L&D leaders ask this question constantly. We compare notes at conferences, swap stories with peers, and wonder if our struggles are unique or universal. But the conversation rarely gets past anecdotes.
At WeLearn, we wanted data. So between September and December 2025, we asked 118 L&D leaders to complete the Learning Strategy Scorecard — a self-assessment measuring maturity across six dimensions: business alignment, governance, technology integration, content strategy, measurement, and culture. The results paint a picture most teams will recognize.
Where most teams land
The scorecard places organizations into four maturity levels based on total score. Reactive (30–74) describes L&D that’s compliance-driven and disconnected from strategy. Operational (75–104) means some alignment to goals, but learning is still seen as a support function. Strategic (105–129) reflects data-informed decision-making with leadership sponsorship. Transformational (130–150) is rare — learning fully embedded as a driver of business performance.
So where did respondents fall?
Four out of five scored at Reactive or Operational levels. Fewer than one in five reached Strategic or Transformational. The average score landed at 86 out of 150.
Most L&D functions have moved beyond pure compliance. Programs exist. Platforms have been adopted. There’s some rhythm with the business. But strategic impact — the kind that shifts how leadership thinks about learning — remains elusive for the majority.
The data reveals where that gap lives.
Five patterns worth your attention
Documented strategy separates performers. Organizations with a formal, written learning strategy score 26 points higher than those without. That’s a meaningful edge. And strategies “in development” don’t deliver the same advantage. Teams in that middle state score closer to those with nothing documented than those with a strategy in hand.
Takeaway: The act of formalizing forces clarity. And clarity drives alignment.
Conversations happen. Credibility lags. L&D teams report solid alignment to business goals and regular executive conversations. But tying learning to performance metrics? That’s where scores drop. And when asked whether business leaders see L&D as a strategic enabler, responses tell the same story. Access has been earned, but influence hasn’t followed.
Takeaway: The gap between being invited to meetings and shaping decisions is where many organizations stall.
Governance varies wildly. No dimension showed wider spread. Some organizations have robust decision-making structures. Many have none. Enterprise-level prioritization exists in pockets, but the cross-functional governance body to sustain it often doesn’t.
Takeaway: Without clear ownership, priorities drift and good intentions turn into fragmented execution.
Almost nobody is ready for AI. “Do you have a strategy for AI and automation in learning?” scored the lowest of all 30 questions — barely past “not yet in place.” Data-driven personalization landed nearly as low. Platforms have been adopted but the data they generate goes unused.
Takeaway: This isn’t about a few laggards dragging down the average, weakness here is nearly universal.
Reporting happens. Measurement doesn’t. Teams send learning metrics to leadership, but few have dashboards that actually inform strategic choices. Numbers go up the chain but rarely shape what happens next.
Takeaway: There’s a difference between sharing data and using it. Measurement means the data changes your decisions.
The culture question
One finding deserves its own space.
Respondents believe learning is embedded in their company culture. But when asked whether leaders model continuous learning themselves, scores drop noticeably.
That gap matters. Culture isn’t a statement on a wall — it’s behavior at the top. When executives talk about development but don’t demonstrate it, employees notice. The message loses credibility.
What this means for you
The research points to five priorities that hold regardless of maturity level:
Start by documenting your strategy — the 26-point advantage makes this the clearest action in the data. From there, focus on measurement that connects to business outcomes. If you’re planning to scale, get governance in place first. Without clear decision-making structures, good programs end up competing with each other instead of compounding. And don’t wait on AI and data capabilities — start building now. Finally, remember that culture follows behavior. Getting leaders visible as learners matters more than any internal campaign.
Go deeper
This post covers the highlights in our data report. The full research includes analysis and benchmarks you can use to compare your results against the field.
Access the Learning Strategy Benchmarking Data Report →
For practical guidance on translating these findings into action — organized by maturity level — the companion guide breaks down what to prioritize and why.
Get the Learning Strategy Benchmarking Guide →
Haven’t taken the scorecard yet? See where you stand.
