Nina Haber serves as Executive Director of People & Culture for Europe and Asia at WongDoody, where she leads transformative Learning & Development initiatives. With over two decades of experience across corporates and startups, she has established herself as an innovative force in HR strategy, creating award-winning programmes like the Babbel Academy. As the founder of two training and strategy consultancies and having worked across Asia, the US, and Europe, Nina brings a unique approach to developing high-performance cultures and fostering sustainable organisational growth.

In November 2024, WongDoody’s learning initiative won the Global People Development award at the MERIT Summit & Awards in Dubai.

How did you measure the initial employee engagement and perceived value of the training programme before and after its implementation?

In my role at WongDoody, I was responsible for overseeing a broad spectrum of People & Culture initiatives, but one of my primary focuses was to create an environment where people could grow and advance in their careers. Upon joining, I quickly realised that despite the availability of various training offerings and a budget accessible to all employees, the actual impact was minimal. The training sessions or coaches seemed to be selected at random, and employees often didn’t attend, even when external sessions were costly. Furthermore, the knowledge gained from these programmes was rarely applied in practice or shared internally.

Through numerous interviews with employees across different levels, departments, and locations, I discovered that many were dissatisfied with their learning and career development opportunities, despite having access to resources and funding. This finding was further validated by an engagement survey, which revealed that only 44% of employees were satisfied with the current offerings.

From my experience in other companies, I knew this situation wasn’t necessarily contradictory, but rather a sign that the issue wasn’t the availability of content or skills to be learned.

What was missing was a platform where people could interact, tackle challenges together, share solutions, network, and be recognised by their colleagues.

Offering individuals a budget and access to resources like LinkedIn Learning or various external training providers can often be overwhelming and lacks the sense of community or engagement that an internal programme can foster. Without a clear structure, training often becomes a "nice-to-have" activity that gets pushed aside in favour of daily work responsibilities.

The programme I implemented was designed to address these issues. One of its key differentiators was its open-access model, which allowed participation regardless of role, level, or department. There was no nomination or selection process; employees simply registered via an Excel sheet, followed by a calendar invite. Additionally, the 3–4-hour long training sessions were held multiple times at different locations, making it easier for employees to attend without disrupting their workday. Topics ranged from leadership skills (offered to interns and VPs alike, because leadership is built on the foundation of followers) to personal development and methodological skills, covering 12 key topics over the course of a year, which addressed the most basic needs of anyone working in an organisation.

The first session, which focused on personality types, served as a pilot, and it was highly successful. The subsequent sessions were often fully booked, with waiting lists prompting us to repeat the sessions multiple times to accommodate demand. The length of the waiting lists, depending on the topic and location, was a clear indicator of the level of interest and need for the training. I found it particularly interesting that waiting lists are a reflection of a company’s learning culture. In cases where the lists were long but then gradually shortened, it indicated high initial interest but a lack of long-term commitment, suggesting that personal development was often sidelined in favour of business priorities. In contrast, when the lists remained steady, with fewer cancellations, it showed that employees were actively planning and committing to their learning, with support from their leadership teams.

Feedback on the training sessions was overwhelmingly positive, with an Employee Net Promoter Score (eNPS) of 76 across all training participants. The tangible impact of the training was also evident shortly after each session, as participants began applying the concepts in team meetings, posts, and ongoing projects.

Many individuals who hadn’t known each other prior to the training also continued collaborating across departmental boundaries, tackling joint initiatives. Participants also began requesting specific topics for future sessions, and entire teams sought tailored workshops or repetitions of content for their peers.

Can you elaborate on the process of identifying and selecting internal talent to become knowledge contributors and session facilitators within the programme? What criteria did you use to ensure the quality and relevance of peer-driven learning experiences?

After initially presenting the overarching structure of the programme, which consisted of three key pillars – on-site training, an e-learning platform hosted by Infosys (with access to LinkedIn Learning), and peer-learning opportunities – I received numerous expressions of interest from employees eager to share their expertise or learn more about specific topics.

We began by selecting experts whose areas were critical to the company’s needs. One such expert was the Creative Director of Experience Design from our Taipei office, who led a UX design training. This individual had already conducted training sessions in the past and was able to quickly adapt to our programme. Through the initiative, we also helped build a network of ambassadors and experts across regions for this particular topic.

