Showing posts with label future work. Show all posts
Showing posts with label future work. Show all posts

Wednesday, 2 January 2013

The make of a break


A few days ago, my mother said to me, “please go back to work … you wanted to be off work for some time … that’s more than done now”. “Why, now even your wife is talking like you do !”, she exclaimed. I asked her to elaborate on the matter about my wife, since we’d spoken about my return to work a few times before. “She’s also saying things like everyone should take a break, do what they would really like to, and things like that”, my mother grumbled. She added, “only the other day she was trying to tell me something like one can take a break … work after retirement … God knows what … I didn’t really understand”.

I laughed. Mothers can be bitter-sweet like only mothers can. “I haven’t messed up her mind, if it makes you feel any better … she was trying to tell you about a fascinating video we both saw recently … it was a speech by a successful designer from New York”, I said, choosing my words well to get her attention, and also that of my father, who was pretending to do something else while his wife was indulgently berating her son, but was in fact predictably eavesdropping.
 
It was the TED Talk by Stefan Sagmeister I referred to. Making periodic eye contact with both members of my audience, I explained in brief, “this man takes a break of a year after every seven years of working … to continue to create fresher designs and be happy about what he does”. “And he postpones his year of expected retirement by one year every time he completes his year of break … so if he manages to take five breaks during his career, he will work till he’s sixty-five and not hang his boots even if he can when he’s sixty”. By now my folks were quite interested and wanted to know more. I don’t know whether, at the time, they recollected the reason I quit work to take a break. It was to find a path that would engage me for longer … well past the age that I could see myself plateauing at in my career of the time.  
“The fresher designs get him some of his old clients back, and also some new ones, and they mostly agree to pay him better fees … that way he makes up for fees and clients lost during his break time … plus he adds a few more productive years to his total work-life”, I continued. Both my parents were smiling by now, and I knew that I stood vindicated, at least for the time being. “Oh, by the way, I almost forgot to tell you, this man says that when he took a year off for the first time, he did lots of random, even if desirable and fun stuff, but the year passed by rather quickly and he didn’t make much progress with his goal of creating fresher designs”, I said, with the express purpose of soothing my parents’ nerves some more. They and I knew that my own past months of break had gone by similarly.
“Why’s that ?”, mum asked. “Because, as he admits, he didn’t dwell sufficiently and regularly on his objective of taking the break … he let the design inspirations from his new surroundings and experiences pass him by … but he did manage to make his subsequent breaks work for him with some more discipline, planning and scheduling”, I concluded. Not one to be left out, my father chipped in, “so you should dwell sufficiently and regularly on your reason for taking the break too”. I nodded in agreement and so did my mother.

I don’t regret it but I do wish that I’d heard Stefan’s talk earlier.

There’s another thing that I wish I’d come across earlier. It’s a line from the movie, ‘Iron Lady’, wherein a frail and reminiscent Margaret Thatcher is depicted as saying to her doctor, “back in our time it was all about doing something, nowadays it’s all about being someone”. If you look within and look about, you might agree with me that the observation is quite true. I can tell you that it’s never been truer for me than it has been during this break time when I have tried to dwell on finding a path into the future. Several things have struck me as those that I could do reasonably well, feel happy doing, and hence engage with for a long time. But what really comes in my way of dwelling sufficiently and regularly on any of these, and in the way of doing something about any of them, is the question, “will I be someone ?”.

Honestly, I always thought of myself as a ‘do something’ person. Or at least a ‘do something and thereby be someone’ person. Never has this belief been tested more. Because introspection and analysis readily give way to fantasy. And my fantasies these days quite often take the shape of ‘be someone and thereafter do something’. Rarely are they about ‘do something and thereby be someone’. And when they are, the ‘do something’ goes by in a rush, my ‘being someone’ happens in a jiffy, and then again it’s back to my inviting and gratifying ‘thereafter do something’ business in loving detail.

Surely, not everyone may require to take a break to get better at what they do or to change tracks or to begin a new chapter. But those that do, would, I think, do well to sufficiently and regularly dwell on the reason for the break and also to avoid frequent distractions of being someone. And do something.

