Freakonomics Radio - Are you doing something new and different today ?

Today on marketplace (NPR), this bit on freakonomics radio caught my attention !

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/10/19/pm-freakonomics-radio-a-government-official-in-venture-capitalists-clothing/

If you have not listened to it go listen, it is really worth 2 minutes of your time. Here is why I liked and decided to share with you today.

It will not take you long to see if your company encourages your ideas or not !

If you are struggling with concept of change or innovation, you can hear how an individual is trying to make the government work like a venture firm & encouraging new ideas. I am sure you will walk away with a feeling that your change/innovation is not that disruptive.

Last but not the least, you can also see how Organizations like xPrize foundation are making a difference in the world of innovation !

Please feel free to post your thoughts on this post !

Thanks
Nagesh,
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

The Right Kind of Bailout. Finally heard about One Today !

I am not sure whether you are tired of hearing the word bailout, but I sure am !

Airline Industry, The Banking Industry, The Auto Industry and even countries now !

However, today as I heard Robert Reich, Professor of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley on Marketplace on NPR, for the first time I really felt , he talked about a bailout, that made sense, hopefully someone is listening:

The argument was simple : Robert Reich's Quote "Financial capital moves instantly around the globe to wherever it can earn the best return. Human capital -- the skills and insights of our people -- is the one resource that's uniquely American, on which our future living standards uniquely depend." UnQuote

For full commentary visit : http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/03/10/pm-reich-commentary/

My understanding in simple terms: We should not let the budget short falls of state and local government impact our school and universities, so we should bail them out to ensure education at all levels is affordable. This kind of bailout will create the human capital needed for a sustainable economy in the long run.

My Take: I whole heartedly agree with Robert Reich. His commentary reminded me of my first blog : Wake Up - If you did not already know you should, which was all about our ability drive value. I truly, can say today I heard about a bailout that made sense and hence decided to blog it.

Thanks
Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

SPEECH MADE ON 21st DECEMBER 1972 IN LOK SABHA BY PRIME MINISTER INDIRA GANDHI

Reason for posting this blog entry: Reason for posting this blog entry: I grew up in the State of Andhra Pradesh in India, which currently going thru a period of unrest, mainly due to Greed of Few Politicians and Lack of True Statesmanship or Leadership. This uncertainty is definitely not good for anyone - Business, Personal or Social. So, as an individual who truly is a well wisher of the every individual belonging to Andhra Pradesh and India, I felt a moral responsibility to publish this Speech by Honorable Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1972 to remind everyone to think before they let the emotions take over.

Please feel free to forward this Post to Any One who you feel should/will read.

Thanks
Nagesh

SPEECH Below:

THE PRIME MINISTER, MINISTER OF ATOMIC ENERGY, MINISTER OF ELECTRONICS, MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS, MINISTER OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING AND MINISTER OF SPACE (SHRIMATI INDIRA GANDHI): MR. SPEAKER, SIR, THERE IS REALLY NOT MUCH NEED FOR ME TO SPEAK AS MY COLLEAGUE, SHRI CHAVAN, HAS BROUGHT A COOLER AND CALMER ATMOSPHERE TO PREVAIL IN THE HOUSE AND HAS DEALT WITH THE REALLY IMPORTANT POINTS. BUT SOME HON. MEMBERS EVEN OF THE OPPOSITION HAD EARLIER EXPRESSED THE OPINION THAT IT MIGHT BE MISUNDERSTOOD IF I DID NOT CLEARLY STATE OUR VIEWS ON SOME POINTS WHICH HAVE BEEN MENTIONED HERE BEFORE. THEY ARE NOT NEW, NEVERTHELESS, THEY THOUGHT I SHOULD DO SO AND THAT IS WHY I HAVE GOT UP.

PARLIAMENT DISCUSSES MANY IMPORTANT ISSUES WHICH ARE HIGHLY EMOTIONAL, AND THE MULKI RULES HAVE BECOME ONE SUCH ISSUE. MATTERS WHICH INVOLVE REGIONAL FEELINGS QUITE OFTEN DO AROUSE THE EMOTIONS OF THE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY AS IN MANY OTHER COUNTRIES, AND WE CERTAINLY CANNOT IGNORE THE EMOTIONS OF THE PEOPLE. BUT I SHOULD LIKE TO STRESS WHAT CHAVANJI HAS SAID, THAT NO SOLUTION CAN BE FOUND WHILE THE ATMOSPHERE REMAINS CHARGED WITH EMOTIONS. ANY SOLUTIONS, ANY ANSWER, HAS TO BE FOUND IN A VERY COOL, CALM AND RATIONAL MANNER.

THEREFORE, ALTHOUGH I WAS ALSO, AS WERE MANY OTHER HON. MEMBERS, TOUCHED BY THE EMOTIONS EXPRESSED BY HON. MEMBERS, BY THE DIFFICULTIES OF OUR FRIENDS FROM TELENGANA AND FRIENDS FROM OTHER PARTS OF ANDHRA PRADESH, WE WERE CERTAINLY TOUCHED BY THE DIFFICULTIES AND EMOTIONS – I SHOULD VERY RESPECTFULLY SAY TO THEM THAT ALL THESE MATTERS HAVE TO BE THOUGHT OF NOT IN TERMS OF EMOTION BUT IN TERMS OF CALM AND COLLECTIVE THOUGHT. AND NOT IN TERMS OF TODAY OR TOMORROW OR THE DAY AFTER BUT OF WHAT IT WILL MEAN TO THEM AND THE COUNTRY TEN YEARS HENCE, 20 YEARS HENCE, A HUNDRED YEARS HENCE.

NATURALLY, IF YOU PUT TO THE PEOPLE THAT A PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT HAS AFFECTED THEIR EMPLOYMENT, IT HAS AFFECTED THEIR RIGHTS THEY WILL BECOME EMOTIONAL. ANY BODY WILL BECOME EMOTIONAL. “I DO NOT KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE GONE TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE AND SAID, “LET US SIT DOWN AND THINK ABOUT IT, WHAT DIFFERENCE WILL IT MAKE IN TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT IN TERMS OF THE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE TELENGANA REGION, FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE OTHER DISTRICTS OF ANDHRA PRADESH”? SO, I DO NOT THINK THAT THE ISSUE HAS BEEN FULLY AND SQUARELY PUT BEFORE ALL THE PEOPLE THERE. THEREFORE, THE REACTION TODAY HAS TO BE ALSO VIEWED IN THAT LIGHT”.

