A not-so-easy take on mandates, culture, and making the “right” hard choice in L&D.
Let’s be real: when time is short, stakes are high, and you’ve already explained it thrice—the urge to mandate something is strong.
- Roll out a capability program? Just make it mandatory.
- New AI tool? Force adoption.
Easy, right?
But here’s the thing: when we keep choosing the easy route, there’s usually a silent cost. And more often than not, it shows up in our culture—the very fabric that holds your organization together. When people begin to associate learning initiatives with top-down enforcement rather than opportunities for growth, you’ve not only lost their enthusiasm, but also their trust. And for L&D, trust is the lifeblood of transformation.
People-Centric ≠ People-Pleasing
Table of Contents
Being people-centric in L&D isn’t about “giving everyone what they want.” It’s asking: What’s good for the business and the people? Then making the tough calls with clarity and care. Sometimes that means consensus; sometimes it means a firm line. The trick is knowing which is which.
It’s also about shifting the narrative. When employees resist a learning initiative, it’s rarely out of laziness. More often, it’s because they don’t see the relevance or value. In today’s knowledge economy, attention is a scarce resource. People are constantly making trade-offs: finish a report or attend a training? Prep for a client call or complete a leadership module?
As L&D professionals, we’ve all been there:
- You know people need to upskill.
- You’ve invested hours in design, stakeholder buy-in, and sometimes hefty amounts in external partners.
- You’re excited. This could help them grow and help the org win.
But then comes the classic dilemma:
- If you don’t make it mandatory, people skip it. “Too busy this week” becomes the polite excuse. Or they show up with one ear and no notebook.
- If you do, they feel forced, disengaged, or even resentful.
You see the irony, right? Something meant to empower people ends up feeling like control. And when learning feels like an obligation, the likelihood of deep engagement plummets.
Why Is the Turnout High for an Offsite?
Let’s pause for a moment and ask: do you have to mandate an offsite? Or an office party? Rarely.
Having said that, a remote-first organisation like ours had to mandate an offsite to get people out of their chairs and out in the open. Yes, we were shocked when people backed out. But we did realise why that was happening.
Some people had social anxiety. Others weren’t sure if it was worth the travel and discomfort of breaking routine. And many, simply, had gotten used to working in their own rhythm—no commute, no dressing up, no crowds. What felt energizing to one person felt overwhelming to another.
This experience reminded us: even events designed for joy and bonding require thoughtful framing in a remote context. ‘Optional fun’ isn’t the same for everyone. Just like with learning, you have to make the purpose clear, the benefits tangible, and the environment psychologically safe.
Yet these events often get high turnout—even from the busiest of people. They don’t have OKRs/ KPIs attached, don’t promise career advancement, and are almost always optional. Still, people show up. They plan outfits. They reschedule meetings.
Why?
Because the psychology of participation isn’t just about importance—it’s about experience. Offsites offer connection, fun, and a break from the norm. They tap into intrinsic motivators: belonging and social bonding.
This doesn’t mean every L&D initiative has to be a party. But it does mean we should ask: what emotional need is this fulfilling? And how can we bring more of that into our learning culture?
The success of non-mandatory events reminds us that when something feels energizing or meaningful, people don’t need to be pushed—they choose to show up.
The Real Story: A New Tool, Some Old Habits
Let me take you behind the scenes of a recent, chaos-filled choice.
We introduced a shiny new project management tool. We had done the groundwork—ran a pulse check, scoped the best options, paid for the licenses (a hefty amount), and felt ready to roll.
But then…
- One team backed out: “We don’t need it anymore.”
- Another said, “We won’t use it till others do.”
- Yet another smiled politely and said, “We’re good with our spreadsheets.”
Reaction #1: I was super pissed. What was the point of all that effort?
Reaction #2: Then I zoomed out—of course they’re only seeing it from their lens. Not the org-wide benefits.
Reaction #3: Maybe they didn’t get the “why.” We’d communicated it—but had we made it resonate?
So, I switched tactics.
