Silent Eloquence » Society http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org Silence.Eloquence.Everything in between. Wed, 16 Jul 2008 04:25:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 en Technology and creativity http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2008/03/02/technology-and-creativity/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2008/03/02/technology-and-creativity/#comments Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:06:11 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2008/03/02/technology-and-creativity/ When you start writing an article, what is the first thing you do?

Several years before, the first thing I would have done would have been to settle down in a nice comfortable chair with a blank sheet of paper, a good pen and armed, probably, with a nice cup of coffee. I would then jot down my train of thought, along with the main points of argument and counterargument. I would glance into space every now and then, and think. Then I would arm myself with a list of topics I would want to research deeper and then head to the local library to hopefully get a few books on the topic. At least this is how I remember preparing for my high school essays.

But now, just as I was considering writing my blog post, the first thing I did was Google the words “creativity and modern technology”. With not many hits on what I wanted to write, I tried permutations of the topic and spent a good ten minutes figuring out what has been written on the topic by those before me. Admittedly, a blog post does not have the same bearing on my life as a bad grade in a school essay would have had nor do I have the luxury of time to spend as much time on one post – but somehow, I would like to believe that all those years of school education had some impact on the way I think and write.

Technology has affected the way we create content. I remember the first time I wrote an html page, I had bought a tome of a book on HTML and familiarized myself with most of the commands before writing <html> on a blank txt file. Yet, now if I were to write a Wordpress template, even though I don’t know CSS and I barely remember HTML, I wouldn’t consider reading up. I would start with an old template and work by trial and error, till I am happy with what I see.

So what has been the impact of modern technology on the way we create content? Have the changes been for better or for worse? And how can we maximize what is good about the new change while keeping the less desirable aspects to a minimum? [...]

]]> When you start writing an article, what is the first thing you do?

Several years before, the first thing I would have done would have been to settle down in a nice comfortable chair with a blank sheet of paper, a good pen and armed, probably, with a nice cup of coffee. I would then jot down my train of thought, along with the main points of argument and counterargument. I would glance into space every now and then, and think. Then I would arm myself with a list of topics I would want to research deeper and then head to the local library to hopefully get a few books on the topic. At least this is how I remember preparing for my high school essays.

But now, just as I was considering writing my blog post, the first thing I did was Google the words “creativity and modern technology”. With not many hits on what I wanted to write, I tried permutations of the topic and spent a good ten minutes figuring out what has been written on the topic by those before me. Admittedly, a blog post does not have the same bearing on my life as a bad grade in a school essay would have had nor do I have the luxury of time to spend as much time on one post – but somehow, I would like to believe that all those years of school education had some impact on the way I think and write.

Technology has affected the way we create content. I remember the first time I wrote an html page, I had bought a tome of a book on HTML and familiarized myself with most of the commands before writing <html>on a blank txt file. Yet, now if I were to write a Wordpress template, even though I don’t know CSS and I barely remember HTML, I wouldn’t consider reading up. I would start with an old template and work by trial and error, till I am happy with what I see.

So what has been the impact of modern technology on the way we create content? Have the changes been for better or for worse? And how can we maximize what is good about the new change while keeping the less desirable aspects to a minimum?

technologycreativity

Technology has made it easier to have access to a wide range of resources. With a click of a mouse, we can have access to whole body of work on almost any topic. It has also made the process of content creation less costly, and easier to be achieved through trial and error, which means that I can start without thinking something through. I could dump a whole lot of ideas onto a page faster with a keyboard than I could with a pen. And it is easier to rearrange and sort them out with small mouse-clicks rather than erasing on paper. And given that we are able to be more efficient, and have access to so many resources, expectations people have from us have also increased. In general, higher quality is expected in shorter time. The inevitable march of increased productivity leading to the eventual progress of mankind.

The obvious benefit of all this is that we are indeed a lot more efficient. I can have a well-researched piece ready in about a tenth of the time it would have taken someone of my capacity ten years ago to produce the same article. We don’t re-invent the wheel – before we even start, we can look up whether someone else has written the same article. Throughout history, we find people who have come up with similar results within short time intervals of each other. They obviously had no idea what the other was doing. Modern technology has helped to make the process more transparent. And we could even argue that, as a collective, we make more progress, since each one picks off where the other has left off.

Yet is it all good? Doesn’t the higher productivity come at the cost of less creativity? When there are so many external ideas crowding our mind, are we less inclined to come up with our own? Are we unknowingly and unwittingly pushed towards a path that others have chosen to tread before us?

This morning, as I was sipping my special Sunday coffee and watching the fiery Dutch winds nearly uprooting the trees behind my apartment, my mind wandered to thoughts about the freedom of wind and then, freedom of humans and eventually, how the concept of freedom is just an illusion. I mused that all societies enjoy freedom to varying degrees; none is absolute enough to say we are free and by that token, not free enough to call another “non-free”. By the end of my coffee, I had come to the conclusion that freedom, and here I mean, individual freedom, to have any real meaning, should be defined in the context of an individual. I, as an individual, would hold certain things more important than someone who lives in another country or society and what freedom means to me is very different from what it means to anyone else. That means not just that there is no such thing as absolute freedom, there can also be no universally acceptable definition of degrees of freedom.

Voila! I satisfactorily sipped the last drop of my coffee thinking that I had a good concept for a blog post. And before I started, I thought I would just google some of these concepts and see if I would come up with something. I came up with quite a few academic discourses on the topic, and while I found them interesting, I was also overwhelmed. So much so that I decided the topic was well beyond my capabilities to reasonably write.