“THE STATE OF HYDERABAD WAS THE LARGEST OF THE OLD PRINCELY STATES. ONE HON. MEMBER HAS SAID AND RIGHTLY THAT IN THIS STATE THERE WERE INDIVIDUALS,

THERE WERE FAMILIES OF VERY HIGH CULTURE. BUT FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THERE WAS POVERTY, THEY HAD NOT HAD OPPORTUNITIES OF EDUCATION OR SOCIAL WELFARE OR OF PUBLIC HEALTH OR ANY KIND OF AMELIORATION OF THEIR LIVING CONDITIONS. WHEN THE COMPOSITE ANDHRA STATE CAME INTO BEING ALL SECTIONS OF THE PEOPLE RECOGNISED THAT FOR GREATER COHESIONS CERTAIN SPECIAL MEASURES OF A TRANSITORY NATURE WERE NECESSARY. THE LEADERS OF THE PEOPLE UNANIMOUSLY ARRIVED AT A GENTLEMEN’S AGREEMENT WHICH WE ALL ACCEPTED”.

“SO, THERE WAS THIS AGREEMENT. NOW, REGARDLESS OF ANY AGREEMENT WE ALL KNOW THAT EVEN WITHIN A FAMILY THERE ARE DIFFERENCES AND DISPUTES. THERE IS NO STATE IN INDIA WHICH DOES NOT HAVE BACKWARD AREAS. RELATIVELY BACKWARD AND ADVANCED AREAS EXIST NOT ONLY IN ALL STATES BUT IN DIFFERENT REGIONS OF THE SAME STATE. IN THE ANDHRA REGION MANY MEMBERS HAVE DRAWN ATTENTION TO AREAS SUCH AS RAYALASEEMA AND SRIKAKULAM. THE TELENGANA REGION MAY BE A BACKWARD REGION BUT IT DOES HAVE BETTER-OFF AREAS”.

“MERELY BECAUSE AN AREA IS COMPARATIVELY BACKWARD IS NOT REASON ENOUGH FOR TAKING DRASTIC OR IRREVERSIBLE DECISIONS. WHERE WILL THIS PROCESS END? I AM NOT AT ALL AFRAID OF THIS BEING CATCHING; THAT IS NOT THE POINT. BUT WHERE DOES ANY ONE DRAW THE LINE ? WILL EACH DISTRICT WANT TO BE SEPARATE? SOME PEOPLE HAVE ADVISED THE DIVISION OF U.P. WHERE TO DIVIDE INTO TWO, THREE, FOUR, INTO HOW MANY AREAS DO YOU DIVIDE IT? DO YOU GO BACK TO THE OLD, VERY SMALL

STATES, PRINCELY STATES; DO YOU GO BACK TO THAT? SOMEWHERE A LINE HAS TO BE DRAWN. YOU CANNOT JUST SAY THAT BECAUSE OF BACKWARDNESS THERE SHOULD BE DIVISION. AS CHAVANJI HAS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, ECONOMIC BACKWARDNESS CAN GO ONLY THROUGH HARD WORK AND THE EFFORT OF THE ENTIRE NATION.

WHILE THERE WILL ALWAYS BE SYMPATHY AND UNDERSTANDING FOR THE SPECIAL HARDSHIP OF THE BACKWARDNESS OF ANY SPECIAL GROUP OR ANY SPECIAL AREA. I DO NOT THINK THAT ANYONE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DEVELOP A VESTED INTEREST IN BACKWARDNESS”.

“I SHOULD LIKE TO RE-ASSURE HIM THAT THIS IS NOT AT ALL THE CASE I DO NOT WANT TO GO INTO THE DETAILS OF THIS”. BUT I THINK HIS FEARS ARE UNFOUNDED. WE HAD ALSO TO COUNTER THE PAST ASSURANCES GIVEN TO THE PEOPLE OF TELENGANA AREA WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND ALSO THEIR PRESENT NEEDS. WE HAVE NOT AT ALL GONE BACK ON ANY ASSURANCE GIVEN AND I SHOULD LIKE TO RE-ASSURE THE HON. MEMBERS THAT WE ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED WITH THEIR PROBLEMS. BUT WE FEEL THAT THIS IS NOT THE WAY OF SOLVING THEM. “IN FACT, AS I SAID ON AN EARLIER OCCASION, MERELY TALKING OF SEPARATION IS NOT AN END OF THE PROBLEM. IT IS THE BEGINNING OF ANOTHER VERY BIG PROBLEM, NOT FOR OTHER STATES BUT ALSO FOR THAT AREA; THAT STATE ITSELF”. THE DECISIONS WHICH WE ANNOUNCED ON THE 27TH NOVEMBER, 1972 WERE IN THE RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST BY THE LEADERS OF THE STATE; THEY THEMSELVES HAVE SAID THAT WE SHOULD DO SOMETHING.

“I STAND VERY FIRMILY FOR AN INTEGRATED STATE, BUT I SHOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT SO FAR AS THIS MATTER IS CONCERNED, EVEN HAD THERE BEEN TWO STATES, IT WOULD HAVE MADE NO DIFFERENCE TO THIS BILL BECAUSE IT DEALS MAINLY WITH THE PROBLEM OF THE TWIN CITIES AND ALSO THE REST OF TELENGANA. THAT PROBLEM WOULD REMAIN NO MATTER WHAT OTHER THINGS YOU DO BECAUSE A LARGE NUMBER OF NON-MULK IS THERE. UNFORTUNATELY, EVEN IN THE SPEECHES HAVE SOME LITTLE BITTERNESS CREPT IN. IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW MANY STATES WE HAVE, YOU STILL WILL BE NEIGHBOURS AND YOU STILL WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH ONE ANOTHER IN A HUNDRED AND ONE THINGS. THINKING THAT JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE SEPARATED, YOU CAN GET RID OF THESE PEOPLE OR WE HAVE GOT RID THIS PROBLEM IS A VERY FACILE WAY OF THINKING. OUR EXPERIENCE HAS NOT SHOWN THAT THIS COMES TRUE”.

