Top 7 Qualities Employers are Looking for in Candidates
08 Jul 2013, 11:37 am
Quote:
http://theundercoverrecruiter.com/top-7-qualities-employers-are-looking-candidates/
7 Qualities Most in Demand
Every employer has had a certain amount of experience with both good and bad employees. For this reason every employer has a pretty good idea of what he or she wants more of. Here are the big seven:
1. The first quality that employers look for is intelligence.
In every study, it has been found that fully 76 percent of the productivity and contribution of an employee will be determined by his or her level of intelligence. Intelligence in this sense means the ability to plan, to organize, to set priorities, to solve problems, and to get the job done. Intelligence refers to your level of common sense and your practical ability to deal with the day-to-day challenges of the job. The key to demonstrating your intelligence is for you to ask intelligent questions. One of the hallmarks of intelligence that is immediately evident is curiosity. The more you ask good questions and listen to the answers, the smarter you appear.
7 Qualities Most in Demand
Every employer has had a certain amount of experience with both good and bad employees. For this reason every employer has a pretty good idea of what he or she wants more of. Here are the big seven:
1. The first quality that employers look for is intelligence.
In every study, it has been found that fully 76 percent of the productivity and contribution of an employee will be determined by his or her level of intelligence. Intelligence in this sense means the ability to plan, to organize, to set priorities, to solve problems, and to get the job done. Intelligence refers to your level of common sense and your practical ability to deal with the day-to-day challenges of the job. The key to demonstrating your intelligence is for you to ask intelligent questions. One of the hallmarks of intelligence that is immediately evident is curiosity. The more you ask good questions and listen to the answers, the smarter you appear.
This is what I do not follow here. I've always thought it was the more higher ups, mainly the manger's, duty to plan, to organize, set priorities, and solve problems. I thought it was everyone's duty to get the job done. I've have been curious about different things. I've had people become angry with me for asking intelligent questions. Why?
2. The second quality sought by employers is leadership ability.
Quote:
Leadership is the willingness and the desire to accept responsibility for results. It’s the ability to take charge, to volunteer for assignments, and to accept accountability for achieving the required results of those assignments.
The mark of the leader is that he or she does not make excuses. You demonstrate your willingness to be a leader in the organization by offering to take charge of achieving company goals and then committing yourself to performing at high levels.
The mark of the leader is that he or she does not make excuses. You demonstrate your willingness to be a leader in the organization by offering to take charge of achieving company goals and then committing yourself to performing at high levels.
How is it logically possible for everyone to be a leader? How does everyone in an organization meet this standard. Is everyone Spartucus? Is everyone Robert E. Lee? If everyone is the general then who are the lieutenants and the privates? Who would do the grunt work if everyone led and had to lead as an inherent standard? This makes no sense to me and I don't get this?
Quote:
3. Integrity is the third quality sought by employers.
It’s probably the most important single quality for long-term success in life and at work. Integrity begins by being true to yourself. This means that you are perfectly honest with yourself and in your relationships with others. You are willing to admit your strengths and weaknesses. You are willing to admit where you have made mistakes in the past. Especially, you demonstrate loyalty. You never say anything negative about a previous employer or a person whom you have worked with or for. Even if you were fired from a previous job, never say anything negative or critical.
It’s probably the most important single quality for long-term success in life and at work. Integrity begins by being true to yourself. This means that you are perfectly honest with yourself and in your relationships with others. You are willing to admit your strengths and weaknesses. You are willing to admit where you have made mistakes in the past. Especially, you demonstrate loyalty. You never say anything negative about a previous employer or a person whom you have worked with or for. Even if you were fired from a previous job, never say anything negative or critical.
What if negativity is a part of who a person is? Aren't strengths and weaknesses relative? I have made plenty of mistakes in the past. If I don't feel like I made a mistake on something and my boss thinks I did then why would I admit to a mistake? Am I not being dishonest with the boss by pretending that I made a mistake when I did not? What if the interviewer asks what I think of my previous job? If I did not like it would it not be dishonest to not admit to this? They want integrity, I have to ask how can one give integrity if one is not supposed to admit any negatives and he forced to lie?
Quote:
4. The fourth quality that employers look for is likability.
Employers like people who are warm, friendly, easygoing, and cooperative with others. Employers are looking for people who can join the team and be part of the work family.