Despite Srijith’s encouragement that I possibly had more personal experience living in societies that could easily qualify for extreme ends of a freedom spectrum than most authors of such articles, I couldn’t be persuaded to continue my logical reasoning suitably enough to reach a good conclusion.

A perfect example of an idea that was nipped before it was even born, because of an overwhelming overload of information and because of being influenced by others’ thoughts, before I had a chance to distill my own. I genuinely believe that if I had actually started from a clean slate, and put my thoughts on paper before plunging head on into a sea of Google search results, I might be posting on a different topic today. And I even believe that even if I try again later, my mind has already been tainted by others’ ideas of freedom that it would be with a lot of reluctance that I will reconsider my own notions. However strange and out-of-this-world they might have been, they deserved a logical reasoning before being trashed.

In some ways, technology does hinder creativity and original thought. And the only way to counter it is to balance out what new technology has to offer with what the old school has taught us – nothing beats the power of human thought. No amount of search, synthesis and rehash has the ability to create new content. In the end, you need to use your brain. I, for one, hope that the next time I start writing, I would settle down in a nice comfortable chair with a blank sheet of paper, a good pen, and armed with a nice cup of coffee, jot down my train of thought, uninterrupted.

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2008/03/02/technology-and-creativity/feed/ Something old, something new: Clash between the traditional and the modern http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2008/01/06/something-old-something-new-clash-between-the-traditional-and-the-modern/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2008/01/06/something-old-something-new-clash-between-the-traditional-and-the-modern/#comments Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:30:42 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2008/01/05/something-old-something-new-clash-between-the-traditional-and-the-modern/ Once upon a time, there lived in Malabar, a kingly state of old South India, a master carpenter known as Perunthachan. He was widely known as an excellent craftsman, with unparalleled genius in architecture and design, and is even today credited for the aesthetic brilliance of many temples and palaces in Kerala. Legend has it that when Perunthachan grew old, there was a severe feud between him and his son, who had by then managed to build up a reputation as an architect in his own right.

Perunthachan believed that the ancient traditions of Vastusastra are too sacred to be modified, while his son had more modern notions of how ancient architectural methodologies and theories could be adapted to better suit the changing times. Versions of the tale also mention that Perunthachan and his son also disagreed on the relevance of caste system in society – the young carpenter was in love with a high caste Brahmin girl and wanted to marry her while Perunthachan strongly resisted it, believing it to be unacceptably antagonistic to age-old traditions. In a rather tragic and drastic ending to the story, Perunthachan is said to have killed his son and thus put an end to this father-son feud.

That is the story of Perunthachan, an old folklore of Kerala that dramatizes the clash between the old and the new. A story that has remained popular even in the current era, as a sign of how the clash between the old and the new is as relevant now as it as has always been.

Most of us would have been confronted with the old versus new question at some point in our lives. If you are from an eastern culture, respect for everyone and everything that has walked or been on the earth longer than you has probably been ingrained into you from the moment you were born. Even in the so-called modern cultures, people cling onto traditions they know and you frequently hear stories of people who have gone to extraordinary lengths in search of their roots. Antiques are usually valued many more times than an object of the same functional value, but with a shorter history to claim. From my own experience, my treasured early childhood memories include curling up next to my aged grandmother, and listening to mythical stories or sometimes, just to the news on the radio. It was not just a grandmother’s love or the excitement of the stories that made those moments special – at some level, I cherish those moments as the only links to a distant past I would never live in or which I can relate to only through words and pictures.

Why, you may ask, do we have this fascination for the old? [...]

]]> Once upon a time, there lived in Malabar, a kingly state of old South India, a master carpenter known as Perunthachan. He was widely known as an excellent craftsman, with unparalleled genius in architecture and design, and is even today credited for the aesthetic brilliance of many temples and palaces in Kerala. Legend has it that when Perunthachan grew old, there was a severe feud between him and his son, who had by then managed to build up a reputation as an architect in his own right.

Perunthachan believed that the ancient traditions of Vastusastra are too sacred to be modified, while his son had more modern notions of how ancient architectural methodologies and theories could be adapted to better suit the changing times. Versions of the tale also mention that Perunthachan and his son also disagreed on the relevance of caste system in society – the young carpenter was in love with a high caste Brahmin girl and wanted to marry her while Perunthachan strongly resisted it, believing it to be unacceptably antagonistic to age-old traditions. In a rather tragic and drastic ending to the story, Perunthachan is said to have killed his son and thus put an end to this father-son feud.

That is the story of Perunthachan, an old folklore of Kerala that dramatizes the clash between the old and the new. A story that has remained popular even in the current era, as a sign of how the clash between the old and the new is as relevant now as it as has always been.

generations

Most of us would have been confronted with the old versus new question at some point in our lives. If you are from an eastern culture, respect for everyone and everything that has walked or been on the earth longer than you has probably been ingrained into you from the moment you were born. Even in the so-called modern cultures, people cling onto traditions they know and you frequently hear stories of people who have gone to extraordinary lengths in search of their roots. Antiques are usually valued many more times than an object of the same functional value, but with a shorter history to claim. From my own experience, my treasured early childhood memories include curling up next to my aged grandmother, and listening to mythical stories or sometimes, just to the news on the radio. It was not just a grandmother’s love or the excitement of the stories that made those moments special – at some level, I cherish those moments as the only links to a distant past I would never live in or which I can relate to only through words and pictures.

