Most of us (credential holders) got into wine for a particular reason and were self motivated to learn more. Most consumers, just want to be able to pick up "something good" to drink. In teaching about wine, if we aren't focused on the customer perspective/experience, we've missed the point. Teaching wine geeks is different than a general consumer experience.
Rebrand and rebuild are different projects, and WSET announced the easy one. I sat the Diploma and walked away, and what wore me down was the structure itself: it rewards memorizing the approved answer over building a palate you can trust. Sustainable pin badges leave that untouched. Change what gets tested and the rest follows.
I often hear criticism that WSET rewards memorisation, but this is less a flaw of WSET than of education systems in general. Institutions that genuinely cultivate critical thinking are uncommon because critical thinking questions authority, traditions, and established structures. The world of wine, with its hierarchies and orthodoxies, offers plenty of opportunities for such questioning.
The wine world's in-group language alienates ordinary consumers. Affluent consumers often have the resources to pursue WSET qualifications recreationally and are typically well-travelled, so professionals have long focused their attention on this audience. After all, these are the customers who buy the highly rated wines that critics and professionals celebrate. But as overall wine consumption declines, the industry seems to be struggling to communicate beyond this narrow circle. Perhaps this specialised language was never merely descriptive; it also functioned to maintain wine as a form of cultural distinction.
Like any message, there are different ways of communicating it. Good communicators understand the nuances of different audiences and adapt their discourse accordingly. Wine, however, is remarkably diverse for having only one dominant way of being discussed.
Of course, many wine professionals don't necessarily need to speak to the end consumer, and trade language has its place. The problem arises when that same mode of communication is used across the board.
Perhaps it's difficult for the industry to recognize that it may need professionals from outside the wine world to help revamp its approach. But as a marketing professional coming from that outside perspective, I have to say that getting the industry to embrace this idea is extremely challenging—the gatekeepers protect their gates fiercely.
When sales were doing well, there was no need to worry: ordinary consumers were drinking wine without questioning it, so there was no perceived need to communicate with them effectively. But now, words are failing.
I hold sommelier certificates, WSET certificates, and was a professor of wine, and I started a women only wine club in Rome so I could impart that knowledge in a socialable way and it works pretty well. When I wasn't sick I tried to have winery visits and tastings about once a month. I think keeping it local was the best way. But I'm not training future wine professionals, I like the WSET model but I do feel it's a very anglo approach to wine. Yes I know there is wine in England but it's not a heavy wine producing country and yet they kind of dictate how we study wine in their language. I did my sommelier certifications in Italy, in Italian and the experience was much more hands on because we had real access to every part of the process. WSET does need to decolonize it's curriculum if they want to be relevant in the future. I think the VinItaly academy has done a great job with Italian wine educations esp in China. I also studied natural wine for five years with Sandro Sangiorgi and I'd he has been instrumental in the evolution of the wine scene in Rome over the last 10 years. It's like wine reeducation. But for regular wine lovers, I think joining a tasting group is the best way.
Wrote about it somewhere but actually he was the inspiration in a roundabout way for women who wine because God do Italian men in wine talk over women!
I love this subject. Thanks for raising it. But does the body of knowledge really change? Really? It still is and must be : history, region, variety, technique. Choose to spend more time on one region or another, but the focus is the same. More importantly, this education is not for the consumer. It’s for the extraordinarily small number of people who MIGHT end up interacting with consumers. Trust the students to discern what their audience might want or need or benefit from.
What is currently missing from the curriculum? Oh don't even get me started. How about wine and food chemistry and pairing food and wine scientifically via compounds? But also - the whole format of education and exam taking formats need to be revamped, too. 1) Content needs to become interactive by default. After all, we have AI now. Why would I look at a chart or a wine report if I should be able to talk to it? 2) Fact memorization needs to go - no need to store information in one's brain. I think soon exams will be about asking the right questions (vs giving correct answers). I hope WSET evolves - I'd rather be tested on my ability to ask the right questions vs my ability to memorize how many months Barolo Riserva should spend.
