The burden of sourcing and managing content

• 93% of L&D leaders dedicate at least an hour per week to sourcing and managing learning content, with 74% spending three or more hours per week.
• Searching for the right content is the most time-consuming aspect of content sourcing and management.
• 80% of L&D leaders claim satisfaction with their content, yet 78% admit that at least 10% of their L&D budget is wasted on ineffective or unused content, and over half report losses up to 25%.

What this tells us

Despite investing substantial time in content management, with nearly three-quarters spending 3+ hours weekly on these tasks, the return on investment remains questionable. The disconnect between high reported satisfaction (80%) and widespread acknowledgment of waste (78% admitting at least 10% budget waste) reveals a blind spot in content effectiveness evaluation. 

This suggests that organizations should shift their focus from content quantity to implementing better measurement frameworks that accurately assess utilization and impact, potentially freeing up to a quarter of L&D budgets that are currently lost to inefficiency.

A fragmented experience for the admin and learner

• 40% of organizations use 5+ learning content providers, while 14% report using at least 10 different providers. 
• Ranking first in priority when selecting a provider is high-quality, engaging content followed by multilingual and global delivery capabilities. Content curation support ranks as the least important contributing factor.
• L&D leaders are split between creating and curating upskilling content, with 65% purchasing from third-party specialized providers, 63% developing content in-house and 44% purchasing from their LMS provider. 

What this tells us

Organizations are navigating fragmented learning systems, with 40% juggling five or more providers and 14% managing 10+ relationships, creating significant administrative overhead. Despite this complexity, L&D leaders rank content curation support as their lowest priority when selecting vendors, instead prioritizing content quality and multilingual and global delivery capabilities. 

This disconnect, combined with the near-even split between third-party purchasing (65%) and in-house development (63%), reveals a strategic tension: Organizations want premium, globally accessible content but undervalue the support needed to effectively organize and deploy it. 

This suggests an opportunity for providers to balance quality content with robust curation capabilities, potentially streamlining both management burden and budget allocation.

Key challenges at play

• Improving workforce productivity ranks as the top reason for implementing upskilling training. 
• Nearly half (47%) of L&D leaders can't find content that meets all organizational needs, while other additional barriers include: 
  - Low employee engagement (38%)
  - Tracking and reporting on training completion (37%) 
  - Limited budget for upskilling training (35%) 
  - Keeping up with shifting priorities (33%) 
  - Limited integration with existing systems (32%)
  

What this tells us

Organizations prioritize workforce productivity in their upskilling initiatives but face significant content and engagement challenges. Nearly half (47%) struggle to find training content that fully meets their needs, while over a third face barriers related to low employee engagement, tracking completion, budget constraints, shifting priorities, and system integration issues. 

Successful upskilling programs need to address both content relevance and these operational barriers to achieve productivity goals.