Reverse Engineering...

In Mumbai Bollywood,Cricket and VJTI Sells

2008-05-26T06:03:00.000-07:00

Newspapers today are obsessed with VJTI . So much has been written about VJTI.TOI has specially assigned Hemali Chappa to scoop all the dirt she can find on VJTI.

Now it looks like DNA has also joined the gang.

I can imagine the DNA editor saying "Listen up people. I want you to blow this thing so much, i want you to sex up this story so much that it makes the Times of India look like Loksatta. If a prof misses a lecture i want to know about it, if the director's son buys a new underwear i want to know about it. Lets get into their lives people."

The Next "Sub-Prime" Crisis

2008-05-22T04:45:00.000-07:00

Ever wonder which is the next crisis which could jeopardize the world's economy.

Well Peter Schiff writing for www.prudentbears.com points out it could very well be the credit card. The US credit card debt now stands at a whopping $957 billion or $3000 per American.(The sub-prime market is $1 trillion in comparison.)

There is a change in the behavior of American consumers. Credit cards earlier were used for unavailable cash and purchases were made over a period of time. But now the credit card is used for availing credit and is used for everyday purchases.

Also now-a-days credit card companies have increased the credit limit and the repayment period. Still what makes it worse is the inflation. Credit card users are just postponing the payments made at higher prices and compounding it with high interest.

Let's just hope that the American consumer repays his debt.

Time of Our Life.

2008-05-17T08:06:00.000-07:00

This song has found a whole new meaning for me. It describes exactly as to what i am going through-the sorrow of change, the loss of a friend and the sadness of leaving college friends behind.

Listen to it.It's added in my playlist.

"Good Riddance (Time Of Your Life)"

Another turning point, a fork stuck in the road
Time grabs you by the wrist, directs you where to go
So make the best of this test, and don't ask why
It's not a question, but a lesson learned in time

It's something unpredictable, but in the end it's right.
I hope you had the time of your life.

So take the photographs, and still frames in your mind
Hang it on a shelf in good health and good time
Tattoos of memories and dead skin on trial
For what it's worth it was worth all the while

It's something unpredictable, but in the end it's right.
I hope you had the time of your life.

It's something unpredictable, but in the end it's right.
I hope you had the time of your life.

It's something unpredictable, but in the end it's right.
I hope you had the time of your life.

RIP DP

2008-05-17T07:08:00.001-07:00

Life's so fragile.

I lost one of my close friend Daidipya in a road accident.He was on his way home from college. Our college had just ended and everyone were looking forward to the journey ahead. There is so much of excitement,anxiety as I look and try to see what life has in store for me.I am sure DP felt the same way.

Sometimes God seems unfair and unkind.He should have protected him.

I came to know about this incident from my friend Ketan. It was quarter to 12. i was lazily browsing on the net and relishing my Butterscotch ice-cream.I have never received any call so late in the night. I got an eerie feeling.Something was wrong. Soon i felt it in his tone.I let the ice-cream melt. My hunger was gone. Next morning i couldn't listen to my Ipod.

Visiting his home was one of the most emotionally draining moments. i have been to condolence meetings before but this was different.The sheer grief and shock his family experienced is unimaginable. I hope my family never goes through this.

Everyday i am reminded of him. I am reminded of his face. It was so fresh and alive. It was like nothing had happened. Somehow i wished he would just get up.

I have learnt two truths in the last couple of days:
1. Change and death are inevitable.
2. Denial or rejection of 1 causes sorrow.

RIP buddy!

We do things differently.

2008-04-05T06:29:00.000-07:00

Its been exactly one month since my last post. Been busy with my final year project(not joking).
So heres a good article i read in TOI. I found it one of the best articles to come on TOI's editorial page.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/We_Do_Things_Differently/articleshow/2908280.cms

Final Year Project

2008-03-05T06:09:00.000-08:00

During the initial years at VJTI i was in complete awe of "FINAL YEAR PROJECTS" and looked forward to them in eager anticipation. What is that i am going to create? What brilliant,state of the art project am i going to involved in which is going to be the amalgam and symbol of my 4 years of engineering education.
I perceived them to be highly cerebral, path-breaking and arduous tasks engaged in by highly knowledgeable students who are at the pinnacle of engineering brillance and who are overflowing with knowledge , curiosity and skills and are guided by an equally knowledgeable mentor. I thought we are going to spent nights brainstorming over cups of coffee with our mentor who knew us by our names and treated us like colleagues.

But I also was pretty dumb and naive at that time.

Here's a look at our conversations with the mentor:

Day: Monday
Time 3.00 pm
Location: Corridor

Us: Sir we are from final year tronix. You are our mentor.(This is the starter whether its over the phone or face-to-face.)

