Risk: a method to the madness?

Warren Buffet wrote: "You have to be fearful when others are greedy and be greedy when others are fearful". Warren was referring to the "ideal" strategy to adopt when dealing with the stock market. The old adage "where there is a will, there is a way" can be rechristened to reflect the new-age saying "where there is risk, there is a reward". It's definitely not Boolean as in there is guaranteed reward when risk is present, or vice-versa. All it does is increase the possibility that one might be more successful when taking risks, than when compared to not taking risks at all. Risk and Reward are two words that have always gone well together - like peanut butter and jelly in some ways because one is sweet and the other salty! The culinary experts advocate a pinch of salt in the most sweetest of desserts to give it a nice twinge - maybe they need to be told the reference to risk and reward!!

Back to mainline, I read an excellent article on 'risk and reward' in the weekend Financial Post newspaper (yes a physical paper on hand, which is fast becoming oblivious!) that could be best summarized by one line that the author beautifully put in, to describe risk taking. Here is my attempt at quoting the article (not verbatim): "Risk taking is by no means consistent as it extends across avenues. A person who is an extremely careful driver on the streets could be the most carefree when he is in a casino. On the other hand, someone who is extremely careful and avoids risk taking in his financial aspect of life could be the most reckless when on the streets."

The essence of what the author's statement meant, or rather what yours truly interpreted it to be, is simple - risk appetite is not just unique to individuals but also unique to areas of life the very same individuals choose to apply it to. You cannot, by any stretch of imagination, choose to be consistent in risk taking. Neither is anyone's appetite to risk taking consistent across all walks of life. I was curious, when I read this article, as to the link between one's risk appetite and their general personality. Interestingly enough, there is a whole scientific community that has delved into this aspect. I for one have been risk averse all the way to one end of the pendulum, and I believe part of it comes with the territory and the culture - the role one's upbringing plays in determining the intangible aspects of decision making in life couldn't be more apparent than risk appetite for example.

What's your risk appetite? Have you seen rewards commensurate with it?

Election democracy: For the vote, By the poll, to the people

“Prediction, especially about the future, is quite hard” said the famous physicist Niels Bohr.

I am not sure if he referred to the kind of predictions the astrologers ilk make. Maybe he was referring to providing an insight into what tomorrow has in store for us in terms of advancements in science and technology, or just its general impact on day to day events. When people form opinions on events after they have taken place, there is always a tag attached – it is the oft used phrase in such circumstances: “in hindsight”. Opinions in hindsight have the benefit of repeatedly analyzing the event that just happened, from various angles, and then putting forth an opinion that is based on logic which therefore can be explained away. Future events or predictions are just that – mere hypotheses about what is likely; maybe the odds are improved depending on the probability of certain events happening more than the other, or some sequence of events from the past guiding the future event in a specific direction.

Putting all the jargon around probability and its basis on prediction aside, for a moment, I am wondering how much attention the exit polls (that various news love to put out around elections) are getting. Would these exit polls or predictions, as to the results of the elections, end up biasing the common man that is the voter? The media is looking for an avenue to analyze and even over-analyze at times, each and every aspect of a particular event. The polls and the drama surrounding the predictions provides more than enough fodder for the media to have a field day around all the data that is thrown up. Whether there is any worthwhile benefit to these polls is beyond my mere comprehension.

It is amazing to note that without any data or useful inputs, there is nothing to debate upon. Where there is a plethora of data, the analysis surrounding the combinations of the very same data isn’t too far behind. This is applicable to every single aspect of our lives – if we take a moment to look at our everyday life, every logical action of ours is based upon weighing pros and cons, or in other words a very analytical approach to analyzing data. So, in my opinion, the poll predictions are just that – a bunch of data that overzealous political analysts love to debate on live television in the fervor that everyday lives depend on it. It would be that much more beneficial to the common voter if these esteemed political analysts would instead pick up and analyze the past performance (yes, a performance review) of each and every meaningful politician that is worth his / her salt – this would at least help the voter make a judicious decision rather than be biased by the opinions of polls that already determine the winner or loser before the first vote is even cast.

Ruling the rules

Aristotle had to say this about wisdom: “Wisdom is the right combination of will and skill”. I had a link in my inbox this week (one of those euphoric moments when an e-mail has something that takes you away from the daily rigor, even if for a brief while, only to bring you back that much more enriched) – this one that delved on our apparent loss of wisdom. Delving straight into the specific 'loss' that prominent psychology researcher Barry Schwartz refers to, he mentions how rules and incentives have forced, or rather clouded, our thinking to ignore practical wisdom in daily lives.

Barry brings up a job description of a typical janitor in a nursing home or hospital and speaks of how the particular job function is so different from ones we encounter in our daily lives – the difference between that of a janitor involves practically no human interaction for 99.99% of the associated tasks. The excellent underlying thought here being that any job description that involves human interactions has to have a scope that is not so rigidly defined so as to limit practical wisdom influencing the daily operations and allowing one to 'do the right thing'. The anecdote from the talk that had an impact on me was the specific one relating to how a father buys lemonade at a concession stand for his young son without realizing that it has a small alcohol content. The series of events that unfold separate the father and the son for nearly 3 weeks; more interestingly and rather curiously, the story notes how at every step of the way – the emergency worker, the judge, etc say that it seems awkward but that they are bound by the rules and regulations that govern their daily lives and determine every specific sequence of action they have to follow.

Coming to our daily lives, I am sure each one of us has at least one pet peeve that is a repetitive part of our job which we have very logical reasons for doing differently, but as the obedient soles that we are, don’t disturb the hornet’s nest. If in our daily roles, as empowering leaders, we can create the space for the teams to be that much more practical in following the rules, we would make our workplaces that much better than we found it in the first place. As Barry notes, rules and regulations are a must and even necessary evil of the society for it would be chaos without them. Where we have to make a distinction is to realize where human interactions are involved, and when dealing with these ‘moral’ roles, create the space for individuals to exhibit their practical wisdom. By creating more rules, and incentives for following the rules, we are creating a society that rewards what might actually be expected behavior in the first place. The anecdote about how having nuclear waste dumps in the local community evoked drastically different responses from Swiss citizen polls, when an incentive was added to the offer, shows how incentives become counterproductive sometimes as you start evaluating 'benefits' from following rules. Where people considered it as a responsibility and a duty in the first place became a calculation of whether it was'worth' the incentive. Considering Barry’s rare expertise in analyzing the economics side of human psychology, he couldn’t help bringing up the fact that the incentives (bonuses) augmenting the rules being part of the economic problems we are dealing with. His proposed solution to fixing the markets isn’t more rules and regulation, neither he is advocating more ethics courses. Rather, in a refreshing way, the onus is on individuals to be "moral exemplars” in every opportune moment, every day of life.

As a frequent listener to Barry Schwartz and other prominent speakers whose lectures revolve around human psychology, I can attest to time spent listening to TED lectures, as being well spent. Here is the complete 20-min talk.

Proverbial Professions

An apple a day, says the doctor,
Obey or disobey, they have the final say;
You eat the fruit and you get the sugar,
They get you finally, one way or the other!

Where there is a will, there is a lawyer,
There is a way, they will always say;
You win or you lose, it doesn’t matter,
End of the day, they are the ones richer!

Make hay in sunshine, says the banker,
When in trouble, they point to the bubble;
Going up or going down, they always have an answer,
Come rain or come shine, only their bonus is fine!

Time and tide, wait for no engineer,
Every problem, they jump up to conquer;
By design or not, no invention is perfect,
What they make sure, is to have questions after!

Lost and Found

Where are they hiding? I am referring to the current era’s equivalent of Newton, Edison or Einstein….have we truly seen the extinction of individual magnificence wherein the individual had the exemplary ability to positively impact the world single handed?

Ever since stumbling upon an article this week on “Group Coherence”, as part of my discovery of applying Agile principles to software development and management, I have been thinking if as a society we have started favoring group achievements over individual brilliance. For long, I have heard that teamwork is essential and the most key ingredient to success, which I do not disagree with even for a bit. Also, lest I am construed as favoring prima donnas, my position on this is far from it. Rather, I am left wondering how much of an impact the evolution of mankind has had in the past century in moving away from celebrating individual achievements to relishing team backed successes.