The goal of any educational effort Los and must be to impart a body of knowledge. As you note, wine does not have a “knowledge problem”. Moreover, it body of knowledge can’t change much because wine can’t change. It is what it had been: the fermentation of fruit juices where the ultimate character of the product results from the fruit used, the places it was grown and the techniques used to guide its production. To learn wine is to learn the variety impacting these factors. The folks who choose any sort of wine degree—WSET or otherwise—is a tiny number. They must be schooled in the variables and body of knowledge outlined above. I think the time spent teaching these wine scholars to “communicate” or teach should be minimal. Each person willing to commit to learning the body of wine knowledge will have different ancillary talents and will apply them to wine knowledge as they see fit: teaching, writing, entrepreneurial efforts, guiding tourists, screenplays, hospitality, etc, etc, etc, etc. Attempting to address how to do all these things while also imparting wine knowledge through a program like WSET is an institutional category error. Teach the body of knowledge. Let the students decide how you use that education.
The body of knowledge is always changing. That’s another part of the problem with these certifications. They keep teaching a hierarchy of wines that is increasingly irrelevant to younger generations, with a focus on wines at the top of the hierarchy that very few people can afford anymore. Just look at how much time is spent on Bordeaux versus say the entire country of Spain.
The knowledge base has lost touch with the market and the consumer. In all realms of knowledge there is a focus on the “translational.” Of course everyone is going to have their own style of communicating that. That can be taught and should be taught.
Wine professionals entering retail or hospitality are increasingly left to make sense of the wines actually being poured and sold in leading stores and restaurants, against a framework that a growing share of the wine-drinking public has no reference for whatsoever. Neither Jason nor I are suggesting every emerging region needs its own chapter in the curriculum. But continuing to use only classic/appellated styles as the default lens for contextualizing other wines simply doesn’t work anymore. It’s not what is poured at most wine bars! This is a translation and communication problem that should absolutely be addressed in wine education.
Most of us (credential holders) got into wine for a particular reason and were self motivated to learn more. Most consumers, just want to be able to pick up "something good" to drink. In teaching about wine, if we aren't focused on the customer perspective/experience, we've missed the point. Teaching wine geeks is different than a general consumer experience.
Rebrand and rebuild are different projects, and WSET announced the easy one. I sat the Diploma and walked away, and what wore me down was the structure itself: it rewards memorizing the approved answer over building a palate you can trust. Sustainable pin badges leave that untouched. Change what gets tested and the rest follows.
I often hear criticism that WSET rewards memorisation, but this is less a flaw of WSET than of education systems in general. Institutions that genuinely cultivate critical thinking are uncommon because critical thinking questions authority, traditions, and established structures. The world of wine, with its hierarchies and orthodoxies, offers plenty of opportunities for such questioning.
The wine world's in-group language alienates ordinary consumers. Affluent consumers often have the resources to pursue WSET qualifications recreationally and are typically well-travelled, so professionals have long focused their attention on this audience. After all, these are the customers who buy the highly rated wines that critics and professionals celebrate. But as overall wine consumption declines, the industry seems to be struggling to communicate beyond this narrow circle. Perhaps this specialised language was never merely descriptive; it also functioned to maintain wine as a form of cultural distinction.
I agree with this. So do you think a new way to communicate is possible?
Like any message, there are different ways of communicating it. Good communicators understand the nuances of different audiences and adapt their discourse accordingly. Wine, however, is remarkably diverse for having only one dominant way of being discussed.
Of course, many wine professionals don't necessarily need to speak to the end consumer, and trade language has its place. The problem arises when that same mode of communication is used across the board.
Perhaps it's difficult for the industry to recognize that it may need professionals from outside the wine world to help revamp its approach. But as a marketing professional coming from that outside perspective, I have to say that getting the industry to embrace this idea is extremely challenging—the gatekeepers protect their gates fiercely.
When sales were doing well, there was no need to worry: ordinary consumers were drinking wine without questioning it, so there was no perceived need to communicate with them effectively. But now, words are failing.
