Monday 12 May 2014

In disarray, the seculars show their communal colors...


The exit poll results, barring ORG MARG give the NDA a simple majority. It does predict they will be within striking distance though. I was watching TIMES NOW last night, just to get a sense of why the ORG poll was relatively conservative.

Arnab was exploring post poll alliance possibilities when a couple of the seculars dropped bombshells. One of them, Kavita of the TRS (from Telangana) said in so many words that they would not join the BJP led NDA in a post poll alliance because the Muslims voted for TRS!

In assessments made by the panellists which included people like Vinod Mehta, Lord Meghnad Desai, Arti Jerath amongst others, the consensus on UP seemed to be that the SP had taken the Muslim vote, as a result Mayawati’s BSP had not done well, but that Mayawati had probably held on to the caste vote.

Add the pre-poll reservation game of the Congress party. And their all consuming pre-occupation with the Gujarat riots 12 years ago, read "see minorities, BJP is bad for you". It was simply seeking to create more divisions between "minority" and "majority" to its political advantage. Of course, it said nothing specific about what it plans to give us in the next 5 years. Division by caste, religion and region is how these parties’ describe secularism. It’s another scam! Perhaps we should call it the Secular Scam! I’m delighted they’ve almost certainly been shown the door.

While I make no defence for the extreme right views on the other side, I haven’t heard them state very much, if anything, about the Hindu vote. Nor are they wooing the caste vote. So the lineup looks like this:

The Secularists :  Congress – reservations & Muslims, BSP – caste, SP – Muslims and caste, TRS – Muslims, and NCP – regionalism...the list goes on.

The Right Wing Extremists : Development, Good Governance.

Hah!

Friday 2 May 2014

Lord Desai, Amartya Sen, what spirit of secularism?


Many intellectuals like Dr. Amartya Sen, Lord Meghnad Desai, and of late some leading Indian journalists like Shekhar Gupta have been writing about the death of secularism.

I’m not a political commentator, student of politics, an intellectual or a journalist. Far from these, all I am is just 1 vote, to be exercised once every 5 years. That’s something, given that I’ll probably have just 10-12 opportunities in a lifetime. That leaves me about 4-5 opportunities in the future, and that’s it. Gives me something to think about, doesn’t it?

When someone suggests to people like me that I may be representing a thought process supporting the death of secularism in India, I find it really difficult to digest. There are really 3 lines of consideration I put behind my vote.

I voted against mismanagement. I voted for hope. I voted to uphold the spirit of the Constitution of India. Let me expand.

Mismanagement is a no brainer. I voted against a stagnating system, incredible and never seen before levels of corruption, uncontrolled inflation, unchecked terrorism, violence against women, ancient infrastructure (the best known highway we have was built by Sher Shah Suri), a declining economy, unfulfilled and undelivered dreams (read jobs), a steady decline in the country’s reputation…the list can go on and on.    

I voted for hope. I voted for a change from nepotism of an unimaginable order, I voted for meritocracy (even the worse is better than a family business that repeatedly undermines the very tenets of government, and of our Constitution, by playing the game of puppets), and against an inept looking and worse sounding option for a leader. I voted so that we can hopefully see a working model in the entire country that has won favor in Chattisgarh, MP, Rajasthan and Gujarat (obviously something works). I voted for a different promise – development and good governance, and against divisive reservations and subsidies.

I voted to uphold the spirit of the Constitution. The Constitution is a pledge taken by “we, the people of India”. That includes every religion, caste, creed, or other sub-division ever created. The constitution promises equality for all. I voted for the equality of all Indians. As a mainstream Hindu without a sub-caste or sub-tribe badge to show off, I feel unequal and disadvantaged. I don’t have a Government appointed commission or some such body protecting my rights. I don’t want one. I don’t have reservations. I don’t want them.  I don’t much care for the concept of domicile rights which make me feel like an outsider anywhere outside Delhi. I just want to be treated as an equal Indian, without having to define my religion, caste, tribe, religion, region or any such sub-division through which I can get more than another Indian can. I voted against great favors done to people, with the expectation that they cast their vote to the giver in return.  All Indians should have the freedom to exercise all their rights anywhere in the country.  I voted for the abolition of regionally divisive politics. I voted for people to be allowed to wear their identity without fear or temptation. I voted for the abolition of special status of states, which is the longest standing and most visible symbol of division. I voted to make people understand that the secular framework of this country is inclusive of Hindus. I voted for us not to highlight people through their divisions because it makes them stand out, and therefore makes them victims or perpetrators, and tools of unscrupulous political agendas.  I voted for the one party that is giving this message openly. I voted for equality, development, and good governance, not for Right Wing Hinduism. I voted for what the Constitution of this country promises me.