What I really want to say is simply this.

One can always argue for and against a break. Like sometimes we run better if we have taken a break from the daily jog. And sometimes we run better because we have continued the rhythm of the daily jog.

Similarly, one can always argue for and against whatever reason for the break. Like someone may say introspection or rejuvenation is for losers and someone else may say there's purity of purpose in introspection or rejuvenation.

The thing is, one can miss a good reason for a break by frequently arguing against the idea of a break itself. And one can make the break purposeless by arguing forever against its reason.

If one is against a break, or doesn't need one, that's ok. Equally, if one is against the reasons for a break, or doesn't feel any, that's also quite ok. But if one needs a break and has a good reason, then one should take the break and should remember to stay put with its reason. That's to say, the break and its reason must connect in day to day action.

That should be the make of a break.

Friday, 20 July 2012

Understanding and managing Gen Y, relatively speaking that is

In many years, I haven’t been as taken in by a book, as I have been by Walter Isaacson’s biography of Steve Jobs. It is an amazingly honest account, unedited by Steve Jobs or any other affected or interested party. Its content is immensely educating, with the story of the man and the story of the computer industry woven together. Predictably, even before I had finished reading the book, I had decided to read Isaacson’s biography of Albert Einstein. At the moment I’m halfway through it. Again, it’s the story of the man woven with the story of the Physics of the times.
There are several common threads in the lives of these two men. Both had biological origins in communities that were not mainstream. Both had fathers with technician-craftsmen abilities. Both had their first un-fleeting alliances with women who were intellectual-spiritual, and later married other pragmatic women. Both were callous with people closest to them. Both were comfortable appearing shabby. Both had disregard for authority and were ironically propelled into becoming authorities themselves. Both got immensely successful by their thirties. Both were agnostics not atheists. Both lived more austere lives than they need have. Etc.
If we set aside these trivia, there were other common threads. Einstein wasn’t convinced that fundamental scientific truths emerged from experimental data; Jobs wasn’t convinced that ideas for truly great products emerged from customer and market research data. Einstein was influenced by the intersection of science and philosophy; Jobs was, by that between science and humanities. Einstein believed that nature loves simplicity, balance and unity; Jobs did the same.  
What I also gather, is that both Einstein and Jobs, and Einstein more than Jobs, imagined of a fundamental immutable law, or laws, which govern all that goes on in the physical and in the not-physical universe. Many other people, in different eras, have imagined of the same or similar stuff. That’s how there’s a line of thinking that links the body with the soul, there’s another line of thinking that uses biological evolution to explain social evolution, etc.
Alternating between reading Einstein’s biography and educating myself with material pertaining to Gen Y, as I have been doing over the past few weeks, I have felt that some references or idioms from the theory of the expansion of the physical universe could be used to talk about the progression of our social world and its generations of people. A bit about the theory first.
The physical universe is increasingly expanding. Each of its dots is increasingly moving away from every other. This expansion happens, in order to, and only in so far as, to counter the pulls that the dots naturally exert on one another. The further they get from one another, the stronger they pull at each other, and the even further apart they move. And so on. To prevent the dots from collapsing into one another till one last dot remains which keeps collapsing into itself.
Increasingly, space expands, and simultaneously, for balance and unity, so does time. If one expands, and simultaneously so does the other, then it must follow that if one contracts, simultaneously so would the other.
Perhaps that’s what happens in the social world. That it contracts, as the physical universe expands. The increasing mobility, the increasing access to information, and the increasing avenues of communication (one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many), serve to increasingly contract the space and time that is experienced. The dots across space and across time come closer. So, Gen Y, and the people of other generations, like Gen Xers and Baby Boomers, who share the world with them, can see and hear more of what is seen, heard, said, thought and done anywhere around. They can also see and hear more of what has been seen, heard, said, thought and done anywhere around in the past. Since they see and hear more, all of them can say, think and do more today than anyone could have in the past.
So Gen Y can today see, hear, say, think and do as much as Gen X and the Baby Boomers can today. And all of them can today see, hear, say, think and do more than Gen X and the Baby Boomers could in the past.
With whatever they choose to.
This view is consistent with our picture of the contracting world and also avoids driving a wedge between generations. With this view we can avoid feeling half convinced and half unconvinced when people say things like, ‘Gen Y is smarter than Gen X’, ‘Gen Y is more distracted and superficial than Gen X’, etc. Rather, Gen Y is as smart, distracted, or superficial as Gen X is today. And both are more of them today than Gen X was back in time.

