Knowledge Vs Experience Vs Creativity

Dear members,

Recently, two graphics were going viral on various WA groups and on Linkedin. The first graphics had two images that described the difference between knowledge and experience. The second graphics had three images and it described the difference among knowledge, experience and creativity. There is lot to learn from these graphics. Whoever was the originator of these two graphics, the person deserves kudos.

In the second graphics, if we look from the left side we find the order of the images as knowledge, experience and creativity. However, movement need not be in sequence and it is possible to jump directly to the creativity. To be creative, one need not have experience. However, can an experienced person do what creative person did? Chances are remote as experience forces us to fit oneself in the pattern. Breaking the patterns is a difficult process. Experience teaches us to make a linear movement whereas, creativity demands non-linearity.

There is a lesson for the top leadership and consequently HRs, who are obsessed with the experience. Most of the time, the recruitment and selection is based on the experience. This brings a situation wherein all the employees working in particular company or department have similar experience. This helps in maintaining the continuity of the existing processes without flaw. In fact, leadership gives rewards for maintaining continuity. But this brings a contradictory situation in its wake. On the one hand, leadership wants continuity that originates from the past but on another hand creative solutions too. This is nothing but running with hare and hunting with the hounds.

In the second graphics, the creative person has drawn image of a cat. Possibly before drawing the image, he might have tried several times and erased the wrong one images. This is nothing but “experiment”. Therefore, the second lesson that these two graphics teach is that creativity cannot flourish without experimentation. Out of sheer fear of failure, people are wary of doing any experiments. Leadership can take lead in removing fear of failure. Some losses are inevitable because of the failed experiments. However, it can be recovered once the experiment succeeds.

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar

Today’s Topic For Discussion – Role Of Consultants

Dear members,

On one of the WA groups of HR, Administrator of the groups, Mr Rajaram Thorve, had raised the topic for discussion. The topic for the discussion was on role of consultants. He had raised the following questions:

Q. 1 Is the consulting more lucrative profession than working as full time professional in the organization?

Q. 2 Are the consultants working as the change agent for organizational development?

Q. 3 Can the consultants work as the authorised signatory to sign any denomination cheques and documents of the organization?

Q. 4 Why aren’t the consultants held responsible for execution of any strategic plan or process to be able to get desired results or failure of any project or financial mess?

Somehow, I could not give my reply to this discussion. I have given the reply today. The replies to his questions are as below:

Q. 1 Is the consulting more lucrative profession than working as full time professional in the organization?

Reply: – To be a consultant, need not be lucrative per se. There is a limit to their earning. Today senior management professional in India earns anything between Rs 25L to Rs 1 Cr. How many consultants earn that kind of profit is a matter of debate. If they have that kind of capacity to earn, they do not remain as consultants and start their own company. Secondly, many persons enter into the profession of consulting after their retirement. Nevertheless, they may not have a zeal to grow. They consider it as just a “time-pass” activity. Others may start consulting before their retirement, but there could be few other reasons. In few cases, persons become unemployed in the mid of their career and to hide their unemployment, they become consultant.

Q. 2 Are the consultants working as the change agent for organizational development?

Reply: – To give the reply, first it merits clarification on the role of consultants. Consultants are Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). Because of their past tenure in various companies, and especially in MNCs, they acquire unique knowledge and skills. Once they feel that they no longer required to do regular work, they share their knowledge by charging some fee. Consultant’s role is advisory. They themselves cannot be change agent per se. Change agent has to be somebody from the organisation especially CEO.

Q. 3 Can the consultants work as the authorised signatory to sign any denomination cheques and documents of the organization?

Reply: – Consultant’s work externally. Therefore, generally organisations do not authorise them to sign important documents or financial instruments like cheque. Unless there are some vested interests, consultants are not empowered to be authorised signatories.

Q. 4 Why aren’t the consultants held responsible for execution of any strategic plan or process to be able to get desired results or failure of any project or financial mess?

Reply: – Consultant can help in preparation of the strategic plan but execution is always the responsibility of CEO or MD. What if there is mismatch in the actual strategic plan and it’s execution? Why consultant should be held responsible?

