Not too often, but every now and then, certain events make us proud. Wait, thats too strong. Lets say, we just stop feeling like total losers. The Pokhran tests, Chandrayaan, Bhuvan etc are some recent examples.
They may not mean much to the younger generation that grew up in the relative prosperity of the late 90s, for they already visualized us as an emerging superpower. But if you have grown up in the 80s and early 90s, and experienced the legendary Indian bureaucratic lethargy (or lethargic bureaucracy), such headlines do bring joy and emotion. You wonder if we are finally breaking away from our past. If we really can do more than write code and deal with angry Americans on telephones.
To be honest, our quality was never world class, for we were rooted is the strong tradition of good enough. When asked to choose any two from fast, good and cheap, we inevitably choose fast and cheap. Be it software or anywhere. Clients are amazed by our rapid fast turnaround of deliverables and appalled by their quality. It seems this is more pervasive than what I thought.
Chandrayaan was touted as India's "nano" space project, cheap but highly effective. The celebrations had hardly died down when some defects came to the fore and now the mission is officially dead. Even the celebrated Pokhran tests have come back to haunt us with a scientist claiming the yields were disastrous and others shouting it was "good enough". And Bhuvan is a nonstarter.
I believe these are not isolated incidents but a reflection of our ethos and pysche.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Sports Formula
The sports ministry has declined a request to bring F1 racing into India on the grounds that F1 is not a sport but rather a commercial entertainment initiative. The logic is impregnable.
The traditional argument to develop sports is that it promotes physical well-being and mental toughness. It is also purported to build character, but the conduct of today's athletes hardly supports this assertion. As for the F1 debate, the formula of the modern day sport has two elements: substance and form. In substance, racing cars cannot be compared to cricket, soccer, hockey or any other sport. Not only is it risky and life-threatening, but winning and losing depends as much on the vehicle as the driver. Yes, it does improve physical endurance and mental sharpness, but in its basest form, it is a thrill rather than a sport. As for the form, which is F1 or A1 racing, it is very close to how every major sport is played today.
Almost every sport has gone pro, meaning it is played for money rather than for pride or fun. Their popularity has more to do with the astronomical sums involved in contracts and sponsorships than anything else. Now, playing for money does not necessarily take away the virtues of sport, and I am definitely not advocating that sports should not be commercially viable. Neither should sportsmen be required to put national interest above individual interests. However, one must recognize that money transforms the nature of the game, and consequently, every sport today has elements of entertainment in it. Ah...those shades of grey.
From what I have read, it did not look like the ministry will have to make any investment. It only had to grant permission to franchise F1 in India. So I am not sure why the ministry rejected the proposal and said arbitrary things like the funds can be put to better use elsewhere. If indeed taxpayer money is involved, I am in complete support of the ministry's decision.
What pushed me to write on this was Karun Chadok's comment that even Olympics are an entertainment. It is true that Olympics are reduced to a form of entertainment in India, for we have systematically ensured that our athletes don't even get close to the medals. We end up watching what the rest of the world is doing. But to generalize that is foolish. To me, the Olympics capture the true spirit of sport, and provide the rare occasion to watch sport triumph over money.
The traditional argument to develop sports is that it promotes physical well-being and mental toughness. It is also purported to build character, but the conduct of today's athletes hardly supports this assertion. As for the F1 debate, the formula of the modern day sport has two elements: substance and form. In substance, racing cars cannot be compared to cricket, soccer, hockey or any other sport. Not only is it risky and life-threatening, but winning and losing depends as much on the vehicle as the driver. Yes, it does improve physical endurance and mental sharpness, but in its basest form, it is a thrill rather than a sport. As for the form, which is F1 or A1 racing, it is very close to how every major sport is played today.
Almost every sport has gone pro, meaning it is played for money rather than for pride or fun. Their popularity has more to do with the astronomical sums involved in contracts and sponsorships than anything else. Now, playing for money does not necessarily take away the virtues of sport, and I am definitely not advocating that sports should not be commercially viable. Neither should sportsmen be required to put national interest above individual interests. However, one must recognize that money transforms the nature of the game, and consequently, every sport today has elements of entertainment in it. Ah...those shades of grey.
From what I have read, it did not look like the ministry will have to make any investment. It only had to grant permission to franchise F1 in India. So I am not sure why the ministry rejected the proposal and said arbitrary things like the funds can be put to better use elsewhere. If indeed taxpayer money is involved, I am in complete support of the ministry's decision.