Why, you may ask, do we have this fascination for the old? Why is it that we continually look back, even as we live in the present, and strive to build the future? Perhaps it is an extension of our attempts to answer the enduring question of where did we all come from. Perhaps we think that the everyday questions that puzzle us might have been solved by someone else before us. Perhaps we hope that we can learn from the mistakes of the past, so we might be spared the dangers of a wrong choice or decision. Perhaps it is nothing so noble – just that letting go of the past may plunge us into a future that we are not yet ready to face.

Whatever the reasons that drive our reluctance to let go of the past may be, willingly or unwillingly, we are all part of a changing world. From the primordial evolution, through the rise and fall of nations, to the incorrigible onslaught of new technology, the one universal constant is the inevitability of change. Just as you cannot see both sides of a coin from one perspective, in order to make way for the future, we need to give up some part of our past. It has been said that we must die one life before we can enter another, an apt statement if one considers that substantial changes are often life-altering.

Almost as constant as change itself is the resistance to change. Almost every new invention or theory has faced opposition, directly proportional to the amount of the past it made us give up in order to embrace the future. Galileo Galilei was thrown into prison and had to face the wrath of the Inquisition for postulating, ahead of his time, that the universe revolves around the sun. Hippasus of Metapontum is rumored to have been drowned at sea for discovering irrational numbers. In a less violent example, closer to our homes, the ubiquitous television that is a part of every modern home and now is itself in danger of being extinct was called the “idiot-box” by dissenters, just about two decades back. When emails became a prevalent form of communication, complaints about the lower frequency of letters from the new generation were a constant topic of conversation among those less eager to accept the electronic over the paper version.

As I recently strolled through the streets of Marrakech, an Islamic town heavily influenced by the modern notions of the European nations to the North, I was impressed by the wide range in the dressing styles of local women – on the one hand, you can see modern style short skirts that seem to challenge the cold December night, while on the other, you have the heavily covered black purdahs that veil everything except the eyes, almost as an attempt to fade into the darkness of the same night. It can well be argued that the choice of what to wear is more often dictated by fashion than tradition. However, it can hardly be denied that, it is also an indication of a personal choice of how much tradition to uphold and how much of modern fashion to adopt. And this question is as relevant even in less controversial topics. Should I send a perfumed letter to my lover or a quick sms text? Should I visit my brother at his home to find out how he is doing or should I throw him a sheep on Facebook and wait to see what he throws back? Should I cook turkey for thanksgiving or can I use this opportunity to show off my new Cordon Bleu skills to my family? – Many of our choices demand that we make a choice on how much of modern conveniences we are adapting to, while giving up on old traditions sometimes forged during the lifetimes of those that came before us, sometimes during our own.

Regardless of whether we move forward or not, the world around us is moving. And even if we are moving, someone else is moving at a pace faster than our own. The aim is not to be the first in the fast-paced race. But the struggle for survival dictates that we shouldn’t get left behind. At least not by a lot.

Like a flowing river, let us not try and get rid of all the sediments brought to us by generations before us. Instead, let’s sift through them, take out the best we can, yet not be afraid to add our own. So, when we reach the sea, we are richer, better and stronger than the innocent spring that sprouted out on the mountain tops.

How much should we adopt of the future, even as we are reluctant to let go of the past? What should we throw away? What should we keep? And how much can we add that is our own? It is a conscious decision that each individual needs to make for himself or herself. Being aware of that choice and its many ramifications is probably the best way to ensure that we are at peace with our decisions and with our pace in this world.

(Image courtesy: Srijith)

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2008/01/06/something-old-something-new-clash-between-the-traditional-and-the-modern/feed/ Random notes on Singapore http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2007/05/26/random-notes-on-singapore/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2007/05/26/random-notes-on-singapore/#comments Sat, 26 May 2007 15:39:36 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2007/05/26/random-notes-on-singapore/ 3quarksdaily has a well-written piece on Singapore.

It is true that changes are afoot in a nation that – after the Asian Financial Crisis, and the terror caused by the spread of SARs – realised its government could never offer it complete protection. The bargain for freedom from want in return for silent cooperation was not legitimately struck. It was based on the false notion that Singapore was a nation in charge of its own destiny rather than a small sliver of land, smaller than the dot that represents it on the global map.

It made me think of my last trip to Singapore, a couple of months back. Every time I visit Singapore, I am surprised by the pace of change. I, in my nostalgia, try to seek out places I knew from before, and am constantly reminded that I am oh-so-outdated.

But this time, I was struck by the number of foreigners. I still remember the time I first came to Singapore. The year was 1995 - sure, there were some foreigners around, but we felt like foreigners - I mean, we felt like we were a minority - as I assume, foreigners in any country are supposed to feel.

I was in Singapore for just a day and had way too many people to catch up with - so I set up shop at a cafe near Millenia towers and as I had cup of coffee after cup of coffee with friends who managed to sneak off work for a coffee break, I indulged in one of my fav pass times - people watching - and I was more than amazed by the proportion of foreigners - almost every other person seemed to be a foreigner!! And for the first time, I heard murmurs of dissent among my Singaporean friends, and we had some lively discussions on the topic.

I don’t quite get it - why is the Singapore Government so desperate for foreigners? Do they really need so many foreigners - to perhaps, the extent, that you have to ask who is the minority here? I can only imagine the government has a plan - and a good one too - that is behind this mass import of “talent”. But none of my Singaporean friends seemed quite able to explain to me the rationale behind the policy. Which begs a bigger question. This is just one of the many policies that the Government makes on behalf of the citizens. I wonder, without due political participation and debate, why do the people assume that the Government will get it right every single time? What if they are wrong?

