"Nishkaam Karma" is perhaps one of the greatest contributions of the Bhagvad Gita to world philosophy. It seems to be a sure-shot model for living a pleasant life. Yet our religious gurus and self-help books rarely preach this vital concept; in fact, they go to the extent of misinterpreting it in models such as "work and you will definitely be rewarded" and creating the notion of a gullible and corrupt God. I wonder why this simple concept has become so rarely practiced.
On some reflection, I feel that we have been built physically and mentally only to work, to contribute. We require food and shelter, so we may have energy to work. We are given the ability and desire to learn, so that we can contribute better, work more efficiently. We have been given the sense to identify excellence or laxity in our work, so we may ensure the former. We have been given the sense of liking and choice, so we may identify what kind of work we can be best at. And finally, we're gifted a conscience, which ensures that we choose a positive and constructive area of work. Nature has clearly built us to work and contribute to the world in our own positive way.
Executing this right and duty to contribute seems to have no negatives or challenges. Working keeps us fit to live and continue working. Improvising on our efforts exercises and satisfies our mind. Remaining synchronous with our conscience, and detachment from results ensure a mind free from anxiety, free to be innocent, intelligent and creative. We can be our real selves, free to trust and love everyone, unhindered by the baggage of their past actions. Our positive contributions, our trust and love deliver happiness to the world around us, which thereby becomes even easier to work in. I find it hard to see any flaw in nature's design for us.
Nishkaam Karma builds utopia for us wherever we are. We have the ability to pursue it regardless of age, sex, wealth, or location. We can find Nishkaam Karma practiced by people across religions - the famous ones range from Mother Teresa to Warren Buffett to Gandhiji to Albert Einstein to Peter Drucker's grandmother (read his autobiography sometime).
Yet this practice is almost extinct in our world today. Despite longer lives, excellent technology for convenience, and stronger world peace, we are not at peace with life. We worry about wealth, security, reputation, what not! We look for opportunities to feel hurt, rather than opportunities to serve. Rather than take moral judgments through our in-built conscience (which only gets stronger through practice), we outsource them to religion. We observe religious practices with zeal and lack of logic matched only by that of OCD patients. While nature gives us friends and colleagues and family to love innocently and contribute positively to, we seek importance and superiority. We deliberately choose not to trust people and find it wise to be "shrewd" and protect our possessions - wasting energy securing ourselves from many who may actually desire only our well-being. Seriously, are we this stupid?!
Organized religions of today reinforce our deviation from happiness. They ask us to bypass our conscience and sense of logic, and outsource judgments to their "one-show-fits-all" illogical rules, many of which were actually defined to be practical centuries ago. Our religious leaders interpret and even evolve our philosophical heritage for their convenience - it is much easier to tell stories of demons and family feuds of Ramayana and Mahabharata, than to teach the concepts behind the Upanishadas and Vedas, or guide us in figuring the principles that should govern our lives. It is obviously easier for them to sell the idea of a "Transactional God" - a Being full of limitations, who punishes and rewards, who can be bribed and fooled, and who we can distract through daily pujas and offerings.
I am not against religion. True religion is nothing but philosophy. Religion offers suggestions about life. Hinduism is not the only religion talking of detached service - Jainism is not merely about wealth offerings and paryushana, but rather absolute detachment (which is now merely symbolic and ignored); Buddhism is about a quest for spiritual awareness and a benign life, not the creation of gold-plated Buddha statues; Christianity is not the set of rules on abortion and gay marriage - it is about seeking "to understand, not be understood; to love, more than be loved".
It seems plain stupidity of us to go against our natural inclination and choose a life of misery over happiness. My preliminary analysis says that our tendency to learn from others (who currently practice this stupidity) makes us defy our natural inclination and logic. This has strengthened over generations, and here we are.
Fortunately, we can reverse this any day, very easily, by changing our choice. It is also on us to make sure that we do not distract the still-innocent next generation from following their natural inclination, right and duty to only enjoy making positive contributions throughout life.
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Friday, July 12, 2013
The Weakness of Positive Emotions
I was giving a pep talk to my colleagues yesterday, when I had an interesting realization - we fail at achieving our positive targets because of the weakness of our positive emotions.
Interesting words, "positive emotions" and "positive targets"... Let me clarify. Negative emotions include anger, vengeance, fear, desperation, etc. Negative targets are the targets we seek being driven by our negative emotions - say the desire to hurt someone, desire to save someone, to escape from a scary place, and so on. Positive emotions include enthusiasm, care, ambition, etc. They are usually propelled from within us, and not by some negative situation around us. Positive targets, ones that emerge from these positive emotions, include the desire to grow, improve, become slim-n-fit, help, etc.
We all know the story of the lady who, on finding her infant trapped, gets a miraculous bout of energy out of nowhere, and succeeds in saving her child. We know countless stories of weak people exacting revenge on big villains. We ourselves get driven when we are desperate - when we are chased by a dog, or when we have to give a critical examination - we know no fevers, no ailments, no tiredness. Yet we do not have this desperation when we work for our careers, our products, our pro-active fitness plans, and so on.
