Month: April 2026

You know the situation. You’ve designed a great training programme. The participants were enthusiastic, the evaluation forms looked promising, and the trainer had clearly put in a lot of effort. But three months later, you’re sitting opposite the director, who asks: “What has this actually achieved?” And you realise your answer isn’t really convincing.

This is the central problem facing L&D in 2026. Not the lack of impressive programmes and annual plans. Not the lack of engaged employees. But the lack of an answer to the question that is relevant today: has anything changed in how people behave in the workplace? And if so, how do you demonstrate that?

Proving the ROI of soft skills training is a complex part of the job for many L&D professionals. And that is precisely the problem PractAIce is trying to solve; not by building better training programmes, but by making behavioural change visible and measurable.

The problem with scores that convince no one

Most training evaluations stop at what Kirkpatrick calls the first or second level: how satisfied were participants, and what did they learn? These are useful indicators, but they say little about what actually changes in the workplace. According to data from the American Society for Training and Development, Kirkpatrick Level 3 — behavioural change — is measured in only 25% of cases, and Level 4 — organisational results — in just 15%.

This is not because L&D professionals do not want to measure it. It is because it is difficult. Behavioural change in soft skills — for example, how someone gives feedback, how someone deals with resistance, or whether someone remains calm during a difficult conversation — is by definition elusive if you do not have a structured way of observing it.

And yet it is precisely this data that senior management is asking for. According to research by the Brandon Hall Group, 57% of L&D leaders are experiencing increasing pressure to demonstrate ROI, and that pressure has only grown in recent years. At the same time, 75% of organisations say that better aligning L&D with business strategy is their top priority for 2025. The gap between what L&D delivers and what the business needs lies not in the quality of the training but in the measurability of the results.

Why soft skills are so difficult to measure and what that means for your approach

There is a reason why management training and soft skills training are so often dismissed as ‘nice to have’: the effects are visible in behaviour, not in figures. And behaviour is difficult to quantify. Especially if the measurement takes place only afterwards, separate from the training itself.

The Kirkpatrick model provides a clear framework for this. Level 3 of the model measures whether participants actually apply what they have learnt in their work — and that is, as Kirkpatrick himself states, the first level at which you can truly say anything about the effectiveness of a training programme. Everything prior to that, such as satisfaction scores and knowledge tests, is internal evidence for the training function itself. What the business needs starts at Level 3.

But how do you obtain Level 3 data for soft skills? Traditionally through manager observations, 360-degree feedback or performance reviews. These methods have value, but they are time-consuming, subjective and come too late, often weeks or months after the training has taken place. By that time, the link between what was learnt and the measured behaviour has often faded.

That is the gap. And it is a structural gap, not one you can close with a better satisfaction survey.

How PractAIce generates behavioural data that really makes a difference

PractAIce works differently from traditional training, and that difference is precisely what matters when it comes to ROI. Every time an employee completes an AI role-play, the platform generates detailed behavioural data: how did someone score on active listening? How was feedback structured? How did someone respond to an escalation in the conversation? Or how effectively does someone handle conflict resolution?

That data isn’t based on self-reporting or a manager’s impression. It’s based on what someone actually did in the simulation, how often, and whether that improved over multiple sessions. That’s Kirkpatrick Level 3 data: not added retrospectively, but incorporated into the platform’s design from the outset.

For L&D professionals, this makes a difference to how you approach boardroom discussions. Instead of “95% of participants rated the training as good or very good”, you can say: “Employees scored an average of 54% on constructive feedback skills at the start; after four practice sessions, that was 71%, with a clear curve in individual progress.” That is a conversation you can have with the director.

Soft skills training that sticks: why repetition is key

One of the most consistent findings in training research is that a single learning session is not enough to bring about behavioural change. People learn something, return to the workplace, and the pressures of everyday life pull them back into old patterns. This is not a lack of motivation; it is neurology.

Deliberate practice, the concept developed by psychologist K. Anders Ericsson, shows that expertise does not arise from experience or natural talent, but from focused, repeated practice on specific behavioural aspects, with immediate feedback after each attempt. For soft skills, this means: not just one role-play in a group session, but running through the same scenario ten times until the new behaviour becomes automatic.

