This review paper examines the effect of matching and mismatching learning style and learning activity and matching and mismatching trainer and trainee learning style on learning achievement. It also explores the possibility of creating a match by promoting learner adaptability or modifying the trainer's training style. The implications of this discussion for training and development are considered.In a recent paper Hayes and Allinson (1994) considered the relevance of cognitive style for management practice. Cognitive style refers to individual differences in information processing. It is concerned with the form rather than the content of activity and relates to how people think, solve problems, learn and relate to others. Hayes and Allinson argue that cognitive style may be used to inform and improve the quality of decision making in relation to selection and placement, career planning, task and equipment design, team composition, conflict management and management style. This paper considers some implications that cognitive style might have for training and development. Claxton and Ralston (1978) refer to learning style as a consistent way of responding to, and using, stimuli in the context of learning and DeBello (1990) defines it as the way that people absorb or retain information. Both definitions present learning style as a subset of cognitive style.irn has received considerable attention in the management literature. Kolb's theory of experiential learning (Kolb, 1976(Kolb, , 1984 has been widely used as a basis for helping individuals identify the kinds of learning activity which they will find most satisfying and will improve their learning achievement. It has The ways in which managers also been used as a basis for helping individuals identify weaknesses in their learning style and suggesting development activities that will make them more effective learners. Kolb's theory focuses on the polar extremes of the concreteabstract and active-reflective dimensions of cognitive growth and presents a four-stage cycle of learning. Concrete experience leads to reflective observation. These observations are then assimilated into a 'theory' through abstract conceptualization from which new implications for action can be deduced. These implications, or 'hypotheses', serve as guides for action which are tested through active experimentation which, in turn, produces new concrete experiences. Kolb argues that, ideally, effective learners will be able to involve themselves fully, openly and without bias in new experiences (concrete experiences), reflect on and observe these experiences from many perspectives (reflective observations), create concepts that integrate their observations into logically sound theories (abstract conceptualization) and be able to use these theories to make decisions and solve problems (active experimentation). While the most effective learners will be equally proficient at all these stages in the learning cycle, in practice learners are rarely like this. By mapping the individual's location on...