The 70-20-10 Learning Model: Complete Guide
What is the 70-20-10 learning model? Origin, the three buckets explained, how to apply it, criticism, and practical examples for growing businesses.
The 70-20-10 Learning Model
What it is, where it came from, and how to actually apply it
For the first few years of running a company, I thought employee development meant sending people to courses. A product training workshop here, a leadership webinar there, maybe an industry conference once a year. That was "investing in people." The problem was that none of it seemed to stick. Employees attended, nodded along, and went back to doing things exactly the way they had before.
Then I came across the 70-20-10 model, and it reframed everything. The research behind it suggested that the vast majority of professional development does not happen in courses at all. It happens through experience: doing challenging work, solving real problems, making mistakes, and figuring things out. Courses contribute maybe 10% of what shapes someone into a capable professional. The remaining 90% comes from the job itself and from the people around you.
This guide covers the 70-20-10 learning model in full: where it came from, what each bucket actually means, how to apply it, what the critics say, how it differs from other models, and how it works in practice at businesses of different sizes. The training and development guide covers the broader T&D framework. This article covers the model that explains why most of that framework is not classroom training.
What Is the 70-20-10 Learning Model?
The 70-20-10 model is a framework for understanding how people develop professional skills and capabilities. It proposes that learning happens through three channels in roughly these proportions: 70% from experiential learning (hands-on work, stretch assignments, problem-solving), 20% from social learning (feedback, mentoring, observation, coaching), and 10% from formal learning (courses, workshops, reading, certifications).
The model is not prescriptive about specific activities. It describes where learning predominantly occurs, not where it should occur. An employee who spends 100% of their development time in formal training is not violating a rule. They are, according to the model, leaving 90% of their development potential untapped by not investing in experiential and social learning channels.
Understanding this distinction matters because the model is frequently misapplied. It is not a budget allocation formula ("spend 70% of your training budget on experiential learning"). It is not permission to eliminate formal training ("courses are only 10%, so cut them"). It is an observation about how effective professionals actually develop, with implications for how organizations design development programs.
Where the 70-20-10 Model Came From
The 70-20-10 model originated from research conducted at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in Greensboro, North Carolina, in the late 1980s. Researchers Morgan McCall, Robert Eichinger, and Michael Lombardo surveyed 191 successful executives and asked them to identify the key experiences, relationships, and events that had shaped their professional development.
The findings were published in McCall, Lombardo, and Eichinger's 1988 book The Lessons of Experience. The executives attributed their development primarily to challenging job assignments (such as leading a turnaround, managing a cross-functional project, or handling a high-stakes negotiation), secondarily to other people (bosses, mentors, role models), and lastly to formal training programs. The rough proportions became the 70-20-10 shorthand that the L&D industry adopted.
The model was later popularized by Charles Jennings, who co-founded the 70:20:10 Institute and advocated for its adoption across corporate learning organizations. Jennings emphasized that the ratios were not rigid rules but a "reference model" for designing learning strategies that match how development actually happens.
It is worth noting what the original research was and was not. It was a qualitative study of executive development at large corporations, not a controlled experiment measuring learning across all roles and industries. The executives were predominantly white men at Fortune 500 companies in the 1980s. The specific percentages were approximations, not precise measurements. The general finding, that experience and relationships matter more than formal training for professional development, has been supported by subsequent research. The exact 70-20-10 ratio has not been empirically validated.
The Three Buckets Explained
Each bucket in the 70-20-10 model represents a different channel through which professional learning occurs. Understanding what each bucket contains, and equally what it does not contain, is essential for applying the model effectively.
70%: Experiential Learning in Detail
Experiential learning is the largest bucket because it is where skill application meets real consequences. Reading about customer objections in a training manual is formal learning. Handling a customer objection in a live sales call is experiential learning. The difference is stakes: experiential learning involves real outcomes that matter, and that is why it produces the deepest skill development.
