Argos Exits India

Argos - the leading British retailer - has now decided to exit India. Argos had a limited presence in India, six shops in Mumbai suburbs. In fact, many people did not even know that Argos had a presence in India, and their decision to exit will go largely unnoticed. However, there is some significance of this announcement for the British businesses looking to go into India.

The conventional wisdom is that Argos is following the path of other British retailers, who are closing down underperforming operations abroad to focus on home operations in this troubled times. Tesco has decided to go slow on its United States expansion and Marks & Spencer is having trouble in China. DSG is pulling the plug on its slow moving Italian operation and trying to concentrate back at home. Argos' decision to exit India, which will mean 'single digit' million pound loss for the chain's owner, Home Retail group, will largely be seen in the light of these experiences.

However, with a close look, it may have more reasons than just domestic downturn. Argos' India operations were plagued with small issues from day one, and they suffered from delays in shipment and stock-outs from day one. They were operating under a franchise arrangements with Shopper's Stop/ Hypercity retail groups in India for about an year now, and their reach even in the Mumbai city was extremely limited. For example, out of the six odd stores Argos had in Mumbai, their flagship had a very limited stock on display and a very thin catalogue [compared to the 1500 page tome we carry home once in six months] and no noticeable web front. The shop, while located in a modern building, was in Thane, far from downtown Mumbai, and it was supplemented by catalogue-only points in nearby areas.

In all, while I am a fan of Argos in the UK, their presence in India disappointed me. They simply did not understand the market and did not have a differentiating strategy in place. I do think this is very common among British businesses to have a very confused strategy about India and a very unclear expectation: I am sure Argos got it wrong from day one.

I know I am indulging in a guessing game here, but let's try to think what has gone wrong. First, I think the choice of Thane, possibly driven by the exorbitant property prices in downtown Mumbai, is a mistake - it is too far out of the spotlight; it is almost a different city. I was told about the brilliant strategy of hiring semi-skilled people and giving them low wages and a incentive - a sure departure from what Argos stands for here, hassle-free shopping, and a recipe for disaster. Besides, as I walked into the Argos store and tried to spot the difference from the homegrown retail chains, I could spot none - other than the fact there were hardly any buyers around. Their prices were at a slight premium - someone must have thought that Indian buyers will pay a premium on electric kettle because it was bought from Argos - another clear mistake.

I can go on and on, but such mistakes are not peculiar to Argos. I do think British companies approach India without first scoping it out, and end up doing too little too late. They also emphasize too much on brand - too much of an inside-out perspective - which surely does not work in India. And, besides, they forget that value creates the brand, and it is not the other way round.

India is an interesting market, by all means, with its huge number of consumers and rising purchasing power. But it is a complex market at the same time - any company having a strategy for INDIA is making a mistake of not factoring various regional and local factors out. It is common among brand-owners to think inside-out, but each new market is a new game altogether and the brand needs to be reestablished. I think it is essential, when approaching India, to scope out the challenges of reestablishing the brand in a big and complex market.

Think of this. Why would I go to Argos and pay a premium for an electric kettle? For a better shopping experience? My foot! The only way Argos could have a sustainable business in India if they offered an unmatched range of merchadise under one roof [which it does in UK and I buy electronics and toys and appliances from Argos] at an unbeatable price. That needed scale and commitment, which it never had.

This also tells another story about piloting new markets. The conventional wisdom prompts us to create small pilots to test the waters before committing to a market. But, more often than not, such business pilots fail. This is possibly because we often confuse the need for scoping with piloting. Especially in markets like India and China, piloting fails to get the necessary traction of volume and fails to deliver value and choice. Such is the fate of Argos: So, of many others.

I was recently asking someone well conversed in international business development whether he has ever met an Indian businessman who talked about less than 200 outlets to him; he admitted he hasn't met any. Now, while this may be because of different factors - exuberance, optimism, or simply talking beyond one's capacity - there is another logic which the European business reasoning fails to grasp: that the market demands such a large scale intervention. From my experience, this is essentially true. A six store 'premium' generalist retailer offering undifferentiated product employing semi-skilled people at low wages was always going to be a sitting duck in a market where Big Bazaar, which came from nowhere and powered themselves on dreaming bag, rules.

This is why I think Argos' experience should be instructive to British, or European, businessmen. I think there are three key lessons here:

(A) India is not a cakewalk. There are highly competitive home grown service companies which can beat the European companies hands down: not just because they are local, but because they are nimble, have less baggage and constantly innovating instead of trying to fit an outworn suit in a new body.

(B) Pilot ventures can only work if this is scoped out right first. This isn't done in most cases. Lots of such international expansions are ego-driven, wanting to be in one the fastest growing markets because the entrepreneur happened to read one of the many recent business books. Such projects, which are based on the mistaken assumption (A) as described above, commit too little. Often, like in the case of Argos, the pilot looks like what the scoping exercise should have been - an exploration into the mechanics of the market.

(C) Whatever the brand, it needs to reestablish itself in every market. Argos should have focused on its basic value propositions - choice, cost, customer service - instead of the board on the door. It is tempting to take a market for granted because one has a brand: but that is committing suicide by taking the brand for granted.

Argos leaving obviously leaves a space in the market in India. I did want to see a shop like Argos [though it was disappointing to find it is different story in India] and I do think a good catalogue retailer will do well in the country. So, we are set to see an Indian company taking that position, soon. And, as the ways of the world these days, it will not be surprising to see that same Indian company buying out Argos in two to five years' time.

Comments About Slumdog Millionaire Before I Have Seen It

I have not seen Slumdog Millionaire, but I am already being compelled to comment on it.

This is because it seems to be such a decent movie, but the critics are after it already. It seems to have shown India as a Third World Underbelly - which Amitabh Bachchan quoted, unquestioningly as he does, on his blog. This is already making a quite a bit of noise everywhere, and as you can see, I picked this up on facebook.

This post isn't about the movie, obviously. I haven't even seen it. But this is about this particular line of criticism, which we have heard before - almost every time a good movie was made about India.

What we seem to love is Ghajini, obviously, one that allows us to keep forgetting things. We love the fantasy of Lagaan, the comedy of Singh is King and all the impossible sets and incredible dresses. We love those soaps where people have sanskritized names, sleep with party dresses on and behave like animals as far as their conjugal lives are concerned.

I saw Indians protesting on TV about the usage of the word Slumdog, and others, apparently well-to-do ones, saying that the film shows the poorest parts of India, not the 'real India'!

It is obviously clear that we are a society in denial. We don't know what real India is, where it is. All the people who are ashamed or distressed about seeing the poverty in the movie, sees that everyday, while driving to office, on the road. The funny thing is that they are not embarrassed about poverty, they are embarrassed someone is talking about poverty.

It will be a shame if the movie is shut down. It can be, India has a record of banning books and cutting down movies. I am hoping to catch the movie on my trip to India, and will be disappointed if I can't see it.

Day 11: What Does BBC Stand For

I am still struggling - there are far too many things to complete before I go again, and it is only 36 hours away. My fault, surely - I am trying to live as normal a life as possible, when I am travelling three weeks a month. When today the electrical connections went down, I thought I sort of reached a nadir - but then that's the time you start picking yourself up and see what you can do. That's what I have done yet again - the last 10 days was extremely difficult, my car's frozen, all the regular payments due, my expense claims not filed, my computer crashing, my email account out, and now electricity - but then I think that's all and wondering what else can go wrong. The bottom, is the correct expression, so I am feeling optimistic yet again.

I am still working on the Mumbai agreement. This is one thing about India, negotiations never stop. I am sure some people believe that this is the best way to get value, but definitely not in my view. I am actually getting an intuition - while my sales training will tell me that customers who have more objections are actually more committed to the process of buying, but in India, it is actually reverse: Somehow talk is still cheap and negotiations can actually an easy way to get into timewasters' trap. So, let's see what I get tomorrow: I am right on the wire and will possibly snap if I can't move it forward now.

In public life, the most outrageous thing that I have come across in recent days is the BBC's refusal to air an appeal - for charitable cause for children and the conflict affected people in Gaza - because they 'can't take sides'. This is the sort of stupid arrogance only BBC can take. They don't have to earn their money, remember. Every houseowner in UK more or less gets taxed for the existence of this out-of-date, out-of-touch institution. As keepers of public culture, they are currently into the promotion of abusive language and abhorrent behaviour. And, now this - a nineteenth century, I-know-best attitude, which is inhuman and beastly. Taking sides? By not airing the appeal, BBC actually condones the mindless killing that is going on in Gaza, and treats everyone of its people as terrorists. They are in this with Sky, but then Rupert Murdoch isn't a great benchmark for humanism anyway. But then, if consumers were outraged [they are clearly not, they are more concerned about Lost and football] and if they left Sky in droves, Sky would have relented and reversed the policy. But, not for Beeb, they have a god-given entitlement to my money and a right to use that in their patronizing way.

Day 10: Rethinking the Indian Republic

I got used to the greeting - Happy Republic Day. This is a new trend, I would not recall being greeted with this ten years back, but something has caught on since then. I would be tempted to think that we Indians have become more conscious about the republic, but may not be so - it is more like Happy Diwali and Happy New Year perhaps.

However, as we return again to our Happy Republic Day, it is important to look back to ourselves, and also our constitution, that unusally long document which wanted to say what we ought to be. It was adopted by our leaders full of hope, who wanted to govern India as a modern country. They were ambitious, otherwise who will talk about universal adult suffarage in a country of millions of poor, landless and illiterate; they spoke about secularism in an ancient land, where daily lives are governed by traditions and beliefs; and they believed in socialism while the riches of the country was mostly concentrated. They wanted to forge an united identity, above the melee of languages, cultures and beliefs. India was possibly the most ambitious project in democracy the world has ever seen.

As we stand back after 58 years, some part of it looks too ambitious, indeed. We are as unequal as we ever were, not just in terms of what we have, but also what we can have - in terms of opportunities. But, at the same time, the democracy project has been a resounding success, bringing forth the biggest and profoundest affirmative action programme in History, leading to a political realignment equal to the revolution that was ushered into American politics by Barack Obama, every day.

As for secularism, we are at an inflexion point in India, where the ideals of our secular country is at a low point than it ever was, and we are obviously lost in the middle of events like the ones in Gujrat 2002 and Mumbai 2008.

I don't really think we have a choice but being secular though. How else do we build a modern country. We have at least 200 million people in India who are not Hindus, and possibly another 500 to 600 million who do not suffer from Brahminical complex? It is only naive to suggest that we create a modern, prosperous country without 70 to 80% of the population. However, those who suggest this kind of things possibly did not know the other 80% exists.

Besides, without being secular, we stop being democratic. The point is not just the 80% population here. It is about one can not be free without everyone around him/her being free. Because excluding other human beings from our lives make us less human. And, besides, though I do fully understand the pains of those who lost their loved ones in Mumbai 2008, and those who did the same in Gujrat 2002, I also know our secularism and freedom are not worth losing over anything: economic progress, assassin's bullet, or even the terrorist's madness. I know the words of Benjamin Franklin by heart - Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.


As I say, we are at an inflexion point in India's history. We have an election in next few months, and we shall usher in, most possibly, a government which will dedicate their energies to changing what we believe, forever. The Hindu nationalists surely learnt from their loss last time, and if given power, they will sway out of the middle road they have already tried and leave the modernist agenda behind. We are possibly going to see an extreme era of politics driven by fear and xenophobia, the end of our republic, secularism, freedom and democracy.

This day, 26th January 2009, may go down in our last Republic Day when we were free to dream unless we strive to save the dream.

Seeing Through The Bad Times

Jim Collins is researching how companies respond to downturns, and he speaks his mind in the current issue of Fortune. He is obviously researching great companies and he is looking at this with the perspective of History.

Bad times? Jim Collins says this is going to stay, this is going to be the normal life. He points to Post-War period and wonders how the face-off between two nuclear empires actually gave us stability and a period of continuous prosperity. 'Danger, yes, but stability', to quote him. Surely it looks like that now - with the perspective of science - though it is funny to think what makes Cold War look like springtime.

However, the key point is what, in Collins' opinion, makes great companies tick in a downturn. He points to two things - values and having great people on board. He talked about the examples of P&G, which never thought about cutting corners and undermined quality and customer service even in a downturn, and H&P, which never let go the opportunity to hire a smart engineer even when in a downturn.

Thinking this through, I can see how relevant are these two observations. The most common reaction to economic downturn is cutting corners - cutting input costs to keep prices down [especially in services] and cutting people, which often, though not always, increases stress and burden of those left behind. The other thing, of course, is to abandon the entrepreneur's commitment to his staff, people who work to make him/her rich, and letting people's wages go unpaid or letting them go randomly.

As I watch a number of SMEs from close quarters, I know this is a cancerous disease. At the first sign of trouble, the SMEs launch defensive action, goaded possibly by the management consultants who cost them more than what it would cost them to keep the company running. The entrepreneur simply abdicates his role. I have seen people, who are relatively successful as entrepreneur, turning anti-entrepreneurial at times like this, blaming staff for the lack of money and even shrugging off the responsibility to pay regular wages.

The common argument will be that a SME will have to do this, because they don't have the luxury of long term. But this is completely wrong, as most big companies today came from rather humble roots and it is the ability to think long term and big picture made what they are today. And, actually, I would even count IBM in that - the notoriously selsy company with a great, hell-of-salesman leader at the helm. It is the ability to articulate a simple vision, keep going regardless of how the times are and never compromising on the basics defined the success stories amidst downturn.

The point about great people is particularly interesting. No plans or special understandings with banks are going to save anyone in the middle of all this. The only thing that can help now is innovation and smart thinking. And, are we going to get smart thinking if we don't have a smart team? Impossible. And, also, if we don't do our bit to show leadership and take the difficult times in our stride, and demoralize the team, can they innovate their way out of the woods? Very unlikely is the answer.

This brings us back to the question of leadership in the middle of downturns. In any other context, leadership is extremely important - but it is critical in the middle of a downturn. Jim Collins point out a critical leadership skill under duress - the ability to zoom out, to see things in perspective. He contrasts this with a fire fighter's tendency to Zoom In, focus on the square area right in front of him, under duress. This is going micro, which so many of us tend to do in a crisis. On the other hand, zooming out allows us to take a more balanced perspective and have a long term view. And, this allows us to act, more than just on the urgent, on the important things too.

Day 9: Ready to Go

I spent the day - which was rainy and depressing - planning my trips and getting my bags packed, somewhat. This is a bit of an improvement, that I am thinking ahead about my travel plans and getting the bags ready. Usually, I always pack the bag last moment, often on the day of travel, and the travel plan remains up in the air.

It still is, indeed. Though I have now put this neatly on Excel and got at least one round of air tickets, my travel plans have so many dependencies that it can change any time. I am increasingly aware that I need to have greater visibility of my work plans, and days like this, I solely attempt to achieve that. But I do think that I have spread myself too thin - and the fault is all mine - and paying the price for that.

