From the perspective of enterprises, under the influence of historical and policy factors, some enterprises pay insufficient attention to training and invest less. Although some enterprises have taken a series of measures to improve training, these measures are a mere formality and fail to effectively improve the quality and ability of employees.

From the employee's point of view, the concept of "iron rice bowl" gradually wears away the enterprising spirit and enthusiasm of employees for self-improvement, while the traditional training mode makes employees lose their freshness and enthusiasm. Under the above-mentioned dual influences, the training work exists in name only, which consumes a lot of manpower, financial resources and material resources but has little effect.

Second, the management level-the relevant mechanism is not perfect.

Training management is a systematic work, including training project establishment, implementation, effect evaluation, external resource development evaluation, internal lecturer management and many other modules. Any problem will make the training effect discounted. In practical work, some enterprises lack a systematic training management system and only train for training.

Third, the level of measures-monotonous form and rigid content.

On the one hand, some enterprises lack optimization and innovation in training forms, and still adopt traditional training methods, such as passive indoctrination in theory by attending activities or lectures, and lack of sufficient practical exercise, so that employees can't really master what they have learned in training and can't reach the training objectives;

On the other hand, the training content is rigid and repetitive, which makes employees lose their interest and enthusiasm for learning. In the long run, it will greatly reduce the core competitiveness of enterprises, increase the operating burden of enterprises, and have a negative impact on the sustained and healthy development of enterprises.