You’ve just explained a new process to your team. Half of them get it immediately. The other half looks confused, and one person won’t ask clarifying questions but will quietly struggle for two weeks before you notice.
This isn’t a competence problem. It’s a learning style mismatch. You delivered the information one way, and half your team needed it a different way.
Most managers know this intuitively. They’ve seen it play out dozens of times. But knowing that people learn differently and knowing what to do about it are two very different things. The standard advice, “accommodate different learning styles,” sounds reasonable but doesn’t tell you much about what to actually change in your day-to-day coaching. (If you’re building out a broader training and development strategy, this is one of the pieces that’s easy to overlook.)
What are learning styles, and why should managers care?
Learning styles describe how people prefer to take in, process, and retain new information.
The most widely known framework is VARK, developed by Neil Fleming. It identifies four primary learning preferences:
| Style | How they prefer to learn | What they gravitate toward |
|---|---|---|
| Visual | Seeing information | Diagrams, flowcharts, color-coded notes, whiteboard sketches |
| Auditory | Hearing information | Conversations, verbal walk-throughs, podcasts, voice notes |
| Reading/Writing | Reading and writing information | Documentation, written instructions, note-taking, checklists |
| Kinesthetic | Doing and experiencing | Hands-on practice, trial-and-error, shadowing, role-play |
There’s also a fifth category, multimodal learners, who don’t have a dominant preference and benefit from a mix of approaches.
Now, a note on the science. Research has questioned whether strict “learning style matching” (only teaching visual learners visually, for example) actually improves outcomes. The evidence for rigid matching is weak. But the practical insight underneath the theory is solid: people do process information differently, one-size-fits-all delivery misses most of the room, and managers who vary their approach get better results.
You don’t need to label each person and stick to a single channel. You need to pay attention and adjust. This becomes even more important when you consider that different generations bring different learning expectations to the workplace.
Why “accommodating” learning styles isn’t enough
Most advice on this topic stops at accommodation. Figure out someone’s style, then present information in that format. That’s a start, but it treats the manager as a content delivery system.
Coaching through learning styles is different. It means understanding how someone processes information so you can coach them more effectively through challenges, skill-building, and behavior change.
The distinction matters:
Accommodation says: “Priya is a visual learner, so I’ll use diagrams when I explain the new process.”
Coaching through says: “Priya processes information visually, so when she’s stuck on a delegation challenge, I’ll ask her to map out who owns what on a whiteboard instead of just talking through it.”
The first approach helps with information transfer. The second helps with growth. As a manager, growth is your job.
How to spot learning preferences without a formal assessment
You don’t need to hand out a VARK questionnaire. In coaching conversations with managers, I’ve found that observation tells you more than any assessment. Watch for these signals:
In 1:1s, notice how they explain problems. Visual thinkers often draw on paper or gesture spatially (“the project is here, and we need to get it here”). Auditory processors talk through the problem out loud, sometimes circling back to refine their thinking. Reading/writing types come with notes already prepared. Kinesthetic learners describe what happened in action terms (“I tried this, then I did that”).
Watch how they onboard onto new tools or processes. Some people read every doc before touching anything. Others skip the docs entirely and start clicking buttons. Some ask a colleague to show them. None of these approaches is wrong. Each one tells you how that person will best absorb the next thing you need to teach them.
And if observation isn’t giving you enough signal, just ask.
The simplest version: “When you need to learn something new, what’s your go-to approach?” Most people can answer this immediately, and the answer is usually accurate.
A learning style audit for your next 1:1
Try this practical exercise with each direct report. It takes about 10 minutes.
Step 1: Ask three questions.
- “Think about the last time you learned something new at work quickly. What made it click?”
- “When you’re stuck on a problem, what’s the first thing you do?”
- “What kind of training have you found most useful in previous roles? What made it work?”
Step 2: Listen for patterns. You’re not labeling them. You’re building a picture of how they process, practice, and retain.
Step 3: Adjust one thing. Pick one upcoming coaching moment (giving feedback, assigning a stretch project, teaching a new skill) and adjust your approach based on what you learned.
That’s it. No formal assessment required. Over the course of a few weeks of this, you’ll have a much clearer picture of how each person on your team learns best.
Coaching through each learning style
This is where it gets practical. For each preference, I’ll share what works when you’re coaching someone through a real skill gap, not just delivering information.
Coaching visual learners
Visual learners struggle when everything is verbal. If you’re coaching someone through, say, improving their prioritization, don’t just talk about the Eisenhower matrix. Draw it on a whiteboard with them and have them place their current projects in each quadrant.
