Business and Politics

Did you ever stop to consider that Business and Politics are almost identical! Except, that businesses have no multi-party system, which kind of makes business similar to the communist party where anyone can reach the top, but everyone has to toe the party line!- RaviD


The above has to the above ultimate irony for a capitalist business from an ideology point of view.

Some more nuggets -

Monopoly - Monarchy

Big Business - Oligarchy

Board of Directors - Senators / Congressmen / Member of Parliament

Chairman Emeritus - Queen of England / King of Spain / etc.

Institutional Shareholders - Power brokers

Individual Shareholders - Voters

Venture Capitalists - Lobbyists

Transnational Corporations - World Domination

Mergers and Acquisitions - European Union

Corporate De-merger - Dissolution of Czechoslovakia

Corporate Cartels - NATO


By the way did you notice there is no mention of democracy here. Democracy is about promoting equality which is a supposed need (disguised wants), business thrives when there is inequality, which promotes wants. So essentially in a thriving economy or business environment there is not need for a democracy...???!??!? Comments...?

Some more analogies -

Walmart - China

Conglomerates - Ex-Soviet Union

Google - India

GE - USA

Goldman Sachs - Switzerland

Microsoft - Japan

Exxon-Mobile - Saudi Arabia

SAP - Germany

Yahoo - England

Ask.com - France

Apple - Canada

Patent Trolls - Al Qaeda

Bear Stearns - Greece

Lehman Bros. - Iceland

Cisco - South Korea

NAFTA - United Nations

Gatekeepers and Screeners at the door - That's what HR recruiters call themselves!

As mentioned in the prior post I got a bunch of responses to my questions on HR and Recruiting. Some of the responses were just amazing!!!

Listed below is the query I framed and a few selected responses -


"Quite often I hear - "... a resume has less than 30 seconds to make an impact to a recruiter - independent or corporate HR.." WHY?"

- "Let me first correct you: It takes 3-10 seconds to review a resume to verify if it meets qualifications for a majority of positions. If it was 30 seconds, I would never get any work done."

-  "Because time is money."

- "10-15 seconds tops... You have to market yourself if you are missing some requirements on the job description...otherwise 10 seconds is all you will get."

- "My goodness, I don't read resumes for a living, but do you know how many of these answers I could skim over in 30 seconds and get a pretty darn good idea of what they were talking about?"

- "For the same reason cyber security is in such great (sic) shape in this country and beyond. As far as I can tell that's 29 seconds past the maximum attention span of most recruiters."

- "The way we see the problem is often greater than the problem we're trying to solve.

To most people;

1. Busy = important, 30 seconds "I must be busy, I'm important"
2. Decision Making = Important, "5's" (performance level relative to the 1,000's in their industry) aren't asked their thoughts on "move the needle" issues, thus, why not make it up in volume, 30 seconds at a time ... important again
3. Believe their intentions are good; say a prayer and move on

I coach the coachable HR people on how to do the process more effectively and efficiently. However, my systems reward / create consequences for HR performance as most don't.

Litmus Test on the Culture of an HR Dept:

What % of the HR Payroll will be paid, regardless of who is hired?
Example: $5M in salaries and $4.7 is paid regardless while $4.9 - $5.1 has a 95% chance of getting paid. Where's the motivation?

Life's too short to worry about it unless you're helping someone that is open to changing it." 

- "They're not, by and large, out there searching for talent. They're the gatekeepers, who screen applications sent in."

- "Because HR people are the equivalent of soccer goalies - their job is not to let anyone in but to keep just about everyone out. ...Getting your resume or a letter in front of the hiring manager is the only way you can get through the stonewall the square peg HR gatekeepers put in your path."


Now keep in mind the above are just a few excerpts from from about 25% of the responses received, the majority of them were basically of the opinion "How dare I ask this question and bring this issue up!".

Well here are a few of my rebuttals - enjoy!

- "...most of the responses seem to validate the "30 Second" rule / hypothesis.

