The chicken or the egg? Protocols, data & experience
Share
The chicken or the egg: How protocols, data, and experience shape dog training
Over my decades of experience as a dog trainer—working with special police operations, creating innovative training techniques, and deploying dogs in high-stakes missions—I’ve often wrestled with a question that many trainers face:
Do we need protocols to train dogs effectively, or do we need data to create those protocols? And even then, is a protocol alone enough to produce reliable results?
This is a version of the classic chicken-or-egg dilemma: which comes first? In dog training, it’s not as simple as picking one. The reality is that protocols and data are deeply interconnected, and success depends on understanding how they work together.
A lesson from passive alert dogs
Years ago, when I was working in covert special police operations, I faced a challenge that was considered unconventional at the time. Most narcotics dogs were trained for active alerts—pawing, scratching, barking. These behaviors were the gold standard among professionals. But in covert operations, those same behaviors were liabilities. Noise or physical disturbances could jeopardize an entire mission. I became determined to train passive alert dogs—dogs that could indicate the presence of narcotics silently, without making a sound or leaving a trace. At the time, this was uncharted territory. I remember finding a trainer who had a remarkable passive alert narcotics dog. When I asked how they had achieved this, the answer surprised me: “I don’t really know. One day the dog started alerting this way, and I liked it. So, I reinforced it.” That moment was pivotal. It highlighted both the power of reinforcement and the necessity of having a systematic way to reproduce desired behaviors. The trainer had stumbled upon a solution, but there was no protocol, no way to guarantee the same results with another dog. As the words of my mentors, Bob and Marian Bailey, echoed in my mind—“You get what you reinforce”—I realized the answer to the chicken-or-egg dilemma. To produce reliable results, you need both: a protocol to guide the process and data to refine and validate that protocol.
Protocols are essential, but they’re not enough
Protocols are the backbone of training. They allow us to break complex behaviors into manageable steps and create consistency across different dogs and trainers. Over the years, I’ve written protocols for everything from training camera dogs to deploying robots alongside dogs in the field. These documents have been shared worldwide and have saved lives in military and police operations. But here’s the catch: a protocol is only as good as the experience and understanding behind it.
A pilot’s training is a perfect example of this. Imagine you’re on a commercial flight, and the pilot announces that this is their first time flying outside a simulator. They’ve memorized the manual, followed every protocol, and practiced countless scenarios in a controlled environment—but they’ve never flown a real plane. Would you feel safe? Protocols are invaluable, but they cannot replace the intuition and problem-solving that come from real-world experience. A pilot who has flown through storms, managed emergencies, and learned to “feel” the plane in unpredictable conditions is far more reliable than one who has only trained in a simulator.
The role of data: building and refining protocols
Data is the glue that holds protocols together. It’s what allows us to measure progress, identify patterns, and make informed adjustments. In my own work, I collect data meticulously—tracking everything from the number of repetitions it takes to achieve a behavior to the type and timing of reinforcement.
For example, when training dogs to work with lasers or to pick up and place sensors, I’ve used data to determine the most efficient methods. How many repetitions does it take to establish the behavior? How does reinforcement type (toys, food, play) impact success? Over time, this data shapes the protocols I use and share with others. But data is more than numbers; it’s also about observation and intuition. It’s noticing the small details—how a dog’s posture changes when they’re uncertain, how their energy shifts when they’re fully engaged. These nuances aren’t always captured in a spreadsheet, but they’re critical to success.
Why experience matters
A story that Bob Bailey once shared with me illustrates this perfectly. He asked: “Simon, imagine you need a risky heart surgery. The hospital gives you two options. The first surgeon is a world-renowned expert who lectures on this procedure, knows all the latest research, but has never performed the surgery. The second is a quiet specialist who has spent years in the operating room, performing hundreds of these surgeries. Which one would you choose?”
The answer is obvious. Knowledge is essential, but experience is irreplaceable. It’s the same in dog training. A protocol written by someone who has never deployed a dog in the field is like a surgery guide written by someone who has never operated. The theory may be sound, but the real world is unpredictable, and only experience can prepare you for that.
The danger of “cookie-cutter” protocols
One of my frustrations is the rise of trainers selling generic protocols—documents copied and pasted with no real-world testing or adaptation. These protocols often lack the depth and flexibility needed for success. A good protocol is not rigid. It’s a framework that can be adjusted to suit the individual dog and the situation. Blindly following a protocol without understanding the underlying principles is like trying to navigate a storm with a map but no compass.
Training Is a creative, dynamic process
Dog training is not a linear process. It’s not as simple as following steps A, B, and C to achieve result D. Every dog is unique, with its own personality, learning style, and challenges. Some dogs thrive on repetition; others need variety. Some are highly motivated by toys, while others respond better to food or praise.The same is true in education. Think about how children learn math or a foreign language. Some excel with visual aids, others through hands-on activities. The curriculum provides structure, but effective teaching requires adaptation and creativity. The same principle applies to dog training.
My journey with data
In my own training, I’ve learned that data doesn’t have to be complicated. A simple system—tracking repetitions, reinforcement types, and time to mastery—is enough to provide valuable insights. For example, when I started imprinting dogs directly on target odors, I kept detailed records of each session. This allowed me to identify patterns and refine my methods, ultimately speeding up the process for future dogs. Collecting data isn’t just about improving results; it’s about accountability. It ensures that you’re not just relying on intuition but making decisions based on objective evidence.
Final thoughts
The chicken-or-egg dilemma in dog training—protocols or data—has a simple answer: you need both. Protocols provide the structure, and data provides the feedback to refine that structure. But neither is a substitute for experience, creativity, and a deep understanding of the fundamentals. As I undergo treatment for aggressive cancer, I’m reminded of the parallels between medicine and dog training. Twenty-five years ago, my diagnosis would have been a death sentence. Today, my survival rate is 75%, thanks to decades of data-driven research and the expertise of medical professionals. For dog trainers, the lesson is clear: don’t rely on pre-written protocols from those who lack real-world experience. Instead, learn to write your own protocols, collect your own data, and adapt your methods to the unique needs of your dogs and handlers. And above all, remember to enjoy the process. Training dogs is a privilege, a blend of art and science that allows us to unlock the incredible potential of our canine partners.