Rethinking Enablement from Training Function to a Strategic Operating One

I've written previously on the challenge of defining enablement and why traditional L&D models fail in enablement functions because they treat expertise as something you can pour into people through a traditional learning experience design model. But real expertise is built through friction, iteration, and solving real problems in the the real world.

Yet there’s another layer to the problem, one that shapes not just how we build expertise, but what enablement actually is.

The truth is too many orgs still see enablement as a “training and delivery” function.

The problem of being the training department

Training isn’t bad. Obviously. But when it becomes the objective rather than a means to a higher-order goal, the function ends up aiming at the wrong target from the start.

Training is just an implementation detail. The value isn’t in training itself; it’s in advancing the broader business objectives that training should serve. Too often the work gets anchored to the training activity rather than the broader activities and ecosystem requirements that need to be true to drive those outcomes.

The real performance levers live upstream from training inside the messy, cross-functional work of spotting gaps, designing interventions, and making sure they get executed.

Two anecdotes

When I designed a high-fidelity, well-received "learning experience" for identifying ideal prospects and pitching a core product line, I thought we were in great shape. A few months later, the metrics told a different story: pipeline conversion for that product hadn’t budged. Reps liked the training. Nothing in the business changed.

Fast-forward to a different scenario: rolling out a new pricing model. Instead of just scheduling a training, I and my team embedded with sales, product marketing, and ops. We as a team with cross-functional partners mapped deal strategies for each segment, built targeted talk tracks, retooled ROI calculators, and set up a live feedback loop from the field. Within a quarter, deal cycles were faster, quotes were explained well and landed well, and pricing escalations dropped. Not because the slides were better, or we had some mystically effective practice scenario, but because “enablement" was wired into the operating system of the business and the ecosystem operated effectively.

Enablement as a strategic operating function

As Matt Groetelaars puts it: "Enablement should look more like an embedded BizOps team for GTM—less 'training vendor,' more 'Chief of Staff' for every GTM leader."

He breaks it down like this:

• "Identify gaps" – This could be in skills, process, tooling, messaging, or priorities.
• "Design targeted plays" – The work of identifying patterns and scaling that lead to specific outcomes.
• "Coordinate execution" – making sure the right people move in sync and impact is measured in business outcomes, not attendance sheets.

Shifting Focus

This approach shifts the focus from training to the broader set of operational activities that enablement can support to help the business achieve its goals. Training is still part of the mix, but it’s one element within a larger, interconnected framework built to diagnose, act, adapt, and sustain results.

When enablement is part of the ecosystem that drives operational effectiveness, the way impact is assessed changes too:

• Time from opportunity to solution – how quickly the system can move from identifying a problem to implementing a solution.
• Adoption of plays – whether the plays are actively used in the field.
• Business impact – changes in pipeline velocity, win rates, ACV, or expansion.
• Ecosystem health – the strength of knowledge flows, collaboration, feedback loops, and continuous improvement that keep the system resilient.

Ultimately, the health of the ecosystem influences whether enablement efforts take root, scale, and deliver lasting value.

Obligatory AI section: This is true for enabling humans, but all the more for agents

We’re stepping into a world where it’s not just humans who need to be enabled. Agents do too. The irony is, as much if not more than humans, AI agents will only ever perform as well as it’s trained, configured, and “enabled" to operate effectively toward a clear goal.

For humans, learning experience design (i.e. the activity of training) matters. It shapes how we absorb and apply knowledge. But even for humans, it’s only an implementation detail. The real work of enablement that makes a measurable difference for humans and agents is in identifying gaps, designing targeted plays, and coordinating execution across the business.

But there’s a lot more to be thought about re: enabling agents...

Why it matters

Especially with the advent of companies like Clay and the emergence of GTM Engineering, the business moves too fast for enablement to be a disconnected service desk of training initiative project managers. Leadership teams benefit most when the function is designed to connect dots, align resources, and help keep the organization moving toward the right priorities.

An enablement function should not try to measure its value by an implementation detail. Even the most polished training efforts fall short if the function itself isn’t embedded in the work that drives revenue. And in that case, it remains at the periphery of meaningful impact.