From Frustration to Framework: How I Stopped Hating Corporate Training and Built a Career Designing Learning That Works

The Architect of Ineffective Training

The fluorescent lights of the conference room hummed with an almost mocking indifference.

Sarah, a newly promoted manager, felt a familiar wave of resignation wash over her.

At the front of the room, a facilitator with an aggressively cheerful demeanor clicked through another slide dense with bullet points.

The topic was “Synergistic Leadership,” but the experience was anything but.

Around the table, her colleagues were engaged in a silent, collective battle against gravity, their heads bobbing as they fought off sleep.

Others were more discreet, their eyes glazed over while their fingers tapped away on phones hidden below the table’s edge.

The session culminated, as it always did, in the hollow ritual of the “smile sheet”—a feedback form asking participants to rate their enjoyment of a training they had clearly not enjoyed, learned from, or engaged with in any meaningful Way.¹

This was the charade of corporate training: a performance of learning that accomplished little more than checking a box.

Sarah’s experience was not an isolated incident; it was a symptom of a systemic, industry-wide crisis.

Organizations spend billions of dollars on corporate training annually, yet a staggering body of evidence suggests that the vast majority of this investment is squandered.

Studies consistently show that up to 90 percent of new skills acquired in training are lost and forgotten within a year, never making their way into the employee’s actual workflow.²

This disconnect is felt acutely by both managers and employees.

Research reveals that 75% of managers are dissatisfied with their company’s Learning & Development (L&D) function, while 70% of employees report that they lack mastery of the skills essential to performing their jobs effectively.⁴

The promise of professional growth and enhanced performance dissolves into a reality of wasted time and squandered potential.

Reflecting on the litany of training sessions she had both endured and, to her growing shame, delivered, Sarah began to deconstruct the architecture of this failure.

She identified a pattern of recurring L&D sins that rendered even the most well-intentioned programs inert.

• The Content Dump: Most training was designed as an information firehose, a “death-by-PowerPoint” ordeal where facilitators read text-heavy slides aloud.⁵ This approach ignores the basic limits of human cognition, leading to immediate cognitive overload and ensuring that almost nothing is retained.³
• The Relevancy Gap: The content was often generic, purchased “off-the-shelf,” and fundamentally disconnected from the specific, immediate needs of the learners and their daily tasks.⁶ A leadership course might discuss abstract theories but fail to address the concrete challenges Sarah faced with her team on the factory floor, rendering it practically useless.²
• The Engagement Vacuum: The sessions were overwhelmingly passive. Long lectures and static presentations failed to engage participants or accommodate diverse learning styles.⁵ This vacuum of interaction created a perfect environment for distraction, with employees mentally checking out or turning to their smartphones for stimulation.⁶
• The Missing Follow-Up: The learning experience ended the moment the session did. There was no reinforcement, no structured opportunity to practice, and no feedback on application.² Sarah herself had attended a fantastic coaching workshop, full of excitement and good intentions, only to find the new skills quickly fade as the pressures of daily work took over. Without a system for follow-up, knowledge decay was not a risk; it was a certainty.³
• The Leadership Disconnect: Too often, training initiatives lacked active participation from leadership and were not aligned with clear, measurable organizational goals.⁵ When training is not explicitly linked to a business need, it is perceived by employees as a low-priority obligation, a box to be ticked rather than a genuine opportunity for growth.⁹

The more Sarah examined these issues, the more she realized they were not just a series of isolated mistakes but interconnected components of a self-perpetuating cycle of ineffectiveness.

The core of this cycle is a fundamental inability to demonstrate value.

Many L&D departments struggle to measure the impact of their programs beyond the superficial “smile sheet”.¹⁰

Because they cannot prove that their initiatives lead to tangible business results, executives view L&D not as a strategic investment but as a cost center—one of the first to face cuts when budgets are tight.⁷

This chronic shortage of resources forces L&D professionals to rely on cheap, generic, off-the-shelf courses that are inherently less effective.⁷

These low-quality programs, in turn, fail to produce any measurable improvement in performance, reinforcing the executive perception that L&D is a drain on resources with no demonstrable return on investment.²

Professionals like Sarah were trapped.

