Data center organizations are hesitant to train staff when so many are being poached by competitors. This is compounded by the retirement of many skilled experts, reducing the level of resources available to train new staff. One solution is to adopt new technology that can train staff both quickly and efficiently.

Extended reality (XR) is the collective term for augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies. XR can use computer-generated imagery to create realistic, interactive training scenarios, speeding up the training process compared with traditional on-site in-person walk-throughs. Although XR training offers potential, many stakeholders are hesitant to adopt it due to high costs and security risks. These technologies often require data centers to provide detailed information about their facility to a third party. Owners and operators need to understand the capabilities and limitations of XR training technology to be able to determine whether it is worth the investment.

Rapid upskilling is essential to address the challenges of high staff turnover among new employees. Respondents to the Uptime Institute Data Center Staffing and Recruitment Survey 2024 report that 43% of employees who left the organization in the past 12 months did so within their first two years (Figure 1). XR technology means that training is more accessible to more workers through guided practice drills, without exhausting the limited supply of expert trainers. This ensures new employees can be trained quickly and effectively, without waiting for in-person trainer availability.

Figure 1. Operators most likely to lose staff between one and two years of employment

Augmented reality versus virtual reality

It is difficult to train staff without disrupting daily data center operations. Both AR and VR allow workers to experience different maintenance or repair scenarios and memorize the corresponding steps, and to see labeled images of the different internal components at optimal angles, without opening the panel.

AR and VR offer different levels of immersion:

• AR training. AR offers visual guides, prompts, and labels that are projected over real-world equipment. A data center employee wears a pair of smart goggles and scans a QR code on a piece of equipment to pull up corresponding equipment data. An AR training module then displays visual prompts to instruct and quiz the employee on the necessary steps to take in an abnormal event. AR users who are able to interact with their facility in an AR module as they would in a real emergency — with the addition of graphic cues on the equipment they service — will be better suited to handle a real-time event. This moderate level of virtual immersion may, however, reduce disparities between the training environment and a real-time event at the facility.
• VR training. VR training immerses the trainee in a digital recreation of a work setting. A VR training module operates similarly to AR, but renders everything in 3D, including a virtual version of the equipment. In some cases, a remote instructor can access the same digital environment to offer further insight during the learning process.

Key findings to date

Many critical industries where staff maintain, monitor and repair equipment have found varying levels of success with XR training, dependent on the level of immersion. Researchers from the University of Central Florida analyzed 25 different studies and found that participants who train for maintenance tasks using XR technology learn faster than those who learn through video or written instruction. Researchers at the University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria found that individuals trained in VR rely too heavily on visual cues provided by the virtual environment. This resulted in the trainees committing more errors and exhibiting a slower performance during a construction task, compared with those who received in-person training.

In another study, Air Force Engineering University researchers in China presented 60 maintenance trainees with equipment fault detection and repair tasks of varying complexity (similar to those required in data centers) in both AR and VR. AR training was found to be more effective than VR for complex tasks: effectiveness increased by up to 10% as maintenance task complexity increased.

Other research from the Braude Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Karmiel (Israel) shows that AR training results in less unsolved errors than VR training in actuator maintenance tasks.

Fidelity, haptic capability and latency have been found to have varying effects on skill transfer to a real-time setting and may explain these differences.

• Fidelity. This is the degree to which the VR training environment replicates the facility on a sensory level. A recent review by Ontario Tech University in Canada and the Royal Canadian Airforce explored the relationship between fidelity and skill transfer in maritime, medical and aviation training, which require skill sets that often overlap with data center operations. They found that VR fidelity levels impact skill transfer differently depending on trainee expertise. New learner performance levels using VR typically remained the same across the research group despite varying fidelity levels and, in some cases, the added complexity decreased novice skill transfer. For expert learners, performance typically improved along with fidelity.
• Haptic technology. Haptic feedback, a tactile sensation produced to simulate physical contact with the VR environment, increases user performance by integrating psychomotor skills into the learning process. Researchers from Vanderbilt University (Tennessee, US) and North Caroline State University (US) found that haptic feedback has the potential to improve learning, but improper implementation can impact user performance negatively.
• Latency. High fidelity digital environments may result in increased latency (a delay between the environment and the haptic feedback). Training effectiveness decreases as the lag between digital environment and haptic feedback increases.

While XR training outperforms video or written instructions, in-person training produces the same level of learning without the need to control as many variables.

The benefits and challenges of XR

AR and VR training offers staff the capability to practice emergency scenarios without disrupting or damaging data center operations. This could include a sudden power outage where employees have to manually activate backup generators and transfer the load. AR and VR would direct and guide an employee to perform these tasks in a virtual environment without wasting generator power and risking power surges that could lead to downtime. Additionally, in-person training with a skilled instructor, although beneficial, is not always feasible. Certain high-risk scenarios may not be prioritized during training because the instructor’s time is limited.

There are downsides to adopting XR, such as building interpersonal relationships. Staff retention is heavily dependent on forming personal relationships with supervisors (and colleagues). Only meeting one’s supervisor in a remote training setting can feel impersonal and reflect poorly on the company. Researchers at the Harvard Business Review found that employees who lack positive connections with their direct supervisors are more prone to “quiet quitting” (slowly disengaging from work without communicating their intention to leave).

Although remote XR training can deliver similar results to in-person training, it often lacks opportunities for trainees to engage directly with supervisors and industry experts. Data center equipment procedure development usually involves in-person training. Including new staff in this process is not only an opportunity for training — it offers trainees a sense of inclusion and ownership in current processes and procedures.

Conclusions

XR is a viable option to supplement training but cannot fully replace on-site training. Managers can mitigate the risks associated with XR by offering a mix of XR and on-site training. There is a range of options for managers who wish to upskill their employees without risking facility downtime:

• Opt for AR technology over VR. Although VR is often more expensive, research favors AR training for industrial maintenance tasks.
• Consider skill levels before purchasing expensive high-fidelity VR equipment. New employees do not see performance improvements from using high-fidelity equipment or being situated in a low-fidelity environment.
• Incorporate haptic technology. Physical feedback improves learning beyond visual memorization of where to perform maintenance tasks.
• Set aside time for in-person training along with any XR training. XR training may feel impersonal and allows fewer opportunities to build interpersonal relationships.
• Choose systems that enable staff to practice new skills with minimal visual cues. This reduces reliance on the XR system and encourages more profound learning.

As XR technology evolves, a wider range of training applications will become available, but it is important to consider the social impact of these indirect training methods. Ideally, managers can balance technology with mentorship to optimize the benefits of each method.