Over recent years, our industry has plunged into virtual, asynchronous learning, drawn by its scalability and cost-effectiveness per learner. This shift has spurred advancements in personalisation, video content creation, and AI tools for targeted learning. The Covid pandemic accelerated these changes, and digital platforms have enabled the scaling of workplace learning. However, it feels like we might be prioritising convenience over effectiveness.

Before my career in L&D, I spent 25 years in media/marketing, an industry that was an early adopter of digital transformation. The impact of digital advertising was measurable and led to significant business growth. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for L&D’s digital transition. The shift to digital learning platforms lacks solid evidence of superior performance compared to traditional methods. It seems driven more by the promise of “doing more with less” than by proven outcomes.

Budget constraints and the empowerment of self-paced learning are valid points, but we must ask: which methods truly achieve learning outcomes, retention, application, behavior change, capability, and performance improvement?

The debate over synchronous vs. asynchronous learning, classroom vs. independent learning, and push vs. pull strategies lacks definitive evidence favoring one over the other. The notable exception is synchronous in-person vs. virtual learning, where evidence suggests no significant difference in outcomes.

At Cognitive Union, we emphasise that not all learning methods yield the same results. The focus should be on impact and outcomes. Do learners change their behaviour, improve their performance, or contribute more effectively to the organisation as a result of their learning? There are efforts in the industry to measure these outcomes, but standard practices are still developing.

We believe synchronous learning and leadership workshops offer distinct advantages. Besides fostering engagement, community, and immediate feedback, they drive more impactful outcomes.

The Gap in Research: From Education to Workplace Learning

Most research comparing synchronous and asynchronous learning focuses on the education sector, with limited attention to workplace learning. Nevertheless, educational insights can inform corporate training. Studies indicate that synchronous environments promote better engagement and immediate feedback, crucial for effective learning.

Cost Considerations in Corporate Training

The trend towards virtual asynchronous learning is driven by scalability and lower costs. While it’s more economical, effectiveness and impact should not be compromised. The ultimate goal is to enhance performance, capability, and execution.

Probably because of a lack of evidence, all too often the calculation might go something like:

If we were to add a few more columns on the end of this sheet, we would advocate something like:

What we’re looking for here is to uncover the impact of the learning. If it costs more per head, but it impacts performance more, then we are getting closer to being able to allocate budget to drive results. We’d like to elaborate on this and explore it further in a subsequent post.

Why We Believe Synchronous Learning Delivers Better Outcomes

1. Enhanced Engagement and Interaction  

   Synchronous learning encourages real-time interaction, leading to higher engagement and satisfaction. Immediate feedback and peer interaction deepen understanding and retention, crucial for workplace performance.

2. Building a Sense of Community  

   Real-time interaction fosters stronger connections among participants, essential in corporate settings. This creates a cohesive learning environment that can enhance team performance and morale.

3. Immediate Feedback and Adaptability  

   Instructors provide immediate feedback in synchronous settings, enhancing the learning experience and retention. Delays in feedback common in asynchronous formats can lead to confusion and disengagement.

4. Reduced Cognitive Load 

   Synchronous learning reduces cognitive load, allowing participants to focus more effectively on the material, facilitating better processing and retention.

5. Accountability and Participation  

   Synchronous environments promote accountability and active participation, driving higher levels of engagement and commitment.

Measuring the Impact on Performance and Capability

The most critical outcome of any learning program is its impact on performance, capability, and execution. Research shows that synchronous learning environments, through higher engagement and immediate feedback, significantly enhance these outcomes. This leads to improved productivity, better team collaboration, and overall performance.

A Balanced Approach

While we recognize the benefits of asynchronous learning, we advocate for a balanced approach based on evidence. The rush to asynchronous learning should be reconsidered in favor of methods that deliver proven results.

Opinion Piece:  Colin Smith Founding Partner@Cognitive Union/ Global Learning specialist/ LEGO®SERIOUS PLAY®

linkedin.com/in/colinrsmith