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar

Topic for discussion – Should Organisations Sponsor Seminars & Higher-level Education Programmes

Dear members,

On one of the WA groups of HR, Administrator of the groups has raised the topic for discussion. Today’s topic for discussion is on *Should Organisations Sponsor Seminars & Higher-level Education Programmes*. He has asked the following questions:

Should organizations sponsor higher/professional education of employees and or reimburse the fees paid by employees?

Should the company management allow or give special concession/leave for employees to attend seminar, Conclave and events to upgrade their knowledge?

Should the organization on its own organise workshop, seminar for employees or depute employees on payment seats?

I have given the replies to the above questions and these are as below:

+++++

Dear Rajaram,

Replies to your questions are as below:

Q. 1 Should organizations sponsor higher/professional education of employees and or reimburse the fees paid by employees?

Reply: – When organisational sponsor higher/professional education course, it is called as sabbatical. Whether to sponsor or not depends on the nature of the course. Therefore, the decision has to be taken on case-to-case basis. On completion of the course, once the employee resumes his/her duties, or even before he/she goes for sabbatical, generally company make a contract agreement with the employee to ensure that employee serves for at least ‘x’ years on completion of the course. In few cases, reimbursements are made on completion of this period.

Q. 2 Should the company management allow or give special concession/leave for employees to attend seminar, Conclave and events to upgrade their knowledge?

Reply: – The benefit of attending seminars or conclaves is that the nominated employees gets a chance to interact with the persons from his function who are working in different industries. This is important otherwise, employees continues to live in a myth that their industry is different. The second benefit is that it widens the mental and intellectual horizons of the employee. It may not be possible to measure the direct ROI on the funds spent for nominations to the seminar. Whether to give special concessions and what kind of concessions to be given has to be decided on the case-to-case basis. There cannot be general rule as such.

Q. 3 Should the organization on its own organise workshop, seminar for employees or depute employees on payment seats?

Reply: – Organising in-house workshops and nominating employee for a public workshop both have their merits. Nevertheless, measuring ROI is easy in former than latter. In-house workshops are customised to the requirements of the organisation. HR Department knows very well what needs to be increased or decreased and in-house workshop becomes means to attain that goal. In contrast, in the public workshop, individual gains the knowledge. How many HR departments do follow up of implementation of the learning by the nominated employee is a moot point.

Final Comments: – Whether the in-house workshop is conducted or employees are nominated for the public workshops, events, seminars etc, it comes with cost. Many organisations do not recover the cost because of the following reasons:

a) Many times attitude of the participants is to relax during the training/seminar because they wanted to be away from hustle-bustle of their workplace.

b) Many times, participants are not told clearly as to why they are attending the in-house the training. The goal statement is not defined. They start asking to the speaker what is the agenda.

c) Sometimes employees have some personal work in the area where seminars are conducted or the city in which the evens/workshops are conducted. They use their influence to nominate themselves. They pretend that they are interested in gaining knowledge but the real motive is to visit that city or that area.

d) Indiscipline and unpunctuality is also a huge problem. Participants continue to get constant calls on their mobile. To attend the “most urgent” or “emergency” calls, they go out of the hall but in the bargain they distract themselves and others too.

e) Sometimes disturbance by the bosses is also a huge challenge. In a country where boss is always right a dogma, can any participant dare not to take his/her call?

f) Sometimes it is wrong nomination by the company. While efficient persons are made to work in the company, not-so-efficient are told to attend seminars, training etc.

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar

Second Anniversary of Exit of Vijay Mallya

Today while India is celebrating the colour festival of Holi, not many remember that it is also an anniversary wherein Vijay Mallya fled the country. Few also would remember that government was caught napping when Vijay Mallya fled the country as much it was when Nirav Modi and Mehul Choksi fled the country.

India is no where close to getting back Vijay Mallya. Yes, the case is going on but notwithstanding bravado of BJP spokespersons on getting Mr Mallya back, outcome of the case is uncertain. Though India has extradition treaty with England, hardly it has worked in India’s favour. Economic offenders can roam scot free in England.

Modi government, if they had ounce of wisdom, could have prevented royal exit of economic offenders. All that was required for Finance Minister or even Prime Minister to give directions and find out solution on how to circumvent future exits. But hang over of 2014 clear victory even in 2016. Modi government was self-possessed, they did not see any political threat and winked at Mallya’s exit.

