MAHA MANDI '14 - Coming Soon (9th August)

And a poster in my vernacular (i.e. Kumaoni)

Happy Learning!!! :)

Charismatic Leadership

From Enchanting to Driving

Charisma, clearly depicts a sense of magnetic appeal, of awe. Undeniably a very strong sentiment it is. A mere presence can enthuse one to get into action, that’s the kind of influence ‘charisma’ has.

As is obvious, this is a perfect match for a leader.

Since a lot has been written about leadership, here is my view of leadership in a very specific light called ‘Charismatic Leadership’.

Time and again, we have seen amazing leadership as well as celebrities culminating. Then what marks the difference between the two. What was that persona of the sort of Vivekananda commanded that went missing in Rajnikant. It isn’t a comparison of the personalities, but definitely their impact on the multitude which revered them.

Let’s elaborate it with a more convenient example. Take MANDI.

MANDI as a concept has undeniably huge fan-following. Outsiders, without even knowing the idea of its inception find it exciting and can be willing to join it. Obvious it is, too many glazed attachments that it comes with. Looks all wonderful and ecstatic. That’s the charisma of MANDI. Even I as a fresher just want to be a part of the event, and it is quite possible that no other event would have seen such undaunted attention. But that’s all about the charisma part. Unless and until we’re a part of it, its all stories, good to listen and intriguing in gesture. You call and we do anything to be ‘there’.

But in this whole process, Mandi is growing, evolving in itself. If you’re not there, there’s nothing much this concept is of use to you. But beyond filling that intent sheet, donning merchandise and entering into the market all set in pretence, what lies ahead is a hefty day of challenges and committed targets. What makes that pretence transform to commitment to stand strong in all those not-so-favourable situations is the energy enthused and that is what implies the leadership factor of MANDI’s charisma, Charismatic Leadership in essence.

Its all about an inside-out model of leadership, where you keep on your usual course of self-evolution, but your growth isn’t supposed to be confined. Its contagious and what it causes is to infuse similar urge of betterment into anybody and everybody who is smitten by it ‘the leader’.

If we talk of MANDI, completing the event is one accomplishment, the event encourages many of us to do. But the real embodiment of the success of this concept as a leader is in germinating seeds of entrepreneurs and marketers and biz-wizards of tomorrow.

And as HBR speaks, leadership in essence is an elevation from self to others. Whatever we do for ourselves can inspire others, but its slated as Leadership only when it drives the inspired ones to deliver logical conclusions to their aspirations.

In context of charisma, transforming the piper’s rats (in effect of Charisma – herd mentality) to inspired ‘sisters’ of Lijjat is what forms the core of Charismatic Leadership.

MANDI-fying Learning

MANDI… certainly the most striking word I found after entering the NITIE campus.

Well as I get to delve more into the entire idea, it evolves in my understanding not only as an event in a B-school but a process with a purpose way more eminent.

Undoubtedly, the fun involved and the curiosity of novelty makes it attractive; but then what exceptional purpose does it serve that the league of decision makers of the college agree to sending their students to the thrashing of the not-so-tempting roadside selling. What makes the echelons of the industry are so willing to endorse this activity? Can’t they do the same for the multitude of hawkers and vendors running their own scale of industry alongside every moment of our being?

Probably, the ‘intent’ is the distinguishing factor, the very objective of this drive.

May be it seems fancy to us, the people who haven’t faced the adversities on the streets and when we do, we’re accompanied by a club of crowd alike. But to ponder what really makes us stand through the day beginning with a fanciful idea and some weird outlook to devour the entire marketing and managerial skills in a gulp to sustain through the day, seeking pleasure in its challenges and also gaining enhancing experiences.

What causes the difference? ‘MOTIVATION’ is the million dollar word. The mere perspective with which we seek a job defines its very consequences. As they say, ‘Why you lead defines how well you lead’ same goes for every single task we invest our effort into. What makes MANDI stand out, is the objective for which it stands, and stands tall.