Steep price, I must add. My health is one. Besides, I, like other people, would love to stay home and know what I do tomorrow. Often, I don't. It feels like being up against the wall all the time. Once I am over with this current task, I shall possibly look back at these blog posts [and this is why I write] and think, with satisfaction, that I have completed another tough journey. But, of course, it is painful and confusing while it lasts.

No doubt, opportunities such as this let you learn, which you will not do otherwise. However, my problem is whether these learnings are any way connected to my life goals, and whether I shall be able to, after all these troubles, make anything good come out of it.

I keep talking about going back to India some day, but I must put a date and a plan for this. It is not going to be easy just to go back. I am acutely aware that the same doors, which are open to me today, will close down once I am back. I am also aware that mostly, people will relate to my going back with a lack of success, and I am sure it will hard to explain that this was always the original intent. Because such things do not happen.

I have got some offers to pursue when I go back to India, but sadly, none of these are attractive enough. I obviously do not want to go back in my life and start doing what I was doing before. I can possibly earn a bit of money, but that was never the objective. I am more or less clear in my mind that the next thing I do must lead to building of an institution - of some kind, a business or an organization - and I must be able to associate, and commit, long term to it. Yes, I am hoping that this will be the place I shall retire from, if I ever do.

Now, some people told me that such stability is not in my nature. But that is possibly wrong, my CV is not the correct guide of what's my nature. I actually loved building things, and I am generally long term in approach. I have left jobs only when the requirements of job ran against the grains of my character, and I have always left jobs well. I actually boast that I can almost go back to any company that I have worked for previously, possibly not entirely true or provable till I try, but this is possibly true for most part. In fact, I also realize that it may be true even for the companies where I did not do too well - I guess I can at least know one - but managed to have contributed in some way, even if that was outside my job description.

So, anyway, what do I want from here? Let's say - by March 31st - I need to set right the projects that we have in India. Actually, the project in India has always been a large undertaking, and most people involved in it did not know, or as in my case, did not want to acknowledge how big this project actually is. Interestingly, here, there is a divergence of opinion on what I think my role is, and what other people think my role is. Many people, in India and here, expect me to run the India operations. Now that is almost impossible sitting in Croydon, obviously. I must say that though I knew the sheer impossibility of such an enterprise, I have been swayed to think in those terms, taking upon myself the whole burden of creating a franchise network in India. This has actually created awful pressure on my schedule and commitments. One of my key goals is to set this right by March 31st and bring order to my life. I dont yet know how to do it, but I have now scheduled myself to be in India soon - in fact the whole of February - to sort this out.

And, beyond March 31st, I think it is most important for me to define my life goals and realign my work towards these. If I am supposed to go back, I should start now. If I am planning to stay, I need to define what for, and work towards it. And, the third, most exciting, possibility is that I close the chapter on UK and find work to live in the United States for a couple of years. This is one my heart is set on, as of this moment.

Day 8: On Becoming British

My Saturday started as usual - late start, no breakfast, resolutions to complete but no progress and a purposeless visit to library - and at 5pm, looks like it will end as usual if I don't do something soon to change it. But, still, I shall pause for a moment to reflect on what's up next. I had a busy week, which ended somewhat satisfactorily. But I have been here before and took a break, only to see all the gains fritter away.

So, not again, and work starts now, etc. But the most nagging thing is that I have to travel soon [which is not that bad] and I have mountains of work to complete, not least turning in my tax returns. The Inland Revenue seemed to have gone crazy and mandated that anyone filing their tax returns after 31st October will have to do so online. While they told me this clearly in advance and I can somewhat understand their logic of driving people to online filing, they have kept the process as complicated as before. Now I have to go and apply for an activation code - don't even remember if I have done this earlier, so will have to do that again - and it will arrive some time on post. Clearly, some people don't understand the online concept and they don't need to understand perhaps, because they can still keep their fat pay cheques and privileges whether there is a recession out there or not.

In fact, while I kick myself in anger for not applying for the activation code earlier and hanging in a limbo at this time - looking out for post morning, day and evening [though it is delivered only once a day] and thinking about the good old days of afternoon delivery - I am thinking that a pay freeze for the government servants will not be a bad idea. They are supposed to keep this economy running and they have to shoulder as much blame, collectively, as we individuals do. Gordon Brown says that he did not see it coming - what an astonishing statement from a man who led one of World's largest economies for more than a decade. A lunchtime conversation with any of the many economists he met would have warned him of this, unless he decided to take an afternoon nap during lunch break. So, why not freeze his salary [poor Gordon] and all his aides' salaries too. [My private opinion is that Alistair Darling's salary should be cut, or he should be fired for creating public boredom even in the middle of a financial 9/11, but I shall keep that to me for a moment].

If taxes aren't irritating enough, the next thing on my agenda is the test for Britishness, a rather dumb online exercise called Life in the UK, which I have to write soon. This is necessary for my Permanent Residence, which will allow me to stay in Britain indefinitely without having to queue up for a visa from time to time and answering questions like common criminals in front of an UK border agency official. Therefore, I have to study and know rather enlightening bits of information like the Queen's birthday, the population of South East England and possibly the date England won the football world cup. This will prove that I have become sufficiently British to be permitted a Leave to Remain.

Of course, I am reminded that I am an economic immigrant, who have come to Britain in search of a livelihood, at least thrice a day on tele. All political parties are united that they need to control economic migration, only letting people come for shortage areas, where they can't find adequate people from the EU. They have a plan to boot out these people after a few years, lest they start thinking and eating British. That way, the wise men tells the rest of the population, they can keep the Britain, British.

Interestingly, of course, it will be an exercise to find out what is actually British. I should know - I should write the test in a few days. Knowing the queen's birthday may not be important for any one with republican sentiments, and Alex Salmond may actually fail the test of Britishness intentionally. Of course, there are many things which are uniquely British and should be preserved, but this colonial pomposity may not be one of them. Kate Fox's brilliant Watching The English of course talks about many strains of being English, though Britishness, like Indianness, but unlike Americanness, is a politically made up concept.

For me, being British is not about writing the exam, but being able to laugh at the vanity of it. Being British is more about beers and football - so that test could have been taken in a pub instead of the dreary online test counters as it happens now. Being British is also shopping for girls and friendship for men. Cloitaire Raphael reminds us that British men has this unique thing about being so close to fellow men ['mates'] and the girls actually feel a bit neglected and therefore dress most outrageously to attract attention. Being British is being a touch vain, don't we see in all American war movies how the British soldiers went along with bands and all. But, if the experience and academic results are any guide, being British has nothing about writing exams and passing it.

I learnt a lot living in Britain. For example, the respect and care shown to the less able is exemplary. So is the public politeness. The love for design. An ability to laugh at oneself. A language that allows one to laugh at oneself, most suitable for wry humour. Things like these - it was worth taking all the trouble of immigration to learn.

But the test of Britishness? To me, it is an unique Anglo-Saxon expectation that the world will behave in their terms and want to be British. A strange old-world baggage when the nation state is almost dead and the globalization has been baptized. As if Gordon Brown had a sudden recollection of things old and gone and brought them in the domain of public policy. Is being in a state of denial British? [Like he did not see the recession coming] The fondness of English language, yes that too, especially when this is a lost property and it is a matter of time when the language is called American.

I noted earlier, while living in London, I felt like the medieval British visitors to Mughal India. Here I saw a civilization at its peak, and a society in decline. With technology changing everything and new financial innovations being made, life has become so comfortable that one starts to forget how one got here. One forgets that the power in this world remains with the curious, not the contented. As those British travellers in the middle ages confronted a far superior, but content, civilization in India. I know they were not subjected to a test of Indianness to settle in India. But as well they could have been - as then India was a society in denial - just as I have to get up now and study useless facts to keep going.

Market Rebels & Radical Innovation

Market Rebels: How Activists Make or Break Radical Innovations, by Hayagreeva Rao, Professor at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business, was published by Princeton University Press in January 2009.

Day 6 & 7: Moving Forward in a Maelstorm

I actually had a good day today. Relatively, at least. This is the first time in many weeks a Friday evening feels like a Friday evening, when I can cosy up with a book somewhere for a well-earned rest after a hard day's work. I know why this is happening. I travel too much, run around too much. It upsets my routine - I work odd hours at different time zones - and while I am working so hard, the work never actually ends. It keeps coming as I hop from one place to another, one project to another. Then, when I come back, I am like a Zombie for at least a week. I fail to allow myself the rest, or if I try to do this, others jump in. So, I live on unmade beds and dusty kitchens, my car does not start and often important mails get lost in the interminable pile.

I am feeling settled now because I was in England for a while now. I did go to Ireland for a couple of days, but that was not too long to disturb my schedule. I am more or less coming back in step in now, though I can see mountains of work as I look around. Besides, this week was productive, full of ups and downs, but in the end, I got somewhere.

One thing I do not like in what I do is the focus is too much on short term. The more difficult the market becomes, the more short term everything becomes - resulting in a frenzy, almost a stampede. I lived as a NIIT salesman for a number of years, and that was not cosy at all. There were constant pressures to achieve growth, all the time. But I remember Raji Pawar talking in one of his conferences [with us, regional managers] where he talked about how funding for education ventures should be different from the funding of software businesses. Basically, he was saying that these two businesses give different types, and levels of return. Hence, the investor expectation should actually be different in these two businesses. Those days, NIIT used to be one business - training and software - but later they split it into two. I would think this short term/ long term investment objective was one of the key drivers for that decision.

Even after I have left NIIT, and it is five years now, I remembered that discussion. And, that sets the perspective of my thinking when I see the privately funded education spreading fast in India. In fact, this will probably be one of India's biggest growth industries today, and after the global financial crisis, as money leaves real estate and stock market investments, education is becoming the next hottest destination. I believe in the power of enterprise and the individual investor's ability to innovate and improve, while government bureaucrats are unable to do either, by design. However, one of my over-riding thoughts is how sustainable is the model of private investment in education in India.

This is an interesting point. No doubt, private investment in education is needed. This is needed for capacity building and the country's long term competitiveness. Government can not, would not be able to create the kind of explosion of capacity that we are going to need. So, some kind of private participation is inevitable. The question is how much and in what form.

My fear is this: If you look at the education market in major Indian cities, there seems to be a glut in business schools. There are dozens of business schools. All of them charge quite a bit of money, though there seems to be a price pressure forming on how much an MBA can go for. However, even more are being initiated. This is more because of economic reasons: education is big business, and there is a lot of capital on flight from the stock and real estate markets.

However, we have seen this before, there will soon come a point when education institutes will fail. They sure fail in every country, but in India, before they close their doors, they will do silent harm by offering low quality teaching and selling degrees. This is obviously because the regulatory framework is flawed - too lax where they need to tighten the belt and too tight where innovation and enterprise need to be allowed in.

But I think the key point was what Raji Pawar told us. He thought investments in education should be made with an expectation of steady long term returns. He thought investors who seek such return, like pension funds who would want to invest in predictable, no-surprises business, will be ideal for an education venture. However, looking at the current spread in India, you can see the problem in the 'quality' of capital. Besides, this quality of capital issue also distort the market and bad capital drives away good capital from business sectors. I am sure the government is doing a lot, but it sometimes feels that they are trying to do too much.

And, we unfortunately have a fairly unimaginative HRD ministry, which is unlikely to change even if there is a change of government after the elections. HRD ministry, unfortunately, is seen as a retirement place for ministers in India. Unfortunately, that too is short term thinking.

Day 5: Reviewing The Priorities

Yesterday was interesting in terms of work, though I spent nearly seven hours on phone! I am sure I need to cut this down, because there will be times when I have to take stock of, and give estimates to other people, what I have done, and these seven hours of phone conversations will possibly come to appear as one or two points on a long list. Does not look too good, surely.

Interesting, that gives us a perspective on Taylorism - the system of measuring work by time spent. This is still the dominant management method among employers, who want to see whether they are getting value for money. However, this is less and less relevant in service industries when it is hard to put a benchmark - how much time a particular job should take - though the habit lives on. Consider this - I had an hour's phone call with a partner who was unhappy about a particular thing. What should I have done when the conversation crossed five minutes? I am sure in the call centre context, a flag would have gone up in my mind that this is a time of supervisor call. But I have no one to pass this on to. Besides, it is hard for me to measure the value of loss if I ended the call there - there may not have been a short term loss at all because the monies have already been paid, but this could have affected the relationship irreparably. By partner, I obviously mean a franchisee, someone we do business with on an ongoing basis, and have a six year contract with. So, this little hitch, possibly, could have lived on for another six years.

Now, I know many organizations measure work by time spent. That remains the dominant way of thinking, as SMEs hardly moved out of the management paradigms of the manufacturing age. On the list of work done, it will look a tiny item - placated X and addressed his complain about Y - and will not justify the big 60 minutes put against that. Is there a way to put the amount of time [and heartburn] saved over the partnership lifetime? Not that I know of.

In any case, I continue to work away the Master Partner propositions for India, which is going well so far. These are complex deals requiring a lot of involvement and personal time, but I guess I finally got a way to reduce my actual field-level involvement. This will eventually allow me to gain greater control over my lifestyle, or so I hope.

I am also readying myself mentally to embark on the journey back. It is hard to leave your own country and come somewhere else; it is sure harder to go back. But eventually, I have to go back. I came to Britain to learn; and I guess that objective was somewhat successful. I have a much wider perspective than I had before coming here. I sure want to spend another year formally at the university and seeing other parts of the world. But I am sure I want to go back to India, not later than December 2010, where I would put my learning in practise. How funny that I often said that I want to retire by 42: That, indeed, will be my retirement from wondering around.

E-Learning: Into The Future

A friend asked me a question : What are my views about where e-Learning is heading in the next five years. I, as always, chose to give a fairly public reply through this blog.

But, before I comment, I must also remind myself that this is indeed curious timing to talk about e-learning into five years in future. Nero playing violin while Rome was burning probably would have been an apt analogy, but I am no Nero and can not do much to stop the mayhem. But, one thing for sure, there is very little certainty in the economic climate right now, and it is hard to see much ahead at this time.

Having said that, one can safely project a significant change in e-learning usage, in Academia as well as in Businesses, over next few years. There are a number of reasons behind such assertion:

(a) The business climate is not going to improve any time soon and there will be increased pressure of cost cutting across businesses. Training usually bears the brunt of cost cutting very severely. However, tough business conditions also mean that competitiveness will be critical, and the need to send executives to a luxurious retreat to be 'trained' will lose its importance in the agenda. All of this point to a big spread of cost-effective ways of doing training.

(b) There will be a big bandwidth boost and significant investments in network infrastructure in different countries. In fact, in current economic climate, the ego projects like WiFi across the city will take a hit, and investment will go into making available fat pipes, notably in America. This will make possible two things - one, more engaging content with videos etc, and two, the e-learning as a service model, where the learning content sits in a rented server.