It wasn’t just that they were designing bad training; they were operating within a system that starved them of the very resources, tools, and strategic alignment needed to succeed.

The problem wasn’t just her; it was the blueprint itself that was broken.

The Epiphany: There’s a Blueprint for This

On the verge of concluding that corporate training was an unsolvable puzzle, Sarah was handed a high-stakes project: design a new onboarding program from the ground up.

The company was hemorrhaging talent, with internal surveys revealing that a significant percentage of new hires felt unsupported and disconnected, leading to high turnover within the first year.¹²

This project was her chance to do something different.

Determined not to repeat the failures of the past, she began a deep dive into the foundational question:

Why does learning stick? Her research led her not to a single answer, but to a series of cascading revelations that would fundamentally reframe her entire understanding of the field.

Her first epiphany came from discovering the science of the learner.

She stumbled upon the work of Malcolm Knowles and the principles of Andragogy, or Adult Learning Theory.¹³

The theory asserts that adults are not simply taller children; they are a distinct type of learner with unique motivations and needs.

This was a paradigm shift.

She read through the core assumptions and saw a direct explanation for every failure she had witnessed:

• Adults are self-directed and want to be involved in planning their own learning.¹³ The passive lectures she had endured were a direct violation of this principle.
• Adults bring a wealth of lived experience to the classroom, which serves as a rich resource for learning.¹⁴ The generic, one-size-fits-all content had failed to tap into this resource.
• Adults’ readiness to learn is oriented toward the developmental tasks of their social and professional roles. They are motivated by learning that is problem-centered and has immediate applicability to their lives.¹³ The irrelevant content and lack of follow-up had ignored these core drivers entirely.
  
  Suddenly, the disengagement, the boredom, and the failure to apply skills were not moral failings of the learners; they were predictable outcomes of an instructional approach that was fundamentally misaligned with the science of how adults learn.

This new scientific grounding led to her second revelation: the discovery of a professional blueprint.

Sarah came across a powerful analogy that resonated deeply: the Instructional Designer as an Architect.¹⁵

An architect, she realized, doesn’t just show up with a pile of bricks and start building.

They follow a rigorous, user-centered design process.

They conduct analyses, develop concepts, create prototypes, and balance aesthetics with functionality, all while collaborating with a team of experts.¹⁵

This analogy provided a new, empowering professional identity.

It wasn’t about being a charismatic facilitator; it was about being a meticulous designer of learning experiences.

This metaphor led her to the architect’s blueprint: the

ADDIE model, an instructional systems design framework standing for Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate.¹⁷

ADDIE was not just a checklist; it was a systematic, logical process for building effective learning solutions.¹⁹

• Analyze: She understood that every project must begin not with content, but with a deep analysis of the business problem, the performance gap, the learning environment, and the learners themselves.¹¹
• Design: This phase was the drawing board, where she could apply the principles of Andragogy to create detailed storyboards, lesson plans, and prototypes that mapped directly to learning objectives.¹¹
• Develop, Implement, Evaluate: The remaining phases provided a clear, structured path from the blueprint to the finished, functional learning experience, with evaluation woven into every step.¹⁸

Her final revelation provided the key to breaking the vicious cycle of ineffectiveness.

She discovered Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Evaluation, a framework that offered a way to measure what truly matters.¹

This was the proof she had been missing.

