Insecure Leaders

Leadership, in my view, is all about creating a vision of what's possible and then creating conditions for your people to achieve it. There are tomes written on the art, craft and science of Leadership and I don't pretend to better this body of knowledge. What I do want to talk about is the pernicious effects of an Insecure Leader on the organization.


I believe that an Insecure Leader not only limits the distance a company can cover, he also vitiates the journey. And on this tedious, long and slow trek, he stunts his people's growth. Taken together it's a grim scenario.


An Insecure Leader believes that he knows best. Convinced in his omnipotence, he retains all decision making with him. He believes that there is 'one best way' to drive business and he knows it. And he limits his organization's potential by this outlook and his capacity. If everything has to be routed through one person, there are bound to be bottlenecks. If the process to achieve outcomes is mandated, people's inherent diversity is insulted. And although ideas often emanate from an individual flash of brilliance, they grow & develop through open discussion. An Insecure Leader prevents this democratic mutation from genesis to maturity.

People working under an Insecure Leader do not develop, unless you count learning what not to do, as important learning (which it is, but then learning by inversion is hardly fun). He doesn't invest in developing people because he fears that he'll lose his edge if he teaches them his insights. What's more he wants people to just execute his ideas, and hires people who are 'coordinators' and 'executives' and keeps them that way. There is no need to invest in developing people, since they are inherently dispensable.

It's in the culture and environment that an Insecure Leader has the worst effect. He promotes confusion and mistrust by keeping the complete picture in his mind and revealing bits and pieces to his people. He believes that fundamentally, people are out there to deceive & shirk and he has to control & police to get results. All authorization and approval rests with him. There are tonnes of unneccessary checks and counter-checks. And in the end, everyone is busy filling out forms, getting signatures leaving little time for growing the business.

Organizations that are stuck with Insecure Leaders do not go far. Because their potential is limited by his life span.

The Last Meter

If you haven't witnessed the Last Meter you have either never driven on Indian roads or you are visually impaired. Since you're reading this, I suspect it's the former.

The Last Meter is the space that is occupied by vehicles that can't discipline themselves to stop when the light turns yellow but are too slow to cross the junction. They stay in the common junction area butting out of their end of the road and creating a bottleneck for vehicles coming from the right.

The Last Meter is the single biggest reason for traffic anarchy on Indian roads. It is also the most infuriating. Why it happens is a matter of conjecture. I'll take a shot at explaining it and invite you to add your two bits.

One reason could be genuine. While the 18 year old strapping stud might think he has the energy to beat the signal before it turns red, the 20 year old Maruti 800 that he's saddled with, simply doesn't oblige. Too slow to cross and too late to stop, it kind of ends up hanging in the middle. It can't go back unless it wants to maim the street urchin selling strawberries. It can't go forward or the guy coming from the right will jump out of his car and do what he's currently threatening to!

The second reason is Auto rickshaws. These are cockroaches of the road. Their ethic is that it's not important where the body is, it's enough to just jut in their snout. The snout of the auto rickshaw has higher legal claim on space than the handkerchief of a Mumbai local traveller. And the Auto rickshaw-wallahs are genuinely illiterate. Chaos is their culture. Order is anathema. Every other vehicle on the road is the enemy. It's a war out there and they are trying to secure all the trenches.

The third is the absence of roads themselves. If you don't know where it ends, you don't know that you're in the Last Meter. You might delude yourself into thinking that you are doing no wrong, that the guy coming from the right is in fact maliciously coming straight at you - you are just waiting for the signal to turn green! 'Why is he making those angry gestures' you might wonder! There is no white line to signal start of the junction, no lane for pedestrians to cross at the junction - no wonder traffic is Darwinian in its mood and method.

Lastly, I wonder whether people even know that they are creating the Last Meter. Or are they just thinking of escaping the hell that's Mumbai roads vs. worrying about the hell that they are creating. What's more, even if they were well meaning, do they know what the right way is? At a time, when driving license is a matter of Rs. 500 and a contact, who even knows traffic rules. In fact it's a wonder that people stop at all at a red signal. It won't be unimaginable for them to run at red like raging bulls - in fact some actually do that!

The Last Meter is symptomatic of India. There are no clear boundaries and no clear rules. Everything is negotiable - from the traffic signal to the traffic cop. Well, if the Nuke deal can comfortably rest on the Last Meter, how can you blame the poor guy with the Maruti 800?!

Temptation

From the time I set foot in India, I have been tempted to record my experiences. The title of 'Diary of a returning NRI' sounded interesting and appealing.

I'm resisting the urge.

Writing being the cathartic instrument that it is, might trap me into complaining about events, people and places that assault the senses. And it'll be too easy to lose the big picture.

Writing being the selective exercise that it is, amplifies the extremes. Add that to my resident cynicism and what you get is an exaggerated version of the negatives.

Too often, we start believing what we write, not writing what we believe.

As far as India is concerned, I want to hold on to my belief about its future and my passion for its present. The Diary of a returning NRI will be written by someone else or it'll come in version 2 - with the benefit of retrospect.

Recounting History

I've often thought that accounts of events should always be written in 2 versions.

