When Training Takes One Minute — Is It Still Training? Control and understanding are often mistaken for twins. Yet anyone who has ever clicked through a mandatory LMS module in under a minute knows the truth: control is easy to document; understanding is not. We have built systems that can measure completion down to the second — while knowing almost nothing about what the person has actually learned. In every audit I’ve seen, the pattern repeats: immaculate training records, perfectly timestamped, fully signed… and a team that still struggles with critical processes. The system insists that learning has happened; reality quietly disagrees. The illusion begins with how many organizations define “training.” A two-minute SOP read-and-confirm. An auto-generated quiz with predictable questions. A Sponsor rule that anything over 120 seconds counts as “engaged.” These micro-requirements create an appearance of qualification while demanding almost no cognitive effort. We have become experts at Minimum Viable Documentation — and novices at sustainable skills development. But competence in clinical research cannot be compressed into a stopwatch. True learning requires context, repetition, dialogue, and the psychological safety to ask, “I don’t fully understand this — can we walk through it?” None of that fits neatly into the LMS architecture. Yet all of it is essential to quality. If we want a workforce that can manage complexity, anticipate risk, and act with judgment, we must shift our focus from compliance tick-boxes to capability building. From timing training to investing in it. From proving people have read something to ensuring they can apply it.

What would change in your organization if the measure of training shifted from “time spent” to “competence gained”?

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories