The Seven Questions That Stop Wasted Training
Too much training. Not enough traction. Sound familiar? If you are like most L&D professionals, you have been asked to build a course or roll out a session for what turns out to be a non-training issue. The result? Wasted time, frustrated employees, and the same problem cropping up again in the next quarter.
It is time to hit the pause button when defaulting on training. This article introduces a practical, field-tested framework based on the classic Mager & Pipe performance analysis model. It helps learning and development professionals to ask the right questions, get to the root of the issue, and choose the right solution, whether it involves training or not.
When Training Isn’t the Answer
Let’s face it: training often gets called in to fix problems it can’t actually solve. Low sales? Train the reps. Software complaints? Train the team. However, what if the real issue is a cumbersome system, unclear expectations, or misaligned incentives?
When training is used as a catch-all, it backfires. You spend resources developing content that has no impact. Worse, you lose credibility when the problem persists. The real fix? Diagnose before you design.
The Seven-Question Diagnostic
This framework enables L&D professionals to serve as performance partners, rather than just training providers. This process guides you through seven questions to clarify the issue and select the appropriate intervention.
Let’s break it down with examples.
1. Is there a real performance gap?
Example: The warehouse team ships 15% fewer packages than the benchmark.
Yes: There’s a measurable gap. Move to the next step.
No: There is no measurable gap. No action is required.
Ask: How is the performance tracked? Who’s affected? Is the data reliable?
2. Is it worth fixing?
Example: New hires do not promptly greet customers, but their expectations are never shared.
Yes: Fix it—with clear standards.
No: This is a communication issue, not a training issue.
Ask: Are expectations documented and reinforced? Do employees know what “good” looks like?
3. Is there a quick fix?
Example: Front desk staff struggle with new software they have not been trained on.
Yes: A job aid or mini-tutorial may be a solution.
No: If the skill gap is deeper, move to training.
Ask: Have you been trained before? Is it a knowledge issue, or something else?
4. Are tools and resources the real problem?
Example: Call center software frequently crashes, negatively impacting productivity.
Yes: Fix the tech. No amount of training will help.
No: The environment is not the issue. Keep digging.
Ask: Are systems helping—or hurting—performance?
5. Is performance reinforced properly?
Example: Sales representatives are instructed to upsell, but bonuses are solely based on volume.
Yes: Fix the reward system.
No: If alignment is strong, move to the next step.
Ask: Are high performers recognized? Do the incentives match expectations?
6. Are there cultural or leadership barriers?
Example: A team disengages after a micromanaging leader takes over.
Yes: Address leadership, not skills.
No: If morale is high, keep going.
Ask: Is burnout, confusion, or resistance something that training cannot fix?
7. Which solution makes the most sense?
Example: Techs struggle with a new app—no training was offered.
Yes, this is a genuine skill gap. Training is appropriate.
No: Look elsewhere.
Ask: Is training the most efficient, targeted, and sustainable solution?
Only Train When It’s Truly Needed
Here’s the final filter before jumping into training mode
- The root cause is a lack of knowledge or skill
- Expectations, systems, and motivation are already in place.
- The issue is widespread, not isolated.
- A learning solution can realistically close the gap.
- If any of these aren’t true, training won’t fix it.
Instead, consider clarifying expectations, providing job aids or standard operating procedures (SOPs), offering coaching, implementing system changes, and ensuring leadership alignment.
Field Example: When Training Was the Wrong Fix
A regional office requested communication training due to an increase in customer complaints. However, upon further investigation, L&D discovered the underlying issue: the new call-routing software was introducing 30 seconds of dead air before agents could even greet the caller.
Diagnosis: Not a people problem—a tech glitch.
Solution: Fix the system. No training needed.
Outcome: Complaints dropped. Training budget saved.
Tools to Support the Process
Elevate L&D’s Role with Better Questions
This approach transforms L&D from a reactive order-taker to a trusted advisor. When you diagnose before you design, you save time, boost credibility, and—most importantly—solve the real problem.
So next time someone says, “We need training,” don’t just say yes. Say, “Let’s talk through it first.”
- If a gap exists, the next step is to assess whether it’s meaningful enough to address.
- If the gap is worth solving, consider whether a quick, low-effort fix could work.
- If the issue isn’t resolved with a quick fix, examine the work environment itself.
- If tools and resources aren’t the issue, examine how performance is reinforced.
- If reinforcement systems are in place, consider cultural or leadership factors that may affect their effectiveness.
- If no motivational or leadership issues are evident, make your final determination.
Too often, training is prescribed before the problem is diagnosed. The seven-question framework introduced here empowers L&D professionals to pause, probe, and pinpoint the real issue before recommending a solution. Whether the cause is unclear expectations, faulty systems, or mismatched incentives, this diagnostic process helps ensure that training is used strategically, only when it’s truly the best intervention.
By asking better questions, L&D teams shift from order-takers to outcome-drivers. Diagnosis before designing protects limited resources, improves performance outcomes, and strengthens internal credibility. As organizations face mounting pressure to prove training ROI, frameworks like this are no longer optional—they’re essential. Don’t default to training. Diagnose first, train second.
Each of the seven questions in the diagnostic model serves a distinct function in surfacing root causes that surface-level symptoms may obscure.
The first two questions—Is there a gap? and Is it worth fixing?—help define the issue’s size and strategic importance. This prevents unnecessary investment in trivial problems. The third question—Is there a quick fix?—recognizes that some performance issues are low-hanging fruit that don’t require full-scale interventions. Questions four and five shift the lens from the individual to the environment, probing whether systems, tools, feedback loops, or incentives are hindering performance. These often-overlooked contributors to failure can cause even well-trained employees to fall short of their goals. Questions six and seven are where many L&D teams stop short—but shouldn’t. Culture, leadership, and motivation often underlie persistent performance issues, and overlooking these areas leads to missed opportunities. Finally, the question of which solution makes the most sense underscores that training is not always the fastest, cheapest, or most sustainable option.
Taken together, these questions offer a diagnostic rhythm that balances urgency with accuracy, speed with thoughtfulness, and credibility with results. When applied consistently, this framework elevates learning and development from an execution-based approach to a consultative one.
Understanding the Purpose Behind the Questions
“Knowing when not to train is just as valuable as knowing how to train.”
Read the first article in this series, When You Are Told to Train Anyway, to explore how L&D professionals can strategically address the call to train and maintain their credibility with effective solutions.