By theory, there are 4 pillars to motivation:

• Task – There’s an evolution of expectation from understanding concepts within the bounds of the classroom to a real-time application of the concepts aimed at acquiring elevated understanding. This flexibility is something that contributes to the factor that we term ‘fun’.
• Goal – Going beyond the league, the target is vividly fuzzy. Accommodating a liberty to ‘achieve what you can’ there isn’t any target deliverable or achievable defined, but the underlying quotient remains to outperform oneself. This opens spaces to put in the best possible in you, also beyond, and to explore ‘the new achievable’. So the underlying tone remains that there is an evident elevation of goals which renders an entirely distinguished destiny to the task.
• Reward – Sounds strange but here the reward, instead of the prize money or the goodies, is the intrinsically identified contentment and sense of achievement. The triumph of identifying each potential consumer, catching their attention, making a sale; every single moment adds to a new experience, a kick to move for the next consumer, next pitch. And that certainly would be enlivening.
•  Power – Well, power comes with responsibility. But the power to frame your own rules paves way to platform your creativity and that is not merely renders a sense of liberty but also ownership. When we can define our own stride, we own the stride and the very cognition of such an ability does a lot.

This is how I see MANDI to be different, in concept and in practice. Its not only an event but a process to sow the basics of manager-ship, not in theory but in practice, and implicitly for sure.

Looking forward to my first MANDI experience ever…. #excited J

**

Want to delve deeper..? All about MANDI  

And here's what the world says about Mandi

**

Quick Picks...

Motivation

• Internal motivations are more powerful than external ones. (HBR Speaks)

Leadership

• The skills leaders need at every level. (HBR Speaks) 
• Elevating role of a leader to 'enterprise leadership': Put the company's Interest ahead of your Unit's. (HBR Speaks)
• Skill Mapping: Employers aren't just Whining - the 'Skills Gap' is Real. (HBR Speaks)

Unconventional aptitude 

• Sir Ken Robinson: Do schools kill creativity? (TED Talks)
• My personal write-up on unconventional-ism (Keeda Blogger) (Found it too informal to be posted on the OB-HR blog, but has an introspective aspect to it)

Pillars of Motivation

What makes us ‘get going’ & also… ‘keep going’!!!

So we discussed the ‘tower building’ exercise, the ‘three monks’ story’ and various implications of working in a team and how it distinguishes from individualistic approach to an intent. But what remains in the core is the driving force which creates the urge to invest one’s effort to reach a consequence. This force, to term, is known as Motivation.

‘Motivation is the driving force that causes the flux from desire to will in life.’

                                                                                                                            -Wikipedia

As a part of behavioural study, motivation is seen to be induced from various factors, to classify as:

Connecting these dots to the situation of the three monks, we can very well observe the four triggers in play throughout the story. To elaborate:

Scene 1

‘Work to Survive… or you don’t exist’

This situation depicts an absolutely monopolistic, individualistic frame where whatsoever the monk did was solely for his own concern. Here, his goals and incentives associated were interlinked. He aimed at the following:

·         To ensure he reaches the monastery

·         To make his stay in the monastery comfortable, in conformance with the rules of the land

Also there was a sense of power for him to own the place, to be accountable for his survival and maintenance of the place.

This motivated the monk to put in his effort to reach the monastery despite the not-so-favourable conditions and also to arrange the best possible for his survival in the place. He did manage to wake up through the night for something he considered to be his moral obligation. He did tread across the valley to fetch water, well aware of the fact that he had no other option to ensure his steady sustenance.

Scene 2

‘Alone we stand, together we stand tall… and so is to regress’

And here enters the second monk, initially with similar motives and drives as that of the first monk. But the coming of a second player in the situation renders a whole lot of change to the associated dynamics. They begin with an individualist aptitude, but when consequences are shared, responsibilities are expected to follow the suit. However ‘sharing’ can be as disastrous as gleaming it might be. So here,

·         Goal still remains the same, except that the interests of two are involved here.

·         Task is to coexist. It begins with a 1+1=2 which gradually demeans to 1+1=1.

·         Rewards seem to diminish here, as there wasn’t any recognition (extrinsic) to their efforts. As of intrinsic recognition, both had their own motives but instead of streamlining them, they found their own comfort niche in the destined. So intrinsically they’d satisfied themselves in a minimalistic attitude, which was a regressive motion.

·         Power. The initial sense of ownership which the first monk had soon faded away as both had already convinced themselves to the buck-passing attitude.

So, eventually the motivational triggers were gradually diminishing from the picture, which indicated a retrograding course for their metaphorical organisation.

