By the time you read this we should know if the nation has decided to change the way we select our members of parliament or not.
However, for an event that could herald the most fundamental change to our voting system and change the way politics is conducted in the UK forever, AV is not a topic that's really caught the imagination of the general public. Indeed, as I sat writing this article there was far more concern and debate in the media and public at large over whether rain would come and spoil things for the other big event on 29 April.
However, even if most people are at best lukewarm over the issue of electoral reform, and many of those who actually do recognise the letters AV think it's all to do with that button on their remote control, I bet many would have an opinion on the question of 'fairness'. So as we are told by those in favour of a change that this whole process is about 'fairness', it got me thinking about how things would be in business if that was the criteria that was applied to every decision that we made or were subject to.
I was discussing this with some colleagues and associates recently and one of them raised the point that in business, when we pitch for work, a new contract, a price increase, whatever, there is no prize for coming second. Often in business you either win or you lose and if you do not win on that occasion you dust yourself down, try and learn from the experience, reflect on what you could have done better, work on improving things and if you still want the business you pitched for first time, come back and try and win next time round.
When you are looking at a political framework, then I guess you have to be seen to cover all bases and take into account all of the arguments, but no matter how inclusive you try to be, the fundamental thing about life and business is that on occasions it really is "just not fair". Whingeing about it and looking round for someone or something to blame won't help.
Some you win, some you lose, and as always those who lose think it's unfair and those who win think it's all fine and dandy! That's just human nature. All you can ask for is that everybody is working to the same rule book.
Of course, politics is not business and although I'm sure that in many large corporate organisations there are plenty of people who could teach Machiavelli a thing or two, I can't see a decision-making process catching on where someone ends up choosing the least worst person for the CEO's job, rather than the best possible candidate.
Let's not forget, it's ultimately all about the bottom line, and shareholders have votes too!
However, for an event that could herald the most fundamental change to our voting system and change the way politics is conducted in the UK forever, AV is not a topic that's really caught the imagination of the general public. Indeed, as I sat writing this article there was far more concern and debate in the media and public at large over whether rain would come and spoil things for the other big event on 29 April.
However, even if most people are at best lukewarm over the issue of electoral reform, and many of those who actually do recognise the letters AV think it's all to do with that button on their remote control, I bet many would have an opinion on the question of 'fairness'. So as we are told by those in favour of a change that this whole process is about 'fairness', it got me thinking about how things would be in business if that was the criteria that was applied to every decision that we made or were subject to.
I was discussing this with some colleagues and associates recently and one of them raised the point that in business, when we pitch for work, a new contract, a price increase, whatever, there is no prize for coming second. Often in business you either win or you lose and if you do not win on that occasion you dust yourself down, try and learn from the experience, reflect on what you could have done better, work on improving things and if you still want the business you pitched for first time, come back and try and win next time round.
When you are looking at a political framework, then I guess you have to be seen to cover all bases and take into account all of the arguments, but no matter how inclusive you try to be, the fundamental thing about life and business is that on occasions it really is "just not fair". Whingeing about it and looking round for someone or something to blame won't help.
Some you win, some you lose, and as always those who lose think it's unfair and those who win think it's all fine and dandy! That's just human nature. All you can ask for is that everybody is working to the same rule book.
Of course, politics is not business and although I'm sure that in many large corporate organisations there are plenty of people who could teach Machiavelli a thing or two, I can't see a decision-making process catching on where someone ends up choosing the least worst person for the CEO's job, rather than the best possible candidate.
Let's not forget, it's ultimately all about the bottom line, and shareholders have votes too!
No comments yet