For most of us, positive emotions are much weaker than negative emotions. People who can strengthen their positive emotions - who can maintain a resolve even when no desperation exists - end up succeeding. I read once that Azim Premji and Narayana Murthy work 70-80 hours a week. The President of the United States puts in no less. Follow Mukesh Ambani or Bill Gates - you will find no difference. It's not that they won't survive if they don't work this hard - they have far surpassed levels of achievement that most of us dream of. They succeeded, and continue to succeed, because they have reinforced their positive emotions.
It is uncommon to find positive emotions succeed. When we try to build our careers, we allow social occasions, travel excursions, health issues, family problems, TV shows, pretty much every little thing, to distract us. We therefore fail to achieve great successes of the scale that people tend to reach through fear or vengeance. And it is therefore unsurprising that positively successful people are also uncommon.
We need to ask ourselves - why can we not wake up at 4 AM and put in 12 or 14 hours of work even if we don't have external pressure? It is fine if we accept that we are not serious about our positive ambitions - that we wish to achieve them by fluke if at all - rather than apply halfhearted efforts that are bound to fail. Let the serious amongst us realize this common weakness, and choose to apply thrust towards their positive targets no less than the miracle energy we tend to receive under duress.
Interesting words, "positive emotions" and "positive targets"... Let me clarify. Negative emotions include anger, vengeance, fear, desperation, etc. Negative targets are the targets we seek being driven by our negative emotions - say the desire to hurt someone, desire to save someone, to escape from a scary place, and so on. Positive emotions include enthusiasm, care, ambition, etc. They are usually propelled from within us, and not by some negative situation around us. Positive targets, ones that emerge from these positive emotions, include the desire to grow, improve, become slim-n-fit, help, etc.
We all know the story of the lady who, on finding her infant trapped, gets a miraculous bout of energy out of nowhere, and succeeds in saving her child. We know countless stories of weak people exacting revenge on big villains. We ourselves get driven when we are desperate - when we are chased by a dog, or when we have to give a critical examination - we know no fevers, no ailments, no tiredness. Yet we do not have this desperation when we work for our careers, our products, our pro-active fitness plans, and so on.
For most of us, positive emotions are much weaker than negative emotions. People who can strengthen their positive emotions - who can maintain a resolve even when no desperation exists - end up succeeding. I read once that Azim Premji and Narayana Murthy work 70-80 hours a week. The President of the United States puts in no less. Follow Mukesh Ambani or Bill Gates - you will find no difference. It's not that they won't survive if they don't work this hard - they have far surpassed levels of achievement that most of us dream of. They succeeded, and continue to succeed, because they have reinforced their positive emotions.
It is uncommon to find positive emotions succeed. When we try to build our careers, we allow social occasions, travel excursions, health issues, family problems, TV shows, pretty much every little thing, to distract us. We therefore fail to achieve great successes of the scale that people tend to reach through fear or vengeance. And it is therefore unsurprising that positively successful people are also uncommon.
We need to ask ourselves - why can we not wake up at 4 AM and put in 12 or 14 hours of work even if we don't have external pressure? It is fine if we accept that we are not serious about our positive ambitions - that we wish to achieve them by fluke if at all - rather than apply halfhearted efforts that are bound to fail. Let the serious amongst us realize this common weakness, and choose to apply thrust towards their positive targets no less than the miracle energy we tend to receive under duress.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Empower politicians to make a better India!
It is commonplace for us to complain about poor governance in India. Projects are not completed in time, promises are not kept, benefits do not reach beneficiaries.
I believe the solution for improving this poor state of governance is in empowering our elected representatives and expanding their number. I realize that this might be quite contrary to the prevailing (fashionable) mindset of disgust towards the incumbent politicians.
I believe that the key cause of inefficiency and ineffectiveness of governance is the fact that essentially nobody is responsible for good governance. Let me elaborate why:
Our first reaction towards poor governance (failed projects, sustenance of corruption, etc.) is to hold our elected representatives responsible. But the reality is that they hardly have any power. Even Narendra Modi, with all his supposedly dictatorial mgmt style, cannot choose his team. He must work with the same bunch of IAS, IFS, GAS, etc. officers that Gujarat has been bestowed with (by a body that reports neither to him nor to us the people). He cannot fire them; he cannot hire them; he cannot penalize or reward them with real performance incentives - he just has the limited ability of transferring them and maybe threatening them with pathetic assignments or dummy cases. He does not even have the ability to choose his ministers in charge of various departments - the finance minister must be an MLA popular in some constituency, while even a Nobel laureate in Economics is disbarred from being appointed!
The team given to ministers and the CM has lifetime job security. They will not even face any penalty for performing badly - in fact, they can indirectly threaten the minister to lose his department (and constituency) by choosing to ignore his directives. These "cadres" themselves form a power center, protecting each other from other layers, while within their layers, create a merit-less hierarchy. Seniority and authority must be given through age and time spent in service, and not on basis of effectiveness or service delivered.
