Move Over 70-20-10 Rule, 3-to-1 Is The New Model for Learning
The 70-20-10 learning model is widely accepted as one of the best frameworks for corporate learning and development. The 40-year-old model suggests that people should acquire 70% of new knowledge from on-the-job experiences; 20% from interacting with peers; and 10% from formal education—like classroom and Zoom lectures. The ratios make sense on paper, seeing that “learning by doing” is the most effective way to apply and habituate new skills.
70-20-10 Is Good In Theory, But Nobody Does It
There’s just one problem. The 70-20-10 model is aspirational, but it’s not being implemented. The Association for Talent Development concedes that on-the-job learning is difficult to track and measure. In its 2020 State of the Industry survey, ATD asked participants to rate the extent to which their organization emphasized on-the-job learning. Almost half of the organizations surveyed do not emphasize on-the-job learning to a high extent.
Ask any director of learning and development to show the allocation of their budget and focus, and they’ll show you that the vast majority is focused on formal education (the category that is supposed to be 10%). They sweat the details of the curriculum, the delivery format, how to move classroom instruction into Zoom, how to do role-plays during the program.
But very little thought and support are given to what happens back on the job; not a lot of effort or tracking is put into the “pull-through” elements, the application elements, of skill development. It’s no wonder the dreaded?“knowing-doing” gap?continues to plague our industry.
A Better Model for Learning: 3-to-1
My humble suggestion is that we replace the 70-20-10 model with something I call the 3-to-1 learning model. It’s a simple, actionable model: for every one formal learning event, you should design and facilitate three on-the-job application exercises.
For example, let’s say you want your managers to do a better job of giving effective feedback. Your “curriculum” would become an action learning journey like:
Ideally during weeks two through four, rather than suggesting these application activities as suggested reinforcement activities, the L&D team would treat this time as more important than week one. They might:
领英推荐
A Shift In Focus
While the 3-to-1 model seems simple, it’s a large shift in mindset. Learning and development professionals should re-imagine their roles. Shift your focus:
In brief, it’s time to put the 40-year-old 70-20-10 model behind us. A simpler 3-to-1 model is actionable and effective.
* Special thanks to Kevin Kruse for this guest post.
If you enjoyed this article, click the subscribe button below and you'll receive a new one just like it each week.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Dr. Travis Bradberry is the award-winning author of the #1 bestselling book, Emotional Intelligence Habits . His bestselling books have sold more than 3 million copies. Dr. Bradberry has written for, or been covered by, Newsweek, TIME, BusinessWeek, Fortune, Forbes, Fast Company, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and The Harvard Business Review
If you'd like to learn how to increase your emotional intelligence (EQ), consider taking the online Emotional Intelligence Appraisal test that's included with the Emotional Intelligence Habits book. Your test results will pinpoint which of the book's 700+ emotional intelligence habits will increase your EQ the most.
Flying probe Test Technician @ Mircom Technologies Ltd | Flying probe testing
4 个月The 70-20-10 learning framework fails because workers who follow instructions or mimic behaviors without understanding the reasoning behind actions don’t develop critical thinking skills, leading to superficial learning and potential errors when conditions change.
Future of Work | GenAI + L&D | Upskilling Engineer | writer | contraptionist | ??
4 个月I like it. I mean 70-20-10 is arbitrary and just gives people an excuse to put "training" in the 10% box. I think 3-to-1 shows people they need to *link* the formal training to the on the job practice to create the skill
Leadership Advisor, Practitioner, Student, Philosopher
4 个月Thank you for writing this article. I have meditated on it for a few days and have some thoughts (due to character limits I have to sound abrupt, I mean no disrespect) "70-20-10 Is Good In Theory, But Nobody Does It". This statement should generate the real question. "Why aren't training programs fully implemented?" It is difficult to assume "70-20-10" is useless if no one is using it (correctly). Whether you call it "3-1", "50-50" "91.2, 3.6, 5.2", or "Unlocking Synergy: Maximizing Your Potential with Our Cutting-Edge, Immersive, and AI-Driven Corporate Training Program" (from Grok) the program will not work unless taken seriously by trainers and leaders. This is similar the myriad quarterly and annual review processes that don't produce results. No one genuinely does the review, or worse, they make people write their own assessment and bring it to the review. "Why aren't 1:1 reviews done correctly?" My favorite question is "Is it a training issue or a compliance issue?" In this case, it is clearly a compliance issue (from the trainers/leaders). To answer my two questions, leadership (not management) should be evaluating implementation and effectiveness of whichever training model is used, and adjust as necessary.
Transformational UX Strategist | Change Management Expert | Innovative Product Leader
4 个月This suggestion offers an interesting opportunity to enhance the learning model. One notable concern of mine is that typically information is provided too early in the learning journey, which results in the acquired knowledge from months prior becoming less applicable when faced with real-world situations.
Leadership Coach ACC, Facilitatrice
4 个月I think that this is really important and I specially like the practical example of the feedback training. Thank you for inspiring me