So taking that for a baseline if one was a great recruiter and received and average of 100 resumes a day, that's about 50mins of your time in the day. I'll be generous and round it up to 60min, wait I'll be magnanimous and give you 1min per resume that's 2 hours of your day every single day of the month. Almost every recruiter out in the field would kill for those kind of potential leads, the fact is none have them, get them, or come even come close to generating them!

So, what do you do the rest of the day? Waste of company time and money if internal Dept. and do outrageously high billing if an external recruiter!

If I was a CEO/CFO/COO I would take a quick look at my HR recruiting Dept and partner recruiting companies and FIRE THEM! HR guys you just discredited your entire industry! You just proved that you provide very little value addition to the hiring process which can be completely substituted by an automated system, albeit one that may require a little more fine tuning"

- "The responses here themselves say a resume is a way to get your "toe" into the door! How can you make a judgement call for an individual by "seeing" their so called "toes" only? It's like the story of the 5 blind men who touched a different part of an elephant and came to a different set of conclusions as to what it was and what it could do, without seeing or even feeling the entire elephant."

- "...almost every other function that you said a "Generalist" may handle has been outsourced or is in the process of being outsourced and automated, or the employee is being "empowered" to handle on their own with the service provider.

So the one pure HR function that you can add value to internally is recruiting, however if that seems too much for most don't blame outsourcing and automation when it takes over completely. What you call "screening" can be done by anyone sitting half way around the world in a window less room, and then making an appointment for the hiring individual by an email or a phone call."

- "...In this day and age of almost 12% unemployment in the US, why employers are unable to fill positions with the "right" and properly "qualified" candidates is the mystery worth exploring..."

 

What does "Over-Qualified" mean for Today's Workers?

Yesterday, I asked a few HR and Recruiting related questions on the social networking site Linked In. I received a bunch of responses.

One a of the few that I found interesting was withdrawn for publishing by the respondent for some reason. However, since they responded to me I will publish the response in my blog for the benefit of everyone to review. I would love to give credit to the writer of this, however the person who actually penned the following statement does not want to have their views published or wishes to remain anonymous. Therefore, I am not identifying them, except to let everyone know that she is a Professional Career Coach with a Global HR Solutions provider.

Typically, "Over-Qualified" for a position in the US is used as a euphemisms for being "too-old" for the particular position or even company culture. Her take -

"I'll respond to being "overqualified." If you are 35 and spent the last 5 yrs in a managerial role and were not "hands-on" then apply for an individual contributor role with no management/supervisory responsibility, you are "overqualified." WHY? Most likely, no matter how much the applicant says they are "ok" not managing people, most likely they will not be a "fit" and will seek a better opportunity before the company sees it's ROI. The applicant isn't "old" but used to working in a different capacity than the job being offered.

Again, if an applicant has 10+ yrs of HR exp at the Dir and above level, they are OVERQUALIFIED to be the HR Assoc responsible for scheduling interviews, processing paperwork, and ordering lunches for the departmental meetings.

Are there cases when applicants may be discriminated against for age? Of course, but a good HR/Recruiter will look for fit and most often we know and have experienced the downside of hiring an overqualified person for a job. Only once in my career did it work and it was because the employee admittedly wanted a "place to hang out" until he retired in 2yrs."

Hope the above helps...

"Mercy killing of Brands... Pros & Cons"

A really thought provoking issue. Secondly, what a question... probably good enough for a Phd dissertation in marketing.

Anyway, to keep it simple and see other viewpoints also. My take is fairly simple - business is there to provide a return on capital employed, when there is no significant return on the capital employed either in the short or long term the business should be liquidated. Obviously, this is a very simplified scenario, hopefully all due diligence is done and all tangible and intangible cost benefit scenarios have been objectively evaluated.

If after doing all the above there is a negative trend for future ROI yes by all means the brand should be killed, otherwise it will negatively impact the overall business, giving a perception that not just one brand is doing poorly, but the entire business is also subject to the same malaise.

To touch upon GM, in my opinion they were too slow and too late in pulling the plug on - Oldsmobile, and even to some extent are doing the same with Buick now. GM makes some of the best vehicles around technology wise, but their perception is that of a stodgy car manufacturer.

