Should I Stay or Should I Go…
Few people who know me in the wine industry know that, in Hong Kong, my main activity is to export bicycle accessories from China and that wine is a passion for me. One that I have certainly carried forward to the extreme in the last few years. Today, I believe that the qualities that helped me establish my company at the age of 25 and persevere with it for more than 20 years were perhaps what kept me going in the Master of Wine program until now. I also believe those qualities probably saved me from passing the exam twice.
Two years ago, when Jeannie Cho Lee MW became my mentor, she insisted at the outset that I present her with a “SWOT” analysis. She believed, not wrongly, I realized over time, that it was an essential tool to guide my studies and help me prepare for this incredibly tough exam. As I am now considering whether to attempt it for the 3rd time, I see this analysis as being more relevant than ever.
However, after more than five years in the program, countless hours of tastings and study, and a great deal of financial and emotional investment, I now see myself analysing more than my strengths and weaknesses. I see myself digging deep inside my soul to confront the brutal truth: do I have the personality to pass this exam, and if so, am I still willing to focus on what needs to be focused on to achieve this goal? More brutal still, why should I do so?
When I registered, it was no secret that this self-study program was one of the toughest in the wine industry and had a notoriously low passing rate. At the time, I dismissed those issues with a wave of the hand and with my usual “if-one-can-do-it-I-certainly-can-do-it-too” attitude. I remember that my 1st yearly seminar in Napa Valley went by relatively smoothly and that I came back to Hong Kong with a sense “that I could do this thing”. I subsequently submitted a few essays, received relatively good marks, passed the First Year Assessment and went on to the 2nd year. All the while devising my ways of doing things, consulting others little, and thinking that if I could demonstrate the “brilliance of my knowledge”, I would pass.
Then came my second 5-day seminar, this time in Bordeaux... Bam! A total disaster. Not only a pothole in the road but a minefield altogether. Each day is realizing that my concepts were not working, that I had no idea of what I got myself into and that I was far from “knowing how to pass”. For the first time in my life, I had failed exams. For the first time in my life, I was confronted with my worst nightmare: that I might not be able to succeed at what I had set out to achieve...
That year, out of misguided fear, I now realise I decided to defer the exam. I also started procrastinating for good reasons: if I could teach about wine in just a few more classes, it would help me master the subject. It would strengthen my tasting skills if I could taste just a few more wines. And, if I could travel just a little farther, going to New Zealand and Australia, Argentina, and Chile, I would find the silver bullet that would help me answer exam questions with “my eyes closed”. All the while, I avoided consolidating my notes, practising essay writing skills, and tasting under exam conditions and all the time, racking my brain to “figure out what “they” wanted”.
When my third seminar came, I was sure I had a pretty good idea. I had a system, a formula, a method. I taught more wine classes with success, bought and read more books, downloaded and filed more articles from the internet, and tasted more wines... Then, Bam! Again...
This time though, I would not let that come in the way. I would go to the exam and “pass this thing”. I dug my heels, ground my teeth, and worked like a dog. Then came “my d-day” and the worst summer of my life. Here I was, a 45 years old middle-aged man with a 12 employees company in 3 offices in China, waiting for the results that “would define who I am”. All the while, feeling more hopeless than I had ever felt, even during the darkest days of starting my business in Hong Kong with just enough to live for three months…
The inevitable came. I did not pass. I became overtaken with deep doubts and thought of deferring another year and “working harder” by teaching more classes, reading more books, creating more summary tables, and tasting more wines. Indeed, my determination would have its rewards!
Instead, it turned out to be stubbornness. Until four months before the exam last June, I had refused to see the Master of Wine program in a different way. I had closed my mind to the reality that my approach might have been wrong. I had been stubbornly ploughing through by pilling on more knowledge, identifying more wines blind, and refusing to see what I think is apparent today. That the Master of Wine exam is about showing mastery by convincingly arguing a position with the use of evidence to back it up, that mastery, under such severe exam conditions, is not about showing off all of one’s knowledge on a topic related to wine but it is about demonstrating why the critical issues of that topic apply in a situation and not in another via the use of real-life examples from around the world.
In retrospect, I believe that a deep understanding of any subject with a broad culture of how and why things are done globally should naturally help one build an argument strong enough to convince an interlocutor, at the very least generate a fruitful debate. However, to be able to achieve this level of convincing for each paper of the exam, practical and theory, four days in a row under rigorous time pressure, one must not only have a deep collection of evidence but must also have an ability to select the most critical issues related to a question and write an argument in the most time efficient manner. It has finally become evident that essay writing skills are crucial.