“RECOGNIZING THE FACT THAT THE CAPITAL BELONGS TO BOTH REGIONS, THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT HAS DECIDED TO REPEAL THE MULKI RULES IN THE TWIN CITIES THREE YEARS EARLIER THAN IN THE REMAINING TELANGANA REGION. EVEN DURING THE INTERVENING PERIOD, EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES IN THE CAPITAL ARE BEING EXTENDED AND EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES EXPANDED FOR THE CITIZENS OF THE OTHER REGIONS OF ANDHRA PRADESH ALSO”.

“A THIRD POINT WAS THAT TELENGANA IS NOT THE ONLY BACKWARD AREA IN THE STATE”.

“SIR, PARLIAMENT REPRESENTS THE WILL OF THE WHOLE NATION. ITS DUTY IS NOT MERELY TO GO INTO THE RIGHTS AND WRONGS OF A SITUATION BUT ALSO TO VIEW PROBLEMS FROM THE NATIONAL POINT OF VIEW, SHRI CHAVAN HAS STRESSED THIS POINT. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REPEAT IT. WHILE ALL OF US HERE ARE ELECTED FROM PARTICULAR CONSTITUENCIES, ONCE WE ARE HERE IN THIS HALL. I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER OURSELVES NOT AS MERELY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF ONE LITTLE AREA BUT AS THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY AND THE ENTIRE PEOPLE OF INDIA. AND EACH PROBLEM HAS TO BE VIEWED FROM THAT ANGLE”.

THE VERY FIRST ARTICLE OF OUR CONSTITUTION DECLARES THAT INDIA IS A UNION OF STATES. EACH STATE HAS HAD A LONG CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL TRADITION AND EACH STATE HAS BECOME A POLITICAL ENTITY IN ITS OWN SPECIAL WAY. ANDHRA PRADESH HAS BEEN A DISTINCTIVE CULTURAL UNIT FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. THE NAME HAS BEEN FOUND IN THE EARLIEST BUDHIST WRITINGS. ALL THE PARTS WHICH NOW CONSTITUTE ANDHRA PRADESH HAVE BEEN UNDER ONE UMBRELLA FOR LONG PERIODS OF HISTORY. LET US NOT LOOK AT JUST THE IMMEDIATE PERIOD OF HISTORY.

PERHAPS, IT WAS THIS LONG HISTORY WHICH INSPIRED THE TELUGU SPEAKING PEOPLE WHEN THEY YEARNED AND STRUGGLED FOR SEVERAL DECADES TO FORM A UNIFIED ANDHRA PRADESH. MAY I CITE A LITTLE BIT OF MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE? I HAPPENED TO BE TOURING PARTS OF THE SOUTH JUST BEFORE THE REPORT

OF THE STATES REORGANIZATION COMMISSION WAS MADE PUBLIC AND MY EARS ARE STILL REVERBERATING WITH THE FUL-THROATED CRIES OF VISHAL ANDHRA.………… (INTERRUPTIONS). IT WAS REALLY THE WILL OF THE TELUGU-SPECKING PEOPLE WHICH PREVAILED OVER THE PROPOSAL OF SOME PEOPLE TO RETAIN THE OLD HYDERABAD STATE”.

“THERE ARE SOME THINGS WHICH ARE PART OF OUR NATIONAL LIFE. IT IS TRUE THAT THE QUESTION OF LINGUISTIC STATES WAS VERY MUCH A PART OF THE NATIONAL MOVEMENT. THERE WAS NO GETTING AWAY FROM IT. THE UNITS OF EVERY PARTY WHICH WAS IN EXISTENCE AT A TIME, WERE FORMED ON THE BASIS OF LANGUAGE IN SPITE OF THE BRITISH PROVINCES HAVING DIFFERENT AREAS. THERE IS AN OVERALL RATIONALITY IN THE FORMATION OF OUR VARIOUS STATES AND WE SHOULD BE VERY CAREFUL NOT TO BREAK THIS FOUNDATION OF RATIONALITY IN MOMENTARY PASSIONS. AS I SAID AT THE BEGINNING WE SHOULD CONSIDER THE FEELINGS OF PEOPLE BUT IT WOULD BE VERY WRONG FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO BE SWEPT AWAY BY FEELINGS. WE MUST SEE WHAT IS IN THE LARGER INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES. WE ARE NOT SAYING THAT THE INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE OF TELENGANA SHOULD BE SACRIFICED FOR OUR INTEREST OR FOR THE INTEREST OF OTHER PARTS OF INDIA. BUT THE GOVERNMENT MUST THINK IN A VERY CALM MANNER ABOUT THE INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE OF THAT VERY REGION AND SEE WHAT WILL SERVE THEIR INTEREST BEST”.

“I AM SURE THAT NO TELUGU-SPEAKING PERSON WHETHER HE LIVES IN THE COASTAL REGION OR IN RAYALSEEMA OR IN TELENGANA WILL EVER DO ANYTHING EVEN IN ANGER OR IN DESPERATION WHICH IS NOT IN THE LARGER INTEREST OF THEIR ENTIRE STATE AND ALSO IN THE INTEREST OF THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE. I CAN UNDERSTAND THE EMOTIONS OF OUR FRIENDS HERE. THIS HAS BEEN A PERIOD OF GREAT AGONY FOR US ALL TO WATCH THE DEVELOPMENTS IN ANDHRA PRADESH AND THE TRAGEDIES THAT ARE TAKING PLACE. I ALSO SHOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY DEEP SYMPATHY WITH THE PARENTS AND FAMILIES OF THOSE WHO HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES. BUT WE MUST LOOK AT THIS MATTER IN THE LARGER PERSPECTIVE”.

Follow up Post on "Economists/Intellectuals - Are we hurting our children?"

Recently, I posted an blog entry titled : "Economists/Intellectuals - Are we hurting our children?"

The post argued how programs like - "Cash for Clunkers", "Hiring more Govt Services Staff using borrowed (Stimulus) money leads to inter-generational transfers i.e. in simple terms - burdening our children with debt of our consumption. Interestingly today I read the following articles on Yahoo! Finance

1. Cash for Clunkers under budget with 690,000 sales
2. "Artificially Sweetened" Market Could Face "Seismic Readjustment," Harrison Says
3. It's Hard to Worry About a Deficit 10 Years Out

Correlating the articles - In US, We just bought a many "Corolla’s and other Small Cars", most of them are not even Innovative (potentially clunkers themselves). The subsidy of $3 Billion therefore will only benefit the manufacturer and buyer at the cost of the some "current or future" tax payer and can in no terms be qualified as something that will benefit the future generation, on the other hand Article 2 clearly equates that a lot of current debt accumulation will have to be repaid by our Kids - inherently lowering the standard of living for them and finally the last article argues how each one us or a future taxpayer will pay for this in the form of higher taxes.