The reason you think of "mercy killing" or using the proper term in my opinion "euthanasia", for a brand at-least, would be mainly because the product, service, and it's communication is no longer relevant to the market audience the - consumer. So removing any support would not really have a backlash from the customer. If enough consumers really wanted to use the product or service you wouldn't be thinking about "mercy killing" a brand.

If you look through the marketing history of the major FMCG organizations worldwide there are numerous instances of killing off various brands and not all of them mercifully! In 1993 Phillip Morris Companies, killed off their corporate name when they renamed themselves Altria.

Sometimes there are perfectly good reasons to initiate the killing of established brands, this may sound quite shocking, but look at the marketing from Microsoft which has a history of such behaviour. BTW, I do not want to get into discussing the merits of the product itself.

In 1995 they purposely killed "Windows X.1" OS to introduce "Windows 95". Then in 1998 they killed "Windows 95" to introduce "Windows 98". In 2000 they killed "Windows 98" to introduce "Windows ME". In 2001 they killed "Windows ME" to bring out "Windows XP", and this year they officially killed "Windows XP" to introduce "Windows Vista".

In each cycle of killing off a major brand MS had a perfectly good product at the stage and an established revenue stream that generated billions of dollars, yet they chose to start completely afresh rather than create a line extension.

The above was done as part of a planned strategy known as phased obsolescence, which is based on the theory that if one rests on their laurels too long someone will come and eat their cake, so rather than have that happen one eats their own cake and goes out searching for more. Again another simplistic viewpoint, but it should get the message across.

Hopefully, that provides some fodder for thought. There will never be a right or wrong answer to a query like this, only hindsight will make us comment more on the merits and demerits of each.

"What Consumers Want... As a Marketer if you had the power to know..."

As a professional in the "Product Development" business I get to hear and know all the time, directly from consumers, middle men, sales reps, etc.; what kind of products and services the consumers want and desire.

However, as a person with operational and fiscal responsibility towards my company I have to evaluate objectively whether I 'can' and more importantly 'want' to respond to those demands by putting out a product/service that is financially viable for us, and meets the needs to the consumer also.

In my opinion the reason the marketing landscape is littered with stories of failed products and services is because marketers put too much faith in listening to what the consumer wants. Most marketer's also forget way to often and conveniently how fickle the consumer is and what they want and need is a puzzling dynamic to the consumer themselves.

If you see the most common and basic service almost all consumers want across the globe is 'good supportive customer service', however almost every major global organization fails to deliver on that one service repeatedly. Even the ones that have failed or are failing on this count were once evangelical about the merits of deploying good supportive customer service, yet have in the long term determined that 'not' offering good supportive customer service does not alienate customers once a significant user base has been built up. Is there a certain loss of dissatisfied users - absolutely, however the gain from new customers more than offsets the potential losses due to consolidation and lack of competition that is now becoming rampant in various industries.

What all consumers want is choice, but due to market dynamics and governmental regulations we keep limiting that option. So in the end do we really want to listen to the consumer or just use that as an excuse to gain false empathy with the consumer, similar to the way Mel Gibson used his powers in the movie? Point to ponder....

How can the next president better help small business and entrepreneurs thrive?