That is what PractAIce makes possible. Employees can repeat a scenario without relying on a trainer or a colleague. They practise at their own pace, at a time that suits them, and thus build up, step by step, the behavioural repertoire that the training aimed to achieve. This is particularly relevant for management training and leadership development: those skills fade most quickly if there is no structured opportunity for practice after the training.

What L&D professionals can do differently

It starts with a shift in how you design training programmes. Kirkpatrick recommends designing backwards: start at Level 4: what business outcome do you want to achieve? Then work backwards to determine what behaviour is required for that (Level 3), what people need to learn to achieve it (Level 2), and what the training should look like (Level 1).

In practice, for soft skills training this means: determine in advance which competencies you want to develop, make them observable, and build in a way to collect those observations. So not afterwards, but as part of the training design itself.

PractAIce directly supports this approach. L&D professionals can create scenarios for each competency that align with their own organisational context – in other words, the kind of conversations employees have in their specific roles, with dynamics that are recognisable to their team. These customised role-plays not only deliver a better learning experience, they also generate more relevant behavioural data.

And that is what changes the conversation with the director. Not “we have trained 120 employees”, but: “we can demonstrate that the feedback culture in Team X has improved in concrete terms, and here is the data to back that up.”

Frequently asked questions about measuring the effectiveness of soft skills training

How do you measure the ROI of soft skills training?
The best way to measure the ROI of soft skills training is to define behavioural indicators in advance that you want to see improve. Consider: how often does someone give feedback, how does someone react in conflict situations, how does someone score on active listening in simulated conversations. PractAIce automatically generates this behavioural data for each practice session, enabling pre- and post-assessment without placing an additional observation burden on managers.

What is the Kirkpatrick model and why is Level 3 so important for L&D?
The Kirkpatrick model divides training evaluation into four levels: reaction, learning, behaviour and results. Level 3 (behaviour) is the first level that truly indicates whether training has worked in practice. Satisfaction scores (Level 1) and knowledge tests (Level 2) measure what happened during the training; Level 3 measures what changes on the work floor afterwards. For soft skills in particular, this is the crucial evidence.

How do I convince senior management of the value of soft skills training?
The strongest arguments are concrete and behavioural. Not “the training was well-received”, but “after the programme, employees demonstrably scored higher on specific communication competencies, and here is the progression across multiple practice sessions.” PractAIce enables this type of reporting without the need to manually collect observational data.

Is AI-based management training more effective than classroom-based training?
Not necessarily more effective in terms of content, but certainly in terms of transfer. The fundamental problem with classroom-based management training is that there is no structured practice environment once the training day is over. AI-driven practice via PractAIce fills that gap exactly: employees can repeat scenarios whenever they need to, with immediate feedback, without relying on a trainer.

Finally: the conversation you want to be able to have

L&D is not an activity centre. It is a strategic function that contributes to how people collaborate, communicate and perform. But that contribution is only visible if you make it measurable.

Proving the ROI of soft skills training is not simply a matter of fancier evaluation forms. It starts with the design: what behaviour do you want to see, how do you make that observable, and how do you build in structured practice so that what has been learnt really sticks? The fact that 80% of professionals say that soft skills such as communication are only becoming more important due to AI does not make the question any smaller, but it does make it more urgent.

PractAIce is designed for L&D professionals who want to be able to have that conversation with senior management. Not based on gut feeling, but on data. Not sure if it’s right for your organisation? A demo shows you more than an article ever could.

Most organisations already know this. You send someone on a training course, they come back full of good intentions, and six weeks later, little of what they learnt that day remains. Not because the trainer was bad, not because the employee wasn’t willing. But because one-off learning in a controlled environment simply doesn’t translate into different behaviour on the work floor. That is the transfer problem, and it has existed for as long as organised training has.

Competency-based training changes the rules of the game. Not by intensifying training, but by organising it fundamentally differently: focused on demonstrable behavioural change, repeatedly practised in realistic scenarios, and measurable down to the competency level. And with the rise of AI role-playing, this is becoming scalable for the first time.

The transfer problem: an issue the sector has faced for decades

In 1988, Timothy Baldwin and Kevin Ford wrote an influential article in the journal Personnel Psychology that would later become one of the most cited studies in training literature. Their conclusion was uncomfortable: only a small fraction of what people learn during training is actually applied in the workplace. More recent analyses estimate that figure at less than ten per cent of training content that systematically translates into different behaviour in the workplace.