Men and women with good personalities are invariably more popular and more effective at whatever they do. Teamwork is the key to business success. Your experience in working as part of a team in the past and your willingness to work as part of a team in the future can be among the most attractive things about you in applying for a job.
Employers like people who are warm, friendly, easygoing, and cooperative with others. Employers are looking for people who can join the team and be part of the work family.
Men and women with good personalities are invariably more popular and more effective at whatever they do. Teamwork is the key to business success. Your experience in working as part of a team in the past and your willingness to work as part of a team in the future can be among the most attractive things about you in applying for a job.
What if a person is not warm, friendly, easygoing and cooperative and this is a part of who he is? Society demands people be true to themselves? How does one do this? If a person pretends traits does he not give up his integrity?
Quote:
5. Competence is the fifth quality sought by employers.
We spoke about this earlier. Competence is terribly important to your success. It is really the foundation of everything that happens to you in your career.
In its simplest terms, competence is the ability to get the job done. It is the ability to set priorities, to separate the relevant from the irrelevant tasks, and then to concentrate single-mindedly until the job is complete.
We spoke about this earlier. Competence is terribly important to your success. It is really the foundation of everything that happens to you in your career.
In its simplest terms, competence is the ability to get the job done. It is the ability to set priorities, to separate the relevant from the irrelevant tasks, and then to concentrate single-mindedly until the job is complete.
Again, this makes no sense. Is it the fifth quality of is it the top quality of them all?
Relevancy is relative. What I consider relevant others may not and vice versa? What is the rubric to distinguish relevancy from irrelevancy? I have had things dismissed by my loved ones as irrelevant when in my mind they are relevant. Everyone has different personalities. Are we all going to come to the same conclusions? In my experience, I don't think so. Therefore, what is relevant is relative and subjective.
Quote:
6. Courage is the sixth quality that employers look for.
This is the willingness to take risks. Courage also means the willingness to accept challenges, the willingness to take on big jobs or even new jobs where there is a high degree of uncertainty and the possibility of failure.
Courage also means the willingness to speak up and say exactly what you think and feel in a difficult situation. Employers admire men and women who are not afraid to speak their minds. And you demonstrate this in a job interview when you ask frank and direct questions about the company, the position, and the future that you might have with the organization
This is the willingness to take risks. Courage also means the willingness to accept challenges, the willingness to take on big jobs or even new jobs where there is a high degree of uncertainty and the possibility of failure.
Courage also means the willingness to speak up and say exactly what you think and feel in a difficult situation. Employers admire men and women who are not afraid to speak their minds. And you demonstrate this in a job interview when you ask frank and direct questions about the company, the position, and the future that you might have with the organization
If courage is endurance of the soul what if the courage is based upon ignorance? Am I going to be punished if I fail? There have been those who have spoken up and said exactly what they felt and thought in a difficult situation. If employers admired men and women who are not afraid to speak their minds then why do those who do so end up being fired or relegated to the mail room? These questions and the questions I have asked above are some of my questions I would ask?
Quote:
7. The final quality employers look for is inner strength.
Inner strength means that you have the determination and the ability to persevere in the face of adversity. Inner strength means that you have the quality of persistence when the going gets rough. You demonstrate inner strength when you remain calm, cool, and relaxed during the job interview. If you are calm and cool during the interview, it is a good indication that you will be calm and cool in the inevitable crises that occur during the day-to- day operations of the company.
Inner strength means that you have the determination and the ability to persevere in the face of adversity. Inner strength means that you have the quality of persistence when the going gets rough. You demonstrate inner strength when you remain calm, cool, and relaxed during the job interview. If you are calm and cool during the interview, it is a good indication that you will be calm and cool in the inevitable crises that occur during the day-to- day operations of the company.
Why would these inevitable crises frequently occur during the day? Why would we have consistent crises? Aren't we supposed to be proactive to prevent crises? Why would one need inner strength to get through a crisis that need not take place? If many crises are taking place during the day then I have to ask how is this company being ran in an effective way?
Quote:
Above all, it is your character, which is the sum total of all your positive qualities, that will have the greatest impact on whether you get the job you want. Your job now is to continue working on your character by practicing the behaviors of top people at every opportunity.
Are these really the behaviors of top people or only some of them? We had Ken Lay at Enron who got to where he was? Did he display integrity and any of these qualities? Personally, I think he was a liar and a schemer yet he still got ahead in life.