Ravi Deva wrote: On 9/20/07 11:27 AM, Ravi Deva wrote: -------------------- Thank you for your personal response. I wasn't expecting any kind of acknowledgment from anyone, but it gives me a glimmer of hope that quite possibly some is at-least willing reach out and hear the opinions of the masses in an uncontrolled setting. Who knows I might even vote for Mr.Obama, he seems to be the most viable candidate out there right now in the Democratic party, plus he represents Illinois my home state. Thank you, Ravi On 9/20/07 10:56 AM, Barack Obama wrote: -------------------- Thanks for participating in Barack's question on LinkedIn Answers – we apologize for the delay in response. We received an incredible number of thoughtful answers, and our campaign will continue to review all of these answers in the days ahead. Barack is committed to helping small businesses and believes they are at the heart of the American economy. He is committed to expanding opportunities and easing the everyday pressures so many businesses face by cutting their health care costs, improving access to capital, and investing in innovation and development. He plans to fix our health care crisis and enable more small businesses to provide affordable care to their employees. He will expand loan programs for small businesses and create a national network of public-private business incubators. He also will invest in women-owned businesses, increase minority access to capital, increase supports for businesses in rural areas, and work to close the digital divide that limits the growth potential of many urban and rural small businesses. We appreciate immensely your willingness to share your insights and suggestions on these issues and your help in achieving these goals. For more information on Barack ideas for improving America visit: www.barackobama.com/issues Thanks, Scott & Becky @ Obama HQ On 9/13/07 9:41 AM, Ravi Deva wrote: -------------------- For small business to truly survive - create a level playing field for all entrepreneurs and businesses. Just because big business has the deep pockets to hire lobbyists and propel their agenda through the executive branch is the biggest impediment for the survival of small business. Create an environment where there is oversight in the real sense for "MEGA" corporations so that they cannot create barriers for free and fair competition with their smaller rivals with the help of big government. Small business does not require sops and platitudes, most of the people who start small businesses do so not because big business is incapable of providing new services, but because it will "NOT" provide new services in a reasonable manner and also because it is too busy trying to protect its turf. Fix the Financial System and Commerce Policy! We are the world's biggest economy, but our fiscal and commerce policy is worse than that of the under-developed nations, not because we do not have the resources, but because we do not have the will to do the right thing. We have been lurching from one financial disaster since almost the last 25years - the S&L crisis, Stock market crash '87, business downturn and internet bubble '90's, and now the real estate and mortgage crisis. What gives? You really don't expect us to believe that big government didn't see this coming to prevent it from happening. Not that I want big government to interfere in everything, but it still does so for the most useless of scenarios so it might as well do so in things that matter! Stop the outsourcing and off shoring of everything otherwise in the long term the entire country will be a hollow shell with no economic activity. How can a small business thrive in the this country when it has to abide by the laws on the this state against a business that thrives in an environment of chaos overseas, without any regard to US protections for safety, environment, respect for personal dignity, etc. That is not fair competition. What will large corporations do next when the cost for off shoring and outsourcing to China and India become sky-high. Move those services and manufacturing to the poverty stricken African continent or some other low cost place because they can do it for cheaper than the Indians or Chinese? Think of the long term when making decisions not just for the duration of your - Presidential Term! Ravi Question Details: -------------------- How can the next president better help small business and entrepreneurs thrive?

Irrational Exuberance or Stupidity! Part - 2

Last week as I started to write about a - bubble of various sorts, forming across the entire gamut of the Indian economy the – sub-prime mortgage mess started to unravel in the US.

Media outlets and various financial organizations expressed shock and disbelief at the ramifications of the situation here in the US. It is interesting that none of them decided to interview the mastermind of the current fiscal mess his holiness - Mr. Alan Greenspan, under whose watchful eye the entire current sub-prime fiasco has it's genesis!

Yes, Mr.Greenspan is a very erudite and knowledgeable person; he is also the architect of this current mess. Mr.Greenspan had the knowledge and the tools at his disposal to prevent this situation in the sub-prime mortgage market as well as the deeper credit crunch that is making ripples across the globe. In fact if memory serves me and possibly other folks correctly this is not the first time Mr.Greenspan can be faulted for his acts of fiscal omissions - The Great Internet Bubble of the 20th Century also happened on his watch!

Now in India we have Prime Minister - Dr. Man Mohan Singh, who also is a very erudite fellow as well as an economist like Mr.Greenspan. Again if my memory serves me correctly the last time India as a country was almost at the doorstep of financial insolvency, this same Dr. Singh was at the head of the finance portfolio. Wonder if this is just a coincidence or fate as they say in India?

Lets look at some other interesting parallels.

Things that happened on Alan Greenspan's watch.

Black Monday 1987.

Internet pump and dump.

Beginning and end of Real-estate boom.

Super hot and sizzling economy, followed by busts and boom.

Overall decline in manufacturing economy!

Things that happened when Man Mohan Singh was lead Economic Advisor to PM, was FM, or PM himself.

India close to financial insolvency 1990.