I always believed and still do; that my parents strived for better living for me - and I want my kids to think the same of me when they grow up. I am not sure they will, given our generations lack of fiscal control and amount of debt we are piling on to them. Hopefully I am proven wrong.

Your feedback or comments on this post are welcome.

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Cloud Computing - Why should Enterprises Care?

Recently, I wrote a blog entry analyzing the results and what they mean - in most cases I concluded that most executives were more confidant on controlling costs than they were on growth. Links to the post: http://kunamneni.blogspot.com/2009/07/ramblings-on-economy-is-it-all-good-now.html.

This brings attention to why are the executives not confidant on growth. Innovation is key to growth, and every executive is talking about it however their immediate actions are related to cost cutting. There may be many reasons; one reason that is probably obvious is that they are not confidant bringing their investments in Innovation fast enough to the market or another reason could be that they try too few ideas and cannot reliably predict the impact on revenue due to high risk that failure of any single idea may cause deviation that will not be accepted by the markets

This then truly raises the question, is the company’s innovation process scalable and whether the costs of scaling innovation process is truly linear to number of Ideas being pursued. Should every organization not take a closer look at their “Process of Innovation” as their future may very well depend on efficiency of the “Innovation Engine”. In simple terms - if a company typically tries 5 - 10 ideas at any time, then it is probably time to ask the question - how can the company scale this 10 fold - without increasing costs linearly, decreasing quality of product and at the same time improving time to market (bringing ideas to market faster).

So what is the answer from my vantage point:- (My take)

If we assume that today’s enterprises rely heavily on technology and analytics to foster innovation; then cloud computing has the potential to provide solution to scaling of the Enterprises "Innovation processes".

Cloud computing promises to lower Innovation costs by

1. Eliminating Upfront Investment Costs by allowing “Pay for Use” and thereby avoiding the lengthy, costly and cumbersome CAPEX processes.


2. Eliminating the need to plan complex deployment processes, by inducing highly efficient scaling and provisioning processes


3. Standardizing the Management Framework to enable complete visibility to all business processes.

In summary, if the future growth of your enterprise is based on engine of rapid innovation, then it is time to analyze the innovation process and how to scale it to try new ideas in a highly efficient manner.

Thank you your for taking the time to read. Your opinions and comments are welcome.

Thanks

Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Economists/Intellectuals - Are we hurting our children?

I took my economics class from Prof. Michael Brandl at the McCombs School of Business. Many a time in the he mentioned. (may not be the same words but this my interpretation of the essence).

"Not all government borrowing is the same. It depends on how the proceeds from the borrowing are spent. If the government borrows today and spends the money in a way that benefits the next generation, then that spending makes it easier for the next generation to repay the debt that has been created. But, if the government borrows today simple to increase current consumption, then the current generation is passing the bill for their spending onto the next generation. That is called a negative intergenerational transfer.".

To be honest, It did not fully sink into me the seriousness of the subject, until I started hearing and questioning myself on how the Stimulus money is going to be spent.

Today's news on "Cash for Clunkers" that the house rushes to approve 2B additional dollars really put me over the edge. I am really happy for the consumers who are taking advantage of the program to buy new vehicles. However, when buying the car, I am wondering if even one of them thought for moment - who is going to pay for the $4,500 that Gov't has convieniently agreed to pay these auto makers?

I guess, each one said or figured: "Not Me"; If it is not the guy who is buying the car, not the person who is actually selling the car, then who is? - Simple answer - That some body else is none other than our children or the collective us.

To a certain extent, shame on the "collective us" - the politicians who want to be populist, the citizens who just want to pass the buck or play ignorant, and the companies who lobby for incentives that benefits them at the cost to society.

So next time when you hear - We are going get the economy going by re-paving a road or putting more government officers on the streets - Question yourself - aren't these like paying for the maintenance your car, or paying for security system to protect your home; then why is it that we are borrowing money to pay for these, shouldn't they be paid for by current income ? To me this is classic Negative Intergenerational Transfer.

Going forward, when you hear an announcement about stimulus/borrowing - Think Again, Question it, Validate that it leads to a future benefit - if not we are just cheating ourselves and passing the pain to our children.

Thanks
Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Ramblings on Economy - Is it all good now ?

Link to Previous Post : My Views on Business and Technology: Ramblings on Economy - Is it all good now ?

Continuing ramblings on economy from yesterday, it is more of the same today

Exxon quarterly profit tumbles 66 percent, shares fall - (Recession - lower demand)

Motorola posts unexpected 2Q profit and says rest of year will see improvement - However on lower sales (missed revenue target), heavy cost cutting (over 8000 layoffs)

Colgate-Palmolive profit tops expectations - Again on Lower Sales and better cost management; Sales lower by 5.5%, volume of goods sold down by 1.5% - Lower consumption

Sony, Sharp post losses, Nintendo loses steam - Folks are not even buying a WII - that hurts

Eastman Kodak moves to 2Q loss as sales slide - Not sure this has anything to do with economy; this iconic company probably has lots of other issues, Still 29% lower sales - ouch

Kellogg profit rises 13 percent in 2Q - Reaping the benefits of downturn - I guess all of us have eat, it is better to eat at home than go out for breakfast. This is a direct result of consumers cutting spending.

Goodyear posts 2Q loss of $221 million, sales drop - Sales 25% lower

When you read more, it is apparent that most companies are giving good guidance on profit expectation for next quarter, however not much on sales guidance. This also makes me believe the companies are still focused on reducing costs aggressively to meet profit expectation and kind of shows the lack of confidence on projecting sales or growth. I feel this feeling of mine is again substantiated by report this morning that - New jobless claims raised more than expected.

As I said in the previous post - if we truly are waiting for stability in housing and homeowners, I feel this this trend has to change. At some point, we have start seeing growth from companies that actually produce goods and services that drive and consume labor.

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Ramblings on Economy - Is it all good now ?

This earnings season, I started paying attention to what was being said while companies are releasing their earlier. My curiosity was directed to understanding whether we are headed in the direction where an average citizen can actually come back after a hard day of work and not fear if he going to have a job next day.

