The desire is strong and hard to resist. Yes, leaders of L&D and even business partners want to chime in and choose the ideal format for training. That seems to be especially true for technical training. Videos are popular, everybody wants videos, that’s the best way to learn because YouTube is popular, and people binge Netflix.
Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that you, as a leader, choose the ideal types of training offered. That’s a job that should be left for instructional designers. I know, it’s hard to resist deciding on a video, course, or live training.
The worst trap? Choosing most or all the options “because people need options for different learning styles or preferences.” Nope, that’s not the way to choose things either.
It’s not about choosing all the options possible or that the content/task could possibly fit into. It’s about determining the best format for the content and the employee. That rarely means every or most types of training.
Don’t choose formats simply because it can be done or can fit the content. Choose it based on impact.
When it comes to enterprise software, the right training format is a byproduct of analysis, not a starting point. That is why this choice belongs to an instructional designer.
In technical training projects, leaders frequently jump to solutions before the problem is fully defined. The plan looks like a list of assets rather than a performance strategy. That approach can lead to misaligned content, high costs, and minimal (or negative) impact on real-world work.
The better path is simple to state and powerful in practice. First, define the business problem and the behaviors that solve it. Then, allow an instructional designer to determine the right format based on evidence, not the necessity to meet everyone’s desires.
This isn’t Netflix; this is learning to do a job better. It’s about simplicity and not overwhelming employees with too many options. That’s why you should keep reading and learn why instructional designers should make the decision and not those who want everything.
The Problem With Format First Thinking
Leaders rarely choose one format. They have a tendency to try to serve everyone by offering everything. That’s a pretty natural tendency for all who are trying to please, but it’s not beneficial to the business.
That looks like a good solution and like they’re being inclusive, but in practice, it produces an overwhelming selection that steals time and attention from employees who need clarity.
Here is what typically happens when many modalities are chosen:
- Employees face a long menu of content and must guess which item is correct for their situation.
- Multiple versions of similar content risk employees receiving redundant content that aggravates employees.
- Multiple formats repeat the same information, which inflates cost and creates messy version control.
- Redundant materials drift out of sync, so employees encounter conflicting or outdated instructions.
- People bounce between formats and still miss the precise practice required to perform in the software.
Technical training suffers the most because accuracy matters, and systems change often. Enterprise systems change frequently, workflows are nuanced, and small differences can have big consequences. The problem isn’t a lack of content. The problem is too much content without a strategy behind it all that connects it in a meaningful way.
What Instructional Designers Actually Do
Instructional designers exist to prevent those problems. They don’t start with deliverables. They start with performance, which includes performance objectives rather than learning objectives.
A focused technical training process usually includes:
- Needs analysis that clarifies the business problem and context.
- Performance outcomes that show what employees will be able to do in the end.
- User and workflow analysis to understand how tasks actually happen in the system.
- Gap identification that separates knowledge issues from environmental barriers.
- Mapping software steps to realistic scenarios that matter to the job and how it’s performed in the real world.
These steps are not academic. They are the logic behind every format decision, which is why the format should not be chosen first. Instructional designers go through a whole process that requires much analysis before a format is ever chosen.
Why the Right Training Format Depends on the Problem Needing to Be Solved For
Once the problem is clear, formats reveal their proper role. Each one has strengths and limits, and none is universally right. But more than that, not all formats that are possible for the content should be created. It’s about striking the right balance of benefits for employees.
Consider these examples of what choices might be used for necessary training.
Short Video
Great for orientation, feature overviews, and short walkthroughs for simple tasks that don’t really need practice. Less effective for hands-on skill building, decision-heavy tasks, or complex tasks that are often strung together to accomplish a larger goal.
Interactive Simulation
Ideal for practice in enterprise software, where employees can make choices and experience consequences in a safe environment. It’s also a great way to introduce realistic scenarios so employees can experience how to use the software to do their job effectively.
This method is great for building a foundational knowledge of how to perform various tasks that will be performed regularly in software.
Job Aid or Other Performance Support
Perfect for infrequent or reference-heavy tasks, especially when accuracy and speed matter in the moment of need. These are great for tasks that aren’t performed very often and are simple enough to follow in a document.
If a job is performed rarely with software and will likely be forgotten, a job aid is a great place to start.