(c) Because the e-Learning as a service concept will spread, the capital costs of deploying e-Learning will drastically reduce. The expensive software ad hardware will go, and open standards will be on demand. In time, a training manager in an organization will be able to deploy e-learning programmes like they purchase training programmes today - just enrol a few participants on an online portal, without incurring a huge upfront cost. Similarly, that training manager will also be able to design engaging content, as they do PowerPoint presentations, and will be able to integrate that content seamlessly on the learning platform, without having to call in an army of consultants and IT people.

(d) The demographics of work will change. Consider this: Roughly, we finish education and start working when we are 22. We assume senior management positions, in matured industries, at about 40. We retire at 65. If these are correct [and if you disagree, put your own numbers], the oldest workers in our workplace today passed out of college in 1966. In another five years time, the cohort will have passed out of college in 1971, when computers appeared in many campuses in the Western world. [In another ten years, it will completely change with the post-PC generation coming to retirement] More importantly, however, most senior managers today would have passed out of school in 1980s. In five years time, the generation which encountered a computer in the school room will enter senior management. There will be a whole new way of looking at computers and Internet.

So, e-learning will change and will become more ubiquitous, but what will it change to? Would we say more video? What form will the interactivity take? Answers to these, and many other similar questions, will obviously depend on the breakthroughs in hardware, software and networks. This may also be influenced by the social trends. As TV loses its grip on media, and we start believing our net friends than we do our daily newspaper, what works may completely change. We may not see more videos in e-Learning, but may see more YouTube. Citizen's video will possibly come to dominate learning, though it is unlikely that it is going to replace the professional content on TV. This is because costs will be critical, and people just love to create content on their personal experience. I shall not be surprised if YouTube starts a learning corner, but if they don't, someone else will. It will be a cool idea to let people upload videos on their experience - at work, travel or life. Interestingly, there is this theory that people do not act creatively if they are not paid for it. Call it the Traders' theory of creativity, this has been proved wrong many times over by things like blogs and YouTube. In history, people never created, or invented, for money; patronage was a much better system for fostering creativity than royalties.

Also, before we ponder about the future of e-Learning, we need to think where Learning will go, in a few years time. Obviously, the learner participation will increase - more and more we will see people using collaborative tools to disseminate experiences and learning. I did talk about crowd-sourced learning, but obviously this is a bit blasphemous for the L&D professionals, who wish to keep training as a black art. But the trend is clearly towards more collaboration, and participatory learning, than one way training. This is actually good news for e-learning practitioners; but like practitioners of other dead arts before them, they don't particularly like it.

Day 4: Into The Deep

Barack Obama got sworn in, and after his inauguration speech, where he talked about the resolve to take on the financial crisis, but warned that there are challenges ahead, the Wall Street sank. How much of it is Barack Obama, and how much of it is due to the continuing bad news coming from banks, it is difficult to tell. But it seems it is mostly banks, as they continue to pour bad news, despite clear evidence that they are now hoarding cash, clawing back on loans and obviously passing on their troubles to the broader economy. The British government, over last couple of days, took some extraordinary steps to give the banks confidence about lending money, basically by insuring their loans. Despite this, question marks are being raised about the financial health of Britain's largest banks, Barclay's for one. Across the pond, it is Citi, yes the world's largest financial institution supposedly, which is in trouble. It is interesting to learn that in Citi, it is only its brokerage arm, Smith Barney, that makes the money; all other consumer businesses of Citi group do not make any money at all. And, Citi is planning to sell Smith Barney. So, it is Deja Vu once again, to quote CNBC commentators. It feels like that week in September when Lehman Brothers went into bankruptcy and AIG came out with its troubles. Just that, this time, it is going to be bigger, and the policy options are mostly exhausted.

Let's talk about it - policy options. It is extraordinary to see what the governments are doing across the world. If we wind back 12 months, the first set of responses were based on interest rates, where the monetary authorities were trying to make money cheaply available to keep the economy going. This was getting sticky, with rising inflation and a negative real interest rate, but everyone kept going. However, around mid year, Banks started failing and the phenomena of reckless lending came to light. By then, interest cuts were no longer the option - it was already cut too low - and the word 'Bail Out' came to the fore. So, governments bailed out the financial institutions and thought everything will be back to normal. It did not, as banks started repairing their balance sheets first - what else do you expect of a profit making entity - and we moved from bail out to 'stimulus', injecting money to the wider economy through loan guarantees to banks and even the extraordinary steps like allowing the central bank to lend to businesses. It looked like we are going on reverse gear on economic theory - we reached from Milton Friedman to Keynes in a few short months.

If one has to read anything in the current situation, the crisis is not going to get over any time soon. I, like many others, expected this to be a short recession, almost an unfinished one, blown away by combined policy actions by the middle of 2010. But, it does seem now, the interventions so far has done nothing - and this is the extra-ordinary thing about collective psychology - and as the banks act rationally in line with their economic interests, we have no way out of this crisis any time soon.

Without the real life pain, I obviously worry about the business I run, it would be an interesting game of strategy. The governments are running out of ideas fast. They are facing a crisis of an extraordinary proportion, and increasingly it is looking like that the whole capitalist system is in a sort of crisis. I say this because, as it stands, if everyone, bankers, entrepreneurs and government officials keep behaving the correct rational way, this crisis will deepen; so, we are possibly standing at a point of inflection in our history.

What could be done now? Everyone knows that we are seeking a Direct-to-Consumer strategy. How to reach money to the consumers so that demands can revive, businesses can start producing and banks see the rationale in lending money yet again. However, in our cascaded society, we have few options for such a stimulus. In fact, the deeper issue is about equality, sub-prime is not the problem but the solution rather. We have been hoarding money in the hands of a few for far too long: such a crisis was expected.

God has this habit of acting Robin Hood. It seems that whenever the balance of the economy is lost, he flattens it out yet again. It happens through disruptive technologies and innovations, but this time it is going to be a cruel correction of economic forces.

There is pain ahead, as Barack Obama also said. The question is: Whether we shall keep our faith and emerge, as good men and women, on the other side of the tunnel. Or, shall we lose ourselves in the process. Suddenly, failure does not look that bad at all. At times like this, I guess the trick is to focus on what we have, rather than what we don't; keep ourselves flexible, and feel the great freedom such crisis provides, one to do anything and be anyone, yet again.

I am, however, stuck to my old life, though I am trying best to escape. I am working on agreements and numbers, knowing fully well that this is about building a hut on the sea-shore amidst a tsunami. But then, habits die hard - our business culture is used to certain things, without which it does not look like work. So, I shall play the game as long as I have to, though I am desperate to send an IM to Noah to keep a seat.

Day 3: Waiting for Obama

I am still on the ball - went back to the habit of drawing up to-do lists in the morning and ticking it over once done; got a few things done during the day that way. Most importantly, I had to write and finish the Research proposal for the university, and all my non-working time went there. So, when I finished, well past midnight second time in a row, I was feeling a bit zombie-ish (sic!) - haven't moved out my chair much through the day and that is a depressing feeling.

But, I am over with it now, for the moment. Obviously, the work starts now and I have to do the research. Sometimes, I feel tempted to think that I am better off completely focusing on such work - writing, reading, research - rather than trying to keep so many balls on the air. There is, of course, no better time to take a career break than this year, when everything is topsy-turvy and the world economy has decided to go back a few years, as if in a time machine. But then, the work I do is not just work - this is my baby in lots of ways and I can't suddenly take a break. Also, I have tried talking this out with friends, and it draws diverse reactions. Some people, professionals and businessmen, clearly follow a line and for them, going back to the university is simply not an option. They rather point out how much lost income this will mean. On the other hand, there are others who get inspired by the idea and wants to do the same - these are people who are not so much after money than they are after happiness. And, for me, a perpetual Gemini, I am neither here nor there, it is hard to make up my mind.

Outside of my own problems, the whole America is now waiting for Obama. Today he gets inaugurated. The American transition process is incredibly long drawn and unbelievably civil, at least as it turned out in this case. To have a President-in-Waiting for almost three months would be almost unbelievable in many countries, but I think it is a great idea - because it is designed to transition the responsibility slowly and correctly. Of course, this is done not with intent - it is just the process of counting and tallying the electoral votes that takes the time.

There are concerns about security and still disbelief that a black man can actually become America's president. I picked up a joke in Ireland. It goes like this: When Obama turned up in haven, St Peter was guarding the gate [no surprises] and he asked Obama, 'And, who are you?' Obama replied, 'I am Barack Obama, the first black president of America'. St Peter, amazed, said,'Oh! I did not know that. When did this happen'. 'About twenty minutes ago', says Obama.

I am sure the security is tight all over America and the excitement is oozing out. I know more than 2 million people will possibly turn up at this inauguration, which I plan to watch, either on TV or on Facebook. But what will be on every one's mind is such dreams, such possibilities are usually fragile - remember Martin Luther King Jr. - and everyone of us, across the world, must do our best to protect the possibility and foster the opportunity. This is an unique moment in the whole human history, when democracy has finally triumphed and showed what it can achieve. We must keep this flame burning.

Obama obviously comes at a difficult time, but his intentions are somewhat clear now. He will not bring in a revolution, and pack Americans off Iraq tomorrow. That is understandable. In real life, you can't be ideological. If he tries to pack off American soldiers off Iraq on the first plane - he can't. There are simply not so many planes to carry all the soldiers and their kits. So, some have to be left on the ground, who will then be exposed to more danger. He has to do an orderly transition. He has to ensure that Iraq does not become another failed state. He has to tread cautiously.

Interestingly Obama knows this and this is why he is the President. But the way Israelis packed their bags and ran from Gaza tells us that they had this license to finish off from Bush and Condi Rice, but they can't carry on any longer. Obama will, hopefully, show firmness and fairness dealing with this conflict, one which is endangering the world not just by fostering terrorism but also by lowering the moral authority of state power. One can not let Israelis go on killing innocent children. As I said earlier, I was moved by the plight of Baby Moshe in Mumbai; however, I can see Israeli government behaves no more civilly than those terrorists in Nariman House.

So, that gets us to January 20th. I have a full diary, and I shall wait, with baited breath, for Obama.

Day 2 of 100: Getting There

I almost wasted the whole day on my laptop, which refused to start in the morning - resulting in a panic that took the whole time away. I tried almost everything, concluding at some point in the afternoon that I have to go out and buy a new laptop, only to realize that how hopelessly dependent on computers my life is at the time - I was thinking of buying a DELL online! But, anyway, I could salvage the situation somewhat, though this did require a full hard disk format and rebuild of the operating system, and almost six hours of work backing up and restoring all data. A colossal waste of time - or in another way, an useful lesson to learn very early in my 100 day experiment.

The lesson is simple : don't leave for tomorrow what can be done today, and I just quoted Benjamin Franklin. I was to write an article on Bangladesh's election for a journal, and while I was almost ready on Saturday evening, I decided to sleep early and send it over on Sunday morning. I wanted to have a last review with fresh mind - so I told myself. But this was actually simple laziness that gets me some time, and this was one of the occasions. I was obviously cursing myself when my computer wont start in the morning, and recounting events in my life when I left things for too late. One of them affected me professionally: I was to write a guide for e-learning to be given out to participants in an exhibition and I left it for too late, only to be caught up in a situation where a family member got very ill and had to be taken to the hospital. My relationship with Mike, my supervisor, which was usually excellent and still is, took a nosedive on this issue - Mike justifiably thought I let him down big time.

I have noticed that I do well under pressure and many of my accomplishments, professional and personal, were achieved in a very short time. But that's no consolation, as I almost always told myself that I could do a better job if I had more time. And, the truth is - I never gave myself more time. I always waited till the last moment to work on something. I think this is a big negative in my character and I ought to work hard - and will do so rather publicly in this blog - over next few days to sort this out.

Yesterday, however, there was a good thing to report amid all this chaos. After a real long time, I tried writing by hand. The laptop was backing up and I was afraid to touch it lest it crash again. So, I took up pen and paper to write, only to realize how unaccustomed I got with that medium. Later in the evening, when I decided not to go to bed without first sorting out the promised essay, I picked up bits from whatever I wrote on paper, but then chose the medium I am most accustomed with - this blog's editor. Yes, over MS Word or any such package, as I am far more familiar with this interface now than anything else. This had an upside too - I got the article saved up on the blog archives. Some day, when the article has already been published [or rejected, as may be the case], it will take me a few minutes to publish it on my blog, in its unedited format. Voila!

Yesterday, I watched a lot of TV - couple of movies, one of them was an old classic, The Apartment. I have not seen this before - one where an ambitious employee gives keys to his apartment to his boss to fool around with a girl from office and thereby gets a promotion - though I have seen a similar story in the bollywood version, Life in a Metro, where Kay Kay Menon played the boss and Kangana Ranaut played the girl from office. I also watched Kevin Costner and Ashton Kutcher in The Guardian, an old movie yet again, but none the less, I like both the actors and it offered the necessary distraction while struggling to recover my files.

More TV, and it was interesting to follow Niall Ferguson on Farid Zakaria GPS yesterday. Dr. Ferguson was essentially saying that we are looking at long drawn out recession ahead of us, one where a situation like Japan's lost decade will be the best case scenario. He made an interesting point: He said that the current world economy is driven by a Chiamerica partnership, where the Chinese is producing and saving and the Americans are consuming and spending. He was suggesting that if this partnership falls apart in the weight of the recession - if the Chinese for example stop buying US treasury bills and start using their savings to generate domestic demand, start a massive social benefit programme for example - the United States government will have a particularly hard time recovering from the recession. They, in fact, may not be able to recover from the recession at all - like the British in the 1940s.

This is an interesting point. Because the Chinese have to do it anyway. The growth in China has already slowed and the situation is rather dire, by the reports I hear. China does not have a democratic society and therefore, is bereft of a peaceful mechanism to voice grievances and seek political reconciliation. In short, China can not elect a Barack Obama and make a new start. So, the government has to keep things going and keep things cool, and the most plausible way to do this is to offer a massive social stimulus - to fix its broken health-care system or to bridge the rural-urban divide may be - by spending some of the trillion dollar reserve they are sitting on. However, while this looks like bad news for the moment, as this will mean the US Treasury Bonds will have to be sold elsewhere and the interest rates will rise, this is not so bad news because this will mean the consumption will rise again, this time with a Chinese engine pulling it.

This, incidentally, means a significant shift of perspective for the businesses. Dr. Ferguson expressed his faith on America's ability to innovate its way out of recession. Very true, and I am certain a new genre of entrepreneurs are waiting in the wings to make the best out of this dire situation. They will have to grapple with a new reality though: How to design products and services and sell it profitably to billions of customers who live on less than one dollar a day. Yes, we have already talked about this in Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid. Call it Capitalism's last frontier, if you wish, but this is where the action will be, if the world economy has to move forward from the current mess we have found ourselves into.

