From 70-20-10 to 3-to-1: How workplace learning is evolving
In today’s fast-moving world of AI tools, hybrid teams and flexible careers, effective learning is more important than ever. But how should organisations and individuals structure learning for real results?
Two models have shaped how we think about development at work 70-20-10 and, more recently, 3-to-1. While they’re different in design, both aim to help people learn through real-world experience, not just formal training. Here’s how they compare.
What is the 70-20-10 model?
This model suggests that successful professional learning happens in three parts:
- 70% through experience: doing the job
- 20% through others: mentoring, feedback, role-modelling
- 10% through formal learning: courses and structured training
“The 70-20-10 model makes learning part of the culture, not just the calendar.”
– Growth Engineering
Why it worked, and still can:
The model helped shift thinking away from classrooms and towards continuous learning at work. When applied well, it:
- Encourages mentoring and feedback
- Supports learning by doing
- Makes development more personal and relevant
But it’s not without its challenges, especially in today’s digital, remote and AI-enabled workplaces.
What’s changed since the model was introduced?
The 70-20-10 model was based on executive reflections in the 1980s. Since then, the world of work has transformed:
- Work is more digital and distributed
- Learning is often micro-based, virtual, or AI-supported
- The original percentages were never meant to be a rule
Organisations today need learning models that fit modern work patterns, and that’s where the 3-to-1 model comes in.
Introducing the 3-to-1 model
The 3-to-1 learning model is a newer, more flexible approach. For every 1 hour of formal learning, aim for:
- 3 hours of practice: applying skills to real tasks
- 2 conversations: with peers, mentors or coaches
- 1 hour of structured learning: such as a course or workshop
“You wouldn’t learn to drive just by reading the highway code. Learning sticks when you use it.”
– Kevin Kruse, Forbes
Why this model might resonate more today:
The 3-to-1 model:
- Feels more achievable for busy learners
- Encourages managers to support peer learning and feedback
- Fits hybrid and tech-enhanced work environments
Comparison table: 70-20-10 vs 3-to-1
| Aspect | 70-20-10 | 3-to-1 |
|---|---|---|
| Structure | Fixed percentage model | Flexible time ratio |
| Focus | Experience, relationships, training | Application, conversation, formal learning |
| Best for | Culture change, broad planning | Action plans, modern work settings |
| Criticisms | Hard to measure, dated origins | Still emerging, less researched |
Which model is best for you?
Both models emphasise that learning is most powerful when it’s:
- Integrated into work
- Social, shared, and discussed
- Backed by formal training where needed
Whether you use 70-20-10 or 3-to-1, the key is to make learning part of everyday life, not an occasional event. That’s how individuals and teams keep growing.
