Virtual vs In-Person AI Training: Which Format Gets Better Results?

Most companies agonize over which AI tools to train on. Fewer spend time thinking about how that training gets delivered. That is a mistake. The format you choose — virtual, in-person, or hybrid — has as much impact on outcomes as the curriculum itself. A brilliant training program delivered in the wrong format will underperform a decent program delivered in the right one.

After running AI training programs for corporate teams across different industries, I have seen all three formats succeed and all three fail. The difference comes down to matching the format to the situation.

Why the Format Question Matters

AI training is not a lecture. It is hands-on, iterative work where people need to experiment with tools, see results in real time, and ask questions as they come up. That makes the delivery format more consequential than it would be for, say, a compliance training or a policy overview.

When the format is wrong, you see it immediately. In-person sessions where half the team flew in from remote offices and is mentally checked out. Virtual sessions where people are clearly multitasking through the exercises. Hybrid setups where the remote participants feel like second-class citizens watching a room full of people they cannot interact with.

Getting this right up front saves you from wasted training budgets and teams that walk away with surface-level knowledge instead of real capability.

The Case for In-Person Training

In-person training has advantages that are hard to replicate digitally, especially for AI topics where people are learning something genuinely new.

Reading the room is everything. When I am standing in front of a group and I see three people squinting at their screens, I know to slow down. When someone leans over to a colleague and whispers a question, I can address it for the whole group. That real-time feedback loop is faster and richer than anything a virtual platform offers.

Hands-on collaboration happens naturally. Pair exercises where two people prompt-engineer together, troubleshoot an output, or build a workflow side by side — these work better when people are physically next to each other. The friction of sharing screens and passing control in a virtual meeting disappears.

It builds team momentum. There is something about a group of people spending a full day together learning a new skill that creates shared language and motivation. Teams that train in person tend to adopt tools faster afterward because they have a group of colleagues who went through the same experience and can support each other.

It works best when: The team is co-located or mostly in one city, you are doing a full-day or multi-day intensive, the topic is complex enough to warrant deep collaboration, or this is the team's first exposure to AI tools and you need to overcome skepticism.

The Case for Virtual Training

Virtual training gets a bad reputation because most people have sat through terrible webinars. But done well, it has real structural advantages.

No travel means faster scheduling. An in-person training for a 20-person team might take six weeks to coordinate calendars, book a room, and arrange travel. A virtual session can happen in two weeks. For companies where speed matters — and with AI moving as fast as it is, speed always matters — that gap is significant.

Shorter sessions fit real work schedules. Instead of pulling people out for a full day, you can run 90-minute sessions over several weeks. People learn something, go apply it to their actual work, and come back with real questions. That spaced repetition is better for retention than a single marathon session.

Recordings create lasting resources. Every virtual session can be recorded, timestamped, and turned into a reference library. Six months later, when someone needs to remember how to set up a specific workflow, they have the exact walkthrough available. In-person training lives only in notebooks and memory.

Geographic reach is obvious but worth stating. If your team is distributed across three states or five countries, virtual is not a compromise — it is the only realistic option that gives everyone equal access.

It works best when: Teams are distributed, you want to spread training over multiple weeks, the content is more procedural than creative, or you need to train a large number of people cost-effectively.

The Hybrid Approach: Best of Both

The format I recommend most often is hybrid, but not the way most people think of it. I do not mean some people in a room and some on Zoom at the same time — that usually creates a mediocre experience for everyone.

Instead, hybrid means sequencing formats intentionally. A typical structure looks like this:

Kickoff in person (half day or full day). Get everyone together for the foundational concepts, the first hands-on exercises, and the team alignment on goals. This builds the relationships and shared context that make everything else work.

Follow-up virtual sessions (60-90 minutes each, over 3-4 weeks). Cover specific tools, workflows, and use cases in focused sessions. People apply what they learn between sessions and bring back real examples.

Async practice between sessions. Exercises, prompt libraries, and a shared channel where people post their experiments and ask questions. This is where most of the actual learning happens.

This sequenced approach gets you the engagement benefits of in-person training and the flexibility and reinforcement benefits of virtual. It also tends to produce better long-term adoption because the learning is spread out and tied to real work.

How to Choose: A Practical Framework

The decision usually comes down to four factors.

Team size. Under 12 people, in-person is easy to manage and high-impact. Over 30, virtual is more practical. In between, hybrid gives you the most flexibility.

Geography. If more than 25% of participants would need to travel, lean virtual or hybrid with the in-person component at a central location.

Budget. In-person training costs more when you factor in travel, venue, and a full day of lost productivity. Virtual sessions are leaner. Grant-funded training can offset these costs significantly — more on that below.

Topic complexity. Introductory AI literacy works fine virtually. Advanced prompt engineering, workflow building, or tool integration benefits from the collaborative depth of in-person work. Try a free module to gauge where your team's starting point is before committing to a format.

Making Virtual Training Actually Work

If you go virtual, the execution details matter more than the format choice itself. Here is what separates effective virtual AI training from another forgettable Zoom call.

Keep sessions to 90 minutes maximum. Anything longer and engagement drops off a cliff. If you have more material, split it into multiple sessions.

Use breakout rooms aggressively. Every 20-25 minutes, put people in pairs or small groups to work through an exercise together. This prevents the passive watching that kills virtual training.

Require cameras on. This is non-negotiable for training sessions. If people are not willing to be present, they are not going to learn.

Build in async practice. Assign specific exercises between sessions that people do with their real work. A prompt engineering exercise using their actual documents is ten times more valuable than a generic practice problem.

Have a dedicated chat channel. Slack, Teams, whatever the company uses. Create a space where people can post what they are trying, share results, and ask questions between sessions.

Grant Implications

One factor that surprises many Michigan companies: the state's Going PRO Talent Fund covers virtual training delivery, not just in-person. This means you can get grant-funded training reimbursement for virtual and hybrid programs. The key requirements are documented attendance, measurable outcomes, and a structured curriculum — all of which apply regardless of format.

This opens up options for companies that assumed grant funding required flying a trainer in. You can run a full hybrid program — in-person kickoff plus virtual follow-ups — and the entire thing qualifies.

Figure Out the Right Format for Your Team

The best format depends on your team's specific situation: where they are located, what they already know, how much time they can dedicate, and what you are trying to accomplish. There is no universal answer.

If you are considering AI training for your team and want to talk through the format question, book a free consultation. We will look at your team structure, goals, and timeline and figure out which approach — virtual, in-person, or hybrid — will actually get results.

Check out the full list of training programs to see what topics we cover, or start with a free module to see the training style firsthand.