It is not that these cadres have any authority either. Even the seemingly all-powerful IAS officers are forced to work with a team of much older and often motivation-less deputies, who are appointed entirely without his say, and also enjoy a lifelong job guarantee. Very often, the best an officer can do is insult or humiliate his subordinates, hoping (in vain) that maybe that the perceived fear might motivate his team, but his team is too smart to fall for that.
The ensuing result is that anyone in the chain can stop an initiative from succeeding, a project from completing. So the best our helpless-yet-responsible politicians can do is make some money at it while hearing their constituents' curses. We force them to make promises that they can't possibly keep, and them blame them when the inevitable happens. We do not give them authority, we do not pay them decently, we despise them and blame them for things beyond their control, and then we expect them to be honest and magically effective - are we that unrealistic and stupid?
Another reason for poor governance is the way authority is distributed. The city of Gandhinagar got a Municipal Corporation recently, but this corporation has hardly any authority to serve people - they cannot enact local laws, cannot spend for public welfare beyond a tight budget supported by meager taxes, cannot improve police security, cannot promote industries. How can this body be considered the authority over Gandhinagar? No wonder we never bother to remember who our councilor is!
In fact, given the deadlocked system, how can we even expect those councilors to do anything in our interest at all? Think of it, what motivation can these people possibly have?
I feel particularly disappointed at this situation because it has a simple solution, which we fail to follow - a solution proven and sustained over centuries at other countries, like the US:
The solution expects us to recognize the fact that we are a democratic nation. By definition, being a democracy implies that we must govern ourselves. We (through our representatives) must have complete direct authority to define our policies and priorities. We cannot be taken for a ride by a select few that passed a UPSC/GPSC examination. In fact, we must have authority to elect all senior officers - in the US, not just lawmakers, but even judges, public attorneys, police chiefs, heads of several departments, etc. are directly elected.
Hence the first step is to increase the range of positions that require getting elected to. Note that this need not be costly - these elections can easily be consolidated with others at fixed intervals by setting a chain of replacements. The US, over the past 200+ years, has not once required an emergency election of Congress or the President.
Thereafter, we must focus all executive authority to one Chief Executive. This CEO must be able to choose his/her team, ways of managing the team, ways of reporting, ways of managing projects and responsibilities, and so on. We must ensure that the CEO gets all the necessary flexibility and authority required to successfully fulfill the role we entrusted him/her. With this CEO in place, we are no longer victims of lack of accountability.
Next, we must set up systems to ensure that the CEO doesn't take us for a ride, say like Indira Gandhi did, or Narendra Modi might as some fear. We must maintain a set of basic guidelines and principles that our CEO cannot violate, and cannot modify without our direct and wholehearted consent. This set is what the "constitution" is supposed to offer. We must also set up checks to ensure that our CEO chooses appropriate people as senior colleagues - the way the board may have a say in appointing CFOs and EVPs and Presidents, an independently elected board (aka "legislature") (and not a politically appointed governor) must approve the CEO's appointments.
And finally, let us keep it our own business to determine the laws and objectives that the CEO should enforce and attain - the way shareholders elect a board to set the direction for the CEO, we should appoint this independent legislature.
At lower and more local levels, let us again set up similar structures, like say a council of directly-elected representatives that decide priorities for the city, and a CEO mayor that executes those priorities. Let us hold the board responsible if it charts bad priorities, and let us hold the CEO responsible if he/she fails to achieve the targets.
At the top few levels, we can maintain a decent critical body, like the shadow cabinet in the UK, or simply the opposition in the legislature, to continually monitor the role of the CEO and point out flaws that might go unnoticed. In today's age of information technology, the media can play that role even better than the opposition.
The system I have proposed has been proven to work and sustain. It will increase our faith in our representatives, because now they will be empowered to actually represent us. It will help our executives do their jobs, because they will not remain bound by rules (or appointees) that nobody really wanted in place.
Those of you who have bothered to read this write-up entirely: I ask you why we cannot or should not switch to the model I have suggested, and if you agree with me, suggest how we can manage this transition.
Hope to have your inputs!
I believe the solution for improving this poor state of governance is in empowering our elected representatives and expanding their number. I realize that this might be quite contrary to the prevailing (fashionable) mindset of disgust towards the incumbent politicians.
I believe that the key cause of inefficiency and ineffectiveness of governance is the fact that essentially nobody is responsible for good governance. Let me elaborate why:
Our first reaction towards poor governance (failed projects, sustenance of corruption, etc.) is to hold our elected representatives responsible. But the reality is that they hardly have any power. Even Narendra Modi, with all his supposedly dictatorial mgmt style, cannot choose his team. He must work with the same bunch of IAS, IFS, GAS, etc. officers that Gujarat has been bestowed with (by a body that reports neither to him nor to us the people). He cannot fire them; he cannot hire them; he cannot penalize or reward them with real performance incentives - he just has the limited ability of transferring them and maybe threatening them with pathetic assignments or dummy cases. He does not even have the ability to choose his ministers in charge of various departments - the finance minister must be an MLA popular in some constituency, while even a Nobel laureate in Economics is disbarred from being appointed!