In the face of all this lies the dilemma of the 2002 incidents in Gujarat. I’m not an investigator, nor a legal expert. However, I do know there cannot be smoke without fire. But I’m not naive, nor am I blind to the number of fires that have burnt this nation, and who the arsonists were. How long are we expected to believe that nothing of the nature ever happened outside of Gujarat 2002? And should we be basing our future on incidents of over a decade, and sometimes over 2 decades ago? The world has to move on. I voted for the people who are talking about what moving on looks like.
In Indian politics, smoke there is in plenty. The moot question is about the architects of the division of our people. It is that divisiveness that is at the root of the fires that have burnt, that should never burn again. But when the architects continue to demonstrate that they have no intention of changing their politics (e.g. Jats getting OBC status on the eve of the elections), then the likes of Lord Desai, Amartya Sen and Shekhar Gupta need to open their eyes a bit wider, and see the larger picture. Our secularism can’t be about Hindu’s, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians. It has to be about Indians.

In the meantime, the Indian in me looks forward to Biryani and Sevian on Eid, Plum Cake on Christmas, my kids decorating a Christmas tree every year, the annual Christmas party in our community (we have no idea how many Christians live in our condo, and it doesn’t matter), we had an Akhand Path at home when my father passed on... and of course, there’s Diwali, Holi and all of the other stuff too, when all my friends, whose names I don’t care to check, send me good wishes from themselves and their families. I don’t know whether my several housemaids are Ahirs, Jats, Mizos, Meenas or whatever. They have free access to my kitchen, and to any part of my house their work takes them to. That’s the India I voted for.

Monday 31 March 2014

The Power of People: Sporting Wickets?

The Power of People: Sporting Wickets?: I've often wondered on this issue. Every time a  sub-continent team loses in Australia, England, New Zealand or South Africa, we hear t...

Sporting Wickets?

I've often wondered on this issue. Every time a  sub-continent team loses in Australia, England, New Zealand or South Africa, we hear the international media go on about about us being tigers at home, and losers in "sporting conditions".

I guess that means the teams from these countries should be winning in our conditions. 

Look at the most forgiving cricketing format. Its called T20. Its supposed to blur the gap between teams with varying talent. What happened today? Netherlands licked England by over 50 runs after scoring less than 150. And Sri Lanka? Half way through their match with NZ, they looked like "poor Sri Lanka". At the end, it proved to be poor NZ. And Australia's match vs India yesterday. They didnt make the 100 run mark etther.

So what's happening to England, Australia and New Zealand? In the last 3 matches, none of them could cross the 100 run mark to win against modest totals. Are these the epitomes of international cricket?

My take is that we in India will tend to support the view of the caucasian, and what are sporting cricket conditions, because we dont believe in ourselves till the "gora" validates us. Get over it boys! The gora is about as good a cricketer in sub-continent conditions as the sub-continent boy is in gora conditions! Its even. Its equal. Nobody's any better than the other.

In case you're wondering about what the "right thing" is, and you're gora oriented, then it is the gora who introduced the home conditions concept. And is now getting licked at it!

Sunday 9 March 2014

13 hilarious attitudes of MNC’s in India...and those who work in them.


13 hilarious attitudes of MNC’s in India...and those who work in them.

I had no plans of posting this one. On Friday night (7 March), at the ex-Microsofties party in Gurgaon, Sukhesh Madaan asked me if I was still blogging. I said I had stopped because I didn’t think anyone was reading my blogs. He said he loved one of them, so I promised I’d push this one out too.

If you’re searching for what will make a certain breed of MNC’s successful in India, then you should look elsewhere. Perhaps read about how to conquer the chaos, though you would do well to research the endeavour. This BLOG is about what AILS them.

I don’t want to name companies in my musings. After all, I know only a bit about some of them. But having spent 20+ years in a few, and coached senior executives or consulted with them in others, I became convinced it wasn’t a problem with my alma mater alone.

Some ripe ones are (not in any particular order, and not comprehensive by any means)
  1. No great idea makes it to execution – we’re abundantly cautious over taking risks.
  2. All our energy is spent telling people why it won’t work, not how it will.
  3. We reward risk takers.
  4. Fire fighting is our company’s most important goal.
  5. Our most absurd traditions are justified as “the company way...”
  6. We drive looking in the rear view, not through the windshield. We review.. & review again.
  7. We are hopeless at changing ourselves, but you are useless if you can’t.
  8. We never need help because we’re smarter than everyone else.
  9. We don’t know what we want, and we don’t like what we get.
  10. Our sense of entitlement always exceeds our sense of accountability.
  11. Mine is bigger than yours. Just name it - Company, home, car, team, bank balance...
  12. We have a bell curve for everything, and we use it to legitimize anything.
  13. Vacuousness is fine as long as the language is smooth and shiny

Hope you enjoy this!

