Nobody home; please leave a message

Posted on July 27, 2008 by Rayan

“Damn it. It’s him again. What do I tell him?” The guy on the right seems to be cursing himself for having picked up the receiver. Situations such as these must have prompted the invention of answering machines and call display. How convenient it is to let the caller leave his message or vent his anger while we go about our routine?

Isn’t it strange that in this age of instant communications we find it ever harder to reach the other person? Especially if that other person owes us for products delivered or services rendered. Try as we could, we never get past the secretary who would be more than willing to put us on to her elusive manager’s voice mail rather than let us know his real whereabouts. I wonder what would happen if the caller calls from his cell phone while standing right outside this customer’s office just to check if he is really there or not.

Or imagine a situation like this: You and your buddy are on the cell phones talking to each other. Unknown to each other both of you are currently in the downtown area of the city where you live. Also unknown to you, both of you are walking towards each other. You ask your friend to check the availability of a product on sale (and the sale ends today, in less than an hour) on the east end of your city. And you say (or lie) that you are in the west end shopping for the same product on sale. Your friend like you replies (or lies) that he is in the east end only and is desperately looking for the product. As soon as he finds one, he will give you call. As you come within vicinity of each other, you have found each other out (literally and figuratively).

George’s way (in one of the Seinfeld episodes) of screening incoming calls comes to my mind. Telephone answering machines have been around a long time that we get more and more creative in leaving recorded messages on our home phone / cell phone. While it is fun to watch, it will in the long run damage our reputation and ruin our relationships. In a connected world, we are alienating ourselves.

When we leave a message; the acceptable notion is that, the receiver at the other end is genuinely unavailable or busy. Or he or she is in a different time zone. But I have a suspicion that some of us are misanthropists who cannot stand humanity. How else can you explain this culture of hiding our predisposition, to communicate with the other person, pervading an always-on communication medium like MSN messenger or Yahoo messenger?

Look at some of the stock messages such applications allow us to leave:

Busy
Stepped out
Be right back
Not at my desk
On the phone
or we can get creative and type in our own message to show that we are not available at the moment.
Or we may even to choose to be invisible to everyone!

Look at the last entry. I believe technology came to our rescue not to serve such devious purposes. What do you think?

Why are we doing this anyway?

Posted on July 22, 2008 by Rayan

If only we ask this question every time we start a new project, how much would it save everyone associated with it? It is so fundamental that we assume that it was asked by someone already and we run with it. You will be surprised to note that it took a disaster like Challenger explosion (28th Jan 1986) to ask the purpose of the space shuttle program. Instead of running with a task handed down, a simple question like, “Why are we doing this or to what end?” would benefit us immensely.

We may defend, “Well that was in 1986, ever since that we come have a long way.” Not really. Time and again we see this folly of not asking this question in our everyday life. Recently Microsoft discontinued its Live Book Search project after nearly 2 years of scanning 750,000 books and 80 million journal articles and spending close to $ 10 million. I wonder if anyone part of the project group raised this question, “Why are we doing this anyway?”

Assuming I am a consultant and my client states a problem with a fat pay check for solving his problem, it would be unwise to accept the stated problem and start collecting data to solve the problem. At the least, asking this question, would expand the perspective of the client, expand the possibilities and change how the solutions are presented. It may even prevent me from tackling his wrong problem!

According to the Purposes Principle, in the book titled ‘Breakthrough Thinking’, the authors implore us to seek the purpose of everything. To quote verbatim from the book, “If the purpose of a shoelace is to tie a shoe, ask what the purpose of tying a shoe is – and then watch the possibilities for alternative, innovative solutions unfold before your eyes.”

Having stated an immediate purpose of solving a problem, we should expand the purposes, to still greater purposes until we have an array of purposes to tackle. Then out of the many we choose the one that would have a greatest impact using our limited resources.

Let me explain with a simple personal example:

Suppose I ask myself the purpose of writing this blog I will come up with the answer: to educate, inform and entertain the visitors to my site. And if I were to ask again what in turn the purpose of that is; my answer would be to encourage more visitors to visit this site and so on.

Eventually my purpose array would look like the following:

To create content for my website to educate, inform and entertain the visitors to my site.
To encourage more visitors to visit my site.
To expose visitors to relevant advertisements displayed alongside.
To click on the advertisements that are of interest or use to them.
To collect payment from my Associates for qualified clicks.
To create an additional income stream through the Internet.
To have more disposable income on hand.
To invest in assets that enhances quality of life.
To enhance quality of life.