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2007/05/26/random-notes-on-singapore/feed/ Multiple careers: Are you relishing your side dish enough? http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2007/03/29/multiple-careers-are-you-relishing-your-side-dish-enough/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2007/03/29/multiple-careers-are-you-relishing-your-side-dish-enough/#comments Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:07:35 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2007/03/29/multiple-careers-are-you-relishing-your-side-dish-enough/ An essay on the increasingly popular phenomenon of simultaneous multiple careers

Multitask Deny it all you like, but most of us lead multiple lives. Not in the schizophrenic way, but in the “One person - Many interests” kind of way.

Gone are the days in which one person could be slotted into one career - the days when you were a doctor or an engineer or a lawyer or a musician or a writer or a janitor.

A lot of people straddle multiple professions - often vastly different from each other - sometimes sequentially, but increasingly simultaneously. The corporate lawyer who composes music during his free time. The railway clerk who writes furiously at night hoping to publish his first novel. The engineer who is a closet activist. The doctor who volunteers to build homes for the poor on weekends. Or the musician who runs his online outsourcing company and buys a Porsche. While some of these characters are figments of my imagination, there are many like them who are very real. To cite just one example, Shashi Tharoor is someone who never ceases to amaze me. How does he churn out so much writing - books, columns, the whole enchilada - even when he is holding a full-time job at the UN? Well, why go that far - if you hold a job and you run a successful blog - there you go, you are one of the subjects of this post.

The Rational Reasons

The truth is, we are moving into a world where people can’t just do one thing. Be it in the course of one’s life time or in the span of five minutes, we are seeking to do multiple things. Multi tasking is the norm - it is no more just a necessity, it is also a choice.

The reasons for this are many - Firstly, it is a safety net. With decreasing job security, people don’t want to have all their eggs in the same basket. Say, you work in the semiconductor industry and it is going to hit a downturn, aren’t you better off if you could run a dance troupe while you out of your job? Secondly, it is because we can. With the proliferation of internet and several other technologies, we can do much more in a shorter time frame. We could run an internet company while we keep a day job. You can be an online trader. You can find out people who would buy the second-hand goods that you like to sell on Sundays.

Thirdly, societal expectations are pushing us towards it. I know, I know, I said it is a choice. But thin is the line that separates peer pressure from choice. Did you really want to smoke the hash the first time you did it or did your friends subtly prod you towards it, by expecting you to. If everyone around us has a “second life”, who wants to be the loser who doesn’t? Fourthly, the additional income. If you have money, the world is exploding with things you can buy and do. Why wouldn’t you take up another vocation if it can bring in some extra dough? And finally, what about the excitement of variety? I used to eat bee hoon for lunch every day through the winter and spring of 1996. Even a cheese sandwich would have seemed gourmet to me then.

Be as common as it is, this phenomena is not well understood or well managed - by those who engage in it and by those who need to support it.

Lets start with the employers - the ones who need to let us earn our daily bread, lest we starve and can’t spend time on our side careers. And the ones who could, if they like, benefit from it.

The Evil Employer

One of the great debates of our times is how to attract and retain talent. Now, one new innovation in the area - from none other than the mighty Google - seems to be to keep the employees glued to their job all day long and all night long. Ok, I am exaggerating. But behind the carwash-on-campus and the hair salons and the gourmet kitchens and the dry cleaners, the real intention is to free up enough time so that employees can spend every waking minute thinking about their jobs. Not a bad strategy, really. But here’s the skinny on it. We are living in a world where ADD is becoming more and more prevalent - hell, you won’t even be labeled as having ADD if you can keep your attention on one topic for more than 5 minutes - the very definition is being changed by innovations such as Twitter. And soon, it will be humanly impossible to dream, eat, sleep and live your job as Google seems to expect its employees to do.

Now, I am not saying Google is evil, just that its strategy may be flawed. The way to attract and retain people is to let them be themselves - allow them to explore their multiple dimensions, spend time out of their jobs, so that when they are really at their jobs, they are productive and at their best. The diversion will only do them good. Employers who give long term sabbatical to their employees are the ones who are getting it right. So are those who allow flexible hours, and part-time work - they not only have a larger pool of potential employees to choose from, they also have a more re-energized workforce who is at their best in the smaller amount of time that the company pays them to sit at their desks.

What else could employers do? They could actually promote employee’s external interests. Encourage inter-company SIGs - it need not all be of the money-making kind. If there is a bunch of wine enthusiasts who would like to start a wine tasting club, then provide them the ability to find each other within in the company networks. Someone wants to start a fitness academy (which incidentally one of my colleagues just did) - let them use their corporate contacts to get clientèle. That entrenches them deeper within the company than the best gourmet kitchens can. Now, I understand the conflicts if what you do for your job and what you do in the side are too similar. But chances are, the interests are divergent enough. If not, clear boundaries, rather than a complete No-No would be better. There are many more things that employers can do, details of which would make for an entirely new article, but the bottom line is, Encourage the employees’ external interests and provide them the flexibility to pursue them, rather than demanding they are at their job every waking minute - chances are they will choose you over your competitor. And continue to stay with you.

The Zealous Selves

And how about us - you and me - who are passionate about our “second lives”?