Theres a delay in response as he tries to recollect.

Mentor:Ummmmm..Aaaaahhhh. Okkkayy you are the "stateflow" guys(know us by our names!!). I will talk to someone in the industry(wooow industry hmmmm..the "mecca" of all engineers) and we can do something practical.(woow practical hmmm..im drooling man).

Us: Ok thank you sir.

Day: Tuesday
Time: 2.00 pm
Location: Corridor

Us: Sir we are from final year troninx. You are our mentor.

Delay.

Mentor: I have a lecture right now. You meet me later.

Us: Ok sir

After 2 hours...

Day: Tuesday
Time: 4.00 pm
Location: Corridor

Us: Sir we are from final year tronix. You are our mentor.

Delay again

Mentor: Yes??

Us: Sir you were going to talk to someone from the industry.

Mentor: Yes Yes im going to speak to him. I will call you guys(yeah right!!). Dont worry we will do something.

Us:Ok thank u sir.

I am not making up this shit. You cant make up this shit. It really happens.

Now lets take a look at our project group discussions. Our project grp consists of goyal,ketan, guy from karjat whazz is name yeah nikhil(he he ) and and yeah thats it.

No wait theres pakya too.Five of us.
I will now let the pictures do the talking.
Venue: Goyal's room.

(At this point we are discussing as to what is a reverse swing?? anyone??)

So what if our discussions dont center around technical STUFF, so what if we dont actually create something path-breaking(its not the end of the world).
So what if our mentor doesnt know our names, so what if we always meet him in the corridors, so what if there are no brainstromings over cup of coffee. so what??

I still have my HEALTH.

Times they are toh changinng..

2008-02-28T07:03:00.000-08:00

Its the last semester and man does it feel wierd. So many things have changed from the first semester.
Heres what my schedule looked like in 1st sem:

7.00 am:Get up

8.15 am:Leave home for college.

9.00am:Reach VJTI

9am-4pm:Attend lectures and lab.

5.30pm:Reach home.

7pm: Study.

And now...

7.45am: Get up

8.45: Leave for college.

9.30am:Reach VJTI.

9.30-11.15 am:Lect/Lab

11.15-1pm- Project work(basically downloading movies from goyal's LAN)

2-3pm:Chilling out

5.30pm:Reach home

6pm:watch recently downloaded movie

7pm:Still watching

8pm :Still watching

9pm:Start watching a new movie/Update blog.

As i said its a weird feeling. With the impending SP Jain results and Deloitte/Wipro VLSI jobs waiting at the end of the semester its tough to be in the present and not think of the future. But at the same time i cant help feeling nostalgic and delve into the past. Anyway life's going to change and its going to change in a BIG way.One way or the other.

I have lost the motivation to pick up a book and study. Got screwed in all papers but some how it doesnt matter. Thankfully mid-sems are now a thing of the past.

Watching movie has become an integral part of my life. I have watched

Jodha Akbar
Michael Clayton
Oceans 13
Bourne ultimatum
Bee's movie
American gangster
Borat
Thank you for Smoking
The usual suspects
The Good German
Swordfish
Good Will Hunting

in the last 10 days. And there are many more which i dont even remember.

Its 9pm. Time to watch the next movie.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

2008-02-28T06:01:00.000-08:00

Let me at the onset clarify i have never uttered the word.Never.Ever.Seriously never!!

Ok whom am i kidding. But it was way back in 8th grade.Yeah i still remember it becauuse it was the only time i uttered it.It was more of a reflex.So it doesnt count.

During the Iraq invasion "whiskey tango foxtrot" was a commonly heard phrase over the radio. It was the American soldier's code for "what the f@#k?"

Lately i have been quite fascinated by the word "f@#k". No other word in the English literature can convey so many emotions and be used in so many forms.

It can used as

1.Noun- what a f@#k?

2.Adjective-what a f@#king car?

3.Verb- Active: A f@#ks B.
Passive: B is f@#ked by A.
Transitive: Its good to f@#k!

4.Gerund- F@#king is a good exercise.

It can also convey a lot of emotions:

Aggression: F@#k you!

Curiosity: what the f@#k is this?

Fooled/Conned: He got f@#ked.

Violence: i will kill you with a f@#king hammer!!

Trouble: We are f@#ked up.

Shock:What the f@#k!!

Get lost:f@#k off!!

Greetings:How the f@#k are you?

Bad day: what a f@#king day!

Face the music: We are in for a good f@#king.

To mess with someone:Don't f@#k with him!!

Request:Get the f@#k out of here.

Apathy: Who gives a F@#k!

I will keep updating the list. You are free to make a contribution.