Thelibrarian
Veteran
Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
08 Jul 2013, 12:15 pm
Cubedemon, as both an aspie and employer, what you post is true though depending on the caliber of job one is seeking. If one is seeking a job demanding fewer qualifications, about the only things the employer has to be convinced of is that you can do the job better than anybody else, that you will show up when you are supposed to, and without causing any disciplinary problems. What you are describing are criteria for managerial or professional employment.
08 Jul 2013, 12:48 pm
Thelibrarian wrote:
Cubedemon, as both an aspie and employer, what you post is true though depending on the caliber of job one is seeking. If one is seeking a job demanding fewer qualifications, about the only things the employer has to be convinced of is that you can do the job better than anybody else, that you will show up when you are supposed to, and without causing any disciplinary problems. What you are describing are criteria for managerial or professional employment.
I understand some of what you said but this leads to further questions.
Quote:
you can do the job better than anybody else
How can everyone do the job better than everyone? Unless all employees are as good as everyone else at least one employee will be on the top rung of how good he or she is. I don't follow this.
Quote:
that you will show up when you are supposed to
This is fine. No problem here.
Quote:
without causing any disciplinary problems
Again, No problem here.
Quote:
What you are describing are criteria for managerial or professional employment.
What does professional employment mean? I don't understand.
08 Jul 2013, 1:08 pm
I'll comment on a few of them from my experiences.
Quote:
1. The first quality that employers look for is intelligence.
Part of intelligence is knowing your job, but another part is being able to figure things out on your own.
Quote:
ow is it logically possible for everyone to be a leader?
There is a difference between being a leader, and having leadership ability. Consider the following: I work in an office of 5 people, if 4 of them call out, who's left to run the office? Me and the student worker. Wouldn't it be good to know the person in charge has the ability to be lead? Or if my boss wants to rotate assignments for group work, it's good to know people can be leaders when called upon.
Quote:
What if negativity is a part of who a person is? Aren't strengths and weaknesses relative? I have made plenty of mistakes in the past. If I don't feel like I made a mistake on something and my boss thinks I did then why would I admit to a mistake? Am I not being dishonest with the boss by pretending that I made a mistake when I did not? What if the interviewer asks what I think of my previous job? If I did not like it would it not be dishonest to not admit to this? They want integrity, I have to ask how can one give integrity if one is not supposed to admit any negatives and he forced to lie?
Very subjective. There is a relativity to it, but there are some hardened aspects. Being a "negative Nancy" can and will annoy people; but a person with integrity won't go along with a bad, unethical or illegal action. It's sort of like the boy who cried wolf, you want to save your negativity for legit applications. As for interviews, tell them what you liked about the old job, or find a nice way to say what you didn't like. For example, instead of saying "The boss was a micromanaging a**hole" say "My work style is more of a mix between independent and teamwork, and the management style there wasn't conductive to my success."
Quote:
What if a person is not warm, friendly, easygoing and cooperative and this is a part of who he is? Society demands people be true to themselves? How does one do this? If a person pretends traits does he not give up his integrity?
You work around people for 40 hours a week, do you expect them to not want someone they can get along with. Being true to yourself isn't an excuse to stop self improvement.
Quote:
Why would these inevitable crises frequently occur during the day? Why would we have consistent crises? Aren't we supposed to be proactive to prevent crises? Why would one need inner strength to get through a crisis that need not take place? If many crises are taking place during the day then I have to ask how is this company being ran in an effective way?
There are tons of occupations where "anything that can go wrong, will go wrong" no matter how much you preplan for it. A good company is proactive to prevent crisis, but nothing will prevent 100% of crises. Imagine if you work in a doctor's office, as a first responder, in a trading company, these are jobs frought with risk that at any moment, things could blow up. I work at a school, one day, we had 2 students threaten suicide. Crises can happen, more than you think, no matter how much you work to prevent them.
Thelibrarian
Veteran
Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
08 Jul 2013, 1:50 pm
"How can everyone do the job better than everyone? Unless all employees are as good as everyone else at least one employee will be on the top rung of how good he or she is. I don't follow this."
How can everyone do the job better than everyone? I'm not sure where that came from. My point is that the purpose of a job interview is so that the interviewer can attempt to ascertain who can do the job best. And with all the restrictions placed upon the interview process now by the government, it is more art and visceral feeling than anything else. Having said this, I've made very few hires I regret.
