70-20-10 Model for Trainers: Design Beyond the Workshop

The 70-20-10 Model is a workplace learning idea that says people develop through a mix of experience, relationships, and formal learning. In simple terms: people learn a lot from doing the work, some from other people, and some from courses or training.

For trainers, the model is useful because it challenges one bad habit.

We sometimes design as if the workshop is the whole learning journey.

It is not.

The workshop may start the learning. It may give language, structure, practice, confidence, and shared direction.

But if the workplace does not support application, the training room becomes a good memory instead of a real change.

That is the point of 70-20-10.

Not to make formal training look small.

To remind us that training must connect to work.

What is the 70-20-10 Model?

The 70:20:10 Institute describes 70:20:10 as a different view of work, performance, and learning, with learning integrated into the flow of work rather than limited to formal courses.

The common version of the model breaks workplace learning into three parts:

1. About 70 percent from job-related experience
2. About 20 percent from relationships, feedback, mentoring, and social learning
3. About 10 percent from formal learning such as courses, workshops, or training

Training Industry summarizes the model in a similar way: job-related experiences, interactions with others, and formal educational events.

For leadership development, the Center for Creative Leadership explains the rule as learning through challenging assignments, developmental relationships, and coursework or training.

That gives trainers a practical reminder.

If your design stops at the course, it is probably unfinished.

The simple distinction: event vs ecosystem

An event asks:

"What will happen during the workshop?"

An ecosystem asks:

"What will help people keep learning after the workshop?"

Both matter.

The event gives focus.

The ecosystem gives transfer.

No sugar coating: if participants return to a workplace where managers do not ask about the learning, peers do not practise together, and systems reward the old behavior, the workshop has to fight alone.

That is a hard fight.

The trainer can still do good work. But good work inside the room is not enough when the real behavior happens outside the room.

How trainers should use the model

Use 70-20-10 as a design lens, not as a strict mathematics exercise.

Do not waste energy arguing whether the percentages are exact.

The more useful question is:

"Where will learning continue?"

For a communication workshop, the answer might look like this:

• Formal learning: a half-day workshop on difficult conversations
• Social learning: peer practice circles for managers after the session
• Experiential learning: one real conversation each manager must prepare, hold, and reflect on

For an AI training program, the answer might look like this:

• Formal learning: prompt-thinking practice in the room
• Social learning: team sharing of useful prompts and failed attempts
• Experiential learning: each participant applies AI to one real workplace output

Now the workshop is not the finish line.

It becomes the launchpad.

Why the 10 percent still matters

Some people misuse 70-20-10.

They hear "only 10 percent is formal training" and conclude that training is not important.

That is too shallow.

Formal learning can create the shared language people need before they practise.

It can make hidden patterns visible.

It can give people a safe place to try, fail, receive feedback, and try again.

It can stop workplace learning from becoming random trial and error.

The problem is not formal training.

The problem is formal training that is disconnected from the work.

Think about learning to drive.

You can read the manual. You can attend a lesson. You can watch someone explain parking.

Useful.

But at some point, you must sit in the car, check the mirrors, move slowly, panic a little, adjust, and try again.

The lesson matters because it prepares the doing.

The doing matters because it turns instruction into ability.

What about the evidence?

Be careful with the model.

The 70-20-10 numbers are widely used in L&D, but they should not be treated as a universal scientific law.

ATD has discussed the evidence question around 70-20-10 and why learning professionals should think critically about the model rather than repeat it blindly.

That matters for credible trainers.

Do not say, "Research proves exactly 70 percent of learning always comes from experience."

Say something more honest:

"The 70-20-10 Model reminds us to design beyond formal training and connect learning to work, relationships, and practice."

That sentence is safer.

It is also more useful.

A trainer-friendly way to design with 70-20-10

Before you finalize a program, map three layers.

First, the 10 layer.

What formal learning will participants receive?

This includes the workshop, slides, examples, practice tasks, frameworks, and facilitator input.

Second, the 20 layer.

Who will help learners after the session?

This may include managers, peers, buddies, mentors, coaches, or team leads.

Third, the 70 layer.

What real work will learners apply this to?

This is the most important question.

If there is no workplace application, the model becomes decoration.

For example, in a presentation skills program:

• 10: teach structure, opening, audience analysis, and delivery techniques
• 20: pair participants for feedback on a real presentation
• 70: require each participant to deliver or improve one real workplace presentation

Now the training has a bridge.

Common mistakes to avoid

The first mistake is treating the numbers like a compliance formula.

You do not need exactly 70 percent of one thing, 20 percent of another, and 10 percent of another in every program.

You need a learning design that does not depend only on classroom exposure.

The second mistake is using 70-20-10 to reduce training investment.

That misses the point.

The model should improve the learning ecosystem, not become an excuse to remove support.

The third mistake is forgetting the manager.

Managers often control whether learning gets applied.

If the manager does not know what changed in the workshop, they cannot reinforce it.

The fourth mistake is calling work experience "learning" without reflection.

People can repeat bad habits for years.

Experience alone does not guarantee learning. That is where Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle is a useful companion.

How it connects to other learning models

Use 70-20-10 with other models in the series.

ADDIE helps you design the learning process.

Bloom's Taxonomy helps you clarify what learners should be able to do.

Kirkpatrick helps you think about evidence and transfer.

70-20-10 helps you ask:

"Where does learning continue after the formal session?"

That question changes the design.

A 15-minute action step

Take one program you already run.

Draw three columns:

1. Formal learning
2. Social support
3. Workplace application

Then fill in one practical item for each column.

If the second and third columns are empty, the program is probably relying too much on the workshop.

Do not panic.

Just add one follow-up conversation, one peer practice task, or one real work assignment.

Small transfer design is better than no transfer design.

FAQ

Is 70-20-10 a rule or a guide?

Treat it as a guide. The percentages are a memorable way to think about workplace learning, but trainers should not present them as exact universal numbers.

Does 70-20-10 mean workshops are not useful?

No. It means workshops should connect to real work, feedback, and application. Formal learning is still useful when it prepares people to practise better.

How can a trainer apply 70-20-10 without controlling the workplace?

Start small. Add manager briefing notes, peer practice, reflection tasks, or one workplace assignment. Trainers may not control the full system, but they can design better bridges.

Final takeaway

It is about making learning bigger than the training day.

The workshop matters.

But the workplace is where the learning proves itself.

Related reading:

• Kirkpatrick Model for Trainers: Start Evaluation Earlier
• Kolb's Cycle for Trainers: Do, Reflect, Think, Try Again
• ADDIE for Trainers: Do Not Start With Slides

If you want this adapted for your trainers, teams, or facilitation workflow, contact Kny.