Learning & Development

Learning & Development (L&D), or skills development, is the function that organises employees’ learning around team needs and company objectives. Depending on the position, it defines a training strategy, designs suitable activities and examines what employees have learnt and apply in their work. It may cover teams, their managers or roles affected by change.

The work begins with a diagnosis: which skills are already in place, which will be needed and which gaps warrant action? The person in the role talks to managers, employees and specialists in the relevant fields. They may then choose structured training, digital learning, mentoring or other support, according to the objective and available resources. The role therefore involves more than maintaining a training calendar.

Reporting lines, budget and autonomy vary by organisation. In a large company, the person may lead a training policy with specialist managers. In a smaller organisation, they may manage providers, schedules and dashboards directly, without managing a team. Agree with the leadership team and HR director which decisions they make independently, which require approval and who follows up on the application of learning at work. Recruitment may fall within a broader HR remit, but it is not central to this role.

Learning & Development, HRBP and HR Director / CHRO: who does what?

• Learning & Development: diagnoses development needs, designs learning responses and tracks their effects.
• HRBP: a related role to consider if the need also covers other HR responsibilities. The exact division depends on the organisation.
• HR Director / CHRO: leads the HR function, whose decisions may set the framework for skills development policy. See the HR Director / CHRO job profile.

These boundaries help define a clear remit. They do not prescribe a single reporting line or a level of seniority for the L&D title.

Hiring for Learning & Development becomes a significant decision when learning needs multiply, roles change or managers struggle to find a shared response to skills gaps. The first priority is to connect each activity with the work people need to perform. Without that diagnosis, the company risks paying for training that people enjoy but that does little to support the work required.

The most important decision concerns the remit. Do you need someone to design the development policy, someone to coordinate activities decided elsewhere, or both? Budget responsibility, provider selection and team management change the profile to look for. Equally, a strategic title with no access to the needs of different roles or room to make decisions makes the promise of the position hard to fulfil.

Hypothetical example: a company introduces uses of artificial intelligence across several teams. The L&D professional can ask managers which tasks are changing, identify the knowledge people need and organise suitable learning. The managers responsible for those functions are still needed to define the uses and judge whether the new practices suit their work. This illustrates one possible contribution of the role, not sole responsibility for leading the transformation.

Manager development calls for the same clarity. If the company expects a programme for managers, specify the management situations it should address, who will provide the expertise and how progress will be assessed. A list of sessions attended says too little about changes in practice.

Finally, ask the prospective hire how they would choose between courses, mentoring and support while people work. The answer depends on the need, available time and budget. The point is to make the link between the problem identified, the activity chosen and the intended result clear.

• Gather development needs from managers, employees and specialists in the relevant fields.
• Compare existing skills with those needed for current or future work, then prioritise the gaps.
• Set learning objectives and choose suitable responses, including training, mentoring or support at work.
• Design learning pathways for teams and, where the remit calls for it, their managers.
• Manage the training plan, schedules, providers and budget within the assigned remit.
• Coordinate with operational managers so that activities meet their teams’ needs.
• Define indicators and examine what people have learnt, how they use it at work and the effects of the activities.
• Support changes in roles, including digital changes, by diagnosing training needs.

The sources used do not identify a single degree required for every Learning & Development job. Apec cites a French Bac+5 level and courses in human resources or training engineering for the training manager role. These are possible points of reference, not an automatic filter for every position.

Look first at what the person has actually been responsible for. Have they gathered needs from managers and employees? Can they explain a skills diagnosis, why they chose a particular method and how they followed up on learning? Experience of coordinating providers or a budget matters especially if your position includes those responsibilities. For a remit focused on development policy, also look for decisions they have made about training priorities and their connection to company objectives.

The levels in the existing salary grid run from “Training officer” to “L&D Director”, with experience guides of 0-2 years, 2-5 years, 5-8 years and 8+ years. Those labels and periods help readers interpret the grid; they do not impose a universal threshold on every candidate. The title of this job profile implies no particular seniority.

Someone coming from an HR or training role may be a good candidate if their work covers diagnosis, design and follow-up. For a position in France that administers training, also assess their knowledge of the training framework and funding schemes. If the company mainly entrusts instructional design to internal experts, clarify what it expects the person in this role to coordinate and decide.

To assess a Learning & Development candidate, start with the decisions your position will require. Use the same criteria for each candidate and distinguish past achievements from responses to a hypothetical case.

1. Set the criteria for the remit

First describe the scope: needs diagnosis, activity design, provider management, budget, evaluation and any team management. For each responsibility, state who makes the final decision and what result you expect. A company seeking someone to lead training policy will assess autonomy differently from one hiring mainly to organise a schedule.

Ask the candidate to rank these responsibilities according to their experience. A positive sign is a precise account of what they decided and what they obtained approval for. An answer that confuses participation in a project with responsibility for its decisions calls for further questions.

2. Examine two past examples

Ask the person to describe an activity carried out for a team and, if relevant to the position, one aimed at managers. Have them explain the original need, who was consulted, the skills targeted, the learning approach and any time or budget constraints. Ask what was observed afterwards and what was adjusted.

Look for a clear sequence of decisions rather than a list of courses organised. A strong candidate can explain why a course was insufficient, or why mentoring was more suitable. Probe claims about results attributed to training when there is no evidence to assess its use at work.

3. Present a case close to the position

Hypothetical example: two teams ask for training on a new AI tool at the same time, but their work and levels of proficiency differ. Give the candidate each team’s objectives, a limited budget and a list of available contacts. Ask what information they would gather before choosing an activity, then how they would prioritise the needs.

A sound approach consults the relevant managers and employees, distinguishes the tasks that are changing and proposes proportionate responses. Also ask which indicators would help track learning and its application. An answer that immediately chooses the same programme for everyone without a diagnosis warrants further exploration.

4. Observe collaboration and communication

Ask the candidate to explain a disputed priority to someone playing the part of a manager. See whether they restate the request, set out the constraints and explain which decision is theirs and which rests with the leadership team. If the position manages a team, add a scenario about allocating work among specialists. Otherwise, do not make line management a disqualifying criterion.

A positive sign is a clear explanation of choices and their limits. A promise that training alone would solve a poorly defined work problem should prompt you to ask how the candidate would identify its real cause.

5. Check the scope through references

With the candidate’s consent, ask someone who has worked with them which decisions they made, how they collaborated with different functions and what they tracked after activities were rolled out. Ask about situations described in the interview. References help establish the scope of an achievement without replacing the practical case.

If no one in the company has expertise in training engineering, involve a professional with that expertise in the assessment. Ask them to examine the diagnosis, choice of methods and evaluation of learning. Keep decisions about the remit, working relationships and budget within the company.