There are definitely individual beacons still around in every industry – the folks that have made a name for themselves through their own sheer hard work or by channelizing the genius in them towards making hallmark accomplishments. But they are also far and few between, and none that can walk or talk on the same plane as the fathers of every field of science or medicine, as we have come to call them. I am reminded of an anecdote where Einstein’s chauffeur apparently chided him once that questions posed to him after his lectures were so simple that even he could answer them. Einstein offered his chauffeur to take his place on the stage for the next lecture because people then didn’t know him by face all over. Apparently so intriguing was this experience for the chauffeur, upon being posed questions, that he told the audience “since these aren’t worth my while, I will ask my chauffeur who’s sitting in the audience (the real Einstein) to address these”!!! Looking beyond the presence of mind and the intellect that even Einstein’s chauffeur possessed, this brings up a very important aspect of the society then – individuals were celebrated but the real glory went to the work and the person doing it was more of a medium that they saw the work through. This explains the anonymity of the face, but not the name.

My reasoning for our current situation is as follows: since the era of the Newtons and the Edisons, over time, we have probably moved to a point where the individual got more prominence than the work itself. Now, the course correction in our evolution kicked in and we are balancing it by going to the other extreme of not looking upon individual brilliance on the same footing as much as we delve upon 'group coherence'. Every scientist that shares something valuable to the world now has a research team behind him or her; every innovation we see has a group associated against it, even a cursory glance at the recent history of patents I have been looking at from the US Patent and Trademark office has a whole list of names on each one, and the list goes on…

I am not immune to this transformation either: I have also been touting the team spirit horn on my teams at every available opportunity. For me the awakening has begun. For the benefit of getting others to jump on this bandwagon, let's look at it this way: there was never a better time to reevaluate our perspective on individual achievements and our broad reactions to it. Make no mistake – playing by the team and working as part of a larger ecosystem is more important today than ever before, but let us consciously make an attempt to encourage and reward individual brilliance as well.

human life <> technology generation

I recently experienced the technology of receiving the "bar coded boarding pass" on my cell phone, via e-mail, which I could just swipe prior to boarding the aircraft (no paper whatsoever!). This led me to think about the advancements in technology during my lifetime and how we see multiple generations of it in one lifetime of ours - the quartet below is a tribute to that!

When the telegram gave way to the letter,
Communications surely changed for ever;
Just when you thought it couldn't get any better,
Began the era of e-mail on the computer!

Televisions evolved from Black and White to color,
Transformation in displays was much sooner;
Looking beyond the question of projection or plasma,
Began the era of the LCD charisma!

Reading used to be on the old styled book,
Carried it around every corner and nook;
To prevent a pile up that needed a ladder,
Began the era of the e-book reader!

Calls over the wired phone began with the trunk kind,
Slowly and surely happened the liberation of the bind;
Trying to come up with an all-in-one solution,
Began the era of the mobile revolution!

The moment is NOW!

These are the times when I see every medium, be it the TV, the Internet, even the fifth estate speaking of the stress in the lives of everyone; most of it is being attributed to the contraction we are facing in the economy. I happened to listen to an audio book on my business trip last week, one part of which had a very interesting anecdote from the speaker on how to deal with stress and it delved into the psychological aspects (the not so apparent sources of stress).
Apparently, a very well educated and highly literate but arrogant scholar was crossing a river in a boat, and he had this ensuing conversation with the boatman:
Scholar: Are you familiar with Sahitya (literature)?
Boatman: No, Sir, rowing the boat is my sole means of livelihood and I have had no opportunity to become familiar with it.
S: A quarter of your life is wasted then; have you at least encountered Alankaara Shastra, which is a very deeply regarded aspect of human lives?
B: No Swamiji, I am not familiar with it...
S: Then another quarter of your life is wasted because it is a beautiful thing you have missed in life. Are you at least familiar with the language - Sanskrit - which is the language of understanding and describing intelligent aspects of the world?
B: No Sir, I am not familiar with it...
S: Then another quarter of your life is wasted for you haven't had a chance to touch upon any of these divine literary pieces.

The boatman continued to row, understanding the scholar doesn't understand his position in life....a little while later, the boatman sees a hole in their boat

B: Sir, are you familiar with "tharana vidhya" (for those who aren't aware, this is the art of swimming!)
S: No, I am not...
B: Then, Sir, your full life is wasted for we have a hole which is allowing water to seep in....
And then the boatman jumps overboard onto the river and swims his way to safety while apparently the scholar drowns. The speaker in the audio book used this as an example to say that one might be an expert in physics, botany, whatever. But, if one does not have the knowledge to cross over the sorrow and the stress and have what it takes to tide over it, then all of the other acquired knowledge is useless. What is this stress? I do not wish to go into the specifics of the entire discourse for this would become a book instead of an article! Essentially, the speaker categorizes the answer to this question into 3 areas - (1) understanding oneself and realizing what materialism (distinguishing between wants and needs) is for there is richness in poverty and poverty in richness; (2) the aspect of living in a state of joy by staying in the present at all times; (3) operating from a sense of emptiness and fullness according to the situation on hand.
If I were to summarize it all in one simple sentence - we should begin to think of every thought we have as not affecting us but rather looking at ourselves as an empty space where thoughts come and go, it leads to a sense of not being attached to emotions. He uses another aspect of daily life to explain this -
"When you are at home, you think of work; when at work, you think of elsewhere and so on......". By this, one is not able to be in the moment and experience the moment.
Apparently, the story behind "Chidambara rahasya" ("rahasya" means secret; for those who aren't aware, it refers to the empty spot behind the Nataraja statue within the Chidambaram temple in South India) is that it is the symbolic reference to the operating with emptiness. When you have a thought that is negative, it symbolizes a need to have an emptiness, which is a state that you need to take on so that it is the thought that visits you and leaves you, and the thought itself does not become you. This, according to this expert on people behavior, is the best approach to tackling stress. The beauty of this approach is that it automatically addresses a number of things: - looking at other people and actions as just that and not making inferences, objective approach to every situation, not carrying baggage from the past, isolating negative thoughts from influencing actions, and most importantly helping deal with daily obstacles in life.

I don't mean to say that it's a simple open and close book case or a simple matter of solving a logical puzzle. I personally tried practicing this "staying in the moment" in the past week or so (part of the reason behind my abstinence from posting any article in this period as I wanted to try this before preaching it) and tried to really consciously stay in the moment every single second that I was awake. It was really hard at the beginning as I found my thoughts wandering all the time but I found that once I was able to exert control onto myself consciously in the form of being in the moment, I started looking at possible approaches to daily situations that I am not sure I would have thought of, earlier. Those who know me would say I am not of the kind that gets stressed very easily, but I can honestly see the positive impact this simple approach has had in my life already. I have by no means perfected it yet. I am sharing this in the hope that it really makes someone's day, or goes at least some level towards alleviating the stress of someone reading this article - that, my friends, would make my day!!!

Driven by Thought, or Powered by Action?

You really start to notice it when you lose an hour's sleep because of it - yes, I am referring to the Daylight Saving Time that kicked in at 2:00 AM local time today for those living in the North American continent. This article isn't about how it works, but rather why it's done and where it's done, and for probably the first time looking at how it's related to the priorities of the local land. I came across an excellent article in the Washington Post today that spoke of why the day light saving, which is at 1-hour adjustments in its present form, should be doubled.

