Closing the credibility gap with the LIFTER Program for training providers

Swick Learning
Feb 1
7 min read

Updated: Feb 19

Already know about RED Track and the LIFTERs?

Skip ahead to the Program Levels or Should you become a LIFTER?

Much of our material on RED Track Feedback, our independent feedback processing service, doesn't explicitly focus on the training providers, because the process benefits everybody.

But the training provider perspective is an essential one. If the process doesn't serve them well enough, the benefits of independent feedback processing won't spread.

This piece looks at the benefits through the lens of providers, which starts with an uncomfortable truth:

When training feedback is presented by the provider, it's almost always viewed with some level of doubt.

This trust issue is well-known to some providers and is unfortunately perpetuated by others.

Even if you are a provider that always handles your feedback data in good faith — who collects and reports the feedback in an unbiased way, every time, this trust issue still hurts you — your buyers will always be wary of your incentives until you prove over a very long period of time that you can systematically resist them.

The buyers of training programs have seen so many cherry-picked statistics and testimonials before that there can be no other rational response to your reports than polite scepticism. Further, they don't have time to interrogate your methods, so it's too hard for them to know if you are being transparent, or you've simply been skilful at masking the bias. For them, the safest option is to simply doubt any data presented by a provider.

So whether it's fair or not, providers do face this credibility gap — particularly with prospects and newer clients — and it's a very difficult gap to close.

Addressing the gap demands a solution that is simple and believable. You need a signal that says you haven't manipulated the feedback, and that signal needs to be extremely clear and efficient.

This is exactly what the LIFTER Program creates. There is no more efficient signal than saying:

"We are a LIFTER, which means the first time we see the feedback is at the same time you do."

And proverbially speaking, a picture says a thousand words, which is why we made this one:

What pain does LIFTER save the buyers of training:

Take a moment to consider the process of sourcing new training from the perspective of the buyer:

Buyers cannot really know what they are buying until after they have bought it. There is simply not enough credible information to truly know, ahead of time, that a program will be effective. This is muddied further by providers who exaggerate what they do and how much impact they have.

Because of this, market for training is structurally inefficient. It's a 'market for lemons,' where the burden of proof is reversed onto the buyer, and it makes the task of sifting through information from would-be providers a persistent source of frustration.

Another way to think of it is like this: it is too hard for buyers to distinguish between great programs and great marketing, until it's too late.

Every provider presents positive statistics. Every provider has strong testimonials. Very little of what is presented is independently verified.

This uncertainty means that buyers carry all the risk.

It is one reason many buyers turn to RED Track Feedback. They want a simple, trustworthy, and commercially viable way to introduce credible evaluation techniques without commissioning disproportionate evaluation studies.

Becoming a LIFTER is even more credible because it shows you have anticipated this need.

A LIFTER is not waiting for independent feedback processing to be imposed on them by their clients (which is a bad look). They are the ones bringing independent feedback processing into the relationship and making it a business-as-usual practice.

They can show any prospective client that they have already committed to transparency upfront and, in doing so, they reduce the time, cost and risks involved for the buyer, before the first session has been delivered.

What is the LIFTER Program?

The LIFTER Program is an accreditation framework that recognises a training provider’s commitment to transparently seeking quality feedback.

A provider becomes a 'LIFTER' by using the RED Track Feedback process everywhere possible — for every program, and every client, unless there is a firm issue preventing it. Becoming a LIFTER means totally embracing the independent processing of your feedback.

For those not already familiar with RED Track (you can read more here), it is not a review platform; it's not a gallery of the most extreme reactions; and it doesn't seek to publish rankings and ratings of providers. In fact, it doesn't even aim to certify that a provider's programs are 'good!'

Let us explain:

In our view, an accreditation system is only effective when two conditions are met:

There is a very clear standard that is being signalled.
That standard is being competently and reliably enforced.

For the LIFTER program, the standard is straightforward: the provider commits to seeking structured feedback on all its learning experiences and makes that feedback transparent through independent processing by a neutral third party.

The enforcement is built around the structural independence of the RED Track Feedback process. The data is collected and analysed by a third party (ourselves), meaning the provider is completely prevented from receiving or shaping it before their clients see it. Additional layers of integrity mechanisms are in place (and always being expanded), with clear mechanisms to detect and deal with possible manipulation. At its core, LIFTER works because the provider has relinquished control over the feedback process.

The signal, then, is ultimately about listening, openness, discipline, and a willingness to have a dialogue when feedback isn't perfect.