The specific types of experiential learning that research identifies as most developmental include stretch assignments (tasks that are beyond the person's current skill level but achievable with effort), cross-functional work (exposure to functions outside the person's primary role), turnaround situations (fixing something broken), start-from-scratch projects (building something new), and increased scope of responsibility. OSHA's safety management guidelines explicitly recommend peer-to-peer training and on-the-job learning as core components of effective workplace education, reinforcing the principle that learning by doing, under guidance, outperforms classroom instruction alone. The cross-training guide covers one specific form of experiential learning: teaching employees to perform tasks outside their primary role.
The critical nuance: experience alone does not equal learning. A person can have 10 years of experience and repeat the same year 10 times. Experiential learning becomes developmental when it includes reflection (what happened and why), feedback (how others perceived the performance), and application (consciously doing something differently next time). Without these elements, experience creates habits, not growth.
20%: Social Learning in Detail
Social learning is the most underinvested bucket in most organizations because it is the hardest to formalize. You can buy a course (formal learning). You can assign a project (experiential learning). But you cannot simply purchase a mentoring relationship or schedule trust-building. Social learning happens through human interaction, and human interaction requires infrastructure, not just intent.
The social learning bucket includes feedback from managers and peers (both formal reviews and informal comments), mentoring and coaching relationships (both assigned and organic), observation and shadowing (watching how a skilled person handles a situation), peer discussions and collaborative problem-solving, and network building (learning from people outside your immediate team or organization).
For growing businesses, the social learning challenge is structural. Enterprise organizations can create formal mentoring programs, leadership development cohorts, and executive coaching engagements. A 20-person company has none of these. Social learning at smaller scale happens through scheduled manager check-ins, buddy systems for new hires, cross-functional shadowing, and a culture where asking questions is normal rather than a sign of weakness. The coaching guide and mentorship program guide cover how to build social learning infrastructure at any team size.
The Department of Labor has long recognized on-the-job learning as the core of workforce development, structuring its apprenticeship programs around the principle that people learn best by doing real work under guidance. This is the 70/20/10 model in practice: apprentices learn through experience (70%), mentorship from journeyworkers (20%), and related technical instruction (10%).
10%: Formal Learning in Detail
Formal learning is the smallest bucket by proportion but the most visible. It is what most people picture when they hear "training": a course, a workshop, a certification program, a webinar, a training video. It is the bucket where organizations spend the most money and track the most metrics, even though the model suggests it contributes the least to overall development.
This does not mean formal learning is unimportant. The 10% provides the foundation that makes the other 90% productive. Formal learning delivers structured knowledge transfer (teaching someone what they need to know before they can learn from experience), compliance requirements (training mandated by law or regulation), baseline competency (ensuring everyone starts from the same knowledge floor), and credentials and certifications (proof of knowledge for regulated roles).
The practical takeaway is not to reduce formal training but to right-size it. If your company spends 80% of its development effort on formal training, the 70-20-10 model suggests rebalancing: invest more in creating structured experiences and social learning opportunities, not less in the formal training that supports them. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects 6% growth in training and development manager roles through 2034, reflecting increasing organizational investment in structured learning. The employee training guide covers formal training program design, and the LMS guide covers the technology that delivers it.
Enterprise vs Small Business: Same Model, Different Execution
The 70-20-10 model was built by studying executives at large corporations. Applying it at a growing business requires translation because the activities that fill each bucket look completely different at 20 employees versus 2,000.
The irony is that growing businesses often practice 70-20-10 more naturally than enterprises do. At a 15-person company, employees handle diverse tasks from day one (70%), learn by watching colleagues in the same room (20%), and take compliance training when required (10%). They just do not call it 70-20-10. The model gives a name and intentionality to what already happens informally.
Where the model adds the most value at smaller scale is in the 20% bucket. Experiential learning happens whether you plan it or not because people do their jobs. Formal learning happens because compliance requires it. But social learning, the feedback, mentoring, and coaching that accelerates skill development, often gets squeezed out when the manager is also the founder, the salesperson, and the customer service lead. Scheduling the 20% is the highest-leverage intervention for growing teams. The leadership training guide covers how managers develop the coaching skills that enable the 20%.
How to Apply the 70-20-10 Model
Applying 70-20-10 does not require an L&D department, a learning management system, or a formal development program. It requires intentionality about three things: what experiences you assign, what relationships you facilitate, and what formal training you provide.
