Rahul Writes

I am a big fan of Dr. Devdutt Pattanaik and I wait for his column “Management Mythos” in the Economic Times every Friday. Dr. Pattanaik, a medical doctor by education (MBBS from Grant Medical College, Mumbai) turned to become a renowned mythologist. He works as a leadership consultant and holds the innovative position of Chief Belief Officer at the Future Group. You can check his website at: http://devdutt.com/  

I am reproducing his today’s article from ET:  

Management mythos: Read situations in all the perspectives 

30 Sep, 2011, 05.49AM IST, ET Bureau 

The sage Narada wanted to marry a young princess. But she said she wanted to marry only Hari. Hari is the name of Vishnu , who is God and the guardian of earth. Narada went to Vishnu and began singing his praises. So Vishnu offered him a boon. 

“Give me the face of Hari,” said Narada. Vishnu granted that wish. Narada went to the princess but instead of garlanding him, she turned around in disgust. There behind her stood Vishnu. The overjoyed princess garlanded Vishnu. Narada wondered what was wrong. Then he saw his face reflected on a mirror. 

It was that of a monkey! He accused Vishnu of cheating him. Vishnu smiled and replied, “I gave you the face of Hari, which literally means monkey, though it happens to be my name.” 

Narad can be read the situation in two ways: a strategic narrative or a sincere narrative. In a strategic narrative, Narad can see Vishnu behaving like a lawyer, playing with words to make him feel like a fool. In a sincere narrative, Narada can see Vishnu behave like God, using a play of words to enlighten him not to trick a young girl simply because he can. 

In a strategic narrative, Vishnu is the wily trickster who wants the princess for himself. In a sincere narrative, Vishnu stops Narada from being a trickster and grants the princess her wish. In a strategic narrative, Narada feels like a fool. In a sincere narrative, Narada is enlightened. 

Every situation can be read strategically or sincerely. When we read a situation strategically, we feel manipulated; we feel we have been reduced to a performing monkey. When we read a situation sincerely , we learn from it; we feel someone cares for us enough to demonstrate to us our shortcomings rather than simply pointing it out. 

After completing his course in Australia, Jason returned to India with plans to start a fast food joint. His father, Paul, was a renowned restaurateur, with many small boutique hotels in East and South India , saw the business plan and knew that it would not work. But he gave his son the seeding capital he needed. 

The hotel started with much fanfare but was in the red in less than six months. That is why Paul sent his team to help out the son. They made two key changes, in the menu and in the advertising. The same place, which was empty for six months, was now full of customers. 

Now Jason has two options, just like Narada. Read his father’s actions strategically or sincerely. He can see Paul as a manipulator, a dominant father, who wanted to put him in his place. Or he can see Paul as a teacher, a caring father, who wanted to show him what actually works in the restaurant business. Jason can feel like Hari, the monkey, or thank Hari, the teacher. The choice is very much his. 

The author is the Chief Belief Officer of the Future Group. He can be reached at devdutt@devdutt .com 

Ref: [ET Article] 

You must have watched Pepsodent’s ad featuring Shah Rukh Khan as a father, who encourages his son to brush his teeth along with him. It is called “Pappu and Papa” campaign.  

Pepsodent is a Unilever brand; just like Surf detergent which features many commercials surrounding family and children. The idea I think is to make the brands part of the families, and hence command customer loyalty. Now this Pappu and Papa (P&P) Ad is unique in my opinion. Unique because of the irony in what they thought and what it appears to customers like me…  

Recently I bought a Pepsodent toothpaste and they gave me a free “comic book” with it. Guess the title! It was the same “Pappu and Papa”. Pappu is a teenage boy of around 12, and he goes accidently on a Chocolate Island with his Papa. Of course when you eat lots of chocolates you need toothpaste – and what a better choice than a Pepsodent? But what I couldn’t resist noticing was the graphic images in the comic book. It showed SRK as a father. The lean look; invisible six-pack inside a full sleeve v-neck t-shirt loosely hanging from the neck and shoulders, perhaps worn without a vest inside, the SRK’s shallow cheeks and eyes telling his advance age; hands waxed to remove traces of hair; it is a perfect recipe which comes with SRK now a days. Even in movies, SRK is never able to get into the skin of the character – no matter what the plot is and what kind of a character he is playing, all that the viewers see is the same SRK rather than a King Ashoka or a Squadron Leader Veer Pratap Singh. The same phenomenon is carried even in his ads. Somehow, this SRK doesn’t look like a caring natural dad of a 12 years old boy. But see the irony, the Unilever guys say that SRK was chosen because he was a caring father in his real life!  

