Think big, think human capability
It has been fascinating to read open letters from two former Number Ten advisers to Jeremy Heywood who is the new Cabinet Secretary and – as both Phil Collins and James Purnell suggest - effectively the head of the civil service.
Phil’s piece is, as always, entertaining and full of cleverness but while it is primarily focused on statecraft, I found James’ call for a genuine national strategy more arresting. In various forums I have been saying for at least a decade that we need to change a political discourse in which values are bland, and ends opaque, while controversy focuses on exaggerated differences over the technocratic detail of reform. But I will repress my desire to shout ‘I had that thought first!’ and welcome someone much more important than me making a similar point:
Whitehall’s secret is that it never has a discussion about what the big choices should be. Are we going to be a larger Sweden, with world class public services but no military aspirations? Or a more successful Ireland, with low taxes but targeted welfare? Or a smaller Brazil, creative, unequal but flexible and prosperous? We avoid vision and don’t attempt strategy.
But what should be the focus of a national strategy? Here I think Purnell is in danger of falling into the same trap as Collins and seeing the starting point as what kind of state we need. Instead I think we should focus on the question; what kind of people do we need? This is to put the RSA’s core concern – human capability – at the heart of the debate.
The starting point here is our old friend ‘the social aspiration gap’, which exists between the future most people aspire to for Britain and the course upon which current modes of thought and behavior have set us. Or to put it another way: ‘how can we enable people to be the people they need to be to create the future they say they want?’
This question poses challenges for the right and left. The right will worry at its social interventionist tone (the main reason so many Tories are suspicious of the Big Society) while the left will find it hard to shift their focus from a state-centric to a citizen-centric model of change.
So here is my suggestion to Jeremy Heywood: I agree with Phil and James, you need to think big (and, by the way, having worked with you I suspect this may be a challenge precisely because you are so brilliant and assiduous when it comes to detail). How about suggesting to the Prime Minister that he frames the long term challenge for Britain in terms of the capabilities our citizens need to meet our shared aspirations? (By the way, this is much salient to the nation’s prospects than levels of wellbeing).
To get you started, here is one way you could frame the core metrics needed to shape a national capability strategy. As the basis for an annual index, I suggest a set of equations. This enables you to balance both aspiration and the need to focus on the most disadvantaged. Try these for starters:
Enterprise
The rate of business start-ups minus the rate of first year business failure
Education
The proportion of young people getting decent level three qualifications (by far and away the most important level for employability) minus the number without level two qualifications
Health
The proportion engaged in sport or physical activity minus the proportion that are obese
Community
The proportion of people who volunteer regularly minus the proportion who have been the victim of crime
Resilience
The proportion of people with significant assets or savings versus the proportion in serious debt
I can already see problems with this list but at least most of the data is easily available, so you can get stared quickly. Over time you’re bound to identify and collect better measures. But the key point is for Government to have a set of strategic goals which, by their nature, can only be delivered by citizens themselves. This means an active Government but one that knows its actions must ultimately be judged by the degree to which they mobilise civil society.
Perhaps, to help, the RSA could even develop such an index itself.
Comments
4 Comments on Think big, think human capability
-
Tom Brookes on
Fri, 14th Oct 2011 1:39 pm
-
Mike Chitty on
Sat, 15th Oct 2011 9:18 am
-
Mike Chitty on
Sat, 15th Oct 2011 9:24 am
-
Russell Webster on
Sat, 15th Oct 2011 2:52 pm
It’s quite a Socratic idea, this social aspiration gap, isn’t it?
What is the good life we should be striving for… & how do we get there.
I read that article yesterday & found its point interesting but its recommendations limited. What is the vision of what the UK could be, nay can be?
Liberal, inclusive citizen led democracy, equal and a world leader in technological and social innovation seem like fine goals (I’m sure there are a million bits of vision for the UK I’ve missed) – but I don’t know that I’m convinced GDP growth & entrepreneurialism are necessarily the best way to close that ‘social aspiration gap’.
I’d speculate that part of the problem stems from our political class and their utter lack of bravery for fear of loosing out at elections, or being labelled idealists & utopian dreamers by an increasing feral media. We need to reform politics before it can start working properly on society – as political culture is the foundation of social improvement, & the shifting quagmire of politics doesn’t encourage the setting of strong social foundations. (Sorry to borrow Cameron’s house-building metaphor, but it seemed a good fit!), particularly when even those involved with ‘Big Society’ projects don’t want the Big Society brand attached to their work – http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b015yr4w/Newsnight_12_10_2011/ (last 15/20 minutes, though the rest is worth a watch, especially Steve Coogan on the deplorable antics of the trash tabloids).
Wrong metric for enterprise I am afraid. Enterprising folk are needed throughout society – not just in business start ups.
Much to love in this piece except for the metrics.
Just the wrong metric for enterprise I am afraid. Enterprising folk are needed throughout society – not just in business start ups. Metric for enterprise should be something like the percentage of people who believe that they are ‘living their lives boldly’.
Also the wrong metric for education! We don’t want paper qualifications, we want young people with passion, influence, creativity and imagination. People who are comfortable with strangers and know how to use social capital in the pursuit of progress. 5 grades A-C tells us nothing about these qualities that count.
And community has little to do with volunteering – it has to do with feeling supported and valued, helping and being helped. It is not about counting volunteering hours.
As thought-provoking as ever. I think the ‘social aspiration gap’ concept is a great way to focus our thinking on what we want to achieve in a given field. So much so that I have piggy-backed on your post to ask the question for drug treatment.
http://www.russellwebster.com/Blog/?p=511
Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
RSA Animate
RSA Mobile
RSA Comment- RSA Projects Blogs
RSA Bookshop
The RSA Bookshop, in partnership with Blackwell's the UK's leading academic bookseller, offers Fellows and friends an opportunity to purchase books and to explore our speakers’ ideas in greater detail. Visit the RSA Bookshop.