70-20-10 and the Dominance of Informal Learning: A Fact in Search of Evidence

Abstract

It is now widely accepted that informal learning plays a critical role in all workplace learning. Five different literature traditions examined here seemingly converge on the claim that 70% or more of work-based learning occurs informally. Referred to here as the 70% rule, that rule is now seen as a basic fact in the field. Yet a detailed examination of this literature finds that the evidential basis for the 70% rule is weak; human resource development (HRD) policies relying upon that claim are likely to be misleading. The research and scholarship cited in these traditions are critiqued in terms of sloppy scholarship, inconsistent conceptualizations, and fundamental research protocol problems. The implications from this review suggest that the 70% rule of informal learning needs to be set aside. The conclusions to this research offer propositions for redefining the focus of formal and informal work-based learning along with revising the role of HRD in organizations.

The rise of technology and impact on skills

“…The evolution of workplace communication, collaboration, information, and learning technologies reflects a gradual transition from learning away from work (e.g., traditional classroom-based training or online courses) toward collaborative problem solving and a seamless integration of learning and work (e.g., online communities or instant messengers) (Rosenberg, 2006). The workplace learning literature also emphasizes the potential efficacy of combining informal learning with formal learning on the provision of proper organizational support (Clardy, 2018). Indeed, recent practices in developed countries reflect the changing shift from structured training to in-time and on-demand learning.…”

The 70:20:10 framework and the transfer of learning

“…In undertaking this study, we contribute to the literature by highlighting the role of social learning as a mechanism that potentially integrates formal and experiential learning, thereby enabling learning transfer. This extends Clardy's (2018) work by recognizing that not only does experiential learning need to have structure to be valuable, but also that such value develops by connecting it directly to formal learning via social learning.…”

“…Our data indicate that senior managers expect middle managers to develop managerial capability by learning from experiences through the ongoing practices of their job or while acting in more senior roles for short periods of time. However, as Clardy () has recently suggested, the “70” rule, reflecting experiential learning, actually relates to the gamut of learning experiences that occur in adulthood; it does not specifically relate to the development of complex managerial skills. Consequently, it is a misconception that on‐the‐job learning and experiential learning are synonymous.…”

“…In this study, we specifically focus on implementation of the 70:20:10 framework to support learning transfer designed to develop middle managers in the Australian public sector. We do this because of the lack of empirical investigation of the 70:20:10 framework (see Clardy, 2018;Kajewski & Madsen, 2013). We also do this because of the important role that middle managers play in organizations (Currie & Procter, 2001;Embertson, 2006), their essential role in supporting the learning and development of the majority of an organization's employees, including their role in supporting the transfer of learning (70:20:10 Forum, 2015a; Enos et al, 2003;Lancaster, Di Milia, & Cameron, 2013) and because of claims that transfer of learning is more challenging in management development and government sectors (Awoniyi et al, 2002;Blume et al, 2010;Kirwan & Birchall, 2006;Laker & Powell, 2011;McCracken et al, 2012).…”

“…There are tools to diagnose factors that enhance or inhibit workplace learning transfer (e.g., The Learning Transfer System Inventory) (Holton III et al, ; Holton III, Bates, & Ruona, ) and frameworks of ideal transfer processes (Baldwin & Ford, ; Burke & Hutchins, ). In parallel, practitioner frameworks independent of scholarly research have been developed to overcome transfer challenges, but few have been empirically tested (Blume, Ford, Baldwin, & Huang, ; Clardy, ). In this article, we explore the implementation of the “70:20:10 framework,” because it has been widely adopted by human resource development (HRD) practitioners, particularly in the Australian public sector who believe it has potential to improve management development and learning transfer.…”