Well, at least in India, a typical father doesn’t look like a SRK. On screen, SRK still plays the roles much younger than his self and even in his other commercial ads, SRK is seen flirting with ladies (much younger than his age), and his personality never matches up with a ‘papa’.  

Also, I think just to catch the phrase “Pappu and Papa”, they have kept the name of the child as “Pappu”, which is mostly used now with other connotations (like a victim of a prank, or to be made fun out of). Both Pappu and Papa are bad choices in my opinion – Pappu a bad choice for a name and Papa bad choice in the form of flirting and flaunting, lean and mean SRK.  

The Unilever wanted to send across the message that fathers should spend more time with their children to teach the lessons of hygiene, like daily brushing. I think even this simple message is lost because of the “star cast”.  

All I want to say to the ad-men is that screen life is different from real life. In real life, SRK may be a very good dad, but on screen he doesn’t live up to the character. A model with a personality fitting a genuine father would have been a much better choice. And if all they wanted was to bring SRK so that children could identity Pepsodent with a celebrity, then also I think a Hrithik or an Aamir, could have been a much better choice…  

- Rahul

While on a train journey, I met a lady of my mother’s age. She enquired about my job and about what my spouse does. When she came to know that wife was in a very un-matching profession than mine, she started sharing her apprehensions. Her son and her daughter-in-law both had same qualifications and were working in similar consultancy profiles for two competing companies. She expressed happiness that whenever one of them needed help on professional front, the other was right there to help. She thought that both ‘gained’ and hence rose fast because of their same job profiles. But I had my doubts.  

I wonder if the two companies where they are working know about their case. In consultancy, there is lot of confidential client information involved, which should be protected at all cost. In the lady’s case, such secrecy is defeated. Secondly, companies also guard their confidential procedures, systems, checks and loop-holes from their competitors. What if the husband and wife kept feeding each other with confidential client information; which actually helped them win accounts ‘individually’? Both these guys would become outstanding performers due to their nexus, but their companies might start losing lots of prospects and money in the process! This is why I believe that companies should be watchful of such circumstances during the background check stage. If husband and wife are in the same profession, both of them could be given offer of employment by the company. That would be a good proposition. But if a critical employee’s spouse is working with a competitor, there is lot at the stake in the long run. 

On the other hand, a couple in the same profession may lack ‘variety’ in life. I don’t know anyone who loves absolute monotony percolating from office to home. And for help, we can always trust good colleagues and close friends! Being in different professions would also avoid any ‘ego-clash’ which is inevitable in same profession couples. Bottom-line: I see more advantages than disadvantages in couples having different professions. What say you?   

- Rahul

With growing consumer’s indifference along with increased consumer awareness, advertisements and PR attempts are becoming ineffective to create a positive image of a company or its products. In these times, companies are thinking about innovative effective ways to reach the same effects. One concept to which we should become aware is the opportunity lying in the exiting employees. Each employee resigning and exiting from the company is actually a potential brand ambassador for the company.  

I can recall my experience with the first company I was working with after my graduation in engineering. Then I had no prior experience of leaving a job and hence I was anxious as to how they will take my decision. That morning when I presented my resignation letter to my immediate boss, he talked to me and then informed the superior bosses. Then I had a meeting with the Works Manager who requested me not to leave and then I had a long meeting and conversation with the Plant Manager. I was asked to review my decision in some days. When I held to my decision, my exit formalities started. I remember my last day in the company. I completed all clearance forms and then I went to the Finance and Accounts for the final settlement. To my surprise, they were very courteous. My documents were checked and they calculated and informed me about my settlement dues and balance. The whole process didn’t take much time and in fact they had given me a priority over other jobs, perhaps learning that it was my last day there in the company. I was so relieved with the entire process that I sent an email to the HR and Finance Heads, thanking them for the extremely courteous exit process.  

I have always been appreciating towards the first company I worked with and this exit experience is one of those which are always in my mind. It is understandable that my appreciation for the company and their fair process goes far beyond to reach others each time I speak about it. I am sure that with word-of-mouth (WOM), the company would have benefited much all through the years.  

Comparing it with another experience made me realise how not all companies are aware or awakened enough about this opportunity. Leaving a job is not an easy experience for an employee and in those nervous hours if the HR and Finance departments are a bit more empathetic, courteous, fair and quick, it creates a whole lot of difference.  

