Imagine a global automotive supplier shifting more of its investment toward electric vehicle components. A long-standing customer still relies on its existing combustion-engine products and asks the account manager what this means for a program they are planning together.
The account manager has attended the product briefing and understands the new direction. Answering the customer, however, requires clarity about ongoing support, future capabilities, and which commitments need internal approval. Colleagues serving the same customer in another region must also give a consistent answer, even when local market priorities differ.
This illustrative situation brings a familiar training challenge into focus. Understanding a business decision and being able to act on it are different levels of readiness. Global sales training must prepare people to explain the implications, coordinate with colleagues, and recognize the boundaries of their authority.
I explored these issues with Akli Aggoune, Vice President of Global Sales and Strategy for PowerDrive Systems at BorgWarner, on CommLab India’s eLearning Champion Podcast. In the episode he discussed his experience navigating the automotive industry’s shift from internal combustion engines toward hybrid and electric vehicles.
Our conversation, From ICE to EV: Global Sales Leadership Lessons in the Age of Automotive Transformation, gave us a concrete setting for examining how learning supports strategic change. For L&D, the responsibility is to translate that business context into practice that prepares people for the decisions their work demands.
Give People the Reasoning Behind the Strategy
A strategy presentation usually communicates the decision. Employees may have far less visibility into the customer signals, competing options, and trade-offs that shaped it. If the direction changes again several months later, their questions deserve attention.
Akli described defining product strategy as a particularly demanding part of the transformation. The work involved gathering insights from customers, sales, and engineering, assessing where the business could compete, and aligning recommendations with senior leadership. He emphasized making that reasoning accessible to employees.
During our discussion, I also asked about involving people while information was being gathered. His emphasis was on broad participation. People in different markets may see constraints or opportunities that a smaller group misses.
That has a direct implication for the learning brief. Before developing the rollout content, L&D should speak with regional sales teams about what customers are asking and where the proposed direction is difficult to explain. Their concerns can help establish what the training must address:
- What changed in the market or customer requirements?
- Why did the company choose this direction?
- What does it mean for the accounts I manage?
- Which decisions or questions still require clarification?
I would give these questions proper space in the learning experience. Sellers will need the reasoning when customers challenge an assumption or ask why an earlier commitment has changed.
We should also allow employees to question the approach. Understanding the decision does not mean that everyone would have selected the same option. Training can help people examine the implications and apply the agreed direction, but unresolved business decisions still need answers from the leaders responsible for them.
Build Learning Around Customer Decisions
Knowing the portfolio direction does not automatically tell an account manager how to respond to a particular customer. One of the points we discussed was the need to translate product strategy into customer strategy.
This requires coordination as well as individual judgment. Regional teams serving the same automotive manufacturer may face different local conditions, yet the customer should receive a coherent account of the supplier’s priorities and commitments.
For L&D, this is a useful place to begin designing scenario-based learning for sales training.
Return to the opening scenario. Give participants the customer’s existing program requirements, the supplier’s revised priorities, and the concerns raised by regional account teams. Ask them to prepare a coordinated response.
They would need to decide what they can explain confidently, what requires technical validation, and which commitments need internal approval. Regional details may differ, but the recommendations must fit a shared customer strategy.
I would review the reasoning behind the response as carefully as its wording. Have participants distinguished confirmed information from assumptions? Have they recognized a commitment that needs approval? Could a colleague in another region use the response without contradicting it?
Customer trust belongs in this exercise. In our conversation, honesty, realistic representations of capability, and delivery on commitments were central to building relationships. Technical understanding helps a seller explain the product, but it does not remove the need to handle uncertainty carefully.
A realistic customer conversation allows learners to practice those judgments before they face the consequences of a poorly considered commitment.
Make Regional Knowledge Usable Elsewhere
A practical example Akli shared concerned a regional alignment call. After seeing how effectively it worked, he recorded it and asked the organizer to share the approach with colleagues elsewhere. Other teams could observe the meeting and decide whether elements would be useful in their own region.
The value of that example is its specificity. People can see how the meeting works, who contributes, and how the discussion is organized. They have something concrete to examine.
However, he also explained why practices do not always transfer directly. Customer expectations and specifications influence how teams work. An approach that succeeds in one region may depend on conditions that are different elsewhere.
When L&D turns regional experience into a learning asset, it needs to preserve enough context for others to judge what they can use.
| What to capture | Why it matters |
| The problem the team was addressing | Helps another region judge relevance |
| The actual activity or decision sequence | Makes the approach understandable and usable |
| Customer and operating conditions | Reveals assumptions behind the practice |
| Required global controls | Establishes boundaries for adaptation |
| Elements another region could test | Gives the receiving team a practical starting point |
A recorded alignment meeting could be accompanied by a short explanation of its purpose, participant roles, and follow-up decisions. Colleagues can then assess what fits their needs instead of copying the format without understanding why it worked.