• Level 1: Reaction. This was the “smile sheet,” measuring learner satisfaction. Important, but insufficient on its own.¹
• Level 2: Learning. This measured the increase in knowledge and skills, often through pre- and post-assessments.¹
• Level 3: Behavior. This assessed whether learners were actually applying the new skills and behaviors on the job, typically measured through observation and performance data some time after the training.¹
• Level 4: Results. This was the ultimate goal: measuring the training’s impact on tangible business outcomes, such as increased sales, improved quality, or, in the case of her onboarding project, reduced employee turnover.¹
  
  This framework was her path out of the funding trap. By designing programs to influence Level 4 results, she could finally demonstrate clear, quantifiable ROI. This thinking aligned with the emerging discipline of Learning Engineering, which formally brings together cognitive science, data analytics, and human-centered engineering principles to create adaptive, optimized, and measurable learning systems.20 She wasn’t just an architect of static courses; she could become an engineer of dynamic learning ecosystems.

These epiphanies converged into a single, powerful realization.

Effective Learning & Development was not a single skill but the sophisticated integration of three distinct domains: cognitive science (the principles of how people learn), design and engineering (the systematic processes for building effective learning systems), and business strategy (the clear identification of organizational problems to solve).

Her past failures stemmed from operating in a tiny sliver of this landscape—delivering content without a deep understanding of the science, a rigorous design process, or a clear link to business needs.⁷

A certificate might teach her a tool, but to become a true architect—one who could integrate all three domains—she needed a more comprehensive blueprint.

She needed a formal education.

Constructing a New Career: The Learning & Development Degree

Armed with this newfound clarity, Sarah made a decisive choice.

While certifications in specific tools or methodologies had their place, she recognized that her core challenge was systemic.²⁴

She didn’t just need to learn a new technique; she needed to learn a new way of thinking.

She needed to master the language of business, the principles of organizational diagnosis, and the methodologies of data-driven evaluation.

A master’s degree, she concluded, was the most direct path to acquiring this holistic, strategic competence.²⁵

It was a commitment to becoming not just a practitioner, but a strategic partner to the business.

As Sarah began her search, she discovered that “Learning and Development degree” was an umbrella term for a family of related, and often overlapping, graduate programs.

Each offered a slightly different lens through which to view the field, but all shared a common goal: to equip professionals to design and lead impactful learning initiatives.²⁶

The main pathways she encountered were:

• Master of Science in Curriculum & Instruction: Often rooted in traditional education, these programs provide a deep dive into the technical constructs of curriculum development, learning theories, educational research, and evaluation models.²⁷
• Master of Arts in Training & Development: These programs are typically oriented toward the corporate world, focusing on practical skills like training delivery, e-learning design, coaching, and performance management, often with a curriculum explicitly aligned to industry competency models from organizations like the Association for Talent Development (ATD).²⁹
• Master of Science in Instructional Design & Technology (IDT): This is a rapidly growing field focused on designing and creating technology-infused learning systems. These programs emphasize skills in multimedia authoring, e-learning development, and leveraging emerging technologies to improve performance.³⁰
• Master’s in Organizational Learning, Performance, and Change (OLPC): This type of degree takes the broadest, most systemic view. It trains professionals to diagnose organizational problems, facilitate large-scale change, manage human resource development, and improve overall human potential within complex systems.³²

After careful consideration, Sarah enrolled in a fully online Master of Science in Instructional Design and Technology program that offered a concentration in Organization Development and Change.

This blended approach offered the perfect synthesis of practical design skills and high-level strategic thinking, and the online format provided the flexibility she needed as a full-time working professional.³⁰

Her time in the virtual classroom was transformative.

The abstract concepts from her initial research were brought to life through rigorous coursework, practical projects, and collaboration with expert faculty and a network of peers.²⁹

Key courses became milestones in her journey:

• In Foundations of Adult Learning, she moved beyond a superficial understanding of Andragogy. She learned to analyze learner populations and design instruction that respected their self-concept, drew upon their experience, and was oriented toward immediate problem-solving.¹³ She could now articulate precisely
  why her old training programs had failed, using the language of learning science.
• In Instructional and Training System Design, she mastered the ADDIE model as a practical tool.²⁹ For a class project, she developed her first comprehensive design document for a fictional sales training program, complete with learner personas, clear objectives, a content outline, and a detailed evaluation strategy. She created storyboards that served as the architectural blueprints for the final learning experience.¹¹
• A course on Assessing Data: Organizational Diagnosis was a complete revelation.³³ She learned how to conduct a formal needs analysis, using interviews, surveys, and performance data to distinguish between a skill-gap problem (which training can solve) and a systems problem, like misaligned incentives or flawed processes (which training cannot solve).¹¹ She was no longer a purveyor of solutions; she was becoming a diagnostician of problems.
• Finally, in Program Evaluation, she learned to apply Kirkpatrick’s model with precision.²⁷ She designed multi-level evaluation plans that could track learning from the initial reaction all the way to measurable business impact, finally equipping her with the tools to calculate and demonstrate a clear return on investment.

The program culminated not with a traditional academic thesis, but with the creation of a professional digital portfolio.²⁹

This was a living document, a curated collection of her best work designed to showcase her knowledge, skills, and accomplishments to future employers.

Following best practices, she didn’t just display finished products; she wrote detailed case studies for each project.³⁴

For a module on workplace safety, she outlined the problem she was solving, her role on the project team, the instructional strategies she chose and why, the challenges she overcame (like a diverse audience with varying literacy levels), and the results of the intervention.³⁴

Her portfolio included a variety of formats—interactive eLearning modules, training videos, instructor-led guides, and job aids—demonstrating her versatility.³⁵

This portfolio was more than a collection of assignments; it was the professional calling card of a newly minted architect of learning.

The Keystone Project: A Case Study in Transformation

Now a graduate, armed with a master’s degree and a powerful new toolkit, Sarah was no longer just a manager who happened to do training.

She was a Learning & Development professional.

Her opportunity to prove it came when she was asked to lead the redesign of the company’s failing onboarding program—the very project that had catalyzed her journey.

The following case study details how she applied her new architectural skills to transform a critical business process.

The Challenge

The business problem was clear and severe.

The company was experiencing a 25% turnover rate among new hires within their first year, a costly problem that also damaged team morale and productivity.¹²

The existing onboarding program was a one-day information dump, focused almost exclusively on processes and paperwork, a common failure point that leaves new employees feeling overwhelmed and disconnected.³⁷

The Process (Following the ADDIE Model)

1. Analysis:

Instead of jumping to create new content, Sarah began with a thorough analysis.18 She conducted stakeholder interviews with department heads, surveyed recent hires about their experience, and analyzed exit interview data.

Her analysis revealed that the primary drivers of early turnover were not a lack of information, but a lack of

connection to colleagues and the company culture, a lack of confidence in their ability to succeed, and a lack of clarity about their role and how it contributed to the bigger picture.³⁸

The problem wasn’t just about knowledge transfer; it was about integration and belonging.

2. Design:

Based on her analysis, Sarah designed a comprehensive, 90-day blended learning journey, not a single event.

The design was intentionally structured to address the core needs of connection, confidence, and clarity.

• Pre-boarding: To reduce first-day anxiety, new hires received a welcome package a week before their start date. This included a welcome video from the CEO, an FAQ, a glossary of company terms, and login credentials for a “one-stop shop” resource hub containing all necessary paperwork and information.³⁸
• Week 1 – Focus on Connection: The first week was dedicated to building relationships. Sarah implemented a formal onboarding buddy system, pairing each new hire with a trained, experienced employee.³⁷ She scheduled team lunches, departmental meet-and-greets, and an interactive session on company values that used storytelling instead of reciting policy.³⁸
• The 30-60-90 Day Plan: Learning was spaced out to the “moment of need” to avoid cognitive overload.³⁸ Role-specific technical training was delivered in the context of their first projects and paired with peer coaching from experienced colleagues.³⁹ Crucially, she designed structured check-ins with managers at the 30, 60, and 90-day marks to provide continuous feedback, address concerns, and ensure a smooth transition.⁴⁰

3. Development:

Sarah and her team used modern authoring tools to develop the program’s assets.41 They created short, engaging eLearning modules on benefits and compliance, produced the CEO’s welcome video, and built the online resource hub.

