Kaala - Some Probing Questions...

To start with a disclaimer: I believe in equality and my views should not be twisted in the name of religion, caste, colour or creed. My view is that when we observe things, be it a movie or a theatrical or an event, we are influenced by our upbringing and our own biases, beliefs and ultimately we see it through those multi-coloured lenses. Some quotes to start setting my write up:

Desmond Tutu “When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land.”

EVR : “While all men are born as equals, to say that Brahmins alone are the highest and all others are low as Pariah (the Untouchables ) or Panchama is sheer nonsense. It is roguish to say so. It is a big hoax played on us”

Swami Rāmānuja (Sri Vaishnava Guru) the first of his 82 commandments “Serve all devotees without regard to their status.” For the uninitiated, Swami Rāmānuja’ espoused equality and sought a lower caste “guru” to initiate himself and then went on to do social engineering (and this was a 1000 years ago and during a period when discrimination was supposed to be at its heights and none of the western religions or EVRs weren’t even around). The irony is that today within Swami Ramanuja’s context, even amongst the Srivaishnavas themselves, one does not get equal treatment, let alone Dalits or Thirukulathar, the way Ramanuja named them to socially blend the downtrodden.

Pa. Ranjith’s Kaala is quite contextual to read alongside these quotes. It’s a movie of struggle for land ownership among the downtrodden and can be seen as anti-establishment (especially the current Indian ruling party) as well as anti-Hindu.

Kaala has reminded me of the purpose to which I had aspired in my earlier parts of the life. Even though I have been cocooned in a plush environment in the last 15 years, during my schooling, I grew up in an economically challenged situation back home. Those days, there was a rebel in me that helped to see things differently. But being a rebel is not enough to understand a Dalit’s mindset and struggle.  I had an opportunity to spend some time through the அறிவொளி iyakkam to serve  the downtrodden in 1994. Though an overnight camp was enough to give a feel for the pain, to understand truly, one needs to experience it inherently from birth. 

My immediate honest reaction after the movie was sheer frustration and that Rajini has fallen!

Then my soul searching and questioning mind took over. These key questions came up, also I read a negative review about the movie. Sometimes to see light, one needs to experience darkness. The negative review made it clearer or gave me an opportunity to look positively. In my view Kaala brings many contradictions and nuances. I sincerely hope everyone takes a positive bit out of it, as opposed to get blinded by their inhibitions and beliefs.

Contradictions and nuances: (the way I see them...)

1.  Why would a spiritualist like Rajini agree to a movie like this especially when he is allegedly associated with the ruling party’s principles ? He’s someone who’s acted Raghavendara to Linga all that espouses hard work, spiritual quest etc. He is also known for selecting his movies carefully.
2. If he wanted to cover communities for the sake of votes, he could have done a Muthu.
3. Is he that gullible to fall into Pa. Ranjith twice!?
4. If he believes in the superficial script of Kaala, why say the exact opposite in Tuticorin?
5. Kaala's son a vegetarian but also a body builder - goes on to save his dad
6. Beef shop just in front of Kaala's house
7. Rap Song after the death of an young guy
8. Ravana kavyam in the background with Ram followers trying to usurp the land
9. Kaala has a big image throughout the movie, but only once he gets into a fight and rest of the movie he is being protected by his people
10. He doesn't drink, except for once when he drinks, something bad happens and he regrets for that
11. He almost romances his ex-lover and manages his wife as well (as opposed to a conservative cinematic view)
12. Both Kabali and Kaala have pro-Dalit themes

The biggest nuance of all, is that for many years Kaala, the leader has done little for his people, yet lives in a spacious big individual house,  has his family around him, all his kids are educated in one way or another, and well settled. He has a nice sporty, trendy jeep for himself, but hasn't done constructively anything for his folks in the slum, not even a decent place for morning doodies. This is the hidden biggest message that Ranjith tries to portray in my opinion. 

The so-called leaders are not prioritising what needs to be done and are unable to make step-change or a systemic change to the lives of downtrodden. Sometimes to win the war, some battles have to be lost - to move from an underdog status, Kaala doesn't think strategically but carries his battles for another day. This is the biggest contradiction of all. - Do we go with development or deal with slow, yet steady change? (and the rappers would sing, tell us kaala, now what to do? - he doesn't have any answers?!)

