The model in one line
70/20/10 says that most professional development happens by doing (about 70%), a meaningful share through other people (about 20%), and a small share through formal learning (about 10%).
Where it came from
The model traces back to research at the Center for Creative Leadership in the 1980s, where researchers asked successful executives which experiences had shaped their development. Challenging assignments dominated the answers, followed by other people, with coursework a smaller share. The 70/20/10 shorthand was popularised later, notably by Michael Lombardo and Robert Eichinger.
What the evidence does — and does not — support
The core insight has held up well: people rarely name a course as the thing that changed how they lead, sell or perform. They name the stretch assignment, the difficult client, the coach who watched them work.
The exact numbers are another matter. They came from recollections, not controlled measurement, and critics — including a well-known discussion by the Association for Talent Development — point out that the ratios should not be treated as a law or used to cut training budgets mechanically.
The sensible reading: design plans that are mostly practice, supported by people, with study where it earns its place.
Using 70/20/10 in a development plan
| Share | What it looks like | Example for "run client negotiations" |
|---|---|---|
| ~70% practice | Doing the harder version of your real work | Lead the prep and the first half of two renewal calls |
| ~20% people | Feedback, shadowing, mentoring, communities | Debrief each call with a senior negotiator |
| ~10% study | Courses, books, videos that support the practice | One short course on anchoring and concessions |
The same pattern works outside offices. A professional athlete's plan is mostly deliberate practice and competition, a coach and training partners supply the "20", and video analysis or sports science reading is the "10".
A common mistake to avoid
Writing "complete the negotiation course" as the goal. The course is a means. The goal is the outcome — renewals led and closed — and the course sits underneath it as one small support.
Jobulary's plans follow this shape by default: practice first, people next, study last, all sized to the hours you actually have. For the goal side of the equation, read SMART goals vs OKRs for an IDP.
Frequently asked questions
What does 70/20/10 stand for?
Roughly 70% of development from challenging on-the-job experiences, 20% from developmental relationships such as feedback and mentoring, and 10% from formal courses and reading.
Is the 70/20/10 model evidence-based?
It is based on interviews with successful executives about what shaped them, not on controlled measurement of learning. Most practitioners treat it as a useful guideline rather than a precise ratio.
How do I use 70/20/10 in an IDP?
For each goal, plan mostly practice at work, add a few conversations or exposure to people who do it well, and include a course only where it directly supports the practice.
Sources
- Center for Creative Leadership — The 70-20-10 rule for leadership development
- ATD — 70-20-10: where is the evidence?
Topics: Learning and development · Individual Development Plan