India and The New Bangladesh

Democracy's Comeback

The overwhelming victory of the coalition led by Awami League and its leader Sheikh Hasina, in the elections in Bangladesh, has been celebrated widely in India. It is indeed good news, and the contrast to the year-end 2007, when Pakistan was tottering on the brink after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, could not be more stark. The expectations are that Pakistan will now be almost irreversibly ruled by a democratic government, however weak, and that in Nepal, hostilities are over and a government, whatever its allegiance, will be firmly in control. With Sri Lankan government finally winning the war against Tamil Tigers, and Maldives and Bhutan successfully implementing democratic transition, it seems that democracy and peace are finally making a comeback in the South Asian region.

This could only be good news for India. Gone are those days of cold war policy making, when we played zero-sum games with our neighbours. The concept of sphere of influence lingers on, but appears dated in this age of global communication and terror. Earlier, it was important to see 'favourable' governments in power in the region; now, the best security for us is in the culture of democracy and shared prosperity.

However, old thinking dies hard and there are far too many people in India who do not like the Nepalese government's closeness to China, or the fact that Sri Lankan Army has now almost beaten the Tamils, who have strong cross-border allegiance. Awami League's victory in Bangladesh, seen in the prism of this thinking, is a good thing - as this is a party supposedly friendly to India.

Forever in Debt

Such assumption of friendliness, of course, originates from history, when India extended its logistical and military support to Awami League led Liberation Fighters and helped them defeat a genocidal West Pakistani army. India was the first country to recognize the independent Bangladesh, and helped its government closely to run its affairs after independence. One of the reasons of downfall of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the first Bangladeshi President and Sheikh Hasina's father, was that he was seen to be too close to India, a stooge, and successive administrations after his assassination, tried their best to distance themselves from India and get close to its regional rivals, China and even Pakistan. The post-liberation generation in Bangladesh, which grew up in the Eighties and the Nineties, have come to regard the Indian intervention in their liberation struggle as a helpful step, but one largely dictated by India's own geo-political interest. On the question of relationship between the two countries, a prominent Bangladeshi intellectual once told me that Bangladesh was no more indebted to India than the United States was to France, and yet it would have been a travesty to expect George Washington to become a vassal of Louis the XVIth, as India did expect of successive Bangladeshi governments.

Indeed, Indian policy towards Bangladesh varied from treating it as a friendly but weak nation to taking it for granted. Take water, for example, an extremely sensitive issue for this largely agrarian country. India, while it built a barrage at Farakka in West Bengal on the Ganges after a long consultation with Pakistani, and later Bangladeshi, authorities, started diverting its water soon after Mujib's death without first reaching a water sharing agreement with Bangladesh. This created an outrage, and though an agreement was worked out later, Bangladeshis always perceived it as an unfair one. The Padma, as Ganges is called downstream, today is much reduced river - something every Bangladeshi squarely blames on Indian unilateralism. Further, it did not help when, in 2003, the Indian government made public its intentions to link its various river basins, without a detailed consultation with the government in Dhaka. Overall, it affirmed the common Bangladeshi perception of India as a Big Brother state.

Bangladeshis today marvel at India's economic achievement and want to imitate its IT industry, though the lack of respect and consideration from India is too obvious to cancel out any feeling of admiration. The on-again off-again relationship between the two countries have not helped trade and exchange, though the cultural and people-to-people relationship across the border remained warm and close. Indian government, despite its professed liberalization and commitment to global trade, has been particularly harsh on Bangladeshi companies trading in India. The best known case on this is Rahimafrooz, the largest automotive battery manufacturer in Bangladesh, who saw a penal tariff being imposed on its batteries after it started making inroads in India, and the Indian manufacturers complained. A furniture business owner, who saw an opportunity when the Indian government recently allowed free trade through SAFTA in 2007 and expanded his business in Indian north-east, saw furniture being quickly added on to the sensitive list, therefore outside the SAFTA provisions, as he started gaining market share.

Besides, this is not just the Indian government, but Indian companies contributed to this mutual distrust. The commercial ties between India and Bangladesh were always strained; the double taxation avoidance treaty between two countries was signed very recently and many Indian companies used this as an excuse to trade with Bangladesh through their offshore subsidiaries, often located in tax havens. This also led to a low level of accountability and lack of professionalism in the commercial engagement, and stories abound how prominent Bangladeshi business houses were short-changed in the commercial transactions with Indian companies. While cultural misunderstanding is largely to blame for such fiasco, and there are indeed successful examples of Indo-Bangladesh commercial engagement, one would wonder whether the narrow, almost reluctant approach to trade is the primary reason for lack of trust between the two business communities.

Hasina's Mandate

While India has its share of responsibility in squandering the goodwill it earned through its engagement in liberation war, Bangladesh was indeed a difficult nation to do business with. Its recent experiments with democracy was riddled with corruption and internecine violence. Political killings were commonplace and Ministers amassed vast wealth on the back of rotten deals. The considerable wealth and natural resources of Bangladesh were plundered by successive governments since the 1980s to the extent that by 2001, Bangladesh was ranked the world's most corrupt state, beating Nigeria and a host of African nations in the game.

Bangladesh's recent politics point towards a common consensus against corruption and political violence. The country is no stranger to violence, but terrorism and violence particularly intensified during the five year rule of the BNP and its Islamist allies [2001-2006] and the ensuing Caretaker government had to pursue extreme options, including capital punishment for some of terror leaders, to control the violence.

It is commonly agreed that the result of this election adequately reflects such imperative, though Sheikh Hasina is an old hand and many of her colleagues and comrades, including the Jatiya Party Chief, ex-President HM Ershad, is indeed the corrupt-in-chief of the country. The results are somewhat paradoxical in that respect, though it appears far more decipherable when the following arguments are considered:

First, Bangladesh has experimented and failed to evolve a third way, an alternative to the two major parties in the fray. Attempts were made to create an alternative with Dr. Md Younis at the helm, taking advantage of his huge popularity and post-Nobel prize international prominence. However, such a move failed to gain political momentum. Besides, the Caretaker government, led by technocrats, started with great hopes but eventually lost its way in the political maze. When in disarray, its autocratic strains became all but visible. Bangladeshis, and all the external powers, obviously realized that their democratic options will be limited, for some time now, to the two warring begums.

Second, this victory is largely attributable to formation of effective coalition, as the results in 2001 were largely on account of BNP and the Islamist vote coming together. Awami League has an extremely motivated following of roughly 35 to 40% of Bangladeshi electorate, and with the consolidation of Anti-BNP votes through a broad-based coalition, they became unstoppable. However, it is prudent to note that this is a coalition victory more than it looks on surface [Awami League won a simple majority on its own] and Shiekh Hasina has to work with her partners if she has to create a sustainable government.

Third, one important factor in this year's election were the first time voters, young men and women millennials who care less about liberation struggle and are more concerned about the road ahead. Studies seem to suggest that Awami League and its partners got their votes; BNP's last minute lurch to Islamic conservatism has cost them dearly here. Bangladesh is a country of young people and this is the new generation which is going to dominate the political agenda from now on.

The All New Opportunity

Therefore, it is reasonable to expect Shiekh Hasina's policies to be dominated by the dynamics of her mandate rather than any feeling of past gratefulness. Her victory presents India with an opportunity, indeed; it is much easier to pursue a common agenda with this administration than it would have been with a coalition involving Jamaat. However, the position now is almost reminiscent of the heady post-liberation days: We have an exciting opportunity, for us to squander.

Bangladesh, contrary to popular perception, is an extremely important state for India. It is resource rich and strategically located. Access to Bangladeshi natural gas will change the economy of West Bengal, and access to sea port in Chittagong and road transit rights through the country will transform the troubled economies of Indian North-East and integrate them far better to the mainland. Bangladeshi entrepreneurs are cash rich and innovative, and free trade and investment opportunities between the two countries will benefit India as much as it will do to Bangladesh.

Besides, Bangladesh is militarily important. This was the reason for India's intervention in 1971 after all, to mitigate a threat on its Eastern borders. China has successfully cultivated the junta in Myanmar to lease air bases and missile installations close to Indian borders; any link-up with Bangladesh will allow it to reach the doorsteps of Kolkata.

However, more importantly, Bangladesh is critical for India's, and the World's, war on terror. If Pakistan was the first, and foremost, example of a modern state created on the basis of Islam, Bangladesh is a prime example how that identity could not be festered upon a linguistic group. If a prosperous, democratic state could be built in Bangladesh, that will serve as an example to the whole world. If it fails, only the Islamic hardliners will be pleased.

Bangladesh, over last several years, became the training ground for ISI and its terror brethren. The rural poverty, and disaffected, unemployed urban youth provided the ideal recruitment zone; the corruption and lawlessness allowed covert operations to go on. After much effort, the government of Bangladesh has pushed back some of these groups, but economic success and political stability will now be required to make those gains permanent.

India needs to engage with Bangladesh with this backdrop. It is time for fresh new thinking, even if it is Sheikh Hasina we will have to deal with. The situation will be irretrievable if we commit the mistakes of the past - take the country for granted or fail to give it its due weight - and we must build a relationship based on respect and mutual commitment. We must allow democracy to succeed, however unpalatable its outcome; and we must be prepared to share our prosperity, as only this can build sustainable peace in the region.

Rahul Gandhi, when speaking in Indian parliament in defence of the nuclear deal, urged his colleagues to think like a big country. In the affairs of South Asia, we have thought and acted with fear and insecurity for too long. It is time that we act like a big country, and engage our neighbours with sincerity and fairness.

Day 1 of 100: New Season

I am living a new 100 days.

This time, I want this 100 days to transform to my life. And, the change is that I am not going to wait till the 99th day for the change, as I have done before. Change starts now.

Last week, I had a very productive visit to Ireland. One which changed my perspectives and the way I saw things earlier. I must admit that I went with an open mind, the way I am trying to do these days, and it helped. I was putting that extra effort to figure out why people think / do the way they think/do, reaching out to hitherto indecipherable individuals.

I mus admit, I could see how wrong I was on certain counts, especially when the prism of my own perception was removed.

I got one very valuable feedback. I am not ruthless enough. That's something which I knew from before, but did not get the right word. I thought I am a people/relationship person. But that's a nice way to say this thing. Ruthlessness is indeed needed, when most people take advantage of niceness. And, if I am not ruthless, I should very well forget about a career in politics, which I intended to get into, and my managerial career also may not get too far. I mean - I do great in functional roles, but can I actually function as a line manager if I am too attached to people I manage.

That's been my problem. In my world, everyone is a friend. That worked brilliantly when I did not work with them, but not so well when I did. It is an interesting way to think. A very Anglo-Saxon thing, I thought, this commercial ruthlessness. But then I can remember San Tzu's dictum, which I quoted in this blog, a leader can not be too attached to his people, otherwise he will make mistakes in trying protect them. My problem, surely.

So, do I want to develop Ruthlessness? Don't know whether it can be developed, first of all. Besides, it is so much against my fundamental character - a touchy-feely nerdy one - that I probably have to live without it. I know I shall be happy without that quality, and it is indeed a good quality to have if one has to lead a team of not-so-equal men.

This gives me another important answer. I remember Tulika, who I consider to be my mentor-at-large, told me once that while I am a brilliant leader in a small team, my leadership style isn't very effective for a larger group. Was she meaning this? Perhaps. Besides, I also know that I expect people who work with me to work like me - with the same level of commitment and energy, and lose patience when they don't. But then I don't force my hand, I wait too long and i keep giving people benefit of doubt. I guess all this adds up - I am not ruthless, too forgiving and hence can't manage a bigger team.

Does this mean that I should now give up and accept mediocrity as destiny? Don't they say that nice guys always come last? I would have thought so - I have never been very competitive in life - and gave up too many opportunities to excel. And, this will obviously rule out my chances of success in entrepreneurial ventures, sadly.

But then, I think I have a few substitute qualities. Like focus. Like commitment. The fine line between ruthlessness and commitment is the objective. Do at any cost is ruthless, but commitment is Do, but don't cross the limits of fairness. That will suit me well - as I am always trying to be fair, some times comically so. I would think I have to give up careers like politics or business, but I can surely do well in a profession, or in cause-related work.

Which indeed means giving up the hopes of living in a manor, going around in a limo or marrying Drew Barrymore [that's off limits already]. But that's fine with me - I am no longer twenty and have a bit of perspective in life to know that going there will take away many things dear to me. Like this time to write this pointless post. The sheer joy of walking on Croydon roads. Things like that. I wanted to be rich because I thought being rich gives you choice, something I wanted to have. But, suddenly, I know choice sits in your head, not in your bank account. I am suddenly feeling free - to do anything I wish to do.

And, that makes me start this new 100 days.

Why Bail-outs May Not Work

The New Year is yet to start.

I was hoping, like everyone else, that there will be something magical on 31st December night. 2008 was a year like never before: Shall we say it was the best of the times and the worst of the times? Or, more appropriately, it was the season of darkness and the spring of hope, perhaps. A recession, worst in many years, was setting in. But, at the same time, a historical American election took place, wiping out the disappointments and disconnects of last eight years, giving people, across the world, something to cheer about. And, this, apart from the usual flipping of the calendar, will bring a fresh start, I was hoping, along with the usual New Year confectionary.

Recessions are painful, but one can not avoid them. Recessions, as the economists see it, are instrumental in moving forward our economic system and sustaining the cycle of innovation and progress. Joseph Schumpeter talked about creative destruction as the principal driver 0f efficiency and improvement in capitalism: We have one at hand right now.

However, while recessions may be an unavoidable aspect of our economic system, even necessary, but it is corrosive and destructive socially. So, it is understood that the politicians can not let a recession happen. They have to intervene, and they have to stop this from happening.

And, the great hope for Joe Blogs, Joe the Plumber, and myself is that they are successful in the effort.

However, I think, so far, we got a very wrong approach to managing the recession. Great hopes were pinned on government activism, fiscal tools funded by taxpayers' money, and one hoped that such activism will allow us to escape the chaos of the Great Depression of 1929, or even a protracted deep recession of the 1980s. I thought this would turn out to be an unfinished crisis - something tamed up fiscal intervention, leading to a greater chaos coming out of an American loan default years later.

Sometimes, things go bad faster than one would imagine, and this year is turning out to be one. We have already had a significant amount of fiscal stimulus and it has solved nothing. The US government was inconsistent and half-hearted, wasting huge amounts of public funds on failed projects and sending out wrong signals. And, more disturbingly, the incoming administration of Barack Obama seems to be committed on a similar fiscal stimulus plan.

This is bad news. Because this reflects the lack of will to fight the recession and sort it out soon. Schumpeter said it and America preached it to everyone else in the world: Structural adjustment was the word they dished out to every other country in the world, including Japan. The advise was - it was painful, but necessary. But when it came to America, no one seems to have the appetite for the fight.

What am I trying to say? When recession sets in, the appropriate policy response is to try to contain the social impact of it and providing support to people who are losing jobs and income. It is important to provide loan guarantees to small firms, so that credit can flow. However, it is also important to recognize that the structural adjustment is necessary, and the economic pain must be bourne. There is no point giving in to inefficient bosses, bloated unions, and greedy investors. Mistakes must be paid for, by them. Throwing money to keep things as it is, is a colossal mistake and will only worsen the situation.

