On this page
Key takeaways
- 70% of employees multitask during training, the highest rate in three years and up from 58% in 2024, according to the 2026 TalentLMS L&D Benchmark Report.
- TalentLMS’s 2026 L&D Benchmark Report found that lack of time has been employees’ top obstacle to training for three years running, and that half of HR managers say heavy workloads crowd it out.
- 86% of employees say they learn by doing, while a third say their training is too theoretical, both figures from TalentLMS’s 2026 L&D Benchmark Report.
- In the 2026 TalentLMS L&D Benchmark Report, 36% of employees say generative AI tools are weakening their ability to solve problems on their own.
- Only 37% of HR managers count business impact among the ways they measure L&D, and 44% say their company prioritizes external candidates over internal ones when roles open, per the 2026 TalentLMS L&D Benchmark Report.
The 2026 TalentLMS L&D Benchmark Report gives L&D teams enough reasons to build more: more courses, more modules, more AI-generated content. That’s the wrong takeaway.
The report doesn’t describe a training shortage. It describes a capacity problem. Employees are stretched, leaders and learners aren’t experiencing training the same way, and AI is raising real questions about quality and judgment. And underneath it all lies the same practical issue: people are being asked to learn during the workday, with no time left.
The numbers make that hard to ignore. Half of HR managers and 53% of employees say heavy workloads leave little room for training, even when it’s needed. 65% of employees say performance expectations climbed in 2025. And 70% now multitask during training, the highest rate in three years.
People didn’t stop caring about learning. The workday crowded it out.
The report answers with 10 data-backed interventions for turning learning into a growth engine. They’re useful, but treated as 10 more things to add, they repeat the mistake the report is warning about.
Taken together, they point somewhere simpler: before you build more training, protect the conditions that let learning work. Below are five places to start.
Protect learning time before you add more content
Time is the choke point. Budget and tools still matter, but they’re not what is breaking learning first. Employees have named lack of time their biggest obstacle three years running, and half of HR managers say workloads crowd training out.
Another course will not help much if the learner has no protected time to use it. Dropping more content into the day is like paving a new lane onto a road nobody can reach.
So fix the scheduling problem first. L&D does not control the workday, and asking for learning time often gets a yes in the meeting and nothing on the calendar. What changes that is making the cost visible, then giving the time block to the people who own the workload.
Show managers where the squeeze already shows up: who starts training and never finishes, which teams take longest to ramp, and where the same questions or mistakes keep coming back. Then tie the learning block to a metric they already own, such as ramp time, productivity, customer readiness, or team performance. Time L&D asks for can disappear in the first busy week. Time a manager owns has a better chance of surviving because canceling it affects work they are already accountable for.
Decide how you will measure it before the first session, not after. In Intellum’s 2026 Education-Led Growth Report, 49% of education teams said they begin measuring a new initiative’s impact within three months of launch, up from 35% the year before.
Time first, content second. Once the time is protected, the next question is what goes into it. That’s where most training quietly works against itself.
Build for doing, not watching
A third of employees say their training is too theoretical, and 86% say they learn by doing. That number matters. Almost everyone builds real skill through action, yet a lot of corporate training still asks people to watch, read, and remember. The format works against the way people learn.
Practice is where training becomes capability. Start with the task the learner has to perform, then build the training backward from that moment. So trade some of the watching for doing:
- A real task they have to finish, not a video they sit through.
- A scenario or sandbox where a wrong move costs nothing.
- A roleplay of the hard conversation before they are in it for real.
Less explaining the job, more reps at it. AI can help build that kind of hands-on material faster, which is exactly where the next problem starts.
Keep human judgment over what AI produces
AI will hand you more content than you can reasonably use, and that is the trap. The L&D Benchmark Report found that 22% of HR managers worry about the reliability of AI-generated content. They’re right to be cautious. The tool can turn out something passable in seconds, but passable, at scale, becomes a library nobody trusts.
The quieter cost is capability. Thirty-six percent of employees say these tools are weakening their ability to solve problems on their own. So the real risk is not weak content alone. It’s people losing the exact muscle the training was meant to build.
The answer is not to keep AI out of the learning process. It’s to put it where it belongs. Use AI for first drafts, summaries, content variations, and the tedious rework that slows a learning team down. Keep people on the part that needs instructional judgment: what’s accurate, what reflects the business, where learners need practice, and what should never ship without review. If no one owns that review step, the content is not ready.
From there, the next question is who gets to decide whether the content is really useful. That answer can’t live only with the team making it.
Build it with learners, not for them
HR managers are more satisfied with their training than employees are, 89% against 84%. Five points sounds small enough to ignore. It isn’t. It means the people building the program and the people living inside it are having two different experiences, and the builders are the happier ones. No surprise, then, that HR managers rank finding the right training content as the second-biggest obstacle to L&D effectiveness, behind time.