Scene 3

‘Ponder + Explore + Align + Coexist + Collaborate --> Synergize --> Achieve’

And the third monk. Again initial frame of mind was not much different from the others. However, he did come with an expectant mind-set for some convenience with the cognition of other monks inhabiting the monastery already. But as they say, energy is contagious and so is lethargy and so was demotivation. Slowly, the three monks delve into clumsiness to the extent that they were devouring their revered assets (holy water offered to Buddha) and holding back for the rains to quench their thirst. To sum up they were not even willing to satiate their basic needs.

Climax is what the fire in the monastery brought. This is a kind of trying situation where they had no other alternative but to run to rescue. But there was this concern for task to sae the monastery, which they considered as their moral obligation which triggered the ‘get going’ fervour in them. Then came the various factors into play. Once they’d identified saving the monastery as the goal, they started investing efforts towards it. A tinge of calming fire was enough to push them intrinsically and ‘keep them going’. Very soon did they realise that there efforts were not giving the desired results and collaboration enters. They broke the task, took ownership, enjoyed the power of being in control of their part of the task and cumulatively of being in control of the situation and ultimately accomplished the feat of saving the monastery.

But the beauty of effective motivation doesn’t ends here. In fact it lies in the continuum, in the progress. The actual impact that after the rescuing endeavour, they could tailor their existing situation to improve it to higher effectiveness and productivity.

The Three Monks

About

This is a Chinese animated movie, based on the ancient Chinese proverb "One monk will shoulder two buckets of water, two monks will share the load, but add a third and no one will want to fetch water". 

Percept

The movie basically depicts the innate nature of human beings, how they respond to various situations, and moreover to the same situation in different contexts.

Initially, we have only one monk who treads his way to the monastery and does whatever was called on for his survival. Not only survival, he was also putting efforts to accomplish the underlying ritualistic intents.

Then comes the second monk, facing similar mundane conditions as the previous one. Both of them begin with an unstated agreement of coexistence. There are efforts to survive, more to coexist but not collaborate. As a result, they reach a sort of edge of sustenance in a few days, not living but sort of elapsing their span in the monastery.

And there enters the third monk, facing similar situations again with certain novelties in responses and individualistic constraints. But this time, as the two monks have already reached ‘that edge’, surviving together becomes a pain. We find a sense of buck-passing amidst the three. The productivity, effort-effectiveness and even the expected cordiality of their relations is all swayed off. Moreover their ritualistic commitment towards Buddha also goes for a toss when they start disregarding their self-stitched norms out of laze and reluctance.

Also, there’s this interesting character of a mouse in the monastery. It has played a significant role in the story. With the first monk alone, it is just a disturbance in his course of action. But with more monks joining in, it exemplifies the sense of irresponsibility and reluctance amidst. This mouse is the creator of various testing circumstances and also the one which brought about a change in the monks’ perspective of coexistence. This event when the monastery catches fire is a turning moment in the movie. In such situation of plight also the monks try to retain their individualistic motives, the difference being that all three motives were quite aligned to each other. All three monks wanted to save their lives and, in a very dogmatic gesture, the monastery as well. And when they observe that they don’t stand a chance to do it single-handedly is when they join hands and really ‘collaborate’. Such collaboration attains a new stature when they re-establish the monastery and re-invent ways to coordinate in a better way oriented towards synergy.

Pick of the story

In a group, it is inevitable not to face individualistic ambitions, and more often than not, their clashes as well. In such instances, it becomes really important to tailor it to achieve a win-win situation.

As we see, for the monks, they were equally competent and efficient by themselves, but since there weren’t any incentives involved, none of them wanted to work in others’ presence. Such a group, can not only be deteriorating for the business it is responsible for, but also discouraging for others. And as we saw, to the verge of diminishing all the fame once earned.

However its only a matter of realisation, when people understand that there’s only a limit to what a person can accomplish single-handedly. And howsoever the components be, they can always be conglomerated to a winning team.

This calls for a sense of coherence, streamlining one’s aspirations with those of the team and seeking the role of a contributor. That is when we can leverage the benefits of bringing together diverse talents.

PS: Yet to come… Revisiting the story with the way it can impact the ‘motivation dynamics’ involved.
Till then, Three Monks @Youtube
Happy Learning... :)

Day 1: Tower Building Exercise

Exercise

With a given set of cubes, two groups of three volunteers each are expected to build a tower, as tall as possible. The task is scaled up continuously adding constraints to the mode of execution.