Essentially, in terms of the impact (I put it as if it's a big thing, which it seems so - for today anyway), what happens is that the second Sunday of March sees the clocks turned forward by an hour in the wee hours of the morning. So, if you were accustomed to waking up at 6:00 in the morning every day, you would wake up with the auto-corrected clocks (one of Microsoft's less-frustrating and positive influences on our lives!) showing 7:00 in the morning. The reverse happens when winter starts to set in towards the end of the year, and day-light saving is turned off, so to speak. The reasons why this was originally started was to enable people to get an extra hour of day light in the evenings during the summer. With the American lifestyle of the summer revolving mainly around visiting ballparks for a game of baseball, or visiting friends and family for a barbecue, or even hanging out by the beach, this hour of sun light and natural warmth after a long day at work is relished upon. More so, when you have nearly 6 months of winter wherein you really get to see little or no day light, this is indeed a welcome and much anticipated opportunity to bask in the sun!

If it isn't clear already, I am heading towards the intangible aspects of the day light savings change - the improvement in the quality of life is what dictated this effort in adjusting clocks. To get an hour of quality time in the evenings, where one could spend his / her time outdoors, there has been a significant effort put in to alter anything under the sun (pun intended). Such is the value and emphasis on quality of life that certain socities seem to place. I did a quick search online to see which developing nations have adopted day light saving vis-a-vis the developed nations. It didn't surprise me one bit when my short and quick research this morning indicated that most of the countries that adopted day-light saving in the summer were further along the economic prosperity curve. I have not been able to find any research that links the GDP of a nation to whether it adopted day-light saving (maybe I should be enlisted by United Nations or some research funded group to do this!).

Inherently, this points to a very basic human trait that derives from the local culture - are we willing to do something purely to improve the quality of life? Or, is quality of life a secondary goal (at this specific instance) of a country's other numerous high-priority issues that call for more attention? The geographic specifics and local climes also dictate day-light saving as I have indicated. But looking beyond, can we look at the demographics? Does the selfless nature ingrained in some cultures play, at least some part, a role in not considering improving quality of life, a sole priority? I am sure no one would say quality of life isn't important - whether we are willing to do some thing exclusively for it is the question.

Habits maketh the human!

The meeting is set for a specific hour,
Making it on time is doing yourself a favor;
It takes some effort to stick to it,
Punctuality is the name of this habit!

Driving on the roads you see a sign,
You honor it by staying within the line;
Aligning with rules wherever it is explicit,
Obedience is the name of this habit!

Stick to your word said my father,
It has stayed with me forever;
It ensures there is no room for deceit,
Truthfulness is the name of this habit!

You give a hand to someone in need,
While not caring about about caste or creed;
Helping others without expecting a benefit,
Considerate is the name of this habit!

You treat them kindly - be it friend or foe,
Chauffeur, waiter or even everyday Joe;
Whatever it takes to be gentle - so be it,
Respect for others is the name of this habit!

Wants and needs are totally different,
Maturity is what makes it apparent;
It isn't easy to stay away from credit,
Saving is the name of this habit!

The blessing that is schooling!

We were young when they started with the Alphabet,
The numbers came right after that;
Language came soon and so did grammar,
All we could do about it then was murmur!

Before I knew it, came by Geography of third grade,
By then, I couldn't distinguish between Belfast or Belgrade;
Not to be left behind was History,
Which to this day remains a mystery!

They started the sixth with elaborate math,
Which to most was a difficult path;
It seemed a while before it all made sense,
Which explains all the initial absence!

The first science I heard was of the moral kind,
Which helped explain the goal of mankind;
Science and math problems were of different kind,
To help comprehend it all, the teacher was the master mind!

The ninth grade introduced us to Calculus,
Practical use for it seemed much less;
Physics and Chemistry soon followed,
Equations and balancing were quickly mastered!

Finally we ended up in grade eleven,
We all felt like in heaven;
It was soon time to get out of school,
Wasn't that like being cool?

Finished school and moved on to college,
Without it all, life would have been a carnage;
It wasn't too late to realize,
That quality education was indeed a prize!

Elimination by Isolation

Gandhi gave up his life to instill non-violence,
Terrorism is taking lives to defy all sense.

Day in and day out, there's news reports coming in on extremists' actions taking valuable lives. From being isolated incidents across the world, this is now stretching to specific regions of the world being isolated. The justification from the perpetrators is that of fulfilling their ideologies but no matter what angle you look at it, there can be simply no reason to consume innocent lives. The extremists or terrorists, however you word them, have no right to take away something they didn't create, period.
First it was the 09/11, then the London bombings, the Mumbai blasts in between - all gave widespread publicity. Interspersed between these incidents, I am sure there are other cases in lesser known places around the world which did not get the same publicity. Irrespective of the prosperity of the land affected, the bottom line was - human lives were lost. From being a regional menace, the issue on hand became a global problem with the mighty joining hands to eradicate this thorn of society.

There are various theories as to who helped groom the 'bad elements' of the respective societies. In some cases it was the local law of the land, in some cases external forces were to be blamed. In a few cases, oppression even was to be pointed at. I will leave the so called analysts and experts to provide judgmental opinions on the cause and effects of allowing this to blossom. The point I wish to make is simply this - there has to be a solution, and quickly at that, for the impact of every such incident has far reaching effects of gigantic proportions. I don't think there is any disagreement that the majority of such blatant activities originate from a specific region of the world. As soon as he took oath, the President of the United States, in spite of offering continued economic assistance and offering other support systems to the country in question, minced no words in highlighting this region as the problematic one, in one of his very first speeches. Canada and the United States are still debating how to get out of one side of this very region, and the Canadian premier even offered his honest insight yesterday that it may be impossible to defeat the insurgency there.

The political diplomacy didn't work, the governments resorted to using coercion and when that didn't work, they used force. But that isn't working by any stretch of imagination. What's the alternative? However controversial it may sound, I would take an "isolation" philosophy and approach to determining a solution - abandon all forms of trade with the region; stop providing economic aid or military assistance. Isolate the region by preventing anything other than medical or humanitarian support systems to pass through, either inside or outside. Yes, the initial going would be tough for the locals, but the governments' hands would be forced as its now a solely internal issue, instead of a regional or global problem, and they have to fix it. The most complex of problems have the seemingly simplest of solutions - maybe this does too.

Dummies guide, to the credit crisis

They say it all started after 09/11,
When they were looking for a diversion;
In an attempt to boost the economy,
Lenders started opening up some money!

As the markets were looking for ways to expand,
The housing sector seemed primed for demand;
Construction industry soon became hot,
And they took over every vacant lot!

With all the money being made available,
The bigger house suddenly seemed more affordable;
Jack went to the bank with his honey,
They came back home with double the money!

Everything seemed hunky dory,
For every house had more than one storey;
It was good while it lasted,
For very soon, the problems started!

Jack couldn't keep up with his monthly payment,
The banks started realizing their predicament;
Supply started exceeding the demand,
New home prices started reflecting this stand!

As price corrections started to happen,
Home ownership started to dampen;
The existing buyers owed more than they owned,
Per the sub-prime term, it was equal to being drowned!

Everyone started to realize their folly,
Suddenly it wasn't as easy to obtain a lolly;
It seemed simple enough for all to benefit,
But it will take a lot more to get out of it!

Now and Then...

Dosas and paranthas made the breakfast surreal,
Now the entire focus is on the cereal;
Chai was drunk with glass or tumbler,
Latte has transformed it to cup and saucer;

All that came with the meal was a pickle,
Now a missing salad deems you fickle;
A sumptuous dessert followed the meal,
Calorie counting now just gives the look-and-feel.

The scooter of choice was a Bajaj,
Now everyone's thinking of a two-car garage;
The whole household had one telephone,
Cell phones are now being handed down.

Sharing photos was by showing the picture,
Now it's all done using the Flickr;
Letters used to be mailed from the post office,
Using the e-mail will now suffice.

Fashion and style were last on the mind,
Now ignoring it won't even make the wife kind;
Bermuda was only known as an island,
Not owning one will banish you to no man's land.

Buying a TV was a big discussion,
Now the size of LCD is the main contention;
How did you buy it was never a question?
The credit crisis has changed the equation.

Life in the fast lane: Urban living

India or America, it is true in every country,
People wake up in the morning, in a hurry;
Grab a quick breakfast, for it is time to exit fast,
Where no one in the street wants to be last!