Be it your passion, be it your choice, be it your solace from daily drudgery - truth is, it is not easy to maintain a secondary line of career. Even a post on a blog requires you to spend precious time and brain space. So, what do we need to do,in order to have our cake and eat it too?

First, recognize and acknowledge. There are several of us who don’t even realize the multiple “jobs” we handle. The career woman who after spending eight hours on the job, comes home and starts her next shift as the family’s chef. The blogger who doesn’t account for the amount of time he is spending on posting something new for his readers every day. The wanna-be musician who spends two hours a day practising after a long day spent at his tiny cubicle. True, they are all labors of love. But even labors of love can have a toll on your life. You must admit to yourself the time you are spending on them, so one fine day you don’t wonder whether there is an abyss where your time is disappearing into. Also, it would be a pity to discover too late that there was some place else you would rather have been. Let the decision to spend time on anything be a conscious decision. If you are consistently spending a substantial amount of time of your life on anything, be sure to acknowledge it.

Prioritize and choose. This sort of stems from the first one. If you sit down and think about all the “side things”, sometimes, and for some people, we are not talking about two. But several. Recently, I met a management consultant who spends about 60-80 hours a week, advising corporations on their strategy. He also volunteers on the board of a non-profit organization. He is a member of the choir of his local church. Not to mention that he is considering writing a book on the latest thinking in strategy - a job that will no doubt require not just typing words, but hard-arse research. I talked to him, who seemed to manage everything with a smile. And even seemed to have enough time to spare to talk to the likes of me. Well, talk to his wife and a completely different picture emerges. We all get overworked sometimes, even when we don’t realize it. Especially when it is spent on multiple things. Carefully consider everything you want to do - and choose one. This is already a side. If you have sides for your sides, some things are going to spill off your plate sooner or later.

Carve out a time and a schedule. If you are serious about something, do something serious about it. There is no point trying to carve out a career as a musician if you are going to go through your day pining about your music, but when you get home your hands are too tired to lift up your viola. And you are never going to make it as online trader, if you don’t spend enough time understanding the market. Even though it is a side, it requires time and effort. The extent of time spent, and the seriousness of the targets set may depend a bit on what you are doing, and why you are doing it. Nevertheless, if you want to have to have a side career, you should at least give it a decent shot to make it successful.

Let all those around you - from family to friends to most importantly, your current and future employers - recognize it and give you credit for it. Let no one call you a loafer just because you come home to spend time behind a computer screen, trading virtual goods on Ultima Online. Or if you spend a good part of your weekend practising with your local jazz band. That makes you a musician, no less than the one who doesn’t do anything else in his time free from playing music. When you write your CV for your next job, build in your alternative career into your skill set. I will wager you might have learned as much or more from those efforts. As important as recognition, is support. If your wife adamantly opposes you freelancing as a web designer in the weekends, it is best to engage her and convince her, just as you would have done, had she disagreed with your day-time job.

And last but not least, remember to give yourself the occasional pat on the back or the kick on the butt, depending on what you deserve.

The Digressive Detail

I just realized that I have probably mixed up several degrees of involvement in a secondary career path in the definition of the side dish that I wanted to talk about. Even though the specific issues you would face were you pursuing your passion as a hobby or trying to meet your ends meet by putting extra hours into the dreaded second job may vary, I believe the issues discussed here remain relevant across the whole spectrum. I couldn’t think of a more apt word - when our plates are full, don’t we just call the dish on the side, the side dish?

The Quixotic Question

So, now, its your turn - pray, tell me, have you had/ do you have/will you have a side dish to the main course of your life? Are you relishing it or not just yet? What worked for you and what didn’t?

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2007/03/29/multiple-careers-are-you-relishing-your-side-dish-enough/feed/ A step-by-step introduction to Indian Institute of Politics (IIP) http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2006/11/22/a-step-by-step-introduction-to-indian-institute-of-politics-iip/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2006/11/22/a-step-by-step-introduction-to-indian-institute-of-politics-iip/#comments Wed, 22 Nov 2006 01:44:14 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2006/11/22/a-step-by-step-introduction-to-indian-institute-of-politics-iip/ Isn’t it about time we established an Indian Institute of politics?

Any executive running a publicly traded business would have either formal training that equips him for the job or years of apprenticeship working at various levels in the company or long experience in the industry or in many cases, all the three above. But what about our dear politicians who make million dollar decisions affecting the lives of billions? Even though India likes to claim that she has highly educated politicians based on two data points, arguably the most important two (P and PM), you and I both know that they are more the exception than the norm. There is nothing in our political system that makes sure that people who make the decisions know what they are deciding about, or even that they are competent enough to understand the options before them.

In the interest of ensuring every citizen of the country has an equal chance at governing us, let us introduce no pre-screening (though, I am very tempted to argue in favour of this). Imagine the elections are over, and the reality of what they promised their voters have just hit the candidates. When it comes to election campaigns, the feasibility and economic soundness of a policy ranks way below their probability of increasing a politician’s popularity. This probably means that in many cases, they have no clue what lies ahead. Or they have a skewed one-track mind. What could be a solution to the issue at hand?

Indian Institute of Politics: There is an undeniable need to establish a Indian Institute of Politicians (IIP) - an educational institution aimed at India’s politicians, run by academics and experienced practitioners, accredited by a university, with a curriculum transparent to the public and media. The mission of the institute would be to ensure that our politicians have the necessary skills to do their job.

