've observed. People attend workshops, feel motivated for about a fortnight, then slip back into old habits because their work environment hasn't changed.

Real behaviour change requires ongoing support, practice opportunities, and accountability systems. Instead, we get certificates of completion and feedback forms asking if the catering was adequate.

When Training Actually Works

Before you think I'm completely anti-training, let me share what I've seen work brilliantly.

A construction company in Perth had safety compliance issues. Instead of booking a generic workplace safety course, they brought in an ex-foreman who'd worked on similar projects and understood their specific challenges. He spent time on-site, identified the exact behaviours causing problems, and designed practical exercises around real scenarios their teams faced daily.

Result? Incident reports dropped by 40% over six months. Not because the workers learned new safety regulations, but because someone addressed the specific shortcuts and workarounds they'd developed.

That's targeted training with measurable outcomes.

Another example: a marketing agency struggling with client presentation skills. They didn't need presentation training – they needed professional communication skills development focused specifically on handling difficult client questions and managing scope creep conversations.

Six months later, their client retention rate had improved significantly. Because they addressed the actual problem, not the obvious symptom.

The Vendor Selection Circus

Don't get me started on how companies choose training providers. Someone googles "leadership training Melbourne," picks the first result with professional-looking headshots, and books a session based on a glossy brochure.

Due diligence? Reference checks? Understanding of company culture?

Rarely.

I've watched organisations spend months evaluating software purchases worth half the price of a training program they'll book after a twenty-minute sales call. The decision-making process is completely backwards.

Premium training companies exploit this by focusing on presentation rather than substance. They invest in fancy venues, branded workbooks, and charismatic facilitators who can deliver engaging content that feels valuable in the moment but lacks practical application.

Meanwhile, smaller specialists who actually understand your industry get overlooked because they don't have the marketing budget for Google ads and corporate networking events.

The Measurement Problem

Ask most training managers how they measure success, and you'll get vague answers about "participant satisfaction" and "engagement levels." These metrics are absolutely meaningless for determining whether training improved performance.

Happy participants don't necessarily equal better results. Sometimes the most valuable training sessions are uncomfortable because they challenge existing assumptions and force people to confront their weaknesses.

I remember attending a negotiation workshop where half the participants complained it was "too confrontational." Six months later, those same people were closing deals they would've lost previously. The discomfort was the point – it forced them to practice difficult conversations in a safe environment.

Real measurement requires tracking specific behaviours and outcomes over time. Sales training should be measured by conversion rates, not course evaluations. Customer service training should be tracked through complaint resolution times and satisfaction scores.

But that requires effort and follow-up, which brings us back to the fundamental problem: most companies want training to be a one-time expense rather than an ongoing investment.

The Internal Capability Gap

Here's another uncomfortable truth: many organisations outsource training because they lack internal expertise, then wonder why external providers don't understand their culture or specific needs.

Building internal training capability takes time and investment, but it pays dividends in the long run. Internal trainers understand company dynamics, can provide ongoing support, and adapt content based on real feedback rather than generic course evaluations.

Qantas does this well – they've developed extensive internal training programs for customer service that reflect their specific brand values and operational realities. Their staff don't learn generic hospitality principles; they learn how to handle situations unique to airline operations while maintaining the Qantas service standard.

That level of customisation is impossible with external providers who work with dozens of different clients across multiple industries.

Making Training Investment Actually Work

If you're determined to fix your training budget rather than waste it, here's what actually works:

Start with specific problems, not general development goals. "Our team needs better communication skills" is too vague. "Our project handovers consistently miss critical details, causing delays and client complaints" is actionable.

Measure baseline performance before training, not just participant satisfaction afterward. If you can't measure the problem, you can't measure the solution.

Build internal capability for ongoing reinforcement. External providers can introduce concepts, but behaviour change happens through consistent internal support and accountability.

Choose providers based on relevant experience, not presentation skills. A former industry professional who understands your challenges is more valuable than a professional trainer with generic expertise.

Most importantly, accept that real training takes time and sustained effort. Quick fixes don't exist in professional development, despite what the brochures promise.

The Bottom Line

Your training budget is probably being wasted because you're treating symptoms rather than causes, choosing providers based on marketing rather than expertise, and expecting immediate results from complex behavioural changes.

But here's the thing – when training is done properly, it's one of the best investments you can make. Skilled employees are more productive, more engaged, and more likely to stay with your organisation. The key is approaching professional development strategically rather than reactively.

Stop buying training like you're shopping for office supplies. Start investing in specific solutions for identified problems, with clear measurement criteria and ongoing support systems.

Your budget – and your team – will thank you for it.

Looking for targeted professional development solutions? Consider working with specialists who understand your industry rather than generic training providers who promise everything to everyone.