The Newest Person In The Room Taught Us How To Use It
What
reverse mentoring taught me about VAK learning styles and whether the model
actually holds up
By Rasiah Keerthana | MBA Batch
37 | Jul 2026
“New idea, no seniority
required.” Source: [Pavel
Danilyuk] Pexels (2021).
In
our general meetings, everyone, new hire or ten-year veteran, is expected to
bring an idea. That's how one of our newest, youngest staff members ended up
teaching the rest of us a platform none of us had used before.
She
proposed it, management agreed to try it, and instead of a memo or a manual, we
ran a couple of hands-on sessions where people actually logged in and used it
themselves. It went well. Nobody was told how the platform worked; they were
made to try it.
Marcinkus Murphy (2012)
calls this reverse mentoring: a junior employee acting as mentor to share
updated expertise with senior colleagues, inverting the usual direction of
teaching while also building the junior mentor's own leadership skills. What
made ours work, though, may not have been the reverse-mentoring structure alone;
it was how the teaching happened.
Barbe's (1979) VAK model
would frame our shift from written instructions to hands-on sessions as
switching from a visual or auditory approach to a kinesthetic one. But Pashler,
McDaniel, Rohrer, and Bjork's (2008) influential review found no
credible evidence that matching instruction to someone's stated learning style
actually improves outcomes; the “meshing hypothesis” behind VAK has never been
properly demonstrated. If that is true, our sessions probably did not succeed
because we correctly identified who was “kinesthetic.” They likely succeeded
because hands-on, active practice tends to beat passive instruction for almost
everyone, regardless of the label we put on their preference.
That
distinction matters for what we do next. If we assume VAK and simply sort
people into visual, auditory, or kinesthetic groups for future training, we may
be designing around a preference that feels intuitive but was never actually
shown to predict better learning. Chaudhuri and Ghosh (2012) make
a related point about reverse mentoring itself: it works best as a genuine
two-way exchange, not a gimmick; the value came from senior staff actually
engaging, not from the format alone.
“The teacher was the newest
person in the room.” Source:
[Yan Krukau], Pexels (2021).
None of that takes away from what the moment meant here. New ideas are genuinely welcomed at every level in this office, regardless of who is bringing them, and that culture is what let a junior voice change how senior staff learned something new.
So here's my question to you: when your team adopts something new, are you designing for how people are told they learn or for what actually gets them to try it?
Watch: The Power of Reverse Mentoring, Rachael O'Connor, TEDxUniversityofLeeds
References
Barbe, W.B., Swassing, R.H. and
Milone, M.N. (1979) Teaching Through Modality Strengths: Concepts and
Practices. Columbus, OH: Zaner-Bloser.
Chaudhuri, S. and Ghosh, R. (2012)
'Reverse mentoring: a social exchange tool for keeping the boomers engaged and
millennials committed', Human Resource Development Review, 11(1), pp.
55–76.
Chronus (2023) Reverse Mentoring:
What It Is, Why It Matters, and How to Do It Right. [Video]. YouTube.
Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zxIHryN7_Y (Accessed: 24 July 2026).
Gordon, P. (2024) Reverse
mentorship: when leaders listen to their employees. [Video]. TEDxShoreditch
Women, YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44-MDhdbn1E
(Accessed: 26 July 2026).
Marcinkus Murphy, W. (2012) 'Reverse
mentoring at work: fostering cross-generational learning and developing
millennial leaders', Human Resource Management, 51(4), pp. 549–573.
O'Connor, R. (2019) The Power of
Reverse Mentoring. [Video]. TEDxUniversityofLeeds, YouTube. Available at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVRcnwbo3kg (Accessed: 26 July 2026).
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D.
and Bjork, R. (2008) 'Learning styles: concepts and evidence', Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), pp. 105–119.
An engaging read with an important message about learning and innovation. I agree that reverse mentoring can be a powerful way to share knowledge and empower junior employees. At the same time, I think the success comes less from learning styles and more from creating opportunities for active participation and an open culture where everyone's ideas are valued.
ReplyDeleteThank you, I like that shift from "learning styles" to culture, and I agree participation matters more than any specific format. My one pushback is that opportunity and open culture don't just appear on their own; someone senior still has to show, in practice, that a junior voice carries real weight, or people stay quiet even when the door is technically open. So maybe it's less about learning styles versus culture, and more about who actively models that the newest person's input counts.
DeleteI'd say this was an interesting read. I liked how you connected your own workplace experience with the concept of reverse mentoring instead of only explaining the theory. Your discussion of the VAK model was also balanced—you acknowledged its popularity while supporting your argument with research that questions its effectiveness. That critical perspective makes the blog stronger. One small suggestion would be to include a brief example of how organizations can intentionally implement reverse mentoring beyond technology adoption, as it would make the practical application even clearer. Overall, it's a well-researched and thought-provoking reflection.
ReplyDeleteThank you, I'm glad the VAK critique came across as balanced rather than dismissive, since that was a hard line to walk. Your point about tech adoption being the easy example is fair; it's the one people notice first because the skill gap is so visible. Beyond tools, reverse mentoring can work just as well around things like customer perspective, new market trends, or even just questioning "how we've always done it" anywhere the newest person hasn't yet learned to stop noticing what's odd. I will keep that in mind as a follow-up point.
DeleteInspiring reminder that fresh perspectives spark innovation. Every new employee brings valuable ideas deserving attention, respect, and encouragement from leaders.
ReplyDeleteThank you. I agree new employees bring real value, but I did add one caution: respect and attention don't happen just because we agree they should. Without leaders actively asking for input and acting on it sometimes, good ideas from newer employees can quietly go unheard. So the encouragement you mention needs to show up as a habit, not just a value we say we hold.
DeleteI agree that reverse mentoring is an effective way to encourage knowledge sharing and it strengthens collaboration between different generations of employees.
ReplyDeleteThank you; collaboration across generations is definitely part of it, though I did frame it slightly differently: the real gap reverse mentoring closes is often about role and exposure, not age itself. A newer employee of any age can hold knowledge a longer-serving colleague doesn't. So it's less about generations working together and more about making sure knowledge isn't assumed to only flow one direction, based on tenure.
DeleteI really enjoyed how you highlighted that valuable learning can come from every level of an organization, regardless of experience or seniority. Your discussion reinforces the importance of fostering a culture of curiosity, open communication, and mutual respect, where knowledge flows in all directions. This is a powerful reminder that organizations thrive when leaders remain open to new perspectives and employees feel empowered to contribute their ideas.
ReplyDeleteThank you, I like how you framed it as knowledge flowing in all directions; that's really the core idea. I only add that "leaders remaining open" needs a concrete outlet; otherwise, curiosity and respect stay as values without much practice. A simple habit, like regularly asking newer employees a direct question in meetings, does more for that culture than the intention alone.
Delete