SLC-S29/W4-“Thinking and Ideas!| Rethinking the Normal!”

Take a week-long course in Bogor after passing the selection.

---

Welcome back with the incredible SLC-S29/W4-“Thinking and Ideas! | Rethinking the Normal!” this week. Last week, I took part in the challenge on the weekend before the deadline, so I had very little time. Like in football, there's always hope in injury time, but the window of opportunity is already very narrow.

This time it's about something that's accepted as normal because so many people do it or it's become a tradition. People no longer consider it a mistake or something to be ashamed of, because so many people do it.

---

---

An abnormally normal score

In Indonesia, this could mean bribery to get a job or the presence of backing in securing a project or job. Some people get jobs or pass a selection process based not on their abilities, but on the recommendations of "important figures" or "influential people."

Meanwhile, others possess decent abilities but fail simply because they lack recommendations, lack a supportive community or community.

It seems so unfair, right? But that's how the world works. Not only in Indonesia, but throughout the world, even in developed countries with very low corruption rates.

I don't blame recommendations. If you apply for a job, having a community or certain individuals provide recommendations is a plus. Perhaps those recommendations can serve as a reference. But if you don't meet the requirements, or even obtain a position by breaking the law, that's a betrayal of honesty, morals, and the law—of course.

I've felt that for a long time. My family has felt it too and has been a victim. In 2018, I participated in a selection process to become an election supervisor. My computer-assisted test (CAT) score was the highest of all the participants. My interview results were the highest.

Remember, I have a background in journalism, and interviewing people is one of my skills. And I've been an election organizer for 15 years. Without studying hard, I already understand a lot.

---

---

However, I failed. I participated in the selection process several times, but I still failed.

Like everyone else, I also tried to seek support from influential communities, such as in the 2023 selection process. I was in the top 10 or became a reserve member who could be elected if one or five of the selected people resigned, no longer met the requirements to be an election organizer, or died (I didn't expect this).

Backing, recommendations, and networks were the deciding factors. Capacity and integrity were not considered for success. Because I often faced this situation, I often reminded my children and friends, "You must have the same ability as Ronaldo or Messi (soccer players) so they have no choice but to choice for you!"

---

I and two of my colleagues were elected as members of the election supervisory body in Lhokseumawe City, Aceh, Indonesia.

---

What might be lost if it were completely removed?

There are also disadvantages if all of these things were lost. Recommendations would be invalid, and the selection committee might make the wrong choice when time is tight or their schedules are extremely busy.

The selection committee might not have the background or knowledge of the candidate. There might be candidates with low profiles who are shy about showcasing their skills on their resumes, or there might be candidates who are deceptive in their bios.

Therefore, fraudulent "insider" practices must be combated in various ways, including a transparent recruitment system. Recommendations from people with capacity and integrity (not just selecting the people) are merely a supporting aspect.

Hi @yuswadinisam, @sualeha, and @lirvic! What are your experiences? Please share them here. Thank you very much.

---

Photo with friends when attending the inauguration in Jakarta Pullman Hotel.