Think about it: what a colossal mistake bailing out Bank of America is. Those guys went out and bought Merill Lynch. Now, they must pay for their mistake. This is crazy that they eat the lunch and taxpayers pick up the bill - and, in turn, everyone in the world, whose retirement money is saved in US Treasury Bonds [because their governments chose to do so]. There are better uses of that money, and these can be spent in building a social safety net, which will allow us to take on future recessions as they come. Instead, we are bankrupting ourselves - spending our money on some greedy banker and his fat-cat speculators.

There is indeed a lesson to be learnt from Japan's experience. Businessweek published a timely article on Japan's Lost decade, which makes this point. And, as things unfold, and the article points out how fast things are happening now, we must brace ourselves for economic pain [yes, let Barclay's fail!] but social resolve. That's the lesson of recession, one which we refuse to learn.

Top Brands in India : The Pitch Magazine Listing

I picked up the latest issue of the PITCH magazine, which had a very interesting feature called Marketing Lessons for The Best. They picked up five very successful brands from India, and talked to respective CMOs to understand their approach. I am attempting to produce a summary of what they said, with my own comments, as usual.

First, the list. The five chosen here were Titan, Kingfisher Airlines, Big Bazaar, Airtel and LG Electronics. I thought this is very appropriate listing, as I could not think of any other consumer brand as good as the ones above. There are a few corporate brands indeed - like Tata or Reliance - but that was not what this feature is for. One could argue that ICICI Bank is a consumer brand and could feature in this list. And, may be some of the car brands too - has Maruti 800 died? - as can be Tata Tea, though they have been considered in a separate section of the same issue. But, overall, a very appropriate list.

Let's start with Kingfisher Airlines first. It was immensely interesting reading about their marketing philosophy. Indeed, their approach sounds uncannily familiar to Richard Branson's - they set out to create a Hospitality in the Air brand. May be, Branson's is slightly different - entertainment in the air. But, those, who travelled with Kingfisher Airlines, know how they package themselves. Apart from this hospitality angle, to which I shall return in a minute, Kingfisher also flies to more locations and have a greater choice of flights than anyone. This is possibly why they have removed the Deccan brand altogether, and repackaged those flights.

At a personal level, though, I must say that I have shifted my loyalties from Kingfisher to Jet recently. I was absolutely floored by the new aircraft, personal entertainment units even in the economy class, Vijay Mallya's charming presentation, its food etc. It had a wow effect on me, apart from the fact that I could use the Kingmiles on Emirates, which I fly often. The availability of the flights had an effect too - I fly Kolkata-Hyderabad sector often, and somehow Jet Airways does not have a direct flight there.

However, I have noticed a marked decline in Kingfisher service off late. I thought they were getting too busy and their staff appeared confused and stressed when the flights were full. On several occasions, I found the cabin crew fairly rude and uncommunicative - they were doing all they were supposed to do, but one could tell that the pressures of quick expansion was telling on Kingfisher. At the same time, I noted the service at Jet Airways improved markedly. Despite various public faux pa they committed, their flights were gradually upgraded, leg space improved marginally and more than anything, their staff appeared better trained, courteous and helpful.

In my mind, Kingfisher Airlines is actually an example of Obsessive Branding Disorder, a title, obviously, I picked up from Lucas Conley's highly readable book. In all this talk about experience, they were out to create an illusion of experience. I hope that it is only very fast expansion and not many trained staff created the problem, and they will be able to focus on fundamentals soon. But, for the moment, I could not buy all the smart marketingspeak which Kingfisher executives handed out.

In contrast, I shall cite Big Bazaar as a great example of consistent branding. It was great to know that the downmarket, Bazaar, feel of Big Bazaar is intentional, designed to appeal to those Indian consumers who have an instinctive distrust of sleek branding and an yawning for value. By being crowded, noisy and a bit chaotic, Big Bazaar is actually trying to send a message that they are cheap and good value. This, in my mind, is branding at its best - projecting a consistent 'character' as opposed to a temporal 'experience'.

Airtel's branding efforts too project a consistent character, a rather traditional Indian character. Airtel adverts and schemes often are very focused on family, the key unit of Indian thinking. It sells itself sublimely through a series of adverts with the message 'some bonding [connections] are forever'. It typically communicates a 'being with you' message. In one of the most memorable advertising campaigns in India, Hutch employed a loyal dog which followed the little girl everywhere, helped in everything she did.

Airtel's adverts, on similar lines, project people-to-people bonding and project a very distinct 'connection' message. Accompanied by a beautiful tune, it invites to 'Express Yourself'.

But then, the line drops.

As in the penny drops. And, we are back to the experience thing again. The line drops. Some connections are forever, but Airtel connections are only for a minute. Their network is on the breaking point under pressure from expansion - success from their branding efforts - which undermine their branding itself. And, again, I would think it is good to have Airtel on that list, but this is taking the purely communications angle into account, and not what would be a complete perspective of branding.

Contrast that, in this case, with Titan. Watches were precious gifts in India, something you received only on special occasions. We Hindus have a ceremony of threading - somewhat akin to Bar Mitzvah - and I was thrilled to get my first watch on that day. This was a mechanical watch made by a Public Sector unit called HMT - watches that worked but was never very fashionable. HMT was what everyone used. Titan changed all that - in a few short years. In fact, I was surprised to discover today that HMT still exists. Titan - more than advertising - built the brand through presence and touchpoints. Suddenly, the fashionable watch stores - the world of Titan - sprang up in the cities, where you could browse and buy fashionable watches. So, my sister started getting watches for passing exams and when valentine day became fashionable, my valentine got watches. That changed the whole ethos of watch wearing in India and in a sense, of personal fashion.

Titan obviously captured that trend and since then, diversified into Jewellery and Eyewear. In fact, I mention eyewear as against Spectacles because of the transformation Titan Eye+ is bringing in India. They are riding the trend of personal fashion and targeted the boring, often unwanted spectacle as an element of personal statement.

In summary, Titan again, represents a character as against experience. Permanent as against temporal - something rooted in the heart of urban India and in line with the times. It is surely not a product versus service thing, as I shall certainly consign LG, whose TVs are fashionable but do not last and whose fridges will need couple of months in the workshop in their lifetime, to the experiential branding.

I do think Indian consumers want value, and such value can be delivered through creating characters through branding - a consistent expectation, buying and consuming experience. The more we focus on experience, our attention gets to the pre-buying experience, and less to what lingers on. I am sure when we judge brands and rank them, it will be good idea to look at them with the complete package, not just in terms of who had the slickest presentation.

Ads on Edge

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Ads on Edge

View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: branding recession)

The Matrix of Self-Management

This is David Allen's Self Management Matrix, which I found very interesting and apparently usable. If you are struggling a bit at this time like me, it may be worthwhile for you to have a look.

Let me explain the two parameters Control and Perspective. There is a great example in the article I picked the matrix up from. [Read it here] It is about an organized kitchen and a great dinner to cook. The control is about having an organized kitchen, with all ingredients in the right boxes and clean utensils ready to be used. The perspective is about knowing what to cook and how to present it.

As you can, it is nice to have both. Only then we can cook a great meal for our guests which will Wow them. However, without one or the other, that won't be possible.

As I looked, I gave these various quadrants names. For example, the optimal one on the Top-Right, which combines great control with abundant perspective, I labelled Leadership quadrant. That's where every great man wants to be. The one below that, bottom-right, which signifies great control but a lack of perspective, is the Blindness quadrant. Being in this one makes everything go right, without the knowledge what one is going for. The one on the top-left, which signifies an abundance of perspective, but a lack of control, is the Up-in-the-Air quadrant. And, the bottom-left quadrant, the one with low control and low perspective, is a Sinking Feeling quadrant.

I used this matrix to analyze my own situation. It was fairly easy. As I look around, my flat is in a mess and I can't find most of my papers. My schedule is up in the air, and I am supposed to be in Poland, Ireland, India, Philippines, Dubai, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka next week. I am supposed to expand our network reach, submit my research proposal, collect our dues, do a business plan for an e-learning operation and talk about starting a business school in Mumbai and a media school in Kolkata, all next week.

You got it right - I am in a low control zone, in Up-in-the-Air quadrant.

However, I know others in other zones too. I can talk about a friend who is perpetually behind all his deadlines, but without committing himself to anything new or innovative. He is surely in the Sinking Feeling quadrant - responding to whatever is thrown at him, perpetually trying to clean his house but without knowing what for. And, of course, I know many people, great people, who are in complete control of their life, but don't know what the next step will be. A great example is a colleague I once worked with - I have never seen a more organized person - but she was moving along the lines set for her without trying to set the agenda. Last time I have spoken to her, she was trying to get out of the Blindness quadrant by taking time off work and thinking through her life's priorities.

The good thing about this matrix these boxes are not prisons to live in. This is about knowing where you are. The goal, if you are ambitious, want to live in your own terms and want to make a difference, will be to move to the Leadership quadrant. If you are not there yet, do not despair - find where you are and this matrix tells you how to get there.

For example, I need to work on Control. So, the first thing I need to do, before any of my travel commitments, organize my papers. Then, cut down on my commitments and see which ones can wait. Also, space out my travel commitments over next 6 to 12 weeks and mark the dates on my diary. Yes, indeed, the first thing I need is my diary, so I shall head out soon to buy a refill for my Filofax.

But, for those in the Blindness quadrant, it is just the opposite. Their diaries are all stitched up already. They actually need to throw away their diaries and take a sabbatical. This is exactly what my very conscious ex-colleague did. Went away. Did various things. Played. Saw places, and people. Introduced a variety to her 8-to-8 office bound life. I am sure she will return a transformed person.

The challenge is, however, in the Sinking Feeling quadrant. I was talking to a new mom recently, who was feeling severely depressed. Because, with a two year old son, she can do little and often her schedule is dictated by her son's fitness and sleeping times. Her perspective has all but disappeared, with the severe pressure on her time commitments and the fact that she had to leave her job and the career she was building up. Or, my friend, who seems to be always behind deadlines. Looking at the matrix, one knows that there are two separate paths to Leadership Quadrant, one through Perspective first, and the other through Control. So, would I suggest that the new mom bring some perspective - start dreaming about things she should do, which will give her energy to do those things? And, a separate solution to my friend, who needs to have control on his life, which can start with taking deadlines seriously?

My thinking, however, is that one needs to follow the Control route, even if that means moving into Blindness quadrant for a while. Yes, even for the new mom, who will be much better off gaining whatever little control she can gain over her daily schedule. This will allow her the space to dream and move up to the Leadership quadrant. The other way, moving up the Perspective ladder, may be dangerous, as with the lack of control, one may quickly fall into the frustration trap.

So, a very useful tool. Try this out for yourself.

We Have To, Or Else

I picked this up from CNN. The Barack Obama soundbites, Jonathan Mann noted, are changing from 'Yes We Can' to 'We Have To, Or Else'. Can't blame Obama too much, as the economy looks dire and the President-Elect knows that his honeymoon will not last too long. He has, at best, three months to reverse the biggest economic downturn in generations. People seems to expect Presidents hold a magic button to bomb away the problems. On a second thought, they can't be blamed too.

I heard bits of Obama speeches too. He sounds wary, and he ought to be. The picture looks worse every day. There is no light at the end of the tunnel and the New Year feeling is fading away fast. 2.6 million unemployed isn't a joke too far: It is staring in the face of every policy maker in the United States.

But one wonders whether the Keynesian stimulus Obama is pushing will work. I confess - don't know the details of the plans. But, generally speaking, those measures are bound to have a limited impact in our cascaded economic system. That's what seems to have happened to the past stimulus - the last ones worked like life-support but stimulated little.

It sure seems that the old ways won't work, but no one is ready to see that yet. This recession, which is happening right under the noses of enormously activist governments all over the world, isn't going to go away. It is actually entrenching itself and eating up the billions thrown at it like a hidden Godzilla. The measures are not working as all they are designed to do is to maintain the status quo, the same, failed system which brought about this recession in the first place.

I conjectured, let's say, hoped, that this is going to be a shallow recession, almost an unfinished one, thwarted by government activism and spent billions. I shall still keep my faith, but it seems that by trying to prop up our failed institutions and maintaining our damaging habits. We continue to burn as much oil as we did earlier, now that the oil prices subsided. We kept our banks, our super-inefficient car manufacturers and allow unjust wars to go on in different countries which divert our attention and undermine our resolve.

The problem starts when we treat this recession as a problem, not an opportunity that keeps our society recession-prone. As of now, we are trying to get out of this recession as quickly as possible, and that is more like trying to jump our way out of quicksand. We have an opportunity to treat this recession as a lesson and help rearrange ourselves.

Consider this. Barack Obama has not even taken office. He has at least two years before he has to seek any kind of mandate again. This is the time for him to say - Yes, We Can.

Like saying - Yes, We Can reduce our consumption. Yes, We Can let some of our banks fail or get sold off. Yes, We Can provide reeducation and reemployment to people laid off by auto companies. Yes, We Can spend these billions in providing universal health-care rather than propping up failed institutions. Yes, We Can say NO to Israel. Yes, We Can try to build a global world, to face enemies from without - a dying environment, corrosive recession and likes of it.

In fact, We Have To, Or Else.

Talking About Franchising : Part I - Who wants a franchise?

I have spent an inordinate amount of time in my working life developing Education franchise networks. And, still doing the same boring thing :) But as it happens, I had little time to pause and think [and breathe], and put on record what I thought. Recently, however, I was mightily flattered when I was approached by an organization planning to pursue the franchising route. They thought I was an expert and offered board seat. I had to decline, of course, because this company is in Dubai and my visits to the Emirates are infrequent and always fairly busy. Instead, I volunteered to coach his team and share my experiences in franchising. I have now put the notes I prepared for this session. I shall share this here, just to claim the hallo of expertise that I enjoyed for a brief period of time. This is Part I, or Session I, of what we did.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Expect no theory here, because I have none to offer. There are good books on franchising if you care to know more about the practise. There are, of course, Complete Idiot's Guide to Franchising and Franchising for Dummies, which, despite those titles, are fairly well written and extensive. If you want to get deeper in theory, try Seven Pillars of Franchising Success, a best practise guide, sort of, written by someone called Andrew Palmer, who looked at many companies that franchise, and spoke to people on both sides of the table, the franchiser and the franchisee. And, before we begin, I shall mention another book, just in case you are a bookworm. Franchising, to my mind, is a largely American affair, and therefore, it is worth reading Franchising Dreams: The Lure of Entrepreneurship in America.

