Making a career pivot is never easy, and breaking into an entirely new industry and new sector is even more challenging. Even so, many educators are making the leap over to corporate training using the transferable skills they have developed throughout their career.

Educators are primed to understand the science of learning. They often have a wealth of experience as facilitators and lesson planners, and they may have a background in instructional design or administration. All of these things make educators immensely qualified to join the world of corporate training.

Even so, the world of K-12 education is different from the world of corporate training, and there are some critical paradigm shifts that have to occur to make the transition successfully.

Here are three key paradigm shifts to consider when transitioning from K-12 into the corporate training sector:

Paradigm Shift 1: From Learner Centric to Business Centric

In K-12, the question is, “What are the skills these students need to be successful?” In corporate training, the question is, “What are the skills these students need to make the organization successful?” You are ultimately developing learners in service of the organization as opposed to their individual goals. This means you must be aware of your organization’s goals and strategy to develop and deliver effective training, and, most importantly, to determine the metrics that will define “success”.

As a teacher, you are probably experienced with being held accountable to certain test scores, achievement levels, engagement rates and other benchmarks, so you have experience with aligning your instruction to key metrics. The difference is that the metrics you are given as a teacher are (in theory) meant to serve the student and the student’s academic goals and are meant to be representative of academic proficiency. In corporate training, your metrics should be representative of the training’s impact on organizational goals (more on this in paradigm shift three).

With this paradigm shift, you’re changing your “north star” from learner success to business success, and the metrics that define your success should be in relation to business impact, not learner impact. Of course, your learners’ success is what will drive business success, but only if you’ve properly aligned your program to a business goal or challenge.

Paradigm Shift 2: The Value of Time

In K-12, the time you spend with students is already set. Even if you could find a way to give students all the knowledge they need in a faster or more efficient way, your hands are tied in a lot of ways. You can’t let 12-year-olds out of class early just because you got through the material faster. In this environment, it’s more about finding the best ways to fill the time that’s already allotted for learning.

In corporate training, you have the power to make learning sessions as long or short as you want, and you also have the power to deliver training in ways that are less structured. Your mind should always be focused on making the experience as efficient and effortless (for your learners) as possible. After all, your learners will resent every extra second they spend somewhere that feels unnecessary.

Your K-12 students may have no choice about where and for how long their learning takes place, but your corporate learners do — and as functional managers and other organizational leaders will remind you, they have other places to be.  So, with this paradigm shift, the focus is less on “How do I make this the coolest one-hour presentation ever?” and more on “How do I turn this one-hour presentation into a 20-minute presentation and a job aid”?

Paradigm Shift 3: Behavior Change Over Knowledge Acquisition

In K-12, the idea is to make students as knowledgeable as possible, and success is generally measured through knowledge-based assessments, like a standardized test. This is partly because of a difference in the expectations for how skills will be applied. The focus in K-12 is more on knowledge acquisition than behavior change because it is expected that learners will apply these new skills in a range of situations and different environments throughout their academic and professional careers. It is also expected that they will retain this knowledge for years to come. To apply their skills in a range of situations and contexts, and to be able to recall their knowledge years later, deep knowledge acquisition is necessary.

This is as opposed to corporate training, where learners are given training on skills in service of a specific role in a specific organization to be applied immediately in service of an organizational goal (paradigm 1). When it comes to corporate training, knowledge is only as good as its impact on behavior on the job, and there is not an expectation that these skills should be applied to a range of other contexts. Training is less about giving learners the deepest and most robust understanding possible, and more about giving them exactly the level of information necessary to effectively apply that skill on the job. In this scenario, training’s success is, or should be, judged based on its impact on job performance.

Conclusion

Professionals with a background in education have the skills and ability necessary to be successful in corporate training, and bring a perspective that is valuable to the industry. With these simple paradigm shifts, you can get yourself into the “corporate training” mindset and more seamlessly pivot your skills into a new career.