Thursday, May 24, 2007

Conflict ...

Desperate to find a house, we reluctantly approached brokers yesterday evening. Very much aware of their modus operandi, as they not only rely on commission but also use a combination of over-quote to customer and under-quote to the house owner, to make money.

Look this is very obvious, since there is direct conflict of interest. They want to make most out of the deal and the customer & owner, who are the real participants of the deal want to part with the least. But what is worth mentioning is how politely and with great humility they do business, along with lying and manipulating.

I could not help but compare it with the corporate environment.

There is a direct conflict of interest between the employer and employee. Despite the terms like employee satisfaction, human resource development, ethics and values of the corporate, competence driven compensation and everything else that sounds good.

All employees want highest possible compensation, with work associated with latest technology, if possible with plum postings; with work load based on their specific aspirations and personal responsibilities. The employer cannot give everyone desired posting, cannot satisfy everyone’s demand of promotions, need people to do any and all task that bring him profits. The management does not want their employees to get lured by opportunities outside, so transparency is limited.

So a lot of sophisticated lying and manipulating happens. Though it may or may not be evident based on the organization.

So work life is not as good I thought it was as a kid. I thought office was all about not getting up very early(as compared to school), getting ready without the choice of dress restricted to a uniform, come home without homework to complete and no tests/semesters to pass.

Friday, May 11, 2007

Job Satisfaction …

Today again a few colleagues sat down to crib about work…talking about the existing, bitter dissatisfaction….my thoughts not very different from this known trend in my circle….

The possible reason….

Life has two constituents … personal and professional…. They are closely related status and success of one affecting other…
But now a day’s most of us…stay away from families to pursue careers …and consequently they expect the professional life to be doubly rewarding to make up for the non existence of the personal life…

Also today’s careers leave little time for recreation … someone may drive pleasure out of cooking, some pursuing sports, some reading others writing…but today most people work round the clock to accelerate their career progress…so any pleasure, excitement and exuberance is expected from jobs

May be this is over simplification of things…but I still believe we want too much from this mundane act of earning livelihood. …

Monday, May 07, 2007

Spiderman 3

Even creator of a Spiderman fiction is not mighty enough to deal with all human emotions in 2 hours and 20 min, prove their main character as ordinary and super hero at the same time, add enough romance to keep people entertain, give enough work to his special effects team and yet make a good movie….

The problems with super hero sequel movies are that they have a template like the hero have defined heroics, must win in the end (in fact in a super hero movie they can only be creative with the villain), kill bad guys, save his lady and yet be different from the previous block buster.

All in all Spiderman 3 did not meet my expectation because, though the creators tried to add new dimensions to the super hero, but they failed in making a gripping movie, making audience crave for what they came to see the movie for…

Wednesday, May 02, 2007

Wrong Reasons???

2 millionaire family Ahujas and Gehlots fight a legal battle to adopt a two-and-a-half month old Shiv, who was found abandoned in a rail compartment at Khandwa railway station.

Why … because both did not have a male child, to be their heir and inherit their fortunes.

Says the lawyer of Ahuja’s “The Ahuja family doesn't have any male child. Even their extended family has all girl children. So if a male child is given, it would be justice to them”

So… an effluent family, can adopt a abandoned child, to groom as their heir … but not make the girls of their own family competent to handle the name and fortunes

Though abandoned/orphaned children should be adopted to bring up a child in family, give it the security, values, education, affection he/she deserves and nurture the child as an individual… but is this one, a valid reason???

What if this abandoned child would have been girl….???