Best of luck with you reading, then, but what we talk now is more of a personal experience - reflections, ideas, those sorts of things. Because I have been there, done that, and despite the fact I am trying to escape, my career seems inexplicably bound to franchising. And, yours will be too, I hope, if you love this thing as I do. It can be tedious, and may mean waking up to a phone call enquiring about stock availability on a Sunday morning - because franchisees, especially the good ones, generally do not sleep. In fact, I shall add, until you start getting those phone calls, you are not doing too well in franchising. I hope you get the point: because your franchisees are sleeping on Saturday nights and/or you still don't have the relationship so that they feel comfortable calling you on Sunday morning.

But before we get there, let's ask ourselves why people buy franchises at all, and why it is such a good business. Let's talk about the typical franchisee - why will she buy a franchise from you. The short answer is that franchising offers the shortest and the cheapest route to entrepreneurship for many people. It also offers an easy way into a new business arena for established entrepreneurs.

If you are now wondering whether there can really be an easy, short, cheap route to entrepreneurship, you are right. There isn't any. But, franchising takes some pain out of it and makes it 'shorter' and 'easier'. Let me explain why. Setting up a new business always has a number of challenges: some of it is legal, getting permissions etc, and some of it is logistical, like getting space, people etc. But then there is an intellectual part of the business too, figuring out how to do the business, what to offer, how to say what to say, carving out processes to achieve the results. This is where intellectual and experiential input is necessary. Basically, entrepreneurs have three alternative routes to cover this aspect: one, use own knowledge, if they already know what they are doing and have previous training or experience of doing it; two, hire knowledgeable people - basically pay a premium to someone who knows the trade and get them to do it; and three, take a franchise of a company which has already established itself in the field.

Entrepreneurs are doing all three all the time. If you care about how these options stack up, obviously the own knowledge route is the best. The obvious requirement is to know what you know - many a times, such enterprise fails because the entrepreneur missed out some key aspects. At one point of time of my career with NIIT, I felt I knew the business well enough and walked out and set up an independent training company. I indeed knew sales and franchising, and the business picked up quite rapidly. However, I was not an expert in training delivery, and did not take in a strong partner to cover the aspect. So, delivery nearly imploded and at one point, we were selling enough but the customers were not satisfied. I had to learn about training delivery the hard way - by becoming a trainer myself in the interim. But we lost time because of that, and gave away a crucial market advantage.

The next best route is buying a franchise. In fact, I shall say, it is possibly the best route - because work experiences are invariably spatial, and does not offer readily usable formats. A good franchise, on the contrary, offers complete business format, a more or less definitive answer on what needs to go in. It cuts down on start-up time, and often, despite significant franchise fees, start-up costs. This is almost always better than paying a premium to hire someone who knows, especially if the entrepreneur is just offering an employment.

My reasoning is simple: Why someone who knows the business so well and in its entirety will accept an employment in a start-up? S/he should start his/her own business or work in an established company, to my mind. And, then, it is hard to know a business completely through work experience. Well, yes, unless it was gathered at a very senior level.

So, as we were saying, a good franchise should offer a complete business format. Products, processes, know-how and identity - in summary. This is referred to as Business Format franchising, where the entrepreneur replicates what the principal, the franchiser, has already done. Subway and McDonald's are examples, and in our industry, NIIT. The format is set, and the deviations, while possible theoretically, are difficult to make and best avoided.

I am not saying all franchise offerings are so complete, but ideally they should be. That's what franchising is for. I have been told by franchise practitioners that they don't want to make their franchise offerings so tight that it cuts down entrepreneurship. That is nonsense. A business format is only one input in a business, and a clear business format can, in no way, undermine the requirements of entrepreneurship. All the franchise offers that promise that the entrepreneur has to do nothing to make money has to be taken with a pinch of salt, because there can be no such thing. The entrepreneurship is critical for success in any business - independent or franchised - and the entrepreneur has to contribute in a franchised business through his local knowledge, ability to take risks and to find ways out of trouble. We are all too familiar with 'moaning' franchisees - it is a problem of entrepreneurship.

Let's spend a minute on the propositions which are incomplete, because there are many in the market. In education, I know of many companies who offer a curricula only, but uses the word franchise to confuse the buyers [and create false expectations and charge higher fees]. The correct word they should use is Licensing, because all they want is people to buy their courses and books. Many a times, they also try to turn their licensing deals into franchise offers by overemphasizing branding. A business format is more than just brand and curriculum; in fact, what franchisees look for primarily is processes and proof of success, which these deals do not cover. Again, a personal example: I wasted a significant period of time in my career on one of such disguised licensing offers, and the fact that I understood the limitations late in the day cost me money, effort and face.

In the next session, we shall talk in more detail about the ideal profile of an education franchisee. But, one key thing is that the franchise propositions should be treated as route to entrepreneurship. If someone is looking for assured returns, s/he is not a franchise candidate. So is someone who wants to have a cool lifestyle. This search for entrepreneurship is important. Often, the criteria we set for selection of franchisees focus closely on financial capability and less on psychological attributes of entrepreneurship. This is a grave mistake, as even the franchiser needs entrepreneurship first, otherwise the burden of running businesses will shift upon them, a cost no franchise fee payout will not be able to cover.

Before we close this session, a note on people who wants a franchise as a route to get into new businesses. There are many such individuals, and it is great to have someone with previous business experience as a franchise. This also allows you have someone with a deeper pocket. However, they are usually not the best candidates, though such generalizations are hard to make. I have seen too many of this kind fail because they do not think the new, small, franchised business is worth their attention. The problem is more in education franchising, where the start-up investment is relatively small but the service delivery commitments are disproportionately high.

I think the qualifying question to ask here - why do you want to be in this business? Many such entrepreneurs would project this as their esteem projects - their foray into social entrepreneurship where people's lives are changed while they make money. My thumb rule these days - especially as the recession is setting in - that 'ego' projects do not work. [I took this advice from a stock analyst, who advised to 'stay away from ego stocks, like airlines'] If the entrepreneur says that the project is too small for his attention, and he is too busy, you should start reading the warning signs. Any business needs its 'entrepreneurship' phase - and there is no short route to success here. The only correct answer here is that 'I love doing this thing, and always wanted to do this'. Recently, someone, who is a successful entrepreneur by her own right, told me that the training franchise we are offering will give her a social exposure which she does not otherwise have [her business is trading spare parts], and because her other business is already established, she will sit in the training centre and look after the business herself. I was thinking, despite my aversion to 'second-business' franchisees, this one may actually work.

Being Home

I am on my way back to England, after spending the Christmas at home. This has been first time I was off work and at home for a few days continuously since I left Kolkata in 2001. My intent to return to India at some stage in my life remains strong, and I spent the time renovating the house and revisiting some of my options in India [though not necessarily in Kolkata] if and when I choose to go back.

As I sit in Dubai airport now [this is becoming my favourite blog-writing ambiance], I feel no t much wiser, but more determined to return, sooner than later. This is a strange feeling, an yawning to be home, to be in a place which belongs to me and where I belong. True, there is an element of tiredness that comes from living in rented apartments in last nine years. Particularly so, as I almost always lived out of suitcase and never knew whether I shall be staying in the same place for more than six months in the future. This uncertainty, my friends would point out, is part of my character, and I do enjoy this in a way: But indeed, this still does not take away my keenness to call a place my home.

On some earlier visits, I had this being home feeling when I walked into my flat in Croydon after long overseas visits. This was about the feeling of certainty and relative permanence: knowing where to look for the TV remote [possibly a wrong example, as, in this particular case, a hotel room represents a far more predictable setting than a home, but one gets the sense] and the reassurance that if I leave a book on table, I am not going to leave it behind. Strangely, these overseas visits also included visits to. And, in context, it seems a bit baffling why I feel the way I do now, when it was the opposite before.

I think the answer is that home is more than just the sense of physical continuity. It is also, no, mostly about people - relationships which represent the same stability and permanence as physical spaces do. This explains why, most times, our own shabby houses feel more comforting than a plush hotel room. Certainly, I shall always feel more comfortable disagreeing with my father than about having polite conversations with a learned Rotary Club audience.

This is what happened to me in Kolkata this time. Strange as it may seem, I have not taken a holiday in Kolkata since I started working. That will make it a long 15 years. The rationale is rather simple: Whenever I took holidays while I was working in India, I went outside Kolkata; and I never took a proper holiday since I started working overseas anyway.

So, as I spent time lazily sitting in our living room, typing in blog posts, attempting to play Cricket on whatever is left of our lawn, buying groceries, seeing movies, and even attempting to see amateur theatre [an enterprise which did not succeed, but was very much like my university days]. I reconnected back to people. It felt exactly like a short version of my 'gap' year - when I waited to go to the university in 1989/90, and spent my time organizing cultural functions, playing cricket and trying to impress the girl in my life. That was a time when I would have stopped on the road so frequently to talk to a neighbour, gossiped about local goings-on, went out to play cricket in other localities, scraped by on a meagre pocket expense [buying a single chocolate bar to split in half with my best friend while we worried about the latest attitudes/ demands of our girlfriends].

This was supposed to be an 'unfree' time. I was an adult sitting at home, without a job or a steady commitment. I had no money to spend, except a meagre Rs. 300 I earned through tutoring, a job I profoundly hated and often absconded from. Most interactions with my parents were best avoided, particularly with my father, who was getting increasingly worried about my lack of directionlessness and who would often vent his anger in the presence of my many friends. I was not sure whether my girlfriend loved me, as I was unsure of myself and my future - and I would always act terribly possessive and abominably suspecting of anything that she did. Looking back, those days, I wanted to get moving, I wanted to get busy, and was terribly upset sitting around.

I did get busy soon thereafter. I picked up the advice of a senior friend and started learning computers. One thing led to another [to be fair, my father was also generous in paying the fees for an expensive computer course] and I was soon gainfully employed, almost obsessively so, burning midnight oil to learn new things in technology and customer relationship. But, since that day, I never felt being home.

Yes, it was almost like living in a suitcase like now, a mental suitcase, then. Yes, I lived in the house I was born in and had 'my' room. I went out to work early and took the same predictable commute. My friends changed, and I got close to people at work. My relationship with my girlfriend strained and I found someone more exciting, urban and ambitious. But I kept saying to myself that this is all temporal and I must return home one day.

As you would guess, that never happened. Though I settled down with my girlfriend eventually, I moved on from one thing to other at work, taking pride in my enterprise, my ambition and my ability to build work relationships and spot opportunities. I developed intellectually, and got interested in public affairs, politics and technology. I questioned the lazy nature that defines my city and lectured my brothers and whoever I could get to hear me out how other communities are moving forwarded. I developed, in particular, a great regard for silicon valley entrepreneurs and wanted to create miracle enterprises like them. I knew being home is not going to be important any more.

How wrong was I indeed? This time, the break in Kolkata reminded me of all that. I must admit Kolkata has changed too. It has started, as Rabindranath Tagore once wrote, going to Mumbai. I roamed around various shopping malls and multiplexes of the city, tasting the food court fares and assuring myself that life won't be that alien if I choose to return from England. I drove around in my brother's Mitsubishi Lancer, an absurdly big car for narrow Kolkata roads and for this age of fuel economy. I tried to enjoy as much the fact that we have been successful, both my brother and me, in creating a life very different from what we were destined to live.

But then, at times, I sat in our living room doing nothing. The winter sun rose slowly and cut the mist to touch the ground on our back lawn. I walked around barefoot on the dusty grounds and remembered a moment.

It was long time back, I must have been in college then. I was right there, on that lawn, barefoot. It looked like the same Sun, same sunlight and same shadows. It felt chilly just like the other day. I was standing there with the same purposelessness. That moment, I was thinking just like that lost day and time.

Then, I thought I wanted to go abroad and be successful; but the next moment, I felt a deep, plunging pain in my heart. The lawn was too dear, the sunlight was too dear, the moment was too dear to lose. My grandfather, my parents, my brothers were too dear to be away from. I thought myself I can't give this all up. No way. I always wanted to be home. At least so, for that one poignant moment of pain.

This day, I suddenly felt time-shifted and frozen. The slowness of life displayed in full abundance. I tried telling myself that attachment is a barrier to progress, to success. But I was as if glued to my past - the attachment overwhelmed me, and all I wanted to do is to be home.

I soon got back to myself, of today.

But, those few moments of time freeze, I knew I would be glad to be home.

Satyam Moment for India

Satyam is imploding. Should I have written it has imploded already? I haven't done so, in deference to the 53,000 highly talented and qualified individuals who are still working there, as hard and as honestly as they can. Saying it will be an insult to their persistence and efforts.

However, the truth is that the company is fast sinking. This was the poster boy of IT boom, a company which came from nowhere, and dominated the IT / Outsourcing scenario in India in last 10 years. This is the fourth largest IT software company [or is it, as all figures reported by Satyan is now suspect], which employs, as I said, 53,000 people.

Satyam, as we all know, means truth. The absolute truth, by implication. While newspapers played on this and reported - Satyam a Lie - the day after its founder and chairman admitted the biggest corporate fraud in Indian history, this is also the moment of truth for the India: Not just for the IT companies, but for the country as a whole.

The media is taking great pains to talk about how this may lead to limited opportunity and greater scrutiny for Indian IT companies. It seems grossly unfair to pin down the blames of a massive fiasco in oversight and regulatory framework on the industry as a whole. I am not certain why anyone should start doubting Infosys, or NIIT, or XYZ software for that matter, just because the corporate governance in Satyam has failed. Especially when such fiasco seems to be induced by real-estate induced greed, it is unbelievable that some people have started suggesting that the whole IT industry boom story is rotten.

But before we get after the miserable souls in the IT industry, who already have their share of worries from other events than Satyam, there are other parties who must do some answering. The list has to start with PriceWaterhouse Coopers. Omkar Goswami in ToI comments that PwC's goose is cooked now. Like Arthur Anderson in the aftermath of Enron, PWC will now - almost certainly - face lawsuits and probes, lose clients and will possibly cease to exist soon. Shed a tear for them - a highly respected institution which operated in India for more than 100 years, and have represented the gold standard in Auditing. Well, may be not - we don't know what we will see next. However, they have surely failed to do their duty, and overlooked something so basic that every audit internee in the country will laugh at them.

It will be interesting, however, to see what action Institute of Chartered Accountants of India [ICAI] takes against PwC. Lawsuits aside, they have now brought the roles of auditors in disrepute as a whole, and the governing body of the professionals have a duty to act. Would they be courageous enough to debar PwC from signing off accounts till they have fully clarified their position and how they could let this happen.? This may be needed in restoring some confidence in Indian Corporate Governance, though this will only be an act of hindsight and more will be needed to restore confidence in the profession. [An observer even suggested that this will be the beginning of the end of the undiluted power of ICAI hold on the practise of audit in India - shall we say clout - and we shall see more openness and integration with global audit practises in the aftermath].

