AG1

My experience as an athlete fundamentally shaped how I view performance and excellence. At the 2018 PyeongChang Winter Olympics, approximately 2,833 athletes from 92 countries competed across 102 medal events. Six countries, including Nigeria, made their Winter Olympic debuts. More importantly, my journey to becoming an elite athlete taught me that there is rarely a blueprint for reaching excellence. Elite performance requires innovation, thoughtful decision-making, adaptability, and an understanding of individual and collective capabilities. These principles have translated directly into how I approach leadership and learning. As an athlete, I understood everything happening behind the scenes to reach an end goal: training, adjustments, setbacks, preparation, recovery, and mental conditioning. Yet when it was time to compete, execution had to become simple: show up, race, and be prepared to perform. I see the same dynamic in leadership, learning, and organizational development. Athletics taught me to conceptualize problems through two questions: What is it, and how do we get there? Many effective solutions begin there.

Meaningful Learning Ties to Connection

I have learned that solutions that sound great do not always scale. A sophisticated learning strategy is not inherently successful, just as a simple solution is not inherently ineffective. Learning strategies can fall into two extremes: approaches built around complex frameworks or an overcorrection toward short-form learning. Both have value, but neither should become the strategy by default. What I have come to believe is that connection is one of the most important components of meaningful learning. Connection may come from a learner’s previous experience, the work they perform, or the relationships developed during the learning experience. A team member may leave a session believing they learned what they needed to know. The greater question is what happens afterward. What makes the topic relevant enough to apply? What relationships, conversations, or experiences reinforce it? A meta-analysis of 89 empirical studies found that motivation, training design, learner characteristics, and the work environment influence the transfer of learning (Blume et al., 2010). Connection is currency in learning because it transforms information into something people can understand, remember, and apply.

Learning Needs to Organizational Capability

For experienced L&D professionals, identifying a gap can become instinctive. The more difficult work is connecting that gap to a business need and determining whether the solution should be a single intervention or part of a broader capability strategy. A need may be specific: a particular group needs to learn a skill or process. A capability is broader: an organization or defined population should be consistently capable of performing something effectively. Building capability requires intentional thinking across business rhythms, organizational context, learner needs, modalities, and the broader learning portfolio. A learning offering can address a moment; a capability strategy builds an organization’s ability to perform over time. This distinction moves L&D beyond simply asking what people need and toward proactively questioning what should be happening. A need is often identified reactively. A capability is cultivated, forecasted, and planned.

The Human-First Workplace in a World of AI

As L&D professionals, it is important to ground conversations about connection, performance, and capability in today’s business landscape. With increased use of AI, designing has become easier, logistics can be automated, and analysis can inform sessions, programs, and experiences. So where does this leave us as learning professionals?

In my opinion, it leaves us human. We remain the humans behind the programs we build, understanding motivators, goals, context, and how to diversify learning modalities while continuing to drive performance. AI is here to stay. But with increased technology comes an increased need for human connection, whether through helping others connect the dots, creating shared understanding, or building awareness through learning. This is where psychology and learning intersect. Building effective programs requires a human-first approach. To do that, we must first understand the humans behind the solution. You do not necessarily need a psychology degree to design human-centered learning, but we do need a mindset shift. As technology advances, so will the need for connection and the workplace components technology cannot replace, not simply on paper, but in practice.

Becoming a Better Practitioner

For current and future L&D leaders, my advice is simple: do not be afraid to challenge theory if doing so leads to better outcomes for people. As practitioner-scholars, we should apply evidence-based frameworks while continuously questioning whether established findings translate to the context in which we are working. Methodology alone does not make us good practitioners. Success should ultimately be evaluated through outcomes experienced by the learner, leader, or organization. L&D is full of thinkers. We should never stop thinking, even when the solution exists outside traditional boundaries. Learn methodologies for process, but develop conviction around what you are building and why it matters to the people experiencing it.

Elite sports taught me that performance is not accidental. It requires understanding where you are, where you want to go, and the capabilities needed to close the distance between the two. The same is true in organizational development. Humans drive results for humans. To develop people effectively, we must first be willing to understand them and reflect on ourselves. A true L&D practitioner is developed by, and with, others.