This content may be of interest to you
Resources
A few months ago, an HR director presented the results of his annual program to me: 200 sales reps trained, a substantial budget, and an average satisfaction rating of 4.8 out of 5. He was pleased. I asked him a simple question: “In practical terms, have your regional managers made any changes to their debriefs since this training?” A long silence. His answer: “Not really.”
This silence sums up the problem with current systems better than any audit could: we invest in training, we measure satisfaction, and we assume that best practices will follow. Most of the time, that’s not the case.
The primary indicator in the L&D market remains immediate feedback. It’s easy to collect, immediate, and reassuring. But a highly rated training program is almost always a comfortable one. Yet practices rarely change when things are comfortable.
What we see at NUMA is that 85 to 90% of the impact of traditional sales training fades away after 120 days. At best, these training programs produce a short-term effect. They sometimes boost sales, but they rarely transform business practices.
What we almost never measure: What has changed in sales conversations six weeks after the training? Are managers debriefing differently? Are deals moving forward with greater clarity? That’s where the true impact of a program is measured.
In the weeks following a training session, something very predictable happens: the manager falls back into old habits. It’s not out of a lack of willingness. It’s because no one has helped them do things differently. They manage the sales pipeline, handle emergencies, and debrief as they always have. The sales reps return to an environment that hasn’t changed. Gradually, what they’ve learned starts to fade.
It’s not a problem with the trainer. It’s not a problem with the content. It’s a systemic problem. Training without involving the manager in the process is like designing a system that breaks down just as things are getting started.
What does coaching actually entail
The difference between training and coaching is not merely semantic. It profoundly changes the way a program is designed. Training involves conveying information that can be explained. Coaching involves practicing what becomes second nature through repetition. In a sales conversation, what really makes the difference isn’t always what is said. It’s how you handle a discussion when it becomes unclear, tense, or uncomfortable. Knowing how to slow down a conversation that’s getting out of hand. Asking a question that unsettles without damaging the relationship. Revisiting a decision that remains unclear rather than launching into yet another sales pitch.
These reflexes aren’t learned by listening. They’re ingrained through practice. That’s why, at NUMA, we have teams reenact the moments that truly hold them back: a client who can’t make a decision, a negotiation that jumps too quickly to the price, a manager who doesn’t know how to challenge without demotivating. We do this until the teams understand. Until the right reflexes kick in naturally.
Training is about measuring immediate satisfaction. Coaching is about measuring what has changed in real-life conversations six weeks later. Training is about designing a program. Coaching is about creating an environment with practice loops, managers who know what to reinforce, and situations that are realistic enough for the learning to take root permanently.
The new NUMA Sales Excellence program is based on a firm belief: the true impact of an initiative isn’t measured solely by immediate satisfaction, but by the changes that follow in sales conversations. It’s not just about getting a good rating right after the fact. It’s about behaviors that actually change on the ground.
Transforming a sales team for the long term requires more than just a brief session on sharing best practices: it requires managers who can reinforce positive behaviors over time, scenarios that are realistic enough to foster new habits, and systems designed to continue after the training ends—not stop there.
Satisfaction remains a useful indicator. But in my view, it doesn’t tell the whole story. It becomes truly meaningful when viewed through another lens: what has actually changed in people’s practices a few weeks later? Are conversations clearer? Do managers conduct debriefs differently? Are teams making lasting progress?
That is where the real transformation takes place.
Anselme Jalon, CEO of NUMA
A few months ago, an HR director presented the results of his annual program to me: 200 sales reps trained, a substantial budget, and an average satisfaction rating of 4.8 out of 5. He was pleased. I asked him a simple question: “In practical terms, have your regional managers made any changes to their debriefs since this training?” A long silence. His answer: “Not really.”
This silence sums up the problem with current systems better than any audit could: we invest in training, we measure satisfaction, and we assume that best practices will follow. Most of the time, that’s not the case.
The primary indicator in the L&D market remains immediate feedback. It’s easy to collect, immediate, and reassuring. But a highly rated training program is almost always a comfortable one. Yet practices rarely change when things are comfortable.
What we see at NUMA is that 85 to 90% of the impact of traditional sales training fades away after 120 days. At best, these training programs produce a short-term effect. They sometimes boost sales, but they rarely transform business practices.
What we almost never measure: What has changed in sales conversations six weeks after the training? Are managers debriefing differently? Are deals moving forward with greater clarity? That’s where the true impact of a program is measured.
In the weeks following a training session, something very predictable happens: the manager falls back into old habits. It’s not out of a lack of willingness. It’s because no one has helped them do things differently. They manage the sales pipeline, handle emergencies, and debrief as they always have. The sales reps return to an environment that hasn’t changed. Gradually, what they’ve learned starts to fade.
It’s not a problem with the trainer. It’s not a problem with the content. It’s a systemic problem. Training without involving the manager in the process is like designing a system that breaks down just as things are getting started.
What does coaching actually entail
The difference between training and coaching is not merely semantic. It profoundly changes the way a program is designed. Training involves conveying information that can be explained. Coaching involves practicing what becomes second nature through repetition. In a sales conversation, what really makes the difference isn’t always what is said. It’s how you handle a discussion when it becomes unclear, tense, or uncomfortable. Knowing how to slow down a conversation that’s getting out of hand. Asking a question that unsettles without damaging the relationship. Revisiting a decision that remains unclear rather than launching into yet another sales pitch.
These reflexes aren’t learned by listening. They’re ingrained through practice. That’s why, at NUMA, we have teams reenact the moments that truly hold them back: a client who can’t make a decision, a negotiation that jumps too quickly to the price, a manager who doesn’t know how to challenge without demotivating. We do this until the teams understand. Until the right reflexes kick in naturally.
Training is about measuring immediate satisfaction. Coaching is about measuring what has changed in real-life conversations six weeks later. Training is about designing a program. Coaching is about creating an environment with practice loops, managers who know what to reinforce, and situations that are realistic enough for the learning to take root permanently.
The new NUMA Sales Excellence program is based on a firm belief: the true impact of an initiative isn’t measured solely by immediate satisfaction, but by the changes that follow in sales conversations. It’s not just about getting a good rating right after the fact. It’s about behaviors that actually change on the ground.
Transforming a sales team for the long term requires more than just a brief session on sharing best practices: it requires managers who can reinforce positive behaviors over time, scenarios that are realistic enough to foster new habits, and systems designed to continue after the training ends—not stop there.
Satisfaction remains a useful indicator. But in my view, it doesn’t tell the whole story. It becomes truly meaningful when viewed through another lens: what has actually changed in people’s practices a few weeks later? Are conversations clearer? Do managers conduct debriefs differently? Are teams making lasting progress?
That is where the real transformation takes place.
Anselme Jalon, CEO of NUMA
Discover all our courses and workshops to address the most critical management and leadership challenges.
Training organisation registered under the number 11755339875. This registration does not imply state approval.
.svg)
.png){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
