Compliance Training’s Real Failure: Lack of Reinforcement, Argues Suzanne Lucas

In a recent LinkedIn post, Suzanne Lucas challenges the conventional approach to compliance training, arguing that its effectiveness is severely hampered by a lack of ongoing reinforcement. Lucas, a recognized expert in HR and business, highlights a critical gap between completing mandatory training and ensuring employees actually retain and apply the knowledge.

Lucas opens by posing a pointed question about the persistent rule-breaking and poor decision-making despite the completion of compliance training. She notes that the problem often lies not in the initial training itself, but in what happens afterward.

“So why do employees and managers continue to break rules and make dumb choices?”

The core of Lucas’s argument centers on the insufficient focus on reinforcing learned material. She cites research indicating a significant shortfall in this area, with only a small percentage of HR and compliance leaders prioritizing post-training reinforcement.

“Only 18% of HR leaders and 13 percent of compliance, legal, and risk leaders say their current compliance approach focuses on reinforcing learning after training.”

Lucas draws a parallel between compliance training and practical job training, such as operating a cash register. In the latter, she explains, the training is continuously reinforced through daily practice, embedding the skills until they become second nature. This contrasts sharply with compliance training, where the scenarios may be infrequent or abstract.

The Challenge of Infrequent Application

According to Lucas, the nature of many compliance-related tasks makes daily reinforcement difficult. Unlike learning to serve a customer, many compliance rules pertain to situations that may rarely, if ever, occur in an employee’s day-to-day work. This lack of regular application means that the knowledge gained during training can easily fade.

“But with compliance training, most of the tasks aren’t done every day. Some of the training is for tasks that may never actually happen.”

She emphasizes that for compliance training to be truly effective, it requires a deliberate and concentrated effort from managers to integrate the principles into the regular workflow. Without this active reinforcement, Lucas suggests, the initial training investment yields diminishing returns.

The Imperative for Ongoing Engagement

Lucas advocates for a shift in strategy, moving beyond a one-and-done approach to compliance education. She posits that weaving compliance into the fabric of daily operations is essential for fostering a culture of adherence and responsible decision-making. This involves managers actively engaging with their teams to ensure that compliance principles are understood and applied consistently, not just during the annual training cycle.

In essence, Suzanne Lucas’s analysis on LinkedIn serves as a crucial reminder to organizations that true compliance is an ongoing process, not merely a box to be checked. The effectiveness of training hinges on sustained engagement and practical application, a point she makes with compelling clarity.