Now in my purpose array I may choose to focus on the initial purpose (level 1) of just creating the content or I may choose to focus on level 2 i.e. to encourage more visitors to visit my site or level 6 i.e. to create an additional income stream from the Internet.

At each level my course of actions will be different. For instance if I focus on level 1, I need to focus on what would be topical and interesting to my visitors and what additional research is required before I complete this post, what improvement in presentation or style of writing is required etc.

If instead if my focus is on level 2, my focus would be to explore other options to attract visitors to my site (like buying quality content from other sources, or other incentives like creating contests with free gifts for winners on my site) other than myself spending time creating the content.

If I have the money I may choose to focus on level 6, I may open an online store promoting my own products or if I am resource poor I may opt to promote others products by becoming an affiliate. Or at level 7, I may choose to ignore the Internet altogether and see more conventional ways of creating additional source of income.

The point is, asking the purpose of doing anything, expands my options. I hope you agree with me.

Is this an expression of gratitude or a sign of weakness?

Posted on July 20, 2008 by Rayan

Recently I received a package from a company with whom I had placed an order for shipment. There was a label on it which read, “Thanks for your order. We appreciate your business. Because of you we are working.” It would be inappropriate to name the company, so I would rather not. One may wonder as to what was wrong with it. Well, for one thing, “Thanks for your order. We appreciate your business” is an expression of gratitude and is always welcome. But going beyond that and saying, “Because of you we are working” is a sign of weakness. By extension it implies, “Please don’t stop ordering, else we will lose our jobs. We have a mortgage on our house, car payments to be made and mouths to feed and so on” and so looks childish.

I understand in today’s economy, there is large scale retrenchment and even skilled, highly qualified employees are let go by all kinds of businesses. There is a shiver in our heart, any time our status quo is threatened. I am not an exception either. As much as my heart goes out to those GM employees in Oshawa or Windsor whose future is threatened because of plant closures, I believe we have to give in to reality that the demand for certain products has disappeared and accept the inevitable. Staging protests in front of the plant may draw sympathy from the general public or some statements from the local politicians and would do nothing much.

A product or service should stand on its own merit and should not appeal to (or depend on) the sympathies of the customer. Not that the customer doesn’t care, but he has more compelling reasons to do as he pleases. So appealing to the emotions of the customer may even make him suspect the product or service.

Lee Iacocca (Autobiography – the Chrysler story) took a much debated government bailout while bringing Chrysler back from bankruptcy. But he delivered on his promise. He believed in his team and products and so pulled off a coup. Last week without so much of a debate Fanny May and Freddie Mac have been bailed out just so people can have jobs. It is a disgrace, a temporary prop and who knows what this additional public debt would do to U.S.A., the paragon of capitalism. I doubt if any single individual is taking responsibility for this.

Peter Drucker the management guru once said that there is no reason for a business to go on and on and should be shut down if it makes economic sense. That in all likelihood will lead to new businesses to sprout. It reflects the Tao or Zen teaching: “When I am completely destroyed, I am about to grow”

There is something magical about boxing

Posted on July 16, 2008 by Rayan

To me there is something magical about boxing; but only if it involves no violence. I mean, I detest any violence dished out (either by the participants or the spectators) in the name of entertainment. I have been a fan of professional boxing (and continue to be to this day) and see worthy contests as when time permits. But it is the no holds barred contests (like some Ultimate Fighting Championships) where the participants take all kinds of risks just so we, the spectators are entertained; that I hate.

The sponsors, the promoters, the event organizers all collect fat checks and the advertisers, the media benefit immensely, while the participants end up as casualties for life. Even if the injured sportsmen take home big money, what good money is to them if they are paralyzed waist down (say due to some injury to their spinal cord or suffer irreparable head injury) and had to move about in a wheel chair or sip food through a tube?

I am not exaggerating. I saw one kick boxing contest where one of the kick boxer’s shin bone broke into two (due to either the shock of the kick he gave or received) and hung like a broken twig from the rest of his leg. I couldn’t bear to see it and stopped watching kick boxing ever since. One may argue that, after all the participants participate voluntarily and are fully aware of the risks involved and so what harm is caused in organizing the show? Nelson Mandela has an active interest in professional boxing but at the same time strongly believes in non-violence. When he was asked if there is any conflict between the two, his answer was the same.

belcher v gamble with commentary.jpg However, if one of the unequal participants induced by big prize money fights and ends up being carried away in a stretcher, is it voluntary? But at least most of the times in boxing, there is this referee who steps in to save the severely injured boxer from himself. And the stupid boxer returns the favor by trying to knock down the referee himself for stopping the fight.

