• Event: Learning Technologies UK 25
• Date: 23 April 2025
• Speakers
  • Caroline McCarthy, Senior Manager, Learning Change and Design, Lloyds Banking Group
  • Jonathan Gray, Change and Design Manager, Lloyds Banking Group
• Chair: Andrew Jacobs, Learning Strategist, Llarn Learning
• Estimated read time: 8 minutes

 

---

 

Quick read summary

Mandatory training is often treated as an unavoidable burden, something to be completed, tracked and quickly forgotten. This session explored how that mindset can be challenged.

Drawing on Lloyds Banking Group’s experience, the discussion examined how large, highly regulated organisations can reduce mandatory learning time while improving relevance, engagement and confidence in compliance.

Readers will gain practical insight into how clearer principles, stronger governance and better learning design can turn mandatory training from a productivity drain into a credible, trusted part of workforce capability.

 

---

 

Mandatory training has become a productivity problem

In many organisations, mandatory training has grown through accumulation rather than design. New risks, policies and regulations are layered on top of existing requirements, rarely removed and seldom challenged.

At Lloyds Banking Group, this had resulted in a mandatory curriculum of more than 38 hours, spread across 85 courses. While much of the content was well intentioned and technically sound, the overall experience was long, repetitive and difficult to sustain. Some colleagues were spending four to five hours every quarter completing mandatory learning.

The issue was not compliance itself, but how compliance was being translated into learning. Completion rates and satisfaction scores existed, but they did not answer a more commercial question, whether the time invested was proportionate to the risk being managed.

 

Start with principles, not content

A key shift described in the session was moving away from asking how to improve individual courses, and instead defining what should qualify as mandatory in the first place.

The team introduced a clear principle. If a course was not a regulatory, legal or policy requirement, or did not directly protect the bank, customers or colleagues, it did not belong in the mandatory curriculum.

This principle became both a filter and a governance mechanism. It enabled the removal of existing courses that no longer met the criteria and prevented new ones from being added by default. Crucially, it also reframed conversations with policy owners, moving them away from personal preference and towards organisational risk and necessity.

 

Less time, tighter focus

Once the scope was clarified, attention turned to time. A strict 20 minute limit was set for all mandatory courses, regardless of topic.

This constraint forced difficult but productive decisions. Long courses had to be redesigned, split or fundamentally rethought. Policy owners were challenged to distinguish between what colleagues needed to know to be compliant and what was simply useful background.

As Jonathan Gray explained, much of the original content existed because it was desirable rather than essential. By focusing on need to know rather than want to know, some courses were reduced to 10 or 15 minutes without undermining their intent.

Optional depth was not removed entirely. Instead, it was relocated to supporting resources, such as microsites owned by policy teams, which colleagues could explore when relevant to their role or situation.

 

Design for understanding, not endurance

Time reduction alone was not enough. The session made clear that mandatory training fails when it becomes a test of endurance rather than a tool for understanding and application.

The redesigned courses focused more heavily on scenarios, storytelling and real world situations. Rather than long policy explanations, learners were asked to recognise risks, identify failures and apply judgement in context.

Examples included short scenario based interactions, peer assessment and narrative driven content that acknowledged the dryness of some topics while still treating them seriously. In some cases, light humour and self awareness were used deliberately to lower resistance and increase attention.

The intent was not entertainment, but retention. Making content relatable and recognisable helped colleagues understand why a policy existed, not just what it said.

 

Adaptive learning as a credibility signal

A significant next step discussed in the session was the introduction of adaptive learning.

Rather than forcing experienced colleagues to repeat the same content every year, learners are given the option to demonstrate competence upfront. Those who answer assessment questions correctly can complete the course more quickly, while others receive the full learning experience.

This approach reduced seat time and sent an important signal. Mandatory training was no longer designed for the lowest common denominator, but respected prior knowledge and experience.

It also generated valuable management information. Patterns in assessment responses highlighted where understanding was weak or where content was no longer challenging enough, enabling more informed conversations with policy owners.

 

Completion still matters, but context matters more

The session did not dismiss completion rates entirely. In a regulated environment, completion remains essential.

However, the speakers were clear that completion should not be the sole measure of success. Automated reminders and escalation processes helped address non completion, but these sat alongside broader efforts to improve relevance and trust in the learning itself.

As Andrew Jacobs observed, organisations often measure whether people have completed training, rather than whether they understand why a policy exists or how to apply it in practice. The changes described aimed to rebalance that equation.

 

Practical application, turning insight into action

Questions leaders should be asking

• What genuinely needs to be mandatory, and what has become mandatory by habit
• Where are we optimising for completion rather than understanding
• How much time are we asking colleagues to spend, and is it proportionate to the risk

Signals to watch in the organisation

• Growing resistance or cynicism towards mandatory learning
• Courses expanding in length without a clear rationale
• Policy owners defaulting to learning as the first response to risk

Common pitfalls

• Treating mandatory training as untouchable
• Allowing want to know content to dominate required learning
• Redesigning courses without changing governance or principles

What good looks like in practice

• Clear criteria for inclusion in the mandatory curriculum
• Short, focused courses designed around application
• Respect for learner experience through adaptive approaches
• Visible leadership support for reducing unnecessary learning load

 

Key takeaways

• Mandatory training should be governed by principle, not precedent
• Reducing time can improve both productivity and credibility
• Need to know must take precedence over want to know
• Adaptive learning respects experience and improves engagement
• Completion matters, but understanding matters more

 

Quote of the session

“What do they need to know, not what do you want them to know.”

Jonathan Gray, Change and Design Manager, Lloyds Banking Group

 

Final thoughts

Mandatory training does not have to be a chore. When organisations are willing to challenge assumptions, apply clear principles and design for real work, compliance learning can become shorter, sharper and more trusted.

The experience shared in this session shows that even in highly regulated environments, it is possible to reduce learning load while strengthening confidence in risk management. For leaders under pressure to improve productivity without increasing risk, that trade off is no longer optional.

 

---

 

Speakers

Caroline McCarthy, Senior Manager, Learning Change and Design, Lloyds Banking Group. Leads learning change and design initiatives, with a background in frontline and leadership roles within the organisation.

Jonathan Gray, Change and Design Manager, Lloyds Banking Group. Responsible for learning design and mandatory training strategy, with extensive experience across learning and development roles.

 

---