Employees and HR are describing two completely different workplaces. Here's what McKinsey’s data says.

There are clear gaps between what HR believes it is delivering and what employees believe experience – specifically on training, performance management, and retention factors.

Those are the headline findings of McKinsey’s HR Monitor 2026 report, which surveyed 1,300 HR professionals and 5,500 employees across Europe, the US and China.

These perception gaps are not intentional, but they are demonstrative of a quieter crisis taking place.

As HR leaders and teams drive workforce transformation for an AI era, the risk of misunderstanding what is actually occurring in the workforce could prove their undoing.

HR leaders cannot be expected to mold the workforce into a future-ready unit if it is unaware of what impacts employees.

UNLEASH examines the three most telling gaps in McKinsey’s data and what HR leaders need to do about each one.

1. The training participation gap

The conflict: McKinsey’s report shows HR teams are overestimating the amount of time workers spend on training. Employees report an average of 3.4 training days per year, while HR professionals estimate nearly twice as much at 6.2 days. 

This equates to just 2.5% of a working year being spent on learning, even by HR’s estimates.

Furthermore, 24% of employees report not participating in any training over the past year, rising to 35% among workers in the Netherlands and Germany.

The findings illustrate a disconnect between policy and practice in Learning & Development. While CLOs are aiming to align learning with organizational and strategic goals, McKinsey’s findings should this is not a priority at ground level.

The action: HR leaders need transparent and honest data on exactly what training is being completed by workers via deep audits. The most crucial information to build on is the gap between what is on offer and what is taken up.

Simply measuring how many training days are completed provides only a surface metric. Instead, HR teams should be tracking role-specific skills expectations and progress, creating a dynamic data story that can be used to reframe the conversation with the Board and C-Suite into what capabilities live within the workforce.

2. The performance feedback gap

The conflict: HR stated that just 3% of employees didn’t receive performance management evaluation in the past year. By comparison, employees state that one in five (20%) did not have a career development meeting or feedback session in the same period – a 17-percentage point difference.

Meanwhile, more than half of employees (58%) said they only receive formal performance management feedback once or twice a year.

McKinsey also uncovered that just 15% of organizations adopt a “structured peer-to-peer feedback” model, with most feedback provided by line managers (68%) and senior managers (50%).

The data shows that performance and evaluation is not being audited at the ground level, despite being adhered to at policy level.

If performance is being evaluated as an annual exercise it has become a compliance practice, rather than a development tool.

The action: McKinsey’s report notes that performance management is “receiving renewed attention” from HR leaders, but like the training gap, they need to conduct audits directly with workers to where meaningful development conversations are being missed. Find the gap between what the policy says and what managers actually do.

Like learning, feedback and performance evaluation should be modelled as a continuous practice linked to development.

Alongside revising the architecture of performance feedback to include peers, managers also need to be developed as coaches and mentors, rather than just appraisers.

3. The retention driver gap

The conflict: The report found employees are placing an increasing premium on compensation as the primary factor of retention. Remuneration and additional benefits was the top factor for 52% of employees, up from 24% the previous year. It was also the top retention driver across all generations in the workforce.

McKinsey states retention is being “shaped more by economic caution and constrained external options rather than by rising engagement.” Workers know their purchasing power is weakening, but limited opportunities are driving lower attrition rates.

Simultaneously, HR respondents are overestimating the impact of training as a reason for workers to both join and stay at organizations. HR ranked training as fifth among factors for both attracting talent (29%) and retaining employees (27%), compared with tenth for attraction (15%) and seventh for retention (19%) among employees.

The action: The introduction of the EU Pay Transparency Directive will increase pressure on HR to enact clear and transparent pay decisions, both from a compliance and employee understanding perspective. Meanwhile, the retention discussion internally needs to be measured against what actually drives it among employees – the data is clear that more training won’t make any difference if employees feel underpaid.

There is also an opportunity to reimagine total rewards structure, not just as a driver of retention. Investment in benefits may be increasing, but that impact often isn’t being seen at the employee level.