A year into building the Learning & Development Board, one thing is clear: there is no playbook for L&D right now. 

Not for proving the impact of learning initiatives. Not for building leaders who can perform in constant change. Not for how to use — and scale — AI. And yet, L&D leaders are expected to have answers. 

That’s the challenge our members have faced: high expectations, low clarity. 

What we’ve seen over the past year is that the most valuable conversations aren’t about best practices. They’re about what’s working, what isn’t, and what people are trying next — because in this environment, no one has it fully figured out. 

A Year of Building, in Numbers 

The L&D Board started with a simple idea: if you bring together the people doing this work — at the scale and seniority of real enterprise L&D — the conversations would be different. 

A year in, the community has grown to nearly 175 L&D leaders across 58 companies, including AbbVie, Allstate, Dell Technologies, Fidelity Investments, Medtronic, Southwest Airlines, T-Mobile, Target, Prudential Financial, Boston Scientific, and Liberty Mutual. 

These are heads of L&D, leadership development, sales training, and talent enablement — running real programs, against real budgets, inside the world’s largest organizations. 

“The Learning & Development Board provides an invaluable forum for senior learning leaders to address the most pressing challenges in our field. By fostering a trusted, peer-driven environment, the Board enables members to exchange best practices, explore innovative approaches, and collaboratively shape future strategies.” — Kim Troxell, Head of US Commercial Learning & Development, AbbVie 

The 5 Questions L&D Leaders are Being Held Accountable For 

Across hundreds of conversations, the same five questions keep surfacing as career-defining pressure points: 

1. Can you prove L&D is driving measurable business outcomes? “We have data, but it’s not telling a clear story.” 
2. Are your leaders able to perform in today’s environment? “We’re investing in leadership, but not seeing behavior change.” 
3. Can L&D operate at the speed and scale the business requires? “We can’t keep up with demand.” 
4. Is L&D focused on the right priorities? “We’re not in the right conversations.” 
5. What is L&D’s role in AI? “We’re experimenting, but don’t have a clear direction.” 

These are showing up in budget reviews, leadership conversations, and day-to-day decisions. 

The Learning & Development Board provides an invaluable forum for senior learning leaders to address the most pressing challenges in our field. By fostering a trusted, peer-driven environment, the Board enables members to exchange best practices, explore innovative approaches, and collaboratively shape future strategies.

Kim Troxell, Head of US Commercial Learning & Development, AbbVie

What’s Actually Emerging 

A few patterns we’ve seen across industries: 

• L&D is becoming a decision function, not just a delivery function. The hardest part isn’t building content. It’s knowing what to do, when, and why. 
• Speed is becoming the competitive advantage. As one member put it: “It’s like having experts on speed dial.” 
• Peer insights are replacing static best practices. Static frameworks aren’t holding up against the pace of change. 
• AI is creating urgency, but not clarity. Everyone is experimenting. Very few have a clear operating model. 
• Leadership development is under pressure to prove itself. Not participation. Performance. 

How Members are Helping Each Other 

Not polished case studies — real moments where decisions were shaped. 

Pressure-testing an AI strategy. A member who recently moved from a long-standing HR role into Talent Management used our North American Learning Executive Summit to shape her organization’s AI approach. “The sessions and conversations played a pivotal role in shaping our AI strategy and approach for Global Operations. Hearing from peers and experts about the practical challenges and innovative solutions around AI helped me pressure-test decisions and avoid potential missteps as our team moved forward.” 

Validating how to measure training impact. Another member used the community as a brainstorming partner while exploring personalized, predictive learning journeys. “It has served as an effective forum to test whether an initiative we’re exploring is working, how to identify potential pitfalls, and how to surface the right partners to engage along the way.” 

Course-correcting in real time. As David Curtis, Sr. Manager of Leadership and Employee Development at Pacific Gas & Electric Company, described it: “These insights have prompted me to reassess some of my approaches and course-correct where necessary, leading to more effective outcomes.” 

Finding validation — not just answers. As Nicole Krause, Director, Headquarters Learning and Development at Target, put it: “I really appreciate hearing from other companies that are experiencing similar challenges. It has served as inspiration and validation that we are not alone in the problems we face.” 

What came up repeatedly wasn’t just what was discussed — but how we’re creating solutions for L&D leaders. 

“A truly open, non-competitive environment where knowledge is freely shared and real challenges are tackled through thoughtful peer-to-peer conversations — without the noise of vendor selling.”

I really appreciate hearing from other companies that are experiencing similar challenges. It has served as inspiration and validation that we are not alone in the problems we face.

Nicole Krause, Director, Headquarters Learning and Development at Target

What’s Changing in Year Two 

Year one was about understanding the problem. Year two is about going deeper on solving it. 

• More working sessions, less broad discussions. Smaller groups, real challenges, live problem-solving. 
• Sharper focus on the 5 questions L&D leaders are being held accountable for. 
• Increased focus on AI — practically, not theoretically. Not “what is AI?” but: What are you actually using? What’s working? What’s scalable? 
• Leadership grounded in real experience, with top L&D leaders shaping the agenda. 
• Structured around in-progress decisions, not abstract trends. 