They also developed a comprehensive guide for managers, training them on their critical role in the onboarding process and providing them with templates and checklists to ensure consistency.38

4. Implementation:

The new program was rolled out to the next cohort of new hires.

A dedicated Slack channel was created for the group to foster peer support and community.38 The process ran smoothly, with managers now equipped and accountable for their part of the journey.

5. Evaluation (Using Kirkpatrick’s Model):

This was the critical phase where Sarah demonstrated the program’s value.

• Level 1 (Reaction): Post-program surveys and feedback from the 30-day check-ins were overwhelmingly positive. New hires consistently reported feeling welcomed, supported, and excited about their new roles.¹
• Level 2 (Learning): Short quizzes embedded in the eLearning modules and discussions during check-ins showed that new hires had a significantly better understanding of company culture, their benefits, and their role-specific tools compared to previous cohorts.¹
• Level 3 (Behavior): Through manager observations and performance reviews, Sarah’s team tracked behavioral changes. New hires were asking more informed questions, collaborating with their teams more effectively, and contributing to projects more quickly. The data showed that the average time to reach full productivity had decreased from four months to just two and a half.¹²
• Level 4 (Results): This was the ultimate proof. Within one year of implementing the new program, the turnover rate among new hires dropped from 25% to 15%. Based on the average cost to replace an employee, this translated into a quantifiable, six-figure saving for the company. Furthermore, employee engagement scores for new hires, measured by the annual internal survey, improved by 25%.¹²

This project did far more than just transfer knowledge.

By focusing on the human elements of starting a new job, the onboarding program directly shaped a more welcoming and supportive organizational culture.⁴⁰

It improved the employee experience from day one and drove measurable business results in productivity and retention.⁴²

Sarah’s role had transcended that of a simple trainer.

She had acted as a performance consultant, a culture shaper, and a strategic business partner.

She had used learning as a tool to solve a fundamental organizational problem, demonstrating that L&D, when executed with rigor and purpose, is not a support function but a powerful lever for organizational success.

Your Blueprint for a Future in Learning & Development

Sarah’s journey from a frustrated manager to a strategic architect of learning is not just an inspirational story; it is a replicable blueprint.

The field of Learning & Development offers a rich and rewarding career path for those who are passionate about solving complex problems and building systems that unlock human potential.²⁴

It is a profession dedicated to driving growth, empowering employees, and achieving remarkable results across every industry.³²

This career is not a single destination but a ladder of increasing impact and influence.

Professionals typically begin by focusing on the design and delivery of specific programs and can advance to roles where they are responsible for the entire talent development strategy of a global organization.²⁴

This progression offers significant opportunities for advancement, decision-making authority, and strategic leadership.²⁴

The following table outlines the typical career path, detailing the expanding responsibilities and corresponding compensation at each stage.

Table 1: Career Progression in Learning & Development

Role Title	Core Responsibilities	Typical Salary Range (USD)
Learning & Development Specialist	Designs and delivers training programs, assesses employee learning needs, and evaluates the effectiveness of training initiatives.	$58,683 – $107,500
Senior L&D Specialist	Oversees a team, develops broader learning strategies, and engages in more strategic planning for the organization.	$57,000 – $102,652
Learning & Development Manager	Works with top management to influence the company’s L&D strategy and provides advice on major talent development decisions.	$85,000 – $143,260
Senior L&D Manager	Oversees the entire L&D department, leads major talent initiatives, and ensures learning strategies are fully aligned with company objectives.	$109,950 – $172,700
Director of Learning & Development	Holds overarching responsibility for all learning and talent development, shaping the company’s overall strategy and guiding its execution.	$85,000 – $150,706

Salary data sourced from Talent.com.²⁴

To embark on this journey is to choose to become an architect of human potential.