Get to work, grab a coffee,
Look forward to the day being sweet as toffee;
End up in meetings, and what’s the catch?
Everyone’s busy, looking at the watch.

Before you realize, it’s time for lunch,
Hunger pangs remind you, of the morning crunch;
You dream of a day that’s more relaxed,
Coming back to reality, you realize how much you are taxed.

It’s late afternoon, you want to get something done,
And you realize, tasks are by the dozen;
You plough through the maze,
By the time you are done, it is time to gaze!

It’s a beautiful night, the stars are shining bright,
And the city is well alive and alight;
The drive home is less stressful,
And soon after, you end up with a tummy that is too full.

You get to bed, hoping tomorrow’s better,
For it is the hope that is dear;
Wishing your family sweet dreams,
You get lost in your own dreams.

Pride & Prejudice

My grandmother used to say that in her times, when they made a charitable contribution, the right hand didn't know what the left one did. I understood it then to mean that they were magnanimous enough that they didn't count the value of the giving, for the thing that mattered was the thought. Little did I realize (many years on) that there was more to it than meets the eye – the real significance of what she really meant was highlighting a specific human quality: humility, that showed through even the giving aspect of life.

These days it is seen as important for one to highlight one's contributions in a competitive workspace - in avenues like the performance reviews, there is a specific opportunity for the individual (by way of what's referred to as self appraisals) to highlight one's own contribution. The highlighting of performance I am referring to is beyond this – something that I have come to understand in various high-performance coaching and mentoring classes that I was recently exposed to. Delving into leading high-performing teams, the instructors encourage the leadership to actually start pushing the teams to exhibit the "be in your face" attitude to visibility. This is being spoken of as the mantra for being aggressive at work and thereby successful at being visible. As with any quality, anything that is overdone becomes its own detriment. It’s a thin line to tread between being humble about one’s contributions versus a public display of one’s achievements. Where exactly do we draw this line?

I don’t have the specific answers or possess the unique judgmental ability to distinguish a specific case that borders on either side of this. But I do know one thing – as with other such erstwhile adages, there cannot be a fire without the spark. There’s got to be a reason why humility was favored all along. To me, this is a non-negotiable aspect that I am not willing to change. For, in my view, humility is not black and white, as in you cannot practice it in certain areas like charity or social life and ignore it at work. Also, I believe it is ingrained in one’s upbringing and defines the level of self-confidence to a certain extent. This is a controversial topic for sure, and I am sure there will be equal arguments to both sides of the story. Maybe I am prejudiced about pride after all!

An ode to Bengaluru

Those were the days in Bangalore,
When Idli & Vada was the main fare;
It used to get cold in December,
And we all had to use a sweater.

Those were the days in Bangalore,
When Doordarshan was the only channel on offer;
The evening buzz was unmistakable in Jayanagar,
The scent of fresh flowers filling the evening air.

Those were the days in Bangalore,
When Kempegowda was the folklore;
BTM-Layout was the southern end of the city,
The horizon was too far to see Electronics City.

Those were the days in Bangalore,
When MTR was the most popular;
The roads were free of traffic,
With the trees that lined the streets making it idyllic.

Those were the days in Bangalore,
When Lalbagh was the attraction on tour;
The VidhanSoudha glistened in the dark,
Not too far away was the Cubbon Park.

Those were the days in Bangalore,
I miss it all for sure;
Shanghai, Geneva, Boston, Montreal - I have seen it all;
But none that satisfies the Bangalore call!

Democracy (in)action

All of last week, the news making waves around the world was the size of the stimulus bill that Obama & co are putting out in the US. This is being discussed fervently, for the common and expert belief is that it will be the turning point to the downside the world markets are experiencing. The actual number tag on the stimulus package was filled in the previous Friday when it garnered enough votes through the House of Representatives and the Senate. Curiously enough, it garnered the very minimum number (60, also referred to as the Filibuster number) to pass through the Senate. The news headlines all of the ensuing weekend overshadowed the $787B, which is the value that the future generations of Americans have to repay for getting out of the current crisis. The news instead was the reactions of the Republicans in the House and the Senate crying out loud over the death of the so-called democracy. The Democrats, which make up the majority, claim this is the mandate given to them by the people, and given the need to do something urgently they do not see this as the time to debate the details now. The Republicans, in their own rights, claim they were bypassed by virtue of their mere numbers in the vote and weren't sought after for crucial decision-making. Whilst both sides have logic in their arguments, for a bystander, this is at some level seen as a failure of democracy.
This isn't restricted to the largest economy of the world. In India, the ruling Congress party has made some decisions of national interest that haven't gone down well with the opposition parties. For example, the public fiasco that was the nuclear cooperation treaty last year isn't that long ago. The December saga in Canada where the government would surely have lost the no confidence vote had it been pushed through by the Governor-General isn't forgotten by the masses. So, what's changed significantly since the wonderful people that coined Democracy to stand for "for the people, to the people, by the people" made it up.
Nothing; zilch; nada! No matter where you look, the idealisms of the politicians have evolved from leading to governing. We have come to an era of politics where even the most capable person in power becomes the laughing stock if he doesn't toe the party line, hasn't ensured appeasement within his/her cabinets, etc. Long gone are the days of charismatic people leading a nation. This is the era of high-power teams, like we are seeing in the new administration. With that, the democratic ideologies and values are also probably long gone because its now decision-making by just individual party consensus. I see a new definition on the horizon – restrict democracy definitions to abstract things like countries and not to people, politicians, etc. Democracy is probably going to be seen as outward exhibition of being tolerant as a nation; not pertinent to specific decision-making. As long as we are being clear in our distinction of what democracy stands for in today's age, we would be doing future generations and ourselves a great service.

A satire on Stanford

Until about a couple of weeks ago, Stanford (to most people across the world) was synonymous for purely academic reasons. The prestigious educational institution in California took in proud students and churned out distinguished alumni, for they occupy an arguably equal level in the esteemed echelons of the industry as say the Harvard graduates.
The law of averages, or karma (however one wishes to look at it), had to strike back at the Stanford name - it was too long for it to go on without an untarnished image! The Harvard had its fair share of recent criticism if the news coverage of the background and education that the instigators of the biggest financial turmoils in recent times had, was anything to go by. Now it was the other hand's turn to face the music - ladies and gentlemen, enter RA Stanford.
What took most people by surprise was the quarters the name's sacrilege came from. A relatively less well known state side until recently, Robert Allen Stanford came into spotlight more or less in the same fashion of his entry into the Mecca of world cricket - Lord's stadium in England - amidst much fanfare, he descended in a helicopter. Much has been written about, and some even criticized it very early on, the England and Wales cricket board's hand-in-glove extravagance with Stanford but it was all attributed to just a public display of wealth then. There's also been more than enough coverage as to what happened on the sidelines of the Stanford 20/20 game with the WAG's of English cricket. Last week, the Federal Bureau of Investigation charge sheeted Stanford after a movie-like chase across the continent with reports that his attempt to flee the country on a private jet failed miserably for his accounts had been frozen the previous day. I am not about to draw conclusions as to whether RA Stanford is a sinner or a saint - there's many paid folks whose day job it is to make that determination.
Where I find this amusing, or even cynical at some levels, is the quick disassociation of the very same people who were seen closely by his side all along. I am sure there must have been some red flags raised last year, especially when the investigating agencies say they've been on his trail for 3+ years now trying to gather all the evidence. The pictures of the helicopter arrival in London make a mighty and stark contrast to the long lines outside the Stanford bank in Antigua this week ensuring the hard earned money isn't lost. I wonder whether the same people knew where the $20M 4-hour game was being funded from. The positives from this - another lesson on financial misrepresentations. On a lighter note, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is!!

The saving grace

Whenever people have asked me, or I’ve spoken of the “Indian culture”, I have always wondered to myself as to the single most important thing that defines my upbringing. I was looking too deep, trying to read too much into every part of my life, while it lay there all along – it was too simple to miss, and yet it was the quality that had the most profound impact on me. The differentiating attribute was the one I am grateful to my grandmother for ingraining in me.

