Required or Desired? Ending the Debate on Making Learning a Requirement
Written by: Katherine Haugh, The Convive Collective
Every learning leader eventually hears the same question: "Should we make learning mandatory?"
It's a fair question.
If people don't attend learning sessions, should leaders require participation? Should attendance be tied to performance? Should calendars simply be blocked and everyone told to show up? After all, learning matters. So shouldn't it be required?
I'd argue we're asking the wrong question. The real question isn't whether learning should be required. It's whether we've designed learning that people actually want.
Recently, a participant in our season Learning Philanthropy Cohort, an Evidence and Learning Specialist, hosted her organization's first Learning Lab.
She redesigned the session around her colleagues instead of around the data. Rather than beginning with dashboards and indicators, she used a hiking metaphor to explain how milestones, objectives, and outcomes fit together. She created space for honest conversation instead of polished presentations. Most importantly, she designed the experience around one question: Who are my learners?
The result?
People didn't leave saying, "Well, we got through another learning meeting." They left asking: "When's the next one?"
To me, that's one of the highest compliments a learning leader can receive. Because the learning experience generated genuine demand.
Even better, one of the teams immediately asked her to facilitate a similar session just for them. The learning didn't stop when the meeting ended—it started spreading organically across the organization.
That's what we're really trying to create. Too often, organizations treat learning like compliance. Complete the training. Attend the workshop. Check the box.
But organizational learning isn't about consuming information. It's about creating experiences that help people make better decisions, solve harder problems, and feel more confident navigating uncertainty.
When that happens, attendance stops being the goal. People come back because the experience helped them. Now, does that mean learning should never be required? Not necessarily. Organizations absolutely need to signal that learning matters.
Leaders should protect time for reflection. They should celebrate teams who experiment, share what they're learning, and create the conditions for thoughtful conversation. Some organizations even dedicate regular learning time throughout the year.
But there's an important distinction between requiring time for learning and forcing participation in uninspiring learning experiences. One builds culture. The other builds resentment.
I've come to think of it this way: Don't make learning mandatory. Make it magnetic.
Design sessions that people leave talking about. Create conversations they wish had lasted another hour. Give people space to wrestle with real dilemmas instead of presenting polished answers. Make the experience so useful that the question naturally becomes: "When's the next one?" Because once people start asking that question, you've stopped pushing learning uphill. The culture has started pulling it forward.