"What does professional employment mean? I don't understand."
Aside from the dictionary definition, what I mean is a job that requires a lot of education, carries a lot of responsibility, and therefore means heavy responsibilities. For example, when my overseeing body hired me, they put me through the kind of scrutiny you describe. But when I hire minimum wage employees, the procedures are much more lax.
Bottom line: Don't oversimplify, but don't make things more complicated than they have to be either. The most parsimonious approach that meets one's needs is usually best.
08 Jul 2013, 1:55 pm
Quote:
Part of intelligence is knowing your job
I understand.
Quote:
, but another part is being able to figure things out on your own.
Isn't it up to the boss to figure things out unless you're the boss? I don't follow. What is the worker hierarchy?
Quote:
There is a difference between being a leader, and having leadership ability. Consider the following: I work in an office of 5 people, if 4 of them call out, who's left to run the office? Me and the student worker. Wouldn't it be good to know the person in charge has the ability to be lead? Or if my boss wants to rotate assignments for group work, it's good to know people can be leaders when called upon.
So, the hierarchy is more fluidic?
Quote:
Very subjective. There is a relativity to it, but there are some hardened aspects. Being a "negative Nancy" can and will annoy people; but a person with integrity won't go along with a bad, unethical or illegal action.
If something this crops up like this how do you correctly point the bad, unethical and illegal action out.
Quote:
It's sort of like the boy who cried wolf, you want to save your negativity for legit applications. As for interviews, tell them what you liked about the old job, or find a nice way to say what you didn't like. For example, instead of saying "The boss was a micromanaging as*hole" say "My work style is more of a mix between independent and teamwork, and the management style there wasn't conductive to my success."
I see.
Quote:
You work around people for 40 hours a week, do you expect them to not want someone they can get along with. Being true to yourself isn't an excuse to stop self improvement.
I keep hearing about self-improvement. What does this mean? What is the rubric? What is one supposed to improve himself to? What does be true to yourself exactly mean? If people have to conform to a set of standards like this then how is one supposed to be true to himself? To me, this come across as double talk to me. Am I wrong? why?
Basically the workplace, is a conformist culture. Why not just say that and just say these are the things you are supposed to conform to and these our the required behaviors we expect from you as our dedicated employee? Why mask a face with the opposite face? I don't get it.
Quote:
There are tons of occupations where "anything that can go wrong, will go wrong" no matter how much you preplan for it. A good company is proactive to prevent crisis, but nothing will prevent 100% of crises. Imagine if you work in a doctor's office, as a first responder, in a trading company, these are jobs frought with risk that at any moment, things could blow up. I work at a school, one day, we had 2 students threaten suicide. Crises can happen, more than you think, no matter how much you work to prevent them.
How does one respond to a crisis w/o thinking it through? How does one come up with an answer in an instant manner?
08 Jul 2013, 2:00 pm
Quote:
How can everyone do the job better than everyone? I'm not sure where that came from. My point is that the purpose of a job interview is so that the interviewer can attempt to ascertain who can do the job best. And with all the restrictions placed upon the interview process now by the government, it is more art and visceral feeling than anything else. Having said this, I've made very few hires I regret.
Sorry, I misunderstood.
Quote:
Aside from the dictionary definition, what I mean is a job that requires a lot of education, carries a lot of responsibility, and therefore means heavy responsibilities. For example, when my overseeing body hired me, they put me through the kind of scrutiny you describe. But when I hire minimum wage employees, the procedures are much more lax.
I get it now.
Quote:
Bottom line: Don't oversimplify, but don't make things more complicated than they have to be either. The most parsimonious approach that meets one's needs is usually best.
I see what you are saying. Are there any tips to do this?
How am I approaching the article wrong and what is the correct way to read it?
Thelibrarian
Veteran
Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
08 Jul 2013, 2:22 pm
cubedemon6073 wrote:
Quote:
How can everyone do the job better than everyone? I'm not sure where that came from. My point is that the purpose of a job interview is so that the interviewer can attempt to ascertain who can do the job best. And with all the restrictions placed upon the interview process now by the government, it is more art and visceral feeling than anything else. Having said this, I've made very few hires I regret.
Sorry, I misunderstood.
