Why do some employees love online training while others hate it?

Approximate reading time: 2m 50s

The uncomfortable question companies avoid

In most organizations, there is no longer any debate about whether online training is necessary.
The debate is elsewhere:

“Why do people formally complete the training but never actually use it?”

This question is especially sharp in:

• banks and insurers (compliance, regulations);

• IT companies (upskilling);

• large corporate structures (onboarding, internal policies).

And almost always, the first reaction is wrong:

“Employees are not motivated.”

In reality, this claim is not confirmed by the data.

What the research shows (not opinions)

According to an analysis by Harvard Business Review (2019):

“Most corporate training programs fail not because employees do not want to learn, but because the training is not designed according to the way adults learn and work.”

Additionally, McKinsey & Company finds that:

• over 40% of L&D initiatives do not lead to measurable behavior change;

• the main reason is a mismatch between training design and the real work context.

There is no psychology for entertainment here.
There is a systemic design problem.

Temperament as a business factor (not a “typology”)

In a business environment, temperament is not a label.
It is a moderator between:

• the training format;

• cognitive load;

• work pressure;

• the way decisions are made.

In other words:

temperament does not determine whether a person will learn,
but when and why they will disengage from learning.

That is a critical distinction.

A real corporate scenario (typical for Bulgaria)

Mandatory online compliance training

Context:

• a large financial institution;

• a SCORM course ~90 minutes;

• video + test;

• deadline: 30 days;

• formal requirement.

Observed results (typical for the sector):

• 60–70% watch the videos at high speed;

• massive “skipping” to the test;

• after 2–3 months, key rules are not applied consistently.

This is not sabotage.
It is rational behavior from people in a busy environment.

How different temperaments react in this situation

Choleric: “This is getting in the way of my work”

Choleric-oriented employees:

• work at high speed;

• make decisions under pressure;

• think in results, not processes.

How they react to typical online training:

• they see it as administrative burden;

• they lose patience with linear content;

• they “optimize” — speed up, skip, test.

Not because they are not interested in the topic,
but because the training does not respect their time.

Melancholic: “This is not serious enough”

Melancholic employees:

• think analytically;

• look for logic, consistency, and detail;

• more often carry responsibility for risk and quality.

Typical reaction:

• frustration with oversimplified explanations;

• distrust toward the content;

• internal distancing.

They do not complain.
They simply stop treating the training as authoritative.

Sanguine: “It’s boring”

Sanguine-oriented employees:

• learn through interaction;

• respond to people, stories, examples;

• quickly lose focus when it is monotonous.

In online training without a social element:

• they are initially active;

• then they “disappear” cognitively;

• they complete it formally, without integration.

This creates an illusion of engagement that misleads management.

Phlegmatic: “Don’t pressure me”

Phlegmatic employees:

• value stability;

• work well in a predictable environment;

• avoid conflict and pressure.

What happens with aggressive deadlines:

• increased stress;

• passive resistance;

• delaying until the last moment.

They do not “hate” the training.
They defend themselves from it.

The key takeaway 

People do not hate online training.

They hate learning experiences that: ignore their work context, do not match their cognitive style, and treat everyone as “the same”.

This is an organizational problem, not a personal one.

What training that works looks like in reality

Companies with effective online training:

• use modular design, not linear courses;

• combine video, text, scenarios, and practice;

• allow different learning paths;

• connect training to real decisions, not just a test.

This is not a platform issue.
This is an instructional design issue.

How this becomes a concrete business service

This is exactly where the natural role of NIT – New Internet Technologies Ltd. appears:

• Redesign of online training that formally exists but does not work;

• Instructional design based on real behavior, not templates;

• LMS implementation (ILIAS) with a focus on learning experience, not “reporting”.

These are solutions for organizations that want results, not just a checkbox.

FAQ 

Why do employees “skip” online training?
Because the training is not designed according to the way they work and make decisions.

Can one training work for everyone?
Yes, if it is modular and allows different approaches.

Is temperament more important than motivation?
In practice — yes. Motivation is often a result of good design.

and finally:

Online training is not the problem.
The problem is poor design disguised as “lack of motivation”.

Companies that recognize this in time gain:

• higher engagement;

• better application;

• less internal resistance.

If you want:

• training that people actually use;

• less resistance and more impact;

• L&D solutions adapted to real people,

contact the team at online-learning.bg (NIT) for a consultation.

---