The problem of land struggles, discrimination, step-motherly treatment by the establishment etc. are problems, not just for India, across the world, for a long time such struggles are going on. Maybe that is why African return Zaareena featured in the movie as Africa return. (Hence my quote from Desmond Tutu). Well known is the fact that China has been usurping Africa and its natives, so did the west in the yester years. West or East, Capitalism or Communism, governing powers maybe seen as discriminating and marginalising the downtrodden. Africa is the biggest living example. Should India allow itself to be manipulated in the name of anti-development or should it 'sacrifice' and develop its people in the Capitalist model? If the answer was so easy, we wouldn't have this movie or we would have developed the whole world.

We are in times of conservative nationalism and protectionist regimes, in such times, it takes more guts to treat everyone equally and it's not easy. Kaala asks probing questions to both left and right, to the ruling and opposing and to the downtrodden and the so called 'settled'. 

Kaala can come back to life in reel-life, but not in real life - so do you fight and loose the opportunity to live now? Hari dada has everything and continues to live happily (even after Kaala kills him, his family would continue to enjoy the benefits), Kaala has enough comforts and his family surrounds him during fun and grief; whereas the ordinary is left to dream for a future and doesn't seem to have an answer to live for the day. That's the take-away Pa. Ranjith wants everyone of us to think!  The clue is in Rajini's interview where he says Pa. Ranjith is such a nice guy, his best quality is he wants everyone to live happily. To live happily compromises are necessary.

The way i see it, Rajini initiated himself into spiritualisim mainly through self-made gurus and not the usual 'madams' that espouse the varna system. This is where Rajini's true spiritualism shines. Both Kabali and Kaala with Pro-Dalit themes have found support from Rajini and he may be purusing a systemic change by appealing directly through their view of the world.

Swami Ramanuja knew equality was difficult to attain, but livelihood and day to day living is more important, hence he reset the system in Srirangam and brought people from all sects to participate in temple administration, this was a step-change and systemic-change in 1100AD. That gave a way for people from different sects to blend socially and a means to feed the starving as well as the hope that one day we will be equals. We needed a spiritualist to do that. At times i think the DMK patriach Kalaingar realised very late and the best he could do was telecast Swami Ramanuja's life and the need to do something here and now, but not oppose everything just for the sake of opposing.

Can Rajini reset the system and bring a spiritualistic progress where everyone has a means to live with a level of satisfaction?

All views are strictly personal

360 days back...

Headline - About an year back, India voted 4 change; Change is visible, but when issues are systemic and deep rooted, it takes time; The broad direction is still hazy and fundamental "step change" plans are unclear.

A lot of my friends have asked me, I send a lot of memes on RaGa and AK67 but none Modi. In fact memes on AK67 have died out as well. Simply because both of them are down in the business and the noise has gone down. RaGa also has started to get his sleeves rolled up, but till a time the shi(f)ts in Congress are visible, memes will continue.

Year 1 Review: CAG has just published a view about our situation on military ammunition stock and the number of fighter jets is also under the minimum advised stock level (re. French deals). India's national security has been dealt in such a careless manner by previous rulers, Media should stop treating UPA with kids gloves (Coalition never would have stopped them on this count) Seriously don't know why SoGa or RaGa (MMS) have not been asked about this question on the above two highly important national concerns;

Sorry it seems like I digress, but this is a fundamental point to take note when we discuss/measure two government performances - the baseline has been so poor. Performance has to be compared against a baseline. Our media and various BJP spokespersons should set this when in a fortnight's time, every Indian Media team will be reviewing Year 1. The Y1 performance should be on a baseline on a key set of factors that is in the scope of Union government- If Media doesn't measure do it this way (I am sure none of the outlets would do), then people who read this should reflect on the baseline.

First my disappointments:

1. Indian PM talked about so many acronyms - where is the policy for skill development? This I remember was his main point - What is the direction and strategy on Skill development?

2. Indian PM recently spoke about democratic values to the Times - why doesn't he set-up something up a forum like NITI Aayog, where all Parties debate on policies regularly and use Parliament to rubber stamp on important policies? This is healthy for democracy but more importantly opposition's voices can be then managed pro-actively? - Handling of bills and opposition has been appalling

3.  To top it all, the messy handling of agriculture sector - the land-bill and how this whole sector has been dealt has frustrated me

I believe on an actionable strategy (In the last sixty years, Nehru & Vajpayee were the ones who showed a strategic and actionable shifts, Indira rode on Nehru's back). Overall and aspects of strategy has to be communicated, even if the government doesn't have a clue - The way hype was created before election, I expected a roadmap of strategic changes - Some changes are taking shape, however a comprehensive direction and policy/approach is missing and that would set the discourse in right direction.

