Organisations continue to invest substantial resources in T&D initiatives with the goal of enhancing workforce productivity and performance (Beinicke & Bipp, 2018; Jevana, 2017; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2024). However, the effectiveness of these interventions is often influenced by the chosen training delivery method. Traditionally, F2FT has been the dominant approach, but the rise of TBT – particularly post-COVID-19 – has sparked renewed debate about the comparative efficacy of both methods (Akpoiroro & Adeleke, 2022; Mikołajczyk, 2022; Żur & Friedl, 2021).

The exploration of TBT as a potential replacement for F2FT is motivated by several organisational realities: Firstly, organisations face increasing pressure to reduce training costs associated with venue rental, travel, instructor time and employee time away from work (Koirewoa et al., 2024). Secondly, the need for scalable training solutions has intensified as organisations expand globally with geographically dispersed workforces (Charitonos et al., 2024). Thirdly, the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated digital transformation and demonstrated that remote learning modalities could maintain business continuity when F2FT was impossible (Maphalala & Ajani, 2023), Fourthly, technological advances in learning management systems, virtual reality and interactive platforms have enhanced TBT’s pedagogical capabilities (Serrat, 2017). However, whether these practical advantages translate into perceived effectiveness from the employee perspective – and whether TBT can genuinely substitute for the interpersonal, hands-on elements of F2FT – remains an empirical question requiring investigation.

While existing literature outlines the strengths of both F2FT and TBT, direct comparisons remain limited, especially within the South African context. The pandemic-induced shift to remote work has further highlighted the need to understand how employees perceive TBT in contrast to traditional methods (Chikandiwa et al., 2024; Mhlanga & Moloi, 2020; Rigolizzo, 2022). Given the infrastructure and accessibility challenges faced by many South African organisations, it is unclear whether TBT can universally replace F2FT. This study therefore aims to explore employees’ perceived effectiveness of TBT compared to F2FT, with a focus on its impact on upskilling and workplace performance. By capturing employee feedback, the research seeks to offer practical insights to help organisations select training methods that align with their operational realities and workforce needs. Based on this, the following research question was formulated: What are employees’ perceptions of the effectiveness of TBT compared to traditional F2FT training to improve their workplace performance?

The following research questions guided the study:

Research on the comparative effectiveness of F2FT versus TBT yields mixed results. Some studies highlight TBT’s flexibility, scalability and cost-effectiveness, especially in digital-era workplaces (Akpoiroro & Adeleke, 2022; Li, 2022; Psicosmart Pro, 2023; Żur & Friedl, 2021). Conversely, traditional F2FT remains valued for its interpersonal interaction and hands-on learning opportunities, often leading to higher learner satisfaction and motivation (Aspeling & Mason, 2020; Martins et al., 2019; Maxwell, 2018). Importantly, research suggests that these outcomes are influenced not only by the training method itself but also by employee perceptions and preferences, which significantly impact engagement and transfer of learning (Jevana, 2017; Nguyen & Nguyen, 2024). The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of TBT, compelling organisations and employees to adapt rapidly. However, challenges such as the need for greater learner self-regulation and digital literacy have surfaced, affecting perceived effectiveness among some groups (Martins et al., 2019; Mhlanga & Moloi, 2020). Within the South African context, where digital infrastructure and skills vary, these perceptions are particularly critical to understand (The National Skills Authority of South Africa, 2023).

Blended training, combining F2FT and TBT methods, has emerged as a promising approach that leverages the strengths of both (Batista-Toledo & Gavilan, 2022; Singh et al., 2021). It offers flexibility and accessibility through technology while maintaining the social interaction and immediate feedback of face-to-face sessions (Hewett et al., 2019). This hybrid approach can improve learner engagement and accommodate diverse preferences, facilitating smoother transitions to digital learning environments (Alsalamah & Callinan, 2021). Despite these advantages, blended training demands higher design complexity and resource investment, which can influence perceptions of workload and intensity (Abudlhabib & Al-Dhaafri, 2020; Alvarez, 2020; Van Leeuwen & De Bruin, 2023).