Mr. Raju's closeness to Chandrababu Naidu and the current Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh raised some questions, though I would see no harm if a leader of a state tries to promote a son of the soil, and extends a helping hand, as long as the demands for propriety and fairness are met, in building the business. It is undeniable that Satyam has made a significant contribution to job creation in Hyderabad, the state's capital, and was partly responsible for promoting Hyderabad as an alternative location to Bangalore for IT services work. While politicians in India are notoriously corrupt and it will surprise no one if stories of impropriety start breaking out, the current suggestions by the media that these politicians have anything to do with Satyam's errors look far-fetched and malicious at this time.

Except in one case, which probably needs to be revisited. I recall seeing an open letter for the CEO of Delhi Metro, Mr. Sreedharan, regarding the way the Hyderabad Metro Railway project is being handled. The project, as we know, has been awarded to Maytas Infra, a sister company of Satyam and one run by the Raju family. It is an old story, and I remember seeing a rebuttal from Maytas to Mr. Sreedharan's charges in the immediate aftermath of the letter. But, with the benefit of hindsight, Mr. Sreedharan's allegations sound familiar: overvaluing of assets, overstating the financial capability. The metro railway project was awarded by YSR's government and he would certainly like this be hushed up. But, looking at Satyam's broad failure to conduct business ethically, it is important that we reinvestigate the Metro Railway project in the light of Mr. Sreedharan's allegations once again.

A part of the blame will also go to SEBI, though it is difficult to see how they would have helped if the auditor was signing the accounts so blindly. But, indeed, this indicates a systemic failure, at least from the gamble of Rajus to buy off Maytas properties at an inflated price to set the accounts right before the fraud was called. One wonders what they were thinking, and why questions were not raised, immediately, by SEBI and the Government about the propriety of the deal; instead, the great corporate steal was left to be stopped by the wisdom of individual and institutional investors.

I also heard someone make a private comment that they will not touch the Satyam employees as they are tainted too. I must express my outrage - because Satyam employees are more wronged than wrongdoing. The investors may have lost money, and some commentators lost face [It feels tragically amusing to read Rajeev Srinivasan's spirited In Defence of Satyam, published on 2nd January, where he was saying the attempts to acquire Maytas was 'unwise, but not necessarily wicked'] - but the employees lost their secure careers, money, their endless hours of work, value of their commitment, esteem from their neighbours, in-laws and family. It is sad to see the sufferings of so many for the wickedness of a few; it is outrageous to hear someone broad-brushing them with their crooked bosses.

Coming back to the impact on Indian IT industry, I would wonder why the question is being raised at all. The fall of Enron did not raise questions about the vulnerability of other US Energy companies in doing businesses abroad. Keep in mind that the energy companies, even the US ones, have a particularly tainted record of ethics [and by implication, of corporate governance] than Indian IT. I would have accepted if this was being talked about in the wake of allegations of data theft against Satyam, which World Bank levelled recently. But to talk about this in the context of this fraud is not just irrelevant, it is plain wrong, as it questions the honesty and integrity of other corporate leaders who have made their millions through innovation and hard work.

Indeed, the Satyam fiasco may impact FDI in India, and put Indian companies under greater scrutiny while attempting to list on Foreign bourses. It will most certainly raise questions about Indian governance standards, and challenge the practises of ICAI, SEBI and other regulatory institutions. We haven't yet heard who did Satyam bank with [I mean, which bank would have certified Satyam for its non-existent billions] and this could be another crisis in the offing, if one of our major banks get caught. So far, there is no proof that Mr. Raju and his cronies have stolen any money. He says he didn't, but his estimate that Satyam was operating at a 3% margin seems questionable. However, if he did, and if he disappears now, it will be a huge problem with the government.

However, this fiasco is an opportunity - as every disaster always is, in a roundabout way. This is the moment of truth for India, when we should start demanding more transparency, and a much higher level of ethics, in corporate conduct than ever before. I am thinking hopefully - whether this will be yet another blow to take the liberalization forward, by challenging the corruption in boards and regulators, leaving inept and corrupt auditors vulnerable, by shaking up otherwise complacent business people as a whole. Would this be our equivalent to the various scandals that rocked the American economy from time to time, but helped, in a way, to build a robust system which is envied by the world?

For the sake of Satyam's employees and countless others, which, we know, we must.

An Appeal Against State Terrorism

A month back, I wrote about Baby Moshe and why terrorism can not succeed. I owe it to everyone who read it a statement why it does.

Baby Moshe is a symbol to me. An innocent child who lost his mom unnecessarily, unjustifiably. He signified why we should always stand against the use of force against the unarmed and the innocent.

Ironically, by the same coin, we must condemn, in strongest possible words, the actions of Israel in Gaza. Rockets have been fired in Israel from Gaza, killing one of its citizens and wounding several. But Israel's response, as in many occasions previously, disproportionate and cruel. It bombed the territory indiscriminately and continuously, killing hundreds, including the children in schools, and an unaccounted for number of Baby Moshe-s.

This is exactly why terrorism succeeds, to win even a single heart as it does. While one must stand for the human decency and rights for unarmed civilians facing hooded gunmen, we should spare no effort to stop organized armies executing similar death campaigns to deadly effect.

We are in a chicken-and-egg proposition where the terrorists cite unilateral and barbaric actions like Israel's wars [remember the one on Lebanon couple of years back] as justifications of their deeds; whereas such wars are entered upon citing the mindless terrorist actions at other times. The key is - both kill unarmed citizens, babies, mothers, disrupt families and destroy lives.

Such destruction is no answer. This is what I continued to say about India and Pakistan, and will say about Israel. Our rulers live in a hangover from ancient times when tribes fought against tribes, and it was possible to be genocidal and wipe out entire populations. This does not fit into a 'globalized' world, in the era of democracy and 24x7 media. Great pioneers like Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin tried this and failed; not because they failed in the 'Information War', they controlled the media and half the world extolled their progressiveness and leadership, but because of Lincoln's dictum about public leadership - you can fool some people all the time, and all the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all the time.

Apart from such stale thinking dating back to Genghis Khan's time, we also continue to make two mistakes. One, we treat, despite the correct political noises we make elsewhere, not every human being as born equal. I am not trying to preach socialism here, but all of us been granted a basic right to life and livelihood, and it isn't for a human being, and any 'government' to take it away. Civilization demands that we accept our rights to live - regardless of our gender, race, religion, nationality or political allegiance - and if we don't, we shall await our own nemesis, for the time when we are on the side of the wronged.

Two, we continue to play a zero-sum game. We treat other's losses as our gains. This instinct goes further back than Genghis - this was the time we were animals. We seem to have overpowered our instincts and became civilized; except when we have a gun in hand or when we are in government. It is for us - citizens and voters - to teach some civilization to these guys, by punishing our corrupt and inefficient governments which fail to protect us for its faulty, short-term policies and put us in danger and degradation by waging unnecessary wars on innocent people. We must read all the signals that our physical environment is giving us: We are facing a far greater threat from outside than within our civilization, and it is time that we abandon the zero-sum attitude and start acting as a civilization. Lots of times, popular Hollywood movies get it before our presidents and prime ministers do.

So, this time, another appeal to save the lives and dignities of Baby Moshe-s in Gaza. Let us prove we are better people than we seem to be [and people like Tony Blair, who seems to be as much an apologist of supremacist thinking and violence, not very unlike his friend Bin Laden, make us look like] and join together in the appeal of an immediate, unconditional cessation of state terrorism in Gaza.

Recruiting In Recession

A friend of mine, who is from Dubai and was holidaying in India, complimented me when I called her to postpone a social visit I committed, because I was interviewing people and it was going well into evening as we had a longer-than-expected queue. She said she was disappointed that we would not meet, but was happy to know we are recruiting.

We are recruiting because we are expanding, one step at a time, but we shall have four outlets trading at the end of January, up from a solitary one as of today. And, in fact, I find this recruitment exercise particularly rewarding, as the number and quality of candidates are better than I expected.

This is the good thing about recruiting in recession. You get good candidates to come to you. Plus, you send out a rare positive message, which attracts the ambitious and the aspiring. Besides, as I know from experience, recession is largely a matter of collective psychology, and one can transcend recession if he starts feeling good about his prospects.

In India, a strange phenomenon is taking place right now. Let's call it - Blame it on recession. Companies are purging deadwood. People are delaying contractual obligations and ducking payment commitments, because of 'recession'. Someone was telling me that even a payment of Rs. 10,000 has been held back because of global recession. Just another excuse, as one can make out, but a dangerous one - collectively we are slowing down by choice.

It should not be so. India is not terribly dependent on Real Estate or Financial Services. These sectors, however significant, only employ a miniscule number of people, compared to the size of the workforce. Despite all its current trouble, the IT and IT Services companies should do better, not worse, as a new wave of cost cutting will give a new fillip to outsourcing. The Indian arms of global companies will indeed face an initial squeeze, but not a deadly blow, and it is unlikely that any major Indian company will falter.

So far, the government has acted, more decisively so since the departure of non-effectual P Chidambaram, who sat on the middle of populism and fiscal conservatism and could not make up his mind. The markets have reacted favourably so far, with BSE Sensex earning back some of its lost shine quickly since the New Year.

Things should not be very bad for India, therefore. Many people I have spoken to in the last few days expects the recession to be over by March [tell that to someone in England!] and more importantly, many businesses have started recruiting and expanding again. Sitting at this point, it feels that India may have been spared from a deep long term recession.

I was also hearing about China who just came back from a trip there. He was talking about how bad the things are there. He was telling that the migrant construction workers have been sent home without the full settlement of pay and insurance. He was talking about poverty - something I thought is no longer there in Chinese cities - with people living on CHY 99 a month. He was talking about the poor state of health care in China - another surprise - and the fact that there are clearly two classes - Party Officials and Businessmen on one side of the divide and rest on another. If true, this is a dangerous situation as the Chinese society, unlike India, does not have the democratic grievance redress systems and therefore may sink into a revolution and anarchy any day. That poses a threat to everyone, including India - who wants an unstable Dragon in the next room?

Coming back to main topic of discussion, I think it is a bad time for companies to do a recruitment freeze. Remember all the talk about talent? Freezing recruitment now will make companies miss a lot of talent acquisition opportunities. This is time when the door should be open - and as the economy goes through the churn and adjust to a new, post-boom market, the companies should be able to create an internal churn and hire new post-recession talents.

A Note On Indian Education

I remarked, on an earlier post, that Indian education is designed to 'disengage' rather than connect one to the community. I did realize that it was indeed right, and deserves more deliberation.

Indian education system has grown out of the colonial education system and never gone through a root-and-branch reform since Macaulay's days. The system was developed to prepare a ruling class. The underlying promise of education was social mobility and differentiation, a better future than everyone else. After Independence, the same system was broad-based and spread out, but have not gone through a critical review. This is because our new rulers were too steeped into 'ruling' class values to see the problem in the first place.


The message that the educated got is that they are to 'rule', not serve. They were taught the idea of India, as a geographic and historical entity. The education comes mostly in classrooms, and there is not much space for outside activities and community participation in the school year. There is a marked examination for 'Work Education' every year, but the only vocational skill taught in these classes are how to make soaps and candles, and sometimes how to draw, often by an uninterested teacher. Ultimately, what counts is marking - the Work Education is usually where discretionary marking goes unobserved and the teachers' favourites excel particularly in the discipline.

There is, of course, no concept of a gap year. The pace is frenetic, and the students are supposed to rush from tutorial to tutorial all their time. The system is riddled with various examination, at least two every year, some major 'board' exams at certain intervals. Outcome centrality, and rankings, are at the core of the system. Most students complete their graduation without seeing much outside their hometown, which is almost universally true in case of girl students. The diversity of India - both geographic and cultural - remains a subject taught in classes, never experienced. There is no concept of social service, the study commitments are too heavy and the parents are too eager for the child to complete their education.

When I was reading OUTLIERS and figured out that there is a certain advantage of being the eldest child in a class, it came as a bit of a revelation. Because I was always the youngest in my class, studying a good two year in advance. It did not occur to me that this could be a disadvantage, as this is a rather common practise among Indian parents, and I was rather happy that I probably saved a few years of my life. The years could have better spent in a different way, but I did not understand that till late.

I have noted that Indians are a strange tribe, marked for their rudeness [Joan Robinson was quoted by Amartya Sen saying: 'You Indians are too rude, and the Japanese are too polite. The Chinese are just right.'] and self-centrality. The current state of public affairs in India is due much to the disengagement of the educated people from community activities altogether. It is commonly noted that every Indian is out for himself/herself, everyone trying to maximize their individual take and thus undermines the collective gains.

In a world of fierce global competition and shrinking resources, we may have to change. We change at the precipice - declares John Cleese's character in The Day The Earth Stood Still. We are at the precipice. Things have to start with education.

Selling to Indian Consumer

My role, in this new year, will change significantly. By definition, what I do is international business development for my company, a B2B affair involving building partnerships with and offering franchise to other business people. However, as a part of our ongoing commitment to our content partners, it seems that I shall have to focus, even if for a limited time, on how to sell our services to the Indian consumer. This is quite different in scope and focus, but I must admit that I am going to enjoy it - doing something what I did before, but with the advantage of hindsight.

No doubt, Indian consumers have changed a lot, since I left the country in 2004. Or, has it? The change that we see today - in physical evidence in sprouting shopping malls in every city and availability of global brands. The psychological proof is in the changing habits, of eating takeaway food, of eating out, of sending one's children to expensive schools etc. Five years ago, I used to say that all the investment in creating a 'cool' ambiance for training is useless, because most of our students went to a state school and never expected an airconditioned classroom - and was never ready to pay a premium for one. This is different now, though the prospective students still come from state school backgrounds, because the Private Training business is three decades old, and many people have attended these institutes and benchmark every entrant in the market against those benchmarks. So, the general consensus is that the Indian consumers have now started moving up the value chain.

I am not sure how far this is true. Because certain things do not change in India. For example, outcome centrality. What we have in this country is an imposed education system, one which teaches science, mathematics and English, but under-emphasise our literature, culture and sense of identity. Community plays hardly any role in the education system, and the education system keeps us away from the community. This is fundamentally different from most other countries, where formal education is meant to connect, not to disengage, one with his/her community and culture. This is where Lord Macaulay did a brilliant job - in creating, perpetually, legions of Indians who do not connect to the community any more and start disliking their fellow citizens after going to school. This education was fundamentally outcome centric, focused on getting a degree and finally a job, preferably in Civil Service. This outcome centrality persisted through generations, and was reinforced by the expectations of parents and social norms. So, private training programmes which are not identifiably outcome centric - like those which helps people improve their English but does not necessarily guarantee them a job - are not the most popular in the market. And, this hasn't changed an iota over the last 15 years I kept track.

I have often been told by Indian marketers that the Indian consumer is 'value maximizer'. That roughly translates to - they want big bang for their buck. But then, who does not? In my personal experience, Big Bazaar is a huge hit, because it is a discount retailer. But, so is Shopper's Stop, the high end clothing retailer. It is wrong to assume that Big Bazaar is successful because it connects to Indian psyche, while Shopper's Stop has gained from the cash-richness of the top end of the Indian middle class. Shopper's Stop is indeed as Indian as Big Bazaar, and both have gained from the new found wealth of Indian Middle class, though Big Bazaar is decidedly downmarket and Shopper's Stop stocks premium brands. I think the question here is the one I posed above: Do the consumers want to pay for a better experience and how much?