The team given to ministers and the CM has lifetime job security. They will not even face any penalty for performing badly - in fact, they can indirectly threaten the minister to lose his department (and constituency) by choosing to ignore his directives. These "cadres" themselves form a power center, protecting each other from other layers, while within their layers, create a merit-less hierarchy. Seniority and authority must be given through age and time spent in service, and not on basis of effectiveness or service delivered.
It is not that these cadres have any authority either. Even the seemingly all-powerful IAS officers are forced to work with a team of much older and often motivation-less deputies, who are appointed entirely without his say, and also enjoy a lifelong job guarantee. Very often, the best an officer can do is insult or humiliate his subordinates, hoping (in vain) that maybe that the perceived fear might motivate his team, but his team is too smart to fall for that.
The ensuing result is that anyone in the chain can stop an initiative from succeeding, a project from completing. So the best our helpless-yet-responsible politicians can do is make some money at it while hearing their constituents' curses. We force them to make promises that they can't possibly keep, and them blame them when the inevitable happens. We do not give them authority, we do not pay them decently, we despise them and blame them for things beyond their control, and then we expect them to be honest and magically effective - are we that unrealistic and stupid?
Another reason for poor governance is the way authority is distributed. The city of Gandhinagar got a Municipal Corporation recently, but this corporation has hardly any authority to serve people - they cannot enact local laws, cannot spend for public welfare beyond a tight budget supported by meager taxes, cannot improve police security, cannot promote industries. How can this body be considered the authority over Gandhinagar? No wonder we never bother to remember who our councilor is!
In fact, given the deadlocked system, how can we even expect those councilors to do anything in our interest at all? Think of it, what motivation can these people possibly have?
I feel particularly disappointed at this situation because it has a simple solution, which we fail to follow - a solution proven and sustained over centuries at other countries, like the US:
The solution expects us to recognize the fact that we are a democratic nation. By definition, being a democracy implies that we must govern ourselves. We (through our representatives) must have complete direct authority to define our policies and priorities. We cannot be taken for a ride by a select few that passed a UPSC/GPSC examination. In fact, we must have authority to elect all senior officers - in the US, not just lawmakers, but even judges, public attorneys, police chiefs, heads of several departments, etc. are directly elected.
Hence the first step is to increase the range of positions that require getting elected to. Note that this need not be costly - these elections can easily be consolidated with others at fixed intervals by setting a chain of replacements. The US, over the past 200+ years, has not once required an emergency election of Congress or the President.
Thereafter, we must focus all executive authority to one Chief Executive. This CEO must be able to choose his/her team, ways of managing the team, ways of reporting, ways of managing projects and responsibilities, and so on. We must ensure that the CEO gets all the necessary flexibility and authority required to successfully fulfill the role we entrusted him/her. With this CEO in place, we are no longer victims of lack of accountability.
Next, we must set up systems to ensure that the CEO doesn't take us for a ride, say like Indira Gandhi did, or Narendra Modi might as some fear. We must maintain a set of basic guidelines and principles that our CEO cannot violate, and cannot modify without our direct and wholehearted consent. This set is what the "constitution" is supposed to offer. We must also set up checks to ensure that our CEO chooses appropriate people as senior colleagues - the way the board may have a say in appointing CFOs and EVPs and Presidents, an independently elected board (aka "legislature") (and not a politically appointed governor) must approve the CEO's appointments.
And finally, let us keep it our own business to determine the laws and objectives that the CEO should enforce and attain - the way shareholders elect a board to set the direction for the CEO, we should appoint this independent legislature.
At lower and more local levels, let us again set up similar structures, like say a council of directly-elected representatives that decide priorities for the city, and a CEO mayor that executes those priorities. Let us hold the board responsible if it charts bad priorities, and let us hold the CEO responsible if he/she fails to achieve the targets.
At the top few levels, we can maintain a decent critical body, like the shadow cabinet in the UK, or simply the opposition in the legislature, to continually monitor the role of the CEO and point out flaws that might go unnoticed. In today's age of information technology, the media can play that role even better than the opposition.
The system I have proposed has been proven to work and sustain. It will increase our faith in our representatives, because now they will be empowered to actually represent us. It will help our executives do their jobs, because they will not remain bound by rules (or appointees) that nobody really wanted in place.
Those of you who have bothered to read this write-up entirely: I ask you why we cannot or should not switch to the model I have suggested, and if you agree with me, suggest how we can manage this transition.
Hope to have your inputs!
Sunday, March 3, 2013
Greatness
It's only by seeking simplicity and service, and by shunning all pretensions of greatness, that we can achieve true greatness and lasting satisfaction.