It requires moving beyond the frustration of ineffective, box-checking exercises and embracing a discipline grounded in science, engineering, and strategy.

It involves learning to diagnose problems before prescribing solutions, to design with the user at the center, and to measure success in terms of tangible, meaningful results.

The initial image of a disengaged audience and a hollow “smile sheet” represents a system that has lost its Way. The final image is that of a confident, strategic L&D professional—an architect who understands the principles of structure, a designer who creates experiences that are both functional and engaging, and an engineer who builds systems that adapt, evolve, and demonstrably work.

The blueprints for a more effective, impactful, and fulfilling career in learning are available.

It’s time to start building.

Works cited

1. What is the Kirkpatrick model? 4-Level Evaluation & How to Use it, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.docebo.com/learning-network/blog/kirkpatrick-model/
2. Why Your Training Programs Are Failing—And How to Fix Them, accessed August 8, 2025, https://trainingmag.com/why-your-training-programs-are-failing-and-how-to-fix-them/
3. Employee Training Challenges And How To Deal With Them In Your Organization – Panopto, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.panopto.com/blog/why-employee-training-fails/
4. Why Corporate Training Programs Fail | How Problem-Solving Works – LeanScape, accessed August 8, 2025, https://leanscape.io/why-corporate-training-programs-fail-how-problem-solving-works/
5. Examining Common Failures in Employee Training Programs, accessed August 8, 2025, https://thetrainingassociates.com/failures-in-employee-training/
6. 8 Reasons Why Most Online Corporate Training Fails – Knowledge Anywhere, accessed August 8, 2025, https://knowledgeanywhere.com/articles/eight-reasons-why-most-online-corporate-training-fails/
7. Free guide to the top 20 L&D challenges and how to overcome them – Easygenerator, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.easygenerator.com/en/guides/learning-development-pain-points/
8. 6 Most Common L&D Challenges [How to Solve Them] | Continu, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.continu.com/blog/learning-and-development-challenges
9. Eleven Reasons Why Training and Development Fails . . . and what you can do about it – ROI Institute, accessed August 8, 2025, https://roiinstitute.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Eleven-Reasons-Why-Training-and-Development-Fails.pdf
10. Common challenges of employee development and how to overcome them – Moodle, accessed August 8, 2025, https://moodle.com/us/news/employee-development-challenges/
11. What is the ADDIE Model of Instructional Design? 2025 Guide – Devlin Peck, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.devlinpeck.com/content/addie-instructional-design
12. A Successful Case Study on Employee Onboarding: Optimizing New Hire Integration at Accenture – Efectio, accessed August 8, 2025, https://efectio.com/en/a-successful-case-study-on-employee-onboarding-optimizing-new-hire-integration-at-accenture/
13. Adult Learning Theory, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.mcw.edu/-/media/MCW/Education/Academic-Affairs/OEI/Faculty-Quick-Guides/Adult-Learning-Theory.pdf
14. Adult learning theory and the principles of andragogy – University of Phoenix, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.phoenix.edu/blog/adult-learning-theory-the-principles-of-andragogy.html
15. Instructional Designers are Architects – Southern Nazarene University, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.snu.edu/blog/instructional-designers-are-architects
16. Analogies for Educational Design: Architecture – Simon Fraser University, accessed August 8, 2025, http://www.sfu.ca/~koneill/architecture.html
17. ADDIE Model Explained: All You Need to Know [+ FREE Template …, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.aihr.com/blog/addie-model/
18. ADDIE model – Wikipedia, accessed August 8, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADDIE_model
19. What is ADDIE? Your Complete Guide to the ADDIE Model – ELM Learning, accessed August 8, 2025, https://elmlearning.com/hub/instructional-design/addie-model/
20. Learning Engineering: Bridging Design, Data, And Science …, accessed August 8, 2025, https://elearningindustry.com/learning-engineering-bridging-design-data-and-science
21. Learning engineering – Wikipedia, accessed August 8, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_engineering
