I think part of the problem is that in many cases the people authorizing the training (administrators) feel like they should specify what the training must be/include. Often, they aren't actually qualified to do this, so the specifications they create actually hamper the training. It might include restrictions on training methods, specific techniques/approaches that can't be taught (they had an almost-injury once, so "X" can't be taught), and requirements that specific approaches be taught. The latter isn't necessarily a hindrance, unless you bring in a trainer who's not versed in that specific method. So, if it required that a BJJ-style ground arm bar is taught, that wouldn't be an issue if the trainer knows that technique well enough to cover when to use it, how to use it, and can teach it efficiently. But if I was the trainer, that'd be a problem, because my experience with that technique is rather thin (more about defending against it).I would be interested in knowing your experience.
But also maybe we could all discuss in a non specific way that would not be pointed at any particular group how industry training fails.
For myself I have taught prison guards out side of the correctional system. They would come back from some of their state required training and talk about how useless it was. So why is that? I believe in part it is because state or company training is only provided for liability reasons to protect the institution and have no real interest in the application and effectiveness of what is being taught. Second; the program selection is often more about political connections then content and those in charge of the selection process have no more experience on the subject that what can be found on Google and netflix. But because they are "in charge" they have the self conflated image of being right.