Upskilling vs. Reskilling: Which is Right for You?

Why Most Workplace Training Programs Are Missing the Point: A Wake-Up Call from the Trenches
The training industry has become fixated with buzzwords and ignored about actual humans.
Having worked in learning and development for the better part of two decades, and honestly? The current state of workplace learning would appall the people who taught me. When I first got into this industry, learning happened through mentorship and hands-on practice. Messy, sure. But it worked.
Now we’ve got Learning Management Systems that cost more than my first car and engagement surveys that measure everything except whether people actually know what they’re doing. It’s crazy.
Here’s what nobody wants to admit: most workplace training fails because we’re trying to fix people problems with technology solutions. Last month I sat through a “digital transformation workshop” where they spent three hours describing how to use a platform that could’ve been mastered in twenty minutes. They were discussing sophisticated features whilst participants couldn’t even log in properly.
The Issues Everyone Pretends Don’t Exist
Australian businesses are throwing money at training like it’s confetti at a wedding. The numbers I keep seeing suggest businesses spend hundreds of billions in employee development. That’s a massive number. The reality is that retention rates for formal training are terrible.
Had a client in the resources sector up north lately. Brilliant operation, safety record that would make Wesfarmers green with envy. Their required learning modules were completely pointless. Digital programs that became box-ticking exercises. The real learning happened during smoko breaks when the old-timers shared stories about near misses.
It became clear that we’re focused on compliance rather than competence.
Production environments often have better approaches to skill development. Seen operations where learning happens on the factory floor instead of conference rooms. There’s something magical about watching a kid figure out how to operate machinery under the guidance of someone who’s been doing it for decades.
But try explaining that to a corporate training manager who needs to justify their LMS investment.
What Actually Works (And Why We Dismiss It)
Person to person knowledge transfer trumps everything else. I’ve seen it happen over and over across different industries. Pair experienced workers with learners on actual projects and watch skills develop naturally.
Westpac has some brilliant mentoring programs running in their branches. Basic concept: pair veterans with rookies on genuine work challenges. Outcomes are outstanding: people stay longer, learn quicker, enjoy work more. Simple stuff that works.
Yet most organisations still choose classroom style sessions where someone talks at people for hours about theories they’ll never use. Why? It’s simpler to track and report. Easy to create compliance reports and dazzle management with participation statistics.
All that accumulated wisdom walks out the door when veterans retire because we’ve ignored informal learning.
Fell into the same trap when I started out. Believed I could package all learning into neat courses that suited everybody. Wasted countless hours building supposedly perfect welcome modules. Polished presentations, engaging activities, cringe worthy simulation games.
Total disaster.
Realised that everyone requires unique methods and support. Who would’ve thought?
The Emotional Intelligence Craze
Don’t get me started on emotional intelligence training. Most tender documents mention EQ requirements. As if emotional awareness comes from presentation software.
I’m not saying emotional intelligence isn’t important. Obviously it matters. Our training approach misses the point entirely. You develop emotional intelligence through experience, feedback, and genuine human interaction. Not via computer tests that assign you colours or animal types.
Worked with a company that invested huge money in emotional intelligence development. Professional trainer, premium facility, elaborate resources that got ignored. Six months later, their employee engagement scores were exactly the same. Turnover actually increased.
Know what would’ve made a difference? Teaching those managers how to have actual conversations with their people. How to pay attention instead of waiting to speak. How to admit when they don’t know something.
But that’s harder to package into a neat training module.
The Tech Industry’s Learning Lies
Digital learning companies promise that algorithms will fix everything. Customised curricula, smart content, bite sized lessons served when needed. Sounds fantastic in theory.
Fact: the technology fixes non problems and creates new ones.
I watched a company implement a “smart” learning platform that was supposed to identify skill gaps and recommend relevant training. Cost them six figures and took eight months to deploy. The system recommended basic computer skills to experts while ignoring critical service deficiencies.
At the same time, top performers were organising casual learning meetings over sandwiches. No technology required.
Genuine breakthroughs in training aren’t emerging from tech companies. Progress emerges from workplaces where people enjoy teaching each other.
Approaches That Get Success
Some companies are getting it right, though. Not many, but enough to give me hope.
Bunnings has this excellent approach to product knowledge training. Rather than classroom courses, vendors deliver practical workshops to employees. Physical items, honest questions, practical issues. Employees develop skills to serve clients better, not to satisfy bureaucratic requirements.
Traditional apprenticeships mixing classroom learning with workplace experience outperform university style programs. Technical colleges working with actual companies offer meaningful employment opportunities.
The formula never changes: education tied to genuine tasks, supervised by competent practitioners, with instant application possibilities.
Yet somehow we keep defaulting to classroom style delivery because it’s familiar and measurable.
What Nobody Wants to Hear About Training Satisfaction
Training providers won’t like this: happy participants don’t necessarily learn anything. Delivered programs that got brilliant feedback but produced zero lasting impact. Conversely, run training that participants hated initially but that genuinely improved their capabilities.
The best learning often feels uncomfortable because it challenges existing assumptions and requires people to change established habits. But uncomfortable experiences don’t generate positive feedback scores, so we avoid them.
Development programs prioritise positive feedback over meaningful behaviour change. Comparable to rating exercise programs on fun factor instead of physical results.
What Happens Next
I don’t have neat solutions to these problems. Truth is, the entire industry is struggling with this. Learning and development has prioritised systems and metrics over the fundamental goal: enabling people to improve their job performance.
Perhaps the solution isn’t improved courses. Possibly it’s designing environments where skill development occurs organically through job structure and human connections.
Could be we need reduced classroom time and increased collaborative learning on genuine projects.
Maybe the best development happens when we stop trying to control every aspect of the learning process and start trusting people to figure things out with appropriate support.
Or maybe I’m just getting old and nostalgic for simpler times when learning meant watching someone who knew what they were doing and gradually getting better at it yourself.
Regardless, current approaches fail the majority of learners in most situations. Denying these problems won’t make them disappear.

If you have any type of inquiries regarding where and ways to utilize Professional Development Training Brisbane, you could call us at the web-page.