70, 20, 10

I've been talking about 70, 20, 10 models for a good time, and it seems that it's applicable in a wide number of different contexts. Generally, it relates to the idea that the majority of time, focus, attention or resources should be focused on established practices or core methods, but room should be left for both extending those core approaches and taking them in new directions, but also for completely new ideas and input.

So in learning and development, the idea is that powerful learning comes from a combination of on-the-job experience and problem solving (70%), feedback and examples (20%), and training courses and material (10%). Eric Schmidt famously described how Google stimulates innovation by expecting employees to dedicate 70% of their time to core business tasks, 20% to related projects and 10% to unrelated activities.

It's also (as Coca Cola have demonstrated) a useful way to begin thinking about more agile budgeting and content strategies with 70% focused on low risk, bread and butter activity, 20% innovating off what works, and 10% being high risk ideas that could be tomorrow's 20% and 70%. And I think you can take that concept and apply it to create a useful model for content planning.  

I've been wondering why this idea seems to be cropping up more and more, and is relevant for so many different aspects of what we do, I think it's because the structure of the model is so apt for the times we live in:

70%... because video didn't kill the radio star, and the start of something new rarely means that previous approaches are completely redundant, replaced or dead.

20%... since, with the availability of expeditious feedback, test and learn processes and the ability to more quickly and easily optimise and amplify should now be common prcoesses

10%... because the rapidity of market change means that every organisation has to build in space for continuous and embedded experimentation if they are not to be outcompeted

I think we often get stuck, and find it difficult to think outside of the confines of established practices, or to change habits that become ingrained. So this is a useful way of developing a framework that is more befitting of the environment in which we all find ourselves, whilst not abandoning tried, tested and perfectly appropriate knowledge, understanding and techniques.

Comments

[Tim Fremmich Andresen]

I love 70 / 20 / 10! But I am still struggling to find any cases from advertising. I know Coke, Red Bull etc. use it. But have you come across anyone with actual expamples of Cokes output? TV and print is of course 70, but what are 20 and 10 examples? Vending Machines started as a 10, then moved to 20 and now 70? And what are some content cases?

[Alex Brands]

This might be an example of what your looking for: http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=1325599149

[Duncan Southgate]

Hi Neil, hope all’s well. I wonder if 70:20:10 is itself evolving from a 10% discipline (a framework applied only by very innovative companies) into more of a 20% or even a 70% discipline (becoming better understood and applied by ever more companies)? The beauty of the model is that it is really flexible. Since we started considering the model at Millward Brown in 2009 http://bit.ly/MB_PBN , we’ve worked to flesh it out in a point of view http://bit.ly/MB_702010 , and adapted the thinking for the automotive category in this AdMap paper http://bit.ly/MB_201010_auto . Not only does it work brilliantly for channel planning, it also helps raise really useful questions about your marketing objectives, and what kind of research should be applied against the activity. The other thing that will ensure its longevity is that media opportunities may come and go, but the 70:20:10 framework remains nicely fixed.

[neilperkin]

@Tim there are some examples of brands starting to operate in this way but I think that's the point isn't it? That this a shift that needs to happen. For me, 70,20,10 is a way into more agile approaches without abandoning perfectly appropriate established practices