“patience under criticism”
“politeness and willingness to oblige”
“loyalty, faithfulness and goodness”
“accuracy and systematic methods”
“neat and ambitious”
All these things are fine, I agree, but there is not one of them that suggests the possibility of advancement to a position of command where administrative ability and initiative will count. I do not suggest that these qualities are absent, but I think the record shows that we are not on the lookout for them and possibly do not value them as we ought. Only once in a while do I find a suggestion that a tendency toward such qualities is of interest, as when, one assistant is commended for “independence and good judgment” and another for “resourcefulness”.
And when we come to the “weak points” reported, the same facts stand out. Here are some of them:
“lack of accuracy and system”
“too sensitive”