The 70-20-10 model for learning and development encounters skepticism for several reasons. Critics point out the absence of empirical evidence to substantiate the model and question its reliance on symmetrical figures (70%, 20%, 10%). Additionally, the self-reflective nature of the survey among successful managers could carry inherent biases, and the model's applicability may dwindle in the face of rapidly evolving online technologies affecting learning styles (Play is serious business). The lack of prescriptiveness and the outdatedness of the method further contribute to the critique.

It seems like a case of (Some models are wrong but still helpful #citation).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/70/20/10_Model_(Learning_and_Development)

#toolong