One, the immediate, visceral, raw account of things as they happen. Capturing it fresh prevents rationalization and perspective from setting in and spoiling the true experience. It's like plucking fruits off a tree and munching on them atop the branches. The writer is just a medium in this case. Transmission loss is minimal and the reader can afford to transport herself to the event. The only biases induced are that of the writer's eyes - different people focus on different elements of a canvas - and of his language - not everyone can write like Michael Palin.

Second, the thought through account which finds meaning, pattern and motives in events through a retrospective lens. This allows the author to add his bit. It's like eating a fruit jam where the processing, sugar and preservatives enhance (or distort) the original taste of the fruit. The writer is not just a medium but also the filter. He chooses what to amplify, what to ignore, what to dissect, what to connect. The only truth is the event - no one can dispute it's occurrence - but your account will bear little resemblance to another account of the same event.

Both versions are important. The difference is that of emphasis. One is the truth and little else. The other a reflection of the author's intellect with the event just providing the spring board. The reader is better off in either case as long as she realizes the difference and digests accordingly.

Parting Notes for a small island

From an island of order to a subcontinent of chaos is a long flight. As I countdown the last 24 hours of my stay in Singapore, I'm overwhelmed by nostalgia.

Singapore has changed from the one I saw when we first moved here in 2001. The most conspicuous is the choice in terms of cab companies. From the duopoly of Comfort and Tibs, now there are more than my brain can remember. The second is the construction boom. From the pits of the housing market in 2000, everywhere you see cranes and workers building nests for the 6.5 million residents expected in the next 8 years & the millions who'll flock to the IRs. The skyline has changed too - the Singapore flyer being a nice rotund addition to the skyscrapers at Shenton Way. The profile of people on the street is different. There are a lot more white collar Indians on Orchard Road now. The airport is bigger, more varied - with the imaginatively named Budget Terminal already operational and T3 coming up. Singapore Airlines has its own budget airlines. The North East railway line is on, making it easier to get to Mustafa & Clarke Quay. The 2nd Link is operational, offering an alternative to the clogged Woodlands checkpoint. Lee Hsien Loong is the Prime Minister of Singapore, relieving Goh Chok from his interim role. The NKF scandal is a scar on the public memory.

In spite of the change, Singapore in it's basic fabric is still the same - watchful, controlled, small. The PAP still rules unchallenged. The Strait Times still toes the official line. Dissenters are often prosecuted under spurious 'defamation' lawsuits. You still can't chew gum. Public debate is still shaped by ERP, GST and COE rates. HDB's are still the housing mainstay in spite of the proliferation of high-end condos. Chinese rule, Malays are still 2nd best. Racism still exists - the White man gets away with a lot and the brown man runs up against prejudices.

The constancy is not all regressive. Singapore still retains it's ability to look ahead - if not in political terms, at least in economic development terms. Whether it's the ability of SGX to emerge as a regional exchange of some weight, or Singapore port's attempt to become a maritime hub or the EDB's efforts in developing Singapore's bio-technology industry - they are all a part of Singapore's continual effort to prepare for the future. This is one lesson other nations and even companies should learn.

India offers many contrasts. I will not dwell on them. I'm excited by it's possibilities and am steeling myself for the challenges. I'm promising myself not to be affected by the inevitable delays & tardiness in services. And I will not make the mistake of comparing the two countries. I've signed up for a roller coaster ride atop the world's most exciting juggernaut and I'm going to enjoy it.

Adieu Singapore, Namaste India!

Watching my brain

I've been wondering these past days at how human beings believe their world is deterministic when it is much more random. How we ascribe motives and skills to retrospective evaluation of success when it could just be a matter of chance. How such explanations lull us into a false sense of 'expertise'. How we see patterns, not because they are there, but because our brain craves for order. How we want to believe we make rational decision when in reality we are a slave of our emotions. How our brain is playing with us.

It's tough to separate yourself from your brain and watch how it fools you. But if you can - and I don't profess any particular skill at this - it makes for a fascinating spectacle. Remember your last meeting with a stranger? At the first glimpse, your brain starts trying to slot her. Tall, thin, fair - everything goes into creating an 'expected' personality. Audio and tactile cues add on and 3 minutes into the interaction, you either like the person, dislike her or couldn't care less. Anything post that is rationalization or amplitude variation on the already chosen scale.

By definition, each one of us is unique. And we are exposed to unique and almost infinite stimuli everyday. But our brain filters and fits. It has to, else it will be paralysed in processing everything.

Language, by itself, is an elaborate approximation tool to help us come to grips with the massive variation in emotion, thought and sight in this world. Our brain fits our unique sensation to an approximate available word : its 'fit' process working all the time!

How we make decisions is another example. If we were to make perfectly rational decisions, we wouldn't even be able to decide which side of the bed to get up from. That's where reflex, heuristics and 'rules of thumb' come in play. And almost always, we are driven by our emotions rather than our thinking. I know of a friend who had a 5 point scale on 10 attributes when he was meeting girls in the elaborate charade of arranged marriage. He just couldn't decide. Not only were there more combinations than he could handle, there were some 'things' (I suspect these were emotions) which were not on his list! Finally, after meeting some 20 girls, he gave up and married someone far from all points and attributes. They are a happy couple now.

Religion, especially monotheistic also pander to the brain's need for order. The notion that there is an absolute truth and one right path to reach it, is highly attractive. It takes away the ambiguity and decision making effort embedded in polytheism.