My motivation behind this was basically simple - pretty much the pundits have tied recovery in housing sector to recovery of economy and in my opinion the recovery of housing is based on whether we can safely bet the home owners will pay for mortages without defaulting, which then relies on the simple fact that homeowner responsible for mortage will stay gainfully employed and the unemployed homeowners have a reason to believe that jobs are getting created and are on the way;

Find below some Headlines Unfiltered, on which I am going base my opinions

Drugmaker Pfizer's 2Q profit plunges 19 percent
Boeing profit climbs in 2Q on strong defense sales
Delta reports $257 million 2Q loss (double digit revenue drop)
PepsiCo 2Q profit falls 2 pct on sales drop
Wells Fargo profit rises; credit losses up
Morgan Stanley posts 2Q loss of more than $1.2B
Dominos 2Q profit plummets 22 percent
Glaxo profits up 11 percent on emerging markets
Altria Group 2Q profit rises, boosts forecast (Lower Expenses offset dip in sales)
Eli Lilly 2Q profit rises 21 percent
Apple 3Q beats forecasts despite recession
Yahoo 2Q profit rises 8 pct despite weak ad sales
AK Steel posts $47M loss for 2Q as demand falls
Coca-Cola 2nd-quarter profit rises 43 percent (rapid overseas growth offsets falling domestic demand)
Caterpillar 2Q profit falls 66 pct on weak demand
DuPont 2Q profit plunges on sales drop, charges
Lockheed Martin 2Q profit down 17 percent
United Technologies 2Q profit falls 24 percent
Texas Instruments 2Q profit falls 56 percent
Bank of America posts 2Q profit, surpasses Street
Google's slowing 2Q ad sales overshadow earnings
Sony Ericsson posts another loss in 2Q
Electrolux 2Q profit jumps six-fold
Nokia posts 66 pct fall in Q2 profits, shares drop
JPMorgan earns whopping $2.7 billion
Goldman Sachs' Q2 Smashes Forecasts On Trading Revenue

Analysis:

1. Companies in Financial Sector (Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Bank of America etc. ) -made a killing ( Lots of Money ) : I am not sure I can call this extortion from the poor tax payer using government support, but sure seems like one. Thanks to government, In the guise of helping the economy, they are actually helping the bank executives look like hero's. So this should really not count in the +ves for the average consumer/homeowner


2. All brick and mortar companies who actually produce some thing useful - Dupont, Caterpillar, AK Steel, Texas Instruments, Delta Airlines, Dominos (pizza) etc. (sample of a wide cross-section of great companies across multiple industries) show dismal performance - revenues are down, profits are down. The implications to the economy -> we are having a tough time. Thanks to pretty smart people at wall street, the managed to set such low expectation that the these dismal earning's look good). However for the average consumer/homeowner the results probably mean that they are not looking to add any new work force and are probably still looking to cut costs.


3. The notable exceptions to the trend of lower sales and lower earnings in the brick and mortar space are Coca-Cola, Glaxo and Apple. Apple currently has really cool products, whereas Coca-Cola and Glaxo did very well due to focus on emerging markets not domestic markets. This really does not count as trend, as Apple is truly an exception to the trend and Management at Coca-Cola and Glaxo really focussed on where they could sell. (My recent post on this subject: Consumer Spending: Are we looking at the right consumer)
4. Some companies like yahoo!, Altria and IBM post better profits on lower sales, that is primarily due to cost cutting; which again does not look good from an employment perspective.
5. Finally, Google also showed stress on revenue (ad sales) - A darling of wall street also showing some cracks.

My Take
Net Net, looking at these results, I am not sure I see the average consumer/homeowner being confidant of paying the mortgage or being comfortable with their financial future as companies that need to thrive without any Government Support and produce real goods are really struggling, where as those that seem to support from government (unfairly??) seem to be raking in the dow (money). Finally, today's report on durable goods, which are down again by 2.5% clearly show the average consumer/homeowner's reluctance to spend and backs my belief.

One thing I have not done and will probably look into later this week is to correlate the earning's data to typical business cycles. That may shed some more light in why the market/analysts are considering every bit of news - good or bad as +ve. For now, My take is that we are really not out of the woods yet. May be the next earnings season will show results that we can all look into and feel comfortable that -- it is all good now !

Thank you reading, appreciate your feedback and comments. Additionally, if you do understand typical business cycles, would appreciate your thoughts on correlation of current economic data to typical business cycles.

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a "reflection of" or "Opinions of" any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Consumer Spending - Are we looking at the right consumer?

Recently there have been many reports on weak outlook for global economy. Additionally, concerns have been raised on "Lack of Consumer Spending" and that the better report on "Unemployment Claims" is kind of misleading, as this could due to folks losing umemployment benefits after 26 weeks rather than actually folks finding a job.

No matter how we look at it - It does not look like the fundamentals are improving and the reason why the market is way higher than 52 week lows is probably driven by factors like increased government spending (stimulus) or the fact investors sitting on sidelines are feeling a sense of lost opportunity and moving into the market.

Whatever is the cause, whether we feel we are on the right track or we are faltering, I think caution rather than exuberance is probably the right recipe for the current situation.

Having said that, Lets now get back to the question, I actually wanted to answer today:- Consumer Spending - Are we looking at the right consumer?

This question made sense to me as I was on vacation to India for the last few weeks, just looking around it is obvious, and there are very few signs of a slowdown. It is just amazing to see the investments into infrastructure, new retail malls and outlets. Looks like everyone around you is an entrepreneur and is confident of making it big.

However when you look at the products that are in your face (either Billboards or when you walk into a retail outlet or what people are buying:

Consumer Electronics: you find Samsung / Sony and other non brands made in Korea or China Durables goods: you find LG
Communication (Cell Phones): you find Nokia
Automobiles (Cars and Bikes): you find Honda/Yamaha / Suzuki Bikes; Suzuki, Toyota, Tata Cars
Soft Drinks (hot country): you find Coke / Pepsi and lot bottled water and fresh fruit juices
Shoes: you find Bata / Nike

What is concerning in this picture is the obvious lack of focus by American Companies in markets where there is real money being spent. Except for in Soft Drinks, Bottled Water and Shoe Segments, it is hard to find find real American Products. We are starting to see some cars from Big Three but really, should they not be aggressive? As a very good friend of mine suggested - "Maybe American Companies no longer make what consumer buy, they own the IP or make what is inside these consumer products". There may be some truth to that but I am not sure that is the answer.