This view also embraces several things, even contradictory ones, that Gen Y, or any other generation, is described to be. And explains similarities and differences between individuals and between groups within and across generations. People see and hear what they see and hear; by similarities and differences in choice, chance, influence, capacity, and focus. Hence, I'm aware that we could typify Gen Y or Gen X or Baby Boomers. But I want to go one level down and dwell on the underlying continuum in the progression of the social world. To better understand and manage Gen Y, among other things.
That resolved, let’s examine what the dots moving closer do. Closer dots mean more information, experience and learning. More choices of what to see, hear, say, think and do. More security. More chances of finding and connecting with your tribe. More support and confidence. More tolerance and diversity. More adaptability and flexibility.
Closer dots also mean more distractions, more lack of conviction in beliefs and paths, and more inconsistencies in actions. More insecurity of having made the wrong choice or missed the best opportunity. More conflict between different tribes. More lack of moorings and anchors because of living different ideologies and identities. More and more, things that seem right also seem wrong. More and more the supremacy of one right is challenged by the supremacy of another right.

Moving on. A large part of the current world comprises of Gen Y. So this is all true for them. When we Gen Xers and Baby Boomers try, for example, to figure out how to manage the Gen Y workforce or to attract the Gen Y customers, we have the same advantages and handicaps that we seek to address. First, we must accept that, if we are to make an honest effort. Second, we must be happy, that if we do a better job of how to manage and attract today’s Gen X and Baby Boomer employee and customer, we would, in effect, have done a better job of it for Gen Y.
And third, the dots will keep moving closer; so we can’t just wish away the intensifying threats. Maybe, an age old suggestion might help. Capitalise on the opportunities and blunt the threats.

To say, think and do things that capitalise on the opportunities is good. Like doing away with policies that prevent multiple employment. To say, think and do things that blunt the threats is also good. Like establishing processes that encourage work-life integration around a few chosen or focussed areas of endeavour. But to say, think and do things that simultaneously do both is better. Suggestions, anyone ?