What works:
- Sketch frameworks during 1:1s instead of just describing them
- Use before/after visuals when giving feedback (“here’s where the project timeline was, here’s where it needs to be”)
- Share screen recordings instead of written instructions for process changes
- Ask them to create the visual, not just consume yours
Coaching auditory learners
Auditory learners think by talking. Give them space to process out loud. When coaching through a challenge, resist the urge to jump to solutions. Ask open questions and let them talk their way to the answer.
What works:
- Schedule voice or video conversations for important coaching moments (not just Slack messages)
- Use the “teach it back to me” technique: after explaining something, ask them to explain it in their own words
- Pair them with a colleague for peer coaching on new skills
- Record important meetings or coaching sessions so they can re-listen
Coaching reading/writing learners
These team members process by writing things down. They’ll often follow up a verbal conversation with a written summary, and that summary is how they actually internalize the information.
What works:
- After coaching conversations, ask them to write a brief action plan and share it with you
- Provide written resources alongside any verbal instruction
- Encourage journaling or reflection notes as part of their development
- Give feedback in writing first, then discuss it verbally
Coaching kinesthetic learners
Kinesthetic learners need to try things. They won’t fully understand a concept until they’ve applied it. Lengthy explanations before they get hands-on will frustrate them.
What works:
- Shorten the briefing and move to practice quickly
- Use role-play for interpersonal skills (practicing a difficult conversation before having it)
- Assign “try it for a week and report back” experiments
- Let them shadow someone skilled before expecting them to replicate the behavior
What about teams with mixed learning styles?
Every team is mixed. That’s the norm, not the exception.
The mistake managers make is trying to find one approach that works for everyone. That approach doesn’t exist. Instead, think about layering.
When you’re rolling out something new to the whole team:
- Start with a brief written overview (catches your reading/writing learners)
- Follow with a live walk-through or meeting (catches auditory and visual learners)
- Include a hands-on component (catches kinesthetic learners)
- Make the written materials available afterward (lets everyone process in their preferred mode)
This isn’t four times the work. It’s the same content delivered through multiple channels, and it takes maybe 20% more effort than doing it one way. The difference in uptake is significant. Creating the right learning environment is about making multiple pathways available, not finding one perfect format. And when you combine this approach with support for self-directed learning, people start owning their own development instead of waiting for you to deliver it.
How AI coaching adapts to learning styles at scale
The challenge for managers is real: you have 6, 10, maybe 15 direct reports, each with different preferences, and you’re supposed to personalize your coaching for each one. That’s a lot to hold in your head on top of everything else.
This is where AI coaching tools become genuinely useful. Not as a replacement for manager coaching, but as a complement that can handle the personalization at scale.
An AI coach adapts in real time. Someone who processes by writing gets reflection prompts and written frameworks. Someone who learns by doing gets pointed toward immediate experiments. Someone who needs to talk things through gets conversational coaching that mirrors a 1:1.
The AI handles the daily reinforcement. The manager handles the relationship, the context, and the judgment calls that only a human can make. It’s a combination that works better than either one alone.
The real goal isn’t accommodation. It’s growth.
Learning styles aren’t boxes to put people in. They’re signals about how someone will best develop, and a manager who reads those signals coaches more effectively than one who treats everyone the same.
The shift from “accommodating” to “coaching through” is small in concept but meaningful in practice. It moves you from being a content deliverer to being a development partner. That’s where managers create the most value for their teams, and where learning and development trends are heading.
Start with one 1:1 this week. Ask the three questions. Adjust one thing. You’ll notice the difference faster than you expect.
FAQs
What are the main learning styles in the workplace?
The most commonly referenced model is VARK: Visual (learns through diagrams and charts), Auditory (learns through conversation and explanation), Reading/Writing (learns through documentation and notes), and Kinesthetic (learns through hands-on practice). Most people use a mix of these, and the style that works best can change depending on what they’re learning.
Do learning styles actually matter, or are they a myth?
The scientific evidence for matching instruction to a single learning style is weak. But the underlying insight is useful: people process information differently, and one-size-fits-all training misses most of the room. The practical takeaway for managers is not to label people but to vary your approach and pay attention to what clicks.
How can managers identify their team’s learning preferences?
The simplest approach is to ask directly during a 1:1: “How do you prefer to learn new things?” But observation is equally important. Watch how someone approaches a new tool. Do they read the docs first, ask you to walk them through it, or just start clicking around? That tells you more than any assessment.
How does AI coaching adapt to different learning styles?
AI coaching tools can adjust their delivery based on how someone interacts. A person who asks detailed questions gets more structured frameworks. Someone who learns by doing gets prompted toward immediate application. This kind of real-time adaptation is difficult for a single manager to provide consistently across a whole team, which is why AI coaching and manager coaching work well together.