While growing up in the Bangalore (Bengaluru just to the locals, then) of the 80’s, I had a penchant for fountain pens. There were various brands then – Chelpark, Bril, Luxor, etc at the lower end with Hero, Parker, etc making up the higher end price points. I had such a fetish that I was keeping track of every brand and model that came out – in hindsight, a very materialistic obsession with buying newer fountain pens. It was affordable enough for my parents and granny to buy me a few every year, but it wasn’t keeping up with the pace at which newer models were coming out! To inculcate a lesson that would hold me in good stead for life, my grandmother seemingly came up with a plan: if I came in within the top-3 ranks in my class (the much berated Indian schooling system then, of monthly evaluations followed by a top-to-bottom ranking within the student populace!!), she would give me 10 rupees every month, as a reward. I could use this to fund my hobby, but it came with a rider – I could only take up to 5 rupees every month from her, for she would deposit the rest into my bank account for future use. I was too naïve then to be made to understand the benefits of saving, so this was her way of helping me understand and inculcate the saving habit. Her reasoning for stashing away half of the money was to enable me to upgrade to the next level of fountain pen collections i.e. the more expensive ones, but fortunately or unfortunately, I outgrew the hobby before I got to that stage.
For what its worth, if I remember correctly, her educational qualifications till date remain as having completed 3rd grade of schooling. That had no bearing on her attitude in life, or what she has passed on to the next generations (that’s a new post altogether). She’s probably handed me by biggest lesson in life, and one that very likely defines a good part of the Indian / Asian cultures. People may argue that the Asian economies are no different today when compared to the Western ones; my counter to that would be that we live in too small a world economy today that its hard to be isolated from international influences. Dug deeper, the saving mechanisms would probably be the grace factor or the deterministic index of how wide the schisms are, or in simpler and more common terms: how big a bail out we need!

MBA: the ponzi curriculum

I recently had a conversation with a well read and well traveled friend of mine about an article we came across in a leading electrical engineering publication: “Common design mistakes.” Moving beyond the initial cynicism around how this was the time of pessimistic news headlines all around, we started seriously pondering over how engineering and product development have evolved. Gone are the days when a design specification sheet for a product carried instructions on how to build something right; now it’s all about how to avoid common errors around it. The wise man had a good analogy: the most recent electronic component that we sourced from a leading consumer electronics manufacturer, had its errata sheets multiple pages longer than the product guide in itself. Not withstanding the pressure to ship something in whatever state, so as to gain the “early bird” advantage in this consumer era, there is a level of responsibility each one of us has as professionals, to product design and the associated disciplines. I wonder 20 years ago if the engineers had the same mindset if we would have made all the rapid advancements we have made today. It is the onus of every individual to make sure there is a balance between delivering to short-term materialistic commitments and preserving long-term value for the efforts. No wonder this led to the term: “technical debt”. A lot of the high-tech companies are putting in serious efforts today, to address this debt they’ve accumulated over the years, for varying reasons – internal and external.
I am not sure who coined this kind of “debt” term specifically but I can see a lot of value in equating this to the financial markets and the general world economic situation we face today. If the financial curriculum of the Harvards and Stanfords of the world had included how not to do certain things, maybe the thought of severe repercussions would have played a role in reducing the magnitude of bad decisions taken. I was privy to a recent airing of a documentary on this very subject: titled “House of Cards” aptly, this focused on the collapse of the market led by the decisions around mortgage securities and lending institutions. What they did not address was, to me, a critical step of righting the wrong: capturing specific lessons and mistakes of today, so they aren’t repeated in the future. It feels like we have come to a point in society today where knowing the wrongs are more important, so that we can avoid those perils, and thereby be on the right track. As a fifth grader attending a special course on preparing for a Math Olympiad, the instructor said the best way to approach solutions to complex problems was to eliminate the choices – to think that we all laughed back, then!
I am sure “The Bernie Madoff” will be a crucial case study in the not too distant future (or maybe even a postulation), but does it take what it did to actually learn from it? In a way, I am thankful to the likes of Madoff for without them, we would have lost a valuable lesson. If we can predict and work around common “design mistakes” for replaceable materialistic objects, I am sure that we intellectuals of the 21st century can learn from regulatory mistakes (or lack thereof, of sufficient regulations) to avert large-scale global situations like the ones we currently face...what say?

Dial C for coach

This is the coach era, period! It all started gaining prominence with sport. Be it soccer, basketball, baseball, cricket - name the sport - the "coach" today has a very high profile and visible role; even seen as the public face of the team or franchise. John Buchanan, the erstwhile coach of the Australian national cricket team, was a big hit amongst the newer generations for his introduction of technology and out of the box thinking. He brought in practices from rugby to fielding sessions in cricket, he considered getting hitting coaches from baseball to train cricket batsmen in hitting over the top, etc. One of the old school blokes who played in John's era, Shane Warne, once famously said "Coach is something that gets you from the hotel to the match venue". He could not have better articulated his disregard for the coach's influence in the scheme of things. This week, while covering the English national team's ongoing visit to the West Indian islands, an outspoken commentator by the name of Geoff Boycott got into the news with his observation that there were more support staff seen out on the field, than players. Unlike a few sports like soccer or the American football where there's a lot of strategy formulations and alternations in game situations, sports like cricket provide very little powers to the coaches in the midst of a game (if you will, for a moment, forget the Cronje-Woolmer mic experiment episodes!).
It is very common to find analogies between sports and businesses. I, for one, am a big fan of using buzz words from sporting worlds in the corporate life. For, after all, where else could you look for better equivalents to team work, leadership, commitment, bonding, etc than look at sports teams. More importantly, it helps a lot of us sports fanatics connect to some of these situations better. No wonder then, to see management coaches and consultants being the order of the day - be it helping in new strategy formulations, bringing in radical transformation to business strategies, or determining newer synergies for organizations. The list goes on and the clan's purview seems expanding by the day...Where I find the freshly "coached" organizations struggling is in the aftermath of the consultants' or coaches' study of the organization: i.e. implementing the report's suggestions (forget the pressure of trying to do some meaningful changes to justify the cost of the fancy report!). The engagement with consulting firms has become a fancy term to the point where the grass roots within the organizations look at these external coaches and consultants cynically. I've had strong opinions in the past, on these very lines, until having had a chance personally to work hand-in-glove with some management consultants and coming away with valuable insights. I think the essence to a successful coach-team or consultant-client relationship is in managing expectations upfront. The likes of Bain & Co., which have made huge reputations in being positive and successful change agents, have succeeded purely because they came in clearly setting expectations and roles on both sides. Coaches or Consultants do not provide magic answers; they don't even wave magic wands! Rather, because they do not the have the vested interests and the associated baggage, they are able to bring in a balanced and objective view to the problem on hand. This is putting it bluntly, but in reality their suggestions (again, not answers) are most likely to be painful transformations to undergo; hence they aren't thought of beforehand, or kept as the last resort, by organizations themselves. I am, not for a moment, trying to belittle the role of external consultants or management coaches. I have had a positive experience, and, as a take away: stressing on the mindset one needs to go with, before dialing "C" for a coach!

The many faces of change

Change is a much commonly spoken about term, especially when there are problems on hand. Change is now looked at as the new management mantra on the block, even seen as solving the world's pain. The online and print media seem to love gloomy stories so much, because the 'depicted' far-reaching effects of it catches the eye much more than reality does. But, when looked at closely, Change is not only about gloom and doom; it really isn't all that bad!

I had a pleasant surprise happen to me this past week: It was one of those rare times when the in-flight reading material provided by the airline ended up relevant and up to date! I had recently heard someone talk about the advancements in the field of medical surgery, and this article delved into the modus operandi (I make it sound like daytime robbery, but I didn't bring any names or occupations!) of alternative ways for treating complicated illnesses, which required a major surgery of some form. The beauty of the innovation spoken about here was that it did not involve any incisions using advanced technology of sorts, but rather making use of the advancements in genetic engineering. These gene-focused innovations would then be utilized to alter the genes in the human body via oral medications. Imagine someone undergoing a major bypass surgery, without the "surgery" being a part of it! This isn't a science fiction anymore, so wake up – the scientific community already has a basic understanding of the various pieces to the genetic foundation that make up the human body. The remaining aspect of this true innovation is finding the right strains to alter the inherent genes to an "ideal" form.