Friday, 24 February 2012

Of liberty and fraternity, in coaching


Think sports and academic institutes if you want to make coaching in the workplace more effective. Remember we’re talking about adults here. It’s different and easier with children, since someone else makes the decisions and choices for them, and they are good learners. Not so, for adults.
The whole business begins with a person’s choice to opt for coaching or not. Someone could either be opposed to ‘extra’ coaching, confident of imbibing the required learning from the existing system. Or believe that true learning happens via numerous interactions and experiences with several people in uncontrolled settings. Or even that he or she is ‘good enough’ and is not in need of any more coaching. I mean, parents, relatives and friends could impress upon this person the need for and the benefits of coaching. Finally, the choice has to be of the person concerned.
Perhaps, as many good sportspersons and scholars have opted for coaching in their lives, as those who have not. For coaching in the workplace to have a good start, it is fundamental to provide employees in the target group with this choice. As much as it is, to allow them to change their mind.
The second consideration is this. Someone who desires coaching also makes a choice of where or who to go to for getting coached. That someone has chosen to join a particular sporting or education academy for the purpose of getting ahead in life riding piggy-back on its influential patrons or famous teachers, or out of peer pressure, or because of its convenient location, should be for no one to judge. That someone has chosen to join an academy for the love of learning, or because of a genuinely great coach, or even because of the likelihood of a relationship of mutual trust and preference with the coach there, should not be anyone’s bother either.
Perhaps, as many good sportspersons and scholars have been the products of the right choices they have made, as those who haven’t. For coaching at the workplace to head in the right direction, it is necessary to allow the employees who have opted for coaching to consider their own motivations privately and then make known their list of preferred coaches. Whether from their organisation or without, from their business group or without.
Coaches also need to make similar choices. Of opting to coach or not. And, if they do make their services available, of deciding who to coach. Again, based on a private consideration of their motivations and preferences. If the choices of the coachees shouldn’t be judged, neither should those of the coaches. That’s only fair.
Perhaps, as many good sportspersons and scholars have been the products of the right choices and motivations of their coaches, as those who haven’t. For coaching in the workplace to proceed further in the good direction previously determined, the coaches must choose from among all those employees who have chosen them. The idea is to arrive at a coach-coachee matching just like sports and education academies arrive at their admissions lists. The coach is as high on the coachee’s preference list, and the coachee is as high on the coach’s preference list, as the matching process allows for. Too bad, if, as an outcome of a fair process, the employee had to settle for an undesirable or less than desirable coach.
If potential coaches and coachees need more familiarity with one another, the organisation must provide information and opportunities of interaction to them before they prepare their respective lists of preference. There could be application forms, credentials and statements of purpose submitted by the coaches and the coachees. Sounds foolish ? Trust me, it's no more foolish than wasting time in trying to coach people to be better coaches, monitoring if people have had the mandated number of coaching interactions, or pushing the coach-coachee pairs to draft and submit their coaching contracts. Wonderful things, these. Bring back painful memories.
The matching process would most likely throw up a situation where each coach has more than a few people to coach. In sports and in education, coaches handle their coachees in a group, and while doing so, they address the individual needs of each coachee too. It’s efficient use of the coach’s time and effort. The coachees get wider learning from watching others being taught. The coach’s as well as the coachees’ performance and behaviour are out in the open, and public encouragement and shame work wonders for both parties. Besides it’s more secure and fun to have co-travellers.
Given time and support, the coach-coachee group work their own rules of engagement, their own understanding of what’s working and what’s not, their own dynamic teaching-learning methods, and their own standards of progress. Broadly, if things are ok, coachees accept the realities of life that some among them progress better than the others, that some among them have louder voices than the others, that the ways of teaching-learning work better with some than with others, and so on.
There remains the matter of one more choice before we close the deal on making coaching in the workplace more effective. Both the coach and the coachee can choose to disengage with one another at any time. Amicably. As self-respecting adults would.
Didn’t I already say something like ….
Perhaps, as many good sportspersons and scholars have opted for coaching in their lives, as those who have not;
Perhaps, as many good sportspersons and scholars have been the products of the right choices they have made, as those who have not;
Perhaps, as many good sportspersons and scholars have been the products of the right choices and motivations of their coaches, as those who have not.

Monday, 20 February 2012

Vote and vote well


A few days ago, during the city’s municipal corporation elections, I cast my first ever vote.

