Inspiration from the “70/20/10 Principle”
I was introduced the “70/20/10 Principle” a few months ago. The Principle is being practiced by a lot of big corporations e.g. HP, Bank of America, Marsek, Mars…. Mars describes the principle as follows:
“……..Research [Footnote] shows that the best combination for learning to be most effective is in the ratio 70/20/10:
70% of all learning comes from doing
20% of learning comes from observing others
10% of learning comes from the formal process of being taught. Included in this are books, training courses, or lectures that you may listen to……..”
When I really think about it, I can appreciate how true it is. Take myself as an example. Think about the banking knowledge I have learnt in my life. Not the theoretical knowledge, but the working knowledge which I need to perform the banking tasks e.g. lending. Most comes from on-the-job experience e.g. lesson learnt. Or I would say only a little comes from the training courses I attended. I would say it is the case for most of my banking friends.
Then think about the training departments. Most if not all are supposed to add value by making people learn the necssary skills, knowledge or attitude. Interestingly, most focus just on formal learning i.e. the 10% piece!! I can imagine some focus on the 10% because they are mandated to be in the beginning. (They are called the training department… after all.) But would it be too risky to the department? Even if its training courses are extremely effective, it contributes to only 10% of the learning!!
It also makes me think about myself. I love conducting training classes. But am I doing something which is much less effective than ‘on-the-job learning’ and ‘learning from others’?
[Footnote] I have not yet found out the details on the supporting research. In particular, I want to understand what 70% exactly means. Literally, it seems to mean that 70% of what we know know comes from actually performing the tasks e.g. lesson learnt. Or does it mean that we should put 70% of our resources (e.g. time) to ‘doing’ in order to be qualified as ‘best combination’?
7 comments7 Comments so far
Leave a reply
I think it means 70% of our knowledge comes from doing.
The 10% component ideally should be a lot higher as it is the most efficient way to learn (ok for some). But unfortunately, people learn quite poorly.
Hi David, great to see your blog and meet you here. I was doing some research on this 70/20/10 principle myself and saw your blog
The concept was developed by Morgan McCall, Robert W. Eichinger, and Michael M. Lombardo at the Center for Creative Leadership. It is adopted by Princeton University as part of their Learning Philosophy. More info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/70/20/10_Model
http://www.princeton.edu/hr/learning/philosophy/
Keep in touch
Paul
[...] raised a question in my previous post i.e. whether the 70/20/10 principle is about ‘how learning normally happens’ or [...]
David, not sure if my response comes too late! I was introduced the “70/20/10″ principle 4 years ago. Paul is correct that this principle was originated from Robert W Eichinger and Michael M Lombardo when they were with CCL. In 1991, Robert and Michael founded a company called “Lominger” i.e. the combination of Michael’s surname “Lom-” and Robert’s surname “-inger”, which, since then, has been one of the leading leadership assessment and development organizations in the States with global reaches. One of their most well-received products is a book called FYI, standing for “For Your Improvement”. It showcases 67 leadership competencies with definition of “unskilled”, “skilled” and “overused skill” content in specific behavioral terms, possible causes and the possible remedies. For details, you would refer to their official website: http://store.lominger.com/store/lominger/en_US/pd/productID.127293400
I have the FYI book on hand and can share with you if you want to take a look.
Let’s get back to “70/20/10″ principle. My understanding is that the number refer to the impact on one’s development. That is, learning from doing can create the strongest impact on one’s development while learing through formal learning like training, reading, etc has the least impact on one’s development, in a comparative sense.
Anthony, thanks for the great information! You know what – coincidentially, I was sent the book FYI by the publisher for review. (I think they spotted me via this blog.) I did not know that it is related to the 70/20/10 principle. I now have even greater motivation to read!!
FYI book, when effectively used in conjunction with other Lominger tools, e.g. Library Structure, Developmental Difficulty Map, etc, can be a very powerful tool on people development…at least based upon my experience in my last employment, in which I was using the tools and resources from both Lominger and Gallup! From my point of view, FYI is a good complement to Strengths Finder. While the latter promotes the identification and maximization of one’s strengths which would drive his/her greater motivation and productivity at work, the former hints the potential danger of over-using one’s skilled behaviors (or strengths) as well as the negative impacts of “career derailers” on one’s long-term development.
Not sure if you received the comment that I sent you before!