In Unpredictable Times, Practice Is Still the Most Reliable Strategy

Why companies should double down on deliberate practice, not pull back, when the pressure is on.

When budgets tighten and the future feels cloudy, one of the first places companies often cut is learning and development. But what if that instinct is exactly backward?

Purposeful practice - rehearsal, feedback loops, and behavioural adaptation - are essential to building resilient communication and leadership capabilities today.

Across industries, we're seeing organizations freeze training investments, delay leadership development programs, or replace them with passive digital content. At the same time, there’s growing excitement around generative AI and its potential to “solve” everything from onboarding to communication coaching. But while AI may offer speed and scale, it can’t replace what remains the most reliable engine of skill development and performance improvement: deliberate practice.

I don’t know about you, but I’m more comfortable when there’s data to support the decisions we take. So, this blog leans into academic data and peer-reviewed research. With that in mind, here’s why practice-based learning, not AI trends or budget cuts, should be at the center of your learning and development strategy right now.

1. Practice Builds the Skills That Matter Most in Times of Uncertainty

When the world is volatile, the ability to lead with clarity, communicate under pressure, and adapt quickly isn’t optional; it’s core to survival. These are durable human skills, and they can’t be developed by passively consuming information.

Research by Ericsson et al. (1993) shows that expert performance in any domain is grounded in deliberate practice: structured, repetitive practice with clear goals, immediate feedback, and incremental challenge. These principles apply just as much to leadership and communication as they do to athletics or music.

More recent studies reinforce this:

• A meta-analysis by Arthur et al. (2003) found that training programs emphasizing behavioural modelling, simulation, and feedback showed the highest impact on real-world performance.

• Lane & Rollnick (2007) showed that simulated practice improves communication competence across professions, especially when supported by feedback.

• Additionally, a 2024 empirical study of distributed leadership during remote work found that leaders who intentionally practiced introspection and refined human-focused soft skills—such as resilience, empathetic communication, and time balance—fared significantly better in hybrid and uncertain workplaces.

These studies confirm what Ericsson outlined decades ago—and underscore that purposeful rehearsal, feedback loops, and behavioural adaptation are essential to building resilient communication and leadership capabilities today.

2. Organizations That Practice, Win

A 2024 global study by Harvard Business Publishing found that 70% of L&D leaders believe the future of leadership depends on broadening and deepening behavioural capabilities across all levels, not just the C-suite. And they’re increasingly turning to action-based learning, coaching, and peer practice to do it.

Meanwhile, DeRue et al. (2012) showed that leadership practice through after-action reviews led to sustained growth in leadership effectiveness, especially in uncertain conditions.

What does this mean? Organizations that prioritize skill rehearsal, not just skill awareness, are better equipped to adapt, recover, and outperform their peers.

3. AI Can Help to Scale Practice, but It Can’t Replace It

Yes, AI can offer valuable support: it can simulate foundational scenarios, personalize content, and provide feedback at a more reasonable cost. But what AI cannot do, at least not yet, is replace the human nuance, real-time feedback, and emotional complexity of true communication and leadership.

What’s more, evidence is beginning to emerge that suggests that participants practicing with AI don’t take the practice or the feedback as seriously as they take coaching by a human, reflecting reduced engagement and over-reliance on the tool rather than intentional behavioural learning.

But what AI cannot do, at least not yet, is replace the human nuance, real‑time feedback, and emotional complexity of true coaching and leadership. The best approach isn't replacing practice with AI. It's using AI to amplify and scale the right kind of learning: practice-based, feedback-rich, high-fidelity experiences that prepare people for what work demands.

• A recent peer-reviewed study by Hansen et al. (2025) found that students using an AI feedback coach in peer feedback exercises produced less reflective, shorter feedback and often prioritized the AI’s validation over their judgment, indicating a weaker sense of ownership and seriousness in the learning act.

• Complementing this, a mixed-methods randomized controlled trial comparing a simulated AI coach to a human coach found that while working alliance scores were similar, participants frequently described the AI as more formulaic and less authentic—suggesting lower perceived depth and commitment in the interaction.

4. Cutting L&D Is a False Economy

Cutting training during a downturn may reduce short-term expenses, but it undermines long-term readiness. As Training Industry and TalentLMS report, companies that maintain or evolve their L&D investments during downturns retain top talent, foster innovation, and recover faster.

What’s more, a scalable, deliberate-practice-based approach, whether through live coaching, AI simulations, or peer roleplays, can deliver measurable ROI: increased performance, faster time to competency, and observable behaviour change.

The Bottom Line: Train Like It Matters, Because It Does

Now is not the time to scale back. It’s time to double down on what works. Organizations that invest in deliberate practice today are preparing their people not just to weather the storm, but to lead through it.

We can help.

References

Arthur, W., Bennett, W., Edens, P. S., & Bell, S. T. (2003). Effectiveness of training in organizations: A meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 234–245.

DeRue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Workman, K. M. (2012). A quasi-experimental study of after-event reviews and leadership development. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(5), 997–1015.

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.

Erbay, E., Kula, M., & Sari, S. (2024). The relationship between leadership and communication, and the significance of efficient communication in online learning. Educational Administration: Theory & Practice, 30(6), 2065–2076.

Hansen, P., van der Meijden, A., & Janssen, D. (2025). The effects of an AI feedback coach on students’ peer feedback quality, composition, and feedback experience. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 100, 102321.

Lane, C., & Rollnick, S. (2007). The use of simulated patients and role-play in communication skills training: A review of the literature to August 2005. Patient Education and Counseling, 67(1–2), 13–20.

Training Industry. (2023). Why cutting L&D in economic uncertainty is a costly mistake. Training Industry.

TalentLMS. (2023, April). What can L&D professionals do during an economic downturn? TalentLMS Blog.

van der Lubbe, J., de Visser, M., & Hu, C. (2024). Exploring working alliances with AI versus human coaches: Implications for engagement and perceived authenticity. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1364054.