Skills assessment: Before any politician is allowed to make a decision that changes the course of our future forever, they should pass a basic skills asssesment test. The test would assess them on the fundamentals of public policy, their understanding of the processes and their awareness of the impact of their decisions. Everyone needs to pass this test before they can be sworn in / appointed to top posts.

In-depth knowledge assessment: For areas they are directly responsible for, every politician should be able to demonstrate a sufficient degree of understanding of the issues, concerns, options and challenges as well as the history of all policies made so far, along with their outcomes. Now, this may be tough for someone just elected to power, though I see no reason why someone would take up a job they are ill-equipped to do. In the spirit of generosity, we could let them attend classes for three hours a day, five days a week for one whole month, where the academics at the Indian Institute of Politics would teach them, methodically, all they need to know. Till then, they can do their usual chores of smiling for photographers, attending ceremonies, kissing babies and whatever else they do, while spending a fair portion of their day studiously attending classes and reading books, so they can start their real job - the first salary slip depends on their receiving satisfactory grades (anyone has any ideas on controlling access to bribes till they pass their test?)

Continuing education: Throughout the course of their tenure, politicians will be aided through regular training. Every decision maker needs to attend two relevant training sessions of one week each, every year. Politicians will have regular access to the university where academicians can help them to identify what courses would best suit their needs, and tailor programs for specific departments.

Communication skills: In addition, every politician should be taught basic communication skills, chief among them being the virtue of brevity and the use of facts to make arguments. Too many of us have been tormented by rhetorical speeches which contain no substance and seem to go on forever. We would even be open to the use of power points to accompany speeches, as long as packs are kept to less than 20 slides per session.

If you think all this is far-fetched, I urge you to take a look at the professional development department of any major company. And then compare the impact of a decision made by, say, a brand manager against that of a nation’s policy maker. I have no doubt that you would agree with me that the investments would be well worth it. Even from the politician’s perspective, they deserve on-the-job training, just like the rest of us, so that they can develop professionally and be better at what they do.

For our better lives and better future, IIP is not an option, but a necessity.

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2006/11/22/a-step-by-step-introduction-to-indian-institute-of-politics-iip/feed/ Don’t hold your breath for women to bake the cakes http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2006/11/21/dont-hold-your-breath-for-women-to-bake-the-cakes/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2006/11/21/dont-hold-your-breath-for-women-to-bake-the-cakes/#comments Mon, 20 Nov 2006 22:17:29 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2006/11/21/dont-hold-your-breath-for-women-to-bake-the-cakes/ Lucy Kellaway, columnist at Financial times and author of “Martin Lukes: Who Moved My BlackBerry“, bids farewell to the flexibility fad, while predicting doom for working women, over at Economist’s The World in 2007 special:

The image of the juggling part-time mother will belong to the past. Instead, the school gates in prosperous neighbourhoods of London and New York will be filled with former bankers and lawyers, baking cakes while their husbands are making the money.

She also says that the term “work-life balance” will be old news, as will be “part-time working” and working from home”. In a rather shocking article which doesn’t depend on any facts, Kellaway puts forward these predictions, without even sparing a thought for why it may not be the case.

“Indeed, the increasing talk of work-life balance has gone hand in hand with more work and less life. The term is still routinely used but has lost its resonance and in 2007 it will start to sicken and die. ”

Here’s why Kellaway is wrong:

There is a global war for talent, which is about to intensify to unprecedented levels. To save myself the trouble of any data collection, let me point to a survey by the same magazine just a month ago. Now if we apply our every day economics, where there is a shortage of labour, labourers have more bargaining power. And if they have more bargaining power, they would easily negotiate for working conditions that would include work-life balance, part-time work as well as working from home. Why wouldn’t they? Wouldn’t employers rather have a part-time employee than no employee?

And what’s with the fall in the number of women executives? Kellaway continues her predictions:

“In 2007 there will be no rise in the number of women in senior positions; in fact the number will fall. HR professionals will continue to worry about this, but decision-makers will not be unduly alarmed.”

Look around you, the number of women at positions of power are steadily rising. Wasn’t it just a couple of weeks ago that we all heard about Nancy Pelosi? Wasn’t it just a couple of days ago that we all read about Segolene Royal? Open up today’s WSJ and you can read about 50 powerful women in the business world.(recommended link)

I look around me, and I see part-time workers everywhere in my workplace, and at all levels. When I am not required to attend meetings at the work place, I have the freedom to work from home. I admit I still see people who work 80 hour weeks and I could probably count myself among them. But, I do see people around me who have made successful careers by working 30 hour weeks too. I frequently get invited to work-life balance conferences. I see no slow down in the horizon - just more acceptance and more flexibility.

The Economist definitely has a lot of great predictions for 2007. But I would wager a bet that this is one that they would get wrong.

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2006/11/21/dont-hold-your-breath-for-women-to-bake-the-cakes/feed/ On Microfinance http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/09/21/on-microfinance/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/09/21/on-microfinance/#comments Wed, 21 Sep 2005 18:47:11 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/?p=111 Here is an encouraging article about Microfinance that was featured in Women’s eNews today. Nothing particularly enlightening about the article, but it is good to see that awareness and interest about microfinance is extending beyond the realms of finance and credit.

The article highlights how microfinance as a whole has grown by leaps and bounds in the last decade or so.

“After growing by between 20 percent and 40 percent a year for the last decade, microfinance now involves about 10,000 lenders and at least 50 million borrowers.”