During the run-up to the day of the elections, I was very excited to discover my voter registration details on the election commission’s website. After all, two of my previous attempts at registration had failed, and I had no reason to believe that I would succeed with my latest attempt of a few months ago. I felt a sense of victory against all the dark forces that conspire against the registration of urban middle class voters like me. Politicos of all hues find us unpredictable and unreliable, since we don’t swing to their tunes of region, community and caste, and hence focus their efforts on expanding their base elsewhere. Bureaucracy ‘stiffs’ see us as politically apathetic and individually powerless, and hence direct their energies to other registration applications brought in by eager politicos.
But this time, I was going to cast my vote. Na-na-n-na-na.
On the day of the elections I searched the website again. Half-suspecting that my details would’ve mysteriously disappeared by then. But there I found them once more, beaming at me in all their glory. I fired a colour print of my voter details on high quality executive paper. And proudly carried it to the polling station. “Internet printout, eh?”, asked the polling agent stationed outside my designated polling station. “Let me check if your details appear in the copy of the electoral rolls for this station”, he continued. The more pages he turned over without finding my name and photograph, the more his self-importance increased. And the more mine decreased. I interrupted him, “but my details are from the election commission’s website”. As though my timely interruption would make the record appear in the pages he hadn’t yet flipped through. “I know sir, but ours is the latest and most valid copy”, he declared, as he continued flipping through his papers to locate my name or photograph. Then he delivered his verdict, “your record isn’t at this polling station; maybe it’s at some other”. “Some other ?”, I gasped. “It happens”, he sighed. This was fantastic. I had about four hours before the close of polling time to visit about a half a dozen polling stations in my area and locate my record. But I was determined. Had nothing particularly better to do that day. So I rushed from one polling station to another, only to hear one polling agent after another deliver the same verdict.
As I was about to concede defeat to the dark forces and slip back again into the set that is accused of not exercising their right and duty to vote, I saw some activity at a street corner. Some respectable looking people were speaking in English and a couple of youngsters were working a laptop. I’m respectable, can speak in English, and own two laptops. So I went there too. Representatives of a newish party that hoped to attract young, educated and affluent voters were helping people locate their records and their designated polling stations. I may not be young or affluent, but I am educated, and hence promptly commissioned their services. Lo and behold ! My name appeared, albeit with a different set of voter registration details. I thanked the volunteers.
And, armed with fresh ammunition and a renewed zeal to wipe out the enemy, I jumped into my car. Told the driver about the new coordinates to take me to.
I confidently walked into the polling station, showed the security personnel my identification, and queued up outside the polling booth. My mind was so clouded with the desire and anticipation of the precious moments that were to follow, that it didn’t occur to me that I had missed the most critical part of my war strategy for the day. To ask my driver who I should vote for ! Don’t be surprised. My driver lives in a neighbourhood that knows lots about the local politicos and about their deeds and misdeeds. He used to be a dance instructor, is now married to a school teacher, nurses upward mobility aspirations, and shares my view that people should vote for candidates with great performance and behaviour. Quite qualified to be my advisor.
When it was my turn to, I submitted my credentials before the electoral officer. He said my name aloud. When none of the representatives of the various political parties objected that I was a bogus voter, he directed me to the polling enclosure. Here I was, all to myself, and salivating at the electronic voting machine. When it struck me that I didn’t know who to vote for. That none of the names of the candidates was even vaguely familiar. So I did what I had gone there for. To exercise my right and duty to vote. Beep.
Even if it was for god-knows-who from god-knows-which-party.
I don’t like politics and politicians. I know that our city is going from bad to worse despite electing different representatives and parties to power. I know that manifestos and promises are forgotten by many of the elected. Etc, etc. So I shouldn’t have felt guilty at how I’d eventually cast my vote. But I did.
In the last few years, I have never read the questions in an employee engagement survey. But have always assigned a score of 5/5 to each. I have behaved similarly while responding to leadership surveys about my peers and bosses. I admit that I didn’t feel guilty while doing so. But I should’ve.

Tuesday, 13 December 2011

Diversity by design


There’s a university and an organisation I know about which promote and protect diversity. Much more than some others do.  And consistently deliver results. Also much more than some others do. Whether their performance is because of the diversity in their fabric, or in spite of it, is a matter best left to your wisdom and dispensation.
The university promotes and protects diversity by design.



If you have a graduate degree in any discipline you can seek admission to any of the post graduate courses there. Admission tests for different courses are conducted on separate days to allow the applicants a shot at many of them. While the question papers are in English, you can choose to write your answers in any of the listed languages. You have to answer any five out of the twenty five questions asked. Even without prior background or preparation, you will always find your five questions to answer, since seven or eight questions usually pertain to topics of general interest.
Such open practices and other unrevealed algorithms of the admissions process guarantee that every new batch has a fair representation of students from different regions, ethnicities, social classes, and income groups.
Attending classes is not mandatory. You can take books to refer to during the exams. If you miss a test, professors will be quite comfortable to have you write a term paper and assign grades.  You can register for elective courses in any other department. There are neither curfew hours nor boundary walls in the hostels. The academic, administrative and financial councils of the institution have student representatives. Spontaneous teacher and student support against injustice and wrongdoing is a common sight. Talent is on full display all the while and everywhere. Dissenters turn into collaborators and yet again into dissenters with ease.
Pick any student, and ask what is best about the place. Most likely, you will get the answer, “I can be me”.