With, the absence of thought leadership in previous 10 years, I was hoping to see some strategic shifts - The two areas with a bit clarity 1) in International policies, 2) "intent" in centre-state joint governance. Apart from these two, there is little clarity on many key topics.

So here you go this is what I am frustrated with BJP government and Modi.

Some positives to note: no scams till date, swift action on auctions (though on SC push), interesting policy debates on NJAC (see what has happened last week in Chennai HC), swift relief on international operations, setting the perception about India in international stage, no riots till date, no terrorist incidents (touch-wood), approach to NITI Aayog, even Nitish has started getting cosy with Modi, Mamta di is now on board smiling.

So all in all, it is not as scary as UPA and associated Media outlets have been projecting. To emphasise again, one needs to compare the government against the base line and also some of the scary thoughts that Media members like Guha, Shiv N etc. were projecting - nothing of that sort has happened.

1 Subtle but strong Voice P. Chidambaram has been writing about the Government and its actions regularly in Indian express since day 1 and has been putting up very good arguments - Except PC no sane or clear views from Congress.

Will I vote Modi again? - Yes (still no alternative from any National party)

NB1: A lot of us debate on multiple issues when we talk about Modi's governance, but we forget about what are Centre's responsibilities, where it ends and what are state's roles... This complicates the debates big time...

NB2: The comments and discussions that happen between UPA vs. NDA or Pappu vs. Feku is slowly edging into borderline riots in the internet arena... This is not safe, the Media should find a way to manage this... a lot of anonymous and false ID comments are twisting the debates into Hindu vs. non-Hindus - this is a very dangerous and alarming trend. It has to be Media, if Modi intervenes on this, a lot of us will say that the government is curbing Media freedom.

NB3: I have omitted a lot of areas of interesting happenings and issues - simply because it is just Year 1 and expecting changes all of the place in Y1 is too much. Let us wait till 2016, when RS strength would get shifted...

Bye for now!

AAP: Ada Assattu Pasanga Party

It happens only in India - Govinda's infamous song comes to my mind as I see the comedy show AAP. If anything AAP has achieved, it is that they have underlined their stupidity, in-experience and have made sure, no new party can rise to challenge of BJP & Congress for the foreseeable future.

I have expressed previously that I am not a great fan of Gandhi's "adam-pudikkum" non-cooperation movement, even though it helped us to get freedom. It is a bad practice and a bad example for not only kids but also for democracy. Anyway it worked in 19th/20th century, but it is not a valid tool anymore. Today for every other challenge one does a dharna in India. In the absence of an information medium, one man fasting and dharna created ripples, but today you have the instant judge and lightning fast judiciary arms such as 24x7TV, Twitters and FB's. If a message needed to be conveyed and acted up on, it can be made possible. Instead what does AAP do? Dharna!!! I digress...

Modi has been Gujarat's CM since 2001 and has successfully implemented some or other schemes (because the moment Modi's achievements are mentioned, someone will come with a % based statistic to disprove - btw % is one of the most abused measure). Except for a few, most would agree that he has delivered 24x7 electricity, Sabarmati re-furb and a few other schemes... More importantly no riots since 2002;  in addition he has convinced his party across multiple states (Gujarat, Goa, Maharastra, Bihar hmm actually, all of BJP's state functionaries) PM nominee and all these in highly charged hostile, step-motherly environment.

Compare that with this guy AK from AAP; An IIT-ian, and also an ex-IRI fellow. or Compare him with UP's CM...

In spite of the hostile environment, did Modi not participate in democracy? did he not go to all-CMs meeting? (Unlike JJ from TN, Modi never walked off  from the CM's conference or sent a second rank minister) did he not meet our MMS - 'Mutta Mestri' Singh and seek solutions for Gujarat? Even though he received very little help from MMS & Co. He has done something... Has he not? Instead of tearing up the letters from Centre (like our RaGa), Modi always engaged Central government and persevered. Think along these lines, one would see that Modi is a better democrat and a governor.

AAP and AK have taken Gandhi (I mean Mohanchand not Rahul) and applied his idea directly. It is akin to a developer copying code, without realising the context...(I have copied code, but will fully re-modify ;) )... The point is Dharna would take you only that far; Gandhi himself was well aware of its value and hence he went to the round-tables and other participative means to keep the conversation going. Also a less discussed fact that Gandhi was the power centre and he allowed other leaders to join the government, embed the party leaders into governance(even prior to Independence). If AK had truly understood Gandhi (Mohanchand & Sonia), he would have let Yogendra or someone else become the CM and remain as AAP's functioning party leader. Thus he could have kept the movement going (if it was his primary motivation). This guy has gone overboard and will soon lose his sheen, dampen aspirations further.

