Select Page

Corporate university and center of excellence

Published: June 13, 2022


  • Lack of uniform standards across groups

  • Differences in training approaches and formats

  • Uneven quality of training

  • Duplication of efforts

  • Inefficient contracting (four versions of the same course from four different providers)

“We don’t usually know what the other training teams are up to,” reported one attendee. “Sometimes, we end up duplicating work on certain projects because of that lack of awareness.”

Another noted, “When moving from ILT to video due to COVID, it was like the Wild West with no standards.”


  • Inconsistency in standards

  • Very different levels of quality in learning solutions

  • Lack of clarity regarding who leads generic skills training

  • Conflicting or different messages in the training

  • Duplication of solutions

  • Difficulty tracking the various training initiatives in a central LMS

One participant said, “It’s hard to stay plugged into all the various departments that might be launching new processes or products.” Some of these could benefit from “our assistance with design and delivery, so they don’t go ‘rogue’ and do something on their own that might not be the most effective.”

When the pandemic hit, the federated model experienced an added challenge. “We have several internal departments/practices that typically lead their own training. However, when moving virtually, each struggled to virtualize their content,” explained one attendee. “They came to our HR team for assistance. This has created an overload of work and a backlog of projects.”

Those using or considering a corporate university model described challenges, too. One attendee wrote, “Tech training changes so fast that keeping up is nearly impossible. The shelf life is short. You have to weigh the time required to develop content versus the lifecycle of that content.” This begs the question, “Who updates the curriculum and how?” And this leads to a broader discussion. Departments within an organization often disagree about who should own the learning programs for software developers and IT professionals.