I almost wasted the whole day on my laptop, which refused to start in the morning - resulting in a panic that took the whole time away. I tried almost everything, concluding at some point in the afternoon that I have to go out and buy a new laptop, only to realize that how hopelessly dependent on computers my life is at the time - I was thinking of buying a DELL online! But, anyway, I could salvage the situation somewhat, though this did require a full hard disk format and rebuild of the operating system, and almost six hours of work backing up and restoring all data. A colossal waste of time - or in another way, an useful lesson to learn very early in my 100 day experiment.
The lesson is simple : don't leave for tomorrow what can be done today, and I just quoted Benjamin Franklin. I was to write an article on Bangladesh's election for a journal, and while I was almost ready on Saturday evening, I decided to sleep early and send it over on Sunday morning. I wanted to have a last review with fresh mind - so I told myself. But this was actually simple laziness that gets me some time, and this was one of the occasions. I was obviously cursing myself when my computer wont start in the morning, and recounting events in my life when I left things for too late. One of them affected me professionally: I was to write a guide for e-learning to be given out to participants in an exhibition and I left it for too late, only to be caught up in a situation where a family member got very ill and had to be taken to the hospital. My relationship with Mike, my supervisor, which was usually excellent and still is, took a nosedive on this issue - Mike justifiably thought I let him down big time.
I have noticed that I do well under pressure and many of my accomplishments, professional and personal, were achieved in a very short time. But that's no consolation, as I almost always told myself that I could do a better job if I had more time. And, the truth is - I never gave myself more time. I always waited till the last moment to work on something. I think this is a big negative in my character and I ought to work hard - and will do so rather publicly in this blog - over next few days to sort this out.
Yesterday, however, there was a good thing to report amid all this chaos. After a real long time, I tried writing by hand. The laptop was backing up and I was afraid to touch it lest it crash again. So, I took up pen and paper to write, only to realize how unaccustomed I got with that medium. Later in the evening, when I decided not to go to bed without first sorting out the promised essay, I picked up bits from whatever I wrote on paper, but then chose the medium I am most accustomed with - this blog's editor. Yes, over MS Word or any such package, as I am far more familiar with this interface now than anything else. This had an upside too - I got the article saved up on the blog archives. Some day, when the article has already been published [or rejected, as may be the case], it will take me a few minutes to publish it on my blog, in its unedited format. Voila!
Yesterday, I watched a lot of TV - couple of movies, one of them was an old classic, The Apartment. I have not seen this before - one where an ambitious employee gives keys to his apartment to his boss to fool around with a girl from office and thereby gets a promotion - though I have seen a similar story in the bollywood version, Life in a Metro, where Kay Kay Menon played the boss and Kangana Ranaut played the girl from office. I also watched Kevin Costner and Ashton Kutcher in The Guardian, an old movie yet again, but none the less, I like both the actors and it offered the necessary distraction while struggling to recover my files.
More TV, and it was interesting to follow Niall Ferguson on Farid Zakaria GPS yesterday. Dr. Ferguson was essentially saying that we are looking at long drawn out recession ahead of us, one where a situation like Japan's lost decade will be the best case scenario. He made an interesting point: He said that the current world economy is driven by a Chiamerica partnership, where the Chinese is producing and saving and the Americans are consuming and spending. He was suggesting that if this partnership falls apart in the weight of the recession - if the Chinese for example stop buying US treasury bills and start using their savings to generate domestic demand, start a massive social benefit programme for example - the United States government will have a particularly hard time recovering from the recession. They, in fact, may not be able to recover from the recession at all - like the British in the 1940s.
This is an interesting point. Because the Chinese have to do it anyway. The growth in China has already slowed and the situation is rather dire, by the reports I hear. China does not have a democratic society and therefore, is bereft of a peaceful mechanism to voice grievances and seek political reconciliation. In short, China can not elect a Barack Obama and make a new start. So, the government has to keep things going and keep things cool, and the most plausible way to do this is to offer a massive social stimulus - to fix its broken health-care system or to bridge the rural-urban divide may be - by spending some of the trillion dollar reserve they are sitting on. However, while this looks like bad news for the moment, as this will mean the US Treasury Bonds will have to be sold elsewhere and the interest rates will rise, this is not so bad news because this will mean the consumption will rise again, this time with a Chinese engine pulling it.