Indian stock market pump and dump 1991/92.

Indian real-estate market becomes super hot.

Super hot and sizzling economy, followed by busts and boom.

Over all decline in manufacturing economy.

What happens next in India?

Every time I talk of the above scenario I am told to stop being a naysayer, and look at the rapid strides the service sector economy has made and the growth of employment etc. that will eventually create a trickle down effect that will uplift the Indian masses. Everyone tells me about the transition of global economies, from being agrarian to industrial manufacturing to eventually service driven.

TO WHICH I SAY CRAP! STOP THIS NONSENSE, FUELED BY PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL DRIVEL!

SHOW ME ONE, ONLY ONE ECOMOMY THAT HAS SUSTAINED ITSELF ON A SERVICE ECONOMY WITH A GROWING POPULATION!

World War I & II saved the British Empire from being a footnote in history 50years ago. Japan has seen it's best days behind it. The Asian Tigers on the Pacific Rim are barely managing to keep their heads above water from the onslaught of the Chinese Tsunami. Countries on the African and South American continent barely register on any economic indicator or can hope to do so in the near future. Argentina and Brazil have never lived up to their potential despite the billions of dollars pumped into them in the past. Except for South Africa which has some economic activity the rest of the African continent it seems will be battling a human medical catastrophe.

Granted some of my predictions are a little extreme, but with a looming global recession, it would not take much for those predictions to come true!

Lets not forget about the nature of the Internet and electronic specialty service economy which moves at the speed of light is also susceptible to an equally rapid transformation into a commodity service that tends to flatten and remove various hierarchical barriers to entry for most service businesses. This not only reduces margins it automates and eliminates various functions that may have been essential earlier, and in turn may have been a source of wide scale employment.

The speed of the service economy is very rapid and by nature disruptive; it has a cannibalizing effect on general business and society as a whole. This is due to the constant search for greater economies of scale and optimization of efficiencies. We have witnessed this on a wide scale level during the dotcom meltdown. The same happens and has happened in an agrarian and industrialized economy, but at a much slower pace. When this reduction in economic activity does happen there is already enough ancillary business activity that has been created that it smoothes out the usual and periodic cyclical business and economic ups and downs.

My next post will touch on the immediate and near term ramifications of this service economy.

Irrational Exuberance or Stupidity? Part - I

For an individual that has been closely associated with the two business sectors in the US - IT Enabled Services and Retail, that have or are about to take off in the Southeast Asia region, especially India I sometimes find myself having a feeling of deja vu when reading excerpts of the astounding economic growth happening there. I have used the terms ITES in the US context because just as in India they were part of the IT growth boom in the US also.

This sense of deja vu is not of the same optimistic kind promoted and shared by a lot of other evangelists of developing world growth patterns.

I rejoice at the phenomenal growth that has and is continuing to happen in India; however I keep waiting to see some measure of hardcore economic activity in the development of physical infrastructure take place. Even when any activity to shore up physical infrastructure has / does happen it is only in response to an ancillary investment in islands of economic boom in places where there is already an ITES infrastructure.

Let's not forget what the acronym ITES stands for - Information Technology Enabled Services, in the majority of cases this is nothing but once again a fancy term for low end backroom processing support work that has been offshored to India from the more developed nations.

Support activity can only happen if there is primary business activity to be supported, if we keep on creating and encouraging an environment where home grown physical industries are decimated and discouraged we will face the same consequences that the US is currently facing.

The home grown US economy is already frayed at the edges and is starting to tear apart due to the lack of regular investments in in the physical infrastructure for almost the last 30years. Let's not forget even the robust internet era of the 1990's in the US could not keep the economy going for long.

I understand all investments follow the money trail, but you cannot have isolated islands of economic prosperity and growth in a land of 1.2billion people, not have some kind of equitable balance being maintained without having nasty repercussions. We have seen the former USSR implode and explode over ten years ago, which had similar kind of isolated pockets of growth. Granted India does have a wider base of business, but we have already seen the erosion and extinction of numerous small scale businesses and industries all over India, especially in areas far from these Special Economic Zones - SEZs.

