Robust Practice in Your Instructional Design: Have Enough?

Are You Building Enough Robust Practice into Your Instructional Design?
For those responsible for elevating employee performance through customized training and development, the mandate from business leaders is clear — learning must translate into relevant capabilities that drive measurable business outcomes. At its core, learning is not just the transfer of knowledge. It is the acquisition of skills, the shaping of beliefs, and the ability to apply both in ways that matter to:

• The individual.
• Their manager.
• The broader organization.

Yet we know from project postmortem data that too often, instructional designers lean too heavily on content creation, modality decisions, and information delivery compared to on-the-job adoption and performance impact.

That’s a problem because:

• People do not learn to perform by consuming content — they learn to perform by doing.
• Behavior change and performance improvement don’t come from stand-alone training — they happen when the environment is intentionally aligned with the desired outcomes.

Skills are fundamentally different from knowledge. Knowledge answers what and why. Skills demand how — and more importantly, how well under real conditions. Training measurement data shows that they require:

• Repetition.
• Feedback.
• Adjustment.
• Reinforcement.
• Refinement.

Without that cycle, capability remains theoretical.

This is where many training strategies fall short. It is also why action learning leadership development programs are more impactful that traditional leadership development approaches.  When learning occurs in the flow of work, everythingchanges.

Organizational culture assessment data reveals that “practice” is often included, but not in a way that builds real competence. A quick role play. A short exercise. A discussion prompt. These may check the box, but they rarely create the depth of rehearsal required for behavior and performance change. Learners may feel engaged in the moment, but they leave without the confidence or consistency needed to execute back on the job.

Robust practice in your instructional design looks different.

• It is intentional, structured, and progressively challenging.
• It mirrors real-world complexity.
• It creates enough repetition for patterns to form and enough variation for adaptability to emerge.
• It incorporates timely, specific feedback that helps learners adjust in the moment — not after the fact.

And it takes time.  Compressing practice may speed up delivery, but it slows down training adoption and impact.  If the goal is more than just awareness and insight, then robust practice in your instructional design cannot be an “nice to have.”

The most effective instructional designs reverse the traditional emphasis. Instead of asking, “How do we cover the content?” they ask, “How do we create enough meaningful practice for learners to perform with confidence?” Content becomes the support system, not the main event.

That shift changes everything.

It leads to designs where:

• Learners spend the majority of their time applying, not listening.
• Scenarios feel authentic, not abstract.
• Mistakes are expected — and leveraged — as part of the learning process.
• Feedback is immediate and actionable.
• Practice continues beyond the formal learning experience, embedded into the flow of work.

So the question is not whether you have practice in your instructional design.  It is whether you have enough of the right kind of practice to make performance stick.

The Importance of Practice in Your Instructional Design: How to Build Real Proficiency
As you evaluate any program designed to change skills and behaviors, one question should sit at the center: Is there enough practice for people to become truly proficient?

Think about almost any performance domain — sports make the point obvious. Whether it’s baseball, tennis, or skiing, no one achieves competence — let alone mastery — without sustained, deliberate practice. The same holds true in the workplace. The difference is that in corporate learning, this principle is often acknowledged but underbuilt.

It’s not enough to include practice. You have to design the right kind of practice — and enough of it.

Six critical facets can help you determine how to structure practice for real performance improvement.

1. The Definition of High Performance
   Before designing any learning experience, define what “good” actually looks like in terms of behaviors, skills, and performance. Too many programs operate with vague or implied standards, leaving learners to guess what success entails.

   High performance should be clearly articulated by role, scenario, and skill. What does excellence look like in real situations? What are top performers doing differently? Without this clarity, practice becomes unfocused and inconsistent.

   When expectations are explicit, practice becomes purposeful — and aligned to what matters most.

2. The Stakes
   Not all skills carry the same consequences. Some are low-risk. Others are unforgiving.

   Consider CPR. The margin for error is essentially zero. Performance must be immediate, accurate, and reliable under pressure. In high-stakes situations like this, practice must go far beyond familiarity. It must build automaticity and confidence under realistic conditions.

   If failure carries significant consequences, your instructional design must ensure that learners can demonstrate capability — not just understanding.

3. Necessity for Speed
   Some skills allow for reflection. Others demand instant execution.

   Returning to CPR, response time is critical. Compare that to a skill like planning a weekly schedule — where speed matters far less. When speed is essential, practice must be structured to build fluency, not just competence.

   Repetition, time pressure, and realistic simulations help ensure that learners can access and apply skills without hesitation. If the skill must be fast, the practice must train for speed.

4. Variability of Approach

   Not all skills have a single “right” way.

   Performing CPR is highly standardized. Delivering an executive presentation is not. The latter requires judgment, adaptability, and nuance — with multiple paths to effectiveness. That distinction matters.

   Skills with high variability demand more diverse practice: varied scenarios, multiple attempts, personalized feedback, and coaching. Learners need space to experiment, adjust, and refine their approach.

   If success can take different forms, your practice design must reflect that complexity.

5. Length of Time to Competency
   Some skills can be learned quickly. Others unfold over months — or years.

   Language acquisition is a clear example. While immersion can accelerate progress, fluency still requires sustained effort and immersion over time. The same is true for leadership, sales, and other complex capabilities.

   Instructional design must account for this reality. One-time events rarely build lasting capability. Instead, learning journeys should extend before, during, and after formal training to reinforce and deepen skills over time.

   If mastery takes time, your design must as well.

6. Degree of Participant Engagement
   Finally, consider how actively learners need to engage to build the skill.

   Can they learn through observation alone? Or do they need to perform, receive feedback, and refine in real time?

   For most meaningful skills, passive participation falls short. Learners need to be “on stage” — practicing in conditions that resemble actual performance, with feedback that sharpens their execution.

   Engagement is not about activity for its own sake. It is about ensuring that learners are doing the work required to build capability.

The Bottom Line
Practice is not a supporting element of instructional design — it is the engine of performance. The quality, quantity, and structure of that practice determine whether learners leave with usable skills or just good intentions. If your goal is real-world proficiency, every design decision should answer one question: have we built enough of the right practice for people to perform when it counts?

To learn more about how to include enough practice in your instructional design, download How to Fast Track Your Leaders with Just-in-Time Action Learning

by Tristam Brown: CEO

Tristam Brown is an executive business consultant and organizational development expert with more than three decades of experience helping organizations accelerate performance, build high-impact teams, and turn strategy into execution. As CEO of LSA Global, he works with leaders to get and stay aligned™ through research-backed strategy, culture, and talent solutions that produce measurable, business-critical results. See full bio.