Banking — United Arab Emirates — 2021
A retail bank's national talent programme
Four cohorts in ten days, thirty-three people. Assessment scores went from 58% to 95%, and nineteen of the thirty-one tested had started below 60%.
The client is not named here, and we have not asked them to be. Appearing on a supplier’s marketing page is a favour to ask of a client and we do not ask it — the same discretion would apply to you. Everything else on this page — the dates, the group, the figures and how they were produced — is from the delivery record.
- Simulation
- Shift
- Participants
- 33
- Sector
- Banking
Where they were
The bank runs a national talent programme for employees drawn from branches and head office across several emirates. Rather than one large session, Shift was delivered four times in ten days to cohorts of five to thirteen, so every participant sat at a table small enough to be seen.
What they needed to shift
The programme's stated outcomes were a proactive mindset — challenging the status quo instead of waiting for direction — a sense of urgency against comfort, fear and habit, and a shift in how change itself is regarded: something you can act on rather than something that happens to you.
How the session ran
- 01
Four cohorts over ten days in December, of thirteen, nine, six and five participants. The same facilitator ran all four.
- 02
Each cohort sat a written assessment before the game and the same assessment after the debrief.
- 03
Participants rated the session and the facilitator separately, on a form covering course design, the mix of explanation and practice, and whether they would recommend it.
- 04
Because the cohorts ran close together, the facilitator carried what the first group struggled with into the second, which is the main argument for splitting a population rather than running it once.
What changed
58% → 95%
Average assessment score across the thirty-one people who sat both tests. A gain of 38 percentage points.
29 of 31
improved their score. The two who did not had already scored full marks before the session.
19 of 31
had been below 60% at the start, and 23 of the 31 scored full marks afterwards.
99 / 100
Session and facilitator ratings from the first cohort's evaluation forms, out of 100. Recommendation averaged 9.6 out of 10.
Where these numbers come from
Figures come from the programme's own pre- and post-session assessments and participant evaluation forms. Averages use only the people who sat both tests. Two participants missed the pre-test and are excluded from the averages but counted in the thirty-three who attended. This is reaction and learning only.
How we think a session should be measuredAre you a training provider?
License Shift and deliver it under your own brand. We generate client demand and route it to the partner who owns that market.