We often think that money, fame, power will deliver success and happiness, and we keep chasing these, always unsatisfied and lusting for more. Hardly do we realize that not one of the great people that we admire from history - be it Gandhiji, Einstein, Lincoln, Tagore, anyone - looked for such kinds of success. Yet they are quite alive and matter to us even today. Even if Bill Gates or Tata get into history textbooks, it will be not for their wealth, but their creations. Why just history, even our fictional heroes - Superman to Singham - are admired for their service, not their self-centered achievements, like making a big house or a hefty portfolio.
Let us pause in this stupid race and reflect if we have chosen the right road to the right destination, and correct ourselves if we're just running after mirages and imitating the wrong models.
We often think that money, fame, power will deliver success and happiness, and we keep chasing these, always unsatisfied and lusting for more. Hardly do we realize that not one of the great people that we admire from history - be it Gandhiji, Einstein, Lincoln, Tagore, anyone - looked for such kinds of success. Yet they are quite alive and matter to us even today. Even if Bill Gates or Tata get into history textbooks, it will be not for their wealth, but their creations. Why just history, even our fictional heroes - Superman to Singham - are admired for their service, not their self-centered achievements, like making a big house or a hefty portfolio.
Let us pause in this stupid race and reflect if we have chosen the right road to the right destination, and correct ourselves if we're just running after mirages and imitating the wrong models.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
New Year Resolution: Be important!
Happy new year, folks! It's once again that time of the year when we make resolutions, with full confidence that we are not going to follow any of those through... ;) Just kidding! I hope you are better at pursuing resolutions than I am, cuz I have one resolution to suggest today, in case you might want to take it up.
The resolution I propose is: "Be important". Kinda catchy, isn't it? Let me explain:
I keep feeling that most of us tend to ignore, and therefore fail to use, the wonderful gift of getting a life as a human being. We just try to survive, spending away the precious 70-80 years of our lives in our routine chores. We learn in order to earn, we earn in order to maintain our family (people who will also learn / earn), and by the time we think we've learnt and earned enough, we're done with our quality time on earth. We are no different than ants and pigeons and dogs, who also live lives just around their daily food and instantaneous pleasures / pains.
I think this is a pretty pathetic waste of the opportunity we've been given: to enjoy life as humans. We have been given the awesome power to change the world by using our brains. We know that we will find great pleasure in bringing about that change and seeing people happier, yet we ignore/forget that. We justify not doing this with our limitations of time and money. I see this especially in case of NRIs and professionals: despite their better abilities and financial position, they spend their entire lives in the same old cycle. It's so pathetic that we don't find time to do what we are made to do, what will give us the most happiness - immediately and in the long run.
So, friends, resolve to discover and use the human potential inside yourself. Get up and change the world around you!
You'll have opportunities to make a difference almost everywhere you look, I'm sure. Guide and influence someone's career decision. Change someone's way of thinking. Bring education within reach of someone who can't afford it. Make a product or launch a service that serves an unfulfilled need, or raises our standard of living, even if by a teeny weeny bit. Find ways to utilize hidden or unused potential in people, say housewives and senior citizens. Train people to deserve employment. Agitate to bring about a change in a law. Spread awareness about some good health practices. Help your friends make money in the stock market. Build houses. Solve a family feud. If nothing else, just find time to sit and listen to people who only want your attention once in a while.
Be someone who matters. Don't be yet another ant or pigeon, whose presence or absence will make no difference to the world. Touch and uplift the lives of people around you. Be someone who made the world a richer place. It will make you feel important, one of the feelings humans crave most for, right since infancy. And you will earn lots of good wishes, which I consider as the main raw material for "luck". Most of all, it will give you sustainable satisfaction, for you will be living a meaningful life.
Our days and years are too few and too precious to waste away in daily crises and efforts to survive. Let us resolve to use them to make a difference to the world around us.
Once again, my best wishes for a fun-filled yet meaningful year ahead!
The resolution I propose is: "Be important". Kinda catchy, isn't it? Let me explain:
I keep feeling that most of us tend to ignore, and therefore fail to use, the wonderful gift of getting a life as a human being. We just try to survive, spending away the precious 70-80 years of our lives in our routine chores. We learn in order to earn, we earn in order to maintain our family (people who will also learn / earn), and by the time we think we've learnt and earned enough, we're done with our quality time on earth. We are no different than ants and pigeons and dogs, who also live lives just around their daily food and instantaneous pleasures / pains.
I think this is a pretty pathetic waste of the opportunity we've been given: to enjoy life as humans. We have been given the awesome power to change the world by using our brains. We know that we will find great pleasure in bringing about that change and seeing people happier, yet we ignore/forget that. We justify not doing this with our limitations of time and money. I see this especially in case of NRIs and professionals: despite their better abilities and financial position, they spend their entire lives in the same old cycle. It's so pathetic that we don't find time to do what we are made to do, what will give us the most happiness - immediately and in the long run.