This is a fascinating journey. Realising that we are governed by our emotions and not our rationality is intriguing. Recognizing instances where our brain's need for order and fit, overrides a pursuit for what's right is amusing. And seeing that there is a lot more randomness driving events around us is comforting as it halts us in our endeavor to ascribe motives and causes to everything.

You might be wondering where I'm going with this. There are 3 implications of such thoughts in my mind:

One, recognizing that our brain will force us into stereotypes, profiling and prejudices is the first step to maintain a secular, non-judgemental outlook towards life, people and events.

Second, recognizing that there is a lot more randomness around us and resisting the urge to accord causality to coincidental events, will ensure that we do not fall into the trap of believing that we have 'THE ANSWER'. This belief can prevent us from being open to alternative scenarios, leading to rigidity.

Third, it impacts how we teach our children. Currently, knowledge is imparted in axioms and absolute truths while a better approach would be to present it as the 'current best'. The history of science reveals how knowledge itself progressed through trial and error vs. an unrelenting pursuit towards an absolute truth.

I'm no expert on this matter - far from it. I don't even know whether what I wrote is true. All I know is that this is an alternative reality. And all I commit to, is to learn more. Not to find the ultimate truth but to uncover lies that are accepted wisdom today.

Essential Reading for Managers

As a manager you don't do much yourself. You rely on your people to perform in order to deliver your organization's goals. first, break all the rules can help you excel in this endeavor.

It's a provocatively titled book but its message is simple and intuitive - Recruit for Talent and Manage by Exception. It prepares a new manager against common pitfalls in managing people and offers an old hand a chance for reflection.

For me, the highlights of this book were in 2 areas -

One, the guidance to recruit for talent. In this, the authors are guided by the belief that underlying talents are unalterable for adults. Therefore, a careful calibration of the role and the talents required for it, should precede any recruitment. And the recruitment itself should be guided more by talent than by experience or grades. Skills and knowledge can be taught, not talent.

Two, the guidance to measure for outcomes, not for process. In P&G, we used to call this accomplishment vs. activity. Focusing on outcomes is liberating for both the manager and the employee since it allows for the individuality of the employee in achieving the outcome yet keeps him focused on what's ultimately important for the organization.

There were also some great nuggets on 'How to manage around a weakness' and 'Spending time with your best people'.

The power of reading ultimately is in the opportunity to reflect and resolve. This book forced me to think about each of the 9 people I have managed till date and ponder over my errors of omission and commission. I caught myself nodding when I recalled instances similar to experiences of great managers. I caught myself wincing when mistakes of average managers looked dangerously familiar. I calibrated myself on the 4 keys of great managers and mentally matched my people to the talent descriptions. More importantly, I made some resolutions towards the future.

If you are going to manage people, this book is recommended reading. If you're already managing people, this book is doubly useful - a kind of course corrector - since you can relate better to the examples.

Lastly, a word about its title - it's a niggle but one that grates on my nerves. The title is unnecessary sensationalist. It is misleading. The book's not as much about breaking rules of management as it is about finding what makes great managers excel. Breaking rules is not the guiding force for great managers; it's the belief that talent is unalterable and people are different. (Mis)guided by this (probably) marketing spin on the underlying thesis, the authors spend a lot of time in quoting prevailing behaviors of average managers as resident Management wisdom . This creates a sense of artificial tension when it could just be a comparison between average managers and great managers. There are no real rules that we need to break here!

I mention this only to manage the reader's expectation. Do not expect a revolutionary, new theory of managing people. Do not expect great revelations about how existing Management paradigms are all wrong. Instead, be prepared for common sense, brass tracks wisdom gleaned from great managers around the world.

Don't let the dissonance between content and cover detract from the fact that this great reading for any manager.

A wake up call

An Inconvenient Truth is aptly titled.

If you wonder what's all the fuss about or worse, if you've never heard the term 'Global Warming', please watch this DVD.

If you're one of those fence sitters who are not sure whether it really is an issue, whether it's just cyclical weather phenomenon or whether the Greens are making a mountain out of a mole hill, this might help you understand the reason behind your ambivalence.

If you know that global warming is an issue, but haven't figured out what to do, this DVD will not only raise a sense of urgency but in closing, will provide some clues on taking action.

I believe that this DVD should be mandatory watching for everyone. Because the topic under discussion is not some woolly headed 'self-help' mantra, or an esoteric scientific theory - it's the fundamental question of our survival as a species, or more accurately, the survival of Planet Earth as we know it.

There are 2 areas where Al Gore and David Guggenheim do a great job. One, Gore adds romance and drama to the issue by running a sub text of his personal journey to becoming an advocate against global warming. This sub text runs through his childhood, his failed bid for presidency and the loss of his sister to lung cancer (made poignant by the fact that his dad ran a tobacco farm). This not only reveals and clarifies his motive for the viewer but also makes for a empathetic connection.

Second, it makes the science and data behind the case against Global Warming accessible to the common man. The data on temperatures back to 650,000 years from Antarctic drilling and CO2 emissions by-country are quite eye opening. The graphics on ocean currents and their distribution of heat energy is simple and instructive. The DVD packs such data, graphics and Gore's glib talking style in a potent combination to make it easy for the layman to understand the issue at hand.