Join the Learning & Development Board for More Insights 

L&D leaders are operating in a function that’s being redefined in real time. The question isn’t whether you have all the answers — it’s whether you have the right people to think them through with. 

What we’ve seen over the past year is simple: the leaders who move fastest aren’t the ones with the best frameworks. They’re the ones with access to real insights at the moment they need it. 

“The Learning & Development Board has been an exceptional space to connect with peers across a wide range of companies and industries. I’m grateful for the openness of this community — its willingness to share, support, and help one another grow.” — Kendra Smith, Head of Talent & Learning at LyondellBasell 

Learn more and join your peers leading L&D at the world’s largest companies to get the full story of what actually works (and what doesn’t) that you won’t hear from other sources. 

As organizations place greater emphasis on leadership readiness, internal mobility, and long-term capability building, the relationship between Learning & Development and Talent Management has become harder to ignore. In theory, the connection is obvious. In practice, many organizations still operate with parallel tracks that occasionally intersect but rarely move in true lockstep.

During a recent Learning & Development Board Community Call, senior L&D leaders compared how their organizations approach this relationship, where collaboration is working, and where it consistently breaks down. While structures varied widely, from fully integrated models to highly decentralized ones, several clear patterns emerged.

Collaboration Matters More Than Reporting Lines

One of the strongest themes from the discussion was that organizational structure alone does not determine success. Some companies have L&D and Talent Management housed under a single leader; others split them across HR, operations, or business units. What separated effective models from frustrating ones was not where the teams sat, but how intentionally they worked together.

In organizations where collaboration was strongest, L&D had regular visibility into the talent pipeline. That meant understanding succession plans, leadership readiness risks, and where bottlenecks were forming. Talent Management, in turn, had a clear view into what development experiences actually delivered, not just what existed on paper.

Where that connection was weak, leaders described duplication of effort, missed opportunities, and development programs that felt disconnected from real business needs. In those environments, learning teams were often asked to “build leadership” without clarity on which roles mattered most or which individuals were expected to step into them.

Leadership Development is the Natural Intersection Point

Across nearly every organization represented, leadership development was where L&D and Talent Management were most closely connected. Succession planning, high-potential identification, and readiness for next-level roles all required tight coordination. In more mature models, Talent Management defined the “who” and the “why,” while L&D focused on the “how.”

“There’s just too many silos, too much politics, too many things that can separate out those [L&D and talent management] when they’re not together organizationally.”

Development programs were intentionally designed around specific readiness gaps tied to future roles, not generic leadership competencies. High-potential employees were prioritized for these experiences, and development progress was revisited regularly with business leaders. 

In more siloed environments, this collaboration still existed, but often relied on informal relationships and manual processes. Lists were exchanged, programs were coordinated, and communication was carefully choreographed to maintain confidentiality. While this approach could work at scale, leaders acknowledged it required constant effort and left little room for efficiency. 

Confidentiality Remains a Real Tension 

One of the most consistent challenges discussed was how to handle sensitive talent data. Decisions about who can see high-potential lists, how transparent the process should be, and whether employees should be told they are considered future leaders continue to create friction. 

For L&D teams, limited access to talent data often makes it harder to design targeted development or track long-term outcomes. For Talent Management teams, protecting confidentiality and maintaining trust with leaders and employees remains critical. 

The most effective approaches did not eliminate this tension, but managed it intentionally. Clear agreements about what data could be shared, with whom, and for what purpose helped reduce ambiguity. Just as importantly, trust between leaders allowed development decisions to be made without unnecessary gatekeeping.

Manual Tracking is Holding Everyone Back

Regardless of company size or structure, nearly every leader described the same frustration: tracking development over time is still far too manual. 

Many organizations rely on spreadsheets, one-off reports, and institutional memory to understand who has participated in which programs, what development actions are underway, and whether readiness gaps are actually closing. As leadership programs span multiple years and roles evolve, this lack of visibility becomes increasingly problematic.

“These new AI tools are going to help us get a lot better at understanding progress over time.”

Some organizations are experimenting with new approaches, including talent pools instead of formal high-potential labels, internal marketplaces for stretch assignments, or early use of AI tools layered on top of existing HR systems. While these efforts are still evolving, they reflect a shared recognition that current processes are not sustainable. 

What This Means for L&D Leaders

The conversation made one thing clear: L&D cannot operate effectively without Talent Management, and Talent Management cannot deliver on its promises without L&D. 

For L&D leaders, the opportunity is to move beyond program delivery and position learning as a strategic lever for talent readiness. That requires deeper partnership, greater comfort navigating sensitive data, and continued pressure to modernize how development is tracked and measured. 

Organizations do not need perfect structures to make progress. They do need shared intent, ongoing communication, and a willingness to design development around real talent decisions, not theoretical ones. 

These are exactly the kinds of challenges our members in the Learning & Development Board work through together. In a trusted, peer-led environment, leaders can compare models, surface what is actually working, and pressure-test new approaches before scaling them. For those navigating the evolving relationship between L&D and Talent Management, the community offers both perspective and practical insight, grounded in real experience rather than theory.

Learn more about our community and join your peers leading L&D at the world’s largest companies today.