Lest this turns into an article about the complicated machinery the human body is, let me back off to say that this is just an example to illustrate the positive transformation, the society at large is undergoing. With this advancement, the medical professionals and the associated experts worldwide predict life expectancy to rapidly improve to the 130's (age) instead of the current 70's / 80's / 90's (depending on which part of the world one is in). In the Western culture of today, where it is about being independent and taking care of oneself in retirement, we have folks that work their entire prime years with the sole aim of building up their wealth portfolio so that "they can retire in peace". For some, this might mean buying a beach condo in ever-sunny Florida, a lodge in the vast lands of the Aussie wilderness, or a Mediterranean-style villa in the beautiful south coast of France (especially the Nice region of the French Riviera - yeah, how I would love to retire there!)

With the current expectancy levels, most people save up enough to last them 20-25 years of comfortable living in retirement without any additional external support. If the expectancy levels rise to a level where people find the need to support themselves for another 60+ years after retirement, what do you think is going to happen? Make no mistake; people will no longer retire at 60. What does this mean? No slam dunk answer; it's much more than that! Put simply: one cannot continue down the rat hole of the so-called specialization. There is going to be a "generalization of the specialists" at some level. I am not saying being good at something doesn't count for anything; people will be expected to bring in more than one area of expertise. People will be forced to look at reinventing themselves, be multi-faceted. The upside – one has multiple opportunities, to make it big in life. Think about it – if one career doesn't cut it for you (note I didn't say fail because you still learn from that experience), how nice would it be if you have 25 years of it to look back on for experience, and start afresh? Yes, beginning a second career at the second stage of your life might look daunting and even be too big a hurdle for some, but those who embrace the change quickly will thrive.

Change is good; we need more of it coming our way, and quickly at that…after all, isn't change the only constant in life??

Defying Newton

If Newton were to live in the current times, I am not so sure he would have a third law of physics associated to his name. Put differently, I would like to believe that at some level, most people today wish to defy Newton by trying to disprove his third law. For those that don't find Newton's laws appealing enough to remember it, the 3^rd law goes like this: "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction"!

Think of every single action in our daily lives and you'll find that there's some less-written about rule associated with each of it – be it obeying a traffic regulation on the streets, practicing basic etiquette when in public, or be it even the small little things that may border on the tedious for one individual but done for the betterment of others. I am not the saint that obeys it all either: for e.g., I don't shut off my phone when in public places, for I have the "crackberry" addiction of wanting to check e-mail; so I just put it on 'vibrate' unless that is too loud as well! I don't wait the mandated full 3-seconds at four-way stop signs unless I spot a cop around the corner! The list goes on…

Now, if I were to be penalized for each of the infractions I mention above, I probably wouldn't do it if the penalty bites me. I was talking to someone who had moved stateside recently, from India. He was talking about the 'affordability' of traffic tickets in India compared to here, and therefore being that extra bit careful not to be ticketed. How nice it is to talk about 'affording' not just material things, but traffic fines!!! It immediately struck a cord with me and pointed out a human trait – I am sure each of us has a disobedient side at some level. For most folks, that are law abiding citizens, I am sure that it isn't really a desire to disobey something in the first place, but we do it as long as there isn't a downside, or negative repercussions associated with it. More importantly we tend to disobey only when there's a fair chance of not getting caught at it!
This is equally applicable to individuals and conflicts: if Jack knows that there's only a 50% chance of him succeeding in a fight against Jill, he would think twice before doing it.

So, if there were to be an equal reaction to every "disobedient" action of ours, with an opposite effect, would we still knowingly incur the opposite effect? No! I wonder what Newton would say…

Crossing the t's and dotting the i's

The aspect of "managing perceptions in human interaction" was something that I never really thought of, in the past, as a key attribute to good leadership. This changed when I listened to a discourse by Swami Sukabodhananda. His discourses are of a specialized form in that they are mostly related to management, leadership and human interactions. Before I go any further, a statutory disclaimer – I am not affiliated to him or any company of his, in any capacity, nor am I paid to write about him!

SS, as I'll refer to him henceforth, is very widely traveled and has interacted with management institutions worldwide in various forms. Uncle N of mine introduced me to a lecture of his – on Stress Management, I think, about 10 years ago. In one of the chapters on the CD, he talks about an incident that occurred during a regular classroom session he had with management folks from around the world. He had noticed that a lady in the back row looked tired and was finding it difficult to concentrate. He requested her to move up to occupy one of the empty front seats, and continued with his lecture. He noticed that the woman seemed very agitated since the earlier event, so after a while, he asked her if everything was OK. The woman was honest enough and said she was upset – she believed that the Swamiji (as many of his admirers/followers/disciples call him) had insulted her by picking her out in front of everyone else, and making her come up to the front. Right after she said this, the Swamiji asked if everyone in the room felt the same way as regards to the woman's reaction. A gentleman, who was seated on the other far side of the room raised his hand and said he would have felt privileged had he been picked instead to come up and occupy the front row. He hadn't noticed the woman being distracted and that she was therefore being called up to the front. He had felt that the Swamiji saw something in the person to "promote" her over the others in the room – to be seated right up front, in the thick of action!

Look at what perception does – it was a simple gesture by the speaker to encourage one of the distracted folk to be more involved, but two different individuals perceived the same event at two extremes. One looked at it as reward, while the other deemed it a punishment. Every word uttered, or every action performed, will look different when taken out of context or seen in a different light. An oft-repeated line conveys the same message – no two fingers of our hand are the same; which meant to say no two individuals are alike. This story goes beyond that – individuals react differently to the same event; so the onus is on the leader to convey the message in a form that ensures reception in the right spirit. The expectations are changing: leadership before was about conveying the right message; leadership now is to not just convey the right message but also ensure it is received right.

Keep in mind – the T and the I don't need crossing or dotting when written as capital letters!

Q to the editor

Media coverage of events across the world has grown manifold in the past decade or so. With the advent of newer forums that use the Web2.0 infrastructure – blogs, twitter, podcast, etc – there are more than enough avenues for folks to get their daily share of news from. The traditional print news media is caught blinded by this explosion of sorts. Not worrying about traditional competition anymore, they are just looking for ways and means to keep their current customer base in place and not lose market share to the new media outlets.

No matter what the level of news reach the online publication options provide, there's still bound to be a time and place for traditional print: be it on an airplane, be it fulfilling the morning ritual of a quick glance at the newspaper with a cup of coffee, or lying down by the pool side on a quiet Saturday afternoon with a newspaper in hand. So, as an editor to a leading news publication, the biggest challenge is to capture and retain the attention of the reader. Does one go the mass market way and provide a tabloid, or does one focus on providing enriched content that adds cerebral value to the reader? The answers to these questions determine the critical choice of whether to put certain events' coverage on page-1 or page-3 of the newspaper. If someone were to pick up a USA-Today and WallStreetJournal in Boston today, there's a marked difference in the Page-1 content between the newspapers. The same difference is obviously visible when one looks at TheHindu & TimesOfIndia in Bangalore, which is on the other side of the world. While these newspapers cover the same little urban village, that is the world, and the content is from the same events worldwide, there's a marked difference on what the focus of these newspapers is, especially when it comes to deciding what goes on Page-1!

As the executive editor, or whatever he or she is now called, what goes into them making these choices? Does their role move beyond just the coverage; do they owe something to the world at large i.e. the customers, by virtue of their bi-partisan positions? Is there a moral side to it? It must be hard to strike a balance between being a self-righteous moral police and being seen as enticing audience with sensationalism.

Essentially, there's a simple answer to this seemingly complex conundrum and the solution is equally applicable to an individual or entity. The clues lie in answering one question: are you a false positive or a false negative? Stripping all the jargon around it, would you rather be seen as doing the right thing, or would you rather do the right thing and not care about the perception or the end results? What would you do??