Ask any teacher whether every student's 'I can be me' adversely affects the university's basic character and purpose. Most likely, you will get the answer, "not at all; the elements of our core remain unaffected, since, no student, even while acting and thinking alone, is against them".
Switch your attention to the organisation now. It is a multinational, which gradually turned diverse in the course of entering and growing in different markets. The more diverse people, practices, views and ideas it assimilated, the more it appreciated the needs and benefits of diversity.
In recent years, its focus on diversity has become sharper, since it serves a more diverse set of stakeholders and customers, needs diverse skills, and seeks to grow its sources of talent. That much is by design.
In its operations in a particular country though, the promotion and protection of diversity happened by accident. The organisation grew so fast there that it hired good people of all types from just about anywhere. As a result, it now has lots of different models of success and ways of working for any employee to emulate. Lots of stereotypes stand broken. Every person finds at least some like-minded, even non-like-minded, supporters. And concludes, “the place does support me to be me”. The organisation has one more step to take, from ‘supporting’ its people to be themselves to ‘desiring’ that they be so.
Other organisations, where such an accident hasn't happened, and who are focussed exclusively on improving the diversity demographics, need to also get to a point where an employee would say, “looks like people here really want me to be me”.
By design.

Friday, 9 December 2011

Make the future work


Yesterday, one of my friends called me to say, “I have taken the advice that your elder brother gave you. To get a loan from a bank and buy another house”. I laughed out loud. Because, I knew instantly what the words behind his words were.

When things are comfortable, thoughts about future life distract from work. A biggish financial liability burns excess libido and brings back the focus to earnings and therefore to work. And life goes on as it is generally supposed to. That’s what my brother told me over a year ago.

Other memories surfaced.

A proclamation by someone, “professionals who aren’t brands in their own right shouldn’t even think about going on their own … they’ll trigger little recall and won’t get anywhere”. True enough.

An admission by another, “I get work done by others and focus on macro items … if I were to start off on my own I would either have to invest in a firm and pay people to do different levels of work … or stay by myself and be content with work that doesn’t use my full abilities since potential customer organisations would have their leaders to take care of the macro stuff … it’s like frying pan and fire”. Sure is.

Preferences - people making choices, doing different work and working differently. Evidence - organisations experimenting with different models of engaging skills. Direction - networking platforms and collaboration technologies.


A task at hand distracted me from these memories. Work towards launching my website - attractive design, super functionality, reader convenience, socially known. Big agency costs were prohibitive. Boutique firms were too focussed on getting big-agency-like customers and would put me on lower priority. Freelancers would have only one or the other of the skills I needed.

A boutique firm that charged fair money, and believed that our collaboration would get them a great credential plus enjoyable work, should be my choice. But why would such a firm sway from its set ways ? Yes, most likely not. Then, how about if there were a platform or association where I could find two or three great guys with the sum total of the skills I needed ? And they collaborated with one another and with me to deliver a great product ? Wishful thinking.

I don’t know why I thought about a group of cabbies we know. It’s been four years since we’ve been using their cabs. It’s an informal association that now has over twenty cabbies. They have a few simple rules. More customers for the association means more customers for each individually. So they pass on business to one another. Retain and grow the customer base for the association by a service offering that easily beats the individual cabbie and also takes on the big daddy cab companies. So they have good and polite drivers. Different cabs to suit your need of the day. Fair but flat price agreed in advance, where loyal customers get lower rates and an exemption from paying waiting charges. A guarantee, that they would reach customers at the appointed time and place. So they make sure that one of them reaches you, even at odd hours, and even if he could afford not to.

