Given the column inches inspired by the Leitch Review over the past couple of years, it would easy to believe our looming skills crisis is unique in the nation's history. Our Elizabethan ancestors, however, found themselves having to tackle a very similar situation, with all its attendant social issues.
The Oxford Companion to British History tells us that in response to 'growing concern at the number of masterless men, increasing vagabondage, and escalating crime' the Statute of Artificers was passed in 1563 to 'banish idleness' and 'advance husbandry'. In short, it was a 16th-century version of Train to Gain - and at its heart were apprenticeships.
Apprenticeships had been around since at least the 12th century, but the Statute made it illegal for anyone to practise a trade without having first served a period as an apprentice to a master. And to ensure that training was conducted to the required standards, members of trade guilds were made responsible for checking the quality of the apprenticeships offered by masters.
On completion of an apprenticeship, a young person became a journeyman who could charge a daily rate for their work and who would aspire to further develop their skills to become a master in their own right. And from the time of Shakespeare until the early years of the Industrial Revolution this was the skills development model that drove the British economy.
So would I advocate a return to this model? Of course not - the Statute of Artificers was a pre-industrial solution to a pre-industrial problem. However, as Mark Twain observed "the past may not repeat itself ... but it rhymes" and I believe a skills model that operated successfully for around 250 years may yield useful lessons for the future.
The first thing that stands out is that the process by which skills were transferred between a master and an apprentice is very different from the process used in the academic setting that dominates our current model of education. There are some skills where there's no substitute for hands-on learning in the actual environment where that skill will be used. Perhaps not surprisingly, these are the self-same skills that are currently in short supply across the entire labour market.
Another feature is the way in which, under the overall umbrella of the Statute, it was the guilds themselves that set and policed the standards of apprenticeships within their particular trade. Thinking about our current situation it's clear that sector skills councils and major employers must rise to the challenge of creating and consistently delivering apprenticeships of the highest standards - standards every bit as demanding as those found in our academic institutions.
However, the main lesson from this model is that it encouraged young people to be ambitious. Because, although the skills of future journeymen will help boost our economy, it's their ambition that will drive out some of the injustices we face in our society.
For example, research shows that the development of low aspirations before the age of 16 is a major factor in young people from disadvantaged groups being six-times less likely to enter higher education than those from advantaged backgrounds. On the other hand, the Department for Children Schools and Families has pointed out that young people who receive quality workplace training are more likely to aspire to undertake further learning.
The past may not repeat itself, but I'm sure that if Good Queen Bess were to take a look at Lord Leitch's report and some recent issues of the Daily Mail she would find a great deal that resonated with the issues she tackled four centuries ago. And given the right response by Government and employers I'm sure she would also agree that, in the words of William Shakespeare, 'the golden age is before us, not behind us'.
- David Fairhurst is senior vice-president/chief people officer, McDonald's Restaurants Northern Europe.