Simplicity And Humility: Signs Of Perfection

2008-02-26T06:37:00.000-08:00

I had read this article while waiting for the 2nd round of interview at SP Jain.At that time i found this article so enlightening that i still remember it today and i thought to share it with you.

Here are two excerpts from the article which i found very enlightening as i could relate to it myself.

..to explain something in a simple way is not easy. It requires thorough understanding of the subject..
....We make ourselves complicated by splitting our personality. Inwardly we are something but outwardly we are different because we mistakenly feel that our outwardly pattern of behaviour should be different under different circumstances.....

How true!! Think of all the vivas and personal interviews.Think of all the grilling we endured and the utter bullshit we uttered. It was either because we didnt know the subject so well or we were trying to be someone else just to impress the panelists.

I hope you do not just read the article but contemplate on it.

Simplicity And Humility: Signs Of Perfection

R K Langar

Where there is greatness, you are bound to find simplicity. Simplicity is a characteristic of greatness. It is the perfect alignment of one’s thoughts, words and deeds.
Great truths are simple but we make them difficult. When you are simple your outer and inner lives coincide. When you are simple, there is no trace of crookedness. We make ourselves complicated by splitting our personality. Inwardly we are something but outwardly we are different because we mistakenly feel that our outwardly pattern of behaviour should be different under different circumstances.
We present ourselves as what we are really not. Such a person may or may not fool others but he is certainly fooling himself. He equates simplicity with being unimpressive and backward. He feels that a simple person cannot be successful in life. But simple persons have done great things in life. They are not only successful but are also perfect in all aspects of life.
A simple person sees things as they are and presents them without adding to or subtracting from them. So there is no scope for untruth. Their conscience is clear, free of any ambiguity. They create plenty of space in their mind to allow noble thoughts to enter. Simple people earn through fair means and are at ease with themselves and with others.
A materialistic man presents truth in a complicated way. He may distort facts to impress others. He is used to making mountains out of mole hills. If you present things in a complicated manner, it covers up your lack of knowledge of the subject. But to explain something in a simple way is not easy. It requires thorough understanding of the subject. It requires talent. The more knowledge a person has of a subject, the more he would be inclined to put it across in a simple way.
When something is presented in a simple manner, it is well received and understood. The same goes for simple writing. There are writers who show their scholarship in their writings, even if what they write is not accessible (comprehensible) to the vast majority of readers.
Simplicity means doing what is necessary and remaining balanced. It means your life is an open book. Simple living means living in moderation. The thought process evolves corresponding to simple living and high thinking. Simplicity comes by living a regulated and organised life. Simplicity can be applied in all spheres of life, dress, food, talk, behaviour and in our interaction with others. For being simple one has to be oneself. A simple person leads a stress-free life since he is pure and truthful. Sri Aurobindo says that to express harmony, of all things simplicity is the best.
Simplicity is a prerequisite for spiritual advancement for it is those who are child-like who get divine illumination. There was one common factor in the lives of Sri Ramakrishna, Swami Vivekananda, Sri Aurobindo, Maharshi Ramana and Mahatma Gandhi: Every one of them led a simple life. Whatever they wanted to convey was free from any kind of multiplicity. They were men of character with deep concern for the welfare and well-being of others. Mahatma Gandhi demonstrated how simple living generates high thinking. Simplicity is also one of the divine qualities as enumerated in the Bhagavad Gita.

Bhaiyya to the rescue..

2008-02-25T06:00:00.001-08:00

Last Sunday i happened to be at Kandivali station on my to Thakur polythenic college,thakur complex(which is different from thakur village). I reached station by 1 pm half an hour before the reporting time.
However i soon found out that reaching thakur college wasn't going to be so easy. All the autorickshaws(f^*$@ing ppl) simply refused to go to thakur college. I despearetly tried to convince them but to no avail.
Soon it became 1.20 and the place outside the station got swarmed by students all desparetly trying to get an auto. Finally i decided to walk all the way to highway hoping to catch an auto. But alas my pleadings fell on deaf ears.
It was 1.30 and i still hadnt found the auto. That plus no one knew for sure whether thakur complex and thakur village were the same place or different!!
I thought God was testing me. I thought may be i wasnt meant to appear for CET.
Fortunately i dont know how but out of nowhere came this knight in shining armour or should i say a bhaiyya in khaki. I asked him"Bhaiyya thakur complex chaloge?? Exam ke liye ho raha hoon" and with the gentle flick of his neck he said"Chalo baytoh". Thank God. A bhaiyya helping a marathi manoos.
At that moment i didnt think it this way.Neither did he. He could have easily said NO. But he didn't. In retrospect all that talk by Raj Thackarey seems utter nonsense.
I can tell you one thing for sure. Mumbai's social fabric will always remain intact. Nothing or nobody can undermine the important contributions that migrants have made to this city.
God bless the bhaiyya!!