Another example came from a change management training session, where an AI expert realised that the term "AI" was still too overwhelming for many colleagues. He recognised the need for a more approachable, step-by-step approach to bring everyone up to speed.

Other instances followed, with some topics being more niche and regional, while others expanded into global initiatives. These peer-driven learning experiences were crucial for maintaining the relevance and applicability of the programme.

Ensuring the quality of the sessions involved selecting internal experts who not only had the required technical expertise but also the ability to engage and teach their peers effectively.

What were the most significant challenges encountered while designing and rolling out this learning approach?

A challenge I frequently encountered – even in organisations with a high percentage of academically accomplished employees – is the lingering negative connotations surrounding the term "learning." Many people understand that continuous learning and development are essential for personal growth, but they still carry with them the baggage of past educational experiences. This often stems from school days, where learning was viewed as an effortful task that could result in failure, or from outdated business training programmes that were overly theoretical, boring, and not relevant to day-to-day work.

To overcome this, I wanted to shift away from the traditional concept of "learning" and instead focus on experience, exploration, and exchange. I believe that true learning happens when we engage with something out of curiosity and see a direct purpose in it – whether it’s improving a skill, simplifying a process, handling a challenge, or even enjoying the process of discovery. After all, we all have an inner child, and forcing learning rarely leads to value. It’s when we feel engaged and see the purpose in what we do that we unlock our full potential.

In terms of challenges of rolling out the programme, one of the biggest barriers was overcoming the fear of wasting time, failing, or putting in significant effort for something that might not be immediately applicable.

In addition, especially in times of market uncertainty, business demands tend to take precedence, which can make it difficult to prioritise personal development. However, we know that investing time in learning leads to long-term benefits, such as increased efficiency, better results, and renewed energy for the job itself.

Another challenge we encountered was the cultural issue of learning. If a manager cancels a training session at the last minute due to a customer meeting, employees may wonder if they’re still permitted to attend. The dynamics of how personal development is viewed within teams can significantly impact engagement with training programmes.

Lastly, we occasionally faced a "luxury problem" – the number of participants exceeded the capacity of the room, or the training format was intended for smaller groups to ensure a more personalised experience. As stated above we solved this challenge by repeating sessions on several occasions.

Given the programme’s emphasis on personalised learning paths, how do you ensure that employees are strategically aligning their skill development with their career goals and the organisation’s broader strategic objectives?

Trust is the simplest and most effective answer here.

In adult education, trusting employees to choose what they feel is relevant or necessary for their growth is key to ensuring the programme delivers meaningful and sustainable results.

Of course, the programme itself needs to be aligned with the company’s needs. But once that foundation is in place, giving employees the freedom to choose what they want to learn – and when, where, and with whom they wish to learn it – ensures that everyone’s learning path is individualised.

Within the training sessions themselves, it’s important to adapt the content based on the participants’ needs and inputs. Again, trust is essential. The knowledge and real-world examples are already present in the room; it’s just a matter of trusting the participants to guide the discussion towards their current challenges. Allowing them to contribute their own cases instead of relying solely on theoretical examples creates a more dynamic learning experience.

Moreover, having teams with diverse backgrounds, countries, units, and levels of experience collaborate on these challenges fosters a collective understanding of the company’s broader goals. This not only ensures the relevance of the learning experience but also contributes to building a common company culture.

The case study mentions the programme’s continuous evolution – could you describe the feedback and iteration mechanism implemented? How do you integrate employee input to keep the content and approach responsive to changing organisational needs?

The key to the programme’s continuous evolution is staying agile and adapting based on feedback. As mentioned earlier, new topics, challenges, or needs often emerge during the training sessions themselves. For example, some sessions with high demand are repeated, while others that attract less interest are phased out. This helps us fine-tune the offering in real-time.

In addition to feedback during training, it’s crucial to stay in tune with leadership teams, customers, and market trends. Listening closely to these external sources allows us to identify new needs and trends that should be incorporated into the programme.

Do you have an initiative in organisational, leadership, and people development worth sharing? The next edition of the MERIT Summit & Awards is coming up soon on 5-6 June 2025 in Lyon. Submit your application until 7 March – shortlisted initiatives will be invited to present at the upcoming summit in Lyon.