I hold sommelier certificates, WSET certificates, and was a professor of wine, and I started a women only wine club in Rome so I could impart that knowledge in a socialable way and it works pretty well. When I wasn't sick I tried to have winery visits and tastings about once a month. I think keeping it local was the best way. But I'm not training future wine professionals, I like the WSET model but I do feel it's a very anglo approach to wine. Yes I know there is wine in England but it's not a heavy wine producing country and yet they kind of dictate how we study wine in their language. I did my sommelier certifications in Italy, in Italian and the experience was much more hands on because we had real access to every part of the process. WSET does need to decolonize it's curriculum if they want to be relevant in the future. I think the VinItaly academy has done a great job with Italian wine educations esp in China. I also studied natural wine for five years with Sandro Sangiorgi and I'd he has been instrumental in the evolution of the wine scene in Rome over the last 10 years. It's like wine reeducation. But for regular wine lovers, I think joining a tasting group is the best way.
Oh I would like to hear more about the wine re-education of Sandro Sangiorgi
Wrote about it somewhere but actually he was the inspiration in a roundabout way for women who wine because God do Italian men in wine talk over women!
I love this subject. Thanks for raising it. But does the body of knowledge really change? Really? It still is and must be : history, region, variety, technique. Choose to spend more time on one region or another, but the focus is the same. More importantly, this education is not for the consumer. It’s for the extraordinarily small number of people who MIGHT end up interacting with consumers. Trust the students to discern what their audience might want or need or benefit from.
What is currently missing from the curriculum? Oh don't even get me started. How about wine and food chemistry and pairing food and wine scientifically via compounds? But also - the whole format of education and exam taking formats need to be revamped, too. 1) Content needs to become interactive by default. After all, we have AI now. Why would I look at a chart or a wine report if I should be able to talk to it? 2) Fact memorization needs to go - no need to store information in one's brain. I think soon exams will be about asking the right questions (vs giving correct answers). I hope WSET evolves - I'd rather be tested on my ability to ask the right questions vs my ability to memorize how many months Barolo Riserva should spend.
The goal of any educational effort Los and must be to impart a body of knowledge. As you note, wine does not have a “knowledge problem”. Moreover, it body of knowledge can’t change much because wine can’t change. It is what it had been: the fermentation of fruit juices where the ultimate character of the product results from the fruit used, the places it was grown and the techniques used to guide its production. To learn wine is to learn the variety impacting these factors. The folks who choose any sort of wine degree—WSET or otherwise—is a tiny number. They must be schooled in the variables and body of knowledge outlined above. I think the time spent teaching these wine scholars to “communicate” or teach should be minimal. Each person willing to commit to learning the body of wine knowledge will have different ancillary talents and will apply them to wine knowledge as they see fit: teaching, writing, entrepreneurial efforts, guiding tourists, screenplays, hospitality, etc, etc, etc, etc. Attempting to address how to do all these things while also imparting wine knowledge through a program like WSET is an institutional category error. Teach the body of knowledge. Let the students decide how you use that education.
The body of knowledge is always changing. That’s another part of the problem with these certifications. They keep teaching a hierarchy of wines that is increasingly irrelevant to younger generations, with a focus on wines at the top of the hierarchy that very few people can afford anymore. Just look at how much time is spent on Bordeaux versus say the entire country of Spain.
The knowledge base has lost touch with the market and the consumer. In all realms of knowledge there is a focus on the “translational.” Of course everyone is going to have their own style of communicating that. That can be taught and should be taught.
Wine professionals entering retail or hospitality are increasingly left to make sense of the wines actually being poured and sold in leading stores and restaurants, against a framework that a growing share of the wine-drinking public has no reference for whatsoever. Neither Jason nor I are suggesting every emerging region needs its own chapter in the curriculum. But continuing to use only classic/appellated styles as the default lens for contextualizing other wines simply doesn’t work anymore. It’s not what is poured at most wine bars! This is a translation and communication problem that should absolutely be addressed in wine education.
Aren’t folks perfectly capable of making sense of these wines?
No.