LIFTER Program Levels

The LIFTER Program has four levels of recognition. These reflect the scope of the evaluation practice that is occurring with the member, not the superiority of the feedback.

The appropriate level for any one provider depends on their context, clients, scale, budget, and evaluation appetite. There is no pressure to climb the levels either. It's not designed that way. The levels only exist to help us make our practices accessible and serve the widest range of providers possible, to change the culture of training feedback.

Here are the four levels:

Practising LIFTER (Level 1)

Practising LIFTERS collect B2B feedback through the RED Track Feedback process. This includes structured feedback from the commissioning decision-maker (buyer) and up to four nominated colleagues. Areas of feedback typically include perceived learning gains, application of the learning, return on investment, and ease of working with the provider.

For many providers, this alone introduces a level of structured buyer insight that is otherwise difficult to gather consistently.

Committed LIFTER (Level 2)

Committed LIFTERs collect both B2B feedback and learner (participant) feedback.

At this level, the datasets expand significantly and begin to connect buyer perception with participant experience. This allows for more robust insight and strengthens the transparency signal to both organisational clients and learners.

Exceeding LIFTER (Level 3)

Exceeding LIFTERs incorporate additional elements of program evaluation beyond just feedback. This may include random session observations, verified attendance and utilisation data, or connection to relevant business outcomes through matching with operational metrics.

Exemplary LIFTER (Level 4)

Exemplary LIFTERs operate at the highest level of continuous evaluation practice. Methodologies at this level may align with standards comparable to formal academic evaluation but embedded as part of business-as-usual activity rather than one-off studies.

The necessary power of accreditation

It would have been much easier for us to remain a service provider and avoid the rigidity of accreditation.

But our goal is much larger than mere service delivery: we want to change the incentives and the culture around training feedback. To eliminate the structural issues in the market we described in the introduction (above).

Achieving that change requires buyer recognition. If buyers do not value independent feedback processes, the culture around it won't change, and providers who actually invest in transparency will go unrewarded. Accreditation was the only pathway for us to create a powerful enough signal that could help buyers understand quickly understand who was genuine.

And the cut-through of the LIFTER designation is alreaddy making a difference at every stage.

For instance, consider that:

Our current LIFTER members do not need complicated justifications of their survey design, data handling, and reporting mechanics, they can simply say: "We are a certified LIFTER."

Within that single phrase, there are several clear and highly believable overtones, like:

"You and your learners can provide the feedback directly to independent consultants."
"The analysis is carried out externally."
"The results are shared with both our organisations at the same time."
"We cannot shape the findings."
"We want the truth as much as you do."

For a prospective buyer, it's a clean and powerful signal.

Accreditation has also been necessary to distinguish between our service and what would otherwise be called outsourcing — where the feedback processing tasks might be handled externally, but the provider ultimately controls it. Schemes like those may succeed for a short time, but they will add to the credibility gap rather than closing it and probably make buyers even more wary.

In contrast, a LIFTER still gets the full benefit of outsourcing the error-prone and painful tasks of surveying, analysis and reporting, but this is more of a by-product than the core focus.

So, should you become a LIFTER?

The truth is that you probably already know!

We have noticed the Program is polarising. Nobody is genuinely unsure. They tend to be either:

Excited, wishing this existed ten years ago, and only needing to check that the costs and practicalities will work for them; or

Terrified at the prospect of losing control. These providers believe it's essential to their survival for them control the information to the prospect/client at all stages.

Here is a little more information to consider, depending on which category you feel yourself falling into:

If LIFTER sounds terrifying:

It's the courage to let go that makes you stand out from other providers; and
The data helps you improve your programs faster, so you can eliminate any weaknesses.
You actually don't look bad when negative feedback comes through. You look trustworthy and committed to your craft.
The process deepens your relationship with your clients. It shows you are listening, not just selling.
Buyers will increasingly come to expect independent feedback processes as more of them — and your competitors — use the RED Track Feedback process.

If LIFTER sounds exciting:

Please get in touch. We want to understand your programs and your business to ensure our processes join smoothly.
We can prepare a quote to put you at ease about costs. Our service rarely exceeds 6% of what you charge for your programs, and in most cases is only 1% (see our transparent pricing model here).
Remember that you will:
- Stand out to prospective buyers.
- Stand out in bidding / tender processes.
- Have reams of believable feedback data to show prospects.
- Put your participants at ease by guaranteeing anonymity.
- Provide clients quality reports, within a few days, every time.
- Build a good, longitudinal data set for improvement and evaluation.
- Outsource a number of painful and error-prone tasks.

We hope you will help us to improve training, everywhere.