India needs better governors, not these Asattu pasanga...

Mumbai T2: Why do we need to spend lavishly?

My friends in India are quite pleased about the way T2 has been done. Needless to say that Media are
excited about T2.

The Hindu: "The T2 terminal is touted to be larger than Singapore's Changi T3 (3.80 lakh sqm) and London's Heathrow T5 (3.53 lakh sqm)"

Ibnlive: "The four-storey glass marvel, whose design has been inspired by a dancing peacock"

NDTV: "The terminal boasts of tens of thousands of artifacts and paintings, housing arguably one the largest collections in the world at an airport."

Indiatoday: A three kilometer long 'art walk' titled 'Jaya He' has been built inside the T2. It displays Indian art pieces between the 8th century and 19th century

Is it actually worth it for a developing country like India? While we try and throw spanner into Mangalyaan type of space projects, actually these T2 type of wastages should be culled. This a classic example of just copying existing implementations, with no attention to what is actually required today and in future. Actually India has gone beyond aping the western world's model of airport building.Who defines that airports should be built in such a way? If the passengers can get in and out in a queue, receive their bags in time and fly out & in in-time then the purpose is well served.

I read on the net that people on average spend 4-10 hours on airport layovers. I also understand for Airbus a380  needs more landing space, but where is the need for a lavish layover when there is a billion people in the country who would need a lot more space in future.  There is an argument that if you are stuck in delays, then the layovers could be useful to spend your time. Seriously? I don't think this is a sound argument... if you are stuck because of delays, you may be keen to window-shop but would you go visit the art gallery? I think if you did, you might miss another flight and get further delayed.

Why is nobody thinking about alternate designs and building things suited to Indian context? In fact this should be the case for all countries. When the world is reeling in recession and billions are starving, Countries need to plan and build in a sustainable way. As internet and Kinect type of technologies are enabling virtual presence, business related travel might actually start to drop off over the next few years. Leisure and tourism might be the key travel reasons, Even if this is not the so - why overload airport infrastructure for very little returns? The maintenance cost over years is going to mount on the public. Am I the only one who is concerned about such extravagant, no-purpose layovers?

Let me clarify that I am not against building new terminals or expanding infrastructure, I only advocate for minimalistic and effective use of funds, acreage in such infrastructure projects. There is no point in competing with China or West on these projects. There are also additional indirect expenses like electricity utilisation, people and maintenance costs. This money could have pooled for building multiple bus-stands or local train stations.

Above all, not many would know that India's aviation policy under UPA-2, allegedly 200,000 seats a week has been magnanimously given to middle-east sector through Jet-Etihad deal (Ref: https://medium.com/p/ab752d0cf543). If this is the case, how will T2 operate successfully as a Hub?

Literally on a very bad foundation, a multi-story T2 has been built. Even if the above posture of Jet deal is a farce, still it begs the question - why should India lavishly spend on airports in a needless and meaningless race of sprawling airports? 

Bee for Boss: Don't underline your ignorance

"Don't underline your ignorance" - Those were the golden words from my dad as he was reviewing my test papers. I have mentioned this previously in a post. I remembered this quote again as I read through our "Boss's" speech.
I said to myself: Boss, who is going to call out that the emperor is wearing new clothes?

True to this storyline, no one is calling out that our Boss is not wearing any clothes and parades before the Confederation of Indian Industry, a non-profit body for that works with the government for advancing policies and strategies for all industrial sectors.

In this setting our Boss starts with a storyline that in 1991 people thought we are travelling in elephants and praises the Industry for giving us the advancement, but then goes on to say in 2012 (over 20 years), that a lot of migrants are still travelling in overcrowded trains and shamelessly admits that he, the Boss allowed an empty-pocket entrepreneur to buy him a cup of tea! Please some amateur story writer has penned his speech, apparently he lost it (see above video).

I am shocked how could Congress let loose such a guy on CII? Aren't those CII leaders ashamed? These are top Industrialists and they have lost a few hours. No one has called out and said he is wearing no clothes... How? are you not scared that tomorrow if such a guy leads a government, that your industries may loose out? our Boss will makes us not only empty-pockets but make us buy a chai and say this is the spirit!

