Talent is not an elitist concept. It’s not just for the
XFactor and Eaton. We are the talent – we all have a talent – and life is about
finding and expressing our talent for the good of ourselves and others.
The Greeks were the first to use the word talent as a unit
of measure. A talent meant an amount of silver equivalent to about 9 years-worth
of skilled labour. What is the price of a young person’s talent so they can
have 9 years and more of skilled labour in today’s challenging environment? How do we invest in the talent young people
have, so they can thrive, and by doing so, enable our society to flourish?
It is a testament to everything that is wrong in our society
that we don’t ask that question enough, that we write endless blank cheques to
pay for the support required to keep someone, who has not expressed their
talent, in a lifelong dependency. Look beyond the stereotypes and you see it is the failure of the adults to care for and manage talent in young people
that defines our society. We have not
put the systems in place to ensure that everyone can find and harness their
talent. It’s our social system that isn’t working, not just the young people within
it.
How do we create something better? The Greeks were also, of
course, the inventor of the Olympics, and we could do well to turn to the
forerunner for today’s international Olympic committee down in Shropshire
where, in 1850, Brooks established what he called The Olympian Class -
"for the promotion of moral, physical and intellectual improvement". On similar terms, we could create our Olympian talent
class, to promote the talent of young people and encourage the community to be
part of its development. It's what the Foyer Federation is trying to build through our Open Talent work.
The end of the Olympics has seen a stream of articles
highlighting the contrast between our investment in the successful medal
winning team, and the lack of investment in basic sporting facilities and
opportunities for large groups of young people. This is an Olympic legacy
issue. But inspiring a generation is not just about playing more sport. It’s also
about what we can achieve in life, as individuals, as teams together, and as a
community for each other. There is a
bigger legacy issue at stake here in the Olympics: how we can be inspired to
think differently about how we invest in our next generation to ensure that
more people can perform to their potential in life to the benefit of all –
whether through sport, the arts, digital technology, business, and the thousand
different talents we express our working lives.
In our medal success at the Olympics, we can see a simple
equation: high quality coaching to develop skills, coupled with targeted
investment in resources and opportunities, together with a supportive community
of practice with high aspirations, generates the advantages required to
succeed. It is a winning formula. It is the formula that drives successful talent
development strategies in business as much as it is used in sport. So why is
this formula not used in the sphere it is most needed – the social sphere,
where talented young people battle inside a system and a way of thinking which
is geared around limiting their problems instead of nurturing their potential?
The Olympics is hugely expensive – but an Olympian
advantaged thinking approach need not be.
We spend billions of pounds on supporting people to cope with
disadvantages, when we could spend less to enable them to thrive through their
talent. It is a question of values, of
putting a value – both moral and economic – on the lives of our young
people. Putting a value on what a
positive future costs, against the cost of dependency and low aspiration. The
Olympics shows us what a systematic approach to nurturing talent can
create. What would be truly
inspirational is to use that approach where it is needed most, where it can
have a generational impact. If we value life, if we have values in our life,
then we must ensure each and every young person has access to the right
investments to create a better future for us all. Clare Balding claims the Olympics changed us
as people. If it has, then as changed people we need to change the disadvantaged thinking paradigm that is preventing people from realising their talents.
You only need to turn two letters around in the word latent
to produce the word talent. That’s the shift that Open Talent services are
trying to make in young people; that’s the shift we are trying to make in the
thinking of funders, charities, and society: to believe we can turn latent into
talent. The average ticket price to watch a London Olympics event was £40. What
is the cost of the ticket to open a young person’s ability, to invest in their life? What is the cost of us not contributing to that? One thing for sure –
a positive future for all our young people is worth so much to our sustainability as a planet, we simply can't afford not to achieve it.