Step 1: Audit Your Current Mix
Ask yourself: how do employees currently develop skills at your company? If the honest answer is "they figure it out" (unstructured 70%) plus "they take compliance training" (minimal 10%) with no social learning in between, the 20% is your gap. If the answer is "we send them to courses" (heavy 10%) without assigning challenging work or facilitating feedback, the 70% is your gap.
Step 2: Design the 70% Deliberately
Identify the tasks and projects that develop specific skills. Instead of training someone on project management through a course, assign them a real project with a defined scope, budget, and deadline. Instead of training someone on customer communication through role-plays, have them handle three customer calls with a debrief after each one. The development goals guide covers how to set specific targets for experiential learning.
Step 3: Build the 20% Infrastructure
Schedule what you want to happen. Weekly manager 1:1s. Buddy assignments for new hires. Monthly cross-functional shadowing sessions. Quarterly skip-level conversations. Social learning requires time, proximity (physical or virtual), and permission to engage. Without scheduled touchpoints, it gets deprioritized under the weight of daily operations.
Step 4: Right-Size the 10%
Focus formal training on three categories: compliance (legally required), foundation (knowledge the person cannot acquire through experience alone), and gap-filling (targeted training for specific identified skill gaps). Everything else, including most of what traditionally fills corporate training catalogs, is better learned through experience and social interaction. The training program guide covers how to design formal training that supports the other buckets.
| Learning Goal | Wrong Approach (Formal Only) | 70-20-10 Approach |
|---|---|---|
| New hire learns the product | 3-day product training workshop | 30-min product overview video (10%) + shadow a sales call (20%) + handle first customer inquiry with support (70%) |
| Manager improves feedback skills | Online course on giving feedback | Practice giving feedback in next 3 one-on-ones (70%) + debrief with their manager afterward (20%) + read one article on the SBI framework (10%) |
| Employee learns a new software tool | Vendor training webinar | Complete a real task using the tool with a guide open (70%) + sit with someone who uses it daily for 30 min (20%) + watch the tool's 10-min intro video (10%) |
| Sales rep improves closing skills | Full-day sales training seminar | Lead 5 live closing conversations this month (70%) + listen to 3 recorded calls from top closer (20%) + read one chapter on objection handling (10%) |
The 90-Day 70-20-10 Framework
The 70-20-10 ratios are not static. During a new hire's first 90 days, the mix shifts from formal-heavy in week one to experience-heavy by month three. This progression makes intuitive sense: you cannot learn from experience until you have enough context to understand what you are experiencing.
The framework illustrates a principle that applies beyond onboarding: the right ratio depends on the person's stage. Someone new to a role, a company, or an industry needs more formal and social learning. Someone experienced in the role needs more experiential learning through stretch assignments and increased responsibility. The 30-60-90 day plan guide covers how to structure these phases for new hires, and the professional development plan guide covers how to design the progression for ongoing growth.
Criticism and Limitations of the 70-20-10 Model
The 70-20-10 model has legitimate critics, and their objections are worth understanding before adopting the framework. Honest engagement with criticism makes the model more useful, not less.
The Evidence Base Is Thin
The original CCL research was a qualitative survey of 191 executives, not a controlled experiment. L&D publications and researchers have noted that the specific 70-20-10 percentages have never been replicated in a rigorous empirical study. The numbers became industry shorthand despite lacking the scientific foundation that the precision of "70-20-10" implies. The general principle (most learning is informal) is well-supported. The exact ratio is not.
The Sample Was Narrow
The research subjects were successful executives at Fortune 500 companies in the 1980s, predominantly white men in senior leadership roles. Whether the same ratios apply to entry-level employees, frontline workers, technical specialists, or people in different cultural contexts is unknown. The model may accurately describe how executives develop while poorly describing how a warehouse team lead, a customer service representative, or a software engineer develops.
The Model Can Be Weaponized Against Formal Training
Organizations have used the "10% formal" finding to justify cutting training budgets. This is a misapplication. The model describes where learning occurs, not where investment should be allocated. Formal training often requires the most investment per hour precisely because it involves structured content, qualified instructors, and dedicated time away from work. Cutting formal training because "it is only 10%" ignores that the 10% provides the foundation for the other 90%.