Once bitten twice shy goes the proverb. But Modi government become shy after second bite. But then to govern a country, what demands is wisdom. Mere having shyness is not sufficient. Has Modi government become wise? Even die-hard bhakts also do not vouch for that.

Modi government went scot free when Vijay Mallya fled the country because it enjoyed the benefit of doubt. With the fleeing of Nirav Modi and Muhul Choksi, the score with the Congress has become even. People are disappointed that this government is laid back as much the previous government was. By chance if the third such exit happens, Modi government could lose all the credibility and it might have to pay huge political price.

Mr Narendra Modi came to power with development agenda. But then Modi government failed to realise that in addition to development, the ruler should be able to create a sense of deterrence. Mr Modi had mocked opposition for not having sufficient chest measurement. The scams show that deterrence cannot be linked to the chest size. Electorate are at least assured that Mr Modi will not talk about his 56-inch chest in the 2019 election!

Was Mr Modi’s Interview to Arnab Goswami Ploy to Counter Dr Subramaniam Swamy?

Yesterday, out of the blue, we watched Prime Minister Mr Narendra Modi interview to Arnab Goswami, Chief Editor of Times Now news channel. This was first ever interview of Mr Modi since he came to power. Arnab Goswami went further, and at the beginning of the interview, told that this is the first ever interview of the any Prime Minister on the TV news channel. Arnab has been interviewing politicians. However, each time it came with sufficient advertising. When Arnab had interviewed Rahul Gandhi in December 2013, the Times Now channel was doing its advertisement almost for two days. For Times Now channel in general and Arnab Goswami in particular, interview of a Prime Minister was a killing. Even then also why viewers came to know about the interview only at the beginning of the day and not much earlier?

This is the first ever interaction of Prime Minister Modi with the media. For the last two years he has kept media at the bay. Even during the height of the intolerance controversy, mob lynching at Dadri in Utter Pradesh, terrorist attack at Pathankot airbase, Prime Minister remained reclusive. Why then he felt need to give up his reticence?

Generally, Arnab Goswami is unsparing in his political interviews. In his own words, he asks “open and direct questions”. But in yesterday’s interview of Prime Minister, Arnab was not what he generally he is. He could have asked few follow up questions. He did not cover few topics at all.

The list of the areas that Arnab did not touch is a long one. Arnab did not ask anything about stake sale in public sector units, award wapsi because of intolerant environment, arrest of the students at JNU and so on. Arnab did not even ask about nexus between Sushma Swaraj and Lalit Modi, now exiling in UK. In the words of Times Now news channel, it was a first “scam” of the NDA-II government.

Arnab dealt superficially about defaulters who are residing abroad. Prime Minister gave his cursory reply. Regular viewers of Times Now channel expected from Arnab a pointed question about Dr Vijay Mallya. When Mr Modi became Prime Minister in May 2014, Vijay Mallya was as much defaulter as he was when he left the country in March 2016. Who gave him long rope? Can it be possible without patronage? Arnab not just disappointed but let down the expectations of his viewers.

The noteworthy question was about exit of Raghuram Rajan, present governor of RBI. Prime Minister told in unequivocal terms that Raghuram Rajan is as much patriotic as anyone else and raising question about his integrity is a publicity stunt. It appears that the whole interview was to send a message to Dr Subramaniam Swamy.

Not that Mr Modi is facing attack from within for the first time. Arun Shourie launched his attack when Mr Modi government was eleven month old. Mr Shourie launched his diatribe twice. Occasionally Mr Yeshwant Sinha, former foreign and finance minister during NDA-I regime, also ranted against Modi government. None of the attack had ruffled Mr Modi’s feathers. BJP has ignored shots from loose cannon like Shatrughan Sinha, a sitting MP in Lokshbha. What is different now?

The old brigade in BJP is above eighty or nearing eighty. They are all arm-chain politicians. Their geriatric kerfuffle is always ignored. Mr Shourie is not member of BJP. But then he does not have his political base as such. BJP acknowledged his criticism for the first time but later it ignored twice.  In contrast, Dr Swamy though about eighty, is a vibrant politician. He has filed suit against Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi in National Herald newspaper case. He is also crusader of Ram Janmabhoomi temple at Ayodhya. He is active on social media like Facebook or Twitter. He does not have his voter base but he has sufficient netizen base.

