It’s easy to see learning objectives as cumbersome statements, plastered at the top of course outlines. However, they help learning professionals facilitate more intentional learning experiences, and build deeper credibility with stakeholders. This article explores how learning objectives are actually a talent development super tool.
Learning Objectives
If you’ve spent any time designing training, you’ll have seen the eye rolls. Someone mentions “learning objectives,” and folks remember an urgent email they need to answer and slink off. It’s understandable. Because, many professionals learned to write objectives like assembling flat box furniture: follow the rules, use the right verbs, check the boxes, and move on.
And like the assembly instructions taped to the furniture parts, the rules for writing objectives are hardly ever explained, and rarely make sense until things go wrong. Like when you assemble the bookshelf upside down–you go back to the blueprint and then it makes sense. Because of this, learning objectives for many trainers are not about sharpening their saw, setting a laser focus, or talking the language of the business. They are about compliance.
Unfortunately, treating learning objectives as compliance distracts us from their actual power. Because when learning objectives are written with intention, they become one of the most strategic tools in the entire talent development ecosystem. And all those pesky little rules about verbs and including “condition statements” make them more helpful.
Clearly defined objectives provide clarity for everyone. Designers know what needs to be included in a learning experience. Facilitators know what to drop and what to emphasize when pivoting in the class to meet learner needs. Stakeholders know what skills to expect from folks who have completed learning. And learners know what success looks like. This clarity doesn’t just make training smoother — it makes performance more predictable, more consistent, and more aligned with what the organization actually needs.
The Problem: We Teach Objectives Backwards
As I mentioned, train the trainer programs often teach new trainers to see learning objectives as a set of intractable rules:
- Make sure it’s at the top of a course outline
- Distinguish between enabling and terminal objectives
- Make sure the action element includes a verb
- Don’t forget to describe the standard
- Dive them into knowledge skills and attitudes (or abilities as used in some circles)
The result? People write objectives to fill in a box, not to drive capability building. And they end up as meaningless statements that sound official but don’t help anyone make better learning decisions.
Now, to be fair, some guidelines for writing objectives need to be followed. For example, objectives have more power when they include the three elements (action, condition, and standard). And certain writing conventions will make them easier to work with. But seeing these through a compliance mindset obscures what they are really all about–capability.
The Shift: Seeing Objectives as Tools that Describe Tasks
When you understand objectives are all about describing tasks, which makes it easier to build organizational capability, everything changes. They will help you:
- Design more relevant learning that resonates with the business
- Communicate expectations with stakeholders around performance and capability
- Create accountability for learners and trainers
- Predict and evaluate performance
- Align programs across teams or cohorts
And yes — once you understand the structure, such as the three elements, you will know when it’s OK to bend or break the rules. I go into detail about how to write objectives in my latest book, Learning Objectives: A Primer for Talent Development Professionals. Objectives turn general course outlines into specific blueprints for performance improvement.
For Example …
Imagine you’re designing a customer service training program. Without clear learning objectives, the planning conversation might sound like this:
“We want people to improve their customer service skills.”
That’s vague which is hard to design around. And it’s nearly impossible to measure. Now imagine you anchor the program with a clear, concrete learning objective:
“Handle a customer complaint call using the organization’s three-step resolution model, documenting the interaction accurately in the CRM within two minutes.”
Suddenly everything snaps into focus.
As the learning designer, you now know exactly what the learning experience must enable. You can choose the right scenarios. You can build practice activities that mirror the real task. You’re able to more easily coach learners towards a specific performance standard. And you can evaluate whether the training actually worked.
But something else happens too — something trainers often underestimate. You talk the language of your clients and stakeholders, which boosts your credibility as a learning professional. You see, the manager who enrolls one of her staff in training wants to know specifically what her staff member will be able to do when they’re back on the job.
When you speak in terms of performance, stakeholders listen differently.
Comments are closed.