But the writer also cautiously reminds readers that there is plenty of room to grow - with almost a half of the world’s population still not eligible for traditional financial services, the work has just begun.

The article high lights two issues - high interest rates and high cost per transaction. While the cost of transaction will go down eventually with increasing scale, participation of bigger financial institutions and better infrastructure, the high interest rate issue deserves a little more attention.

Littlefield says that while such rates are high, they are still much lower than the alternative, where informal moneylenders offer rates that often exceed 10 percent a month.

A study by the Consultative Group indicates that a standard moneylender loan in the Philippines is the “5-6 loan” requiring that for every five pesos borrowed in the morning, six must be repaid by evening, a daily interest rate of 20 percent.

Sure, compared to a 20% daily interest rate, any interest rate is going to look like a steal. But when it comes to pricing, microfinanciers should look beyond the service they are replacing. It should not be just a case of “There is no other alternative for them. We can get away with it, so lets charge a slightly higher rate”.

If the profile of the microfinance customers consistently show good credit rating, as they do in many parts of the world, they should be eligible for good competitive pricing. As many governments seem to have learned the hard way, the way to guarantee this is not to impose interest rate ceilings (I am not a fan of any ceilings, but if I had to choose between two evils, I would go with a ceiling on profit% earned, ensuring a reasonable margin for the microfinanciers). But the right way to fix the interest rate problem is to increase the depth of the market and develop sophisticated technologies and credit rating systems, so this segment can be sufficiently analysed and reasonably priced. Hopefully, more competitors entering the market would be just the right push in this direction.

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/09/21/on-microfinance/feed/ No offence intended http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/07/10/no-offence-intended/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/07/10/no-offence-intended/#comments Sun, 10 Jul 2005 06:56:58 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/07/10/no-offence-intended/ “Oh, I know a great joke. But, before I start, let me just say - please don’t be offended”. Before even waiting for an answer, someone goes on to narrate a crude joke about say, your country, your language, your culture, your beliefs or anything else that you may hold dear. If you have lived in multicultural societies, chances are the above mentioned scenario may not sound all that unfamiliar. “Its just a joke” - does that prefix really absolve the “joker” of all sin?

I genuinely believe that most people who indulge in such culturally insensitive jokes do not have any malicious intentions. Very many of them even heartily believe in the power of the above disclaimer. But what exactly do you expect me to do? If I am in a group where I am the sole representative of the population that you will be laughing your head off in about five minutes, do you really expect me to laugh with you? But then rebutting it wouldn’t be polite, because you of course had the holy disclaimer. I may not question the factual accuracy or the humor in your jokes - in fact, in my free time, I might even laugh at them myself. But while laughing at oneself as an individual is often easy, laughing at yourself as a member of a community or country is hard. I have listened to my fair share of Indian jokes and as much as I would like to think I am immune to them, I am not. And its not just me - I have the opportunity to meet and interact with people from different countries around here, and its common to hear jokes about the different cultures. As much as everything seems hunky-dory, if you would bother with subtleties (and sometimes not so subtle tones), the undercurrents are not as still as the surface seems to be. People are usually just polite to say anything about it. But mostly they are uncomfortable with such jokes, even when not directly made at them.

The funny thing is that most of the people who make culturally insensitive jokes are incapable of handling it, if the tables are turned. I am very bad at rebuttals in such situations - blame it on my upbringing, the fact that I am against them in principle or maybe just that I am not sharp tongued enough to respond in time with a caustic retort - but through the years, my response has been silence. But in my last job, I had a fellow Indian in my team who wasted no time listening to such jokes - whether they were served with disclaimers or not. To pick a mild example, when my Chinese colleagues would bring up people running around trees in Indian movies, he would have something to say about the flying counterparts in Chinese movies. 9 times out of 10, it would achieve its intended effect of shutting them up - but also, it would have considerably dulled the mood at the table.

To me, the disclaimer or intent has no relevance in this context. Its like placing a trampoline next to a building and pushing me out of a third floor window, for everyone else’s amusement. Sure, you placed the trampoline - you intended no harm. And you even told me that I am going to be pushed down - you preempted your joke with a “No offence intended”, didn’t you? Maybe I am not physically hurt from the fall - but the push is humiliating. And I had no choice but to be pushed. If I protested or pushed you back or even, just did not laugh with everyone else - I am the wrong-doer - the person who took the joke in the wrong spirit.

I believed that lie all these years. When people told me that it was meant in good faith, I thought it was really my fault that I was feeling bad. After all, I should be able to laugh at myself too. But that is just bullshit. “Society” conditions us into thinking that we should accept insensitive jokes and laugh with people who laugh at us - only because such people don’t want to take responsibility for their actions. They just push the blame around. But you know what, its not going anywhere. In an awkward situation created by an insensitive joke, only the person who said the joke it is to blame - and perhaps, the people who laughed with him. Though, sometimes the onlookers are just confused about what to do and choose the path of least resistance.

Its about time that people who make culturally insensitive jokes realise that it ain’t all that funny after all - offence intended or not.

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/07/10/no-offence-intended/feed/ Microfinance : What can we do? http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/06/30/what-can-we-you-me-do/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/06/30/what-can-we-you-me-do/#comments Thu, 30 Jun 2005 16:50:43 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/06/30/what-can-we-you-me-do/ As the G8 summit looms near and the publicity for more aid and grants reverberate more than ever, I am reminded of the unassuming yet important cousin in the developmental policy family that everyone tends to forget - microfinance (mF).