Now they do not wait at taxi stands nor ply about in search of business. They get familiar, quality customers who give them respect and admiration. They are open but choosy about which other cabbie they accept into their group. When members rub against one another they iron out issues as a collective and move on. They offer employment to willing and able relatives and friends as their assets multiply. Each can solicit business for himself but doesn’t anymore. Everyone can leave the group at will but very few have.

Wednesday, 7 December 2011

Seen that cook lately ?


Just as I was about to speak to my cook of ten years, my brain began sending this live feed to the rest of me. "Control your expression ! You do like his work, loyalty, sincerity, attitude and appearance. Ok, look away when you talk to him. Moderate your speech ! You only want him to know that these days he's taking too many calls while he's cooking ... and he's spending more time away with friends which pushes out the time when the kids should have dinner and go to sleep ... and he's routinely dishing out stuff which we have mostly accepted in our history together. Ok, ok, sound fair but firm when you tell him".

I finally said to him, "why don't you cook something different that is nutritious yet appealing to the kids "? The look he gave me, only Jack Nicholson could. Part confused, part amused, part defiant.



And I had hesitated about telling him that, after many recent reminders, he had not made a habit of replenishing the stock of items that were now important to us. Recommended in our book on 'food as medicine'. These would help our parents. Couldn't he imagine how happy we would be if he stepped-up or got a bit more flexible ? Couldn't he imagine how happy he would be with a higher place of pride in our household ? What had happened to that spark that prompted him to learn driving so that he could help with errands in the absence of our regular driver ?

Never mind. He had been good. Even now he was good. It's not even that he was beginning to burn out or reach a plateau. There wasn't a fat chance that we would misbehave with him or contemplate his replacement. Or would we, at times, if only fleetingly ? No, no. We shouldn't. What guarantee did we have that another new-age expert of healthy and interesting recipes would have all the other qualities that we so valued ? Of course our cook would continue to stay and work with us.

But our parents had changing needs and our children had changing preferences. If only he could also give us what the winds of change demanded. If only we could get rid of the faint feeling that we were just a little stuck with him. If the wind blew harder and he got blown away, whose fault would it be ? Ours, that we didn't tell him like it was ? Or his own, that he didn't realise it in time ?

Deja vu. When and where did I have the same experience ? Intensely similar feeling ? Vivid image ?

Many, many times ! Even at work ! Sometimes I was that cook and sometimes it was others who were. Have you been such a cook lately ? Have you seen one of late ?

Sunday, 4 December 2011

Marching song


Two things are top of mind for me these days. Well, there are others; but for this show, I want to spare you the distractions of a multi-starrer film, and save myself the obligation of granting each star some screen space.

One, from the advice and opinions I got when I planned to take a break from an active corporate career. "Now you'll know who your real friends are". "Now you'll realise what you are not good at". "In three months time your shelf life will expire and you will be labelled as unemployed". "It will not feel good if others are not interested in what you are saying or doing". "Are you ready for some harsh treatment"? "What about your lifestyle"? Etc etc etc.

It's not just what others say or do; its also my own fears and who I am, that keep bringing me back to the thoughts about humble pie. What does it taste like ? Is it easy to digest ? I don't know. Neither might you, I think. If you have, like me, done reasonably well for the most part, and spent a good portion of time in the company of people who have commensurate lives.

The second, which is top of mind for me these days, is mortality. Pretty commonplace after one crosses the forty mark, I am told. There's so much unfinished business I have with regard to my family and myself. In little and significant ways, I get signals about what two decades of smoking, no exercise, and bad routines have done to me.

Earn my sleep and regain lost ground. So I began with daily walks. From my house, to a nearby hill, and then uphill. Those of you, who have experience with an outdoor physical exercise of some degree of difficulty, will understand how I also began to get clear thoughts, images and feelings during these walks.

One day, while I was struggling to negotiate a particularly steep bend on the road uphill, I heard a voice from within. "I'm ready to eat humble pie but not ready to die". What was that again ? Nothing. But I thought I heard something. Never mind. All I could hear were my breathlessness and creaking shin.