So, friends, resolve to discover and use the human potential inside yourself. Get up and change the world around you!
You'll have opportunities to make a difference almost everywhere you look, I'm sure. Guide and influence someone's career decision. Change someone's way of thinking. Bring education within reach of someone who can't afford it. Make a product or launch a service that serves an unfulfilled need, or raises our standard of living, even if by a teeny weeny bit. Find ways to utilize hidden or unused potential in people, say housewives and senior citizens. Train people to deserve employment. Agitate to bring about a change in a law. Spread awareness about some good health practices. Help your friends make money in the stock market. Build houses. Solve a family feud. If nothing else, just find time to sit and listen to people who only want your attention once in a while.
Be someone who matters. Don't be yet another ant or pigeon, whose presence or absence will make no difference to the world. Touch and uplift the lives of people around you. Be someone who made the world a richer place. It will make you feel important, one of the feelings humans crave most for, right since infancy. And you will earn lots of good wishes, which I consider as the main raw material for "luck". Most of all, it will give you sustainable satisfaction, for you will be living a meaningful life.
Our days and years are too few and too precious to waste away in daily crises and efforts to survive. Let us resolve to use them to make a difference to the world around us.
Once again, my best wishes for a fun-filled yet meaningful year ahead!
Sunday, June 24, 2012
What do we really want in life?
What do we really want in life?
Now that's one FAQ without a single clear answer, isn't it?
Nope, I don't even claim to have the answer for you. But I wish to share my thoughts here, and hope to know yours, and probably offer a single answer applicable to all. And let me modify the question - what should we really want in life?
The most likely object people seem to be seeking is wealth. At times people don't acknowledge it openly, but you'll find that money and material assets are the most popular objectives. But that doesn't make sense to me. I've hardly ever seen anyone satisfied upon having achieved this objective. Firstly, rarely does anyone achieve his financial objective, cuz it keeps moving. And then, even as he crosses his original targets, his discontentment remains the same, if not increases. This is because we seek to be richer (than X, Y, Z), not rich. It's a relative target, not absolute. And as we upgrade ourselves to financially richer social circles, we find our new friends to be at our own or higher level, and obviously we again aren't rich enough. As a peon toils hard to become a clerk and rise within his social circles of peons, he realizes that his new world is full of clerks, and he's hardly ahead of them. I don't think we consciously think this way, but it seems the obvious explanation to the behaviour of many of us.
Satisfaction with wealth also hardly seems to give any satisfaction in life. It doesn't assure that our kids will stay with us as we grow old. It doesn't ensure the longevity of our marriage or even life. It doesn't give us the social importance we crave for.
Well, maybe then a happy family is what we're looking for? I guess having a warm and caring family surely keeps us happy, but it expects very little ongoing action or maintenance. As intellectual beings, we need to keep doing something. If a happy family is our end objective, I think we'll feel pretty incomplete or blank soon after we reach that level.
Social respect, or importance, or fame, is also something many crave for. We seek attention from the day we were born. Even rich people seek to get noticed by building and showing off weird-looking skyscraper homes, or naming universities after themselves. Gangsters are also probably just fulfilling their internal desperation for some importance. Politicians, after amassing enough wealth for tens of generations, still seek power, for power gives them the feeling of importance. Some social workers do stupid things to stay in the limelight even after their causes have succeeded or crashed, because they're addicted to getting attention.
I am not sure if importance or attention will give us satisfaction. It is addictive, for sure, but having it seems to cause more desperation than contentment. And as I see in people who I think as successful - like Ratan Tata, or Peter Drucker, or Dr. Patt - they shun attention so that they can enjoy life more. Their sense of importance comes from within only.
I think what we really should seek is sustained happiness. I think this one is the winner. This is actually the primary objective - it is for happiness that most seek wealth or fame or power. Yet I don't think we realize that this is our real objective, because to achieve these superficial objectives, we compromise happiness very easily. We easily give up the pleasure of listening to the sweet songs of birds or the coos of a sweet child or the smile of a customer, so that we can attend to professional priorities. We do not realize how a kaka sitting outside his hut in a remote village can be happier than us, without having any iPad or laptop or even electricity!
So how can we achieve sustained happiness? I believe we can do so by seeking happiness of others. There is no pleasure greater than that found in making others smile. Ramola teacher and Fr. Hector and Dr. Patt may not be as rich and famous as Mukesh Ambani, but they have inculcated knowledge and character in countless students. Peter Drucker and Stephen Covey offered ways to be more effective, and win together by empowering and teaming with others. Ratan Tata and Bill Gates and Steve Jobs delivered products that changed, elevated, our lives. Interestingly, most of these received fame and importance, though they never sought it, still don't. They enjoy seeing the effect of their work in people's lives. They enjoy being in sync with their natural compass or conscience.