Instructor-Led Workshop
Useful for complex decision making, collaborative problem solving, and cross-functional workflows that require discussion and coaching. These aren’t often necessary in technical training, but that doesn’t mean they never are.
Just be sure not to waste people’s time with instructor-led workshops where employees simply watch someone else doing the job in the tool rather than gaining real practice. The main reason we don’t do this type of training is that real practice isn’t possible, and they’re not typically as effective for most types of technical training.
The task employees need to do determines the format. The format does not determine the solution.
How Instructional Designers Determine the Correct Solution
Professionals use a simple decision path. It’s practical, repeatable, and tied to outcomes.
- Identify the business problem and define success in measurable terms.
- Specify the behaviors employees must perform to achieve that success.
- Analyze the workflow and system constraints that shape those behaviors.
- Determine the barriers that block performance, such as knowledge, tools, process, or incentives.
- Select the training approach (if training is even the solution) that addresses the true barrier with the least friction and the highest relevance.
While there are a lot of subtleties in this approach that can’t be covered, overall, you can see how it prevents unnecessary content and focuses investment where it matters. It also shortens time to proficiency, reduces rework, and limits the sprawl that confuses employees.
The Benefit of Involving an Instructional Designer for Technical Training
Enterprise software training is not only about learning a feature. It is about matching precise steps to real-world scenarios and doing the actual job in the system. That’s where instructional designers add unique value.
Instructional designers add some key benefits to the process of choosing the right corporate training format. That includes:
- Accurate and consistent instructions that reflect real workflows and system versions.
- Streamlined content that eliminates duplication and reduces maintenance.
- Practice activities that mirror the way work is actually performed.
- A clear learning path that tells employees what to do and where to find further help. Training where further training is essential.
When a professional guides the process, leaders get fewer assets but better outcomes. Adoption improves, support tickets decline, and teams perform with confidence.
Addressing the Misconception That Training Is a Menu
Training is not something employees should have to sift through or that leaders choose from. When organizations present a buffet of options without a clear path, it looks like a redundant mess to employees, and confusion rises and performance stalls.
The cost includes wasted time, inconsistent messages, and too much content that is outdated before it can be updated.
Two quick scenarios make the point that too much training can be worse than none at all:
Scenario One
A team launches videos, simulations, and a PDF guide for the same workflow. Employees watch a video, try the task, then open the PDF for help. The PDF is already out of date, and the simulation uses a different software version.
The result is frustration and more help desk tickets.
Scenario Two
A department offers a full e-learning course for a task employees perform once every quarter. Too much information and for tasks performed too rarely leads most employees to skip it and ask their peers for help anyway.
A two-page job aid would have solved the problem faster and with far lower cost.
The goal is not variety. The goal is necessity and effectiveness.
How to Work Effectively With an Instructional Designer
Leaders get the best results when they frame the challenge and invite the expert to design the path. A few practical tips make collaboration smooth.
- Share clear business goals, success metrics, and deadlines.
- Provide access to SMEs and a small group of end users for quick reality checks.
- Prioritize outcomes instead of volume. Ask what the minimum effective solution looks like.
- Expect recommendations that remove formats rather than add them, and welcome the focus that brings.
When everyone aligns around performance, the training becomes a solution rather than a collection of all possible options. Working effectively with an instructional designer is all about giving them the power to do their job effectively, rather than within the guidance of all possible options.
Wrap Up
Choosing formats first or based on potential fit might feel decisive, yet it often creates clutter and confusion. An instructional designer protects your budget, timelines, and employees by aligning training to real workflows and performance outcomes.
The best enterprise software training is not a menu to order from. It’s not about choosing what formats could potentially fit the content or goal. It’s about designing solutions that solve a specific problem and have a specific purpose in employees’ workflows.
No employee wants to be met with a course, a job aid, in-app support, and a video that all cover the same thing. Each piece of content should have its own purpose for various workflows with as little overlap as possible.
If you’re planning a technical rollout or wrestling with adoption, involve a professional early. Define the outcomes together, then let the process guide the format. Your employees will thank you with better performance. Your organization will feel the difference in real results.
An instructional design consultant can help guide the process and proper training content. If you have a project coming up, schedule a free consultation to gain some professional guidance and figure out what the ideal plan might look like.