Quote:
Aside from the dictionary definition, what I mean is a job that requires a lot of education, carries a lot of responsibility, and therefore means heavy responsibilities. For example, when my overseeing body hired me, they put me through the kind of scrutiny you describe. But when I hire minimum wage employees, the procedures are much more lax.
I get it now.
Quote:
Bottom line: Don't oversimplify, but don't make things more complicated than they have to be either. The most parsimonious approach that meets one's needs is usually best.
I see what you are saying. Are there any tips to do this?
How am I approaching the article wrong and what is the correct way to read it?
What I'm getting at is the article you're reading is applicable primarily if you're going after some kind of high-powered job. Even a first job that requires a college education won't entail what you are describing. Again, these procedures are for jobs that carry high levels of responsibility and authority.
The only exceptions I can see would be if you're going for a job such as police officer or in the military. At age seventeen, I went into Naval intelligence and had a background screening that took four months to complete. Again, it was the authority and responsibility thing: I handled some of the nation's most classified materials, and they wanted to make sure I was responsible enough to do so. But these are the exceptions.
My advice would be, assuming you're not going for one of the jobs I'm describing, my advice would be to worry about that organization's mission statement, and ensure that you are able to fulfill it. It's the KISS principle--or Keep It Simple Stupid. Unless you're going to work as a bureaucrat, it rarely pays to make things any more complicated than they have to be. Just worry about doing your job the very best you can, showing up on time, and being trustworthy. Everything else is small potatoes.
08 Jul 2013, 3:05 pm
cubedemon6073 wrote:
Are these really the behaviors of top people or only some of them? We had Ken Lay at Enron who got to where he was? Did he display integrity and any of these qualities? Personally, I think he was a liar and a schemer yet he still got ahead in life.
When I wanted a career in law enforcement, I could say all of those traits were desirable. While not everyone hired can or will be in a position of leadership, being a natural leader is needed to do the job well because if people don't listen to you when you don't have a badge, odds are they won't really listen to you when you do have a badge.
Usually, they look for varying degrees of leadership ability, and I know some officers leave an agency for other agencies when they realize their promotion potential is being hindered. However, others are content to stay and not move up in spite of what ability they may have.
08 Jul 2013, 8:42 pm
Thelibrarian wrote:
Unless you're going to work as a bureaucrat, it rarely pays to make things any more complicated than they have to be. Just worry about doing your job the very best you can, showing up on time, and being trustworthy. Everything else is small potatoes.
That is the main thing.
Leadership ability means that when something goes off, you can problem solve, think of a few solutions and act on them appropriately to the situation. For example, if you note that your office is out of blue pens or some other necessity, go ahead and let the supply ordered in your company know. It does not mean going to your boss for handholding.
Regarding attitude, if someone at your office is really ticking you off, not everyone needs to know. Be proactive in finding out ways to correct the situation. Bring a smile to work, or try.
Remember, do YOU enjoy hearing negativity all the time?
Tina
08 Jul 2013, 8:47 pm
Quote:
That is the main thing.
Leadership ability means that when something goes off, you can problem solve, think of a few solutions and act on them appropriately to the situation. For example, if you note that your office is out of blue pens or some other necessity, go ahead and let the supply ordered in your company know. It does not mean going to your boss for handholding.
Regarding attitude, if someone at your office is really ticking you off, not everyone needs to know. Be proactive in finding out ways to correct the situation. Bring a smile to work, or try.
Remember, do YOU enjoy hearing negativity all the time?
Tina
Leadership ability means that when something goes off, you can problem solve, think of a few solutions and act on them appropriately to the situation. For example, if you note that your office is out of blue pens or some other necessity, go ahead and let the supply ordered in your company know. It does not mean going to your boss for handholding.
Regarding attitude, if someone at your office is really ticking you off, not everyone needs to know. Be proactive in finding out ways to correct the situation. Bring a smile to work, or try.
Remember, do YOU enjoy hearing negativity all the time?
Tina
Wait a minute! All of this is so simple the way you put it. I can go ahead and let the supply ordered in my company know. I would probably want to order a bit before hand.
I can bring a smile
Why do these articles talk in such complicated terms?
You are awesome!! !
08 Jul 2013, 10:09 pm
I meant to say purchaser instead of ordered. I thought orderer was a word, but spellcheck got me, and I did not think of reading the sentence over again, as my tablet automatically changes words when it thinks I am getting them wrong. It annoys me slightly, but sometimes it is good.