Training effectiveness traditionally refers to the extent to which learning objectives are met and applied in the workplace, resulting in improved performance (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016; Zhou & Xie, 2024). Crucially, perceived effectiveness – how employees evaluate and feel about the training – is a key factor influencing motivation and knowledge transfer (Martins et al., 2019; Sheeba & Christopher, 2020). Effective human resource development (HRD) requires a systematic approach, including needs analysis, supportive environments and continuous evaluation to ensure alignment with organisational goals (Aboyasin & Sultan, 2017; Farouk, 2022). This study adopts a multi-level evaluation approach, assessing training across input (learner reactions), acquisition (knowledge gain), application (behavioural change), organisational payoff (performance improvement) and societal contributions (client and community impact). By focusing on employee perceptions within this framework, the study seeks to illuminate which training delivery method – F2FT or TBT – is perceived as most effective in enhancing workplace performance.

An interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) design was selected to align with the qualitative approach and research objectives. This design enabled in-depth exploration of participants’ subjective experiences and meaning-making processes. Semi-structured interviews were utilised to capture participants’ detailed experiences and perceptions of both F2FT and TBT, as well as their perceived effects on workplace performance.

The sample comprised 12 financial sales advisers from a South African financial insurance and investment company with branches nationwide and headquarters in the Western Cape. The target population focused on Western Cape employees who joined before 2020, ensuring experience with both face-to-face and TBT methods. Participants were selected using non-probability purposive sampling based on these specific criteria.

All interviews were conducted via Microsoft Teams because of its established organisational use and accessibility. Following informed consent, interviews were recorded using Teams’ integrated capabilities. Participants were briefed on the study’s purpose with opportunities for questions, creating a comfortable environment for open discussion. Interview duration ranged from 30 min to 60 min.

Interviews were guided by a structured interview schedule comprising 12 primary questions with follow-up probes. The questions were developed based on the research objectives and theoretical framework identified in the literature review to ensure logical coherence. Sample questions included: ‘Describe your experience with F2FT. What did you enjoy about it, and what was challenging?’ and ‘Which training method enabled you to effectively transfer your acquired knowledge, skills, and attitudes back into your job?’ A standardised interview process was followed with all participants to enhance reliability and validity. Following completion of each interview, recordings were transcribed using Microsoft Teams’ automated transcription feature, supplemented by manual verification to ensure accuracy.

Thematic analysis was employed as the analytical framework, following Braun and Clarke’s (2006) systematic approach to identifying, analysing and describing patterns or themes within qualitative datasets. This analytical method has gained prominence in qualitative research because of its effectiveness in capturing participants’ perspectives, experiences and understandings of particular phenomena (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The compatibility between thematic analysis and IPA made this approach particularly suitable for exploring participants’ subjective experiences and meaning-making processes related to training methods.

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the University of the Western Cape Humanities and Social Science Research Ethics Committee (Ref. No. HS22/10/5). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, with voluntary participation ensured. Participant identities and contributions also remained anonymous and confidential. Interview transcripts and recordings are password-protected and accessible only to researchers. Recording permission was also requested before each interview.

All participants confirmed that F2FT was their main training method before the COVID-19 pandemic. They shared both positive and challenging aspects of their experiences, including classroom sessions and manager-led coaching. The sub-themes presented in this section further explore these experiences.

All participants confirmed that during the COVID-19 pandemic, their primary training mode shifted from face-to-face to virtual formats, mainly using Microsoft Teams and e-learning modules. The following sub-themes further explore their experiences with TBT.

Part of this research examined F2FT and TBT’s impact on employee performance. Training and development strengthen individuals’ KSA to enhance job performance (Hermina & Yosepha, 2019; Kuruppu et al., 2021; Mehale et al., 2021). Participants described how training affected their performance and whether they maintained performance goals after transitioning to TBT. Several participants indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic, rather than the training method itself, directly impacted their performance, as evidenced in the following.

To understand training preferences, participants described their learning styles, experiences with support during the F2FT to TBT transition and opinions on future training methods.

Technology-based training’s growth accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic, enabling continuity via synchronous virtual sessions and asynchronous e-learning (Kalio, 2019; Mohamad et al., 2020). Participants valued TBT’s flexibility and ability to learn at their own pace, including revisiting recorded content – advantages over traditional note-taking in F2FT (Hoq, 2020; Żur & Friedl, 2021). These findings directly support Żur and Friedl’s (2021) argument that TBT’s asynchronous capabilities enable self-directed knowledge consolidation and accommodate diverse learning speeds. However, effectiveness depended heavily on trainees’ self-discipline and conducive learning environments (Akpoiroro & Adeleke, 2022). Distractions at home and technological challenges, especially among older or less tech-savvy employees, limited engagement and motivation (Alshawabkeh, 2020; Fayole & Ajayi, 2021). Our findings extend Fayole and Ajayi’s (2021) observations on digital literacy gaps, revealing that generational differences in technology comfort represent a more substantial barrier in the South African context than previously acknowledged, particularly affecting knowledge retention and application. Infrastructure issues like poor connectivity further hampered learning. This infrastructural constraint is underexplored in Western-centric TBT literature but proved critical in our emerging market context, where load-shedding and unreliable internet directly impeded learning continuity. While literature praises TBT’s accessibility (Hoq, 2020), participants perceived it as less effective than F2FT because of reduced human interaction and technical barriers (Areiqat & Al-Doori, 2018; Kim, 2022). This reveals a critical tension between TBT’s theoretical accessibility advantages and employees’ actual perceived effectiveness in real-world implementation – suggesting that technological potential does not automatically translate to learning outcomes. Thus, despite flexibility benefits, TBT’s impact on performance improvement remains constrained by these challenges.

