To get or to give?

Think big, Aim big, Think like a winner, Badi Soch Ka Bada Jadoo, You can win, You'll see it if you believe it etc. are very common titles or themes of what we get to read now a days. Today's child grows up while planning to start it big. Names like Dhirubhai Ambani, Sunil Bharti Mittal and Gautam Adani seem so close to him. Everybody is taught, encouraged and trained to look at oneself in the mirror and remind one that the future has just one thing in store and that is golden tremendous unending success. Low aim is crime and nobody is a criminal in the coming generation.

All this is fundamentally right. This helps everybody to overcome the mental barriers. The confidence is boosted up to a great extent. And when such a positive optimistic individual goes for any job, he reminds himself to be a die hard optimist. The idea of thinking big enters his soul and every action coming out is anything but realistic. When the interviewer asks him to state his career objective, prompt comes the reply, 'I want to be the CEO of a big multi national corporation'. This is expected to impress the interviewer and to have a big start.

But there seems to be a fundamental disconnect. What about the unglamorous but solid foundation? Nobody plasters or paints the foundation pillars below the ground level. But it is unquestionably the first step of a beautiful building. What should be the foundation of a successful corporate career?

Let me put this in another words. What should be initial focus of a career seeker? What i am going to get from this job or what i am going to contribute to this job. I am sure every experienced person knows that no corporate house would ever allow a performer to leave. To be very frank, performers with proven track record are so less in proportion in the work force today that they are always in demand. Let me give you some examples. Try to find out about the first job and the first assignment of Jamsetji Nusservanji Tata, Dhirubhai Ambani, G D Birla, L N Mittal, N R Narayana Murthy, Azim Premji, Satyen (Sam) Gangaram Pitroda, Verghese Kurien, Subhash Chandra or Cawasji Nanabhoy Davar. All of them are shining examples of one and the only one fundamental principle of making a successful corporate career and that is -

"The more you strive to give, the more you get,
The more you strive to get, the less you get."

"If i always strive to give my best to the company i serve, it will do its best to retain me and to do the best it can do for me. In case it fires me in spite of that, my thanks to the great lord that it saved me from a sinking ship!"

And by the way, one should never reply to the career objective question as in the example above. No interviewer likes to listen to that because in crude street language it would mean, "Main tumhara Boss banana chahta hun." A perfect recipe for failure. Isn't it?

The third side of the coin

I had my first job offer to work as an assistant accountant with a commercial automobile company. The year was 1988. I was a fresh commerce graduate. And it was perfectly natural for a young graduate to think of creativity and innovation as the only requirements for growth and development. As it happens with every young brain in that age, my mind was also full of new ideas and i used to consider it my primary duty to flood everyone i came across with those ideas.

It was a campus selection. (Yes! Simple B.Com. pass outs were offered jobs through their colleges in those times prior to LPG!) Eight of us were called for on site selection process. Finally three of us could manage to get final job offers. The salary offered was Rs. 1475 per month. Ultimately none of us finally joined but this decision had nothing to do with the compensation figures. In fact, one simple wall plate containing some instructions for the new recruits had played the spoilsport.

And what did that plate read? It just carried four simple instructions:

1. Boss is always right!
2. Shut your mouth and do your duty!
3. Any confusion? Go to number 1 !!
4. Any suggestion? Go to number 2 !!

All of us preferred not to join the place where our creativity and innovation were not welcome.

How do you rate this decision? Twenty one years have passed, and even today i can't decide. I am a teacher and entrepreneur, Krishnakant an advocate and Rajesh a school teacher. And the company? It has also grown to become indisputable market leader in its own category.

We can never have water tight compartments in life. Everything is relative. Isn't it?

These days will never come back!

What is it that a modern student covets most?



One view : He wants to enjoy every moment of his student life. He knows that these days will never come back and so he must make maximum out of every second available.



Second view : He wants to learn maximum and enrich his knowledge bank as much as possible. He knows that these days will never come back and so he must make maximum out of every second available.



Third view : He loves his friends and cherishes their company! He wants to enjoy every second of accompanying his friends and is always ready to sacrifice his own individual needs for the same. He knows that these days will never come back and so he must make maximum out of every second available.



Fourth view : He is confused. He knows that these days will never come back and so he must make maximum out of every second available. And so, he is even more confused. He is afraid of making any wrong choice. Hence, every day begins with a dilemma and ends in the same. When he enjoys himself or with his friends, a feeling of guilt grips him. Am i using my time to the fullest? Is this what my parents expect of me? And when, he dedicates his time to learning and personality enrichment, he also feels that he is missing something. Oh! But for the adventures of youth! The sheer pleasure of being in the right company at the right age!!

I can't offer any solutions. This post is not written to give any advice or something like that. The only purpose of this post is to throw this question open to you all, smart young readers. What do you think about this confusion? Don't you think that we need some more frank honest expressions, particularly from the young generation, on this perennial quandary?

Power Shift - what next?

"Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested" said sir Francis Bacon. A great thought but only from the readers' perspective. What about the authors? Do they also write books with a particular objective in mind?


Let us take the case of some world famous books and their authors. What was the purpose of Alvin Toffler when he wrote Power Shift? Was it a systematic enquiry of the historical power shifts or merely a recording of History? Did the master want to record the past events or find an undercurrent that can be extrapolated to predict future? Was it an expression of musings or an attempt to institutionalise a new medium of scientific enquiry with social trends as the raw material?