22. Learning Engineering: New Profession or Transformational Process? – Campus Technology, accessed August 8, 2025, https://campustechnology.com/articles/2024/07/08/learning-engineering-new-profession-or-transformational-process.aspx
23. 10 Things I’ve Learned From My 20 Years in Learning and Development | by seanbengry, accessed August 8, 2025, https://medium.com/@seanbengry/the-10-things-ive-learned-from-my-20-years-in-learning-and-development-6c93b9de1a6e
24. Learning And Development Manager Career Path – 4DayWeek.io, accessed August 8, 2025, https://4dayweek.io/career-path/learning-and-development-manager
25. Degree vs. Certification : r/instructionaldesign – Reddit, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/instructionaldesign/comments/1icsfni/degree_vs_certification/
26. Education Requirements for Learning and Development Specialists – Teal, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.tealhq.com/education/learning-and-development-specialist
27. M.S. in Curriculum and Instruction – Curriculum Development – FIU …, accessed August 8, 2025, https://fiuonline.fiu.edu/programs/online-graduate-degrees/master-of-science-in-curriculum-and-instruction.php
28. Masters in Curriculum and Instruction Online Education Degree …, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.wgu.edu/online-teaching-degrees/curriculum-instruction-education-masters-program.html
29. Earn your master’s at Roosevelt, become a Training and …, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.roosevelt.edu/programs/masters-training-and-development-ma
30. Master of Science in Instructional Design and Technology – SJSU – School of Information, accessed August 8, 2025, https://ischool.sjsu.edu/master-science-instructional-design-and-technology
31. Instructional Design, Technology, & Organization – College of Education | Illinois, accessed August 8, 2025, https://education.illinois.edu/epol/programs-degrees/instructional-design–technology—organization/master-of-education
32. Organizational Learning, Performance, and Change M.Ed. – Colorado State University Online, accessed August 8, 2025, https://online.colostate.edu/degrees/olpc/
33. Organization Development and Change Master’s Degree Online – Penn State World Campus, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.worldcampus.psu.edu/degrees-and-certificates/penn-state-online-organization-development-and-change-masters-degree
34. How to Write Instructional Design Case Studies for Your Portfolio, accessed August 8, 2025, https://theelearningcoach.com/career/how-to-write-instructional-design-case-studies-for-your-portfolio/
35. How to Create an Instructional Design Portfolio (+ Examples) – iSpring, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.ispringsolutions.com/blog/how-to-make-instructional-design-portfolio
36. PORTFOLIO – INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN BY TRACY CARROLL, accessed August 8, 2025, https://tracycarroll.net/portfolio-3/
37. The Business Case for Reimagining Your Onboarding Program – ATD, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.td.org/content/atd-blog/the-business-case-for-reimagining-your-onboarding-program
38. Case study: How to onboard employees to boost connection and productivity, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.gatheringeffect.com/insights/onboarding-case-study-how-to-increase-connection-and-productivity
39. 19 Best Onboarding Process Examples To Inspire You – AIHR, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.aihr.com/blog/onboarding-process-examples/
40. Case Study: Structured Onboarding Process – Work Friendly HR Consulting, accessed August 8, 2025, https://workfriendly.com/blog/case-study-onboarding-process/
41. Case Studies | Real-World L&D Success Stories | ELB Learning, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.elblearning.com/case-studies
42. Success Stories From Companies Just Like Yours – Vital Learning, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.vital-learning.com/why-vital-learning/success-stories
43. Employee Onboarding Programs: 3 Real-Life Case Studies and Successes – SSR, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.selectsoftwarereviews.com/blog/employee-onboarding-program-examples
44. degreedirectory.td.org, accessed August 8, 2025, https://degreedirectory.td.org/#:~:text=This%20degree%20is%20perfect%20for,results%20across%20sectors%20and%20industries.
45. Top 8 Learning And Development Career Paths in the Post AI World – Risely, accessed August 8, 2025, https://www.risely.me/top-learning-and-development-career-paths/