Awards: Difference between revisions

32 bytes removed ,  25 January 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|g|[[File:EPOTY.png|300px|thumb|right|You know you want it.]]}}
{{a|g|{{image|EPOTY|png|You know you want it.}}{{image|LDOTY|jpg|Excellence in [[complaints management]]}} }}Awards of any kind are a dignity-shredding affair, even when your auditors can count envelopes, but just what is going through the mind of an investment banker, [[head-hunter|recruitment consultant]], [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]] or [[compliance]] professional who allows {{sex|himself}} to hold, be nominated for, win, ''modestly'' disclose on [[LinkedIn]], or congratulate anyone else who should so modestly disclose, an “[[industry award]]” is hard to fathom.
Awards of any kind are a dignity-shredding affair, even when your auditors can count envelopes, but just what is going through the mind of an investment banker, [[head-hunter|recruitment consultant]], [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]] or [[compliance]] professional who allows {{sex|himself}} to hold, be nominated for, win, ''modestly'' disclose on [[LinkedIn]], or congratulate anyone else who should so modestly disclose, an “[[industry award]]” is hard to fathom.


These “awards” have long been doled out at gala events convened by tedious [[industry magazine]]s to reward their most persistent advertisers—credulous businesses who can’t get much else out of the spend (well: does anyone really ''read'' [[industry magazine|Carbon Trading Magazine]]?<ref>The answer to this rhetorical question, originally posed in 2010, turned out to be “no” — or at any rate, not enough of a readership to justify continuing to publish beyond September 2012. May the memory of those boozy nights on Carbon Trading Magazine’s red carpet rest in peace.</ref> What for? The horoscopes?)  
These “awards” have long been doled out at gala events convened by tedious [[industry magazine]]s to reward their most persistent advertisers—credulous businesses who can’t get much else out of the spend (well: does anyone really ''read'' [[industry magazine|Carbon Trading Magazine]]?<ref>The answer to this rhetorical question, originally posed in 2010, turned out to be “no” — or at any rate, not enough of a readership to justify continuing to publish beyond September 2012. May the memory of those boozy nights on Carbon Trading Magazine’s red carpet rest in peace.</ref> What for? The horoscopes?)  
Line 10: Line 9:
How cynical.
How cynical.
   
   
Seemingly there are insecurities that only a gong for “[[Environmental Finance Personality of the Year]]” (you couldn't make such a thing up: it really exists); “Business Development Professional of the Year” (there are ''hundreds'' of these) or “In-house Litigation Department of the year” (what does it say about an organisation that lionises its own capacity to [[Make America Great Again|conduct litigation]]?) can redress.
Seemingly there are insecurities that only a gong for “[[Environmental Finance Personality of the Year]]” (you couldn’t make such a thing up: it really exists); “Business Development Professional of the Year” (there are ''hundreds'' of these) or “In-house Litigation Department of the year” (what does it say about an organisation that lionises its own capacity to [[Make America Great Again|conduct litigation]]?) can redress.


O! To have existential doubts that can be so simply quashed!  
O! To have existential doubts that can be so simply quashed!  
Line 16: Line 15:
If such an award, “judged” anonymously, without reference to published criteria, from amongst nominees whose main merit appears to be employment by a prolific advertiser of the sponsor’s product — if a personal tribute as feeble as ''that'' can assuage your deep insecurities; if that is all it takes to put you back on a level keel — your psychological health is rude indeed.
If such an award, “judged” anonymously, without reference to published criteria, from amongst nominees whose main merit appears to be employment by a prolific advertiser of the sponsor’s product — if a personal tribute as feeble as ''that'' can assuage your deep insecurities; if that is all it takes to put you back on a level keel — your psychological health is rude indeed.


Right?[[File:LDOTY.jpg|thumb|center|Excellence in [[complaints management]]]]
Right?
{{seealso}}
{{sa}}
*[[LinkedIn]]
*[[LinkedIn]]
*[[Boredom heat death]]
*[[Boredom heat death]]