What pushed me to write on this was Karun Chadok's comment that even Olympics are an entertainment. It is true that Olympics are reduced to a form of entertainment in India, for we have systematically ensured that our athletes don't even get close to the medals. We end up watching what the rest of the world is doing. But to generalize that is foolish. To me, the Olympics capture the true spirit of sport, and provide the rare occasion to watch sport triumph over money.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Game Theory and Traffic Rules
Game theory attempts to explain our behavior in situations where the success of our choices are impacted by the choices of others. Price wars are the most common example. If Pepsi cuts prices, assuming elastic demand, sales will increase and so will profits. But if Coke follows suit, Pepsi's action will be neutralized such that both Coke and Pepsi end up with lower profits than what they would make if prices werent cut in the first place. So letting prices be is the best course of action for both, which is the conclusion they will eventually reach after the game is played multiple times.
I got thinking if this explains the problem with our traffic rules. When we all follow rules, then it gives those who break them an advantage. Let's say the rule is that we stick to our lanes regardless of traffic. Now, if the traffic is slow, someone can cut across lanes and weave through traffic, assured that everyone is driving in their lane. But once that happens, the rest will naturally feel cheated and start doing it too, and we end up with massive chaos.
I see two ways of addressing the problem. One is to remove the incentive for breaking rules, by imposing hefty and consistent fines, which is impossibly difficult to do in our country. The second is to let people play this "game" enough times until they realize that we are better off following the rules. It doesnt mean every single person has to experience chaos before sanity returns. Once enough people decide to follow rules, a critical mass is reached. You have - tada - a tipping point. You see people following rules, then more people follow rules and so on. The concept of social proof kicks in.
Its not as far-fetched as it sounds. I think it partly explains why Mumbai has better lane discipline and civic sense than other cities - people here have seen traffic chaos so many more times.
I think the unfortunate part is when everyone starts to follow the rules, some of us will be tempted to break them and get an unfair advantage. And when there is no system of fines or penalty, more people will start doing it creating another tipping point and the cycle continues...
I got thinking if this explains the problem with our traffic rules. When we all follow rules, then it gives those who break them an advantage. Let's say the rule is that we stick to our lanes regardless of traffic. Now, if the traffic is slow, someone can cut across lanes and weave through traffic, assured that everyone is driving in their lane. But once that happens, the rest will naturally feel cheated and start doing it too, and we end up with massive chaos.
I see two ways of addressing the problem. One is to remove the incentive for breaking rules, by imposing hefty and consistent fines, which is impossibly difficult to do in our country. The second is to let people play this "game" enough times until they realize that we are better off following the rules. It doesnt mean every single person has to experience chaos before sanity returns. Once enough people decide to follow rules, a critical mass is reached. You have - tada - a tipping point. You see people following rules, then more people follow rules and so on. The concept of social proof kicks in.
Its not as far-fetched as it sounds. I think it partly explains why Mumbai has better lane discipline and civic sense than other cities - people here have seen traffic chaos so many more times.
I think the unfortunate part is when everyone starts to follow the rules, some of us will be tempted to break them and get an unfair advantage. And when there is no system of fines or penalty, more people will start doing it creating another tipping point and the cycle continues...
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Consultants as Traffic Police
Consultants are arguably the most hated bunch of professionals around. While the financial engineers have stolen that crown momentarily, it won't be long before the trophy is passed back. Not just because the crisis will be forgotten, but also because every minute, consultants are coming up with ludicrous recommendations. Ludicrous when you look at them with 20/20 hindsight that is.
Every manager worth his salt hates to employ a consultant for it is a tacit admission of his own incompetence. Yet, the consulting profession continues to thrive and remains the most sought after career option for management graduates. What gives?
I was crawling in Mumbai traffic when it hit me. In front of me was a Santro sandwiched between a truck and a BEST bus. Now truck and bus drivers believe in extreme precision. They will drive by within an inch of your vehicle without skipping a beat. In this case though, both of them were generous enough to spare a couple of inches, but the Santro guy got all worked up. He kept nervously peering over the bonnet and looking through the side windows to make sure he was okay. I, of course, clearly saw that he just had to maintain his line and he was fine. For a minute I was amused, but soon realized it happened to me as well. Several times, in fact. Sitting inside the car, I find it incredibly difficult to accurately estimate the space available around the vehicle be it when making a sharp turn or parking in a tight spot. And that is what happens to organizations as well. People within find it difficult to clearly see the external environment. And their calls might result in a traffic pile up, or worse, a crash. The former causes organizations to lose its direction and momentum while the later pretty much kills them.
Time for your friendly neighborhood consultant to step in. He is not a Santro expert – you are – but he knows enough about it to guide it out of traffic. Which is what consultants often do; they bring in simplicity and clarity. In other words, the value added by a consultant comes from his perspective and not so much his competence. If he is a good one from McK, he will know the shortest route to the expressway. In that sense, he is no different from a traffic policeman. Of course, the recommendations would fail if something else comes up on the suggested route - another traffic snarl, for example. Or you ignore his idea and stick to your route and by some freak chance the traffic clears up. And when that happens, organizations ensure consultants dont go unpunished.
