You can’t miss it nowadays: the worldwide press is filled with stories about the US Presidential Elections. Living in a country that probably has the most governments per citizen, I have already dealt with a fair deal of Elections and I’m always a bit intrigued by the process.
If you want to get “elected” for a position, the key is to convince as many people as possible that you are the best candidate. But very rarely I see the campaign being about past accomplishments. Nine times out of ten, the focus is on what the candidate will do in the future and why all others have failed and/or will do worse.
This is exactly the opposite of what is needed to get “selected” for a job. In interviews, the only thing that counts is your experience and accomplishments in the past. And it is certainly not-done to criticize any other candidates or any previous employers.
Still, the President is like the CEO of the country, someone who needs to manage it for the people. Then why do companies qualify on past proven accomplishments, and countries on “popularity”? Is that the way to get the best person for the job?
I don’t have an answer to this question, but I do believe in “the right (wo)man for the right job”. And therefore I would like to send out this little thought when you are selecting people for a certain job, task or role: Carefully analyze what is really needed and find the best person that fits the profile. And don’t be afraid if the person is not the most “popular”; that’s usually not what counts.
The most valuable treasures are often hidden deep down.