My Take:

It is time for American and other global companies to start focusing on where the consumers are still spending rather wait for the American Consumer to start spending. Historically, these emerging markets posed a challenge for cutting edge consumer products, in terms of

1.) Pricing: Inability to extract high margins on leading edge products, spending on older versions was not worth it. Hence very little focus on emerging markets

2.) Size of Market: Though the population is huge, the segment of population that could actually afford these products was low due to low wages. May be it is time to re-look whether this is really true?

3.) Complex: Rules/Regulations and other government functions were more of a hindrance to business than friendly? May be it is time to look at how the Asian and European Competitors are cracking the code?

3.) Technology: The specification for the Markets (Infrastructure, Temperature, Energy, Roads etc. ) pose significant barrier that will need R&D and adaptation ? Probably time to revisit the assumptions, As they may not hold good any more.

4.) Supply Chain Management: Historically, it may have been impossible to manage global supply chain for rapid global releases. However, Reduced Product Life Cycles are a reality today nobody wants version n-1 consumer products. Hollywood has figured it out, so have the Asians and Europeans, so shouldn't the most technologically advanced society figure it out?

5.) Language/Culture Barriers: There may be a perception that dealing with countries like india is like dealing with many countries and many regulations. This may still be true to certain extent but is it really that bad?

In summary, it is necessary for any global company, American or not, to really look at what was the reason not to aggresively focus on Markets like India and re-evaluate validity of their assumptions. If they don't, they risk losing out attracting one of the worlds largest customer base and relegate themselves to irrelevance.

Lastly, over the last decade or couple of decades, I feel the American Consumer has done his fair share of spending to keep the world economy growing, it is now time to for the American Consumer to Save and for global companies to focus selling in markets beyond America to be successful !

Your feedback is appreciated. Please feel free to respond by posting a comment and I will respond if I can. Thank you for reading

Thanks
Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

My Views on Business and Technology: Equating Outsourcing to Losing Jobs - Is that Right?

My Views on Business and Technology: Equating Outsourcing to Losing Jobs - Is that Right?

Some additional Reference Posts that I read after I published the previous post, and felt they help us understand and refine perceptions further on the above post

1. How the Mighty Fall and How to Stay on Top - Jim Collins in Business Week. Book Review
2. The 2009 Global Outsourcing, Special AdSection - Fortune 500 Magazine (May, 2009)
3. HUGE PROBLEMS AHEAD by Sandy Leeds
4. Trying to Curb the Wrong Compensation by Sandy Leeds

Thanks
Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for

Equating Outsourcing to Losing Jobs - Is that Right?

This recent article in yahoo finance/business week goes to the extent of equating "Outsourcing" to Losing Jobs for American's http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/107048/Where-Your-Job-Could-Be-Outsourced and some addtional comments by Administration regarding encouraging protectionism really got me concerned and thinking.

I do not get the connection between the statements, articles and the outcomes being discussed, so figured it is a topic that I wanted to research and take an a position on my blog

My First Stop : Definition of Outsourcing in wikipedia

"Outsourcing is subcontracting a process, such as product design or manufacturing, to a third-party company.[1] The decision to outsource is often made in the interest of lowering cost or making better use of time and energy costs, redirecting or conserving energy directed at the competencies of a particular business, or to make more efficient use of land, labor, capital, (information) technology and resources[citation needed]. Outsourcing became part of the business lexicon during the 1980s. It is essentially a division of labour."

Analysis of definition clearly shows no mention of moving jobs to other countries just for moving jobs or because some one loves Bangalore, India or Buenos Aires, Argentina vs. creating the same function New York, US. It however is very clear that outsourcing is driven by business to

• redirect energies to core competencies
• make more efficient use of land, labor, capital, technology and resources

These drivers make perfect sense to me - not sure why all of a sudden there is so much negativity about outsourcing. The fact is - what is non-core to one business is core to some else's business. If every business is focussed on improving its core then we should get closer the ideal Macro Economic goals of "Profit Maximization".

Theoretically, this sounds good but then why is it that off late, outsourcing is getting more defined as moving jobs to countries India, China, Russia, Brazil, Poland from US or Europe, referred also as "offshoring"

My Take#

1. We are failing to recognize the rate of change has accelerated dramatically. Which implies, As we have moved from farming to manufacturing to service to now knowledge based economy, the time it takes innovations to disperse across the globally connected economies is faster then ever before. This puts pressure on rate of innovation expected from the underlying economy to sustain growth and prosperity. if you still are unconvinced see this video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL9Wu2kWwSY


2. Assuming Quality of life in US and other modern western economies is at least 3x better then third world countries. If that is true of Bangalore, India and New York, Businesses should expect value of at least 3x more for having the same job function in New York vs. having it performed in Bangalore, India. (Note - I am saying value not just labor cost ... ). If not businesses will be overpaying which is not good and not sustainable in the long run.

So what am i really saying ... we have some basic choices which we can make

1. Choice 1: Unlike the past, where innovation led to jobs that led to jobs that lasted 20 years, 10 year or 5 years now thanks to technology they cannot lock-in the productivity gains for those long periods. So we have to innovate / change continuously that creates value. Implication -> Encourage entrepreneurship more than ever before and do not raise barriers


2. Choice 2: We have start getting used to lower standards of living - (loss of jobs or reduction in salaries), reduce spending or sacrifice benefits we have become used to taking for granted so that business do not find value in moving jobs off-shore. Implication -> Lot smaller economy that will need to support the growing population.


3. Choice 3: Raise barriers for business to be global using government controls or extend subsidies to businesses by borrowing. Implication -> This is not sustainable as business are like water, they will eventually find a better home or dry up (belly up) when the government cannot sustain the subsidies or controls.

So far – Businesses seem to be focused more on Choice 2 and Government on Choice 3 rather than collectively focusing Choice 1. This is a scary trend, we should figure out a way for businesses, citizens and government to focus on Choice 1. We know this can be done. To prove it, we need to look no further into history then leaders like Henry Ford, who increased wages (sharing profits) at the same time setting goals (innovation) to reduce the price of car so that all employees (increase sales) can afford a car - improving quality of life of everyone.

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Swine Flu - Is your Business at Risk?

Listening to Dr. Brandl today on Effect of swine flu on economy, I felt it is time for corporations to ask whether their Disaster Recovery plans truly consider all aspects Business Continuity i.e People, Processes and Technology.

