“I told you it was hot, but you touched it anyway.” A phrase not unfamiliar to parents of toddlers. No matter what the parents say, children seem to learn best through action. They need to take action themselves. Only after the action like burning their hand, do they reflect on the consequences and learn.

Unfortunately, as children get older, learning becomes more abstract and less action, consequence and reflection-focused. In high school, a student doesn’t visit a foreign country to learn about it, they read about that country in a book. Students don’t do math in a supermarket to figure out if they can afford groceries that week, they do dozens of worksheets instead. School is not action-first.

Unfortunately, workforce training has not evolved much beyond the ineffective and outdated school model. We hear lectures about “how to lead” in leadership training workshops, but the participants don’t lead other people. We study good customer service, but we don’t talk with real customers. We discuss sales strategies but don’t sell anything in the sales training class.

Corporate training programs are not action-first. Sometimes, there is no action at all, just clicking “next” to continue or listening to a sales trainer drone on. If we want to prepare employees properly, we need to prepare them through action-first learning designs. We need to help them understand the action, consequence and reflection process.

What is Action-First Learning?

Action-first learning is an approach to designing meaningful instruction that highlights the need for learning experiences to require learners to take immediate or initial actions to observe the consequences and to reflect on the experience. This doesn’t mean action for the sake of action. Instead, it means involving the learner in meaningful activities as soon as the instruction begins.

Too often, adult learners tune out instruction, either online or face-to-face, because they are asked to passively absorb information — often with no recognition that they come to the instruction with previous knowledge. The focus should not be on what employees need to learn. Instead, it needs to be about what employees need to do. What actions do employees need to take in their jobs? What tasks do they need to perform to be successful? This is the essence of action-first learning.

Overcoming Obstacles to Action-First Learning

Workshop facilitators, instructional designers and others understand that action-first learning is an effective approach but they are often stymied in the implementation of action-first learning by a number of obstacles. Learners often underestimate how much they actually learn from a lecture or eLearning module. Most people “feel” that they learn a lot from passively absorbing and recalling information. They feel that they should encounter little to no difficulty while learning. However, that’s not the best way to learn. Two ways to aid learning are to slow down the instruction and add manipulatives into the instruction: Both of which are traits of action-first learning.

Slow Down Instruction

Unfortunately, many corporate learning strategies or approaches designed to speed up the acquisition of knowledge actually make it more difficult to apply critical thinking to situations when the employee returns to the job. For example, during training for sales representatives, the reps might be given a list of the most common objections and responses to memorize. This seems like an effective way to quickly train those representatives. Most reps will memorize the statements quickly and easily and even be able to pass a quiz where they answer objections with spot-on accuracy from their scripts.

The problem arises when those same employees are faced with real customers who ask unexpected questions for which there is no script. In this case, the employees struggle with the actual job situation. It would have been more difficult but more useful to present the employees with various strategies to overcome objections rather than specific scripts for specific objections. This is sometimes referred to as “desirable difficulties,” which is the idea of introducing challenges into the learning to slow down the process and therefore increase retention, understanding and transfer.

Most corporate training does the opposite by reinforcing the sense that quickly memorizing and repeating content is the same as preparing for on-the-job situations. Corporate training programs that provide content in a well-structured format delivered in easily digestible and predictable chunks with quizzes the end of a learning module can make learning easy and quick, but does little to prepare the employee for actual situations they’ll encounter on the job. Speeding up the learning process often creates an illusion of competence without real competence.

The irony is that learners in active-learning settings can learn more than traditional, passive instruction, but — and here’s the kicker — the learners often feel as if they’ve learned less. This perception problem is a huge reason why learners push back against action-first learning designs when they are asked to participate. They feel like they are not learning because they have to exert more cognitive energy to sort through materials, think critically and apply knowledge.

They aren’t simply memorizing information; they are asked to apply that information and make sense of the information. This is hard work that many employees in a corporate learning setting are simply not familiar with and, as a result, they complain and view it as a waste of time and tell their managers who then stand up for their employees even though they are, in the long run, hurting their employees’ chances for success.

Add Manipulatives

Another obstacle is that designers and developers of instruction think action-first learning requires high-fidelity reproduction of the actual work environments. Nuclear power plants can afford to create accurate reproductions of the control room for training purposes, but most training departments don’t have that kind of budget. Nor do they need that kind of budget.

Fortunately, high fidelity isn’t always required for effective learning outcomes. Action-first learning can thrive without perfect replicas of the workplace. Instead, instructional designers can leverage creative and cost-effective solutions to immerse learners in meaningful activities that mimic key elements of trainees’ jobs.

For example, cards and board games can simulate complex decision-making, allowing learners to explore consequences and experiment with strategies in a safe space while requiring immediate action by the learner. Escape rooms, which combine storytelling with problem-solving, are another effective, low-cost approach to action-first learning that require critical thinking and collaboration.

Audience response systems, virtual breakout rooms or even carefully designed branching scenarios in eLearning modules can offer realistic decision-making opportunities and immediate consequences and a chance for reflection. The focus should be on creating experiences that prioritize action, consequence and reflection, rather than achieving perfect visual or environmental fidelity.

Action-First Learning Design

Designing instruction with an action-first approach begins with an action or activity designed to immediately engage learners setting the learning process in motion. Examples include dealing cards, starting a board game, initiating a virtual reality scenario or solving a puzzle in an escape room. Initial action prompts learners to respond actively, such as moving a token, making a choice in a branching scenario or finding clues. The key is that the learner engages in meaningful action from the outset, not merely for its own sake but as a deliberate step toward achieving the learning objectives.

As the learner participates, they apply knowledge to the actions they are taking, often involving problem-solving and critical thinking. Throughout this process, feedback plays an important role, ranging from subtle cues, like a character’s expression in a branching scenario, to overt responses, like unlocking a drawer in a virtual escape room. Additional instructions, tips or guidance helps learners stay on track, reinforcing their efforts to achieve the desired outcome. Social interactions, whether with peers, virtual characters or other elements of the environment, provide cues and foster an emotional connection to the learning experience, heightening its impact.

Action-first learning emphasizes that learning extends beyond the immediate activity through reflection, a critical component of the process. Learners are encouraged to assess how the experience can inform future actions, modify current behaviors or inspire new strategies. The reflection process helps to solidify the learning and ensures its applicability to real-world contexts. This structured approach ensures that the learning doesn’t just end with the activity but continues as a meaningful influence on the employee’s development.

Conclusion

Action-first learning represents an approach to designing and delivering instruction that prioritizes immediate, meaningful engagement and action by the learner. The meaningful engagement, in turn, can foster deeper cognitive involvement and practical application of knowledge than traditional, passive instruction. Although action-first learning requires overcoming resistance and addressing misconceptions about effective learning, the benefits far outweigh the obstacles. Action-first learning prepares employees to think critically, adapt flexibly and apply their skills during the learning process.