P.S: CET was fine.

hE HEE

2008-02-21T01:38:00.000-08:00

WHO'S IN CHARGE?

2008-02-20T08:12:00.000-08:00

Visit the following site and it's pretty amazing as to how accurately we can guess who is the band leader just by seeing the publicity photo. Some weird science maybe....

http://wichone.blogspot.com/

My SP JAIN INTERVIEW....

2008-02-05T09:51:00.000-08:00

Interviewer: So tell me what are derivatives?
Me:Sir i have no idea...
Interviewer Ok tell me what are futures?
Me: sir i have applied for marketing not finance....
Interviewer so you think you know about marketing
Me: Yes sir
Interviewer:Which FMCG manufactures Axe deo?
Me:i think its HUL.
Interviewer:u think?
Me:im not so sure
Interviewer: ok what are the 4Ps?
Me: they are price position promotion and...and... i cant remember what is the 4th.
Interviewer: ok thank you. nice meeting you.

Luckily this was just a dream. A dream which thankfully never came true. After what i heard from my friends and senoirs i was sure im in for a stress interview. but things turned out to be quite different.

I coulnt sleep properly that day. Questions kept popping inside my head even while dreaming. But that morning i wasnt a bit tensed. Maybe it had to do with the cold weather. Or maybe it had to do with my new Lee cooper shoes.maybe....

I was dressd, what should i say, a bit unconventionally. Half sleeve white shirt,quadras and no tie(yes no tie!). one thing i learnt at college interviews that one's formal attire doesnt make any difference(you may disagree). My friend Ketan's innocuous query "tu udhar ja ke change karega?" made me realise that i may have dressed a bit too casually. hell with it.i dont give a tiny rat's ass.

After reaching SP Jain we had to verify our documents and soon the batch for the 1st interview was announced. Ketan and i were in the same group along with 4 other candidates. The 1st interview had 2 panelists-Renuka kamath(marketing) and one more lady prof(i guess from systems). They were quite friendly,always smiling but always evaluating. We were asked to introduce ourselves. i gave 3 liner intro short and simple. others narrated their whole life story.

Coincidently the other prof turned out to be from vjti and she quickly turned her attention towards us. for the next 5 mins the conversation revolved around vjti. finally renuka kamath boke our conversation and went to the 1st guy.the questions were mostly factual. He made only one blunder. when asked which company he loved to work with , he said ITC(big mistake..poor guy he paid for it , he was the only who didnt get selected). and with the ever smiling face the panelist (here comes the knocker) asked him "if itc doesnt come to sp jain then what will you do?" . His answer was rather unconvincing.

15 mins into the interview everyone was asked something or the other one candidate was also asked to play the the tabla. but not a single question was directed towards me. finally the panelist asked "Has anyone read 'the world is flat'? can anyone tell me who is the author" i was the only one who knew the answer. Finally all that reading came to my rescue. Mr thomas friedman thank you very much. and i spoke abt the book for the next 2 mins unaware that i was swinging side to side in the revolving chair. she looked impressed. and i was content.

After the 1st interview we took a behaviour test and within an hour we had our 2nd interview. This too turned out to be an easy going one. tell told said us to introduce ourselves tell us something which is not given in your CV and the guys did the exact opposite. During the intos another candiddate and i mentione the word "creative" (hot topic for interviews), so he asked each one what do they think "creativity" is and can it be learnt. After that they asked to give a creative solution for reducing India's poverty. while the 1st candidate was having a go at it the panelist said"mankar tejas ..tejas that's your first name? yes sir ...so tejas do you agree with what he said?" A nice way to check whether i was listening luckily i had kept a track of what he was trying to say. i was able to successfully refute what he was trying to propose. he was basically saying the government should distribute money to the poor. creative but infeasible. To be fair a creative answer is not always a feasible answer just like lateral thinking you have to combine lateral and vertical thinking to come out with a feasible answer. And you cant control creativity how can one come up with a creative answer [and feasible] within 30 seconds and in such a tensed environment.
Then the panelist trained their guns on me. so tejas recently the union health minister urged SRK and AB not to smoke was it rit to do so? i went on creative liberty...right to express..blah blah.. ok so if you were given 10 lakhs to model a cigarette would you do it? If im an upcoming model not so popular as SRK well then yeah i will do it. No apprehensions.No moral dilemma.
They asked the next guy "what about you?". He says no sir i wont do it(yeah right!!) the panelist says"but you are not SRK".Still i wont do it,he said. The panelist then asked another candidate "Tejas just mentioned the word 'integral'. You think actors can avoid smoking on screen.You think in GODFATHER he could have used a chewing gum instead of a cigar." The candidate its possible that they can avoid smoking on screen but since she had not seen GODFATHER she cant comment on it.He then moved to the third guy. he too hadnt seen GODFATHER. I was getting desperate. Come on ask me ask me!!. Someone up there must really like me. So tejas what you have to say. "Sir...Don Corleone ....the Italian Gangster...if you look back at that movie every part was played to perfection.People remember the way he spoke,the italian accent(maunday,tuesday..),the dialogues(i will make you an offer you cant refuse),the way he scratched his chin ....everything was perfect,bang on. So if actors smoke on screen its because they need to develop a character... ".First thomas friedman and now Godfather. im starting to get goosebumps.BTW the room was damned cold.
The guys having work experience were grilled on their company's operations.who are their clients and so on. One piece of advice BE EXTREMELY CAREFUL WITH WORDS. Never use strong words like "passionate". Use the correct words(wazz the difference between sentimental and emotional??). Know the difference between values and strengths. Yeah by the way they asked us whether value systems are relative.
To answer such questions you need to be well read and this is exactly what they are trying to gauge. how in depth can you think can you provide an insight with whatever knowledge you possess right now.
So preparing for interviews is a constant process.

