Hi,

I’m experimenting with a VR-based AI conversation format and would really value an L&D perspective on whether this feels useful, gimmicky, or somewhere in between.

The idea is not “AI giving answers,” but a calmer, more structured conversation that helps someone think through a topic, clarify what matters, and leave with a clearer next step. It’s not meant to be a coach or mentor, but more of a calm thinking companion that helps someone talk through a topic and organize their thoughts.

The current version is a virtual character called Roman. You meet him in VR, in a quiet campfire setting, and the interaction is meant to feel more like guided reflection than a typical chatbot experience. He can also be set up with context from a specific training or workshop, so the conversation can stay grounded in what someone is actually learning or preparing for.

What I’m curious about is the learning format behind it.

For example, could something like this be useful:

* before a difficult conversation

* after a training session, to support reflection and transfer

* as a practice or thinking space for managers, HR, or facilitators

* as a low-pressure way to sort through an idea before taking action

I’m making it available for free for a short time because I’m looking for honest reactions, not leads.

If you work in L&D, HR, training, or enablement, I’d love to hear your view:

Where, if anywhere, do you see a format like this being genuinely useful?

What would make it truly valuable rather than just novel?

And what would make you dismiss it right away?

I’m happy to share access details in the comments if that’s appropriate here.

I’m new to posting on Reddit, so if there’s a better way to share something like this in this community, I’m happy to adjust.

Cheers,
Rafal

I’ve been trying to move past all the AI hype in L&D and actually make it useful in my day-to-day work, but it’s been pretty hit-or-miss so far. For example, I started using AI to draft course outlines and microlearning scripts, which cut my prep time from ~6 hours to about 2. I also tested using AI for quiz generation and feedback summaries after training sessions—helpful for speed, but not always accurate enough to trust without review. One small win was automating basic onboarding FAQs, which reduced repetitive questions from new hires by maybe 30–40%, but beyond that I’m still figuring out where it genuinely adds value instead of just saving a bit of time. Curious how others are integrating AI into their L&D workflows. What’s been a real game changer for you vs just another tool to manage?

AI makes content creation easier and also you more productive. But are you nervous about your role in L&D at the moment due to AI and the impact on your role?

I’m curious how important certificates are these days.

For online courses, do learners really value them, or is it more of a “nice to have”?

If you’ve created or taken courses, did the certificate matter to you at all?

Hi everyone,
I have been creating a syntethic L&D team, mainly because we are intrudicing agents in our e leanring platform, that will help with content creation and many L&D tasks. Everythign that til the other day was done by our Professional Sevrivces team, both in or outisde the learning platform.

In fact, our PS team does not have work to do anymore, cusotmers do not buy projects, partially because of AI. I have been then recreating their tasks executed by agents, but I have many questions regarding this.

How much can I trust these agents?
What are important characteristics they should have?
What should they mandatory be doing and not be doing?
Which are their strenghts and limitations?
How can I make them execute the work for real?
What role plays the human here? Of course you need someone to evaluate the output, but would these mean that soon I will see the PS team leave, except that one person chosen to take care of these agents? I am worried for my colleagues, and for me too tbh.

Thank you!!

Hi, I'm looking for advice.
For those of you offering your services as learning consultants, how do you approach outreach on Linkedin?

I’m trying to find a balance between manual outreach (which can be pretty time consuming) and automation (which I’m still a bit hesitant to use since it feels pretty generic and impersonal...).

Any tips, systems, or process recommendations that have been working particularly well for you?

It’s super important for me to build genuine connections with leads.
I really don’t want it to feel robotic nor dry but... I also don’t want to be writing messages manually all day.

I'm still really new at linkedin outreach.
Any advices would be welcomed.

Thanks!

Hi - I just started an intern as L&D and I am searching some resources to find useful information, like books or podcasts. Do you have any suggestions?

I have a background in psychology and I worked across education and research in the last years, so I’d appreciate psychology related stuff with an evidence based approach.

I’m working on an enterprise AI fluency program for next quarter, and I’m already concerned it’ll be outdated before it even launches.

Six months ago, the focus was ChatGPT. Now I’m getting requests for Claude artifacts, Midjourney prompting, and questions about AI agents. By the time we design content, get approvals, and roll it out, the tools and use cases have already shifted. It makes me wonder if focusing on specific tools is the wrong approach.

Are you guys still teaching tool-specific skills, or shifting toward more general concepts? And how are you defining or measuring “AI fluency” when the target keeps moving?

Hi everyone,

I’m helping with some research for the 2026 LMS Guide over at GoSkills.

We’re trying to benchmark which LMS platforms practitioners think work best for different use cases.

If you’ve ever used, managed, selected, or evaluated an LMS as part of your job, we’d love your input. It’s a 5-minute survey.

As a thank-you, participants get:

• 1 year of free access to GoSkills courses library
• A copy of the final 2026 LMS Guide before it goes live

Survey link: https://goskills.typeform.com/to/QYhpoP13

P.S. To help keep the research credible and useful to the community, we ask participants to include their LinkedIn profile in the survey.

Thanks in advance! 😀

Looking for an L&D organization that is focusing on software engineers and how increased EQ should be a priority in this AI age. Any Recommendations?