That is no small problem. It is a systemic failure in how we organise learning. And yet, in many organisations, the model has hardly changed: a training programme, a module, sometimes some e-learning afterwards. The context of learning and the context of application remain fundamentally separate.

What makes transfer so difficult? Research repeatedly points to the same factors: a lack of opportunities to practise after the training, a working environment that does not support the new behaviour, and the fact that learning in a safe setting bears little resemblance to the chaos of real-world practice. People learn something in a classroom, but have to apply it at a desk, in a meeting, at a time when they also have ten other things on their minds.

What makes competency-based training different

Competency-based training starts with a different question. Not: ‘What do people need to know?’, but: ‘What do people need to be able to do, and how do you recognise that they can do it?’ That shift sounds subtle, but it has far-reaching consequences for how you design training.

In a competency-based model, learning is not measured by attendance or passing a test. It is measured by demonstrable behaviour in context. This means that, as an organisation, you must determine in advance which competencies you wish to develop, how you will make those competencies observable, and what evidence you will accept as proof of mastery. PractAIce is built on precisely this foundation: every practice session is linked to specific competencies, and progress is made visible at the behavioural level, not based on attendance or self-reporting.

For soft skills, such as communication skills, giving feedback, dealing with resistance and conflict management, this is no simple task. These skills are, by definition, contextual. How someone gives feedback to a junior colleague is different from how that same person gives feedback to a defensive director. Competency-based training recognises that complexity, rather than simplifying it. PractAIce translates that recognition into practice: for each competency, scenarios have been developed that challenge precisely that nuance.

Role-play as a learning tool: from awkward exercise to serious instrument

Role-plays have a mixed reputation in the training world. People find them awkward, forced, or experience them as a kind of theatre that has little to do with their daily work. That experience is understandable, but says more about how role-plays are used than about their potential.

The science is clear on the importance of simulated practice. In his research into the development of expertise, psychologist K. Anders Ericsson demonstrated that exceptional performance does not stem from talent or years of experience in themselves, but from deliberate practice: targeted, repeated practice on specific weaknesses, with immediate feedback. That is precisely what a well-designed role-play does.

A study in the journal of the National Institutes of Health showed that scenario-based role-playing exercises for training soft skills, in this case among medical students, led to significant improvements in communication skills across successive practice sessions. What stood out was that students explicitly stated that they learnt through role-play what remained unattainable through lectures. The exposure to realistic situations made all the difference.

The problem with traditional role-playing is scalability and safety. An exercise with a colleague rarely feels real, because you know the other person is playing along. And in a group session, nobody wants to make a fool of themselves in front of the group. That barrier hinders the quality of learning.

Customised role-playing: why customisation is key

Not every role-play is the same. That may sound obvious, but its implications are often underestimated in training practice.

A generic scenario about ‘conducting difficult conversations’ has a different learning value than a scenario built around the specific situations people encounter in their own roles. A team leader in the healthcare sector has different conversational contexts than an account manager in the B2B sector, or a manager at a government agency. The degree to which the scenario mirrors one’s own reality partly determines how seriously the brain takes the situation, and thus how much is actually learnt.

Research into training evaluation shows that the degree of similarity between the training context and the application context is one of the strongest predictors of successful transfer. Baldwin and Ford describe this in their transfer model as one of the central mechanisms: the greater the similarity between the learning and application situations, the greater the likelihood of transfer.

Customised role-plays build in that similarity. PractAIce allows organisations to create scenarios that align with their own team dynamics, culture, typical conflicts and the competencies the organisation wishes to develop. The AI avatar plays a recognisable role, not a generic situation that seems to come from another planet.

How AI tackles the transfer problem in a fundamentally different way

What AI adds to competency-based training is something the sector has long been missing: the ability to organise repetition without relying on a trainer, a colleague or a schedule.

Transfer so often fails because there is no further structured practice opportunity after the initial training. Knowledge and skills fade. The work environment reverts to familiar behaviour. Recent literature on learning and transfer processes in organisations emphasises that transfer is not a single moment, but a process that requires support long after the training. AI makes that support possible on an ongoing basis.

An employee practising via PractAIce can start a scenario at any time. Five minutes before a difficult conversation, or a week after something went wrong in a meeting. The exercise aligns with the moment of need, which is precisely the circumstance under which the transfer of training proves to be most effective.