Take the case of "Discovery of India" by Jawaharlal Nehru. I am sure all the readers of this book have their opinions on the utility and character of the book. But let us try to scan the purpose of the genius brain behind writing the book. Was it intended to be a History text book? Or did he attempt to present the real India, unknown to the world prior to that? Or was it an intellectual experiment conducted by the author to enable him to read a lot and present the reflections thereon to the western world?

OK. Let's move to the book 'Mere Sapno ka Bharat' by Mahatma Gandhi. Did he aspire to give a direction to the freedom struggle or provide a vision to the leaders then? Was it an attempt to legitimise the demand for freedom or to provide a road map for the post independence era?

The process of this enquiry is of course interesting but without any trustworthy conclusions.

Let me suggest an approach for the young leaders. Before reading a book, just scan through the introductory part. Then contemplate on the theme. Write down your thoughts in a notebook. Also write down the expectations from the book. Now is the time to go through the book at length. After completing the same, try to write the message of the book. Now we can compare our own prior writings with this newly acquired wisdom. The delta is the contribution of the book to the mind. This is what the writer has been able to achieve.

Impact of some books can also be judged by extrapolating the subject. For example, Power Shift tells us about the changing currency of power. In the beginning, it was muscle power only. Power flew from the barrel of a gun at that time. Jiski Lathi uski Bhains! (The buffalo belongs to the one with the weapon!) But soon it changed. And came the advent of money. Money became the next currency of power. Moneyed ones were able to hire musclemen and get things done. And then came the latest shift. Knowledge has become the most significant currency of power. We are of course living in a knowledge economy today. Knowledge is power.

In my humble opinion, conveying this should not be the sole purpose of this great intellectual experiment. The reader must be able to apply this knowledge and understanding. Can we predict the future? What will dethrone knowledge from its present seat of power? I want to end this post with this open ended question.

I will summarize it in these many words. Muscle power gave way to money power and that was the first power shift. Money power is giving way to the knowledge power and this has been the second and the latest power shift. What will be the next?

Indian wedding system - a bad Economics?

"Observation is the key to learning. There is no dearth of learning opportunities around us but there is certainly a deficiency of attention management. If one can be trained to have a keen observation and honest contemplation, learning will be automatic and self enrichment will always be an ongoing process."



I do not recall exactly who imbued this in my mind, my mother may have been that person, but i can recollect that this was an imprint with me and i always tried to follow this since very early days of my schooling. I would sit in the class always in the first row and would listen to every word my teacher spoke in the class very carefully and try to retain it. The same habit extended to all those social situations also where i was able to accept someone as my role-model.



My cousin, elder to me at least by 10 years or more, is a knowledge professional. These days he works for a very popular Hindi newspaper. He has always been a very eloquent speaker and i have always made it a point to listen to him with undivided attention whenever we meet. His rational approach has always attracted me. He has always challenged the practice of following the traditions without applying one's own logic.



Some twenty five years ago, we were sitting on the occasion of some marriage in the family. He was the centre of attention for everyone. He was talking with someone (not directly to me) about Indian wedding system. He said, " I don't understand why we spend so much money on wedding ceremonies. It's a very bad Economics and a bad Sociology as well. So much money is wasted. Moreover, so many man hours are wasted. And to add to the problems, the couple getting married is so much involved in the rituals that the natural love between them and the thrill of getting married is also lost. I suggest something better. Both the families should go to some hill station with the couple. A very small but closely knit family function should be held for the marriage and then everyone should come back leaving the couple behind."



The idea appealed to me. I accepted his argument that the existing system was very bad Economics. As time passed, this idea gained strength. Then somehow, Indian festivities also were added to the same list. I began to believe that celebrating Diwali with so much fireworks and decoration etc. is a sheer wastage of money.



When i studied Economics for my masters, everything changed. The study of socialism gave me a new perspective. And when i read the theory of Prof. Pigou about welfare, an entire new thought sequence dawned upon me. And today i can say with conviction that welfare Economics supports Indian wedding system and festivities in most of the cases. Excepting some systems like dowry etc. all the other rituals not only pass the test of socialism but they also promote the cause of human welfare and economic well being of our nation. Allow me to present this case in a simple language.

Prof Pigou says that welfare of a nation can be ensured in any or both of the two ways. First, the Gross National Product should go up. Second, the flow of money should take place from the rich to the poor. And Indian wedding system fulfills both the requirements. The celebrations and the extravaganza not only increases Economic activity and increases GNP in the process, but also transfers the funds from the rich to the poor. Just pay some attention to the fact that who is spending and who is getting; and you can hear the soul of Prof Pigou appreciating our wedding traditions.

And how is the declared national objective of socialism achieved by this? When the flow of money takes place from the haves to the have-nots, the difference between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is bound to diminish! Naturally, socialists should support these traditions.

So, one can say with conviction that our festivities and our rituals are a very good Economics.

Does it imply that i support the extravaganza? Not at all! On a very personal level i will always continue to believe that economic sense alone cannot justify many traditions of society. I still find the scale of celebrations irrational. And by the way, I am not a socialist either!

The idea of having weddings on hill stations cannot be scrapped that easily!