That, of course, is nothing unique to the person who holds the office of president in any given year. It is something which many practitioners experience, some even from the week they commence articles. And it is something that we need to get better at - on two levels. First, the role of president needs to be reviewed to see whether a smaller com mitment, but over an extended period of two years, would achieve better results for the Institute and the profession. Second, individual practitioners need to find out how their satisfaction with the hand life has dealt them can be enhanced, rather than detracted from, by their career.
Presidents come and go very quickly.
Some, and I am one of them, would say that just as you are starting to become best at fulfilling the role, your year of office seems to be drawing to a close. Relation ships which you have worked hard at developing with leaders of government, the profession and other industries are less easily able to be built on once the president of the day has left office. Projects which were dear to the heart of a particular president often take more than 12 months to fully develop and be imple mented and a really good idea runs the risk of not being properly followed through. Another year of the same would be out of the question. That, then, is the dilemma.