Introduction
The 70:20:10 model was developed in the mid 1990s through a research by Michael Lombardo and Robert Eichinger. The model is based on the argument that development is based on the identification of a need and the motivation to act to meet that need. The model is also based on the assumption that a combination of different learning approaches can provide a powerful learning experience. The model states that development will be 70% from on the job experiences, learning and problem solving, 20% from feedback and from working based on learning from examples of the need and 10% from formal learning. The theory therefore attributes only 10% work based learning on formal learning and the rest on informal learning. Informal learning in the workplace is a key component of this model. Informal learning is actually the 70% that the model envisions.
Theories applicable
Social cognitive theory is a learning theory that makes an analysis of how thoughts, feelings, and social interactions shape the process of learning in individuals. Its use in workplace learning makes a focus on the cognitive processes that are employed by employees when they are learning. Social cognitive theory is based on vicarious learning; a process by which an individual will acquire skills and knowledge by watching the actions of another individual closely (Boswell 1995). Learning is through observation and will attempt to imitate this behaviour. In the workplace, this theory is used through associations of learners with individuals who are experienced. It is a common practice to attach new hires to experienced workers for a particular period. Through this association, the hires are able to learn more effectively and within a short time (Cross 2007).
The social cognitive theory of learning is closely related to the 70:20:10 model. Learning through observation of others and imitating their actions can be explained as being part of the 20 percent that is acquired from learning from others and through mentorship. In the original research of the model, the 20% was attributed to leraning from others and through mentorship, and the social cognitive theory fits into this category (Cross 2007).
The social cognitive theory of learning involves observation of an individual conducting a process in the workplace. More importantly, it is expected that the learner will imitate what is being done and attempt to deliver the same results by carrying out the same actions that were observed. On the 70:20:10 model, this will fall under the 70% of learning in the workplace that is learnt through on the job experience, tasks and solving of problems. By imitating, the learner employees have a real feel on the tasks that need to be done. Since by mere imitation, perfection cannot be achieved, tasks and problem solving that were learnt through imitation have to be conducted repeatedly by the learner to ensure that an acceptable level of skill and knowledge of the processes involved in the tasks are obtained. Evidently, based on the presumptions of model, this falls under the 70% part of workplace learning. Thus, the social cognitive model as employed in workplace learning and development makes a perfect fit into the propositions that are enshrined in the 70:20:10 model (McCall 2010).
Social cognitive theory of learning also makes a description of how individuals learn on their own, and this is based on the assumption that these individuals display a high level of self control. In this part of the social cognitive theory of learning, learning occurs even when there is no reinforcement that guides the employee on what needs to be done. This will fall into formal learning that occurs without practical experience (Loewenstein and Spletzer 1998). Formal learning more often than not involves theoretical learning, and when employees use what was obtained through formal education in carrying out tasks and solving problems in the workplace, they are reinforcing the social cognitive theory of learning on their own. This falls at the 10% of the 70:20:10 model. This is because the learning that they have is based on the skills and knowledge that is obtained through formal education (Jennings 2008).
Self efficacy is an important part of the social cognitive theory of learning. In reinforces the belief that employees who have a belief in their ability to carry out a certain behavior. Self efficacy plays an important role in the 70:20:10 model since it positively affect the level of persistence that employs display when approaching new challenges in the workplace, the effort which employees will apply to new challenges. This is fitting to the model since it reinforces the informal learning which makes the largest part of the model (70%). Employees will need high levels of self efficacy to learn through on the job experience which does not involve formal tutorship (McCall 2010).
The adult learning theory is also part of the 70:20:10 model. It is assumed under this theory that adults are internally motivated and self directed, goal oriented and have life experiences and knowledge. This means that formal trained for adults should be kept at a minimum and learning through experience encouraged in the workplace. It is also assumed that adults are relevancy oriented and like to be respected, and thus will make more effort to learn through experience to earn this respect (Carnevale and Carnevale 1994). Following the model and based on the adult learning model, a minimum of 10% will be allocated for formal learning for the adult learners and the rest made up for in practical on the job leaning and practical tasks. Any involvement in formal learning to adults that is more than necessary will result in low motivation levels for the employees to learn. Informal learning that is emphasized by the adult learning theory should be encouraged, as stipulated in the 70:20:10 model (McCall 2010).
The experiential learning theory of learning is also applicable to the 70:20:10 model. It has four key pillars; the acquisition of knowledge, development of skills that can be used to apply that knowledge, the presence of direct experience which can be used for the application and practice of that knowledge and the presence a method of gathering feedback, review of progress and implementation of planned changes (Jennings 2008).
