When organizations talk about role-play practice in l&d, they often describe it in abstract terms. “We need more role plays.” “People need more reps.” “They just need more exposure.”
The problem isn’t that this thinking is wrong. However, it’s incomplete.
In the few cases where practice does happen, it’s usually unfocused. Learners repeat conversations, but they’re not building specific skills. Instead, they’re getting more comfortable talking, not more capable under pressure.
That distinction matters.
Repetition Doesn’t Automatically Build Skill
Practice only compounds when it targets something precise.
In many programs, role plays are framed loosely.
“Handle a difficult customer.”
“Practice a coaching conversation.”
“Try a sales call.”
Learners go through the motions. They say reasonable things. They finish the exercise. Then, they do it again the same way next time.
Confidence might increase. Familiarity might improve. But the underlying skill doesn’t shift, because nothing in the scenario forces it to.
Without a clearly defined skill target, repetition just reinforces existing habits.
Why Generic Role Plays Stall Out
Unfocused role plays don’t create the conditions that make skill visible.
If you want to build assertiveness, the scenario has to make assertiveness uncomfortable. If you want to build judgment, the scenario has to include trade-offs where the right choice isn’t obvious. And if you want to build problem-solving, the learner can’t be handed a clean path forward.
Most generic role plays avoid this complexity. As a result, they smooth the edges. They remove the tension. And in doing so, they remove the very thing that would drive learning.
The learner performs, but the skill never shows itself.
Where DIY and Prompt-Based Role Plays Fall Short
This is where many teams turn to AI and DIY role-play tools.
On paper, it makes sense. If practice is hard to run live, automate it. Let learners role-play on demand. Remove scheduling, facilitators, and friction.
The issue isn’t access. Rather, it’s focus.
Most DIY role plays generate conversation, not skill pressure. They don’t reliably surface whether someone exercised judgment, avoided risk, followed policy, or took the harder path. Without that clarity, it’s impossible to tell whether the skill improved or whether the learner simply sounded competent.
Practice happened. Skill didn’t move.
Precision Is the Missing Ingredient
Good practice is designed backward from the skill, not forward from the conversation.
It starts with a clear definition of what “better” looks like. Then it creates conditions that force the learner to demonstrate that capability under realistic constraints.
That level of precision doesn’t come from repetition alone. Instead, it comes from design.
The issue isn’t that organizations need more practice.
It’s that unfocused practice doesn’t compound.
Recent Comments