I therefore believe that we will find long-lasting satisfaction and happiness in life only if we make it our life's objective to see others happier. Small acts of thoughtfulness and kindness and generosity, pleasant surprises to our friends and family, can lift our spirits every day, as our conscience gives us a thumbs up. People who want more than a live-by-the-day approach can identify noble causes they believe in, and make that their career. That may be building educational products for children, or researching effective management theories, or fighting the green house effect, or finding the cure to cancer - there are countless options. Some professions have contributions built-in - doctors save our lives and health, pharmacists find cures to illnesses, civil engineers and architects build magnificent structures to serve our future needs, musicians create tunes to please our senses. In fact, if we remain conscious about it, we can redirect almost any professional career towards making a positive difference in the lives of the people around us.
I am more confident than ever that people seeking others' happiness will be the most successful of all. I hope you're one of those people!
Now that's one FAQ without a single clear answer, isn't it?
Nope, I don't even claim to have the answer for you. But I wish to share my thoughts here, and hope to know yours, and probably offer a single answer applicable to all. And let me modify the question - what should we really want in life?
The most likely object people seem to be seeking is wealth. At times people don't acknowledge it openly, but you'll find that money and material assets are the most popular objectives. But that doesn't make sense to me. I've hardly ever seen anyone satisfied upon having achieved this objective. Firstly, rarely does anyone achieve his financial objective, cuz it keeps moving. And then, even as he crosses his original targets, his discontentment remains the same, if not increases. This is because we seek to be richer (than X, Y, Z), not rich. It's a relative target, not absolute. And as we upgrade ourselves to financially richer social circles, we find our new friends to be at our own or higher level, and obviously we again aren't rich enough. As a peon toils hard to become a clerk and rise within his social circles of peons, he realizes that his new world is full of clerks, and he's hardly ahead of them. I don't think we consciously think this way, but it seems the obvious explanation to the behaviour of many of us.
Satisfaction with wealth also hardly seems to give any satisfaction in life. It doesn't assure that our kids will stay with us as we grow old. It doesn't ensure the longevity of our marriage or even life. It doesn't give us the social importance we crave for.
Well, maybe then a happy family is what we're looking for? I guess having a warm and caring family surely keeps us happy, but it expects very little ongoing action or maintenance. As intellectual beings, we need to keep doing something. If a happy family is our end objective, I think we'll feel pretty incomplete or blank soon after we reach that level.
Social respect, or importance, or fame, is also something many crave for. We seek attention from the day we were born. Even rich people seek to get noticed by building and showing off weird-looking skyscraper homes, or naming universities after themselves. Gangsters are also probably just fulfilling their internal desperation for some importance. Politicians, after amassing enough wealth for tens of generations, still seek power, for power gives them the feeling of importance. Some social workers do stupid things to stay in the limelight even after their causes have succeeded or crashed, because they're addicted to getting attention.
I am not sure if importance or attention will give us satisfaction. It is addictive, for sure, but having it seems to cause more desperation than contentment. And as I see in people who I think as successful - like Ratan Tata, or Peter Drucker, or Dr. Patt - they shun attention so that they can enjoy life more. Their sense of importance comes from within only.
I think what we really should seek is sustained happiness. I think this one is the winner. This is actually the primary objective - it is for happiness that most seek wealth or fame or power. Yet I don't think we realize that this is our real objective, because to achieve these superficial objectives, we compromise happiness very easily. We easily give up the pleasure of listening to the sweet songs of birds or the coos of a sweet child or the smile of a customer, so that we can attend to professional priorities. We do not realize how a kaka sitting outside his hut in a remote village can be happier than us, without having any iPad or laptop or even electricity!
So how can we achieve sustained happiness? I believe we can do so by seeking happiness of others. There is no pleasure greater than that found in making others smile. Ramola teacher and Fr. Hector and Dr. Patt may not be as rich and famous as Mukesh Ambani, but they have inculcated knowledge and character in countless students. Peter Drucker and Stephen Covey offered ways to be more effective, and win together by empowering and teaming with others. Ratan Tata and Bill Gates and Steve Jobs delivered products that changed, elevated, our lives. Interestingly, most of these received fame and importance, though they never sought it, still don't. They enjoy seeing the effect of their work in people's lives. They enjoy being in sync with their natural compass or conscience.
I therefore believe that we will find long-lasting satisfaction and happiness in life only if we make it our life's objective to see others happier. Small acts of thoughtfulness and kindness and generosity, pleasant surprises to our friends and family, can lift our spirits every day, as our conscience gives us a thumbs up. People who want more than a live-by-the-day approach can identify noble causes they believe in, and make that their career. That may be building educational products for children, or researching effective management theories, or fighting the green house effect, or finding the cure to cancer - there are countless options. Some professions have contributions built-in - doctors save our lives and health, pharmacists find cures to illnesses, civil engineers and architects build magnificent structures to serve our future needs, musicians create tunes to please our senses. In fact, if we remain conscious about it, we can redirect almost any professional career towards making a positive difference in the lives of the people around us.
I am more confident than ever that people seeking others' happiness will be the most successful of all. I hope you're one of those people!
