Read on Twitter
In theory there are three routes for talent development.
The first is to simply increase the number participating across the board - in doing so you will get more performers in the high performer 'tail' of the bell curve...
The first is to simply increase the number participating across the board - in doing so you will get more performers in the high performer 'tail' of the bell curve...
The 2nd is to focus our efforts on the high performer tail to the exclusion of the rest (thus increase the standard deviation)
This assumes we are able to identify the high performers in the population
Sadly our ability to do this in practice is not stellar
This assumes we are able to identify the high performers in the population
Sadly our ability to do this in practice is not stellar
..also a major downside is that the performance of the population as a whole goes down due to being neglected.
This is particularly problematic if the population as a whole includes the talent that we were unable to identify
This is particularly problematic if the population as a whole includes the talent that we were unable to identify
Finally, we can seek to increase the mean performance for the population - increasing the numbers and raising the level of the high performer tail as a result
Clearly option 3 is a utopia that may not be achievable given limits on investment.
Blended approach of increasing participation plus diversifying talent development strategy to reach a wider pool in addition to identified current high performers will nonetheless increase yield!
Blended approach of increasing participation plus diversifying talent development strategy to reach a wider pool in addition to identified current high performers will nonetheless increase yield!
The full deep dive on the topic can be read here: https://informedinsport.com/new-blog/rethinking-talent-id-and-development
The figures are adapted from Cornet & Stager's 2014 publication: https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/ijspp/10/5/article-p626.xml
