A recent Reddit thread asked the blunt question: Is training and development dying? The original poster described shrinking budgets, fewer dedicated roles, and the rise of self-service tools. Many comments echoed the frustration: organizations pushing e-learning libraries with little follow-up, cutting staff, or collapsing training into HR functions.
At first glance, it feels bleak. But this is not death, it is creative destruction. That phrase, coined by economist Joseph Schumpeter, simply means that old ways of doing business collapse to make room for better ones. In L&D, the lecture-heavy, slide-driven model is breaking down. In its place, new models are emerging that focus on relevance, speed, and measurable impact. The opportunity lies in building on the rubble, not clinging to it.
Let’s pull the signal from the noise.
1. Training is not dying, but “content delivery” is
The old model of a trainer standing at the front of the room, flipping through slides and calling it a day, is fading fast. AI tools, YouTube, and corporate libraries already do “content dump” better and cheaper. What technology cannot replace is the trainer who translates business goals into performance change.
If your value is “I can teach this module,” you are competing with software. If your value is “I can diagnose a performance gap, design practice that mirrors the job, and ensure behavior changes,” you are future-proofing yourself.
2. The real opportunity is in performance consulting
Many comments on the thread noted that companies are cutting “training” but still spending on performance improvement. The difference is subtle but critical.
Modern L&D professionals need to reframe their identity: not order-takers who design courses, but partners who ask, What’s the business problem? What’s blocking performance? Which part of this is training, and which part is tools, incentives, or feedback?
That skill, performance consulting, is scarce, and organizations will pay for it.
3. The shift is toward integration, not isolation
Another theme from the comments: training often sits siloed from the business. When cuts come, silos fall first. Trainers who survive (and thrive) embed themselves in the workflow. They attend ops meetings, shadow top performers, and design quick interventions that managers can use tomorrow.
Stop thinking like an event planner. Start thinking like a systems designer. The goal is not just to run workshops, it is to engineer conditions where learning sticks.
4. Learners want relevance and immediacy
One frustration in the Reddit comments: employees dislike generic modules. They want training that helps them solve the problems in front of them right now. That is opportunity, not obstacle.
As a trainer, you can add value by:
Building job-realistic practice (not just discussion)
Designing quick, targeted micro-sessions tied to real tasks
Providing job aids, checklists, and prompts that live in the flow of work
When learning feels relevant today, participation soars.
5. The AI and automation wave creates new demand
Some comments worried that AI will “replace trainers.” The opposite is true if you use AI as a force multiplier. AI can draft outlines, create job aids, or generate practice scenarios. What it cannot do is build credibility with sponsors, align programs to metrics, or coach people through real errors in real time.
Smart trainers will use AI to offload production and free up time for consulting, coaching, and stakeholder engagement. These are the parts of the role that truly matter.
6. The business case still rules
One point that came through strongly: when budgets tighten, L&D is often the first cut because leaders cannot see the return. That is on us. Trainers must measure more than “smile sheets.”
Track whether people can perform in class. Confirm with managers whether the skill shows up on the job. Tie results to a directional business metric. You do not need perfection; you need evidence that training moved the needle. The trainer who can prove value will always find a seat at the table.
7. The mindset shift: from trainer to value creator
So is L&D dying? No. But the job description is changing. The trainer who sees themselves as a “presenter” is vulnerable. The trainer who sees themselves as a value creator, consulting with leaders, embedding practice in real work, using data to prove results, is in demand.
The question is not whether learning and development has a future. The question is whether we as trainers are willing to let go of the past and step into the opportunity.
Innovation is the path forward
Creative destruction clears away outdated approaches, but what fills the gap is up to us. Trainers who innovate—by designing for performance, building relevance into every session, partnering with managers, and proving business value—will thrive. The work that survives will be leaner, sharper, and closer to the job.
L&D is not dying. It is transforming. The professionals who thrive will not be those who cling to yesterday’s classroom, but those who invent tomorrow’s performance solutions.
Your Two Cents
If you could give one piece of advice to trainers worried about their future, what would it be? Add yours in the comments, and I will feature a few in next week’s Digest.
I agree. Any sort of slap on a band aid training that doesn’t address issues will likely be cut.
Mandatory safety training will be hybridised.
And anything that resembles a course will have to have a proper business plan with ROIs, and a robust course evaluation where outcomes are tracked. Oh and it also will be hybridised.