Experiential training, a sub-field of experiential education, is founded upon some commonplace observations. First, technical skills and competencies are necessary but not sufficient for success in the workplace. Chemistry matters. And so does character. Just as mountaineering expeditions succeed or fail not only according to their technical competence but also according to their teamwork and leadership, so it is with business.

Second, teamwork is tough stuff that requires more from one than passively consuming a power point presentation. There is a deep irony to studying the rigors of leadership while sitting in the comfortable confines of a climate-controlled conference room stocked with oversized banana muffins and designer drinks. Hence, experiential training.

Although experiential education programs are often described with a slew of imprecise buzzwords (trust, empowerment, etc.), the good news is that there has been sufficient quality scholarship in recent decades to provide reflective practitioners (and reflective customers) with sound theoretical foundations and terminological precision. Experiential education employs an inductive methodology-i.e., rather than moving (deductively) from generalization to application, learners move from concrete experience to generalization (and back again).

Among the several theoretical models that inform and express experiential learning systems is David Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle. Kolb draws on several earlier theorists, but most notably Dewey, Lewin, and Piaget. The experiential learning process, according to Kolb, mimics the scientific method:

"[L]earning, change and growth are seen to be facilitated best by an integrated process that begins with here-and-now experience followed by collection of data and observations about that experience. The data are then analyzed and the conclusions of this analysis are fed back to the actors in the experience for their use in the modification of their behavior and choice of new experiences. Learning is thus conceived as a four-stage cycle. Immediate concrete experience is the basis for observation and reflection. These observations are assimilated into a 'theory' from which new implications for action can be deduced. These implications or hypotheses then serve as guides in acting to create new experiences" (Kolb, p.21).

The relevance of this theory is clearer when contrasted with other learning theories. It should be noted that all education and training, even if less theoretically intentional, embodies an epistemology-in-practice.

According to Kolb, experiential learning theory differs from "rationalist and other cognitive theories of learning that tend to give primary emphasis to acquisition, manipulation, and recall of abstract symbols, and from behavioral learning theories that deny any role for consciousness and subjective experience in the learning process" (Kolb, p. 20). In short, the goal of experiential learning theory is to integrate thinking, feeling, perceiving, and behaving. Those familiar with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI) will recognize the consistency of this theory with Jungian types, and hence the happy synergy of employing the MBTI within experiential training programs.

The advantages of experiential training are several. First, learners are engaged not just mentally, but physically and emotionally as well. Consequently, experiential training engages learners more actively, and elicits greater intrinsic motivation than mere information acquisition. By designing activities that are "isomorphic" to the workplace, experiential training activities are relevant and easily applied. Finally, learners actively engaged in discovering and creating solutions to problems enjoy excellent retention of the lessons learned.

To pursue the topic further, and for references on program evaluation research, see our bibliography on experiential training and development.

Kolb, David. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1984.