Can a Teams attendance report tell you whether training worked?
Someone can stay in a training call until the end and still need help with the first customer case afterward. I'd keep those two facts separate in a training report. Microsoft's existing Teams guide describes join and leave times, plus engagement information such as reactions, raised hands and cameras turned on. It also says a participant's time on hold is still included in the attendance report. Those records are useful for checking attendance; they don't demonstrate that someone learned the procedure. If you ask an AI assistant to summarize the export, don't let ‘attended’ become ‘understood’ or ‘ready to work independently’. For a session teaching a new returns process, I'd add one realistic practice return afterward, with help available. Note which step still needs explaining, then fix that part of the instructions before the next session. I wouldn't rank people by camera use or reactions. A quiet participant may understand perfectly well, and a busy chat doesn't settle it either. This is a proposed training check based on what Microsoft's documentation says the report contains, not a test of Teams or a finding about a particular course. What would you want someone to be able to do before marking that training complete?
Comments
Before an AI summary marks someone absent, I'd check which export it read. Microsoft's limitations section says the report downloaded during a meeting with more than 120 participants includes only some attendees; the post-meeting report contains all attendees. It also says view-only attendees aren't currently included. A missing row therefore needs investigating before it becomes a missed-training notice. I'd have the person reviewing the summary resolve that gap, rather than make an employee defend an absence the file never established.