We leave jobs but our experiences don’t leave us. Therefore companies should try to convert this loss (of engagement) into an opportunity. Each employee leaving the organisation is a potential Brand Ambassador. The sooner companies realise this, the more effective and permanent their PR endeavours would be.  

- Rahul

(Management)

To care or not to care

I am not sure if this interests you:) I enjoy discovering new things and particularly the small/big ones that others don't get to see.

I haven't kept too many shortcuts on my desktop and hence I open programs like Winamp through Start Menu of Windows. Every time I go to open Winamp, it would look like this:

I always wondered why would 'Uninstall Winamp' appear at the top of the menu, and for accessing Winamp, I would have to bring the cursor down at the bottom. Why didn't they design it in such a way that the main program that I want to open, i.e. Winamp appears on the top and other files like Uninstall, Read Me file, etc appear afterwards? Don't you think it would be more user-friendly thing to do?

I went ahead to check how it works for some other programs. The case was the same for WinZip: to my surprise, Help Manual appears on the top, while WinZip 9.0 appears at the bottom of the menu!

Then I realised how it works. Windows keeps the items from top to bottom according to the Alphabetical Order. Hence 'U'ninstall Winamp appears before 'W'inamp, and 'H'elp Manual appears before 'W'inZip. But still, they could have done something to make it more convenient for users! They could have Written WinZip Help Manual instead of simple Help Manual, and that would have made sure that this file appears after WinZip!

When I checked with one other software ' PictureProject, it was designed exactly as I had thought ' all items in the menu are prefixed with PictureProject and hence the order is this: PictureProject, PictureProject Help, PictureProject ReadMe, and then PictureProject Uninstall! It takes care of the alphabetical order requirement and is just what the users want.

Why was it that Winamp and WinZip didn't care to make it this way while PictureProject did? I guessed, just confirmed and there were no surprises: PictureProject is software from Nikon, Japan, while Winamp and WinZip are American products! (Winamp is from the US; Winzip is from Canada).

There is a concept called Quality Function Deployment ' the motto is to incorporate the quality systems from the design step itself so as to avoid faulty production in the later stages. As we all know, the Japanese companies have excelled quality and taken it to benchmark status. And many American companies have been failing on this front.

Do you think my analysis was na�ve and no one cares about such small-small things? :) First, such small things go a long way in customer orientation, and second, quality and customer satisfaction become very much part of our organisation culture ' we lose focus once and it would take years for us to change. Taking care of such small things in the design stage is the success of products like iPod. Ideally there should be no limits to which designers and companies go create a product / service to delight customers, taking care of the minutest of the details

(Rahul)

5 am post! :)

Management

Coaching or Mentoring is a great tool in management for talent development. This small piece tells how the Mahabharata teaches us the key points:

Trust in coaching: Krishna and Arjuna

In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas are shown to have fought with the Kauravas on a matter of principle.

Arjuna was the person on whose shoulders the morale of the Pandavas rested. His well-being heralded victory and he stood for all that was supreme Pandava valour and glory. He had two biological older brothers, so he was not solely responsible for looking after the family. However, Arjuna was a little vain and sensitive, and felt he had nobody to look up to. Krishna filled this void. Krishna's style of mentoring relied on certain building blocks.

Krishna proclaimed his love for Arjuna publicly and attached the highest importance to his friendship with Arjuna. They spent much time together and Krishna took every opportunity to demonstrate his love for Arjuna. On one occasion, they fought a battle which pleased Lord Indra. Lord Indra offered Krishna a boon. Guess what he asked for? He asked that his friendship with Arjuna continue forever! This built great trust in the relationship. Trust is the first building block in the mentoring.

The second feature was that Krishna was always supportive of Arjuna but never interfered with his life. At no point did Krishna take the decisions or the actions required, he merely offered his advice to Arjuna. At any rate, Arjuna had a fragile personality, the kind that would not accept interference by someone else. Krishna ensured that after proffering his advice, he gave Arjuna his own space so that the prot�g� felt no sense of dependence on the mentor.

The third feature was that the relationship was one of cheer and warmth. Arjuna took his tasks very seriously and had frequent outbursts of temper. Krishna showed himself to be a friends and comrade despite the moodiness of his prot�g�, so that Arjuna felt free to open his heart to him.

The fourth feature of Krishna's mentorship was that when required, he criticized Arjuna's decisions openly but never insulted or denigrated him personally. Krishna's focus was on the issue, not on the person. Thus he was always non-judgemental.