Discussions on Global Warming are typically split into 2 camps - the Skeptics who wonder whether the effort required is really worth it, whether we aren't exaggerating the impact and the Radicals who are against anything that exhales CO2, who take the matter to a stifling extreme. Gore, though clearly leftist and green in hue, is a bit more balanced in his presentation of the issue and his stance on the solutions.

This DVD should spur you into action. It will force you to think. Pick it up & watch it. You owe it your future.

Neither foolish nor random

If you haven't read Fooled by Randomness, make it a priority. It has to rank as one of my Top 5 non-fiction.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb has an acerbic wit, sharp intellect and sound knowledge. Staying true to the book's argument, I wouldn't ascribe causality between these traits and the book's contents. However, while reading, I often caught myself wondering about the size of brain behind the weight of words.

The fundamental thesis presented in the book is that we consistently underrate and understate the role of luck and randomness in our lives. Our successes are always explained post-facto by a combination of skills, courage or some other precisely defined reason. We do not make provision for the role of randomness. We're more benign (or I'd say ready) in cases of failure where luck (or the lack of it) is often presented as the nemesis. But overall, as a species, we are more geared towards determinism vs. randomness

While this thesis by itself might not warrant a book, what makes for an interesting weekend of reading is the author's style and his short detours into various angles & subtleties on the subject.

I for one, found it highly enlightening. I must admit that probability has been a blind spot for me owing to a fortnight of typhoid I suffered at age 17 when the subject was taught in school (and here again I might be overstating the causality - it might be just random or I was genuinely incapable of understanding 'the likelihood that something is the case or will happen'). After reading Fooled by Randomness however, I can vouch for an increase in my understanding. That, in itself, is reason enough to pick it up.

If probability doesn't interest you, perhaps the fact that Taleb opens the door to Karl Popper and his theory of empirical falsifiability, is sufficient inducement. Don't be alarmed at the big words - what it basically means is that any theory is true only as long as it is not falsified. There are no absolute truths, only lies waiting to be found out. While it makes intuitive sense, seeing how knowledge has progressed through trial and error in the past - what is alarming is that we do not make provision for this 'knowledge impermanence' in our education system.

Taleb also takes you down a winding road of biases induced by our lack of understanding of probability. This makes for one of the most stimulating sections of the book. I remember hearing about conditional probability in school but I can admit understanding it only now.

You might ask - What is the benefit of knowing that randomness plays a larger role in our life than we think? Should it lead to fatalism? skepticism at people's success? general disregard for skills and hard work? Taleb makes a clear distinction that there are areas more subject to randomness than others. And he also offers suggestions on what to do in the face of randomness - most of them applicable to a trader but some such as stoicism and dignity, though 'soft', are applicable to anyone.

In the end, the value of a book is random - it's more about the reader and less about the author. I loved Fooled by Randomness. A weekend of mirth, a week of introspection and the falsification of some long harbored 'truths' made it an absolute treasure for me.

ps: I should thank Shiv for suggesting this book in response to my perennial complaints about typhoid robbing me of probability :-)

How the Swiss do it

If you have a weekend to spare and want to read a contrarion point of view on investing, The Zurich Axioms fits the bill

There are 12 major axioms and 16 minor ones in the book. Max Gunther purportedly distills these axioms from his observations from Swiss bankers - those magnificently rich people who have made it in a landlocked, mineral-poor, small country.

Frankly, there are only 3 or at most 4 insightful 'axioms'. The others seem to just make up the numbers. Max Gunther does try his best to debunk oft quoted advice from wealth management experts - Diversify, Invest for the long term, Don't sell too early, Technical analysis etc. He also trashes experts who are ubiquitous nowadays on TV and newspapers spewing advice on anything and everything by quoting trends, correlations and causality.

His writing style is conversational and this is admirable on a subject such as investing where P&L statements, Balance sheets and ratios are de rigueur.

If you've read Peter Lynch or you get your hands on Fundsupermart's quarterly magazine or have had a chance to read any other book on stocks or investing, this is a good 2nd book. Don't read it as your introduction into investing.

Unshackling India: Barriers - Part 3

In the last 2 posts in this series, I had talked about Illiteracy and Poor public health as two factors preventing our abundant human resources from being economically productive. But for even those who are able and ready, poor infrastructure either prevents or enervates their initiative.

A country's Infrastructure can be assessed broadly on 4 vectors. These vectors are either inputs for production or enablers of trade. The 4 is not an exhaustive list but is indicative of the strength of a country's infrastructure and is also instructive in where the malaise lies. The 4 are:

Power, Transport, Ports, Communication.

I'm not covering Sanitation here - not because it isn't important, but because it'll complicate the discussion. We'll come back to it in a later post when talking about solutions for Poor public health.

Let's look at Power. India's production of electricity is only 630 billion kwh. If you switch on a 100 watt electricity bulb for 10 hours, that's 1 kwh. Light it for 15 hours and you spend 1.5kwh - you get the math, right? For a country of 1.13 billion people, this means, we can afford only 558kwh per year per person!! That is 1.5kwh per day! Each person can basically light one electric bulb for 15 hours at this rate!

China produces 2500 billion kwh or 1900 kwh per person - each person not only gets a bulb, but a fan and some extra power to convert some iron into steel. The US produces 3980 billion kwh or 13,220 per person. While at some level, my 'Green' conscience tells me that's a bit too high with all its Greenhouse effects, a level between China and US should be our aim.