Shrewd politician like Mr Modi understood threat that may emerge from maverick like Dr Swamy. BJP has borne brunt of Dr Swamy’s activities twice. During Janata Party regime from 1977 to 1979, when BJP was not formed but was part of the Janata Party, Dr Swamy was instrumental in the downfall of the Janata Party. About twenty years later, Dr Swamy was at his best in the downfall of Atal Bihari Vajpayee government. Today, he is bête noire of Sonia Gandhi but it was he, who had organised meeting between the then Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu Jayalalitha and Sonia Gandhi. The meeting led to the loss of trust vote of Vajpayee government.

Dr Swamy has been sending tweets about high ranking officials of the Ministry of Finance. Before that he had launched attached against Mr Raghuram Rajan. The snub of Dr Swamy in the interview, as media calls it, is nothing but warning to the errant leader. But then why Mr Modi has chosen media rather than having a tête-à-tête with Dr Swamy is a mystery. Upshot of the interview could be loss of credibility of Arnab Goswami for providing his shoulder to the Prime Minister for firing at Dr Swamy. It is unlikely that Dr Swamy will take it lying down. Expect more fireworks in the coming months!

What is Organisation’s DNA?

Dear friends, in some another forum a query was raised on what is organisation’s DNA. I am forwarding my reply on this forum.

+++++

Dear friends,

There is a query on organisational DNA. Let me clarify it from my side.

The concept of DNA used here is to denote a blood quality. When a particular activity is done generation after generation, certain skills are developed naturally. No special training is required to develop these. In Indian context, various communities like weaver, blacksmith etc. developed their innate skills.

Organisational DNA is developed when over a period a typical quality is developed. Take the case of Google. Sooner Apple launched its first iPhone in 2007, within just 10 months Google came up with Android OS for the mobiles. Only Google could have achieved this feat and no one else. In contrast, Nokia, though a well-established mobile manufacturer, could not come up with any phone that can match iPhone even after five years of its launch.

So what is the difference between Google and Nokia? Response of Google originated from their culture of innovation that has become way of life for them. Therefore, we can say that innovation is in the DNA of Google. This DNA of innovation is originates from very high IQ level of its employees. It is often said that Google is not a company but a separate planet of brightest persons on the earth.

The another company that has innovation in their DNA is M3. The company always introduces newer products into the market. When they observe that they have sufficient competitors in the market, they just abandon the product and move on to next one. Therefore, introduction of newer products and taking first mover advantage is in DNA of M3.

Japanese companies are not known for innovation. Nevertheless, their ability to produce defect-free products is well known. Therefore, DNA of the Japanese companies is quality products.

Quality products apart, Japanese companies like Toyota Motor Corporation (TMC) are also known for their operational efficiency. Therefore, acquiring cost leadership through operational efficiency is in the DNA of many of the Japanese companies. Teamwork is also is in the DNA of Japanese companies.

Sooner company’s name is uttered, what thought occurs to one’s mind in fraction of second reflects the DNA of that company. German companies are known for their strong and sturdy products. Strong emphasis on R and D is in the DNA of German companies. I do not know latest news, but one time Robert Bosch use to patent 10-15 products per day!

Organisation’s DNA is different from organisational culture. This is because culture has composite structure of too many concepts. While organisational culture can be studied, DNA cannot. Nevertheless, organisation’s DNA is produced from the organisation’s culture.

Take the case of Indian software companies. Most of them have very good organisational culture but then none could produce a world-class product. Be it Java or Dotnet or any other language, all are produced in USA. This is because Indian software companies were primarily service companies and doing they never thought of creating something new.

In India, L and T is famous for their ability to handle not just large but complex projects as well. Therefore, L and T’s DNA is complexity of the projects. Another organisation that merits mention is Mumbai’s Dabbawalas. These tiffin carriers have such a strong network that per day more than 200,000 containers containing home food are handled. It is heard that even six sigma is inadequate to measure their efficiency. Therefore, working in teams, networking is in the DNA of these Dabbawalas. They have achieved this feat without any formal training.