I don’t want to sound like Lisa in ‘The Simpsons’, advocating vegetarianism, while rest of the party enjoys a hearty meal of the wild boar. But if we, the spectators are in it to vent our male aggression (remember the movie Fight Club) or driven by greed by betting heavily against one or the other player, then we need to check our motives.

I mean how far are we removed from the Romans watching the blood sports in the arena with glee. Russell Crowe in Gladiator comes to my mind. After annihilating his enemy he turns to the spectators with equal rage and asks, “Are you entertained now?”. To me, at the end of the match, if we leave the stadium even with a little guilt, than it is not a sport.

If you ask me to be more specific and lay it out in clear terms (what is magical about boxing other than the boxers blowing their brains out?) hear is my answer:

To me more than the fight itself, the prelude that leads up to the fight that is magical. The stadium, the lighting, the assemblage of the VIPs accompanied by their beautiful female counterparts, the spectators with flags to show their solidarity, the statistics of the contestants (impressive both by themselves and taken together),the rigor they had gone through prior to the fight shown as flashback, the locker room briefings, the announcer’s (the undisputed champion Michael Buffer’s) commanding voice about the ensuing fight, the arrival of the boxers in glittering costume, followed by their respective entourage carrying their medals, their chosen music played out as they arrive, all go to create an expectation of an outcome that is magical. We tend to believe that this really is going to be the fight of the century and we got our value for money even though we may watch it for free over the TV.
As the fight progresses there is a momentary disappointment in us that the fight is not going as we have predicted. We see our limitations as amateurs exposed, with the minute to minute ring side view provided by the commentators (who can substitute an ace like Jim Lampley), the expert commentary provided by an ex boxer or a seasoned coach (like Emmanuel Stewart) and the insightful, often witty remarks of a sage like Larry Merchant (now that he has retired, we miss him). All these go together, to make the event magical.
Finally at the end of a good, clean fight (by clean I mean neither contestant is greatly harmed and the referee has done a great job) the boxers give their reasons as to why they have lost or won, the strategy they adopted and if they are ready to take a rematch etc all these go to make it magical.

We realize almost the entire event is carried out spur of the moment and none of it can be rehearsed in advance and that is what is makes it magical.

Finally as we leave, we prepare ourselves for the next fight of the millennium and isn’t that expectation magical?

Isn’t it time for open source journalism?

Posted on July 13, 2008 by Rayan

In one of my earlier blogs I rejoiced over the success of open source movement in the field of information technology and the help it brought to this site. Now I have more reasons to be happy. Recently I read an article titled ‘Nightly News, Not-For-Profit’ in the Time magazine. While it is not open source, I believe the initiative is praiseworthy and may encourage open source journalism. The moment we hear not-for-profit news, we expect some unbiased, credible news.

Despite the initiatives such as Wikinews, Indymedia etc. the open source journalism has not yet gone mainstream. Probably because it has to contend with ourselves, the readers. First of all we have stopped reading. Secondly, while we don’t suspect open source’s profit motives, we are concerned how good the presentation would be vis a vis that from professional journalism. If you read John Dvorak’s column (www.pcmag.com) titled Losing Perspective you will understand what I mean.

(We had similar doubts about Wikipedia’s success and authenticity. In the early days some of the articles that I read in Wikipedia were so poor in content and presentation and made me wonder if I am wasting time reading them. But in due course, we see how the iterative correction to the contents from contributors all over the world does wonders. Oxford University even conducted a thorough study of the accuracy of Wikipedia’s contents and compared it against those from Encyclopedia Britannica and came out with the conclusion both had equal number(though not many) of errors!

But it is my firm conviction that my readers know more than I do and is echoed in this page. It is just that all along we lacked the medium to put and link together all that we know. The Internet perfectly closes this gap. And it has another advantage. A democratic setup like the Internet will vote out those bloggers who remain second grade or have vested interests and the cream always come to the top.)

Thirdly, as the article says, “investigative reportingâ€ an expensive enterprise that can consume months of a writer’s time and often yield few results” is as applicable for open source journalism as it is for professional. While open source journalists may be passionate, they may lack the resources of a for-profit, seasoned organization. As you can see from the Time’s article, a seed capital of $ 10 million was required to bring this project into fruition.