The list of pernicious effects of lack of power is too long to enumerate. Suffice to say that a nation cannot aim to convert it's abundant natural resources into usable products, if it lacks energy.

Next is Transport. Roads, Rails, Air and Waterways being primary modes of moving goods and people. In Roads and Rails, it's interesting to note that the issue is not of penetration but of quality and reliability.

India has 1.6 million km of metalled roads, 0.54 km per sq. km of land. That compares favorably with China (0.16) and US (0.45). Net, roads cover more land in India than in China or the US. The problem is in the definition. What passes off as metalled road in India would count as dirt track in a 1st world country. The fact that China has 34 thousand km and US has 75 thousand km of expressways and India has almost none reveals the real issue (yes, yes, we have the Mumbai-Pune expressway - but isn't it pathetic that we have a single stretch of 200km road to banner in 2.9million sq km country?). India's roads are simply not efficient or reliable enough to move goods and people at a speed that can be an enabler to economic growth.

On railways the story is similar. India has 21m of rail track per sq. km. China has 8 and US has 25m. So far, so good. But the average speed achieved on Indian tracks is 25km/h. If someone has data on China and US, please send it in, but it's safe to assume that it won't be below 25km/h.

A peek into airways and waterways is quite revealing. China has 13m of waterways per sq km. India has only 5 and the US has 4.5m. Waterways are the one of the most energy efficient manner of transportation and are a natural link from ports to the hinterland. We do not have a pan-Indian river system to ride on.

In airport density, the US is far ahead with 15000 airports - 1600 per 1000 sq km. India has 115 per 1000sqkm and China has 52 per 1000sqkm. Airports, historically have been better movers of people than goods so in a sense, it might not be the most important factor of transportation.

So here is the picture on Transport. China has ridden on it's extensive waterways and expressways. The US has its rail and road network. India has none. It's roads are dilapidated, railways is unreliable & slow and waterways, non existent.

The 3rd Infrastructure factor is Ports. In a way, they are an extension of our transport system. Too few and too tardy. Our interaction with the outer world doesn't make for good copy. The 12 Indian ports have 233 berths with a throughput of 465 million tonnes of cargo. Shanghai, by itself, has a throughput of 537 million tonnes!

The average turnaround time at Indian ports is 4 days. This is an improvement over the 8 days we used to take in the 1990's. Singapore has a turnover time of, guess what.....12 hours!!!! Even other ports have a turnaround time of 1 day on an average.

What this means is that goods take 3-4 days to reach our sea ports from our factories and farms. They then sit idle for 4 days at our ports. 8 days of inventory carrying costs on a GDP of $922 billion is humungus!!

Last on the list is communications. For all the talk of a mobile phone revolution in India, we have just 150 million mobile phone users. China has 450, the US has 220 million translating to a teledensity of 34% and 73% respectively as compared to India's 13%. 'We have some distance to cover' might be the understatement of the year!

This makes for a grim prognosis. 1/3rd of our population is illiterate. Out of the remaining 700million, almost 1/3rd is out of work either due to disease or malnutrition. What the able and educated can produce is constrained by lack of power. What is produced either takes inordinately long to reach the market due to poor transport or loses half its value in the time it takes to get there. Markets are inefficient because of poor communication facilities.

These are the hard problems. The one's backed by numbers and data. There are a lot of soft problems too - terrorism, separatism, fanaticism, rich-poor divide, lack of civic sense, lack of service culture etc etc. Most of these are symptoms of an underlying gap between haves and have nots. And that gap is driven by the 3 underlying factors we've talked about - access to quality education, quality health and infrastructure.

I wanted to emphasize the primacy of these 3 underlying factors because in discussions with friends, I have discerned various starting and ending points on this topic. For some, the rich-poor divide is the biggest issue we need to solve. For others, it is the Muslims vs. Hindus divide. Some call it the urban - rural divide. Still others, say that separatism is the biggest threat to the country. I think these are profiling variables not discriminating ones. If you group all those who are illiterate and unhealthy, there will be a pre-ponderance of Muslims, of rural folks and of poor people. The have nots will be the ones asking for a separate state - the perception that being master of your destiny is the panacea to all their ills. But you can't do anything about someone being a Muslim, Rural or Poor apart from conversion, migration and donation - and I bet, those 3 would never solve the underlying problem.

Net, if we can tackle illiteracy, poor health and infrastructure in an equitable manner, I believe we will cover a fair distance in achieving our goal of becoming the #1 economic power in the world.

Over the next few posts, I'll try to explore solutions to these issues.

In closing, I wanted to bring up a soft point - the Lack of a clearly articulated Indian identity. It is a symptom, the causes of which can be seen scattered over illiteracy, curriculum, history and politics. I do not want to vitiate this forum by delving into it now but later, when talking of solutions, we cannot but help pay due import to this issue.

Good, thought provoking book but not gospel truth

Management leads by example - this is true not only for leaders but also for the discipline of Management Education. Case studies and examples are the best way to introduce and clarify concepts. Clayton Christensen uses cases from the Disk Drive industry and the Mechanical Excavator industry to answer the question he poses in the beginning - Why do great firms fail?

His answer - The Innovator's dilemma: The very capabilities that make firms great are the cause of its downfall when faced with disruptive innovation. He also peppers the book with interesting examples from other industries such as PCs, cars, retailing.