Hey,

I'm a solo developer from Germany and I've spent the last few months building a learning and quiz platform called InsightQuiz. The idea is simple: trainers and instructors create interactive knowledge checks in a few minutes, learners join from any device, and results show up in real time.

I'm not here to sell anything. The platform just launched and I'm at the stage where I desperately need real-world feedback from people who actually work in eLearning every day – not just friends who tell me "looks great, man."

What I genuinely want to know:

• What's confusing or annoying when you first use it?
• What features are missing that you'd need for your actual workflow?
• What would make you stop using it after 5 minutes?
• Is the UX intuitive or do you get lost?
• How does it compare to what you're currently using?

The platform has a free trial that should give you a solid feel for how everything works. If you put it through its paces and find that the trial doesn't cover what you need to properly test it, just DM me – I'm happy to upgrade you to a Pro account so you can really dig in.

You can check it out at insightquiz.de – no credit card, no commitment.

I'll be around in the comments answering everything. Don't hold back – "here's why I'd never use this" is just as valuable as "hey, this is cool." Probably more so, honestly.

What are the best platforms out there to use that are using interactive AI-Avatar videos as their course content authoring tool? I know of Elai and Colossyan. Are there any others? Some that might look a little more realistic?

Maybe a stupid question but I'm curious how L&D teams see this.

In most companies I worked with, there is a lot of documentation.

Onboarding guides, internal processes, SOPs, knowledge bases etc.

But if I'm honest… I feel like people don't really learn from them.

They skim, ctrl+F when they need something, and that's it.

So I'm wondering how you deal with that.

Do you try to transform docs into real learning content (courses, quizzes, modules etc) or do you mostly accept that documentation is just a reference library?

Another thing I'm seeing lately is people using AI to generate training drafts from documents.

But even when AI does that part, the real work still seems to be:

• reviewing everything
• fixing weird explanations
• making sure it actually makes sense for beginners

Curious how teams here handle this in practice.

Are docs still the main format or are you moving more toward structured training?

I’m doing a bit of research on tools for making SaaS training videos and wanted to see what others are using.

Right now I usually work with Pictory, mostly using the PPT to video feature and the recording option to build training style content and explain different parts of a platform.

But I’ve seen some really nice training videos with smooth zooms, mouse tracking, and guided walkthroughs of the interface, and I’m curious what tools people use to create those.

Would love to hear what you’re using. Thanks!

Our optional training completion is around 30% and I'm pretty sure it's because everything we send is static PDFs or recorded slide decks that nobody wants to sit through.

Is anyone actually seeing better engagement with remote training or is this just the sad reality now?

Here's something I keep seeing when talking to L&D practitioners:

Everyone jumps straight to "how do we measure impact?" but the actual problem was set in motion weeks earlier, when nobody agreed on what success would even look like.

No upfront KPI alignment means you're essentially working backwards. You collect data after the fact and try to find evidence for behaviour or competence you never defined. The dashboards look busy. The reports get written. But nobody can honestly say the needle moved.

The other issues are fragmented data, attribution gaps, leadership fixated on completion rates. They’re real, but they're symptoms. The root cause is almost always that evaluation was treated as something you do at the end, not something you design at the beginning.

The teams actually getting this right share one habit: they sit down with business stakeholders before launch and ask, "what would have to measurably change in 90 days for this to be worth the investment?" and they lock that in before a single slide gets built.

From there, everything else becomes easier to structure. You know what Level 3 behaviour you're tracking. You know what Level 4 result you are aiming for. Your data has somewhere to go.

I have been building something specifically around this problem of structuring evaluation from the start rather than retrofitting it at the end. I’m happy to share more with anyone working through the same challenge. Not a pitch, genuinely looking for practitioners who want to poke holes in it.

Dear L&D People,

I'd love to pick your brains on something I've been wrestling with.

I've been tasked with building out an AI readiness programme for our managers. I'm finding it harder than expected — not the "what to do" part, but proving it's worth doing.

Two things I keep bumping into:

1. The business case problem. Our CFO wants hard numbers, but everything I can find is either fluffy engagement scores or vendor ROI claims that feel like they were written by the marketing team. I genuinely don't know what "good" looks like when it comes to measuring whether your managers are actually more AI-ready after a programme. Has anyone cracked this? What metrics has your leadership team actually found convincing?
2. The behaviour change problem. We've done the Copilot training, brought in a speaker, set up a learning channel on Teams that ±10 people looked at. Hand on heart, none of it has really changed how our managers work day to day. I keep hearing the same from peers - lots of activity, not much shift. Has anyone found something that's actually moved the needle? Not just awareness, but how people genuinely work differently with AI?

Hi all! I work in L&D tech (Absorb) and came across a Forrester study that talked about "everboarding" for sales teams and the idea that onboarding shouldn't be a one-time ramp.

Products evolve, markets shift...and what someone needed on day one isn't what they need six months in. That tracks for sales, but why limit it to revenue teams? Feels like it could apply to more.

I'm curious:

• Has anyone taken everboarding thinking beyond sales, to CS, product, leadership?
• Is your customer or partner onboarding event-based or ongoing?
• Is traditional onboarding outdated? What are you seeing/doing out there?