𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗻𝗲𝗴𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴, theory is good, simulation is better, coaching is the grail.

And the data backs it:

1️⃣ Theory (classroom)

Classic training transfer research (Baldwin & Ford, 1988) shows that often only 10–20% of what’s “learned” in the classroom shows up later in real behavior.

2️⃣ Simulation & deliberate practice

Meta‑analyses on experiential learning and simulation‑based training (e.g. Sitzmann, 2011) find that realistic simulations drive significantly higher learning and retention than lectures alone — because people must decide, speak, and adjust under pressure, not just “understand” concepts.

3️⃣ Coaching on the job

Joyce & Showers’ work on skill transfer found that adding ongoing coaching after training can boost real‑life application from around 10–20% to 80–90% of the target skills being used.

Same content.

Different level of support.

Radically different impact.

In negotiation, it’s even more extreme: only live simulations and coaching reveal the invisible traps — defensive “why?” questions, escalation spirals, illusion of power, emotional inconsistency.

That’s why our approach is simple:

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗼𝗿𝘆 → 𝗦𝗶𝗺𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 → 𝗖𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴

Not either/or. All three — in the right order.

That’s what we provide at inness.

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘕𝘦𝘨𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘑𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘺. 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗻, 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗦𝗰𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲, 𝗦𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗔𝗜.

Some leaders will still say “a good 2‑day training is enough”.

But the numbers — and the behavior in the next tough supplier meeting — disagree.

𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦:

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗱 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗻𝗲𝗴𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 — 𝗮 𝗯𝗼𝗼𝗸, 𝗮 𝗰𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗺, 𝗮 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻… 𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝗱𝗲𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘀?

Curious who disagrees.