It Assumes Access to Good Experiences and Good People
The 70% assumes the person has access to challenging, developmental experiences. The 20% assumes they have access to skilled colleagues, effective managers, and mentoring relationships. In workplaces with poor management, limited task variety, or toxic cultures, the 70% and 20% may reinforce bad habits rather than develop good skills. The model works best in environments that are already reasonably functional. It is not a cure for dysfunctional workplaces.
70-20-10 vs Other Learning Frameworks
The 70-20-10 model is one of several frameworks used in learning and development. Understanding how it relates to others helps you choose the right lens for different situations.
| Framework | What It Describes | Best For | How It Relates to 70-20-10 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 70-20-10 Model | Where learning predominantly occurs (experience, relationships, formal) | Designing the overall development mix | The parent framework |
| 5 Moments of Need (Gottfredson & Mosher) | When learning is needed: New, More, Apply, Solve, Change | Designing just-in-time learning support | Complements 70-20-10 by focusing on timing rather than source |
| ADDIE (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate) | How to design formal training systematically | Designing the 10% (formal training programs) | Lives inside the 10% bucket |
| Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle | How people learn from experience: experience, reflect, conceptualize, experiment | Making the 70% more intentional | Deepens understanding of the 70% bucket |
| Bloom's Taxonomy | Levels of cognitive complexity: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, create | Setting learning objectives at the right level | Applies across all three buckets |
| Kirkpatrick's Four Levels | How to evaluate training: reaction, learning, behavior, results | Measuring training effectiveness | Primarily evaluates the 10%, harder to apply to 70% and 20% |
The 70-20-10 model is unique in that it focuses on the source of learning rather than the process of designing, delivering, or evaluating it. Other frameworks tell you how to build effective training. The 70-20-10 model tells you that training alone is not enough, regardless of how well it is designed. The training goals guide covers how to set measurable objectives that span all three buckets.
Practical Examples by Role
How the 70-20-10 model plays out depends entirely on the role. Here are four examples showing what each bucket looks like in practice for different job functions.
| Role | 70% Experiential | 20% Social | 10% Formal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Customer service rep | Handle real customer inquiries with increasing complexity. Resolve a complaint independently. Process a return without escalating. | Shadow a senior rep for a day. Debrief difficult calls with manager. Listen to 3 recorded calls rated 'excellent'. | Product knowledge training. CRM tool walkthrough. Company return policy and escalation procedure review. |
| Sales representative | Run 5 discovery calls this week. Lead a full sales cycle from prospect to close. Manage a pipeline of 20+ accounts. | Shadow the top closer for 3 calls. Weekly 1:1 with sales manager to review pipeline. Role-play objection handling with a peer. | Product certification quiz. CRM data entry standards. Read 1 chapter on consultative selling. |
| Operations manager | Manage weekly scheduling for a 12-person team. Handle a vendor negotiation. Fix a process bottleneck end-to-end. | Monthly skip-level with company founder. Quarterly peer exchange with ops managers at similar companies. Weekly team standup facilitation. | OSHA safety training. Project management basics. Inventory management system certification. |
| Software developer | Build and ship a feature from ticket to production. Debug a production issue under time pressure. Review 5 pull requests from teammates. | Pair programming sessions with senior dev. Architecture review discussions. Code review feedback from tech lead. | New framework tutorial. Security best practices course. Cloud platform certification. |
The pattern across all four roles: the 70% is always the core job, done with intentional progression in difficulty. The 20% is always interaction with people who know more or different things. The 10% is always foundational knowledge that the person cannot reasonably acquire through experience alone. The skills assessment guide covers how to identify which bucket each development need belongs in.
Common Mistakes When Applying 70-20-10
Six mistakes consistently undermine organizations that adopt the 70-20-10 model. Most stem from taking the ratios too literally or applying the enterprise version without adaptation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the 70-20-10 learning model?
The 70-20-10 learning model is a framework that describes how professionals develop skills. It proposes that roughly 70% of learning comes from hands-on experience (doing the job), 20% from social interactions (feedback, mentoring, observation), and 10% from formal training (courses, workshops, reading). The model was developed by Morgan McCall, Robert Eichinger, and Michael Lombardo at the Center for Creative Leadership in the late 1980s based on research with successful executives.
