> there's no better way we know of than to do training exercises
Are you sure about that? Is there any evidence that supports this claim?
It certainly fails the sniff test. Behavioral science does not hold setting you up for failure as an effective learning contingency. I mean try teaching your dog that way, see how far you’ll go. You will also teach your workers that phishing emails come from internal so there is no need to report it.
When I was working as a life guard we never went into training situations unknowingly. There is a reason for that, a) it is dangerous as workers might act irrationally creating a dangerous situation, b) it is stress invoking and not healthy for anyone, especially those that have underlying stress issues or conditions, and c) there is no evidence that live training is any more effective or teaches you anything more than traditional training does.
Are you sure about that? Is there any evidence that supports this claim?
It certainly fails the sniff test. Behavioral science does not hold setting you up for failure as an effective learning contingency. I mean try teaching your dog that way, see how far you’ll go. You will also teach your workers that phishing emails come from internal so there is no need to report it.
When I was working as a life guard we never went into training situations unknowingly. There is a reason for that, a) it is dangerous as workers might act irrationally creating a dangerous situation, b) it is stress invoking and not healthy for anyone, especially those that have underlying stress issues or conditions, and c) there is no evidence that live training is any more effective or teaches you anything more than traditional training does.