Furthermore, AI makes it possible to measure competencies objectively across multiple training sessions. That is the promise of genuine competency-based training: not simply ticking a box, but demonstrating that someone has mastered a skill. After each role-play, PractAIce generates detailed feedback on specific behavioural indicators — does someone listen actively, does someone structure feedback in a way that the other person can hear, does someone remain calm when emotions run high — and thus makes visible what would otherwise remain invisible.

Frequently asked questions about competency-based training and AI role-plays

What is the difference between competency-based training and traditional training?
Traditional training is usually focused on knowledge transfer: what does someone need to know or understand? Competency-based training focuses on demonstrable behaviour: what does someone actually need to be able to do in their own work situation, and how do you demonstrate that? The difference lies in the yardstick. In competency-based learning, the standard is not a completed module, but proven behavioural mastery in context.

Is competency-based training also suitable for soft skills? The competency-based model is particularly well-suited to soft skills. Communication skills, giving feedback, and dealing with resistance are skills that cannot be assessed in a test. They can only be assessed in practice, or in a realistic simulation of it. Competency-based training provides the framework; AI role-plays provide the practice environment.

How does an AI role-play differ from a traditional role-play?
The biggest difference is safety and repetition. In an AI role-play, there is no audience, no colleague playing the ‘game’ alongside you, and no embarrassment when mistakes are made. Furthermore, you can run through the same scenario multiple times, until the desired behaviour becomes second nature. This is precisely the structure of deliberate practice that research has shown to be most effective for behavioural change.

What does it cost to implement PractAIce for a team?
PractAIce operates on a licensing model tailored to the size of the organisation and the number of intended users. There are no travel costs, venue costs or reliance on external trainers. For a specific quote, we recommend getting in touch or requesting a demo.

Finally: has the future of learning already begun?

The transfer problem has existed for decades. But the solution simply wasn’t there yet: there was no scalable way to let people practise sufficiently, in realistic situations, with immediate feedback, measured at a competency level. That has now changed.

Competency-based training using AI-powered role-plays is not just a pipe dream. It is already being used by organisations that understand that learning is not a one-off event, but an ongoing process. Research by LinkedIn shows that 91% of L&D professionals believe continuous learning is more important than ever. But continuous learning requires an infrastructure that makes it possible. PractAIce provides that infrastructure.

Are you unsure whether this aligns with your organisation’s learning ambitions? A demo provides more insight than a brochure ever could. Feel free to request a demo. No obligations – just see if it’s a good fit.

You know how it goes. After a day of soft skills training, people are full of good intentions. They’re going to give feedback. They’re going to listen. They’re no longer going to shy away from difficult conversations. And then Monday comes. The hustle and bustle of the day. And three weeks later, there’s little left of that training. Not because the training was bad. But because a one-off session is never enough to really change behaviour.

That’s exactly where PractAIce is different. Soft skills training only works if you keep practising, in situations that feel real. With an AI avatar as your conversation partner, you can do just that, whenever it suits you, without needing a colleague to play the angry customer.

What are the best online platforms for soft skills training?

There are now several platforms that claim to be able to train soft skills online. Most offer videos, e-learning modules or live webinars. That has value, but it lacks something crucial: interaction. You can spend an hour watching someone else give feedback, but practising and applying a difficult conversation yourself is a different story.

PractAIce stands out because the platform is built around a single idea: practice makes perfect. Not through theory, but through role-plays with an AI avatar that reacts like a real person. That offers resistance. That shows emotions. That forces you to think about what you say and how you say it.

What makes an online platform effective for soft skills training?

• Realistic practice scenarios that closely mirror your own work environment
• Immediate, specific feedback after every conversation
• Repetition: practising the same skill not just once, but dozens of times
• Safety: making mistakes without consequences for real-life relationships

How does an AI avatar work in soft skills training?

An AI avatar is a digital conversation partner that responds to what you say. With PractAIce, you choose a scenario – for example, a bad news conversation, giving constructive feedback to a colleague or dealing with resistance in a team meeting – and then you start the conversation. The avatar listens, responds and sometimes escalates the situation. Just as it happens in real life.

Afterwards, you gain insight into what went well and what could have been better. The feedback is intuitively tailored to specific behaviour. It indicates what you said, how you said it, what effect it had on the other person, and how you could say it differently. The AI coach provides concrete examples of how you can say it. You can apply this straight away, which immediately enhances the learning effect in your own work context.