That gap is not a scoreboard. It’s a design problem. You don’t close it with a survey after launch, when the disappointment is already baked in. You close it by bringing learners in while the content can still change.
Ask what feels relevant. Ask where the workflow breaks. Ask which examples sound like the real job and which ones sound like a training slide. Then treat the answers as design input, not applause after the fact.
Content built with the people who will use it beats content built at them, every time.
Knowing what to build is half the job. Proving it moved anything is the other half, and that runs on skills.
Track skills like the business depends on them
Nearly eight in ten HR managers (79%) say their companies are adopting a skills-based approach, meaning they are starting to hire, train, and plan around what people can actually do, not the title on their badge. The instinct is right. But it only earns the name if those skills are visible, current, and used in real decisions.
That’s where many companies still fall short. Only 37% of HR managers count business impact among the ways they measure L&D, and 44% say their company prioritizes external candidates over internal employees when roles open. That is what happens when capability exists somewhere in the business, but the system cannot see it.
Three moves turn a skills-based approach from a slogan into an operating model:
- Map roles by the skills they require, and define what evidence proves each skill.
- Tie development to business KPIs, so growth gets measured and a manager owns it like any other number.
- Read your own skill data before posting a job externally, so internal mobility is based on readiness, not guesswork.
Visibility is the part most teams underbuild. A significant number of Intellum customers use the Data Connector to move learning data into their own warehouse as it happens, where it lands next to the metrics the business already runs on. Cricket Wireless runs it in Databricks, next to its revenue. That is what turns workforce skills and performance into something a manager can act on instead of something a report asserts.
Tracked and tied to the work, a skill is an asset. Skills that live only in a manager’s head don’t show up when a role opens.
What the report found, and who it asked
TalentLMS surveyed 1,000 U.S. full-time employees who had received training in the past 12 months and 101 U.S. HR managers, in September 2025. Every HR-side figure rests on that 101-person sample, so a one-respondent shift moves it about a point.
| What the report found | Figure | Who was asked |
|---|---|---|
| Multitask during training | 70% | Employees |
| Say heavy workloads leave little room for training | 53% | Employees |
| Say heavy workloads leave little room for training | 50% | HR managers |
| Say they learn by doing | 86% | Employees |
| Say their training is too theoretical | A third | Employees |
| Say performance expectations climbed in 2025 | 65% | Employees |
| Say AI tools are weakening their own problem-solving | 36% | Employees |
| Satisfied with the company’s training | 89% | HR managers |
| Satisfied with the company’s training | 84% | Employees |
| Worry about the reliability of AI-generated content | 22% | HR managers |
| Company is adopting a skills-based approach | 79% | HR managers |
| Count business impact among the ways they measure L&D | 37% | HR managers |
| Company prioritizes external candidates for open roles | 44% | HR managers |
The debt comes due
The report has a name for what builds up when learning keeps losing to the workload: learning debt. It behaves like debt, too. You skip the development today and nothing breaks right away. Then the interest starts collecting quietly, in skills that fall behind, work that slows, problem-solving that dulls, and people who stop believing growth is real.
It rarely arrives as one big crisis. It shows up as a company falling behind and unable to say exactly when it started.
Pick one of the five and protect it this quarter. Start with the calendar, because none of the other four survive a workday with no room in it.
FAQs
What is learning debt?
Learning debt is the 2026 TalentLMS report’s term for what accumulates when development keeps losing to the workload. Nothing breaks right away. The cost shows up later as skills that fall behind, work that slows, problem-solving that dulls, and people who stop believing growth is real.
What is the main takeaway from the 2026 TalentLMS L&D Benchmark Report?
The main takeaway is that L&D teams don’t need more training by default. They need to protect the time, practice, feedback, and skill visibility that make learning work. The report’s own data points at capacity, not content volume, as the binding constraint.
Why don’t employees have time for training?
Employees have named lack of time their top obstacle to training three years running. Half of HR managers and 53% of employees say heavy workloads leave little room for it, 65% of employees report higher performance expectations in 2025, and 70% now multitask during training.
How can L&D teams make training more effective?
By moving past passive content. A third of employees say their training is too theoretical and 86% say they learn by doing, so real tasks, sandbox practice, roleplays, and learner feedback build capability where another video does not.
What role should AI play in L&D?
AI should speed up the work, not own the judgment. Use it for drafts, summaries, content variations, and repetitive rework, while people stay responsible for accuracy, relevance, and learning design. 22% of HR managers already worry about the reliability of AI-generated content.
How do you measure L&D by business impact?
Only 37% of HR managers count business impact among the ways they measure L&D. Tie each program to a metric a manager already owns, such as ramp time or customer readiness, then move learning data into the warehouse where it sits beside revenue.