The same principle applies to account planning and collaboration between sales and engineering. Required procedures should be clearly identified, along with the elements teams may adapt. Employees should not have to infer that distinction from the material.
Give Employees Practice Before Expecting Independent Performance
Customer quotations provided an example of why some processes require common controls. Before an account manager makes an offer that commits the company, the appropriate approvals must be in place.
The rollout approach described in our discussion included live sessions across time zones, opportunities for questions, recordings, and supporting documentation. When a tool changes, employees also have time to practice and raise further questions before the previous tool is retired. The transition period depends on the scale of the change.
This is where instructional design needs to be precise about the expected performance. A briefing can explain the change, and work instructions can support task completion. We still need to know whether the employee can follow the workflow when a situation requires judgment. Choosing suitable sales training formats, including simulations and role-play, should follow from that performance requirement.
During the conversation, I described the watch, try, and do approach we use for process training. Learners observe a demonstration, practice with support, and progress toward performing the task independently.
For a quotation workflow, we could provide a worked example, guided practice, and an independent case. A customer request with incomplete technical details and a proposed delivery commitment would require the learner to identify missing information and obtain the necessary approvals, alongside using the tool correctly.
That gives a manager something specific to review. If the learner navigates the system correctly but overlooks an approval requirement, further support can focus on that decision. Repeating the tool demonstration would leave the underlying gap unresolved.
Our guide to designing sales training around curriculum, assessment, and reinforcement explores the broader design considerations behind this kind of program.
Match Development to the Work Each Person Needs to Do
A shared business change creates different development needs. An experienced account manager may need help with a changed approval workflow. A technically strong seller may benefit from practicing a difficult customer conversation, while someone taking responsibility for a global account may need support coordinating decisions across regions.
I asked how development was tailored to different levels of competence. The approach described combined common requirements with individual discussions. A new tool or major process change could require training for all affected employees. Much of the remaining development was discussed with managers using personal development maps. Customer relationship development was also identified as an area of broader need.
For L&D, the practical task is to make those discussions specific enough to guide action. An observed customer conversation, a process error, or an upcoming responsibility can help the employee and manager agree on what needs attention. Looking at training needs at organizational, task, and individual levels helps distinguish shared requirements from gaps affecting particular roles or employees.
Clear capability expectations and learning options tied to particular tasks make the next decision easier. Someone who needs help interpreting approval requirements should be able to access relevant practice without repeating an entire product curriculum.
Personalization becomes useful when the employee and manager understand which work requirement the activity addresses and what progress would look like.
Let Evidence of Readiness Shape the Rollout
Akli’s closing advice was to protect time for the foundations of performance: the skills needed to meet expectations and an understanding of the standards and processes governing the work. Customer requests and management demands will otherwise consume the available time.
That advice has an operational consequence for L&D. Practice needs a place in the rollout schedule, with managers clear about the support they are expected to provide.
For an upcoming strategic change, I would begin with one consequential customer-facing task. Agree with sales leadership on what good performance looks like and where regional adaptation is appropriate. Then determine how employees will demonstrate that performance.
Can sellers explain the strategic rationale accurately and coordinate a response to a shared customer? Can an account manager complete the changed approval process without avoidable rework? Attendance and completion data establish participation. Observing the work shows where support is still needed.
Revenue outcomes may also matter, but pricing, product availability, demand, and other conditions influence them. Evidence from the task gives L&D and sales managers a more direct basis for deciding what to reinforce.
If employees can recall the new strategy but cannot resolve a realistic customer situation, further support is needed before they handle that situation independently. The value of a readiness assessment lies in what we do with its findings.
Frequently Asked Questions
What should global sales training standardize across regions?
Standardize required processes, approval controls, and the core explanation of the company’s strategic direction. Teams serving a shared global account should coordinate their customer strategy. Regional examples and working practices can reflect local conditions, provided they remain consistent with those requirements and commitments.
How can L&D assess readiness for a sales process change?
Ask employees to complete a realistic task that requires them to apply the changed process, identify approval requirements, and handle missing information. Review whether they complete it accurately and where they need help. Questions and errors during practice can guide follow-up support before the process becomes mandatory.
Does personalized sales training require adaptive learning technology?
No. Managers and employees can identify development needs, select relevant learning activities, and review progress using evidence from the work. In our discussion, personal development maps and manager conversations were the methods described. We did not establish the use of automated adaptive technology.
If your sales organization is preparing for a strategic shift, explore CommLab India’s sales enablement training. We can discuss the customer conversations, role-specific capabilities, and process decisions your training needs to prepare people for.