The fifth feature was that Krishna never left Arjuna to fend for himself just because he had chosen a path which Krishna was not supportive of. When Arjuna's son Abhimanyu was killed in battle by Jayadratha, Arjuna vowed that by evening he would either kill Jayadratha or commit suicide. Krishna did not think this was a good idea, but he stood with his prot�g� to help him complete his difficult task. Lastly, when Arjuna faced a personal crisis on the battlefield, Krishna came to his rescue by propounding the Gita; it was not a mere sermon but a way of looking at the issues he was facing and helping Arjuna to resolve his dilemmas himself.

(Taken from the book "The Case of the Bonsai Manager", by R. Gopalakrishnan)

When in doubt, look 'inside'!

Picture: Dmytro Siryi a.k.a. Dina Bandhu Dasa, is an artist born in Ukraine. Visit his website to see the beautiful paintings he has made. Don't miss this: http://www.artdbd.com/

Management

Turnaround Babus

One day when I returned home, I found a piece of paper fixed on my door. I was ready for surprises. But it turned out to be a notice from a post man that he had brought a speed-post and as the door was locked, now I had to collect it from the designated post office within five days. I thanked the postman for his concern; otherwise he could have just returned it back.

When I went to collect the post at my nearby post office, I was asked to collect it from another PO at some distance from the place, and that too before 10 AM.

Two days after, I went there, and found to my surprise that there was a queue of around 7 people waiting to receive their registered/speed posts. The recipient needed to show our picture ID cards in order to receive. The lady at the counter was as expected slow. And then, another woman complained that the postman never made a second round to deliver; he just left the notice when he found the door locked. There I realized the problem: As the government departments are fighting hard to improve profitability, or to become profitable at all, should they do that at the sake of poorer service to the public?

Imagine how many times we shall need to make rounds of post offices just because our main door was closed for the few hours in which the postman came? Or about the person in whose name the letter has come is out of town for some time? Should government departments be making profits? Yes. But should they adopt quick-fixes in order to make profits? Think about the courier guy who will call you up if he doesn’t find your house. On the other hand, the post offices don’t offer any comparable service. This is true for all government departments trying to turn around. Shouldn’t they focus on improving efficiency and making some real changes in their work process and culture? Think about the railways which, in order to become profitable, fixes an extra side berth, reserves large quota for RAC and tatkal, or increases cancellation charges. Why should the railway tickets booked via the internet be costing more than those booked at their counters? I am using my computer, paying via my card, taking print of my ticket on my own printer, and thus saving the railways time, manpower and money. But in return, I am charged more than the guys who make queues at the reservation counters, fill up requisition slips, argue with the booking clerks and fight at their mundane fancies. As one of our professors says: by automating the wrong processes, you will end up doing the wrong things more efficiently!

May I take your five minutes please?

It goes back to the time when I was an engineer trainee on my first job. Like most of the work places, we were not getting as much support and guidance as we needed or hoped for. Managers didn't have time to coach us. Some of them asked us to meet them at 5:30 in the evening, exactly after the working hours ended. When we went to meet some others in the first half, they used to call us in the second half. They all seemed to have kept their noses to the grindstone. We had hard time keeping our thumb up.

But when ever I went to meet our Plant Head, he had enough time for us. Often he called us in, even when we didn't have prior appointment. He looked interested in our training and used to ask us to brief him about what we learnt in the previous week. At one time when I was about to leave, he flattered me by saying: "Anything else, technical, that I can explain to you?" I couldn't believe my ears! Not a single manager, engineer or worker had said that to me. How was that possible? I asked some questions, which he explained with interest. Young people have lots of questions. If solutions to all their queries can't be provided, at least they should be facilitated to search on their own. When I asked him why an innovative practice was not being followed in the plant, he said: "think and tell me, what may be the reasons it is not being followed here. What are the plus and minus points associated with it?" I thought and found answer to my query on my own!

How that was possible that the top most person had enough time for others, but the lower rank personnel were busy up to the brink most of the time. It became clear to me when I read it in a book: More successful you are, more time you have for your people. If you are successful, you learn to manage time. You know how to take efficient decisions within a timeframe. You know what to delegate and to whom. You know what right thing should be done at what right time and in which right way. You know how to reply in a single sentence, in a situation when others will need a hundred words. In short, your success gets reflected in the plenty of time you have for your subordinates.

[Kumar Rahul, Mumbai, May 25, 2007]