And it is not always the money. Ramnath Goenka the newspaper magnate who owned Indian Express was dependant on the Indian government to grant him licenses to import newsprint. His prolific editor in chief Arun Shourie’s extensive coverage and columns were thorny and unwelcome by Mrs. Gandhi’s government. So he had to let go its editor, just so the newspaper can continue to present ‘unbiased’ news.

And to give an example from recent times, the clout enjoyed by CNN in the coverage of Gulf war II was enviable. But it left some doubts in the minds of the viewer of its authenticity. Was CNN compromised due to pressure from Pentagon?

Luckily in the Internet age we don’t need the newsprint or even the television to get our news, but still the government can thwart what we can see and hear by selectively blocking out some sites that don’t serve its interest. We will to have to wait and see how neutral Beijing
will to have to wait and see how neutral Beijing Olympics coverage is going to be. In the mean time we should do all that we can to promote open source journalism.

Having fun is the most productive thing you can do

Posted on July 6, 2008 by Rayan

“Having fun is the most productive thing you can do”, says the kid (Logan Lerman) mentoring his mentor (Aaron Eckhart) in the movie Meet Bill. But do you agree with this statement? Before you answer, may I bias you by quoting one more movie Accepted; reinforcing the concept. Often I am tempted to agree but lately I have my suspicions. Today the U.S. is losing out against other more competitive nations, its dollar value dropping against other major currencies, and there are job losses everywhere. Haven’t we in North America taken this concept (having fun) a little too seriously and gone into excess in all aspects of our lives?
Continue reading →

If I had a million dollars …

Posted on July 2, 2008 by Rayan

What would you think if someone says to you,”If I had a million dollars, I will buy you a casket”? You will be shocked, wouldn’t you? For it runs counter to ‘norm’. We may hear like, I will buy you an exotic pet, or some art like a Picasso or a Garfunkel or I would hire a limousine to drop you at your bus stop. (OK, I admit I am inspired by Barenaked Ladies song by the same title.)

Well that’s exactly what my friend said to one of our other colleagues (he is not well liked by anyone in our group) during our lunch break. My friend is a regular at buying lottery tickets and I have never played lottery to this day and I was being initiated into buying one these days. Our discussion about lotteries eventually led us to finding out what would we buy each other if either of us won it big. That’s when our colleague chipped in and got bitten. Though personally I have some misgivings about this colleague, I felt my friend’s reply to be in bad taste. But seriously, why would it upset us if someone near to us discusses our imminent death.

I mean it is OK to hear one’s insurance agent (or they see an ad that asks, “If you died today, who will take care of your family?” showing some distraught kid near a grave) discuss his (her) death and the need to provide for their near and dear ones, once they are gone. Not only are they not upset, but they shake hands and buy as much insurance as they can afford. They even go to the extent of buying their own funeral arrangements making a down payment and following up with monthly payments thereafter. They feel relieved or should I say joy in their hearts?

It is probably because under those circumstances we conjure up images of our death in the distant future. Or we should give credit to the insurance companies and the ad agencies that have made it palatable to discuss death. But the moment someone shows a casket, and says it is our own to take it home for free, we are terrified. For example we don’t particularly like our children say, Dad (or mom) I bought you a coffin for this father’s (mothers) day

Why is it so? The answer my friend, as my philosopher and guide Eckhart Tolle puts it beautifully, We are intensely attached to our identity as to who we are. He says, “Suppose you see a fish being born in an aquarium and you name it John and adopt it as your pet. A little while later when you see it eaten by a bigger fish, will you grieve over it”? Of course not, we will dismiss it as natural part of life to be born and gone. But when it comes to our own identity, we will defend it to death! (No pun intended). He says it is our attachment to our identity that keeps our cosmetic, fashion industries alive and the moment we relinquish our identity, these industries will collapse. To that list, may I add the insurance industry too, if he had not already done?

By the way, later I asked my friend as to why he was so rude to our colleague. I got this for an answer, “Do you know Rayan, how much it costs to buy a good casket these days”? and he was serious! That only made me laugh and honestly I don’t have a clue. For in my afterlife, I have no intention to be constrained underground but fly upwards in smoke freely. And the rest of me may travel along the river to meet the ocean. You know, I intend to enjoy my life now and later with zest.

viewsonweb

Month: July 2008