Potential of TBT Replacing F2FT Workplace demands for continuous upskilling surpass traditional methods’ capacity (Li, 2022). The pandemic hastened digital adoption, with organisations increasingly integrating TBT for cost-effective, wide-reaching training (Żur & Friedl, 2021). Participants recognised this trend but raised concerns about TBT’s limitations – lack of interaction, immediate support, attention challenges and digital skills gaps – especially among older employees. Critically, our data challenge the either-or replacement framing prevalent in much of the literature (e.g. Clapper & Greyling, 2022), with participants rejecting binary thinking in favour of integration. Many advocated for blended learning, combining TBT’s flexibility with F2FT’s practical and social strengths (Alsalamah & Callinan, 2021; Kim, 2022). This employee-driven preference for hybrid approaches validates Alsalamah and Callinan’s (2021) and Kim’s (2022) theoretical propositions about blended learning’s superiority, but grounds these claims in actual user perspectives rather than institutional assumptions. Suggested approaches include phased training, starting with virtual modules followed by in-person sessions, optimising engagement and learning transfer (Maxwell, 2018). Given infrastructure issues in South Africa, such as unreliable internet and load-shedding, TBT cannot fully replace F2FT. This contextual reality challenges the universal applicability of TBT adoption frameworks developed in stable-infrastructure contexts, suggesting that the replacement debate must account for regional technological readiness – a dimension largely absent from existing literature. Instead, a blended model is recommended to enhance accessibility and performance while mitigating each method’s limitations (Hewett et al., 2019; Martins et al., 2019). Our findings thus extend Martins et al.’s (2019) blended learning framework by demonstrating how contextual constraints – not just pedagogical preferences – necessitate hybrid approaches in emerging markets.

Incorporating both F2FT and TBT poses challenges for T&D professionals, who must be skilled in designing and delivering training through both methods (Abudlhabib & Al-Dhaafri, 2020). This dual competency requires additional time and effort to prepare well-organised, engaging content, which often leads trainees to perceive blended training as demanding (Alvarez, 2020). To maximise effectiveness, organisations should ensure T&D professionals are proficient in both methods. A practical approach is to deliver theoretical content via self-paced e-learning (TBT) followed by practical sessions in-person (F2FT). Additionally, executives and managers play a crucial role in fostering a learning culture by encouraging employees to engage with training and highlighting its benefits. Managerial support helps motivate employees to enrol in and complete e-learning courses with discipline.

Several limitations should be acknowledged in this study. The present study employed a qualitative research method. While appropriate for exploring participants’ lived experiences and perceptions, this limits the generalisability of the findings because of its subjective nature and small sample size. Secondly, participants were drawn exclusively from one organisation within the financial services sector, restricting the applicability of findings to this specific context. Thirdly, the potential for researcher bias exists, as is inherent in qualitative research where the researcher serves as the primary instrument of data collection and analysis. Despite assurances of confidentiality and participants’ confirmation that they provided honest responses, the potential for social desirability bias remained, as participants may have felt compelled to provide responses they perceived as favourable rather than expressing genuine experiences and opinions. It is recommended that future research should consider the use of other research methods (quantitative or mixed methods). Furthermore, future research should expand sampling beyond a single organisation and industry to include participants from diverse organisations, industries and provinces across South Africa, thereby enhancing the generalisability of findings. A larger sample size exceeding 12 participants would provide broader perspectives and richer insights. Additionally, incorporating various job roles rather than focusing exclusively on financial sales advisers would strengthen the comprehensiveness of findings. To minimise potential bias, researchers should avoid sampling from their own organisations, as external researchers may elicit more candid and honest responses from participants who feel less constrained by organisational relationships.