What the life of Nelson Mandela tells us about measuring human potential



The passing of Nelson Mandela has already prompted millions of words in tribute to his accomplishments. It has also led to all sorts of petty squabbles on internet forums, about everything from racism, to the legitimacy of the ANC’s terrorist activities to his personal life.

I have no intention of starting any debates here about any of these things. I feel it's much more constructive to talk about what his life can teach the rest of us.

The world has lost one of its most charismatic and inspirational figureheads. Nelson Mandela was a great man. He was also an imperfect man, born into a very imperfect world.

It's a simple fact of life that none of us are perfect. And our pasts are a cocktail of successes and failures. But in the eyes of those whose professional business it is to make judgement about others, imperfections, deviations and failures are often used in the calculation of our future value and potential.

Despite being frequently attributed to Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird, it was originally the Cherokee tribe of Native Americans, who said, 'Don't judge a man until you have walked a mile in his shoes'.

Nelson Mandela spent a total of 27 years in prison. He emerged without a trace of bitterness towards his captors. In later life he always looked for the best in people, even defending political opponents to his allies, who sometimes thought him too trusting of others.

Mandela was a devout believer in democracy and would abide by majority decisions even when deeply disagreeing with them. He held a conviction that inclusivity, accountability and freedom of speech were the fundamentals of democracy, and was driven by a belief in natural and human rights.

His achievements and personal qualities have elevated him to the level of a saint in the eyes of many. But he was characteristically modest about his accomplishments, saying  "I was not a messiah, but an ordinary man who had become a leader because of extraordinary circumstances."

In 1895, at the age of sixteen, Albert Einstein sat the entrance examinations for the Swiss Federal Polytechnic in Zurich (later the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule ETH). He failed to reach the required standard in the general part of the examination.

Another legend, Walt Disney was forced to file for bankruptcy in 1920 when his biggest client went bust. However, after few years, Walt launched a new company and created Mickey Mouse in 1928, which brought him financial freedom.

If we take anyone’s past record and assign it any importance as an indicator of the future, we are failing to understand that what people do is the outcome of a complex and unique blend of time, place, circumstance, personality, learning, aspirations, beliefs and options.

It’s a common notion that ‘past actions are the best indicator of future performance’. It may well be that people's basic characters do not change much. But character interacts with all the other situational factors to produce differing outcomes. In other words, put the same person in a different environment and a different outcome is more or less guaranteed.

So here’s the point. If we are to try and judge others, we’d better have a really good understanding of every aspect of their life history. If we don’t, our judgements cannot be reliable.

Just consider the common practices involved in recruiting people. The application pile is quickly reduced by rapid scanning to a small pile of 'best fits'. Average time spent - about 10 seconds per resume.

These remaining resumes are then examined forensically to try and find grounds to diminish an applicant’s suitability. Answers to interview questions are scrutinised to try and see if they reveal shortcomings. Ridiculous surrogates are used to try and assess an individual’s character, like their handshake or details of their hair and clothing.

How would Nelson Mandela stack up against these sorts of measurements?

“Mr Mandela, we've been looking at your application for the post of President of South Africa. Have you had any previous experience of being a national leader?”

“Could you tell me about a situation in which you had to overcome opposition to your ideas and how you went about it?”

“We operate a strict policy that all heads of state should have a clean police record. Have you ever been in trouble with the police or convicted of any offence?”


The future performance of an individual will be determined as much or more by the circumstances and experiences they have in the future as it will be by what has gone before.

The past is not a reliable predictor of the future.

And if organisations want to attract and keep the best people, they've got to try much harder to provide the conditions that allow their people to flourish. Create the right culture and environment and everyone performs better than they have ever done before.

The HR agenda should worry less about pseudo-scientific psychological evaluation and much more about how the daily work experience and environment equips and encourages people to be the best they can be.

Unless you are lucky enough to hire someone like Nelson Mandela who is so special, that punishment motivates them to do their greatest work. But you won't, because people like Nelson Mandela won't pass your screening process.


Success tips for using email and voicemail to get hired


By Neil Patrick

When we're job hunting and never hear back from a company we've approached by email or voicemail, it's tempting to give up and move on to the next prospect.

It's natural to conclude, either:

1. They’re not interested OR 

2. I messed up what I said OR

3. I won’t call again because I don’t want to be a pest

This is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Your email or telephone message might be to you the most important thing you did that day. But the truth is, it’s rarely the same priority for the recipient.

The reason you don’t get called back is usually that people are just too busy. If for any reason you don’t make it into their dozen or so must do tasks for the day, you’ll end up ignored, deleted and forgotten.


Getting a job is a sales and marketing job. Not a mechanical process. And therefore you need to think like a sales person not an engineer.

For many years I worked in direct marketing. Some people would call it junk mail. And I was pretty successful. I ran hundreds of campaigns and spent millions of pounds and my bosses were really happy with the massive growth in new business this generated.

You might think that to be a junk mail maestro means you have to employ all sorts of trickery and special methods. Well, it was a rigorous process of selecting the right people for the right offer, creating a great sales message, designing mail packs which were cost efficient and ensuring the customer inquiries were well looked after by the operational teams.

But here’s the thing. This great success was based on about a 1% response rate. Put another way, for every 100 letters we sent, 99 were ignored. But the 1% that were interested more than covered the costs of sending out the other 99. In fact, they made huge profits for the business.

And job hunting is no different. You have to work the numbers, not worry about the fact that not everyone will be interested or respond. They never will.

And as Jill Konrath explains here, you should never assume that no reply means you shouldn’t go back again…quite the opposite in fact as you’ll discover in this clip:



How (not) to get a six-figure salary job


By Neil Patrick

If you are going after the highest paying jobs around, it’s really important you do your homework and here’s why…

A little while ago I was approached by a head-hunter about a job.

