“Dear L&D” is a reflective letter-style series where learning leaders address the profession directly, giving voice to the lessons, challenges and opportunities shaping the future of learning and development (L&D).

If you’ve ever partnered with a subject matter expert (SME) to build training, you already know the dance. SMEs are brilliant, experienced and deeply knowledgeable about their work. They carry the operational wisdom that organizations depend on. Yet many trainers know the tension that can arise in these partnerships — meetings that turn into information dumps, slide decks that grow to 120 pages and courses that explain everything but teach very little.

SMEs often want learners to understand the full complexity of their field because they care about accuracy and credibility. Trainers, on the other hand, are responsible for clarity, retention and behavior change. When these two priorities collide without alignment, learning experiences can become overwhelming instead of empowering.

But this is where our profession has an opportunity for a mindset shift. Our role is not to capture every detail an SME provides. Our role is to shape knowledge into experiences that help people perform better. This requires us to move beyond the mindset of “collecting content” and into the practice of “curating learning.”

How Trainers Influence Effective Learning Experiences

In real-world projects, the most successful SME partnerships begin with a simple reframing conversation: “What do people need to do differently after this training?”

When that question leads the discussion, everything changes. SMEs start identifying critical decisions, common mistakes and real scenarios learners face every day. Instead of explaining the entire system, they begin highlighting the moments that truly matter.

Another behavior shift that transforms these partnerships is how we manage information flow. SMEs often feel responsible for completeness. Trainers must feel responsible for relevance. Respectfully guiding SMEs to prioritize “need to know” over “nice to know” protects the learner experience without diminishing the SME’s expertise.

This doesn’t mean pushing back aggressively. It means partnering thoughtfully.

For example, when an SME says, “Learners need to understand all of this background,” a trainer might respond with curiosity: “That context is valuable. Where do you see employees struggling the most today?”

Questions like this signal respect while gently redirecting toward performance outcomes. Over time, SMEs begin to trust that trainers are not minimizing their knowledge — we are amplifying its impact.

There is also a standard of practice our profession must continue to strengthen: trainers must come to SME conversations prepared. Too often SMEs feel like they are asked to “build the training” themselves. When trainers arrive with a clear structure, draft objectives or a rough learning pathway, the conversation becomes collaborative rather than extractive.

Preparation communicates professionalism. It tells SMEs that their time and expertise are valued.

And perhaps most importantly, trainers must remember that SMEs are not obstacles in the learning process. They are partners who care deeply about the success of their teams. Many have simply never been exposed to the science of learning design.

Where SME-Led Learning Goes Wrong

Picture an engineer leading a virtual class with slides full of diagrams and technical terminology constantly glowing on the screen. Their intention is good, as they know the system inside and out. But the way they explain it feels more like a system architecture review than a training session.

They begin by describing how the new learning management system (LMS) works behind the scenes. This description includes database structures, integrations, authentication flows and API connections. Words like backend, permissions architecture and workflow automation fill the air. For the engineer, this context makes perfect sense; understanding the structure explains everything.

The frontline reps, however, are thinking about something very different. They are curious how this makes their work more efficient; hence asking questions as such:

• How do I log in quickly?
• Where do I find my assigned training?
• What do I click if my course won’t load?
• How long will this take me during my shift?

As the engineer continues, they demonstrate features by navigating menus rapidly, clicking through five layers of settings while narrating the logic of the system rather than relaying the experience of the user. The explanation is precise, but not practical. The reps watch quietly, trying to translate the technical explanation into the simple actions they’ll need when they return to their desks.

Occasionally someone raises a hand and asks a practical question like, “Where do we submit a completed course?” The engineer pauses, slightly surprised, then backtracks through the system to find the screen that answers the question.

Here’s what’s happening: The engineer’s deep knowledge makes it difficult to see the system from a beginner’s perspective. They are teaching how the system works while the frontline team needs to know how to use the system effectively within their work environment.

In an ideal training environment, these two perspectives align when technical expertise is translated into practical, step-by-step guidance.

That is where we come in.

The SME-Facilitator Partnership Makes Training Impactful

Our expertise is not in knowing everything about the job. Our expertise is in helping people learn the job.

When trainers confidently step into that role — asking better questions, guiding conversations toward performance and designing experiences rather than information repositories — the relationship with SMEs transforms.

The result is training that is shorter, sharper and far more impactful.

The future of our profession does not depend on trainers knowing more than SMEs. It depends on trainers partnering with SMEs in smarter ways. And when we do, we turn expertise into learning that truly works.