Two things to single out from his speech. 1. A man on the white-horse and 2. Bee-hive theory

Re, A Man on the white-horse: Not only in India, but across the world, millions of stories about a single individual in many fields over many years have changed the course of history. We have our own 'Original' MK Gandhi, Narasima Rao (who incidentally started the change in 1991), His great grand-dad, grand-mom all have single handedly influenced the Nation. The point about hearing a billion voices is fine, but even the bee-hive needs one single queen. In the west, there are many such tall leaders like Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, Margret Thatcher, etc. who have altered the course of their Nations - in some cases through their teams, in some cases personally leading the charge. Even though Cricket is a team sport, many a times we see and read the Captains knock. - I say Boss don't underline the ignorance. Interestingly towards the end of his speech, our Boss starts mentioning individuals like "Sam Pitroda, Krishnamurthy, Sreedharan, Nandan Nilekani(?! Narayanamurthy?)" - so he is now contradicting his own thought process, where he higlights individuals who have made the change, if instead he had said the organisation names, I would say he believes that no one man can change things...

Re. the Beehive, A writer in the Universal Magazine for May, 1800, has penned:
"Thou art a fool, thou busy, busy bee
Thus for another to toil;
Thy master waits till thy work is done,
Till the latest flowers of the ivy are gone,
And then he will seize the spoil. He, will murder thee, thou poor little bee.”

Does the boss wants India to be like a beehive where the honey is tasted by someone else? In the pursuit to display a fresh and original idea, our Boss has underlined his ignorance about India's complexity and gone with a freemasonary symbolism of beehive - a very old idea. With his mom at the top, using beehive as a symbol is the last thing one would want to choose.

So what is wrong with beehive - this whole concept of colony and society is actually not true in case of bees. Most bees aren't social -- less than 15 percent of bees live in colonies. The rest are solitary. They may exhibit some social tendencies, but they don't build large hives or store lots of extra honey. i.e. 85% of the bees are individualistic and does not work and live together as our Boss thinks! Anyway the idea looks fresh, but the question is does he want all of us to be just workerbees delivering the honey to Queen and her drones? I will leave it to your choice...

Tortoise and Hare - The Race Never Ends...

In a FB comment one of fellow FB-ians posted a frustrated note that "Can we outsource our country's governance to some other country ? Will there be takers ?" I read the blog and my view is this another blogger who has done a very basic piece of analysis and concluded that China has won the race and India will be end up second as opposed to Morgan Stanley's view that India will take lead by 2050's.

Surprisingly the blog article is from a regular writer (meant to say not a novice) - Steven Rattner, he led the Obama administration's auto task force, was one of the executives involved with payments under scrutiny in a probe of an alleged kickback scheme at New York state's pension fund, according to a person familiar with the matter. (Link, Link2). But this has got nothing to do with his write-up. I wanted to spice it up and found this allegation.

Anyway I responded to the FB post that The writer misses quite a lot of context and compares a banana and a jack-fruit (!). Like an under-grad student in an analyst intern role, he has blindly compared the statistics.

So why did I say that? Steven himself starts and finishes the blog about the choice of vehicle for development between both countries, In fact to make sure he doesn't get a kick from his elitist club, has dismissed Chinese autocratic regime and puts the disclaimer that he doesn't support it(!)

India has opted for a slow moving, let us call it a "bullock cart" to reach its destination, where as China took a "Maglev". By the very fact that two countries have taken two different mechanisms to deliver its objective, direct comparison is going to give a lopsided view. But still if you insist a comparison, leveling up those mechanisms and reviewing the outputs can help. So how do you level up?

I do these all time in my work when i review IT contracts, procurement, solutions etc. The mechanism can be different, but make sure the inputs to mechanisms that are in comparison are same. i.e. if you are comparing 3 different mechanisms, one should first make sure the inputs to those 3 mechanisms are same, if these are still same and one mechanism provides better result then there is a winner (May be). I would still investigate any hidden assumptions on the winning mechanism to understand why this is different. This basic science lab stuff.

Hence I say Steven's analysis is intern stuff! He is not calling out the inputs before comparing democracy and autocracy. First the context: Did both countries start development at the same time - answer NO! They lag by 15 years. The economic policies and financial management - are the same? i.e. the amount of investment that both countries deploy. Macro-economic situations for both countries may be similar, but by the time China had started its Phase 1 development, Bangladesh war had just finished in India's context, Also China had just screwed up India and not to forget the constant nonsense from the neighbor supported by China. (In fact Chin as it grows, keeps tripping India - bad sportsmanship in a race) The resources as inputs to the mechanism is something that can be contentious i.e. how much raw materials were available to both countries, human power, Industry knowledge, etc. In my view there are lots of lagging factors between the two countries; so with that, comparing these two models are going to be incredibly difficult and most likely are to be subjective. (Same with my blog)

Steven's blog has been reviewed by another blogger - (Fernando Salazar), this guy he adds a simple variant like education. This insight is better and informative in contrast to the bland statistics that Steven has put together. Steven calls himself an economist and God Bless USA. In any field and more particular to economics, when you review macro-models like China and India, it imperative to level the inputs and then get into a study.