This, incidentally, means a significant shift of perspective for the businesses. Dr. Ferguson expressed his faith on America's ability to innovate its way out of recession. Very true, and I am certain a new genre of entrepreneurs are waiting in the wings to make the best out of this dire situation. They will have to grapple with a new reality though: How to design products and services and sell it profitably to billions of customers who live on less than one dollar a day. Yes, we have already talked about this in Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid. Call it Capitalism's last frontier, if you wish, but this is where the action will be, if the world economy has to move forward from the current mess we have found ourselves into.
Popular posts from this blog
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which
Introduction : The Business of Gift Giving Business gift giving has always been common and contentious at the same time. Business gifts are usually seen as an ‘advertising, sales promotion and marketing communication medium’ (Cooper et al , 1991). Arunthanes et al (1994) points out that such gifting is practised usually for three reasons: (a) in appreciation for past client relationships, placing a new order, referrals to other clients, etc.; (b) in the hopes of creating a positive, first impression which might help to establish an initial business relationship; and (c) giving may be perceived as a quid Pro quo (i.e. returning a favour or expecting a favour in return for something). The practitioners of gift-giving generally argue that doing business is often an aggregation of personal interactions and relationships, and gift-giving should be seen as a natural way of maintaining and enhancing these relationships. ‘Business gifts, especially one given in the course of the festive s
In most societies today, making profits are accepted as moral, if not especially praiseworthy. This was not as obvious as it appears today – people used to be embarrassed about making a profit not so long ago. Crazy as it seems today, it is worth thinking why it was so. Profits, as economists will put it, is the reward for risk-taking, for putting a business enterprise together in the pursuit of an objective. In this definition, remember, profits are not what it is commonly understood to be – the gross middle-line towards the bottom – but a figure net of entrepreneur’s earning [wages for his labour], dividends and interests on borrowed capital, and provisions for building and other physical assets [a sort of rent, offsetting what these assets could have earned if leased out]. This pure profit – surplus – accrues to a business as a reward to its organisation, for the act of entrepreneurship itself. Economists were divided on how this surplus comes about. The conventional wisdom was,
Buzzwords have disadvantages. Right now, experiential learning is one, and that means we put the label on everything and it stops to mean anything. Also, this means reasonable conversation about experiential learning becomes difficult - at times such as this, either you preach experiential learning or you are traditional, antiquarian and hopelessly out of touch. But, overlooking the limitations of experiential learning can cause big problems. Experiential Learning does many things - putting practice at the heart of learning is an important paradigm shift - but not everything, and it is important to be aware what it does not do. Usually, we equate the terms Project-based Learning (the method) with Experiential Learning (the idea) and Learning from Experience (the ideal), treating them as one and the same and using the terms interchangeably. Any talk about distinctive meaning of these terms is usually seen as pedantic, but really represent very different ideas about education.