My Take # This pandemic which now has spread from single nation (Mexico) to over 11 Nations in days if not hours should serve as a rude awakening to corporations to take a closer look at their Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity Plans, as today's businesses use Global Resources in a Globally Connected Economy and their current Disaster Recovery plans could primarily be based on specific what-if scenarios and do not necessarily consider a Globally Spreading Pandemic.

Thanks
Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Economic Crisis - Have we even defined the problem right?

Link to Previous Post: My Views on Business and Technology: Economic Crisis - Have we even defined the problem right?

Though after writing this article, I got a little lesson on commercial paper market drying up at the 4th McCombs Alumni Conference, it however did not convince me fully.

Today, as I read thru the articles on "Wells Fargo's" Windfall earnings, I felt these prove my belief on the topic of Credit Worthiness - Banks are lending and there is credit available for those who are credit worthy; however, I guess they are lending to who they deem are "Credit Worthy". So if anyone is not getting credit - may be like Mahatma Gandhi Said - It is time to look in the mirror.

Some Links
http://finance.yahoo.com/loans/article/106893/Wells-Cashes-in-on-Mortgage-Boom
http://tampabay.bizjournals.com/tampabay/stories/2009/04/06/daily56.html?ana=yfcpc


Thanks
Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Cloud Computing - What is so disruptive about it?

I have heard varied opinions about cloud computing - ranging from we already do it, it is nothing but more virtualization, it is the next buzz word for SOA, It is just IT Services branded and sold differently to it is very disruptive enterprise IT Providers.

I am not sure I agree in 100% to any of the above generalizations. So to put some perspective, I will try to shed perspectives on "Cloud Computing", the first one today being on "What is so disruptive about it?

The other day, I was reading a book on Innovation in which there was very simple example that caught my attention and felt it may provide some context to disruption. So here it is

Most of us in America subscribe to some form of Cable/Satellite TV, the basic service has 20-30 channels, and you pay more to get more channels or movie channels and finally you have options to order specific programs and watch. This is great and Is an accepted norm.

Now what if, You called the cable company and said "I like your cable service, however I watch it sporadically, some days I do and some days I don't, and more over I want the flexibility to pick and choose what I like to watch irrespective of your current packaging structure however I would like you "Mr. Cable Company" to figure out what I watched, how long i watched and send me the bill to only that and not what i am entitled to watch. i.e Change the NORM on the Cable Company.

How do you think your cable company will react and do you think your cable company can do it ?

To me this will be very disruptive current cable providers as they have optimized their business model to delivering packages based on market segmentation in the most optimized way and to change that would be re-think all business processes and supply chain components in totally different way.

My Take ==> So If we believe "Cloud Computing" is expected to deliver true automated processes that enable on-demand consumption based IT services and not manual configuration/fixed asset based IT services, it will be disruptive to every IT Services Department/Provider who have honed this business model over the last 10-20-30 years - whether it is internal Enterprise IT or an external IT Service Provider. It is fundamently changing the accepted "NORM" of delivering Enterprise IT Services.

Thanks for reading. Feel free to comment on this post.

Thanks
Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Do Enterprises need any Hardware other than EDGE/End User Devices?

Recently, I posted on article titled "IT Hardware - Who is the future buyer?",

Today, I ran into this announcement from VMWARE: VMware to Manage Virtual Machines from Mobile Phones.

Though this announcement is from a specific supplier of virutualization technology, I am pretty confident this is trend in the industry.

If you carefully read and analyze the under pinning of the message, which is :- "we can reliably manage Virtual Assets from Edge/ End User Devices and virtual assets can be consumed on demand" - then we will truly have commodotized the Physical Hardware by being able to seamlessly move our virtual assets at WILL to the best value provider of physical assets dynamically ==> My Take: This announcement substantiates my assertation in the previous post in the long run !

Thanks
Nagesh
The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Economic Crisis - Have we even defined the problem right?

My Basic Education was in Mechanical / Industrial Engineering with some focus in Operations Research. I still remember the first thing my Professor said way back. 95% of the solving the problem is about "Defining the problem right" remaining 5% is about "applying the right algorithm".

Off late, as I have been questioning whether we have even defined the problem right?

Looks like the root cause economic problem is defined as "Lack of Lending" or "Lack of Credit Flowing"?

So the solutions to the problem range from Re-capitalization to Closing Banks. The current govt solutions are trying to meet in the middle with plans like public-private partnership etc etc as noted in Prof. Brandl's Blog today - http://blogs.mccombs.utexas.edu/brandl/2009/03/25/geithner/

So I took the liberty to comment on the blog entry, the essence of which is as follows

1. If we truly believe there are good well run banks in the mix - then why are they not lending and why are we focussing on the so called large insolvent banks? With interest rates close to 0% the good ones should be able to borrow and lend infinetly? ( Net - Net - It should really not matter if the insolvent ones do not !)
2. Lend to whom ? The american consumer is so much in debt. When was the last time any bank lent to the person who has maxed out his borrowing capability or does not have a job? Would you, if you were running a bank lend to a consumer profile who is already saddled with debt he cannot pay?
3. Assuming, we are successful in re-capitalizing the banks. The banks will naturally try to find the most credit worthy and profitable consumer profile to lend to. Are we really sure that, THAT consumer profile is really the American Consumer ? If not, Question who this consumer is and will money start flowing to that consumer?

As I think thru this subject, I really, would like some economists to illustrate which credit worthy institution / individual is not able to borrow ? and if there is such an example, I would like to further understand why the so called well run banks are not lending to them ? That may shed light on what the real problem is?

So what is My Take: My Gut tells me that the real problem, America now faces is not availability of credit, it is credit worthiness of American Consumer. So the solutions should make American Consumer Strong and Credit Worthy Again.

In the short run this may be best acheived by letting the American Consumer - The individual who is acutally working 8 hrs a day and makes a salary around the national average keep more of his money and " by American Consumer I do not mean American Businesses or citizens who make say more than 2x of national average". The mid-term solutions lie in executing national projects like upgrading National Infrastructure - Highway Systems, Air traffic Control Systems, Power Grids etc and The longer-term solutions lie investing into education, re-training, and providing funding future technologies - Energy Independence, Regulatory Frameworks, Tax-Code re-write etc.