But he has just put together measures like GDP, Inflation, Budget deficit etc. and these are current day figures and does not go pack to starting point to show the trace-ability. Reviewing such measures over a time period is a basic requirement to trace the nature of economic levers and this so-called economist has just used a point in time. Also, We all know how % can be misleading. To give an example using his own statistics, the 6% difference in Investment proportion between China and India is roughly $3000/person. That's a whopping big number! i.e China potentially invests $3T more than India. (assumption both countries have a ~1B people). Just as a side note - please look at this study and refer to slide 7. (Link to India start-up report)

Now to the title of this blog, In my view Development is a mirage. I myself have used the word USA is fully developed and i am happy to recall it. Growth always is a cycle of ups and downs. The question I often ask, why do you even need to be in a race? Why shouldn't India take its own time to grow? Another analogy: One could eat well and go to gym and build his/her body alternatively could buy a protein from H&B and pump weights to build quickly - we all know the disadvantages of the artificial growth. Hence I say development is a mirage. In fact Fernando, the Techie sums-up in his blog that "India is a peculiar mix of social democracy" I like his blog better than the so-called economist Steven. I meant to quote in FB that USA has reached its 'developed' country tag and it took them almost 250 years. So the US we say today was not the same as recently as in 1930 i.e. prior to the big depression.

Sometime the path is important for a few, sometimes the results are important for a few but the path is not. I am not suggesting that India has taken a noble path, but India's vehicle of growth is a long drawn one. In such a race, the Hare will always seem to run faster to a set distance, retard for a while, then run faster again, but the Tortoise will keep moving at its own pace, and the Race never Ends!

Post-Script: The writer fails miserably in his writing style as well. First the title that India is losing the race, then ends up saying India will be second... Also he does dilly dally between India's state of affairs in legal, corruption, summary execution and confuses throughout... He is unable to identify a clear state of difference between both countries, but ends up saying India is losing, however doesn't support the autocratic Chinese regime? Sorry Steven a shoddy write-up - change the ghost-blogger, this person is damaging your reputation!

Sonia gandhi - Good in management! We should give it to her - Part 2

What is a role of a manager in a company? I was trying to research and draw a view on this role definition. However in this context of analysing Sonia, i understood it is going to be difficult. However if I try to define a ‘Street-smart’ manager then I could outline a lot of views. I am sure we all have had good and bad managers and I am going to simplify the definition in a Politics context - can be applied broadly too.

If I can simplify, typically our experiences can relate to a manager who supports our development as well his/her development and by the process deliver the shared objective and such a case is “Good management” and “Good Manager”.

I am looking at it from the perspective that if given an amount of wealth or a piece of an asset be it knowledge or process or a new invention, it is up to an individual to put ‘good’ use or ‘bad’ use. I quote the bad and good – coz’ these are relative terms and qualifiers. So with this definition, I am about to see SG. I am about to outline a set of techniques that she may have put to use to deliver the shared objective.

In my opinion, hers' and Congress (I)’s shared objective is to be in Power and govern India. Let me qualify that the actual results of governance may be bad/good, but as far as the objective goes – she has managed to put Congress (I) in power for 10 years! – So is she not a good manager?

How do you uplift and motivate your team?Managers use different techniques, some define a threat or some put forward a Vision, or some inspire using ‘Hope’, some define an economic profit i.e. a monetary goal or a few philosophise for a dream or a few evoke empathy and play victim to rally people around and create a hope.

On 26^th May 1999, “A combative, impassioned Mrs. Gandhi, who quit as president of the Congress Party a week ago after three party leaders had opposed her candidacy for Prime Minister because of her foreign birth, said an outpouring of support from party members had persuaded her to withdraw her resignation. In a voice choked with feeling, Mrs. Gandhi, 52, staked her claim to being an Indian patriot. The country adopted her 31 years ago when she married Rajiv Gandhi, she said.”