The magic bullet

Yes, if you read through to the end of this article, I guarantee that you will have the remedy to almost every trouble, or the magic pill for nearly every problem, there is!

A recent study was conducted on the major league sports in North America which, to those in the know, is a highly competitive and much coveted arena for sportsmen. I did not know the exact probability statistics, but I could afford a logical guess that it took years and years of training hard to even become a contender, and not end up a pretender. Also, to go with the skill, it probably took the slight bit of luck which involved being in the right place at the right time as also to cash in at the slightest hint of visible opportunities. Now, this study looked at the stars of today and yore – unlike most media paparazzi (the kind that springs up magically the moment these stars get themselves a celebrity girlfriend!), this team of researchers did not cover stardom and beyond but rather went into the making of the stars, so to speak. Apparently, if you take ice hockey (which is a religion in itself in Canada and significant parts of the US) as an example: the players put in about 10000 hours on the ice before they made it to the major league level. An independent team delved into other major sports and came up with an equivalent number – nearly 10000 hours of practicing and doing what they did, to get to the level they are at! What's the magic of this number? Is that the number of hours of physical activity one needs to put in to get muscle memory at the sport to get to a level where they become the best (or the cream of the lot) at what they do? Read Malcolm Gladwell's latest book: "Outliers" to get more insights into this theory.

Someone who read these research findings came across Bill Gates at an event, and without providing any background to the aforementioned sports research, asked him about how many hours of programming he had done? Before I provide Gates' answer, let me remind you all that the common perception of Bill is that he was a lucky bloke who made it big in life, when he couldn't make it through high school! Bill Gates' answer to the programming question was – yes, 10000 hours!

I have not personally confirmed the veracity of these answers; neither do I have the 'contacts' to validate these answers with the individuals in question! But, let's assume for a moment that these answers were indeed true. What is the common theme to these folks – we can see that it took a lot of hard work; not to forget the ability to sustain one's focus over a significant period of time. All this, just to have the "chance" to be successful. I am, not for a moment, implying we all need to put in 10000 hours each in our own careers, far from it.

If this is what it takes confirmed successes to earn their livelihood, why aren't we putting up with something for even a fraction of this time before putting our hands up? Can we learn from these folks, who we and our kids regard as idols? Patience, as a virtue, is fast losing ground in this current day and age, where it is all about instant gratification. I remember, as a kid, seeing an instant noodles ad on television wherein the primary message was that it was "ready to serve" in 2 minutes. Figuratively speaking, are we now expanding this to every single avenue of our life? Traffic jams are a common and even expected way-of-life in major cities around the world today. Knowing and accepting it as reality is one thing, but being impatient on the road is another. Even driving for a couple of hours each day, assuming 250 such days on the road in a year, one would put in 500 hours of driving each year. Putting aside that the fact that one is accomplishing the objective of getting to / from the place of livelihood i.e. workplace, it would take a minimum of 20 years of driving at this rate, to rack up the same kind of hours that these professionals do to earn their chops. There might be arguments that these folks earn the high salaries they do, and it's compensating for their hard work, but that's beside the point. Also, being in a vehicle on the road isn't nearly in the same boat as these professionals, as far as effort involved is concerned. We should consider ourselves blessed for what we have, without having to go through the same rigor day in and day out for 15 consecutive years or more (which is what it takes the sportsmen to make a mark) and the sacrifices that go with it. I am just asking for everyone to exhibit that extra bit of patience in the time that one spends on the road.

To not come across as patronizing, I end this with a confession: I was probably the most impatient person I once ever knew, but I consciously worked on it. Coming back to our behavior on the streets, please take a moment (yes, just a moment!) to reflect on the profound and long lasting effects. I hope everyone can see that our message to the next generation, when we love teaching by example, isn't coming out as its intended to be. I just took the example of street behavior to illustrate my point of impatience profoundly increasing, but this is just as applicable to each and every aspect of our lives. If only we could all live by this quote: "Patience is bitter, but the fruits of it are sweet", the world will be that much better a place, and we would all have done our bit to make it so!

Two birds, no stone!

I recently got to attend a much sought after talk, wherein the speaker was a renowned expert in his own domain. His claim to fame was the application of best practices from the automotive and other age-old industries to the relatively newer era of technology management . He was adept with the likes of Lean Management, Agile development methodologies, Xtreme programming practices, etc and he spoke passionately about these, at length.I came out really excited, with some out-of-the-box thoughts to try out on a team that was willing to be the scapegoat for my experiments! A topic that he briefly touched on was something that, in hindsight, could easily be extended to beyond just software development. This topic of interest to me, was "Pair programming". I am sure those with exposure to 'extreme programming' paradigms know all about it, and more! But to those uninitiated in the jargons above, "pair programming" is just literally what it is – a pair involved in the programming i.e. rather than have just individuals working on their own programming problems, a pair of individuals are involved in putting their heads together to solving the same problem. The advantages he quotes are many – having someone to bounce thoughts off, a senior mentor to guide a junior engineer, equal peers having each other watch over so that defects are reduced, learning from each other's experience (read: mistakes), etc. The applicability of this practice or the success measure of this practice isn't really the point of write up. My thoughts are about scaling this, and looking beyond software or technology management. It is about extending this to corporate governance.

With the recent disclosures around Satyam's senior management (or the lack of it, considering none except one individual seemed to have any inkling of internal reality), it led me to think what if there were actually a pair involved in managing the affairs of a corporation. To lead on a possible modality, how would it be if every public listed company had a pair running the organization – one being the executive that's managing inside-out (this is the traditional CEO role as the public face of the company) and the second one in the "pair" being the external representative. He / She would be appointed by the majority stakeholders as their face or voice. There might be concerns as to the veracity of the second appointment, how a consensus is to be reached amongst the shareholders, etc. Of course, I don't have the answers to all these questions, but I am sure we cannot work out a magic formula that would work for every single organization out there. Each entity is as unique as it can get and it is in the best interests of each organization to determine the best way to select the second part of the "pair". This is crucial because this piece of the puzzle would need to work hand-in-glove with the 'traditional CEO' in making sure they are making decisions with the best interests of the company , both at heart, and in soul. The independent board of directors, unfortunately, don't make the cut any more for they are too independent to be involved. As the story goes, they want to be the chicken and not the pig! (non-committed vs. committed; for more background on this, Google "chicken, pig and Agile"!)

The need of the hour is a committed bunch (or two) – someone who doesn't have the same vested interests as the CEO, but at the same time has accountability to deliver, and is committed to this as a full time position. Of course, the much talked about CEO compensation would be back in focus, for there is now a 2x outflow. But I am confident that seeing the long term health of the company in good hands, and the shareholders' interests continuously and independently protected, is a fair enough price to pay for this model. As a parting thought, is there a hidden message in "pair" being a part of "repair"? The onus is on every Indian, with exposure to the West, to undo the damage that the Satyam saga has done worldwide, so that the questions surrounding corporate governance in India are put to rest once and for all!

The power of prime

What's the biggest prime number? Just kidding…this isn't an article about math!

This is about RW Emerson's quote: "Money often costs too much"; this is about the impact of the prime-lending rate (PLR) on the common man and its far-reaching consequences on the economic future of the country. To put it simply, this "prime" number is the interest rate that the central bank would charge for a loan that it lends to say, one of the banks.