At first I wasn't especially interested. It's not unusual for this to happen. But I looked into the job and it soon became clear this job was a great match for my skills and experience and I knew I’d be able to make a big contribution. It was a board level job in a plc. with a solid track record. It also had a very large salary and bonus attached.

I managed to extract from the head-hunter who the client was. Then I went to work. I mean really went to work. I got hold of every news report, annual accounts report and company statement I could find. I tracked the share price history. I used LinkedIn and other social media to discover the name and background of every senior person in the business. I researched their competitors. And their competitors’ strategies. I made notes on all the market sector reports and analysis I could find.

This research suggested to me some strategic weaknesses and vulnerabilities in the business. I was restricted of course in the information I could access, but I was certain the business was in a much weaker position than its headline results suggested. Which posed an interesting question. Should I raise these questions and risk appearing foolish or negative because I couldn’t access all the information I really needed, or should I present my analysis and queries for discussion?

Rightly or wrongly, I opted for a compromise. I compiled a list of key questions about the business, the job and the business’s strategy touching on what I thought were the key weaknesses, but not actually digging into them too hard.

The problem with this approach was that if I was offered and accepted the job, I’d be getting into a business I had serious strategic worries about. And as the newest member of the exec team, I might be at risk of alienating myself from day one if my view was in conflict with theirs. I decided to worry about that question only when and if I was ever offered the job.

Appear keen whatever reservations you may have

I told the head-hunter I was interested in the job. Very interested.

After this, I agreed to meet up with the head-hunter and we talked for a couple of hours over lunch about my background and the role in question. The meeting went well and my interest level increased. The head-hunter explained to me that it might take a while to hear anything further as he was having a dozen or so meetings like the one he’d had with me, then he’d need to go back to his client and review the candidates he’d found and decide who to invite for interview.

I waited for several weeks but kept in touch with the head-hunter once a week or so. Things did as he’d anticipated take a while to progress. The reason was that his client was the CEO and he was having big difficulties getting a slot in his diary to meet and decide who to select for interview.

Then about a month after our first meeting, the head-hunter called me. I’d been selected for interview by the CEO along with two other candidates.

Prepare, prepare, prepare

So I went back to intensive preparation. I wrote down every question I thought I might be asked, from the deceptively simple ‘tell me about yourself’, to the testily specific ‘what’s your take on the regulatory frameworks in the market’. And everything in between. I scripted the best answers I could come up with, polished them and learned them as mini-scripts so I could more or less recite them word perfectly.

But I didn't just prepare answers, I prepared almost as many questions. I wanted the interview to be as much of a discussion as I could make it. And for that, I needed good questions. This would not only take the pressure off me a little, it would show if I chose the right questions, that I had really done my homework.

All in all, I think I spent about five full days of work preparing. But at the end, I felt I was so prepared and ready, that I would put on my best possible performance. When the day came and I sat in the reception area, waiting to go into the interview, I was calm, focussed and actually looking forward to the interview and having the discussion.

I was surprised that the interview was just between the two of us. Perhaps this was a preview, before the final panel interview? I never did find out. But I did put on just about the best performance I was capable of. And at the end, I left feeling satisfied that I’d done the best job I possibly could.

Then wait, wait ,wait

As usually happens, I waited. And waited. After a couple of weeks the head-hunter contacted me and told me I was the second choice. And the first choice person had been offered the job. And accepted it. Naturally I asked what the reasons for the decision were. He said it was because the person they selected came from within the same industry and I did not.

This may or may not have been the whole truth. I will never know. Head-hunters are people too and they will usually select the reason they think will be the simplest and least hurtful to the applicant. Which of course actually isn’t the most helpful information the applicant can receive.



Why failure isn’t the end, it’s the beginning…

But here’s the interesting part of the story. A short while ago I picked up the business section of the paper and on the front page was a big headline about the firm in question. Their share price had collapsed to about 10% of the price it had been when I was interviewed. The business had not posted their annual report and accounts. The chairman said there was no realistic prospect the business could recover its revenues.

It was a tale of corporate catastrophe. My concerns about the business’s vulnerabilities had been borne out even faster than I’d imagined possible.

And I could only imagine what the daily experience of working at the business would have been like. Pure misery I suspect.

Which leads me to what we can learn from this.

1. Time spent on company research is never wasted

I still don’t know if I would have accepted the job if I’d been offered it. Before accepting, I think I’d probably have asked for a further meeting to talk in detail about the concerns I had and only then would have made the decision.

But quite apart from this aspect, the detailed preparation filled me with confidence about my capability to do well at interview. Nerves were not a problem and I actually enjoyed the experience.

2. All that glitters is not necessarily gold

It would have been easy to be blinded by the status and reward package on offer. But I actually feel I escaped a near miss rather than experienced a failure. And the fact that I spotted the vulnerabilities that subsequently came to cripple the business has boosted my confidence in my own judgement.

3. Trust your instincts and research

By carrying out all the due diligence I could before the interview, I not only felt I was very well equipped to handle the interview, if I had have been offered the job, whether I’d accepted it or not, I’d have made the decision with full knowledge of the critical facts.

4. Don’t rely on everything a head-hunter tells you

My experience proved again that you cannot rely on head-hunters to tell you the truth. I’m not saying the head-hunter was deceitful or not acting in good faith - but they are in the business of simply finding the best people for a job, not carrying out forensic evaluation of their client’s businesses. That's down to us.

5. Failures may lead directly to your next endeavour

Had I been offered and taken this job, I certainly would not have started this blog. And I certainly wouldn’t be enjoying the company of all the great people around the world it’s put me in contact with. The course of my professional life would have been totally different. I think it’s no exaggeration to say this interview failure has turned out to be a huge blessing in disguise.