At the time when I was moving to the US in the early '90s, major trans-national consumer (hard and soft goods) corporations were making a beeline to India to capitalize on the spending power of the - emerging Indian middle class. Many of them lost their shirts in the ensuing years and some have barely managed to stay around profitably even after all these years. This despite all the years of boom activity.

There is risk in all activity, however when people lose sight of rationality in understanding and accepting risk, it is politely termed - Irrational Exuberance, or in layman terms - Stupidity!

The Indian stock market has been growing at a double digit rates for the past few years, the real-estate situation is even worse prices are going up in triple digits and the lay people are lapping it up in the name of growth, being led around by organized opportunists - like rats dancing to the tune of the Pied Piper!

My opinions may seem harsh to many, but I have my reasons and will elaborate on them going forward.

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 14

*
Is attrition a "thing" of the new century? Why isn't anybody bothered about it?



“Attrition, it can be a blessing as well as a curse for both the employer & employee, has always been there & is not a new buzz word.

When organizations face a tough competitive landscape for cost control, attrition - albeit voluntary may provide an easy way to cut spending without having to incur additional costs related to separation. Depending on the employee that departs there may be associated repercussions, for example if a key employee that is part of a crucial project or team leaves then there may be more problems, however, if a relatively non-essential/under-performing employee departs it may be a blessing?

Attrition also keeps an organization vibrant a& dynamic by infusing new ideas & talent, the flip side is loss of employees with key talent & experience possibly to competitors exacerbating the situation further.

For organizations facing high attrition rates in any industry or geographical location it is symptomatic of problems such as -

*Highly skilled workers employed in basic entry level jobs.

*Depressed wages in a high demand industry.

*Stressful & high pressure work environment.

*Improper or lack of verification of candidate credentials.

*Poor internal company culture that contradicts the projected company vision.

*Last, but not the least poor HR practices - hiring, training, & orientation of new employees.

Of the above I would like to touch on the last 3 in more detail -

In my experience employees having a short history of tenure at earlier 'jobs' are unlikely to stay longer at any future opportunity.

2ndly, their short tenure at previous positions would seriously inhibit their ability to gain expertise for future positions.

The part about internal company culture vs. projected vision. I 'm sure almost all of us can vouch for knowing organizations embodying the above. Due a meteoric rise or an isolated blockbuster product/service companies starts to live in their own 'lala land' which has absolutely no co-relation to their work practices.

Lastly, due to internal organizational pressures the HR staff is out of the communication loop when parameters are being drawn up for the various requirements internal departments have for workforce selection.

I have come across situations where requirements are so vague that all you need is a - 'warm body with a pulse' or so exacting and stringent no matter where you look you may not find a qualified candidate. Once a consensus is reached on hiring a certain individual there hardly any proper follow up regarding training/orientation.

Per my observations almost 80% of new employees get a cursory walk through of organizational practices & objectives & then get thrown into a grind-mill. There is no communication with these employees from the HR staff who after hiring take a hands off approach. There is very little if any contact of new employees with their immediate supervisors except in work related meetings, where they are supposed to listen only. Till the time they get their formal review/appraisal at least 6 months if not a year down the road, new employees are 'MAYBE" given a benchmark of performance objectives they were supposed to have been performing against. Even so no rhyme or reason is given for a majority of the ratings that are handed out. Most companies have some kind of exit interview programs, but they are hardly utilized. In HR forums everyone agrees ‘Exit interviews’ are a powerful tool to reveal causes for attrition, however most either do not use them or even when they are used nothing is done with the results.

Going back to my point about internal communication of HR staff within the organization, they have an unenviable job if it is to be done right. Almost 90% of HR recruiters are generalists & people who are usually at the entry level position of most organizations yet we put the burden of screening and selecting potential future superstars for the organization on them. Would welcome more observations... ”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 13

*

What is the funniest human resources story you have????


“My comment does not pertain to any particular incident, but to the seemingly insane, moronic, as well as oxy-moronic questions that potential qualified candidates get asked during interviews, and the person asking feels that they are going to get a real and genuine answer.