I have heard this view that Shopper's Stop and Big Bazaar has two distinct clientele. Indeed. But then there is a huge overlap, and I belong to the middle ground. I do shop at the both the places, and so does scores of others I know. So, does the Indian consumer want to pay for a better experience?

On the face of it, it seems that they do, as Multiplexes are generally putting old movie theatres out of business, and trendy eateries charge a handsome premium to offer a pleasant experience. My answer is that India is in the middle of a huge consumption churn, and millions of people are joining the consuming class every year and moving up the ladder. Our old provider state economy created sufficient capacity for the middle-of-the-road spender, but did not leave much for the rich and the aspiring. So, today, the facilities for the aspirational rich are coming up, providing the physical proof for progress. For example, Mainland China, a very popular, very good but fairly expensive restaurant in Calcutta runs full capacity today, which is indeed a sign of prosperity. On the other hand, Ballygaunge Dhaba, a popular, reasonably priced eatery in Calcutta, is running full capacity too, but no one else seems to notice - as they always ran full capacity. On a closer look, however, you will notice many middle aged executives in Mainland China who were regulars at the Dhaba when they were younger; the Dhaba acquired a new clientele now.

In my experience, most global companies have difficulty with India as they don't understand it, and do not want to make the effort to understand it either. Their business plans are mostly based on stereotypes developed from dated literature. Their aspirations are based on '1 Billion people' mystic. I have told people that companies come to India seeking a huge multiplication effect - several times the population of Europe attracts them - but then face a puzzle of division and segmentation unlike any other country in their experience, and falter. The key to understand this is that India is almost a sub-continent, much bigger and more diverse than what one will understand as a country. It represents a matching level of complexity and demands a level of analysis, understanding and effort. Logically, if the business expectation out of India is little and the company does not find it fit to allocate enough resources to this business, they are better off exiting the market in the first instance. Especially in services, where local champions always have a much greater advantage in terms of culture-fit solutions and relationship networks. And, consequently, the only way to sell successfully in India is to create an Indian company, an independent entrepreneurial outfit which is not subservient to diktats from the Head Quarters, except in terms of resources and business practise templates, which are to be tried for adoption but should not be taken in blind faith.

The other question is whether one should do business in India at all. The obvious answer is - it depends. Obviously, no global enterprise can be built without India today. But then India is not an easy game, and the organization should clearly define its strategic perspective first. I know the question to ask. Before I ask why the company wants to be in India, I ask why the entrepreneur is in business. If I hear, for making money, I know that the entrepreneur is essentially looking for a short and sweet way to profit, not an anomaly in business, but India may not actually fit that perspective.

So, selling to Indian consumer is complex. If one asks how complex, this is my try: The market place is complex with various segments - cultural, psychological and historical - and it is in a state of churn. It is a time in India where the social mobility is at its peak, and we are redefining ourselves. Selling to Indian consumer is, therefore, about not where he comes from but where he wants to go: Something that can not be achieved without clearly understanding India itself. So, that's the solution - an India strategist, as against a global development czar, someone who analyzes the country, understands the nuances and comes up with micro-strategies. I am quite excited to have this opportunity thrown at me.

The New Innovation: N=1, R=G

I read C K Prahalad's interview on Indian Management, the monthly journal of All India Management Association, where he talks about his upcoming book and the new idea, N=1, R=G, and various other issues. I found this particular idea particularly intriguing and decided to write about it.

The underlying idea is simple, and actually quite obvious. Dr. Prahalad's idea is that today's business needs to offer individualised, personal solutions to customers [N=1] by finding best resources globally [R=G]. While this may seem obvious, most of our consumer market business models are built on standardized demand across market segments being met by allocated resources in a given geography.

In fact, the Business-to-Business world is possibly more used to Dr. Prahalad's formulation, where vendors scour the world to find the most appropriate resources to serve each of their clients. The conventional wisdom is that such customization is possible for high value, repeat clients, whereas the mass market 'consumer' has to remain satisfied with the standardized offering that companies lay out to them.

Dr. Prahalad says the boundaries between B2B and B2C are fast disappearing. This is true, not just because the individual customers have started demanding custom products and services [laptops in different colours, TV package mixes, iGoogle are some examples], but also because the B2B market today is being dominated by small businesses [more than 80% of UK businesses, for example].

And, N=1 isn't just going to be a premium proposition; with a vast amount of information at their disposal, and with falling costs of switching loyalties, customers will desert the provider who does not understand their requirements and care for their preferences, at the first possible opportunity. Technology has been the primary enabler for such demand patterns - as it made information ubiquitous and instant comparisons possible. It is also the solution the companies will turn to - to collate information on aggregate and individual demand in real time.

On the other hand, R=G is a strategic imperative driven by the quest of efficiency and lower cost facilitated by the arrival of developing country suppliers in the party. The proposition simply is - if you don't source globally, someone else will. The technology comes as an enabler here too, as do the gradual easing of global tariff barriers and establishment of common markets in different parts of the world.

Today's innovation imperative, then, is to move the businesses to a truly integrated value chain, which narrows down to N=1 at the customer end but extends the scope of supply chain to R=G. To achieve this, the various roles, of the CEO, CIO, CFO etc, have to be re-thought. IT has to be given its due weight on the strategic agenda and customer data analysis need to be integrated, closely, with strategic planning. Global sourcing skills and infrastructure will be key to business success, as will be global talent and intercultural understanding.

My takeaway: a comment by CKP, "You don't need satisfied employees in your business, you need excited employees".

Personal Note: The Reinvention of Nearly Everything

This is my welcome note for 2009. Thank God that 2008 is finally over. A year of miseries, most people will say. One would hope that the current downturn is only psychological, and the New Year celebrations will lift the spirit. The end-of-year will represent a clear break with the past: At the stroke of midnight hour, all the follies of last five years will be behind us. So be it: 2009, a year of reinventing nearly everything.

First, let's start with expectations itself. Many ceilings and benchmarks have been repeatedly breached in the last few years, so let's not get there. Sensex, Dow Jones, NASDAQ, FTSE - in all of that. Those points have almost become meaningless now, in the floor-busting year of 2008. If we start afresh, we shall not talk about indexes anymore. We can rather talk about simple things, like happiness and family perhaps. They are usually things we forget in giddy times, and don't have time for them amid disasters. This year will be a good time to return to these things.

Fear is another such area. We have lived in constant fear of things unimaginable. Since the day the planes flew into the tall buildings of New York. Since then, lots of people have been killed just for taking wrong trains, and even for going to hotels and hospitals. This seems to be a particular type of worship, a newly bottled religion. But we seem to be coming to the end of it: End of this life of fear. Increasingly, we know fear is being used by both sides - by our attackers to limit our movement and by our defenders, to limit our thinking. We realized we lose more by fearing than by not fearing. So, 2009 may see us marching out again, beating our fears.

Taboos need a reinvention too. This is the year of Barack Obama, remember. How would it feel to see a Black American president on TV all the time? He will remind us all the time that things change and unimaginable can happen. There are some good taboos that may be broken too. Like toying with nuclear missile launchers. Asif Zardari is a bit too naive to handle such dangerous things anyway. He came close to breaking this taboo in 2008. Hopefully, he has learnt, and keep these things stashed away somewhere.

Businesses will learn a number of things. Like the party can not go on forever. India and China have to work a bit to resurrect their pre-2008 glory. It was all downhill for China since the Olympics, and they need to do something quickly and decisively to avoid another Tienanmen. So far, they are getting too close to that for comfort.

Personally, I am hoping a better end of the year than how it is starting. I need to reinvent myself too, and restructure my life. I have spent far too long in the wrong trade, 2009 will see me shifting finally. I am almost committed to reinvent everything, right from how much I sleep to what I talk about. This would have been revolutionary, but under the current circumstances, I am looking like a laggard already.

Bangladesh and India: The Road Ahead

I wrote yesterday about Sheikh Hasina's victory in Bangladesh and the possibilities it opens up. In some ways, as The Economist observed, with the burden of expectations on her shoulders, she is bound to disappoint. But, it is undeniable that this is a moment of opportunity, not just to rebuild Bangladesh but also for the South Asian region for a whole - to move towards a stable, peaceful future.

To make this happen, the key lever is Bangladesh's relationship with India. India is not just the largest country in the region, it is getting stronger economically and militarily, and has deep connections - through people, culture and history - with Bangladesh. It is Bangladesh's largest trading partner, and neighbour across the border on three sides of the country. All major rivers of Bangladesh, critical as they are for this agrarian economy, flow through India before entering Bangladesh territory.

India should also be Bangladesh's most trusted friend. It trained and armed Bangladesh's Liberation Army during its war against Pakistanis and finally, sent in its army to seal the victory. It helped the newly formed government with aid and advice. Yet, the diplomatic relationship between the two countries were never very close, and the tensions erupted from time to time, over the sharing of water resources, regarding border hamlets, on the use of Bangladeshi territory by Indian terrorist groups, regarding the continuous stream of illegal immigrants from Bangladesh to India, on unfair trading practises of Indian companies and very limited access to Indian markets for Bangladeshi companies, and a number of other issues.

These tensions were visible from day one, with Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the political leader of Awami League and the celebrated leader of Bangladesh Liberation Movement refusing to identify himself too closely with India. [It must be said, at this point while Mujib was the instigator-in-chief, he spent the period of liberation war in Pakistani Jail, leaving the political initiative to be taken by the Bangladesh Government in exile leaders such as Syed Nazrul Islam and Kamruzzman, and the military action on a number of liberation army commanders, including Major Ziaur Rahman, later President and the late Husband of the current leader of Bangladesh opposition, Begum Khaleda Zia]. Mujib's strategy did not work: primarily because most of his comrades were part of the Government in Exile, and was identified too closely with India. This, along with his own dictatorial ambitions [along with his ill-fated courtship with Soviet Russia, which alienated the Americans at the height of Cold War], brought about his downfall, when he, along with his entire family [except his two daughters], was assassinated. The governments that followed, including the one led by General Ziaur Rahman, adopted a somewhat ambiguous strategy towards India, avoiding direct confrontations, but refusing to cooperate with India on most things, and making overtures to India's strategic rival, China.

India helped in Bangladesh's war of liberation out of its own strategic imperative: it wanted to avoid being challenged by Pakistan on the East as well as the West, and the civil war started by the genocidal Pakistani Army and resultant stream of refugees were creating unbearable population pressure on Eastern India [Interestingly, this was India's official reason for intervention, but one that was never believed]. But, for the Bangladeshi leaders, who gratefully accepted help when it was offered, being an Indian client state was never the objective [as George Washington never wanted the United States to be a vassal of the Louis XVIth of France]. India, however, was somewhat insistent on its gift of gratitude - and expected the Bangladeshi governments to be in debt forever for liberating the country.

This flawed view has undermined the realism in Indian foreign policy towards Bangladesh for decades. Indian policy-makers often pre-assumed a sense of debt and gratitude on the Bangladeshi side and were later disappointed when this was not in evidence. Bangladesh was hardly consulted while the barrage on Ganges, Bangladesh's main river, was built in Farakka, and this remains a key dispute even to this day. I recall the outrage I have witnessed in Bangladesh when the country learned, mainly through newspapers, of an Indian government plan to link its major rivers and alter the courses of some of these. Obviously, the Indians did not feel it necessary to consult the Bangladeshis, though they would have been directly affected by such action.

Also, Indian governments effectively barred Bangladeshi businesses from Indian market even when India started courting foreign investment and tried to lift the tariff barriers on most of the goods. Bangladeshis, many of whom have family and friends in India, face more difficulty in acquiring an Indian visa than a citizen of Iraq or Afghanistan. The Indian Border Security Force [BSF] often fought pitched gun-battles with Bangladesh Rifles [BDR] across the border, and at the same time, working hand in hand, turned the border zone an area of lawlessness, of smuggling, human trafficking and narcotics trade.

This created an environment of mutual distrust and hostility, which serves no one well. The politicians in both countries treated the mutual relationship as 'expendable' and played to the domestic audiences slating the other country and antagonizing the people even further. Inefficient and corrupt manufacturers lobbied with their respective governments successfully and kept the trade between two countries limited and ridden with tariff and restrictions. When I was enquiring about a limited initiative of creating tariff free trade undertaken by the two governments recently, a Bangladeshi business leader told me how he took advantage of the tariff free trade on furniture to start supplying to Indian North-East, only to see the duties reimposed as soon as he started gaining market share. A journalist also told me that if he has to believe that the world is flat, Bangladesh and India must be on two different tectonic plates, divided by a bottomless chasm.

Sheikh Hasina's victory opens an opportunity window, but is unlikely to change the relationship dynamics. But what can change this is India's attitude. Post-Mumbai, we are increasingly aware of the challenges of trying to build a modern state in a poor region. While most Indians may believe that we should build a brick wall, as Israel did, on our border, it is actually thousands of kilometers long, and has more than 198 enclaves on two sides [bits of territory surrounded by the other country]. Stopping people from crossing over, and particularly those who speak the local language and not racially any different from the residents, is not a viable task. The only way to stop them from crossing the borders is to allow the country to prosper - something which can easily happen with collaboration and trust between the two countries. This is exactly where a new start must be made, and a realistic and long term strategy should be pursued earnestly.

For India, it is time that we recognize the existence of Bangladesh, and treat with it with respect and fairness like any other sovereign state. The historical references to India's assistance in the Liberation Struggle should remind us of our commitment to democracy and shared prosperity, not of a moral debtor/creditor relationship. It is time for India to work a fair sharing of water resources, and move towards a Free Trade Regime with confidence and commitment. It does not make any sense to keep the Bangladeshis out when we are inviting businessmen from across the world to invest in India. While we should look for the facilities we need - transit facilities from the Chittagong Port to Indian North-East, road access from West Bengal to Assam, a Joint Action team against sundry terrorists - we must give in return: a preferential treatment for Bengalis buying property or setting up businesses in India, tariff-free access to our market [in reciprocal arrangement] and even visa-free movement between the two countries.

I know it will sound counter-intuitive to allow visa free movement at a time when some of the Mumbai terrorists have been proved to be Bangladeshis. But our sense of security is only superficial. No amount of supervision will stop terrorists: a familiarity with India and a prosperity in the home country will [a shirt for Qasab during Eid would have saved some of Mumbai's best policemen]. We are better off saving salaries of corrupt immigration officers and converting them to better coordination systems in our emergency services.

In summary, an opportunity has been created in Dhaka. But to make good of this opportunity, India must act with transparency and commitment. India, as the bigger partner in the equation, has to stop playing the zero-sum game and extend its hand to Bangladesh. It will, in turn, secure our economic prosperity and help build better lives for everyone.