Next day, instead of walking uphill, I tried the impossible. Jogging uphill. At the steep bend, that seemed nastier that day, I heard a voice. "I'm ready to eat humble pie but not ready to die". This time it didn't go away. Perhaps because its rhythm was in sync with my breath and step. "I'm ready to eat humble pie .... huff huff huff .... but not ready to die ... puff puff puff". What was that again ? "I'm ready to eat humble pie ... huff huff huff ... but not ready to die ... puff puff puff ... hup one two three four ... one two three four". I smiled and jogged up the nasty bend. A marching song to help me on subsequent days, eh ?

I have attended college for longer than I needed to and have two post graduate degrees in humanities. And a love for models and constructs therefore.

My marching song seemed incomplete. What if my jogging uphill could be compared to the beginning of my second innings at work ? Would the lines of the marching song change in the medium term ? The long term ? What if it weren't me, but someone else just beginning a professional career? Would my lines for the short, medium and long term still apply ? And help ?

Couldn't get my answers. Went for my walk-cum-jog. Clarity hormones got triggered again. I knew at once what my line in the medium term should be. "I'm not getting that much humble pie, looks like I'm not going to die". And that I would like the song to eventually end with, "I long for some humble pie, I'm quite ready to die".

There was my marching song ! Complete with a model. A happy song that gave me direction. The next day I sang it silently. In full.

"I'm ready to eat humble pie ... huff huff huff ... but not ready to die ... puff puff puff ... hup one two three four ... one two three four".
"I'm not getting that much humble pie ... huff huff huff ... looks like I'm not going to die ... puff puff puff ... hup one two three four ... one two three four".
"I long for some humble pie ... huff huff huff ... I'm quite ready to die ... puff puff puff ... hup one two three four ... one two three four".

I smiled and jogged up more nasty bends that day. Go ahead and make your marching song. If you can't, take mine.

Friday, 2 December 2011

Live-in with an organisation


Someone comes up to you and says, “I want to be in a live-in relationship”. And you begin to think.

Does this person want to choose convenience over responsibility? Keep an exit option open and be focussed on the short term? Make an unconsidered choice and follow the trend? Is influenced by what is increasingly heard or said? Had a bad experience with marriage or witnessed dear ones go through a rough patch?

You may get surprisingly similar thoughts if someone comes up to you and says, “I want a flexible work arrangement”.

Now imagine that it’s my child who comes up to me and says, “I want to be in a live-in relationship”. I can’t just have thoughts and opinions. I will have to act. Do something for my child’s happiness and welfare.

Sure my child can make a choice. Just like she has in the past and handled it well. And be happy. Like I have been with my choices. Then, as an ordinary parent concerned about her welfare, I would want to ensure -

·         that she is making a considered choice and is doing it for the right reasons;
·         that she continues to respect and believe in marriage, to either consider it at some point, or at least, to be at peace with her choice and get peaceful vibes in return from married people;
·         that her partner scores well on the points mentioned above;
·         that she lives in a place that has people who are respectful of people and their choices.

Indulge me. Replace ‘live-in relationship’ with flexible work arrangement. ‘Marriage’ with full time regular work. The ‘person choosing to live-in’ with the candidate desirous of flexible work. The ‘live-in partner’ with hiring manager, supervisor, team mate or family. The ‘place of residence’ with an organisation.

And you might just hit upon the ingredients of making flexible work arrangements work ! Ask your questions, use the four points listed above, and get some answers. As an organisation, check to see how much you generally respect your people and their choices. And you might be able to predict whether and how beneficial it could be to offer flexible work. As an individual, introspect if you continue to appreciate that, all else being equal, the career advancement opportunity should go to the other person on regular employment. And you might temper your insecurities about getting victimised while on flexible work. As a line manager, assess how much you are willing to partner with an employee on flexible work. And you might get the direction to make it work. 

Since our individual and community experience with live-in relationships is more than it is with flexible-work arrangements, we could use the learnings from the former to inform the latter and push it in the right direction. Faster.