Acquisition of knowledge based on the experiential learning theory falls into the 10% part of the 70:20:10 model. Knowledge acquisition as per this theory is through formal learning which often leads to certification. Knowledge that is obtained through this level is theoretical and skills to carry out work related activities are not present. This is one of cyclic levels of the experiential learning theory (Argyris 1994).
Skills employed in the performance of work related tasks depend partly on the employment of the theoretical knowledge obtained in formal learning. However, formal education only plays a minor role and most learning at this level will be as a result of behavioural observation and imitation. Most workers will learn from their colleagues through observation and attempting to replicate what they observe on their own (Allman 1982). This forms the better part of learning in the workplace and the 70% of the model is attributable to this. Under the experiential learning theory, direct encounter with experienced people in the workplace will also play a key role in the learning process. This forms part of the model that is based on the job experiences and problem solving tasks through mentorship by experienced hires (McCall 2010).
A key part of the experiential model involves the review of feedback on the performance of the implementation of the other three levels. This can be considered as part of the 10% in the 70:20:10 model since it involves a theoretical observation of the learning process. Evaluations are important since they enable the critical evaluation of the learning process and develop measures to make it more rewarding to the organization and the individual employee (Jennings 2008).
There are two major challenges that the 70:20:10 model implementation may have in an organization. In this era of technological advancement, measurement of performance of many aspects of a business need to be measured to high degree of accuracy for purposes of planning and resource allocation. The 70:20:10 model offers a major challenge to this level of performance measurement since the largest part of the model deals with behavioural learning which is very difficult to measure objectively. A method of measuring the productivity in the workplace based on the behavioural learning is yet to be developed and this poses a huge challenge to the implementation of the model in business organization (Calvert et al 1994). Most business leaders need objective statistics which they can use to convince investors and use to allocate scarce organizational resources, and the use of this model will to some extent present uncertainties on the part of the organization (McCall 2010).
The use of the model in business organizations is very difficult. Though theoretically the model appears simple and straight forward, its practical application is not so. This is because of the behavioural nature that the model advocates. It is easier to establish formal learning channels in the organization than employ informal channels where measurement of progress is not possible (Jennings 2008).
Conclusion
The 70:20:10 model is an ideal method which can be used to improve workplace learning and development. It offers a straightforward method that can be used to allocate learning and development resources in the organization in a manner which is efficient since it shifts focus from formal learning which is usually very expensive (Lindsey et al 1987). Formal learning should be limited to those situations which it is unavoidable and a business organization should at all times minimise the level of resources that are used for formal learning within the organization. Informal learning through observation and mentorship should be encouraged (Barth 1990).
The employment of this model is also ideal because it offers a seamless connection of the various modes of learning within the organization. Formal learning and informal learning in the workplace are integrated in such a manner that no conflict of the two modes of learning occurs and the results are most cost effective and convenient for the organization. The use of this model, if well managed and applied will most likely result in cost savings for any business organization.
References
Allman, P. 1982. “New perspectives on the adult: an argument for lifelong education”, International Journal of Lifelong Education, Vol.1 No.1, pp. 41-51.
Argyris, C. 1994. “The future of workplace learning and performance”, Training and Development, May, special supplement, pp. s36-s47.
Barth, R.S. 1990. “Building a community of learners”, Schools from Within: Teachers, Parents and Principals Can Make a Difference, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 37-48.
Beck, M. 1989. “Learning organisations: how to create them”, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol 21, May/June, pp. 21-8.
Boswell, T., 1995. “Lifelong learning: a framework for discussion”, Adults Learning, May, pp. 258-63.
Calvert, G., Mobley, S. and Marshall, L., 1994. “Grasping the learning organisation”, Training and Development, June, pp. 39-43.
Carnevale, A.P. and Carnevale, E.S., 1994. “Growth patterns in workplace training”, Training and Development, May, special supplement, pp. s22-s8.
Cross, J .2007. Informal Learning: Rediscovering the Natural Pathways that Inspire Innovation and Performance. Wiley & Sons, San Francisco.
Jennings, C. 2008. ‘The point-of-need: Where effective learning really matters’, Advance: Saffron Interactive, London.
Lindsey, E. H., Homes, V. and McCall, M. W .1987., Key Events in Executives’ Lives, Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, North Carolina.
Loewenstein, M. A. & Spletzer, J. R .1998., ‘Informal training: A review of existing data and some new evidence’, National Longitudinal Surveys Discussion Paper, US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, DC.
McCall, M. W. 2010., ‘Peeling the onion: Getting inside experience-based leadership development’, Industrial & Organizational Psychology, vol. 3, issue 1, pp. 61-68.
