By the time most training providers start evaluating a TMS, they’re not short on information.
They’ve watched demos, scoured comparison pages and definitely read a few AI summaries. On the surface, most systems look capable. They all schedule courses, send emails and produce certificates.
The real differences appear later. When plans change, training volume increases, or someone key is off sick.
This tick list gives you everything you need to think about when considering whether a TMS will hold up once it’s running your operation day to day.
Course delivery rarely follows the original plan. Dates move, trainers swap, delegates cancel or join late. A TMS should absorb those changes quietly, without creating extra work or damaging data.
Use this as a sense check:
☐ You can move course dates after bookings without breaking records
☐ Trainer availability updates without manual chasing
☐ Delegate communications adjust automatically
☐ Certificates remain accurate after reschedules
☐ Historical data stays intact when changes are made.
Many platforms cope at low volumes. The real test is what happens when delivery ramps up and margins tighten.
Look for signals like:
☐ Admin effort per course stays roughly the same
☐ Scheduling remains usable as course numbers grow
☐ Reporting performance doesn’t degrade
☐ Data duplication doesn’t creep in over time
☐ Workarounds don’t quietly become part of the process
A surprising number of training operations rely on one or two people holding everything together. A strong TMS reduces that dependency.
Ask yourself:
☐ Courses don’t rely on one person knowing “how it’s done”
☐ Temporary cover can manage delivery confidently
☐ Processes are clear inside the system
☐ New starters get up to speed without months of shadowing
☐ Nothing breaks if someone is off unexpectedly
Connectivity is often treated as a nice-to-have. In reality, it’s one of the biggest predictors of whether a TMS reduces admin or simply shifts it elsewhere.
A well-connected system should pass these checks:
☐ Data moves between systems automatically, not via exports
☐ There’s a single source of truth for learners, customers and courses
☐ Updates made in one place reflect elsewhere without delay
☐ Reporting doesn’t rely on manual reconciliation
☐ Copying and pasting becomes the exception, not the norm
Even good reporting tools struggle if the underlying data lives in silos. Connectivity is what turns data into something decision-makers can trust.
Things to look for:
☐ Training data connects cleanly with finance and CRM systems
☐ Reports reflect real delivery, not partial snapshots
☐ Forecasts are based on live, consistent data
☐ Leadership doesn’t need multiple dashboards to see the full picture
☐ Insight improves as volume grows, not the opposite
Confidence in your data changes behaviour. Teams stop double-checking everything and start making faster decisions.
A robust TMS should give you that confidence:
☐ Certificates tie back cleanly to attendance
☐ Audit trails show who changed what and when
☐ Historical records can’t be overwritten accidentally
☐ Evidence is easy to retrieve for audits or inspections
☐ Spreadsheet cross-checks become unnecessary
Finance teams often surface problems first. If costs, revenue and invoices don’t line up with reality, trust erodes quickly.
Use this as a check:
☐ Cost per course is visible without manual exports
☐ Revenue reflects how courses are actually sold
☐ Invoicing supports your commercial model
☐ Forecasts are based on live, connected data
☐ Finance doesn’t need its own shadow systems
Most training providers don’t deliver in a single, simple way. Public courses, private courses, blended delivery, requalifications and customer-specific rules all add complexity over time.
A TMS should flex with that reality:
☐ Public, private and blended courses are handled cleanly
☐ Customer-specific rules don’t require hacks
☐ Trainers, venues and equipment constraints are respected
☐ Requals are managed without constant oversight
☐ The system adapts as delivery evolves
Rigid systems often feel fine at first, then quietly slow everything down.
Most platforms look good in the early weeks. The real test is how they feel six or twelve months in.
Ask longer-term questions:
☐ Reporting improves as more data flows through
☐ The system adapts as processes mature
☐ Support helps you optimise, not just fix issues
☐ New features don’t force rework
☐ The platform still feels like a good fit over time
Before committing, it’s worth stepping back from the detail.
☐ You’d still choose this system in two years
☐ Admin pressure would continue to reduce, not creep back
☐ Data confidence would increase over time
☐ Switching away would feel unnecessary
☐ The system would support growth, not constrain it
You don’t need every box ticked on day one. What matters is whether the platform is built to cope with change, scale and connected working, not just today’s setup.
Want to stay up to date with what we're up to? Subscribe to our blog or follow us on Instagram!