Sometimes, when I have been asked such questions I have felt like giving the 'genuine' answer, but then good sense or rather - 'hypocrisy' has prevailed and I have kept my real answer to myself. There have been instances when the person sitting next to me has asked a potential candidate one of the questions and I have had to literally choke and chortle myself from blurting something on the verge of being censored!

My list (can always be added to) with the top questions in random order -

* What is your current compensation?

* What are your current compensation expectations?

* Why do you want to leave your existing job?

* Why do you want to work with our company?

* Can we contact your current & immediate boss?

* Where do you see yourself with our organization in the next 5 years?

* What do you rate as important in your life - money, family, career, or something else?

* Can you get along with your boss?

* What kind of boss would you like?

* Why do you think we should hire you?

* What would your boss say about you?

* Do you get along with people?

* Can you work 'overtime' to finish a crucial project, if needed?

The list not all inclusive, but just a sampling.

Here's one I was actually asked by one of the biggest MNCs in India, it went like this - (after 2 hours of a grueling 2nd interview) - ...we really like what you have to offer, we are the final decision makers with no further review and would be willing to make an offer on the spot, keep in mind we have people lined up to do almost anything to work for us (true). "Would you be willing to shave your facial hair? The culture of our company predicates that people with facial hair are perceived as being lazy and incompetent. Please take 15minutes to review and let us know your answer."

I heard the offer, their condition, and expectation of the response. Without even batting an eyelid I put my papers in my bag, got up, thanked them for their time and added " ... it was a shame that they did not review my application in detail earlier, as it would have spared everyone the trouble of wasting so much time, as my photograph (a requirement for the job application) was on it with facial hair, secondly nowhere in the job ad was there such a stipulation that one had to be clean shaved!...." I extended my hand for a handshake, but then just waved, turned around and walked out of the room.

Outside, I was stopped by an HR associate who came running upto to me and asked me to wait in another room for a minute. No sooner than I went in the 2 gentlemen who supposedly held my fate (job-wise) in their hands came into congratulate me on being selected to join their company. I was a little taken aback and asked what about the 'facial hair' they brushed it off as a "TEST" to see how susceptible I would be to various pressures in compromising my integrity!”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 12

*

Call Centre Groups


“ It depends where you are based there are several such associations. If you were to do a Google search and then localize it you may find what you are looking for. You may want to check the following site

http://www.customerservicemanager.com/call-center-associations.htm ”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 11

*
What are the top 3 things that are critical for the success of your projects?


“My top 3 critical requirements for the success of any project - large or small are -

* - Clarity of Vision - CONSTANT FOCUS - through Communication, internal & external.

* - Commitment of Vision - OF ADEQUATE RESOUCES - internal & external.

* - Implementation of Vision, adhering to time-lines otherwise - ORGANIZATIONAL APATHY - sets in.”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 10

*
Google is a leading company on Internet, in the ads market, in video distribution services, mail services, map services, in networks and datacenters. They're everywhere, before everybody, how long do you think the others will survive ?



“Disruptive new offerings that would take peer to peer social networking technology and apply them to the CRM and ecommerce fields, making the marketing and sales of various services on a peer to peer targeted basis. This would eventually lead to greater and more diverse outsourcing of various services / functions by large corporations, as their scale would prevent them from entering this realm. These customized offerings could be monetized or be offered gratis depending on the provider of such services. The above could be achieved by advances in technology - hardware and software, which would come from the creation of the much anticipated and hyped ‘neural net P2P computing grid’ where each peer node would be a server and client simultaneously, thus doing away with the massive data centers that companies like GOOGLE have. Secondly, a lot of information being part of the public domain would be the base on which individual services would be built. Once again making the individual the master of their domain. I’m sure someone will point out privacy and security concerns; however I’m sure supporting technology would be available to filter and scrub the relevant personal information and yet make the information meaningful enough to others for various purposes. That’s my vision of the future…”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 9

*

Is 'BRIBING' the right thing to do to become really powerful?


“Was that a ‘real question’ or a ‘rhetorical question’ and what is the context of this question?

The reason I ask is to determine how to answer it, instead of giving an answer full of moral platitudes and ethical values.

