During the weekend I had to make a choice between two people in a ballot.  (Actually I didn’t really have a choice, but the illusion remains.)  And during the course of the decision making process some one mentioned the fact that both people putting their heads on the chopping block were of an outstanding calibre.  The comment made me wonder, just what is it that puts a person in that category.

Both were professionals, one a small business owner, the other who had been active in business bodies.  One was also active in community support organizations that were not just related to business and had children.  The other would be in trouble if he had children as he’s only been married a couple of months.   

Workin hard, being confident and passionate and being involved with people outside your direct sphere are good, but are they outstanding?  Or is my perspective tainted by the circles I move in as whilst both these people seemed to be good and able to do the role, I wasn’t sure just how noteworthy they are.  I will include in my assumptions for this little rant, that a person who aspires to be considered outstanding, noteworthy or any sort of leader, should be better than me in most aspects.  

Being in a professional line of work and most of my jobs requiring a university education, I almost expect it to be the norm.  Looking at the ABS site, of every one over the age of 15, 51.5% have done further education after school and 19.6% have completed uni education.  2.95% have completed to the same level as me (post graduate degree).  One of the fellows in question did not present his academic qualifications.  The other claimed to be a candidate for a degree (which I think is saying he may not have finished it).  Fair enough. We don’t all go to uni and some of our top community and business leaders haven’t either.  As long as there’s something there to compensate it’s all good.

Both candidates had a steady work history.  Which is important, however at a time when unemployment has been quite low for quite a few years, it’s to be expected.  Also they both weren’t so young they had never worked.

One claimed a connection with a business body in the area, which again is good, and not run of the mill…  except with professionals.  Professionals, associated professionals and managers make up 40.2% of the population (and this is by no means saying those in other roles are unimportant).  The majority of these people would be part of a professional association (as opposed to a union) and or some sort of industry body.  So being active in the business community, would actually be compulsory for some one in a professional or semi-professional role.  Being active or on the board would be exceptional, however you’d need to be highly recognised in your field and have the time.  So perhaps that that sort of outstanding is in the realms of fantasy.

What is not in the realm of fantasy is some sort of professional recognition or leadership.  Contributing to discourse, competition and recognition.  This is an important aspect of some one I would consider exceptional.  Whilst they don’t have to have written volumes, they do have to have put forward and opinion on how to do things better in their field at some poing.

Additionally working in an organisation that encourages excellence is a must if the person is not involved in running their own business.  There are some companies, organisations and government bodies that do not do this or do not add anything to the world we live in which would generally be considered a negative point.

I feel the urge to add community involvement here as well.  But community is such a subjective word as is involvement.  Is involvement as much as turning up to the local swimming pool and saying hello to people every now and again or does it mean some sort of commitment such as doing a weekly shift at meals on wheels or a crisis counselling centre and having a tangible positive impact on the people around you?  The latter is a big call, requiring more time than most professional people have.  However I would settle for them supporting some one who was involved in the community in this way or they are regularly able to give money that puts them in the small group of people who make significant donations to the group.  At the very least I would say a person demonstrates themselves to be extraordinary in community involvement if they are regularly involved in an organisation that gives them exposure to a broad cross section of the community – church, sports clubs, voluntary organisations are all indicators of some one with a strong commitment to the social environment in which they live.  Over and above that are people who sacrifice their time and other career goals to run these organisations and these people again are very very rare.

Being who I am, I also think that good character is important.  Again this is a subjective measure, but key is that the person lacks any anti-social behaviour, any signs of a significant personality disorder and any mental illness they have is treated to the point that they can function well in the field they have chosen to achieve in.  The person should not have any criminal record, or have any disposition to being violent, abusive, bitter, a bully, revenge seeking, have a great number of interpersonal conflicts and enemies or a lax attitude towards being law abiding (in themselves and others).  They should always strive to be the best, to see the best in others and to alter what they can to give the most benefit to all.  They should be as honest and courageous as possible and not rely on denigrating others to build themselves up.  As far as possible they should show logical thinking and commonsense as well as show little willingness to condemn or be prejudiced in thinking.  A person of good character must also be considerate of the needs of others (be they the beneficiaries of a community group, employees or share holders) without sacrificing their sense of self and be able to maintain confident and healthy self imaged.  They must be thick skinned but also open to fair criticism.  And above all they can not be out for success at any cost (although I do acknowledge that the price of success is high).  As far as possible they must also have a balanced attitude towards their family and friends, although this is also difficult given the time it takes to devote to be excellent at work and other pursuits.

Finally, there are the peerless few who are actually leaders in their field or have gained wide spread recognition for their achievements in their field.  These people do not have to be as well balanced as some one who is more generally excellent, however, for them to be truly deserving of their position and this description they need to also show good character – still being approachable and not too self-important.

I will also add that women who have devoted themselves solely to their children and spouse deserve to be in this group if their family members are high-achievers because of their support.

So there it is.  There is probably more, and I may be a harsh judge, but I don’t expect to come across true excellence every day.  I don’t mind people who aren’t outstanding or extraordinary aspiring to make something of themselves.  But I do like to see that adjective used carefully.

On a finishing note I would like to say that I do admire the people who led me to this rant as they are both braver than I am in not only aspiring to this role, but for being willing to fight for it.  I could only vote for one of them and in the end it had to be based on my personal exposure rather than some objective measure.  But the whole thing did lead me to some very long and convoluted thoughts.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/7d12b0f6763c78caca257061001cc588/DAFB02C706E30C45CA257236000346B0?opendocument (education)

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/7d12b0f6763c78caca257061001cc588/41433590903656DECA257236000146CB?opendocument (levels of employment)