London (UK), January 2011 - Heads of learning and development at global organisations have expressed concern about how the 70/20/10 model, which has been highly influential in spreading awareness of the importance of informal learning, may be interpreted and used within some organisations. In certain instances, it may be taken on board as a strategy, rather than an observation of how people learn. And in extreme cases it has been suggested, could even been used as an excuse for cutting training budgets.
The 70/20/10 model, developed in the early 90s by Robert Eichinger, Michael Lombardo, and Morgan McCall, asserts that seventy percent of learning and development takes place from real-life and on-the-job experiences, tasks, and problem solving; twenty percent of the time development comes from other people through informal or formal feedback, mentoring, or coaching; while ten percent of learning and development comes from formal training.
One worry is that formal learning initiatives are devalued and that if ninety percent of learning is informal, it therefore requires no attention. Another is that this observational research is used as a hard-and-fast strategy for designing learning models.
In a presentation given at a forum event hosted by LINE Communications, LINE's Design Director, Andrew Joly, suggests that 70/20/10 should be an influence on strategy rather than a strategy in itself, and that the most useful application of this powerful model for understanding learners and their learning world should be to
The BBC's Nick Shackleton-Jones adds to this picture of the balance between formal and informal learning in his own presentation. He suggests that people will learn informally around the subject areas that most interest them, while the most uninspiring, mandated areas of training are the most important areas in which to supply exciting, highly engaging formal learning interventions.