Thats about it. no question on marketing no question on profile sheet All in all i was satisfied with the way i conducted myself.

IPOs don’t guarantee returns on listing day

2008-01-22T21:41:00.000-08:00

The year 2007 witnessed 107 IPOs as against 92 in 2006. In 2008 , 150-175 IPOs are expected to come out.The FCH and Reliance IPO got 117 and 72 times oversubscribed. The retail investors were convinced that REL has the resources to execute the projects on time. But in India delays of 3 to 4 years are quite common (For eg Mumbai metro one of which RADAG is a partof is incharged of the Mumbai metro but hte project has still not seen light of the day)and hence some market analysts had advised not to invest in the Reliance IPO. Some retail investors actually sold some of their existing stocks and some even borrowed loans so that they would be able to invest in the IPO. What they dont realise in case the IPO gets oversubscribed(which was likely and it did) the lottery system comes into play.

Now there are 23 crores of shares out of which 30% are reserved for retail invstors .Now 5.1 million retail investors bid,let's assume, for 210 shares for Rs.450 each. So thats a bid of 10.5 crore equity shares for around 6.9 crore shares. Now if we use the lottery system and assuming that a minimum of 15 shares has to given each retail investor then 4.6 million investors will get get 15 shares each. While 0.5 million investors with land with nothing.Even if the shares list at a premium say at double the value around 900 the investors will make a profit of Rs.6750. That by any stretch of imagination is not big profit even for short-term or to take loans or sell existing stocks. So people take a chill pill!!

If you still need a reason not to go crazyon IPOs heres an article from TOI.

IPOs don’t guarantee returns on listing day

Investing in a public issue is not different from buying stocks. So, don’t get carried away by the euphoria in the market

Madhu T | TNN

Investors seem to be mesmerised by initial public offers from companies. Consider this: The initial public offer of Kishore Biyani-led Future Capital Holdings has received thumping response since day one. Its issue was subscribed 131 times by Friday evening. That means the issue has received bids for 84,14,51,848 equity shares as against 64.22 lakh shares on offer. Qualified institutional investors’ reserved portion subscribed 107 times followed by 27 times in retail and 33 times in HNIs category, according to sources. The price band for the IPO was between Rs 700-Rs 765, which analysts felt was on the higher side. Reliance Power IPO almost created a frenzy. From the moment the Anil Ambani-led company finalised its IPO, investor interest had been tremendous. There were stories of people selling their existing holding to participate in the issue. Some people were even ready to borrow to invest in the company. Suddenly, it seemed, everybody wanted at least one share of Reliance Power. No wonder, there were reports of the prices quoting at a premium in the grey market. As per last reports, the issue was subscribed 72 times, with retail investors subscribing 16 times.
What is happening? Why is everybody suddenly flocking to the IPO market? “Well, these two issues had strong promoters behind them. So, you can understand the mad rush to get a piece of action,’’ says an analyst. “However, even otherwise people tend to get carried away once the market is on a bull run. They would chase even obscure issues thinking that IPOs are sure way to make money.’’ That, he says, could prove a costly mistake. This is because IPO are not always supposed to list at a premium. Sure, you may have seen a host of IPOs listing at the stock exchange on a premium, but don’t consider it as a norm.
Don’t rush to fill in the application form for an IPO because suddenly everyone is talking about it. Spend a little time understanding the process, figure out the risk involved before signing on the dotted lines. A company enters the market with
an IPO when it needs money to fund an upcoming project. The company has two ways to fund the project. One, it can borrow from banks or financial institutions. Two, it can tap the market by offering a part of its equity. This has an advantage. The company doesn’t have to pay any interest otherwise it would have given to the bank. Instead it just needs to part with the profit to the investors.
This is exactly what makes IPOs risky. Fine, if they list on a premium and you get out immediately. What happens if you have to stay invested for a while to make money from them? The answer is simple: the company has to perform well. This means you should adopt all the precautions you would normally take while buying a stock in the secondary market. “People don’t realise it. But investing in an IPO is not very different from investing in a stock,’’ says a mutual fund manager. “Analysing a stock already listed in the market is easier because you already have its track record in public. Also, there will be a lot of research report and new available in the media, whereas you don’t have much information on a company entering the market with an IPO. You solely have to rely on the prospectus of the IPO,’’ he adds.
What makes the IPO game even murky is the last minute rush of dubious companies into the market after a prolonged bull run. It has been observed that many unscrupulous promoters enter the market to rob unsuspecting investors of their hard-earned money. “The recent issue of Future Capital and Reliance Power is a classic study. The issues received tremendous response from investors because two powerful promoters were backing these IPOs,’’ says the analyst. “But investors who fail to get allotment in such bumper IPOs often end up putting money in dubious ones, thinking they will make money from them, too.’’ Needless to say, it doesn’t happen always. On the other, they may actually lose money in the process. Remember that we have seen a bull run in the last four years and many dubious IPOs may be getting ready to hit the market. Stay away from them if you want to create wealth.