Depending on where you are and what the business environment values are, a referral fee commission may be viewed as a ‘bribe’ in certain situations, whereas a ‘bribe’ in another environment may be business as usual somewhere else.

The second part of the question ‘ becoming powerful’ is an enigma in itself to the person asking the question. So without knowing the context of this query I guess all answers are moot…”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 8

*
How would you differentiate between skill, knowledge and competency ?


“Competency = basic / learned capability required gain knowledge and skills.

Knowledge = basic / advanced information required to perform certain functions.

Skills = the dexterity to required to perform those functions.

Expertise = Competency + Knowledge + Skills ”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 7

*

I am looking for Professionals, Managers who are responsible for outsourcing contracts.



“Please provide details on your domains of expertise, a few references of projects currently ongoing or recently completed, billing rates, and average lead times along-with your location in India. Will certainly get back to you if this passes muster with my associates. ”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 6

*
How Do I Introduce Western Style entrepreneurial skills Into countries like Malaysia, Russia, India, China, Philippines, etc.


“I am trying to understand the scope of your question/comment, based on some of the answers I'm even more confused. Are trying to provide a service to encourage entrepreneurial talent in these countries to use western marketing concepts within their own countries? If so, then you might as well take India off your list as there is no dearth of entrepreneurial skills or the knowledge of any proven marketing concept there. I would venture to go as far to say that business in India may offer concepts that are light years beyond what is currently being practiced in the west, not to mention they have been validated in their own markets. All this due to a thriving capitalist economy, despite strict government oversight. If you are trying to provide a service to assist businesses in these countries market their services and products in the west, then there may be opportunities. However, all that depends on your contacts, cost structure, and the services that you can provide. All of which is no different from any other business service - B2B, B2C, MLM, etc. ”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 5

*
Is everyone at Linked in Single? or am I missing my 'prospects' :-) ?


“Maybe I'm missing something, but the link to your site is password protected...even before you see a web page???? Could that possibly be the cause of your problem...???? I used IE & FF, access issues...preventing even a look see?”

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 4

*
How do you ask a former star employee to leave?



“Your question on "How to?" seems a little more in-depth than just a superficial question to a performance related situation.

You mention - - this person is emotionally attached to the company

- Why / How ? - is this person a former partner who is not happy with a new direction the organization may be going?

- Was this person promised / awarded with high rewards compared to initial baseline
expectations than what the company initially had? Now that that the business is maturing the expectations are different? So a change in star status????

- Since yours may still be a fledgling organization you may not have a formal HR setup and everyone maybe viewing themselves as having potential ownership of the company, though in reality there may be only one or two real owners.

- No matter where you are or what you do a - 'friend' is never perceived as a - 'boss' or 'mentor', so don't try to become a 'boss' now after being a 'friend'. You will usually be ignored at best and / or be viewed with antagonism and being arrogant otherwise.

My suggestion is to have a peer of your's have a formal heart to heart talk with this associate and plant a seed of separation on either a voluntary or involuntary basis. Sometimes even the office grapevine has it's uses in resolving such issues. This way if and when you finally discuss the separation issue directly it will not come as a surprise to this individual as then it would be viewed as inevitable since others in the work place knew of it also.

Lastly, I can't imagine having dead weight around as you imply is good for the company bottom-line, so also mention that the organization's finances cannot support operational inefficiencies therefore separation would be the most mutually beneficial option. Keep the discussion focussed on the organizational needs and expectations, do not delve into personal issues, habits, or behaviour as this would be counter-productive.

Be firm, but compassionate. Offer a personal recommendation to assist with new endevours if the person requests and keep it brief and business oriented. Hopefully, your friendship will survive this incident."

Sample of my musings on Linked In - 3

*
Greed is good. But what’s better than greed?



“Having your CAKE and being ABLE TO EAT IT !

Greed is only a CONCEPT, a means to an end... THE CAKE !

If you never get the CAKE, and always keep running after it - You are labeled GREEDY !

Those that have are - CONTENT, those that don't have are - GREEDY !

CONTENTMENT IS BLISS !!!!!!!!!”