Why Net Promoter Score (NPS) is Killing Corporate Learning—and Why We Should Let It Die

Author: Raatha Ganesh, Head of Partnerships at Black Dog Consultants

The Net Promoter Score (NPS) wasn’t designed to measure the effectiveness of learning.

Let us say that again. The NPS was not designed to measure the effectiveness of corporate learning.

Created in 2003 by Fred Reichheld and Bain & Company to measure customer loyalty, it’s great for customer opinion on retail or tech but completely misaligned with corporate learning.

Despite this, many organisations cling to it like the Holy Grail of L&D evaluation.

The truth?

NPS doesn’t just fall short - at best, it gives a lukewarm indicator of the likeability of the experience and at worst, it may actively undermine what you are trying to achieve – awareness and change.

So here’s why it’s time for bold L&D leaders to bury this retrofitted metric once and for all.

NPS worships likeability, not learning

NPS is essentially a popularity contest, gauging surface-level satisfaction: Did participants like the facilitator? Was the coffee good? Did the venue impress?

But deep down, we know real learning isn’t about ‘likeability’.

It’s about challenge, growth and shifts in behaviour - none of which are ‘comfortable’ or ‘easy’ in the moment.

Worst of all, many of the most impactful, bear-prodding programmes may initially receive low NPS scores, only for participants to later realise, “Hmm, now I realise that was the most valuable experience I’ve ever had.”

If we judge learning by its immediate ‘fun factor’ (something else NPS is often mistaken for), we risk losing what truly drives transformation.

Learners don’t know what they are rating

Here’s another kicker: when learners are asked to give an NPS score, they often don’t know what they are actually being asked to rate – what an NPS is (sort of) trying to measure.

People reserve high scores (above 7) for ‘amazing, over-the-top’ experiences, attributing their feelings to irrelevant factors like venue temperature or lunch quality.

In addition, our learners in Asia often work in a second language and the meaning of NPS is lost to them. It tells us more about fleeting impressions than actual learning impact.

So it’s a sentiment score, not a measure of effectiveness

NPS also measures perception, not outcomes. Participants might give high marks because the session was entertaining (but shallow) or low marks because the programme challenged them. Let that sink in for a moment. However, neither reflects whether learning actually occurred or if skills are being applied back on the job. To measure impact, we must go beyond feelings and look at behavioural shifts and results.

Glorifying NPS scores may even encourage shallow programmes

NPS treats learners as customers to be pleased, not individuals to be challenged. This mindset may lead to the design of entertaining but shallow programmes that earn glowing reviews yet fail to deliver meaningful change.

In addition, trainers and facilitators can become obsessed by making friends with their learners and ensuring everyone likes them, rather than being willing to challenge what is in front of them and encourage authentic, deep learning from more challenging conversations.

Real learning demands depth, not just satisfaction.

It risks ignoring the organisational context

Learning doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Organisational culture, leadership support and opportunities for application heavily influence many outcomes of learning agendas.

And NPS ignores this entirely. Think about it for a moment: a poor score could really be a reflection of a toxic work environment rather than the programme’s design.

Blaming L&D for these factors is often misguided.

It reduces complexity to a shiny number

Learning is a complex process involving emotional breakthroughs, cognitive shifts and sometimes hard-striven-for behavioural changes. Reducing that to a single number oversimplifies the nuance and depth of true impact. We need metrics that respect learning’s messy, multifaceted reality.

Similarly, NPS thrives on large sample sizes with consistent experiences, such as retail or tech interfaces. Corporate learning, however, often involves small groups with highly individualised experiences.

This mismatch can create volatility in responses, leading to skewed results and a lack of reliability in the data.

So, what metrics should replace NPS?

• Behavioural Change: Are participants acting differently?
• Business Impact: Did learning improve key business metrics?
• Application Rates: Are new skills being used?
• Return on Time: Did the programme deliver value commensurate with the time invested by learners?

Here are some easy-to-implement ideas for measuring learning impact:

In all our design work at Black Dog Consultants, we continually build ways to help you measure your training impact. And your organisational commitment to these is as critical as the measure itself. Here are some simple ideas to build into your designs.

1. Post-training action plans: Have participants identify 2-3 specific actions they will take after the programme. Follow up after 30, 60, or 90 days to track progress. This can often be automated in your LMS or LXP with nudges.
2. Stakeholder check-ins: Equip key stakeholders (e.g., managers, team leads, or peers) with a short guide to discuss the application with their team members after training. Ask about real-world examples of applying the learning.
3. Pulse surveys: Conduct short, focused surveys 4-6 weeks post-training to measure confidence and skill application rather than immediate reactions.
4. Skill demonstrations: Use role-plays or simulations during and after training to observe how well participants have mastered and applied new skills. These can often be run by your leaders acting as role models and teachers or can be supported by your training provider or HR business partner. Assessments like simple 180s or 360s done at time points one and two show visibly if they have moved the needle. These can often be simple to write in-house and do not need external investment.
5. Business metrics alignment: Link learning outcomes to KPIs like sales growth, error reduction, or productivity improvements. Collaborate with business leaders to identify relevant metrics.
6. Capability and confidence questions: Ask participants if the learning increased their capability and confidence to deliver performance outcomes. This question affirms existing strengths while highlighting developmental impact.

Time to Let NPS Die

The next time someone asks, “How likely are you to recommend this programme?” why not suggest a better question: “How did this programme help you grow and what impact has it had on your work?” Real learning isn’t about likeability - it’s about transformation.

On the face of it, NPS is an easy metric, but easy isn’t what learning needs. It’s also a bad habit most of the corporate learning world has got into.

Just because we’ve always done it this way doesn't mean it's right. Let’s stop settling for shiny numbers and start measuring what truly matters: growth, change and results.

Let’s Dive Deeper Together
At Black Dog Consultants, we don’t just help you measure impact—we help you create it. Are you curious to see how transformative metrics can elevate your L&D strategy? Let’s connect and explore the possibilities together. Learn more here.

About the author

Raatha Ganesh, Head of Partnerships at Black Dog Consultants.

As a certified organisational coach, emotional intelligence master practitioner and positive mental health instructor, Raatha's passion lies in empowering leaders and teams to unlock their full potential through growth, inclusion and well-being. Unwaveringly authentic and deeply human, Raatha’s approach leaves a ripple effect of positive change wherever she goes. She strives to leave people better than she found them, igniting their drive to achieve greatness.

Connect with her on LinkedIn or contact her on our website

Be sure to subscribe to Ahead of the Pack for more content like this.