Brand Failures

2008-01-21T06:05:00.000-08:00

Brands are ways of protecting products from failures. Brands create a perception about products. Brands conjure up a emotions in a consumer's minds even before he sees the product on shelf. Today brands have become so entwined with the product that if a product is doing well then it must be the brand which is at fault.Today if a product fails the brand falters too.
Recently i read a book "Brand Failures:The truth about the 100 Biggesst Brand Failures of All times". Its a really good book for marketing guys. I have posted two examples where big brands have failed either because they didn't really understand the consumer's perception about the brand and making the worst possible mistake of cloning it(Coca-Cola) or by not analyzing the market properly(as in Kellogg's case).

1 New Coke
Think of a brand success story, and you may well think of Coca-Cola. Indeed,
with nearly 1 billion Coca-Cola drinks sold every single day, it is the world’s
most recognized brand.
Yet in 1985 the Coca-Cola Company decided to terminate its most
popular soft drink and replace it with a formula it would market as New
Coke. To understand why this potentially disastrous decision was made, it is
necessary to appreciate what was happening in the soft drinks marketplace.
In particular, we must take a closer look at the growing competition between
Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola in the years and even decades prior to the launch
of New Coke.
The relationship between the arch-rivals had not been a healthy one.
Although marketing experts have believed for a long time that the competition
between the two companies had made consumers more cola-conscious,
the firms themselves rarely saw it like that. Indeed, the Coca-Cola company
had even fought Pepsi-Cola in a legal battle over the use of the word ‘cola’ in
its name, and lost.
Outside the courts though, Coca-Cola had always been ahead. Shortly
after World War II, Time magazine was already celebrating Coke’s ‘peaceful
near-conquest of the world.’ In the late 1950s, Coke outsold Pepsi by a ratio
of more than five to one. However, during the next decade Pepsi repositioned
itself as a youth brand.
This strategy was a risky one as it meant sacrificing its older customers to

