Subject Matter Experts Are Quietly Destroying Learning

Before you get offended, let me say this first.

I love subject matter experts.

I have spent almost 30 years surrounded by them.

I am one.

Some of the smartest people I know are engineers, architects, security specialists, Agile coaches, consultants, and technical leaders.

This is not an attack.

This is an observation.

One that has become impossible for me to ignore.

Subject matter experts are quietly destroying learning.

Not intentionally.

Not maliciously.

But systematically.

And I believe it is happening inside organizations everywhere.

Because somewhere along the way, we confused expertise with teaching.

Then we confused teaching with facilitation.

Then we confused facilitation with running activities.

And now we have entire organizations that believe learning is happening simply because people are talking.

It isn’t.

Expertise is not teaching

The moment we become experts, something dangerous happens.

We forget.

We forget what it feels like not to know.

We forget confusion.

We forget insecurity.

We forget anxiety.

We forget what it feels like to enter a room and know absolutely nothing about a topic.

We forget how vulnerable learning actually is.

Instead, we begin designing trainings around content.

We ask ourselves:

Which topics do we need to cover?

Which frameworks should we explain?

Which exercises should we add?

Which tools should we introduce?

Rarely do we ask:

How should people feel throughout this experience?

Because people do not learn when they feel overwhelmed.

People do not learn when they feel stupid.

People do not learn when they feel left behind.

People do not learn when they are afraid.

People learn when they feel safe.

Liberating Structures are not a shortcut to human-centered learning

This might be my most controversial opinion.

Learning a handful of Liberating Structures does not make someone a facilitator.

I say this as someone who genuinely loves Liberating Structures.

I have used them for years.

They are wonderful tools.

But they are still only tools.

I increasingly see workshops that look like this:

Pair discussion

Breakout groups

Sticky notes

Dot voting

Troika Consulting

Conversation Café

Wonderful.

Now answer me one question.

What did people actually learn?

Because interaction is not learning.

Discussion is not learning.

Sticky notes are not learning.

A room full of energy is not learning.

Learning requires synthesis.

Learning requires intentionality.

Learning requires a storyline.

Learning requires moments where expertise steps back in.

Otherwise, we are simply entertaining adults.

Sometimes I walk out of these sessions thinking:

That was fun.

But what changed?

The cult of participation is quietly exhausting people

There is another uncomfortable truth.

We have become obsessed with participation.

Everything is now:

💚 Turn to your neighbour.

💚 Find a partner.

💚 Discuss.

💚 Share.

💚 Collaborate.

💚 Co-create.

💚 Network.

And while that sounds wonderful, it can become incredibly exclusionary.

Not everyone processes information externally.

Some people need silence.

Some need to read.

Some need to hear information first.

Some need time to think.

Some need to observe before contributing.

Some need movement.

Some need experimentation.

Some need psychological safety before speaking.

When we only design for one type of human, we unintentionally exclude everyone else.

Ironically, many workshops designed around inclusion are actually excluding people.

Great facilitation is invisible

The best facilitators are rarely the loudest people in the room.

They are constantly observing.

Who is overwhelmed?

Who is disengaging?

Who is excited?

Who is being left behind?

Who hasn’t spoken yet?

Who is already bored?

Who needs silence?

Who needs movement?

Who needs another example?

Great facilitators are not controlling rooms.

They are noticing humans.

They understand something incredibly important.

Humans do not all learn the same way.

And they design accordingly.

Every training should have a heartbeat

Not as content delivery.

Not as workshops.

Not as presentations.

But as stories.

Stories have rhythm.

Stories have tension.

Stories have release.

Stories have curiosity.

Stories have aha moments.

Stories have endings that leave us changed.

Great trainings should too.

The flow often looks something like this:

Connect

↓

Curiosity

↓

Explore

↓

Discuss

↓

Distill

↓

Teach

↓

Apply

↓

Reflect

↓

Act

Notice something important.

Teaching is still there.

Expertise is still there.

Facilitation did not replace teaching.

Teaching and facilitation dance together.

One without the other creates problems.

Too much teaching creates disengagement.

Too much facilitation creates confusion.

The magic happens in the balance between both.

We need a new type of expert

I don’t think organizations need fewer experts.

I think organizations need more human-centered experts.

Experts who understand psychology.

Experts who understand energy.

Experts who understand group dynamics.

Experts who understand that every room contains:

🐉 Introverts

🐉 Extroverts

🐉 Fast learners

🐉 Slow processors

🐉 Readers

🐉 Talkers

🐉 Observers

🐉 Experimenters

Experts who understand that humans are not machines waiting to receive information.

Humans are ecosystems.

And ecosystems require intentional design.

Perhaps the most important question we can ask before every training is no longer:

What do I want to teach today?

Maybe the better question is:

How do I want humans to experience learning today?

Because great teachers do not transfer knowledge.

Great teachers design environments where knowledge can land.

And that is an entirely different skill.

🐉

Human-centered systems will always outperform content-centered systems.

That is true for leadership.

That is true for engineering.

That is true for Agile.

That is true for AI.

And it is absolutely true for learning.

Sarah’s Human-Centered Facilitation Tips

1. Design for humans, not for content

Don’t start with:

🖤 What do I want to teach?

Start with:

❤️‍🔥 How do I want people to feel?

❤️‍🔥 How do I want them to experience learning?

