The 70-20-10 Learning Model for Learning and Development Team

The 70-20-10 Learning Model Explained

The 70-20-10 learning model makes a claim that surprises most organizations when they first encounter it: the formal training programs that L&D teams spend most of their time and budget building represent only about 10% of how employees actually develop.

The remaining 90% happens through work itself – the challenging projects that push people into unfamiliar territory (70%) and the relationships, feedback, and conversations that surround those experiences (20%). These two channels are where most real capability development occurs. They are also the channels that most L&D functions have the least direct control over, which partly explains why they receive the least investment.

The model is not an argument against formal training. It is an argument for designing learning architectures that intentionally support all three channels – and for L&D teams to expand their remit beyond course production into the experience design and coaching capability investment that drives the larger portion of development impact.

Origins – Who Created the 70-20-10 Model?

The 70-20-10 model came from research conducted at the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) in the late 1980s. Morgan McCall, Michael Lombardo, and Robert Eichinger studied how senior executives had developed their leadership capabilities across their careers. They asked a large sample to look back and estimate what proportion of their development came from three sources: challenging job experiences, significant people in their career, and formal coursework.

The aggregated self-reports produced figures roughly in line with 70-20-10. The framework was published in Eichinger and Lombardo’s 1996 book The Career Architect Development Planner and gained broad corporate L&D adoption through the early 2000s. It is now one of the most cited frameworks in organizational learning strategy globally.

Breaking Down 70 20 10 model for learning and development

The 70% – Learning Through Experience

The largest development channel is challenging on-the-job experience. Not routine work that maintains existing skills but rarely builds new ones. The development value is in the stretch: assignments that sit at the edge of a person’s current capability, where the demands of the situation require them to figure out new approaches, make consequential decisions, and adapt to unfamiliar complexity.

What qualifies as developmental experience in the 70% category: stretch project assignments with real accountability, leading a cross-functional team for the first time, managing through a significant business challenge, job rotations into unfamiliar functions, increased scope or complexity of existing responsibilities, and action learning projects that address real organizational problems with observable outcomes.

The implication for organizations is significant. If 70% of development comes from work experience, then talent management decisions – who receives stretch assignments, how managers structure challenging work, whether the organization creates visible opportunities for growth through doing have more development impact than any training program. L&D teams that only build courses miss the largest development lever available to them.

The 20% – Learning Through Others

Even the most challenging assignment produces limited development without the feedback, coaching, and reflection that helps the person make sense of what they experienced and extract transferable lessons from it. The 20% channel is the relational infrastructure that surrounds experience and converts it into capability growth.

This channel includes: manager coaching conversations, mentoring relationships with senior colleagues, peer feedback, 360-degree feedback processes, observation of how experienced colleagues handle similar challenges, communities of practice, and team-based knowledge sharing.

The quality of this channel is almost entirely determined by manager capability and organizational culture. A manager who provides specific, developmental feedback after a stretch assignment accelerates the employee’s development measurably. A manager who only completes annual performance reviews provides almost none. Investing in manager coaching skills is frequently the highest-leverage L&D action available because it multiplies the value of every stretch experience across the entire team.

The 10% – Learning Through Formal Training

Formal training eLearning courses, classroom workshops, certifications, structured programs is the channel most L&D functions know best and invest most heavily in. The 70-20-10 model does not argue that formal training is unimportant. It argues that formal training is most effective when it connects to and is supported by the other two channels.

A leadership program that runs as a standalone event produces limited behavior change when participants return to an environment with no stretch assignments and no manager reinforcing the new skills. The same program, followed by a stretch assignment that requires applying what was learned and a coaching conversation about how it went, produces substantially better transfer. Formal training works best as an accelerator for experience, not a substitute for it.

70-20-10 Examples by Development Area

Does the 70-20-10 Model Work? The Evidence

The 70-20-10 learning model is more widely cited than it is rigorously evidenced. Understanding the strength and limits of its evidence base matters for L&D teams deciding how much weight to give it.

The original data came from retrospective self-reports by successful senior executives not from controlled studies measuring learning outcomes. Executives were asked to look back and estimate the sources of their development. Several methodological issues follow from this:

• Recall bias: Memorable, dramatic experiences (a challenging project, a formative mentor) are more salient in memory than routine training events, which may inflate the perceived contribution of the 70% and 20% channels.
• Survivorship bias: The sample was senior executives who had succeeded. People who had significant experiential learning and did not develop effectively are not in the sample.
• Self-report limitations: People are not accurate observers of their own learning processes attribution of development to specific sources is genuinely difficult.

The ATD has published directly on this: “70-20-10: Where Is the Evidence?” questions whether the model should be applied as a prescriptive formula. CIPD has echoed similar concerns in its guidance on workplace learning.

The balanced position: The 70-20-10 model is most useful as a strategic philosophy and conversation starter, not as a precise formula. The underlying argument that organizations over-invest in formal training relative to the other channels that drive most real development is consistent with adult learning research, even if the exact percentages are not empirically validated. Use the framework to challenge assumptions about L&D investment allocation, not to calculate exactly how many hours should go to each channel.

How to Apply the 70-20-10 Framework in Your L&D Strategy

1. Audit your current investment allocation

Map where your L&D budget and team time currently goes across the three channels. Most organizations find their actual investment ratio is inverted closer to 70% formal training, 20% social, 10% experience design. The audit makes the gap visible and provides the basis for a strategic conversation with business leadership about rebalancing.

2. Make stretch assignments intentional

The 70% channel produces development only when challenging experiences are deliberately structured into employees’ work. Work with managers and talent management to identify available stretch assignments, ensure they are allocated for development purposes (not just operational needs), and that employees understand the development expectations of each assignment before they begin.

3. Build manager coaching capability

The 20% channel depends almost entirely on manager behavior. A manager who provides specific, developmental feedback after challenging assignments multiplies the impact of every stretch experience on their team. Invest in manager coaching skills particularly the ability to conduct development-focused conversations, give meaningful feedback, and act as an active sponsor of team members’ growth.

4. Connect formal training to the 70%

Redesign formal training programs so they connect explicitly to on-the-job application rather than operating as standalone events. Pre-work that surfaces a current stretch challenge the participant is facing, workshop content that provides frameworks for that challenge, and post-program application with manager coaching support produces significantly better transfer than the same content delivered without this architecture.

5. Measure across all three channels

Extend evaluation beyond completion rates and assessment scores. Track stretch assignment availability and allocation, manager coaching quality (through 360 data or direct observation), and the performance outcomes that result from the full learning architecture not just the formal training component.

Pradnya

Instructional Designer - eLearning Developer · Paradiso Solutions Blog

Pradnya Maske is a Product Marketing Manager with over 10+ years of experience serving in the eLearning industry. She is based in Florida and is a senior expert associated with Paradiso eLearning. She is passionate about eLearning and, with her expertise, provides valued marketing services in virtual training.