Who created the 70-20-10 model?
The 70-20-10 model was created by Morgan McCall, Robert Eichinger, and Michael Lombardo at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in the late 1980s. Their research asked 191 successful executives to identify the key experiences that shaped their development. The findings showed that challenging job assignments contributed most to development, followed by relationships with other people, and formal coursework contributed least. The exact 70-20-10 ratio emerged as a rough summary of these findings.
Is the 70-20-10 model still relevant?
The core insight remains relevant: most professional development happens through experience and relationships, not formal training. However, the specific ratios have been criticized for lacking rigorous empirical validation and for being based on a narrow sample (Fortune 500 executives in the 1980s). Modern learning science supports the general principle while suggesting the actual ratios vary significantly by role, industry, career stage, and individual learning style. The model is most useful as a design principle, not a measurement tool.
What is the evidence for the 70-20-10 model?
The original CCL research surveyed 191 successful executives about formative experiences. Subsequent studies have produced mixed results. Research supports the general principle that informal learning (experience and social interaction) contributes more to skill development than formal training alone. However, the specific 70-20-10 percentages have not been replicated in controlled studies. Critics including the Association for Talent Development (ATD) note that the model lacks the empirical rigor to justify precise ratios. The model is best understood as a heuristic, not a scientific law.
How do you apply 70-20-10 in a small business?
In a small business, the 70% happens naturally because employees handle real tasks from day one. The challenge is making it intentional: assigning tasks that stretch skills, allowing room for mistakes, and creating reflection opportunities. The 20% requires scheduling manager check-ins, assigning buddies, and creating shadowing opportunities since formal mentoring programs typically do not exist at small scale. The 10% means compliance training, product knowledge modules, and targeted skill courses. The key difference from enterprise: small businesses already do most of this informally. The model provides a framework to make it deliberate.
What is the difference between 70-20-10 and 80-20 learning?
The 70-20-10 model splits learning into three categories: experiential (70%), social (20%), and formal (10%). The 80-20 reference usually comes from the Pareto Principle applied to learning: 80% of results come from 20% of effort. They are different frameworks. The 70-20-10 model describes how learning happens (through experience, relationships, and training). The 80-20 principle describes efficiency (focus on the activities that produce the most impact). Both are useful, but they answer different questions.
What are the limitations of the 70-20-10 model?
Five main limitations: (1) The original research sample was narrow: 191 white male executives at Fortune 500 companies in the 1980s. (2) The specific ratios have not been validated through rigorous empirical research. (3) The model does not account for variation by role, industry, or career stage: a surgeon's ratio looks very different from a software developer's. (4) It can be misused to justify cutting formal training budgets. (5) It assumes access to challenging experiences and knowledgeable colleagues, which not every work environment provides.
How does 70-20-10 apply to employee onboarding?
During onboarding, the ratios shift over time. The first week is heavy on formal learning (10% bucket): compliance training, policies, product basics. But even in week one, shadowing colleagues (20%) and completing first small tasks (70%) should begin. By month two, the ratio approaches the classic 70-20-10 as the new hire takes on real work with decreasing supervision. The key insight for onboarding: do not front-load the first month with only formal training. Get new hires into real tasks quickly while providing the social support and formal knowledge they need.
What are alternatives to the 70-20-10 model?
Several alternative learning frameworks exist. The 5 Moments of Need framework (Gottfredson and Mosher) focuses on when learning is needed: new, more, apply, solve, change. The ADDIE model (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate) is a structured instructional design process. Bloom's Taxonomy classifies learning objectives by cognitive complexity. Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle describes four stages of learning from experience. The 70-20-10 model is unique in focusing on where learning happens rather than how to design it.
Does 70-20-10 mean formal training is not important?
No. The 10% is not a measure of importance. It is an observation about where learning predominantly occurs. Formal training provides the foundational knowledge that makes experiential and social learning productive. Without compliance training, employees do not know the rules. Without product training, they cannot serve customers. Without tool training, they cannot do their job. The 10% is the floor that enables the other 90%. Cutting formal training because 'it is only 10%' misunderstands the model entirely.