talent in context could likely mean either innate ability or learned skill. it's used fairly interchangeably however in either case more than a few of these would be wrong.
I'm sure by body language they could mean presentation and conversational skills which are learned skills. and do not require innate ability but by having acquired them could be considered a talent.
We get into a sort of double negative thing. “Talent” is a natural aptitude or skill. So all the things on this list you CAN be talented at, but they are also mostly things a person can learn or improve on as well. But.... like #8 is “be coachable.” If you have 0 ability at being coachable then you are not coachable because how could you be coached to be coachable if you have 0 ability at being coached? If you have at least SOME ability at being coached your coachability can be improved, but at 0... you can’t be coached. That’s total nonsense unless you’re supposed to be bitten by a radioactive coach or something and gain the ability to be coached spontaneously.
So having at least some natural ability in these should be a prerequisite- but it’s a hodge podge of nonsense. #3 is effort- so even if you don’t have 0 natural talent to put forth effort and are just bad at it... it takes effort to improve your ability to give effort- and improving any of these generally takes effort... so I mean... we could say it takes effectively no special talent to do any of these... but the implication is that anyone can do these things and in the same sense that anyone could be an astronaut or a world leader or an Olympic gold medalist that’s theoretically true... but in reality that’s kinda misleading.
For people with a higher rank to take advantage of you