2005 is the year of microcredit, but one will be hard pressed to find many large-scale mF projects on a global level. I can’t help thinking its because they are less jazzy - giving away a billion dollars in loans, be they micro or not, just doesn’t sound as noble as giving away a million dollars, just like that. And the politicians are, as usual, swayed by jazz. Sad, but true.

However, I think the common man stays away from supporting mF only because it seems to be too distant a concept and perhaps, inaccessible. Like something only banks, governments and NGOs should be worried about and can do something for. It also doesn’t help that a lot of mF literature are full of jargon. But there are several things, albeit small, that we can do about mF - after all, it takes many little drops to make the vast ocean.

So, heres my list of how we - you and me - can help in promoting mF:

1) Choose banks that support mF activities - just like you frequent cafes that use recycled paper cups and buy shoes that are not manufactured in sweat shops.

2) When you support NGOs or non-profit organisations, consider one that has mF activities. Or when a company tells you that they donate, say 1% of their profits from you, to a non-profit of your choice - choose one that supports mF.

3) When your less fortunate household help or painter or plumber or farmhand or anyone that you might know, asks you for a loan that you are unable to provide, take the time to help them find out mF institutions in your locality, educate them about it and get them in touch with the right people.

4) And if there is no NGO in your locality that supports mF, perhaps you could spare some time and the initiative to get one started. Or maybe campaign for starting one. Or when the next Panchayat or Municipality elections are round the corner, bring this up with the candidates. Or when a non-profit asks you for donations, talk to them about including mF initiatives in their activities.

5) The next time you invest, consider securities that are microfinance related. (Disclaimer: Please don’t construe this as financial advice), but consider contributing a small percentage of your investible cash to funds that may be supporting mF funding. Most financial advisers may not proactively suggest these, but ask them to find out and readjust your financial portfolios (according to their well-informed advice).

6) Be aware - and educate.

If you are not convinced that you should support mF, read some of my arguments here. Or better still, imagine yourself in the shoes of a less fortunate person. Wouldn’t you rather receive loans than alms? Wouldn’t you rather be given the helping hand to be an entrepreneur than be a beggar? Wouldn’t you rather be taught fishing that be given a free fish today?

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/06/30/what-can-we-you-me-do/feed/ What women want - they never get it right, do they? http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/06/19/what-women-want-they-never-get-it-right-do-they/ http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/06/19/what-women-want-they-never-get-it-right-do-they/#comments Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:19:15 +0000 Surya http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/06/19/what-women-want-they-never-get-it-right-do-they/ A recent article in the Economist,”Sex changes” claims that glass ceilings are giving way to glass partitions. That is, women are indeed making inroads into careers that were traditionally male dominated, but they are choosing to do so only in certain areas of these professions. And they are choosing the lower paying areas.

Maybe people are just sick of the usual gender inequality rhetoric and they just want to sing a different tune, but for a reputed magazine like Economist, I would say the case needs to be supported better by more data and analysis. The only trends shown in the article shows an increasing trend of women in the three male dominated professions they have chosen to analyse. But when it comes to driving home the point that there are less women in the higher paying areas, the numbers presented are sketchy and inadequate. When making a claim like this, it is insufficient to use “anecdotal evidence” to “suggests that few female commercial barristers return to work after having babies“. And the “worries” of a a member of barrister’s guild about “those mothers who do return to the commercial bar will revert to type, taking only short, low-profile cases” just ain’t evidence either.

About the Church of England example, the evidence that “the most recent figures show 314 women training to be non-stipendiary priests, compared with just 200 men” isn’t enough to say that “women priests also show a preference for non-stipendiary (unpaid) work“. Yes, the absolute numbers are higher, but what really needs to be compared in this case is the % of women vs men. The article further states that “whatever their pastoral value, such clergy are less likely to secure the top jobs in the Church, if they are ever allowed to apply for them“. Perhaps that is precisely the reason that women tend to apply for non-stipend work (if that claim is indeed true). The clergy profession, in its very essence, is service-oriented and without the motivation of being able to apply for higher pastoral jobs, they take up unpaid work. This is not glass partitions, it is a glass ceiling for sure!

A publication like Economist tends to be taken seriously, and when they make claims about changes in gender trends, one wishes that these claims will be well researched and well analysed. There just isn’t enough evidence in the article presented to make these claims. It goes against my common sense that well-educated women, who have worked as hard or more (given that some of them may have faced discrimination, they might have had to work harder) than men to attain their qualifications, will just sit back and choose to be working in the less paying areas of their professions. Its not always about pay too - the higher paying ones tend to be the most challenging and most exciting - and any self respecting professional would not want to excluded from the fun.

If indeed the claims are true, a good analysis would go beyond the superficial reasoning of thats “what a girl wants” to what the underlying reasons for this trend are. Is it because women are better suited for these jobs? Or are they being pressured by their family commitments to take up professions that are less taxing? Do their spouses have ridiculous egos that resent wives who get paid more? Are women who paid more less attractive socially and hence, there is a subconscious negative selection of higher paying jobs? Or is it the expectations of the society that women have to be paid less and thus, even when they are forced to break the glass ceilings they have to replace it with the glass partitions? Or is there a wrongful distribution of pay in the professions, which HR managers need to look at? The possibilities are endless, and without adequate research, one can only speculate. And this is the kind of analysis I would have expected Economist to make before laying out such claims.

]]> http://silenteloquence.suryaonline.org/2005/06/19/what-women-want-they-never-get-it-right-do-they/feed/