Though the prime is an index measured in basis points, it's a metric decided upon by the powers that manage the central bank, and it is adjusted every once so often. Barring economic casualties that seem to arise often of late, as in the current times, there is a specific schedule to evaluating and adjusting this rate. There are various factors that go into how this rate is determined, and how it is altered, but that's beyond the scope of this short article. When looked at a consumer's perspective, the prime rate determines how the banks that deal with individuals (the ICICI's and SBI's of the country) go about lending money. For example, if a private bank is aggressive at handing out loans, these loans might be offered to the customer at prime rate or just above it, with a marginal profit. This is where it all gets interesting – the banks in India currently don't seem to distinguish between the individuals' ability to pay off the loans and their past history at doing so, when doling out loans. Of course, there is the lien that people need to provide and records of assets owned, etc to back up claims for loans at the higher housing levels, like those seen in the millions of rupees range. At certain lower levels like automobile loans or consumer purchases in the lower hundreds-of-thousands, there seems to be a near free-for-all eligibility to get hands on one of these loans. There's a very thin line that divides the consumers' desire to upgrade their lifestyles with borrowed money and, to put it simply, the greed to not be able to distinguish between wants and needs depending on affordability. The US economy, beginning with the sub-prime housing crisis, and now extending to credit difficulties caused by very poor liquidity should be an important lesson for India. As the saying goes, it is best to learn from the mistakes of others, and not repeat it oneself. The law makers need to encourage good, responsible behavior while at the same time make it difficult for people to stretch their economic freedom to levels where they can no longer sustain it. I am sure there are conflicting opinions between achieving rapid economic growth vs. sustained growth at slightly lower levels, but this balance might be important to ensure the long-term health of the economy. This is where utilizing the "power of the prime" to ensure adequate liquidity levels becomes very important.

Unlike some of the developed Western economies, India doesn't (yet) have a centrally reported "credit score" for every individual. To establish such a system, there needs to be a central database that pretty much tracks the "credit history" of every individual. This would mean tracking all transactions wherein there is not cash or an instant money transfer (debit purchases) involved. In other words, transactions that require borrowing of money would need to be reported by all the banks that offer credit cards or loans, to the central reporting / monitoring agency. This bipartisan agency would then come up with a 'score' for every single individual based on his / her past record with loans and promptness in paying off debt. I hope this system is included as part of the e-governance transformation the country is undergoing. Given a transparent setup that everyone has access to, the lending institutions wouldn't fall over one another in doling out sub-prime loans (and then have people head over heels in paying off these loans), and banks would really understand the risks behind each loan made. This results in accountability getting built into the system at all levels. More importantly, it is never too late to reward good behavior!

Yes we can...

This quote is, without-doubt, attributable to the new President of the United States. Ever since I heard him say it with passion for the very first time early in '08, I have been enamored. Why? Read on…

There've been many factors quoted by the experts for Barack Obama's popularity around the world, the least of which is not the historic factors surrounding his origins. That aside, the ability to intellectually connect and therefore favorably polarize people isn't being quoted (at least publicly) as the principal factors for his worldwide acceptance. If looked closely, there's a lot of similarity between his position in the American ecosystem (and the demographic engulfed within) and India's current position in the economic world order:

Rising from a position of adversity, where the only way is up, it is possible to talk on the same terms what India's economic growth has done to the world's perception as has Obama's win done to America's (and indirectly the world's) perception of race. Not for a moment am I indicating that this is a win of any sorts for any non-political reasons, but let's take a magnanimous look at the impact of "faith, belief" and "hope" in the end result.

India, as it's been since 1947 until the technology-driven economic boom of the 21^st century, has been at some level continuously driven by the "hope" that the hard work of the people will bear fruit eventually. We are not the new world order, yet, economically or strategically, but India is the new kid on the block that the neighbors stand up to take notice. If I were to express all of this change or transformation in one key word or phrase, it would arguably be the "HOPE" or the "yes we can" attitude. That we didn't definitively come out and say as much explicitly reflects on the confidence that initial success gives you to make that bold statement. To draw a parallel again, note that this wasn't Obama's message from the get go, but rather the initial primary wins over Hillary that gave him the confidence to put his confident foot forward and issue the war cry of "yes we can".

The message to the new "leaders" (I prefer this to "politician" for its long been misused and therefore tarnished) that govern India should be: Drive Change at all levels, for it is change that gives rise to new possibilities; use hope to power this transformation, and the beliefs from past successes to achieve this change.

Signing off, I hope (yes I do too) it is time to expand on the original quote:"Yes we can, and we should!"…

What's in a name?

I was recently left pondering over this very question, when a coworker asked me to explain the significance of our choice for our little one. I am sure most Indians who have had any exposure to the West have had to clarify something related to their names - be it the way its pronounced, or explaining the significance of it!

I still have a few unanswered questions at the end of my rhetoric investigations: is it that the names are complex in English pronunciation because they were not designed for the language in the first place, a.k.a lost in translation? Do all the Anglican names translate fairly easily over to other languages? Having spent the last couple of years in a predominantly francophone community, I can see how Michael became Michel, Mark became Marc, or Stephen became Stephane when it passed the Anglo-Franco transformation and also suit the needs of the local language, as also to gel well with the syllables.
As the world becomes one small village, as the cliche goes, are we faced with having to come up with an equivalent Indian-Western name transformation?

To visit the other side of the story, I'm sure there's a reason why we have the names we do. At the cost of generalizing, let me take the South Indian Hindu names for e.g: most have some sort of relationship to a Hindu God/Goddess. The most logical conclusion I can make is that the grand parents and parents wished to chant these religious names as often as they could, resulting in the names being what they are! It served the dual purpose of being religiously inclined, while at the same time giving identity to the culture and religion. So, while there's the argument to translate into the Anglican form to give it more identity to the local land, there's also the cultural identity. I guess its the ultimate choice - local identity or cultural roots' identity that governs the answer to "what's in a name?"

To end on a lighter note, I have an anecdote from summer of '02: one of my unofficial roles, when being assigned to cover the initial foray of an Indian outsourcing services provider in the NorthEast US, was to help the newer arrivals from India settle down. I had one such engineer (who was to become a close friend later) land in Boston and during the first week, I took him to the Social Security office to get a SSN (Social Security Number, to those in the know!). We apparently set a record then for his middle and last names (coming from a typical Tiruchirappalli tradition of having the village name be part of it) exceeded the space allocated for names in the SSN system. To those curious minds, all's well that ends well - he ended up giving a shortened name, which then became his name for the rest of his life in the US!

The "scar" in scarcity

As someone who grew up in India in the '80's, I've first hand experienced a social phenomenon which I am sure a lot of Indians from the same era can relate to: I am referring to the scenario which occurred at pretty much every public place where there was a need to form a line or queue.
Be it a bus station where one needed to get a taxicab, board a train, or entering the stadias gates for catching a game, there would always be attempts to override the queue and rush to the front if not for policing by either the public themselves or by specifically assigned folks to ensure people "literally"stayed in line. I am, by no means whatsoever, demeaning the population or referring to this as only happening in particular regions of the world. I am merely attempting to delve deeper into the psychological aspects of this particular human behavior.
I did have to wait for long to get some out-of-the-box thoughts and insights into this - when it finally did come, it was from a coworker of my dad, a German national who was living in India then. His reasoning for this behavior was that people were afraid of being left out i.e. if they weren't at the front of the line, they would miss out on getting it eventually, for there as a possibility of it running out by the time their turn came around! A simple enough argument, but it made the most logical sense to me. Was scarcity the answer to people really behaving the way they were?
I do not have the credentials to provide any expert opinions on the human mind, but let's take this to be the case for a moment: would fear of not having a bus come by the same route for an hour afterwards force people to do what it takes to get in? Oh, yes. Would, in spite of holding a paid-for ticket, not guarantee a good view of the game? Yes, because, they aren't reserved seats! These examples I've taken could easily be argued upon as being the same in any other developed nation, but these are what they are - just examples! I could, in a moment's notice, come up with umpteen more cases but that's not the point. My case is that such a behavior could stay with an individual and be a part of him/her without even a conscious feeling of doing so. I have seen some Indians exhibit the same behavior when visiting a doctor's office in the US - the doctor isn't going away, but they are concerned anyway; so they want to be the first in line when the doctor's office opens and the secretary is taking in registrations.
For those that read this far, I am sure the title of this post is now self explanatory - it is the scar caused by the scarcity (or fear of it) that I hope is diminishing in the new India. With all the growth and prosperity the nation has experienced materialistically, I hope we can be richer psychologically as well. For, after all, this will be our true gift to the next generation of Indians!