Thought Leader Q&A: Exploring ADDIE With Dr. Jill Stefaniak
Implementing ADDIE For More Impactful Training
Dr. Jill Stefaniak is the Chief Learning Officer at Litmos. Her interests focus on the development of L&D professionals and Instructional Design decision making. Today, she speaks with us about implementing the ADDIE framework, L&D needs assessment, and training evaluation.
Why is the ADDIE framework still so relevant today, and how does needs assessment and evaluation fit into the process?
I like to think of analysis and evaluation as the bookends to the ADDIE framework. They both provide the infrastructure needed to support training. While they are two distinct phases of ADDIE, they are interconnected because both phases focus on improving learning and performance.
A needs assessment is typically conducted at the beginning of a design project to identify gaps between current and desired knowledge, skills, and performance. By systematically gathering data from learners, stakeholders, and organizational contexts, L&D professionals can pinpoint where interventions are needed and prioritize learning. Essentially, a thorough needs assessment provides a baseline against which the effectiveness of instructional interventions can be later measured.
Evaluation feeds back into the needs assessment process by assessing whether the designed instruction is meeting its intended purpose. The insights gained from evaluation can identify previously unrecognized or detected gaps in performance or evolving learner needs. This prompts a new cycle of needs assessment and refinement. Needs assessment and evaluation create a continuous feedback loop where assessment informs design and evaluation measures its impact. Evaluation uncovers new needs, ensuring training remains relevant and effective.
Based on your experience, what’s the most common mistake that L&D professionals make when implementing ADDIE?
I think there are two common mistakes that L&D professionals make:
- They rush (or skip altogether) the analysis phase. They tend to jump right into designing content without asking the important questions to understand the nuanced needs of the learning audience. They also tend to look at analysis as simply learner analysis and miss the opportunity to gather important information that can have a major impact on training outcomes.
- Another common mistake is treating ADDIE strictly as a linear process. While L&D professionals are expected to progress through the framework sequentially, it is important that they be flexible and adaptable throughout the design process. This means revisiting various phases of the design process as new information emerges. A successful L&D project is one that embraces ideation and iteration. Prototyping, revisiting phases to ensure there’s necessary alignment between training needs, content, and evaluative metrics, are critical to ensuring the content designed is meeting the organization’s intended outcomes.
How can L&D teams better understand the needs of their learners by focusing more on utility, relevance, and value when conducting needs assessments?
When L&D teams focus on utility, relevance, and value in their needs assessments, they gain a clearer picture of what truly matters to learners in their organization. Utility ensures that training addresses practical skills learners can immediately apply in their roles. Relevance connects learning directly to job responsibilities and career goals. By examining value, teams identify which learning opportunities will have the greatest impact on both learner engagement and organizational outcomes. This ultimately leads to the development of more effective and targeted L&D programs.
What is one of your standout success stories that involved the ADDIE framework?
Our L&D team at Litmos created Litmos University to provide targeted training to support our customers. We began with a needs assessment to better understand where learners were struggling and what skills were most critical. That input shaped the design and ensured we focused on the right content from the start. Through development, we shared design documents, prototypes, collected feedback, and made iterative improvements. The result is a collection of courses that felt relevant to learners and showed clear improvement in both engagement and performance.
Do you have an upcoming event, launch, or other initiative that you’d like our readers to know about?
I’ll be hosting a webinar on October 9 with Dr. Stephanie Moore, Associate Professor at the University of New Mexico, that explores the biggest pitfalls of AI-generated learning, including reinforcing stereotypes, fueling the “learning styles” myth, and producing vague or ineffective objectives. It’ll cover practical strategies for writing measurable objectives, setting ethical guardrails, and ensuring your training remains diverse, accessible, and grounded in research. You can register for it here.
Wrapping Up
Thanks so much to Dr. Jill Stefaniak for sharing her valuable insights and expertise with us. If you’d like to learn more about designing effective and engaging training, you can check out her article on the Litmos blog, which highlights four questions L&D teams can ask to scale their needs assessment.