She recalled the assassinations of her mother-in-law, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, in 1984 and her husband, a former Prime Minister who was 46 when he was slain in 1991. And she witheringly noted that the same three men who were raising the questions about her origins had a year ago asked her to head the party, then in a slow dance toward oblivion. ''I became a wife here, a mother here, a widow here, too, right before your eyes,'' she said, speaking in Hindi. ''The greatest daughter of this country, Indiraji, breathed her last in my arms. Every drop of blood in me says this country is mine. This country is mine.''

Apologies if it reminded you of Rahul Gandhi’s recent speech. But here Sonia chose to sympathise and create a dramatic entry. (I still wonder if it was stage managed with Sharad Pawar – look they are all one, even though for namesake he calls it NCP)

How do you show you are Strong – Play the victim, but show that you are a fighter?She defiantly said she would not reply to those who questioned her patriotism. She was apparently alluding to critics who have asked why she waited until she had been in India for 15 years before becoming a citizen and suggested that she might not have renounced her Italian citizenship, a contention that her friends say is false. ''The people will give a resounding reply to that,'' she said.

Choose words and attack enemies, de-stabilise and create a negative brand for your enemies.1999 - The Congress president said that ''the people doubting my credentials as an Indian would get a befitting reply in the coming election. All these non issues are being raised by the Bharatiya Janata Party to divert the people's attention from their 13-month misrule,'' she said.  ''The very people who targeted the minorities, made them suspects in the country are asking proof of my nationality,'' she said in a direct attack on the BJP-orchestrated criticism.

2001 - A normally reticent Ms. Sonia Gandhi today blasted the Prime Minister, Mr. A.B. Vajpayee, for ``unfairly attacking the Congress and trying to sermonise to it''. In a rare display of emotion, the Leader of the Opposition launched an onslaught after the Lok Sabha adjourned sine die and the members were leaving the House.

Manager needs to grasp the Situation and Politics1999-2002 Her major emphasis has rightly been on political stability as the country goes into a third election in three years. The Congress party's emerging strategy of contesting the Lok Sabha polls on its own for the most part and making stability the key campaign issue makes complete sense.

Sonia Gandhi has in recent weeks proved how unequal she is to the task of providing leadership; she even needs a written text to say yes or no to a straight question from the Press
Emerging from a 40-minute meeting with the President, Sonia admitted that she had so far mustered the support of only 233 MPs. ``I shall talk again with all the colleagues who voted against the confidence motion. It is for the other secular forces to see that the BJP Government does not come back,'' she told waiting correspondents.

Take full controlThe AICC left it to her to overhaul all the party organisations from top to bottom with people of her choice. Indira Gandhi had the backing of her father, Nehru, and 25 years of their service to the party. Sonia Gandhi has achieved the position without lifting a finger.

Manage your networks and growQ, Hinduja brothers, Ahmad Patel, P.C. Chacko, Datta Meghe, Prafful Patel and Prabha Thakur, MMS, Pranab, Arjun Singh and so on

Managing PerceptionsEven the faces are familiar. Those who saw Jawaharlal Nehru in Narasimha Rao and found Kesri's `home-spun' qualities endearing, are now singing Sonia Gandhi's praises. Not even once did she make any gesture or observation to indicate that she felt embarrassed. The secrecy about her health also goes into this mix.

We all know how the media co-operates and Times listing etc. However recently I read a tit-bit, that she was in UP and a prepared speech given to her had omitted a senior Congress(I) member’s name and in a flash, she picked the miss and reworked the speech. – This was in the news… The incident highlights her individual management style as well as the perception management to ensure this news is published in Media.

New York Times published an article that Sonia Gandhi reclaims congress party and its members’ devotion – did Advani do it? Jayalalitha has done it, Omar is better, Modi is trying hard, Mamta struggles, Yeddy is already becoming a teddy, Stalin is way off in comparison to Karuna, Sena has split, AP’s Reddy is in Jail – so that many people struggling at State level, where as one lady has managed to hold 29% of national votes to Congress (I) – isn’t she a good manager? I have largely focused on her initial days in Congress as these are the crucial days for any manager! But the history as people often say provides a lot of answers! - In fact a quick comparison to RG's recent speech can tell you the template was from SG's initial speech.

However I leave with a parting thought – is she a good leader? Await part - 3

We should give it to her...

I never thought, I would appreciate Sonia-ji one day. Before I write anything further, I wish to state a few things.

1. The below thoughts are highly recommended to be consumed only in the perspective of 'Management style' and not relate it with Patriotism, Politics or any other viewpoints. 
2. I don't mean to support the Congress (I) party in its agenda or Sonia-ji's politics 
3. I will aim to keep this apolitical and focus on the management, but will challenge other politicians in the due course and relate to some political events, but the main aim is to discuss her Management style.