Another instructive section is his explanation of capabilities - the factors that affect what a firm can and cannot do. He breaks up capabilities into Resources, Processes and Values - something that managers at the helm can use at different stages of a firm's life cycle.

It's in the solution to the dilemma that I feel Prof. Christensen does not do enough. This is actually symptomatic of a general trend I see in popular management books where solutions are presented as a straightforward inverse of the issue. If current capabilities inhibit success in disruptive innovation, create a separate organization with new capabilities. If small opportunities do not fulfill the growth needs of a large company, embed the innovation in a small organization. If it's hard to estimate market size, plan to fail.

Reality is not that simple. Failure at great firms in the face of disruptive innovation is either because they did not 'see it coming' or executed incorrectly. His thesis presents solutions for the 2nd cause, not for the 1st.

In essence this problem from the perspective of the incumbent is that of balancing current business with future growth. Stated this way, it's not an either-or. A successful firm needs to do both - deliver current business and plan for future growth. Some of the future growth will come from sustaining innovation (for which the current organization is appropriate) but an unknown part can come from disruptive innovation. A separate, self-sustaining group, preferable under the CEO's watch is better positioned.

Prof. Christensen also does not cover the issue from the perspective of an entrant - the book would have been more complete if he had. For an entrant, the challenge is to find a consumer segment that wants his innovation. I feel that instead of stating and re-iterating the innovator's dilemma (which after a point starts to grate), he could have spent some effort in laying out a conceptual framework to help an entrant. Here, I find the concept of Points of Difference and Points of Parity from other management schools to be useful.

And even if you don't have a disruptive innovation but want to enter a market, there are important pointers in the book - though they are not laid out as such. Find a market where the existing products are over-designed for some people. Create an innovation that achieves Point of Parity for current important attributes and Point of Difference on a new attribute. Windows compatible software that is not as evolved as Microsoft Office, meets the basic word processing, computation and presentation needs of a significant part of the population but is significantly cheaper is a case in point. And to subvert the bundling problem, it can be downloaded.

The power of the book for a practising manager is that it asks an important question. And through its examples provides a fertile ground for you to introspect and ruminate over your experiences. The real value of the book resides in these connections that your introspection reveals.

Chak De India - commentary

1. I thought of writing a commentary after chancing upon a reference on wikipedia. It said that the film opened to lukewarm response in India and UK and some critics have trashed the movie as being slow.

I loved the movie. I absolutely did. And it's hard to explain why; I always struggle to explain emotions. Contrary to opinions that persistently asking 'why' leads you to the root cause, I believe emotions can't be explained. One, because the very method employed to elicit an explanation causes an error - Claimed data is claimed. It undergoes rational processing that renders the response incorrect. Second, why explain something that is supposed to be felt. Try explaining a fragrance - they do that when explaining perfumes and it makes for a very poor alternative to some good ol' sniffing.

Anyways, coming back to the movie........

Chak De India uses hockey as the sub text to bring into relief 3 issues that afflict India sport - 1) Individualism, 2) Regionalism and 3) Using sports as a means to an end. More importantly, it offers a poignant commentary on the fickleness of Indian public where public adulation is driven by the most recent performance. Lastly, it directs one's eye to the disproportionate focus of India sport to that genteel pastime - cricket, at the expense of all else.

The movie is commendable for its bravery and instructive in its business acumen. Using 11 unknown faces, no leading heroine, no exhibition of flesh and no song-dance sequence is brave. Ensuring there was Shahrukh's face to pull crowds in, was smart.....else this might have ended being a late bloomer or a DVD wonder.

See the movie if you haven't. It'll 'stick' with you.................

ps: Tomorrow, I'll pick up the threads of the 'Unshackling India' series. Apologies for the longish hiatus.

The End of Poverty - Review

Who is it for?

Anyone interested in developmental economics. Anyone interested in poverty. Anyone interested in getting a helicopter view of what has happened in the economies of Bolivia, Poland, Russia, China, India and Africa.

Who is it not for?

Footsoldiers, innovators or entrepreneurs looking for execution ideas that'll make a clear, verifiable and real difference in the lives of the poor. Wide-eyed arm chair philosophers looking for a magic bullet, an insightful idea that will make good conversation over coffee/beer.

What is it?

A planner's experience-laden fiscal plan on how much is needed to eradicate poverty and how to fund that investment. Peppered with anecdotes and events that affected economic transformations in countries we are interested in. Topped with exhortations and appeals to our moral, intellectual and human side. With a fair sprinkling of bashing of US war & tax policy.

What is it not?

An action plan to eradicate poverty. A repository of execution ideas that can be implemented by individuals, entrepreneurs or private enterprise.

Is it any good? Yes

Does it lay out the problem, spell out the investment needed to solve it and give ideas on how to finance it? Yes.

Does it delve into what to do with that investment? A little bit.

Does it give you a good understanding of development economics? Yes.

Does it make for an interesting read, was it educative? Yes, most certainly

Is this book the magic bullet that will eradicate poverty? Maybe not.

Does it talk about how to execute? No.
Does it go down to the trenches, dirty your hands and talk of real people. No.

Overall, a good read. I might add to this review after I've read the 'White Man's Burden'.

Unshackling India: Barriers - Part 2

The last post covered Education and the lack of quality (skill and stance) and reach as a barrier to achieving India's goal of becoming #1 GDP country in the world. In this post, I'll explore Health as the 2nd big barrier.