Coca-Cola, but ultimately it proved successful. By narrowing its focus, Pepsi

was able to position its brand against the old and classic image of its
competitor. As it became increasingly seen as ‘the drink of youth’ Pepsi
managed to narrow the gap.
In the 1970s, Coke’s chief rival raised the stakes even further by introducing
the Pepsi Challenge – testing consumers blind on the difference
between its own brand and ‘the real thing’. To the horror of Coca-Cola’s longstanding
company president, Robert Woodruff, most of those who participated
preferred Pepsi’s sweeter formula.
In the 1980s Pepsi continued its offensive, taking the Pepsi Challenge
around the globe and heralding the arrival of the ‘Pepsi Generation’. It also
signed up celebrities likely to appeal to its target market such as Don Johnson
and Michael Jackson (this tactic has survived into the new millennium, with
figures like Britney Spears and Robbie Williams providing more recent
endorsements).
By the time Roberto Goizueta became chairman in 1981, Coke’s number
one status was starting to look vulnerable. It was losing market share not only
to Pepsi but also to some of the drinks produced by the Coca-Cola company
itself, such as Fanta and Sprite. In particular the runaway success of Diet Coke
was a double-edged sword, as it helped to shrink the sugar cola market. In
1983, the year Diet Coke moved into the number three position behind
standard Coke and Pepsi, Coke’s market share had slipped to an all-time low
of just under 24 per cent.
Something clearly had to be done to secure Coke’s supremacy. Goizueta’s
first response to the ‘Pepsi Challenge’ phenomenon was to launch an
advertising campaign in 1984, praising Coke for being less sweet than Pepsi.
The television ads were fronted by Bill Cosby, at that time one of the most
familiar faces on the planet, and clearly someone who was too old to be part
of the Pepsi Generation.
The impact of such efforts to set Coca-Cola apart from its rival was limited.
Coke’s share of the market remained the same while Pepsi was catching up.
Another worry was that when shoppers had the choice, such as in their local
supermarket, they tended to plump for Pepsi. It was only Coke’s more
effective distribution which kept it ahead. For instance, there were still
considerably more vending machines selling Coke than Pepsi.
Even so, there was no getting away from the fact that despite the proliferation
of soft drink brands, Pepsi was winning new customers. Having already
lost on taste, the last thing Coca-Cola could afford was to lose its number
one status.
The problem, as Coca-Cola perceived it, came down to the product itself.
As the Pepsi Challenge had highlighted millions of times over, Coke could
always be defeated when it came down to taste. This seemed to be confirmed
by the success of Diet Coke which was closer to Pepsi in terms of flavour.
So in what must have been seen as a logical step, Coca-Cola started
working on a new formula. A year later they had arrived at New Coke.
Having produced its new formula, the Atlanta-based company conducted
200,000 taste tests to see how it fared. The results were overwhelming. Not
only did it taste better than the original, but people preferred it to Pepsi-Cola
as well.
However, if Coca-Cola was to stay ahead of Pepsi-Cola it couldn’t have two
directly competing products on the shelves at the same time. It therefore
decided to scrap the original Coca-Cola and introduced New Coke in its
place.
The trouble was that the Coca-Cola company had severely underestimated
the power of its first brand. As soon as the decision was announced, a large
percentage of the US population immediately decided to boycott the new
product. On 23 April 1985 New Coke was introduced and a few days later
the production of original Coke was stopped. This joint decision has since
been referred to as ‘the biggest marketing blunder of all time’. Sales of New
Coke were low and public outrage was high at the fact that the original was
no longer available.
It soon became clear that Coca-Cola had little choice but to bring back its
original brand and formula. ‘We have heard you,’ said Goizueta at a press
conference on 11 July 1985. He then left it to the company’s chief operating
officer Donald Keough to announce the return of the product.
Keough admitted:
The simple fact is that all the time and money and skill poured into
consumer research on the new Coca-Cola could not measure or reveal
the deep and abiding emotional attachment to original Coca-Cola felt
by so many people. The passion for original Coca-Cola – and that is
the word for it, passion – was something that caught us by surprise. It
is a wonderful American mystery, a lovely American enigma, and you
cannot measure it any more than you can measure love, pride or
patriotism.
In other words, Coca-Cola had learnt that marketing is about much more
than the product itself. The majority of the tests had been carried out blind,
and therefore taste was the only factor under assessment. The company had
finally taken Pepsi’s bait and, in doing so, conceded its key brand asset:
originality.
When Coca-Cola was launched in the 1880s it was the only product in
the market. As such, it invented a new category and the brand name became
the name of the product itself. Throughout most of the last century, Coca-
Cola capitalized on its ‘original’ status in various advertising campaigns. In
1942, magazine adverts appeared across the United States declaring: ‘The
only thing like Coca-Cola is Coca-Cola itself. It’s the real thing.’
By launching New Coke, Coca-Cola was therefore contradicting its
previous marketing efforts. Its central product hadn’t been called new since
the very first advert appeared in the Atlanta Journal in 1886, billing Coca-
Cola as ‘The New Pop Soda Fountain Drink, containing the properties of
the wonderful Coca-plant and the famous Cola nuts.’
In 1985, a century after the product launched, the last word people
associated with Coca-Cola was ‘new’. This was the company with more
allusions to US heritage than any other. Fifty years previously, the Pulitzer
Prize winning editor of a Kansas newspaper, William Allen White had
referred to the soft drink as the ‘sublimated essence of all America stands for
– a decent thing, honestly made, universally distributed, conscientiously
improved with the years.’ Coca-Cola had even been involved with the history
of US space travel, famously greeting Apollo astronauts with a sign reading
‘Welcome back to earth, home of Coca-Cola.’
To confine the brand’s significance to a question of taste was therefore
completely misguided. As with many big brands, the representation was
more significant than the thing represented, and if any soft drink represented
‘new’ it was Pepsi, not Coca-Cola (even though Pepsi is a mere decade
younger).
If you tell the world you have the ‘real thing’ you cannot then come up with
a ‘new real thing’. To borrow the comparison of marketing guru Al Ries it’s
‘like introducing a New God’. This contradictory marketing message was
accentuated by the fact that, since 1982, Coke’s strap line had been ‘Coke is
it’. Now it was telling consumers that they had got it wrong, as if they had
discovered Coke wasn’t it, but rather New Coke was instead.
So despite the tremendous amount of hype which surrounded the launch
of New Coke (one estimate puts the value of New Coke’s free publicity at
over US $10 million), it was destined to fail. Although Coca-Cola’s market
researchers knew enough about branding to understand that consumers
would go with their brand preference if the taste tests weren’t blind, they
failed to make the connection that these brand preferences would still exist
once the product was launched.
Pepsi was, perhaps unsurprisingly, the first to recognize Coca-Cola’s
mistake. Within weeks of the launch, it ran a TV ad with an old man sitting
on a park bench, staring at the can in his hand. ‘They changed my Coke,’ he
said, clearly distressed. ‘I can’t believe it.’
However, when Coca-Cola relaunched its original coke, redubbed ‘Classic
Coke’ for the US market, the media interest swung back in the brand’s favour.
It was considered a significant enough event to warrant a newsflash on ABC
News and other US networks. Within months Coke had returned to the
number one spot and New Coke had all but faded away.
Ironically, through the brand failure of New Coke loyalty to ‘the real thing’
intensified. In fact, certain conspiracy theorists have even gone so far as to
say the whole thing had been planned as a deliberate marketing ploy to
reaffirm public affection for Coca-Cola. After all, what better way to make
someone appreciate the value of your global brand than to withdraw it
completely?
Of course, Coca-Cola has denied that this was the company’s intention.
‘Some critics will say Coca-Cola made a marketing mistake, some cynics will
say that we planned the whole thing,’ said Donald Keough at the time. ‘The
truth is we are not that dumb, and we are not that smart.’ But viewed in the
context of its competition with Pepsi, the decision to launch New Coke was
understandable. For years, Pepsi’s key weapon had been the taste of its
product. By launching New Coke, the Coca-Cola company clearly hoped to
weaken its main rival’s marketing offensive.
So what was Pepsi’s verdict on the whole episode? In his book, The Other
Guy Blinked, Pepsi’s CEO Roger Enrico believes the error of New Coke
proved to be a valuable lesson for Coca-Cola. ‘I think, by the end of their
nightmare, they figured out who they really are. Caretakers. They can’t
change the taste of their flagship brand. They can’t change its imagery. All
they can do is defend the heritage they nearly abandoned in 1985.’

