Design for Progressive Overload

Good training is like a good workout 🏋

Both need 3 things - variety, depth and complexity.

The fitness world calls it Progressive Overload.

It means gradually putting more stress on the muscles to improve strength.

• Variety = training a muscle using different exercises

• Depth = how much you're straining it (weight, reps, time under tension)

• Complexity = what compound movements you're progressing toward

Learning, like our muscles, needs all three.

Variety

Variety is about how novel an experience feels. Does every session look the same or are there new experiences?

For example, in a leadership training:

• Session #1: A framework and live example to see application

• Session #2: A roleplay to experience something firsthand

• Session #3: A debate on two approaches to a situation in smaller groups to build a point of view

Variety could be in terms of:

• Format (online, offline, hybrid)

• Content type (video, audio, simulation etc)

• Session type (Fireside chat, AMA, roleplay, case study etc)

And many other things!

Too much variety, and you overwhelm your learners.

But too little, and your learners will be bored.

Depth

Depth is about how much detail of the subject matter you’re able to go in. What levels does the training cover?

For example, in a training on software engineering:

• For fresh hires, the focus will be on getting the fundamentals right. Starting from the basics and building confidence.

• For mid-senior engineers, the focus will be on new tools, efficient practices and building on what they already know.

Most trainings do not come with a fixed curriculum. As L&Ds, we often need to build a mental model of these different levels before we can design for it.

Too much depth and our learners end up feeling overburdened, questioning if the training is for them or not.

But too little depth, and the training seems superficial and not relevant.

Complexity

Complexity is about cognitive load or how hard your brain has to work. It’s not about making things confusing, but asking more of your learners over time.

For example, in a training on communication:

• Module #1: Learn to articulate your own thoughts clearly

• Module #2: Learn to understand someone else's perspective

• Module #3: Have a real conversation where you do both at once

As designers, how are we constantly putting our learners in a flow state?

Too much complexity and we risk cognitive overload.

And too little of it, and our learners feel like this isn’t worth their time.

Most training fails not because the content is bad, but because it lacks one or more of the 3 ingredients.

A good training has a variety of things, goes into the depth you seek and challenges you just enough.

What ingredient do you end up ignoring more than others?