Health is both a cause and effect of extreme poverty. And it's a very complex problem. Let me state the magnitude of the problem first.


25% of Indians do not have access to basic healthcare. Sometimes percentages numb our senses since they hide the people they represent. What this 25% means is that around 270 million Indians, when they fall ill, do nothing but wait. They wait for divine intervention or human fortitude or quacks or ultimately for...... death. These are people in remote villages, slums or shantytowns next to big construction projects - you can see them living each day on borrowed time.


With infant mortality of 34.6 per 1000 live births, 1 million infants die every year - laying waste 9 months of pre-natal investment. This is no small number. It means half of New Zealand dies as infants in India every year!!


For every 1000 adults of working age, 4 die of infectious diseases such as TB, Diarrhoea, AIDS and Malaria. That is 4.5 million preventable deaths a year!! More than the population of Singapore! Another 2 million die of nutrition related diseases. It's ironic that Singapore is trying to get up to a population of 6.5 million by 2010 to sustain its economic growth and we lose the same number every year to deaths that are preventable via sanitation, immunization and nutrition.


India has 25% of the world's population of blind people. Isn't that blinding infuriating?? 1/4th of world's blind people are in India!! - a direct result of Vit A deficiency and poor cataract treatment outreach.


With such vast swathes of people rendered economically ineffective, its not hard to see why India has not been able to harness its abundant human resources - a lot of them are just not fit to work!

What are the causes of this abysmal state of healthcare in India?

First is Poverty. Poor people just do not have the economic surplus to invest in nutrition, prevention and treatment.

Second is Budgetary failure. Indian Govt. has a) not allocated enough to fulfill its promise of universal healthcare and b) whatever is allocated doesn't reach the needy due to corruption and inefficiencies.

Third, is Lack of infrastructure. This happens on two fronts - 1) Lack of roads and refrigeration impedes reach of medication and vaccines, 2) Lack of sanitation compounds spread of infections.

Fourth is Lack of education. This again, works on two fronts - 1) The affected don't know and therefore don't take simple actions that can prevent a lot of infectious and nutritional diseases and 2) there are not enough doctors and health workers for our population.

Interestingly, most of the above are interlinked. And that's not surprising. Over the past 407 years (1600 - 2007) while the Western World went through its political, industrial and technological revolutions, India's GDP was stagnant for the first 340 years and grew at a meagre 3% for the next 30. Only in 1970 did we break into a more respectable 5-6% growth rate behind the Green revolution and from 1991, started galloping at 7%.

The first 370 years of the last 4 centuries made the pernicious factors of illiteracy, poor health and poor infrastructure intertwine into a massive ballast that keeps pulling the Indian ship down.

In my 1st post, I mentioned that in addition to Education and Health, the 3rd barrier is that we have not created conditions that allow our human capital to contribute. This primarily alludes to lack of Infrastructure but extends into 2 other vectors - 1) Governance and 2) Inefficiencies (corruption, intermediaries)

In my next post, I would explore this 3rd barrier in some detail

Unshackling India: Barriers - Part 1

The fundamental barrier to becoming the World's Largest economy is the quality of our human resources. India has poor human capital - both in terms of literacy and health. If you're sick and/or unskilled, your economic value is low and your ability to improve your stock is impaired.

A secondary barrier is that we have not created conditions for our human capital to realize their potential (read: infrastructure)

What makes the issue complicated is the inter-twining of these barriers over the years, thereby blurring the lines between cause and effect. This vicious cycle needs some explaining.

India has a population of 1.1 billion. But 39% of population is illiterate. This in itself significantly curtails the economic value of our human capital. Here's a simple way of increasing our GDP by 60% - achieve 100% literacy! This will need twin efforts in 1) increasing school enrollment of Point of School Entry kids and 2) reducing drop out rates. The other 61% literate are not really off scrutiny. There are 2 issues that beset those defined literate - one hard & poignant, the other soft & regrettable.

Lets take the hard issue first. This issue is of skill (or the lack of it in our current education system). A recent survey by Pratham and another one by Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra revealed that out of those termed literate as per the 3 R's, only 23%, yes 23%!!! students were able to read/write a simple sentence or do a simple sum. Others just recalled their name as you would recall a logo or wrote their name as you would draw a caricature - there was no understanding aiding their memory. This finding is scandalous not only for its content but for the fact that it's not better publicised!! The issue is shifted from primary to secondary & from secondary to higher secondary levels due to teachers' vested interest in performance parameters & executed via a combination of teacher-aided cheating and manipulation of answer sheets in exams. Why, you would ask, are students not getting it? Why after spending 13 years in school, they are not able to gain understanding of language and arithmetic? The answer doesn't lie in the student's lack of ability but in 1) teacher absenteeism that besets Govt. schools in India and 2) lack of teacher training in engaging students. Later, we'll discuss causes of these behaviors and possible solutions.

The second issue among the 61% is soft. Its one of stance. Our current education does a poor job of imbibing values in our kids. Over the years this has come full circle where today's parents and teachers are themselves devoid of 1) civility 2) nationalism, 3) honesty and 4) dignity of labor. Our current education system also does a poor job of spurring creativity and multi-dimensional development in our children. Rote learning, extreme focus on year-end examinations and very low student-teacher ratio in assembly line classrooms inspires conformism and inhibits creativity. No wonder India is the world's back office and not its lab. Again, we will analyze causes for this and possible solutions in future posts.