What we saw

Each group emulated a corporate scenario, with one being the General Manager, other Manager and one Worker. As per pertinent hierarchy, the Manager conveyed the approach to the blindfolded worker, following which the worker was supposed to build the tower. Also, the group was supposed to estimate a target as per their capabilities, the resources in hand and the constraints in picture.

Both the teams gave a decent performance, in the sense that they projected a realistic and feasible target, which they could surpass with their efficient co-ordination and skills.

What I perceived

There are three major aspects to the entire activity. In a corporate scenario or in purview of team performances, the binding between the components is equally important as the components themselves.

So here I jot down the plausible critical points of a team performance which can ‘make-or-break’ the entire structure.

·         Flow of concept: In a group, be it hierarchical or flat, the flow of information is pretty important. But this information is futile if conveyed as a statement. When dealing with animate entities who can think, satisfaction and the drive to follow comes only when some information satiates their reason, feeds to their queries and curiosities. So, as we saw, there was a team who’s manager was constantly instructing his worker as to how to put a block along with the phrase ‘because this will help balance the cubes, or it’ll give a robust base’, etc. These statements, howsoever intuitive, communicate a sense of understanding of the big picture to the worker who was actually not able to see how the tower was shaping up in reality.

·         Trust: Again, be it hierarchical or flat, to induce synergy in performance of a team it becomes highly important to maintain a state of trust across the team, inclusive in entirety. It does happen at times, that certain amount of information needs to be retained amongst defined echelons, with just reasons for the same. But in a state of lack of trust, such situations would emerge as a reason to agitate for the lesser privileged, for the ignorance they are forced to. Rather than this, in a state of trust, we hold confidence in the next person and a modest level of empathy as well. Citing an example from the task, there was this GM in a team who had maintained his composure throughout the task. He had conveyed the task with all the requisites and expectations and was quite watchful about the proceedings as well. But didn’t interfere between the manager-worker duo, rightly so. There was a notion of trust he was conferring unto them. Similarly, the workers, in both teams were smoothly integrated with their respective managers and mutual trust could be depicted. On the other hand, there was this other GM who wanted to get involved in the manager-worker duo, all with good intentions. But in that way, he passed on his sense of anxiety to his sub-ordinates as well. Along with that, it came to the worker as if he was receiving instructions from two ends, howsoever streamlined they be, it generated confusion, hindered communication and hence caused the worker to be a bit miffed at times.

·         Acceptance of opinion: Beginning from the task itself, we observe that even the worker, despite of his institutional constraints, gives ideas as per his observation of the task at hand. And what renders an edge to any performance is the diversity of opinions and visions that comes along with the conglomeration of various people involved. Hence the acceptance of pinion, with respect to their context and not with a prejudice of their positioning in the team can always bring up a new aspect towards the unexplored territory of a situation in hand.

·         Defining goals, ‘SMART’ they should be: It sounds fantasizing to have the liberty to define goals for oneself, and adding ‘SMART’ to it makes it feel all the more trendy. Smart work, smart goals, the universe is all behind ‘smartness’. Well, there have to be reasons for the same. ‘SMART’ as the acronym goes, implies goals which are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-bound. In essence, there is a balancing act while deciding a target for oneself.

o   Need to have a realistic cognition of one’s capabilities and bandwidth

o   Trade-off between convenience and feasibility

o   This is not the place for randomness and subjectivity; goals should be hard-defined and should form the bedrock of the entire process structure.

o   Defining timelines is as important as structuring the objective.

Citing from the classroom activity, the beauty of their target setting was in the fact that when projecting the attainable height as 16, they considered the constraints in picture, the count they were able to draw without those constraints and the time given. The way the activity was performed, the target didn’t come out to be way too easy but the teams were able to achieve it. Given their streamlined operational skills, could also manage to go beyond their projections but not creating an unrealistic gap; which would have again indicated the slack in their target projection.   

There are, and can be, many more conventional as well unconventional points not mentioned here. Amongst the conventional ones are the need to co-ordinate, communicate effectively. Also to remain poised despite the external pressures or situations. Definitely being a social animal, an absolute insulation cannot be called for, but a sense of efficient balancing act is something expected for good reasons.

Note: This post is open for discussion and feedback... value addition to say. J