In this podcast conversation, Adrian Stäubli, a global learning and development expert with more than two decades of experience designing scalable capability systems for large organizations, makes a clear and field-tested argument: learning fails not because content is poor, but because organizations systematically prevent transfer.
Across corporate, financial services, and technology environments, Stäubli has observed the same pattern repeatedly. Organizations invest heavily in courses, platforms, and learning events—then expect capability to emerge on its own. It rarely does.
The Knowledge–Capability Gap
According to Stäubli, the gap between knowledge and capability is not cognitive. Learners generally understand what they were taught. The gap is contextual and systemic. Learning is treated as something to complete, not something to use. Once employees return to their desks, time pressure, incentives, and existing habits overpower new behaviors. Organizations unintentionally optimize for forgetting.
Three Conditions That Make Learning Stick
Stäubli identifies three non-negotiable conditions for turning learning into sustained performance. If anyone is missing, the return on learning investment collapses.
1. Application
Capability develops only when learning is applied immediately to real work. Abstract simulations and hypothetical role-plays fail to transfer. Learning sticks when participants bring real problems, real decisions, and real constraints into the learning process and apply new behaviors directly on the job.
2. Support
Feedback activates learning. Stäubli emphasizes that brief, frequent check-ins—often five minutes or less—are enough to trigger insight. Learners often “get it” only when they articulate their struggle aloud. Managers do not need to provide answers; they need to create space for reflection, adjustment, and honest dialogue. Psychological safety is essential.
3. Time
Behavior change is biologically constrained. New habits require repetition, reflection, and reinforcement. Ten-minute leadership monologues do not change behavior. When learning time is not explicitly protected, it disappears. Organizations that succeed treat learning as real work—scheduled, defended, and modeled during working hours.
Leadership’s Role: Making Learning Legitimate
Stäubli stresses that learning sticks when leaders legitimize it. Senior leaders must role-model learning, openly discuss what did not work, protect learning time, and reinforce development through systems and incentives. Without this, learning becomes performative and fades.
Learner Responsibility and Cultural Shift
While leaders create conditions, learners own execution. Capability grows when individuals take responsibility for practice and experimentation, and when teams normalize conversations about what did not work. Stäubli also highlights a necessary structural shift—from role-based development to skill-based development—creating a shared, measurable language for long-term growth.
Culture of Capability
High-performing organizations stop treating learning as an event. Learning becomes how work gets done—embedded in routines, peer conversations, short reflections, and small behavioral “notches” that compound over time.
Bottom line: As Stäubli makes clear, organizations cannot accelerate human learning beyond biological limits—but they can design systems that either support or sabotage it. The organizations that win do not train more. They engineer environments where capability is unavoidable.