I have taken artistic liberties to make the analogy work and sincerely apologize if it caused offense to traffic policemen.
Tailpiece: It is much more difficult to estimate navigate sharp turns if you are driving a big car like Accord or Corolla. That explains whylarge organizations react sluggishly to changes in environment.
Every manager worth his salt hates to employ a consultant for it is a tacit admission of his own incompetence. Yet, the consulting profession continues to thrive and remains the most sought after career option for management graduates. What gives?
I was crawling in Mumbai traffic when it hit me. In front of me was a Santro sandwiched between a truck and a BEST bus. Now truck and bus drivers believe in extreme precision. They will drive by within an inch of your vehicle without skipping a beat. In this case though, both of them were generous enough to spare a couple of inches, but the Santro guy got all worked up. He kept nervously peering over the bonnet and looking through the side windows to make sure he was okay. I, of course, clearly saw that he just had to maintain his line and he was fine. For a minute I was amused, but soon realized it happened to me as well. Several times, in fact. Sitting inside the car, I find it incredibly difficult to accurately estimate the space available around the vehicle be it when making a sharp turn or parking in a tight spot. And that is what happens to organizations as well. People within find it difficult to clearly see the external environment. And their calls might result in a traffic pile up, or worse, a crash. The former causes organizations to lose its direction and momentum while the later pretty much kills them.
Time for your friendly neighborhood consultant to step in. He is not a Santro expert – you are – but he knows enough about it to guide it out of traffic. Which is what consultants often do; they bring in simplicity and clarity. In other words, the value added by a consultant comes from his perspective and not so much his competence. If he is a good one from McK, he will know the shortest route to the expressway. In that sense, he is no different from a traffic policeman. Of course, the recommendations would fail if something else comes up on the suggested route - another traffic snarl, for example. Or you ignore his idea and stick to your route and by some freak chance the traffic clears up. And when that happens, organizations ensure consultants dont go unpunished.
I have taken artistic liberties to make the analogy work and sincerely apologize if it caused offense to traffic policemen.
Tailpiece: It is much more difficult to estimate navigate sharp turns if you are driving a big car like Accord or Corolla. That explains whylarge organizations react sluggishly to changes in environment.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Dogs and Culture
Came across this, well, interesting piece of news. Some guy in New Zealand barbecued his pet dog. Inevitably, the SPCA raised a hue and cry and came close to taking legal action, but realized there was no case because the dog was killed painlessly. Usually such events only get a couple of lines, but this was a full-blown story with interesting details.
The incident took place in Auckland but the man originally came from Tonga, where dog meat is perfectly acceptable. Why was he so desperate as to eat his pet dog? Apparently, the wife was bored with it. So what better way than to make a meal of it! I dont know if they have a 911 number for SPCA over there, but they seem to have reacted pretty quickly. "The dog had been skinned and partially charred" when SPCA arrived!! Man, in our country, even an ambulance wouldnt reach in that time. Unfortunately for SPCA, it is legal in NZ to kill animals so long as they are killed swiftly and painlessly. The guy hit the dog on its head with a hammer to render it unconscious and then slit its throat - apparently the standard procedure of killing animals for meat.
The SPCA is disturbed that it is legal in NZ for people to kill and eat their own pets, and are pushing for a change. But here's the part that intrigued me. SPCA advised the man that it was not part of the "culture" to kill and eat pets. My guess is this Tonga region must have be home to natives or aborigines who were here before us (going by the fact that dog meat is still acceptable there). And now we have the gall to tell them what is culturally appropriate!!
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/no-charges-man-barbecued-dog-2919419
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/spca-calls-law-change-after-dog-bbq-2919922
The incident took place in Auckland but the man originally came from Tonga, where dog meat is perfectly acceptable. Why was he so desperate as to eat his pet dog? Apparently, the wife was bored with it. So what better way than to make a meal of it! I dont know if they have a 911 number for SPCA over there, but they seem to have reacted pretty quickly. "The dog had been skinned and partially charred" when SPCA arrived!! Man, in our country, even an ambulance wouldnt reach in that time. Unfortunately for SPCA, it is legal in NZ to kill animals so long as they are killed swiftly and painlessly. The guy hit the dog on its head with a hammer to render it unconscious and then slit its throat - apparently the standard procedure of killing animals for meat.
The SPCA is disturbed that it is legal in NZ for people to kill and eat their own pets, and are pushing for a change. But here's the part that intrigued me. SPCA advised the man that it was not part of the "culture" to kill and eat pets. My guess is this Tonga region must have be home to natives or aborigines who were here before us (going by the fact that dog meat is still acceptable there). And now we have the gall to tell them what is culturally appropriate!!
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/no-charges-man-barbecued-dog-2919419
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/spca-calls-law-change-after-dog-bbq-2919922
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)