must read

Rethinking Work

By BARRY SCHWARTZAUG. 28, 2015

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/30/opinion/sunday/rethinking-work.html?emc=edit_th_20150830&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=68064827&_r=0

Lok Sabha Television: VOX POPULI FAUX PAS

VOX POPULI FAUX PAS seems like any oxymoron.
But hey! Just literally but not so practically.

LOK SABHA TELEVISION (LSTV) has done just that and may be many time over.

Forced by my friend to watch a program
VOICES: VOX POP "9.30pm - MP3 and Sound of Music" in which his views on the subject were to be telecast.
Contemporary! I thought, and leaving my apprehensions about a government-like channel to be of any worth. Coming up with a relevant topic made me try it out.

But not for long!
Re-affirming my faith in the incompetence of anything and everything which has its genesis or links with state machinery.

The scroll ran like till 9.45 pm VOICES: VOX POP "9.30pm - MP3 and Sound of Music" and then suddenly vanishing without any trace of that program coming in sight.
No! not even till 10.30 pm.

And I was flabbergasted on both the audacity and the incompetence of the concerned people. What? Are the audience blind? or they want to make us that.
Insensitive to many people who might be pinned up in hope of watching there known faces on TV.
(My friend who runs a guitar school invited all students over and asked all the clients to watch the show was literally crying for the disgrace and insult he had to face by being associated with this channel)

I might sound overtly sensitive, but I was not, as I saw a wasted effort.
As a strategy and management student/professional I could just exclaim PATHETIC!
Yes , it's been a wasted effort.
First, of people's money what is going on in funding LSTV.
Second, of the marketing efforts that have been trying to establish LSTV as a niche channel.
Third, of the creative and technical effort gone into making this program
And many more indirect efforts being wasted.

Can a nascent channel effort to be so careless, so incompetent, so low-tech and so discourteous.
There was no apology or regret message apprising of the viewer of this.
Rather sheepishly the scroll was removed.

Mistakes do happen and technology may fail but there should be bona fide acknowledgment.
Even newspapers and publishers come out with 'errata' and 'corrigendum'.
I wonder what made it so difficult for LSTV to come out with a rejoinder.

What LOK SABHA TELEVISION has done today has made me depressed over the state of affairs. When a channel representing the highest democratic institution fails miserably to deliver, God Save Us!
I grieve for the level of competence and ethics my country is falling to.

Written in hope to find an eye who can try and pull the right strings and set things right.

Donning the marketers cap - a final word of caution for LSTV.
Lok Sabha Television should advertise but first set its house in order.
People watching the channel will look for the quality that it promises.
Failing on this front will lead it into the vicious circle of poor performance.
Word of mouth will hit it hard even before it get any recognition.
(I know of around 100s of us who will talk to 1000s about this and will exponentially spread the bitter experience.)
Inception to execution must be foolproof if LSTV wants to attract viewer and make them sit and watch the programs.

Liberty of carelessness and casualness can be afforded, though to a small limit, by a well-established channel but never for a nascent one like LSTV.
Here with participants and viewers like us who are passionate for what we do and watch, it is
SURVIVAL of THE FITTEST!

HBSWK readers' respond: Is There Too Little "Know Why" In Business?

HBSWK readers' respond: Is There Too Little "Know Why" In Business?

The purpose of business is creating wealth. It is the only "Know Why" for any business.
Affluence is the fifth dimension which entails all discovery, altruism, excellence and heroism. Any firm which restricts itself to any one of the components is not realizing its full potential.
"Know Why" is the primary driver to arrive at "Know How," but often that is missed as we get too much involved in the complexities of running a business. Organizations tend to stray from their objective in the absence of clear definition. And that definition is nothing beyond "Affluence" that is "Creating Wealth."
Adding abstract dimensions and definitions to "Know Why" may work at an individual level but for an organization we need a realistic definition that's easy to understand and follow.
Many may term it as a mean motive of an organization's existence minus all morals. On the contrary, if an organization has to be affluent and sustain creating wealth it cannot do away with morality. As already cited by Jim Heskett in his article, do we see Enron anymore?
In conclusion, "Know Why" is "Affluence" and for "Know How" I leave this choice to the organization.

HBSWK readers respond:The China Dilemma for U.S. Firms: Comply, Resist, or Leave?

HBSWK readers respond:The China Dilemma for U.S. Firms: Comply, Resist, or Leave?

Comply, resist, or leave are strong, close-ended options for an organization if we consider them in isolation and presume they are stand-alone options. But once we realize that interactions and interdependences exist within these elements we can formulate and execute a strategy that can help.
Leaving is definitely not an option. Organizations should not ignore the "dragon's might" and its economic prowess. Resisting completely is also not an advisable stand, because you should never take the dragon head-on especially when you know it breathes fire. Complying completely is also not a recommended option because it may lead to strangling the very ethics and values on which the organization survives.
What I suggest is a combination of resist and comply. This gives you ample room to bargain and negotiate.
I do not see any threat or moral hazard when the service provider makes clear to its customer the potential threat [that it may share information with] the [government] or other authorities. Forewarned is forearmed. So the organization can start with a basic product/service offering. Clearly study the politics and potential of the market and then slowly spread your wings by negotiating, bargaining, and making the authorities and customers understand the benefits of the offering.
As they say, when in Rome do as the Romans do. I would say in the East play it cool because aggressiveness can send the wrong signals to the authorities and also to people at large. As in Buddhist philosophy, follow the middle path and take baby steps in spreading business in the "Land of the Dragon." I agree with the critics of this strategy that profits will be limited and controlled, but so will losses in case the strategy or game plan fails. And it's better to fight than to attack or run and hide.

HBSWK readers respond: Should More Transparency Extend to Education for Management?

The whole idea of grades relating to recruitment is a non-issue from the Indian management student's perspective. From time immemorial we have been taught to excel in education and that meant transferring hard work and intelligence into grades, marks, or percentages, whatever evaluation system we may use. When most of the grading systems are relative, it becomes all the more necessary for recruiters to know the grades of prospective candidates. Organizations recruit for a particular job profile rather than for a particular grade. If an organization has a preference for grades and you prefer otherwise, than you will never gel with the organizational culture: You are simply not the one for that particular job profile, nothing more, nothing less. Students who feel that revealing grades to recruiters may hamper their chance of selection can follow one of two options. First, get in the groove and align with the system and score. Second, be yourself, understand yourself, and try to be the "best fit" to the dream organization. Mark Twain wrote, "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." I would add "schooling or grades." It does not matter really what grades you get. Personally, I believe grades do not always reflect intelligence. My MBA experience tells me to have a resume reflecting the "true you." Your potential, both achieved and latent, is more than any one aspect.