Weekends & Productivity
My latest management experiment at Peach is the two-day weekend.
I have always wondered how people in the US and other developed countries, despite working just five days a week, deliver amazing output, at very predictable speeds. I do realize that better education, superior management, different social traditions, etc. may be more influential in bringing about this efficiency; however, I have a feeling that a two-day weekend also plays a good role in improving productivity. And, in fact, I feel that a two-day weekend is more necessary here in India than elsewhere, given our cultural tendencies.
I believe a weekend is supposed to be a break for us from the daily work routine. The break should give us time to relax, reflect, and recharge ourselves for the next week.
Now I guess a typical professional here uses a one-day weekend to contribute at home (which is obviously tough on weekdays given exhausting work hours and the daily commute), spending time with family, buying groceries, eating out, repairing breakdowns in the house. Add to that our countless social events - marriages, birthdays, engagements ("ring ceremonies"), katha, mundan, besna, what not... In four months of the year, hardly a weekend goes by without a marriage to attend (btw today I have to attend two). Now, a weekend is also the only opportunity we have to meet friends, cuz they're also lost in their careers.
Many of us manage to squeeze these priorities in a Sunday, but at a high cost - I find people more exhausted on Mondays (that's when I have maximum absences - we call it "Monday fever") than even on Saturdays. Forget about getting relaxed and recharged for a new week. Forget about reflecting on the week, and introspecting how we can do better, or learning something new. Nope, it only adds to our exhaustion.
My hypothesis is that the two-day weekend more than doubles the effectiveness of a weekend. And we deliver better output in a five-day week than in a six-day week (assuming, of course, that people are sincere).
I believe so because the two-day weekend is clearly more than sufficient to handle family priorities, social occasions, and fun plans. We get so much time that we're forced to relax or think up work. And that is the type of time we need for learning, enriching ourselves, and planning ahead. Even an hour of sitting on the swing doing nothing, or a lazy afternoon nap, recharges us, as it erases the exhaustion of the previous week from our minds.
Work is also unlikely to suffer because people come refreshed on Monday, well-prepared for the week ahead. Sincere professionals have time to simulate their priorities before they come. As that they had enough time to handle personal and family priorities in the two-day weekend, they can focus on work without getting distracted.
I have initiated two-day weekends (on even Saturdays) at Peach, and intend to observe the difference in productivity in my own self and in my colleagues during the odd and even weeks. This was the first such weekend, and I personally feel very rejuvenated, and am looking forward to getting back to work tomorrow. I hope that more of us feel the same way....
I have always wondered how people in the US and other developed countries, despite working just five days a week, deliver amazing output, at very predictable speeds. I do realize that better education, superior management, different social traditions, etc. may be more influential in bringing about this efficiency; however, I have a feeling that a two-day weekend also plays a good role in improving productivity. And, in fact, I feel that a two-day weekend is more necessary here in India than elsewhere, given our cultural tendencies.
I believe a weekend is supposed to be a break for us from the daily work routine. The break should give us time to relax, reflect, and recharge ourselves for the next week.
Now I guess a typical professional here uses a one-day weekend to contribute at home (which is obviously tough on weekdays given exhausting work hours and the daily commute), spending time with family, buying groceries, eating out, repairing breakdowns in the house. Add to that our countless social events - marriages, birthdays, engagements ("ring ceremonies"), katha, mundan, besna, what not... In four months of the year, hardly a weekend goes by without a marriage to attend (btw today I have to attend two). Now, a weekend is also the only opportunity we have to meet friends, cuz they're also lost in their careers.
Many of us manage to squeeze these priorities in a Sunday, but at a high cost - I find people more exhausted on Mondays (that's when I have maximum absences - we call it "Monday fever") than even on Saturdays. Forget about getting relaxed and recharged for a new week. Forget about reflecting on the week, and introspecting how we can do better, or learning something new. Nope, it only adds to our exhaustion.
My hypothesis is that the two-day weekend more than doubles the effectiveness of a weekend. And we deliver better output in a five-day week than in a six-day week (assuming, of course, that people are sincere).
I believe so because the two-day weekend is clearly more than sufficient to handle family priorities, social occasions, and fun plans. We get so much time that we're forced to relax or think up work. And that is the type of time we need for learning, enriching ourselves, and planning ahead. Even an hour of sitting on the swing doing nothing, or a lazy afternoon nap, recharges us, as it erases the exhaustion of the previous week from our minds.
Work is also unlikely to suffer because people come refreshed on Monday, well-prepared for the week ahead. Sincere professionals have time to simulate their priorities before they come. As that they had enough time to handle personal and family priorities in the two-day weekend, they can focus on work without getting distracted.
I have initiated two-day weekends (on even Saturdays) at Peach, and intend to observe the difference in productivity in my own self and in my colleagues during the odd and even weeks. This was the first such weekend, and I personally feel very rejuvenated, and am looking forward to getting back to work tomorrow. I hope that more of us feel the same way....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)