Most organisations don’t have a learning problem. They have a transfer problem. Research consistently shows that what happens after a course ends, especially how managers respond, is the strongest predictor of whether learning is applied. This blog explores the science behind learning transfer and why manager behaviour quietly determines whether skills stick or fade.

“That’s not how we do things here”

Imagine this.

An employee completes a leadership programme. It might be face-to-face, it might be digital. They leave motivated, with new language and practical tools. The next week, they try something different in a team meeting.

Afterwards, their manager pulls them aside and says, “That’s not really how we do things here.”

The message lands immediately. The learning wasn’t reinforced. It was corrected.

In that moment, something important happens. The new behaviour is not just discouraged. It is socially marked as misaligned.

This is how learning transfer quietly dies.

What the science says about learning transfer

The research on learning transfer has been consistent for decades.

In their foundational model of training transfer, Baldwin and Ford (1988) identified three key influences: learner characteristics, training design, and the work environment. Of these, the work environment, including supervisory support, plays a decisive role in whether new skills are applied.

Subsequent reviews, including Burke and Hutchins (2007), reinforced this conclusion. Manager support, opportunity to practise, and reinforcement in the workplace consistently predict whether learning translates into changed behaviour.

The course matters. But the context matters more.

Why managers carry disproportionate influence

Managers influence learning transfer in three powerful ways.

First, they signal priorities. When a manager references a programme, asks about it, or models similar behaviour, they communicate that it matters. When they ignore it, they communicate something else.

Second, they control opportunity. Even motivated employees cannot apply learning if their manager does not allow space for experimentation or new approaches.

Third, they shape psychological safety. Trying something new carries risk. Without encouragement or tolerance for early mistakes, most people revert quickly to familiar habits.

None of this requires a manager to oppose learning directly. Passive indifference is often enough to block transfer.

The hidden disconnect between L&D and managers

When a manager says, “That’s not how we do things here,” it often reveals more than resistance. It exposes a disconnect.

L&D may design programmes aligned to strategy, culture and future capability. Managers, however, operate in the pressure of short-term performance. If they have not been involved in the learning design or briefed on its intent, the programme can feel abstract or misaligned with operational reality.

This creates a gap between learning aspiration and managerial expectation. Employees are left caught in the middle.

Why skills initiatives stall without manager reinforcement

Organisations talk frequently about skills, upskilling and capability building. Far less attention is given to how skills are reinforced day to day.

The 70:20:10 framework highlights that most development occurs through experience and exposure, not formal courses. That experience is shaped largely by line managers.

If managers are not equipped to reinforce learning, the return on training investment is reduced dramatically. Courses become events rather than catalysts.

This is not a content problem

When transfer is weak, the instinct is often to redesign the programme, improve the eLearning, or invest in better facilitation.

Those improvements can help. But if manager behaviour contradicts or ignores the learning, impact remains limited.

The research is clear. The work environment, especially manager support, is the single biggest multiplier of learning impact.

What this sets up

If managers make or break learning transfer, L&D cannot treat them as an afterthought.

In the next blog, we explore how learning can be deliberately designed so managers become part of the solution. Not through generic encouragement to “coach more,” but through structured prompts, tools and reinforcement built into the learning experience itself.

FAQs: Manager influence on learning transfer

What is learning transfer?

Learning transfer refers to the application of knowledge or skills from a training programme into real workplace behaviour.

Why do managers affect learning transfer?

Managers influence priorities, provide opportunities to practise, and shape psychological safety, all of which affect whether learning is applied.

Is training design less important than manager support?

Both matter, but research shows that the work environment, especially supervisory support, strongly predicts whether learning is sustained.

What happens when managers contradict training?

Employees quickly revert to old behaviours, and learning credibility declines.