I think I was a bit strongly antagonistic and that is cuz I had a stressful day at work at the end. Apparently, the people in my program enjoyed it, but I feel I am 'flying blind' when I run programs for families. In that I can't tell if the experience was a good one for them that they liked.
I only say this as I thought in my last job that going to my boss constantly for advice, which is what I mean by handholding, and such was the best thing to do, and it annoyed her to no end. I can't even say that I picked up on her being annoyed until it was too late. Which if she had just told me she was annoyed, I would have changed, gosh darn it.
Anyway, I learned about leadership a little too late. But leadership does not always mean having to do things yourself. You can still get others' consensus and be a leader. I was told that telling people everything that was wrong right as soon as being hired was insulting to them, and that it was better to wait a while so that I could know their history a lot more before jumping in and changing things.
09 Jul 2013, 9:20 am
I have received good answers but I still have not received answers to these things.
cubedemon6073 wrote:
I keep hearing about self-improvement. What does this mean? What is the rubric? What is one supposed to improve himself to? What does be true to yourself exactly mean? If people have to conform to a set of standards like this then how is one supposed to be true to himself? To me, this come across as double talk to me. Am I wrong? why?
Basically the workplace, is a conformist culture. Why not just say that and just say these are the things you are supposed to conform to and these our the required behaviors we expect from you as our dedicated employee? Why mask a face with the opposite face? I don't get it.
Basically the workplace, is a conformist culture. Why not just say that and just say these are the things you are supposed to conform to and these our the required behaviors we expect from you as our dedicated employee? Why mask a face with the opposite face? I don't get it.
I will expand on my questions. I've always thought that be true to oneself meant to be natural with other people. Don't pretend to be something you're not. Do we have free expression in the workplace? Do we have to conform to a set of standards? This is one of the main things that has prevented me from moving forward. What is the ultimate golden standard that one has to self improve himself to?
09 Jul 2013, 7:32 pm
Ok, you have freedom of expression in the workplace so long as the things you say do not offend coworkers, like by telling them you do not like something they are wearing, or that they are unattractive/overweight. But, within the rules outlined by the company, you can be totally free to choose a look that is good for you. You have to conform to the dresscode and the things that are laid out in the company policy that are unforgivable to break, like theft and such. If a group of coworkers is doing something safe but not necessarily against the whole policy, like taking five minutes longer for lunch than is the norm, go with the group decision if you have chosen to have lunch with them.
Being true to yourself means that on your own, you follow your rules. However, if company needs say one thing, then you do that .
Am I being clear enough?
And self improvement never has a finish line. There are always new things to learn, and new people to adapt to.
The golden standard is to improve toward being your personal best, and that level of best is not the same as your coworker's due to the different skills and talents that you have been given naturally.
09 Jul 2013, 7:59 pm
Quote:
Ok, you have freedom of expression in the workplace so long as the things you say do not offend coworkers, like by telling them you do not like something they are wearing, or that they are unattractive/overweight. But, within the rules outlined by the company, you can be totally free to choose a look that is good for you. You have to conform to the dresscode and the things that are laid out in the company policy that are unforgivable to break, like theft and such. If a group of coworkers is doing something safe but not necessarily against the whole policy, like taking five minutes longer for lunch than is the norm, go with the group decision if you have chosen to have lunch with them.
Being true to yourself means that on your own, you follow your rules. However, if company needs say one thing, then you do that .
Being true to yourself means that on your own, you follow your rules. However, if company needs say one thing, then you do that .
Yes, this is very clear and makes sense. I have no problem with any of this.
Quote:
a. And self improvement never has a finish line. There are always new things to learn, and new people to adapt to.
b. The golden standard is to improve toward being your personal best, and that level of best is not the same as your coworker's due to the different skills and talents that you have been given naturally.
On the other hand, I don't follow what you are saying here. I decided to put letters to for easier writing. a is inconsistent with b and here is why. You're stating self-improvement never has a finish line. At the same time you're stating I have to strive to be my personal best. This makes the assumption there is a personal best. In a it seems like you're saying there is no personal best because self-improvement is infinite. In b you state there is a personal best and it is finite.
What is the specific criteria for self-improvement? What is the rubric that I must follow? What must one self-improve exactly?