And if you’re wondering whether practising with an AI avatar really works, it’s very realistic. They look like people and react like real people. The more accurately it reflects the work context, the greater the learning effect. And research into behavioural change consistently shows that rehearsing behaviour in safe conditions leads to better performance in real-life situations. The avatar doesn’t need to be perfectly human to achieve the learning effect. It just needs to be realistic enough for your brain to take the situation seriously.

Which companies offer soft skills training in the Netherlands?

In the Netherlands, there are various providers of soft skills training, ranging from large training agencies to independent coaches. Most work with group sessions, individual coaching or a combination of both. This has its merits, particularly for complex situations that require human nuance.

PractAIce is one of the few Dutch platforms offering soft skills training via AI at scale. This means: no dependence on a trainer’s availability, no need to stick to a group timetable, and accessibility for every employee, whether they work in Rotterdam, Groningen or from home.

This makes PractAIce particularly suitable for organisations wishing to roll out soft skills training across multiple teams or branches, without the logistical challenges of scheduling group sessions. HR managers and L&D specialists recognise this problem: the will is there, but scalability is the bottleneck.

Role-playing as the core of behavioural change

Role-playing sometimes has a bad reputation in traditional training. People find it awkward, forced, or they play it off with a wink to the colleague next to them. That’s understandable. A role-play with a colleague rarely feels real, because you both know it isn’t real.

With an AI avatar, it works differently. There is no audience watching. There is no one you know on the other side of the conversation. You can stop, restart, and try the same situation five times over. That lowers the threshold enormously, and that is exactly what is needed to dare to experiment with different behaviour.

Communication skills such as giving constructive feedback, dealing with resistance or having difficult conversations aren’t something you can simply read about and then do. They’re like muscles. And you develop muscles by using them, not by watching a presentation about them.

What are the benefits for your organisation?

Soft skills are not ‘soft’ in the sense that they don’t matter. They are the driving force behind collaboration, a feedback culture, psychological safety and leadership. Teams that communicate better make fewer mistakes, resolve conflicts more quickly and have lower absenteeism.

PractAIce makes that development concretely measurable. After each role-play, the platform shows how an employee scores on specific competencies: active listening, structuring feedback, staying calm under pressure. This gives HR and managers insights that you rarely get from classroom-based training.

It sounds logical, yet in practice it’s tricky: making development visible. PractAIce does this in a way that doesn’t feel like being assessed, but like growing.

Frequently asked questions about AI and soft skills training

What exactly is an AI role-play?
An AI role-play is a simulated conversation with a digital conversation partner. At PractAIce, you choose a work scenario — such as a performance review or a conversation with an angry customer — and have that conversation with an AI avatar that responds to what you say. Afterwards, you receive feedback on your communication and behaviour.

How do you train soft skills digitally?
Training soft skills digitally works best through repetition and immediate feedback. PractAIce offers role-plays in which employees practise the same situations over and over again, until the desired behaviour becomes second nature. This is fundamentally different from watching an e-learning module or attending a webinar.

Is AI coaching suitable for all employees?
Yes, AI coaching via PractAIce is accessible to employees at all levels. Whether it’s a new team leader learning how to have a difficult conversation, or an experienced manager looking to hone their feedback skills: the platform adjusts the difficulty level based on progress.

What does AI-supported soft skills training cost?
The costs of AI-supported training are generally lower than traditional training programmes, especially when you factor in economies of scale. There are no travel costs, no room hire fees, and no reliance on trainer schedules. PractAIce operates on a licensing model tailored to the size of the organisation. For specific pricing, please get in touch or request a demo.

Finally: is this something for your team?

Soft skills training via an AI avatar is no substitute for the human element of learning. But it fills a gap that traditional training has neglected for years: the space to practise, to fail, to start again and to grow, without anyone standing by to judge you.

If, as an HR manager or L&D specialist, you’re looking for a way to make soft skills training scalable and measurable, PractAIce is worth a look. Not because it’s a miracle solution, but because it answers the right questions: how do you ensure training sticks? How do you make development visible? And how do you give people the safety to practise?

Not sure if this is right for your organisation? Feel free to request a demo. There’s no obligation – just see if it’s the right fit.