Hope I have clarified the concept of organisational DNA.

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar

 

Hypocrisy of Indian Secular Parties

This is about the fakery of the secularism of the Indian political parties. The parties that profess secularism with their every breathe, the trouble with them is that their secularism starts with BJP-RSS bashing and ends it with it too.

Right now I am watching debate on Times Now on validity of the triple Talaq. The very woman who received Talaq through Speed Post, is on the panel. She has filed suit in Supreme Court challenging the validity of the triple Talaq. She is the second woman to do so after Shaira Bano.

The question comes why women were forced to approach the Supreme Court. If the triple Talaq is unconstitutional, then why none of the secular party brought the bill to annual practice of triple Talaq? What held them back? If triple Talaq is annulled even in Muslim countries as well, then how Indian Muslims are different from the Muslims from the world over?

This is how these the so called political parties give chance BJP to prove that how these parties are pseudo-secular.

In the year 1987, Supreme Court gave verdict in Shah Bano case and made it mandatory to pay maintenance allowance to the divorced Muslim women. The then Rajiv Gandhi government had brought legislation to override the Supreme Court verdict. The legislation absolved Muslim men to pay maintenance. It was a great regressive step of the Rajiv Gandhi government. Thirty years later, possibly Modi government may face similar situation.

When ordinary persons knock the doors of Supreme Court to protect their fundamental rights, it exposes ideological hollowness of our political parties. Essence of secularism lies in stopping discrimination because gender. But then expediency of vote bank politics overrides this essence then naturally our 100% secular parties fell to to this expediency. How long will this go on? Mulayam Singh Yadav, Lalu Prasad Yadav, Nitish Kumar, Rahul Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi, Communist leaders of all hues, will you please take a lead in bringing bill to parliament to stop discrimination against Muslim women?

 

How to conduct Manpower Attrition Analysis or Employee Turnover

Check the following link to read my reply:

http://www.citehr.com/519562-employee-turnover-report.html#post2211229

AAP’s Victory or BJP’s Humiliating Defeat on Delhi Assembly Elections 2015

The electoral drubbing that BJP has received in Delhi Assembly Elections was unimaginable. While political pundits will analyse the causes, I feel the following are the reasons:
a) Taking electorate for granted
b) Over-sale of brand Modi
c) Bringing outsiders into the party and giving them tickets. It is shame on BJP that they could not develop leaders even after 50-60 years of existence in the Delhi
d) Because of (c) above, there was internal sabotage. Without internal sabotage, it is impossible to achieve defeat of this kind
e) Thinking that money power gives the win. It is known truth that tickets are sold internally.
f) Rampant corruption in Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) where BJP is in power. BJP Govt did not do anything to reduce the corruption.
g) Finally people remembered 49-day rule of Arvind Kejriwal. During his tenure he had created a deterrent effect and corruption at MCD or by Delhi Police was reduced.
h) BJP lost votes of Government servants. This is because he is tough task master and average government employee did not like a leash of discipline that Mr Modi has imposed.

Is this post-visit diplomatic jerk?

When Mr Obama visited India, at the fag end of his visit, he had reminded Indians about religious tolerance. Barely ten days passed since he left India and he has given one more statement about India on religion. Is this post-visit diplomatic jerk?

Indians were overboard because of Mr Obama’s second visit to India. He is the first president to witness Republic Day functions. His acceptance to guest for the Republic Day was considered as diplomatic victory by Mr Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister.

When Mr Obama visited India, in his welcome speech, Mr Narendra Modi, referred Mr Obama with first name. Generally in international relations or diplomacy, heads of state are never called with first name. However, it was departure from protocol. Mr Modi had told further that he has developed “personal chemistry” with Mr Obama. Critics wagged that how can anyone develop “personal rapport” or “friendship” within just eight months in power?

The second statement on religion has created brouhaha in India. English media had debates on the statement of Mr Obama. Participants in the debate told that Mr Omaba should be sternly told to mind his own business and not to infringe on the sovereign matters of India.

In diplomacy, there are no permanent friends or enemies. There are only permanent interests. It is time for Mr Modi to take a note that country like USA will always give primacy to their interest over “personal chemistry”.