Finally, we cannot ignore the psychology of markets, we have to recognize that as long as every one, which includes banks feel that there will be a better opportunity (option) in future they will stay out which will make things worse. John Maynard Keynes recognized this way back, so long as government in this case keeps the hope that more help is one the way to the banks, it will stall the recovery.

Thank you for reading. Your feedback is appreciated.

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Follow up to My Post "Wake Up - If you did not already know you should"

Recently, I had written blog post titled, "Wake up - If you did not already know you should". A key point in my view about expectation of "Credit Flowing" as soon as Banks had enough capital is that it is not a valid expectation as "Flow of credit should be tied to credit worthiness" and not somebody's ability to lend or that somebody feels he is entitled to credit.

"Part I: Geithner's Plan "Extremely Dangerous," Economist Galbraith Says" was the Tech Ticker interview with Prof. James Galbraith, The University of Texas at Austin on Yahoo! Finance today. I was surprised at how clearly he articulated that lending by banks will not resume unless the loans are provided to credit worthy purposes and that the American Consumer is saddled with debt and cannot take on any more debt.

Net-net, given what I heard and read today, my convictions around my post have become stronger. I strongly recommend every one reading this blog to listen to Prof. Galbraith interview and come to their own perceptions of the right medicine for the economic mess. I was humbled by some to the simple solutions suggested by him.

Happy reading and forming opinions

Thanks

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

IT Hardware (Servers, Mainframes, Storage) - who is the future buyer ?

HP bought EDS Last Year. CISCO has come out with clear intentions to be a datacenter player with their new server line. Yesterday's announcement of IBM's plan to acquire SUN raise a very fundamental question : WHO IS THE BUYER OF IT HARDWARE?


Historically, Software has been specifically designed for a particular OS/hardware platform. Has this paradigm finally shifted. Has software matured far enough that it is either truly synonymous or ubiquotous to underlying platform.?


Historically, Enterprises have always liked to own software and hardware. IT hardware and Software have always been treated as Assets of value. Has this paradigm finally shifted. Can Enterprises finally accept there is no true asset value beyond their use, hense can be procured as an operational commodity?


Historically, Enterprises believed software has to custom built or bought for specific/differentiating use. Has this paradigm finally shifted. Can Enterprises finally accept that software is just tooling, what they consume is services and processes that are either specific/differentiating to them?

If you have answered or even leaning towards answering "Yes" to the questions, then we both are on the same page? However we may not really really agree what it means to future of IT Services -

So here is My Take: If your business in not related to providing "Technology Services", the only hardware your business will procure will only be Edge or End-User Devices that lets your enterprise stay connected. The last to adopt would be the mega-enterprises, who will eventually adopt due to asymetric global demands and changing business objectives.

Thanks for reading. Let me know what your opinions are.

Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Professional Networking - The game has changed

Recently, I gave a talk on Career Management to TexasMBA students as a part of Executive Speaker Series at the McCombs School of Business, The University of Texas at Austin. My Presentation can be found at http://docs.google.com/Presentation?id=dppnrzq_64hrzwf7fh

This week, I noticed I crossed 200 connections on Linked-in (http://www.linkedin.com/). I started this journey accepting an invitation from Tiffany Glass (http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=516663&authToken=KiYZ&authType=name) around 2004 and have been pretty selective about who I network with. This to me is a major milestone.

This milestone, coupled with current economic climate and the recent levels of activity in networking events, it is pretty clear to me - The game as we know how to look for the next career challenge has totally changed. My Take:

1. If you are not change agent then you are being changed. So, ask yourself - are you changing or are you trying avoid it. No one else but you can answer the question for yourself.


2. Networking is not about joining Linked-in or any professional networking site, it is all about presence and having a networking strategy. Ask the hard questions : Who is in your network and How do they fit in? When was the last time you actually had a meaningful conversation with some one on your network who is not a part of your daily work life or personal life?


3. Networking is not about quantity, it is about quality of your network. In a rush to network, do not try to grow/expand at the expense of quality. At the end of the day, Garbage in equates to Garbage out. So, if most of folks in your network are ones you have never spoken to in your life or have nothing in common or are just family and friends or are not aligned to your goals then question the value of your network or you may not achieve the benefits you were hoping for?
4. You need to spend time with it, just like you do with work, family and favorite past time. Professional networking should become a part of your life not just something you do because of a particular event or treat it as a one time event.

My Conclusion: Effective networking should result in you being Seeked not you Seeking Something, whether it is a Job or Assignment.

I want the thank Bill Fleming from McCombs Career Services for making me think about this subject and present to the students of 2010; Tiffany Glass, who introduced me to professional networking when the game was still changing; and folks in my Network, whose relationship I value.

Thanks

Nagesh

Note: The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.

Wake Up - If you did not already know you should

What is at stake today is our ability to drive value in the long-run, and the long-run is not far away - It is here. Please watch and read the following blog posts

• “Did you know” by Karl Fisch, Scott McLeod, and Jeff Bronman. Watch it, you will be surprised. The link is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL9Wu2kWwSY
• Macro-Economic Updates by Professor Brandl’s from McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin. The link is http://blogs.mccombs.utexas.edu/brandl/

If these posts are not providing a wake up call - I am not sure what will!

My View:

1. Stop talking about tax breaks (I am sure by now most people do not mind paying a little more for a greater good. At least, I am) and start trying to figure out how to invest into our Future (education being one of them) that will allow us and our kids (our future) to be competitive. So Rather than taking a stance of rejecting money due to political affiliations, figure out a way to invest that will produce long-term benefits.
2. Stop talking about bail-outs (they are necessary so lets get beyond that) and ordering banks to lend (there is no entitlement here, carelessness in lending is what got us here in the first place), so rather than having an entitlement behavior, lets provide a reason for institutions to lend; Announcing projects, is one way - which becomes the basis for credit worthiness and reason for someone to lend. If not, just lending will get us back to current situation faster than we can imagine. New business (Projects) will provide the “Hope” needed to move forward.
3. "Hope" does not emerge if the justification for every move is based on “Catastrophe Avoided”. This will only scare people further, So Let the next bail-out be framed in-terms of meeting Business needs (insurance/lending - what ever they may be) rather than another “Dooms Day” Avoided. That will help show “Light at the end of the Tunnel” rather the darkness everyone sees on every bail-out measure announced.
   

Thanks
Nagesh

The views represented in this blog are my personal views and are not a reflection of or opinions of any of the institutions I am associated with or have worked for.