I have come around to appreciate Sonia in her personal capacity for what she is today. Imagine you get married to a foreigner (and that too a topmost politician of a country) and to add, you have no roots to politics or any upper class lifestyle habits. In this situation, you have got a MIL (Mother-in-law) who is ruthless and comes the history of declaring emergency... Please visualize/imagine (irrespective of your gender) yourself walking to Indira Gandhi to be introduced as Sonia! Take a few minutes, get yourself into that character and tremble in your shoes...

From there you have come all the way to aiding the congress to win 2 elections, even more keep the family in tact as a single mom, in addition got the whole party under control, PM under influence (being gentle on MMS), your sworn enemies like Pawar, Sangma etc. come back to support you, worse the opposition leader LKA arriving at your lawns and accepting your latest position as a supreme leader in India - As people like Subramaniam swamy say it may all be about Money, it could all be for protecting the black money, still a lady, a single mother, a foreign national to take up the mantle of India - She has got it!

Where does this leave the other politicians in the game of chess? What has happened to their strategy? You cannot get a word out of her unnecessarily, she has got veil and a whole layer surrounded and nothing can penetrate her world - so what ever may be the cause, however selfish she may be, without that level of management, how can she be there at the top for so long? In fact so-called Chanakya of TN - Mu.Ka is no where near her stature! Even is she is corrupt and has all sorts of bad intention, she has swept the country's multi-functional system, managers and leaders - If you say money is the reason, may be. But for someone to hang onto the power and stature for this long, it is extra-ordinary... Why hasn't the top parties like BJP, Left got any answers? Are there no leaders to her match? (I will let Modi out of this writing, coz' irrespective of his background and his politics and the godhra, he is proving to be a thorn for his opponents - not to mention both have similar styles of functioning)

So you got to give it to her... Wait for Part 2.

Great Saved the world - Job done!

Many of them mocked, I was one among them. But the world leaders apparently agreed to save the world. This was an apprentice, where everyone got HIRED! As i moved through the traffic this morning, I imagined how it would be if Sir Alan Sugar made an episode with the G20 leaders fighting to be his apprentice. The French president did not play ball, same with the German chancellor, Chinese were ready to help but wanted them as the project manager for all the episodes and make the Chinese currency as the bill to pay the winner, Indians as usual talked about policies and procedures, Obama in his usual style patted the browns, allowed him to lead the team, but stole the limelight when the draw was announced and everyone of them were Hired to play the BANKER! 

Imagination helped me brighten up! The answer is pay the trillion now and grow the debt; If by any chance the plan failed...(Believe me, I am an optimist)

"Ring a-ring o' roses, A pocketful of posies. a-tissue!, a-tissue!. We all fall down" 

Democracy a way forward?

Is democracy still a meaningful concept in the 21st Century? Thats my question. Most of the democratic governments, the voting numbers have gone done. The only other concepts of governance are dictatorship and communism. Clearly communism has failed. Dictatorship can never be the right answer. So that leaves us the option with democracy. I have not seen much thought leadership in the area of political governance that can promise a better structure that provides a better governance.

I am right now reading a book about 'Writing on the wall and the West in 21st Century'. This book delves into the history of chinese governance. I think thats much needed to find a good way of governance and making sure the world shares the risks, effects as a society together. I seriously think democracy is also loosing its sheen and in another 15-20 years, this concept will also be questioned like the communist concept.

The key point is people are loosing interest in governments and are working in a self-centered manner. So how can a governor provide a good rule, when the subjects aren't really bothered or why should he/she actually care to provide an impartial rule for such subjects. Recently a candidate in the US election has a different view of involving everyone into the senate and the view is if citizens aren't interested in law making, why should the state care about them? Its not a great idea but a start. When so many people involve in decision making, a decision can never be reached.

I have been thinking about this for long and an idea - may be this has its own pros/cons as every system would do. But its for the netizens to debate. The idea is every country should lay out some guidelines etc on State matters and devlove rest of powers to utmost the local council level and effectively all taxes should also go to the councils. e.g. In a local town of 1000 people, if 600 of them earn, their income taxes go to the local council which administers the town and they should be empowered to make all decisions except the State related one. I admit its similar to democracy, but devloving power can be the only way to bring the interest back. (I can see such flavours already existing in UK, France etc - but not fully implemented - the locals don't participate in council elections) Bring Money & Justice to local level which can put the interest back to people.

My knowledge in this area is limited, I encourage netizens to participate which will be a good start....