H. D. Kumaraswamy Quotes

We've done a lot of research on the characteristics of our teachers who are the most successful. The most predictive trait is still past demonstrated achievement, and all selection research basically points to that.

It doesn't matter what your pedigree is, who your family is or what degrees you have. What really matters is how you perform your job and how you produce results. Whoever could do the best job, that's who the focus is on - and it definitely doesn't matter if I am a woman or a man.

Meritocracy is a good thing. Whenever possibly, people should be judged based on their work and results, not superficial qualities.

I'm tired of demographic appeal being more important than talent. I want to fight against that.

When it comes to work, there is a fear factor around meritocracy. People are afraid of being openly judged. However, when you know what you are being measured against, it's empowering.

The principle which the Queen would wish to see acted upon in her diplomatic appointments in general, is, that the good of the service should precede every other consideration, and that the selection of an agent should depend more on his personal qualifications for the particular post for which he is to be selected than on the mere pleasure and convenience of the person to be employed, or of the Minister recommending him.

The first man put at the helm will be a good one. Nobody knows what sort may come afterward.

In my experience and observation, senior appointments are rarely based entirely on merit.

We don't get offered roles because of who we are but because of what we delivered in the past.

Any player who is in a national team is their because he deserves to be.

You hire a chief executive, pay him, and hold him accountable after a year or two. The time for so-called honorary jobs is over. What Pakistan squash needs is results, and that can only be achieved by professionals.

In the workplace, employees should be judged on their merit and hard work and not on aspects that are irrelevant to their performance.

The commission process in America and England is different. In America, they do it through an interview process, and it's really based on whether they like you or not. I mean, it's nothing to do with whether you do the best scheme or the worst scheme.

City employees will be hired and promoted because of their abilities - without outside interference.

Merit should count more than academic background.

The game has a cleanness. If you do a good job, the numbers say so. You don't have to ask anyone or play politics. You don't have to wait for the reviews.

I am not in favour of quotas. Just put the best person into the job. It is not about gender; it is about experience, leadership and vision.

When I arrived at IBM, there were 'Team' signs all around. I asked, 'How do people get paid?' They told me, 'We pay people based on individual performance.'

You have to study the people and the ones that measure up are not always the ones you expect.

Eliminate numerical quotas, including Management by Objectives.

I think you're only as good as the work that you do.

You don't need to know someone personally to be able to discern whether their work is high quality or not. The idea of a meritocracy is that it's what they do, not who they are.

We will also have a more rigorous approach to professional development and managing unsatisfactory performance.

… open, competitive examinations for testing the fitness of applicants for the public service now classified or to be classified hereunder. Such examinations shall be practical in their character, and so far as may be shall relate to those matters which will fairly test the relative capacity and fitness of the persons examined to discharge the duties of the service into which they seek to be appointed.

It is also absolutely necessary that the examinations should be competitive, and the appointments given to those who are most successful. A mere pass examination never, in the long run, does more than exclude absolute dunces.