Today, Helen Goddard, 26, a highly popular music teacher of a City School for Girls, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Her crime was to carry out a year long lesbian affair with one of her pupils, who appeared in the court and admitted that the affair was consensual and it was she who pressured Helen into the affair. For Helen, a bright musician and a devout Chistian, this is an extraordinary lapse of judgement. Also, she was teaching in the £13,000 private girls only school in London. She was surely aware what the consequences of her action will be. The fact that she still could not stop herself tells us that lovers do not always act rationally, something we always knew. There is more in this affair than personal tragedies. For a start, this has all the dramatic elements: a bright, beautiful teacher more in Julia Roberts mould [as in Mona Lisa Smile], a stiff upper lip school [not unlike Wellesley] and a story like Notes On A Scandal with an added twist. Indeed, Helen
Introduction Erna Petri née Kürbs, a farmer’s daughter from Herressen in Thuringia, arrived in Ukraine with her three year old son to join her husband Horst in June 1942. Horst, an SS leader inspired by Nazi ideologue Dr Richard Walter Darré, settled in the plantation of Grzenda, just outside today’s Lviv, to become a German Gentleman-Farmer. Erna saw Horst beating and abusing the workers in the plantation within two days of arriving there, which was, as Horst explained, necessary for establishing authority. Erna joined in enthusiastically, settling into a combination of roles of ‘plantation mistress, prairie Madonna in apron-covered dress lording over slave labourers, infant-carrying, gun-wielding Hausfrau.’  However, there were clear rules in the plantation, and Erna was very much expected to play the woman’s role of being a Cake-and-Coffee hostess. When four Jews were caught in the estate while trying to escape from a transport to a death camp, Horst told Erna and her female
A week into lockdown and things are beginning to change. Mornings are late, afternoons are lazier and evenings never end; meditations are filling out the time for Yoga routines and Netflix profiles are strewn with half-finished movies. This state-mandated, state-funded period of idleness is being likened to being called up to serve, but is nothing like that: Such a comparison is really an affront to the idea of service. Instead, this is just one long streak of panic; of the centre not holding and life not going on as usual. With the usual patterns and rules in suspended animation and business talk - and business - being rendered meaningless, space is opening up for unusual questions: Is Capitalism about to end? Is this the death of globalisation? Does it get uglier from here? My grandfather's generation would have scoffed at us. They saw through wars and pandemics. But, in fairness, we haven't had a life-ending crisis of our own. Notwithstanding the experiences of th
The ‘Why’ Question? Adolf Hitler was appointed the German Chancellor by President Von Hindenburg on 30th January 1933. This was an extraordinary turn of events. Previously, President Von Hindenburg consistently refused to appoint Hitler the Chancellor, despite the impressive electoral performance of NSDAP in July 1932, Hitler’s uncompromising demand of the Chancellor’s post and a repeat election in November 1932 which failed to break the deadlock. Explaining his refusal, Hindenburg wrote in a letter on 24th November, “a presidential cabinet led by you would develop necessarily into a party dictatorship with all its consequences for an extraordinary accentuation of the conflicts in the German people.” The question ‘why’ Hitler was appointed Chancellor, despite the President being acutely aware of what might follow, is therefore a significant one. The NSDAP had election successes throughout 1932, and was already the biggest single party in the Reichstag and various Landtags acros
I wrote a note on Kolkata, the city I come from and would always belong to, in July 2010. Since then, the post attracted many visitors and comments, mostly critical, as most people, including those from Kolkata, couldn't see any future for the city. My current effort, some 18 months down the line, is also prompted by a recent article in The Economist, The City That Got Left Behind , which echo the pessimism somewhat. I, at least emotionally, disagree to all the pessimism: After all Kolkata is home and I live in the hope of an eventual return. Indeed, some change has happened since I wrote my earlier post: The geriatric Leftist government that ruled the state for more than 30 years was summarily dispatched, and was replaced by a lumpen-capitalist populist government. Kolkata looked without a future with the clueless leftists at the helm; it now looks without hope. However, apart from bad governance, there is no reason why Kolkata had to be poor and hopeless. It sits right
Meritocracy is a convenient lie, as Socrates foretold, and it is the ballast of the social system we have built. The story goes like this. Once upon a time, we had kings and queens and their families and nobles, who got the best meat and the best mate, and everyone lived happily. But then the things fell apart as luxury corrupted the nobles and feebled the spirits of their offsprings - and the peasants and the artisans came claiming their fair share. So we had the age of revolutions in Europe and North America, when we created a new, fairer social system, under a 'natural aristocracy of men', where destiny was no longer shaped by birth but by intelligence and hard work, and anyone could make it in life. And, everyone again lived happily ever after. Of course, this did not really happen. Slavery persisted, at least for a long time. The 'fair' system mostly excluded the real peasants and workers and once they have done their duty dying for various revolutions, they were s
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.