This might seem obvious to some, especially for those who have graduated with an English major. However, being an international business major was not apparent at the outset. Even though I received many signals from various sources at various times in my studies, I stubbornly believed that the brilliance of knowledge in theory and tasting skills in practice would help me pass. Until it was too late, I realize today that the first issue that came in the way of succeeding was that I never really understood how to write essays and argue a position under exam conditions and that I left it for too long before starting to work on these skills.
The second issue that I did not clearly understand until too late was the use of evidence, or in MW parlance, “examples”. In fact, I felt for most of it that the emphasis on examples “cramped my style”. When I travelled to Argentina last February, I finally had a flash. To carry my books was impractical and therefore I printed academic research papers to read on the way. Quickly, I became fascinated by how all kinds of concepts related to wine, ideas I thought were “evident”, had been intensely studied and backed up with complex data to demonstrate their validity. Silly me, I finally realized that the “examples” needed for the exams were similar to the complex data used in research papers. That they were, in fact, the most fundamental aspect of my studies. That if I could not demonstrate a concept with evidence, whether in the theory or the practical, then the idea was not yet established as being valid and remained “unproven”. Last February, I finally woke up to the fact that this exam is about explaining the whys of the theory through examples of it being applied in various conditions around the world and how the whys change according to changing conditions.
Back in Hong Kong, I completely changed how I consolidated my notes until then. I focused on a radically different approach to each question and started working with another purpose. The closer the exam came, the clearer everything became.
The only problem with the theory was that selecting and consolidating strong examples four months before d-day became challenging, especially for papers 1 (Viticulture) and 2 (Vinification). Countless hours were spent poring over the sketchy notes I took during winery visits, digging deep into books, searching the internet, and sniffing out magazine articles. Even though I had travelled to many wine regions around the world and met dozens of winemakers with whom I remained in good contact, I was embarrassed to write them emails with what I thought was admitting weakness so close to the exam. And so, I built a list of examples as best as possible and worked very hard on it. During the exam, however, it became clear that a few of them would not be strong enough to support my arguments in some essays. My marks show this as I scored unsatisfactorily on two papers but still achieved an A on two others. Clearly, my strengths are business and contemporary issues and my weakness is viticulture.
For the practical, a similar situation occurred. To convince the examiner, one must not rely on blind-tasting skills alone. As we saw last June, appearances can be deceptive. The key is to use evidence in the glass and build a strong argument. Again, obvious to some, but not so easy when one insists, as I did, that the exam is to precisely identify the wines “and going for it”. As the exam consists of 36 wines and the time pressure is extreme, without absolute focus on the essential and distinctive features of each, it isn't easy to finish the paper and pass. For this, strict writing discipline and razor-sharp-tasting skills are required. I believe to have the tasting skills but, even though I had practised writing extensively and had a good technique before the exam, discipline failed me as I evidently achieved marks below passing grade even though the first time I did the exam, I had achieved better results, even getting an A in paper 3. Most likely because I had practised little under exam conditions, I reverted to old formulations and tried to identify the wines instead of arguing them. Unfortunately, identification is often the victim of “shoe-horning” when a single piece of evidence in the glass takes a disproportionate level of importance and is completely misled. Argumentation on the other hand requires discipline and focus to reach a logical conclusion, one that can be valid even if the exact identification is wrong. I believe a subtle but fundamental difference is why I failed to pass the practical paper.
Today, a few days before the deadline to register (or not) for a 3rd attempt, I see myself seriously questioning whether I should continue with the program. In light of this analysis, I feel that I now understand what is required to pass. However, not because I know how to that I am automatically ready to. Already five years were invested in this program and my family has sacrificed as much, if not more, than I have. I have also postponed several projects which I would like to work on and many different dreams I have yearned to pursue. That I have not passed already is my full responsibility for having stubbornly stuck to my way of thinking for too long. However, I doubt that my knowledge of wine and tasting skills will increase much if I continue. However, it will undoubtedly help solidify this knowledge and tasting abilities to an even higher level than I already possess. Still, after five years of hard work and sacrifices, I must ask myself: will focusing on obtaining the MW title for 2 to 3 more years change my deep passion for wine and the burning desire to share about it? Will adding the two letters beside my name make me a more effective storyteller?
For sure, there will be a price to pay no matter what I choose. Should I decide to continue, more sacrifices will be required and projects will be delayed. If I choose not to continue, the title will no longer be possible.
Ask any entrepreneur, and they will confirm that hard work, determination, and stubbornness are essential qualities required to establish and build the first stage of a company in some of the most challenging conditions. But, the same attributes can be distracting when the same company has reached a certain level and a professional management approach becomes required. I believe that this is what happened with my studies. After five years in the program and much time and effort, I seriously question whether channelling more of it into it will make a difference to the success of other wine-related projects I want to work on and other dreams I wish to pursue...
I gave my best shot at becoming a MW, but in the end, a series of mistakes in my studies led me to make the hard decision to quit the program…