2. Every training needs a storyline

A training should have a beginning, middle, and end.

Think like storytelling.

Flow:

Connect → Curiosity → Explore → Distill → Teach → Apply → Reflect → Act

Avoid random activities that don’t connect together.

3. Create psychological safety before learning

People cannot learn effectively when they feel unsafe.

Avoid:

🖤 “Find someone to talk to.”

Instead:

❤️‍🔥 Movement exercises

Examples:

💚 Group by role

💚 Group by experience

💚 Group by country

💚 Group by familiarity with the topic

Let people ease into the room.

4. Teach to all learning styles

Every training should include:

📖 Reading

👂 Listening

💬 Discussion

🖼️ Visual learning

🛠️ Hands-on practice

🤔 Reflection

Not everybody learns the same way.

5. Discussions are not learning

Discussion is only one ingredient.

Every discussion requires synthesis afterwards.

Always ask:

❤️‍🔥 What is the takeaway?

Discussion → Synthesis → Learning

6. Liberating Structures are tools, not facilitation

Knowing Liberating Structures does not make someone a facilitator.

🔥 Sticky notes.

🔥 Conversation Café.

🔥 Troika.

🔥 Dot voting.

These are ingredients.

Not the meal.

Use them intentionally.

7. Expertise still matters

Do not turn every learning moment into another discussion.

Sometimes participants need authority.

Participants often need:

❤️‍🔥 “This is why this matters.”

Teaching is still important.

Teaching and facilitation dance together.

8. Design for 50 people, not 8

If a session works for 50 people, it will work for 8.

The reverse is often not true.

Larger groups require:

❤️‍🔥 More processing time

❤️‍🔥 More structure

❤️‍🔥 More peer learning

❤️‍🔥 Less dependence on the instructor

9. Always give more time than you think

If an exercise normally takes 10 minutes.

Plan for 15.

There will always be:

🔥 Slow starters

🔥 People who need to reread instructions

🔥 People who get stuck

Don’t create unnecessary stress.

10. Fast learners need jobs

Fast learners can unintentionally destroy inclusion.

Prepare extra activities.

Examples:

❤️‍🔥 Reflection questions

❤️‍🔥 Extra exploration

❤️‍🔥 Sticky wall exercises

❤️‍🔥 Bonus challenges

Keep them occupied.

11. Bring everyone back to the same place

If people work individually first, always create a convergence moment.

Examples:

❤️‍🔥 Sticky walls

❤️‍🔥 Grouping exercises

❤️‍🔥 Walk around observations

Nobody should feel left behind.

12. Use the room itself as your teaching material

Observe.

Ask yourself:

🔥 What did people miss?

🔥 What surprised them?

🔥 Where are the misconceptions?

Then flex your teaching.

Don’t blindly follow your slides.

13. Don’t make everyone present

This is a very common mistake.

Not every group needs to present.

Choose:

🔥 2 or 3 groups

🔥 Or random groups

Otherwise people disengage.

14. Energy management is more important than time management

Don’t ask:

🖤 “Are we on schedule?”

Ask:

❤️‍🔥 “What’s the energy in the room?”

Great facilitators manage energy, not clocks.

15. Great facilitation is invisible

The facilitator is constantly observing.

Who is:

🔥 Overwhelmed?

🔥 Excited?

🔥 Quiet?

🔥 Lost?

🔥 Bored?

🔥 Dominating?

Facilitation is the art of noticing humans.

16. Great trainings end with more energy than they started

The success metric is not:

🖤 “They learned a lot.”

The success metric is:

People leave saying:

❤️‍🔥 “I want to learn more.”

Not:

🖤 “I’m exhausted.”

17. Resistance is data, not disruption

One of the biggest mistakes facilitators make is treating resistance as a problem to solve.

Examples:

You ask:

🔥 “Name your feeling.”

Someone says:

🖤 “I don’t feel like any of these feelings.”

Or:

🖤 “I don’t connect to this exercise.”

You ask people to roleplay.

Someone says:

“I would never authentically engage like that in real life.”

You ask:

🔥 ““Think quickly and write down your answer.”

Someone says:

🖤 “I need more time to think.”

Many facilitators immediately think:

🖤 “This person is difficult.”

🖤 “This person is disrupting the flow.”

🖤 “This person is resisting the exercise.”

But what if they’re actually giving you valuable information?

Their resistance is data.

They are showing you where your design excludes certain humans.

Great facilitators become curious.

Instead of forcing participation, ask:

❤️‍🔥 What is this person teaching me about my exercise?

❤️‍🔥 Which type of person did I accidentally forget?

❤️‍🔥 How can I adapt this activity to include them too?

Sometimes the person resisting is not breaking your workshop.

They are improving it.

The fastest thinker is not the only person in the room.

The person who needs more processing time matters too.

The person who dislikes roleplay matters too.

The person who cannot identify with your predefined emotions matters too.

The goal is not to make people fit the exercise.

The goal is to make the exercise fit more people.

This is one of the biggest differences between activity facilitation and human-centered facilitation.

The first asks:

🖤 “How do I get everyone through this exercise?”

The second asks:

💚 “What is this exercise teaching me about the humans in front of me?”

And sometimes, the most valuable person in the room is the one who says:

❤️‍🔥 “This doesn’t work for me.”

Because they are showing you who you forgot to include.

🐉

When humans struggle inside systems, don’t immediately fix the humans. First investigate the system.