Instead of nudging features or compliance, we set up a live-client demo involving one real project that touched all functions. It wasn’t a feature tour. It was a mirror to their pain points—the ones they’d vented to their managers and to me. And we showed how this tool could solve for those.
This experiment is still running, so the verdict is pending. But based on past tries, teams do lean in—and even if they don’t jump from 0 → 100, they move enough to matter.
Mandates in L&D: Why It’s Complicated
According to LinkedIn Learning’s 2024 Workplace Learning Report, 94% of employees say they would stay at a company longer if it invested in their learning and development. Yet, over 60% of L&D leaders report low voluntary participation rates in capability programs.
That gap? It’s often bridged with mandates.
And while mandates ensure participation, they rarely ensure learning. Compliance and commitment are not the same.
From onboarding to leadership development, every L&D leader has faced this tug-of-war:
- Do we let people choose their path?
- Or do we nudge, remind, escalate… and eventually mandate?
The answer is rarely binary. There’s nuance. For example, compliance modules on ethics or safety? Those should be mandatory. But what about a future-skills course? A resilience workshop? A new coaching program? That’s where the complexity lives.
Before leaning on mandates, here are some things L&D leaders can do differently:
1. Design with Co-Ownership
Involve learners early. Even a small pilot group can shape the tone. When people feel like co-creators, not consumers, engagement soars. Co-ownership also builds advocacy—your best marketing comes from participants who believe in the value.
2. Narrate, Don’t Just Instruct
Learning isn’t rational. It’s emotional. Use stories, role models, and examples. Use the pain people already feel in their jobs as your starting point. Show how the program solves their problems, not just organizational gaps.
3. Measure Signals, Not Just Completions
It’s not just about how many finished the module. Look at:
- Are managers talking about it?
- Are teams applying the learning in reviews?
- Are new behaviors showing up?
Adoption is a process. Culture change takes time. Track momentum, not just milestones.
Culture: The Hidden Key Result
That tool episode reminded me—again—that mandating first is quick, but understanding first is sustainable.
Because every decision broadcasts a message that eventually lands in your engagement scores, your manager effectiveness scores, your attrition data.
Culture remembers how you decided, not just what you decided.
And in L&D, how we facilitate learning is as important as what we teach. Every rollout is a signal. If we shortcut the process, people start believing that learning isn’t truly valued—just tracked.
Ask yourself: What values are reflected in the way this initiative is implemented? Are we modeling the curiosity, openness, and growth mindset we want from our people?
As organizational psychologist Adam Grant reminds us, “People hate being told what to think, but they love being given something to think about.” In other words, autonomy fuels engagement. When we invite people into change—rather than drag them—we increase both buy-in and ownership.
Grant also emphasizes that sustainable change happens when people feel their identity aligns with the shift. Instead of saying, “You must do this training,” try: “Here’s something that will help you grow into the kind of leader you’ve said you want to be.”
So… Do We Mandate or Not?
I wish I could give you a neat 2×2 or a yes/no checklist. But the truth? It depends. And that’s the hard part.
Here’s the filter I use:
- Have I explained the “why” in a way that resonates? Not just the business case—the human case.
- Have I answered “what’s in it for them” (WIIFT)? If the answer is “not much,” they’ll smell it.
- Have I created space for real feedback, not just polite nodding? Ask. Pause. Listen. Then respond.
If yes—and there’s still no buy-in—then yes, it may be time to draw a line. But draw it with empathy, not ego.
Because empathy isn’t the enemy of accountability. It’s how you build it.
Sometimes that means making it mandatory—but only after exhausting the opportunity for shared ownership. And even then, framing it with respect for adult learners.
One Final Thought
Mandates are tempting. Especially when we’re under pressure to show uptake, ROI, and quick wins. But in a world where trust and agility are currencies of culture, how we roll out change matters as much as the change itself.
So the next time you’re about to say “just make it mandatory,” take a breath.
Ask yourself: What does this decision teach people about how we learn here?
And choose the route that builds the kind of culture you actually want to keep.
Because the most meaningful learning journeys start not with compliance, but with clarity.
And that’s what makes the hard choice—the right one.