Thus, lack of quality education - both its stunted reach and emaciated serving (skill & stance) - are barriers that need to be removed.

In the next post, we'll explore the state of healthcare and its negative impact on Human resources in detail.

In the meantime, would welcome any thoughts or perspectives on Education

Unshackling India : The Goal

Any discussion on how to unshackle India should start with a disclaimer and a request.


The disclaimer : These are my opinions and they are biased.

The request is a corollary to the disclaimer : Please be indulgent and patient in equal measure.


Lets start with what's our goal - since problems and solutions are best talked in relation to a goal. Different people lay different goals for India.
-Improving living standards of our countrymen
-Removing poverty.
-Achieving complete literacy for Indians.
-Making India a superpower.
-Ridding India of corruption.
-Creating social harmony in India.
-Sundry others.......


To my mind, all these are either means to an end or a problem stated as a goal. They are either vague or too narrow. I want to set a concrete and broad enough goal for India. My goal is for India to become the World's Largest economy in terms of GDP (absolute $s). All other goals in my mind lead up to this goal. Stating the goal in economic terms also takes it beyond social, religious and regional overtones that run the risk of derailing our discussion.


Now, what's the barrier to achieving this goal, what are the causes of these barriers and what are some possible solutions?


Over the next few days, I want to explore these areas and would love to hear your thoughts. Does anyone have a goal that is more inspiring and concrete than this?

Integrity

What makes you respect someone?


The answers range from intelligence, position, money, courage to aura, personality etc. But I feel the one thing that is critical to command respect is INTEGRITY.


Integrity manifests itself in different ways.


There's personal integrity. Simply, giving credit where it's due. And raising your hand when things don't go well. I've seen apparent Giants act like dwarfs when they hijack someone's work and present it as their own. I've also seen people look around for scapegoats when shit hits the ceiling when admitting a mistake would be much simpler. And I don't know whether its insecurity that guides their action or indifference that prevents them from doing what's right. But the upshot is that people don't respect them. Personal integrity is critical to inspiring trust. And trust is a pseudonym for respect.


Then there's process integrity. Simply, promises made, promises kept. Some people simply do not accord a lot of importance to their word. How would they get others to respect their word if they themselves can't? Its actually quite simple - Don't commit, if you can't deliver. And deliver once you commit. If midway, you know you'll not be able to keep your promise, go back and re-set expectations. Don't just not pay any heed to it. I feel people take on a lot more than they can deliver, simply because they can't say NO. And once they realise that they can't manage it, they again can't say 'I was wrong'.

There's also Professional integrity. Showing things as they are. Some people confuse perspective with showcasing. I do not respect people who present data selectively. Who decide on something and instead of acknowledging that they are going by their gut, resort to manipulating data to support their decision. If you don't see you manager being truthful, how in the world will you respect him?

Lastly, there's intellectual integrity. Doing what's right vs. doing what's acceptable. Everybody wants to be liked - it's a universal emotion. But in our quest for being likeable, we tend to agree to everything, we don't make tough calls, we don't say it as it is. Skirting around an issue tends to create swirls that can drown a whole organization. People might like you because you're pleasant, but they won't respect you.

Integrity is a pre-requisite for commanding respect. For people build their trust over a strong foundation, not on shifting sands.

The 3 moments of truth

Leaving a company has 3 moments of truth.

The First Moment of Truth (FMOT), when after months of chewing on the thought of leaving and feeling around its taste on your tongue; you finally digest it in your mind. Its a simple click when everything seems to fall in place and a blinding clarity reveals itself.

The Second Moment of Truth (SMOT) is when you make the leap from thought to words. When you translate your decision into an action. Sitting across your manager and telling him its off is like a load off your chest. Now, its out there and now it will happen.

The Third Moment of Truth (TMOT) is your farewell party. Its the ceremony that completes the transition. Farewell speeches are signposts. They indicate a turn where you leave behind the past and face a new future.

How many Moments of Truth have you had?

A Cynic's view of meetings

The one moment I dread most in big meetings is when the Boss rocks back in his chair, makes a wide sweep with his arm and asks, 'what do you guys think?'

Suddenly, everyone feels compelled to have a point of view. Even those who were either catching up on sleep or checking email on their blackberry, perk up, put their arms back on the table and pretend to be thinking hard.

Then the verbiage comes. This ranges from thinking aloud to thought through. As the baton is passed on, everyone pretends to say something different. Most of the time, people say the same thing in different words. Its not considered good to say, 'I don't have anything to add'.

After a while, it becomes comical as people start snatching at scraps. Comments start focusing on format, colors and typos.

Now the Boss is in a quandary. Having asked everyone their opinion, he can't just ignore them. He has to "build on" what others have said. If you're lucky, the nightmare ends in one round. Mostly however, someone realises that he failed to say something intelligent and is compelled to make amends. Rarely does the 2nd attempt break away from the band of inanity.

More often than not, you leave the room more confused than clearer. Not much is achieved. But keeping with the general tone, you also pretend to understand.

What you have definitely achieved is a climbdown from purity of individual thought to the lowest common denominator of democratic concurrence.

Is there a way out of this?