Tuesday 11 September 2012

Knowing What To Stop Doing

Great piece I read in a book. I can't remember which one now. It opened my eyes. just as one Sunday morning, the blooming Laburnum in this picture did. Thought I'd share it with friends.

"

As a 10-year board member of the Peter Drucker Foundation, I had many opportunities to listen to this great man. Among the myriad wise things I have heard Peter Drucker say, the wisest was, “We spend a lot of time teaching leaders what to do. We don’t spend enough time teaching leaders what to stop. Half the leaders I have met don’t need to learn what to do. They need to learn what to stop.”
How true. Think about your organization. When was the last retreat or training session you attended that was titled, Stupid Things Our Top People Do That We Need To Stop Doing Now? When was the last time your CEO delivered an internal talk, designed to motivate employees, that focused on his negative traits and his efforts to stop this destructive behaviour? Can you even imagine your CEO (or immediate supervisor) admitting a personal failing in public and outlining his efforts to stop doing it?
Probably not.
There are good reasons for this, largely allied to the positive tone and fast-forward momentum organizations try to maintain. Everything in an organization is designed to demonstrate a commitment to positive action – and couched in terms of doing something. We will start paying attention to our customers (rather than stop talking about ourselves). We must begin to listen more attentively (rather than stop playing with our BlackBerries while others are talking).
Likewise, recognition and reward systems in most organizations are totally geared to acknowledge the doing of something.  We get credit for doing something good. We rarely get credit for ceasing to do something bad. Yet they are flip sides of doing the same coin.
Think of the times you’ve seen colleagues go on a sales call and return with a huge order. If they’re like the salespeople I know, they’ll come back to the office brandishing the lucrative sales order and regaling anyone who’ll listen with a blow-by-blow account of how they turned the prospect around. What if during the sales call these salespeople added up the numbers and realized that they were about to close a deal that actually costs the company money with every unit sold? What if they decided on the spot to stop negotiating and say no to the sale? Do they rush back to the office and boast about the bad deal they’ve just avoided? Hardly – because avoiding mistakes is one of those unseen, unheralded achievements that are not allowed to take up our time and thought. And yet...many times avoiding a bad deal can affect the bottom line more significantly than scoring a big sale.
Think of Gerald Levin when he was the much-admired chairman of Time Warner in the 1990s. Levin was hailed as a visionary CEO, the man who foresaw the future of cable TV and helped invent HBO, transforming Time Warner from just a combo of magazines, movies, and music into a broadcasting powerhouse.
But then in 2000 Levin made a mistake. He merged the venerable Time Warner with the upstart online service AOL. It was the biggest corporate merger in US history at the time – promising to create a company that would dominate for decades. Of course, it didn’t work out that way. The merger nearly destroyed Time Warner. The stock lost 80 percent of its value. Thousands of employees lost the bulk of their retirement savings. As for Levin, he lost his job, a big chunk of his net worth, and all of his reputation. He went from being chairman of Time Warner to being the architect of the worst corporate merger in US history.
Now imagine if Levin at any point in the negotiation with AOL had applied the brakes and walked away from the deal? Chances are, we’d never know about it. Levin would not hold a press conference to announce, “We are not merging!” He’d keep it to himself, as just one more example of a bad decision avoided. And yet...if he had done this—if he had simply stopped what he was doing – his reputation and net worth might have remained intact.
That’s the funny thing about stopping some behaviour. It gets no attention, but it can be as crucial as everything else we do combined.
For some reason, we are less likely to poison our thinking this way in normal everyday life. When it comes to stopping behaviour or avoiding bad decisions outside the workplace, we congratulate ourselves all the time.
A few years ago my wife and I decided not to invest in a real estate venture. Too risky, we thought. Fortunately for us (though not for some of our friends), it went bust. Not a month goes by when Lyda and I, sitting around the kitchen table paying our bills, don’t say to each other, “Thank God we didn’t plunk our money into that scheme.” We’re quiet for a moment, think sadly of our friends’ losses, and then resume paying our bills. This is our way of honouring the bad decision we avoided.
Likewise, with stopping a bad habit in our personal life. If we successfully stop smoking, we regard it as a big achievement – and congratulate ourselves all the time for it. Others do too (as well they should when you consider that the average smoker tries to quit nine times).
But we lose this common sense in the can-do environment of an organization – where there is no system for honouring the avoidance of a bad decision or the cessation of bad behaviour. Our performance reviews are solely based on what we’ve done, what numbers we’ve delivered, what increases we have posted against last year’s results. Even the seemingly minor personal goals are couched in terms of actions we’ve initiated, not behaviour we have stopped. We get credit for being punctual, not for stopping our lateness.
We can change this. All that’s required is a slight tweak in our mindset, in how we look at our behaviour.
Get out your notepad. Instead of your usual “To Do” list, start your “To Stop” list. By the end of this book, your list may grow.
"

Monday 6 February 2012