The course of the discussions at this ASL session devoted to Italy’s human resources was premised on two widely-accepted propositions. The first of these – deemed beyond question – is that, today, human capital is to all intents and purposes to be notionally considered an asset in the country’s balance sheet. The second is that, for decades in Italy, this very same capital has been little valued, underutilized and even wasted, a view backed up by increasingly alarming comparative studies that paint a picture of a society where social mobility has come to a standstill and whose performance is undeniably lagging behind the average for its European and international competitors. Further corroboration of this is found in the numbers, which for years have pointed to a country of weak growth, rising inequalities, stalled productivity, and falling employment. In particular, it was noted that the percentage of young people who have been forced out of or who have never gained entry to the labor market is on the rise, as is the number of those who do not complete their course of studies. Finally, the annual exodus of talent seeking opportunities for personal and professional fulfillment abroad is also increasing.
It was observed that assessing the role played by human resources in furthering Italy’s competitive development solely through the objective lens of statistics ends up lending substance to the many varied – and indeed the bleakest – prospects of decline hanging over the country. Yet these risks, though clearly exacerbated by the effects of the global crisis, have their origins in certain problems made chronic by Italy’s incomplete process of modernization. The factors weighing heavily on this situation include a North/South divide never tackled in earnest, labored if not non-existent relations between all levels of the education system and industry, and the absence of a comprehensive strategy for reviving the country’s fortunes. It was suggested that the common thread running through all these factors is the difficulty encountered in forging or building up a stock of social capital genuinely capable of installing itself as a virtuous link between institutions and the economy.
The participants thus felt that the three key concepts of mobility, employability and networkability could be said to sum up neatly the development dilemma facing contemporary Italy – a mirror which, when held up to Italian society, reveals it as fragmented and vulnerable, struggling to be cohesive and competitive, and held together more by family bonds or informal relationships than by any real or shared spirit of community. These negative indicators were said to point to a system with a social elevator that is “out of order”, and in which young people are no longer being guaranteed the opportunities and hopes once enjoyed by the generations that preceded them.
Yet, against the backdrop of the monumental (geopolitical, demographic and technological) transformation underway, and in the depths of a recession that has few precedents in recent economic history, the crisis itself was seen as affording an opportunity, even in this case, to introduce changes “on the go” to a system which clearly no longer functions as it should, especially in cultural terms and with regards to its political approach to the issue at hand. Indeed, without wishing to detract from the importance of the lessons learned vis-à-vis the unshirkable responsibilities of decision-makers as a whole, it was felt that lessons can also be drawn from the crisis regarding how to capitalize best on the country’s resources, notwithstanding the current squeeze on available funds and the consequent reduced scope for public intervention. Those lessons – it was suggested – would be to consider people as representing valuable resources to be optimized and networked rather than further dissipated, and hence, to view investment in people as an investment in the community and its future; to move on from paying mere lip service to merit-based culture and embark on an active change of paradigm that shifts the focus away from scrutinizing procedures to evaluating results; and to import best practices systematically and use them as benchmarks for the purposes of innovation and for ensuring that choices are made selectively, that skilled human capital is attracted, and that education and training policies reflect the real needs of the national production system.
In conclusion, the participants felt that it was once again a question of transforming a constraint into an opportunity, and hence, of turning the three watchwords of mobility, employability and networkability into keys to try and unleash the country’s potential, thereby enabling it to regain the seemingly lost path to development and competitiveness.