Lessons from New Coke Concentrate on the brand’s perception.
In the words of Jack Trout, author of Differentiate or Die, ‘marketing is a battle of perceptions, not products’.
Don’t clone your rivals. In creating New Coke, Coca-Cola was reversing its
brand image to overlap with that of Pepsi. The company has made similar
mistakes both before and after, launching Mr Pibb to rival Dr Pepper and
Fruitopia to compete with Snapple.

Feel the love. According to Saatchi and Saatchi’s worldwide chief executiveofficer, Kevin Roberts, successful brands don’t have ‘trademarks’. They
have ‘lovemarks’ instead. In building brand loyalty, companies are also
creating an emotional attachment that often has little to do with the
quality of the product.

Don’t be scared to U-turn. By going back on its decision to scrap original
Coke, the company ended up creating an even stronger bond between the
product and the consumer.

Do the right market research. Despite the thousands of taste tests Coca-Cola
carried out on its new formula, it failed to conduct adequate research into
the public perception of the original brand.

Kellogg’s in India

Kellogg’s is, of course, a mighty brand. Its cereals have been consumed around
the globe more than any of its rivals. Sub-brands such as Corn Flakes, Frosties
and Rice Krispies are the breakfast favourites of millions.
In the late 1980s, the company had reached an all-time peak, commanding
a staggering 40 per cent of the US ready-to-eat market from its cereal
products alone. By that time, Kellogg’s had over 20 plants in 18 countries
world wide, with yearly sales reaching above US $6 billion.
However, in the 1990s Kellogg’s began to struggle. Competition was
getting tougher as its nearest rivals General Mills increased the pressure with
its Cheerios brand. Kellogg’s management team was accused of being
‘unimaginative’, and of ‘spoiling some of the world’s top brands’ in a 1997
article in Fortune magazine.
In core markets such as the United States and the UK, the cereal industry
has been stagnant for over a decade, as there has been little room for growth.
Therefore, from the beginning of the 1990s Kellogg’s looked beyond its
traditional markets in Europe and the United States in search of more cerealeating
consumers. It didn’t take the company too long to decide that India
was a suitable target for Kellogg’s products. After all, here was a country with
over 950 million inhabitants, 250 million of whom were middle class, and
a completely untapped market potential.
In 1994, three years after the barriers to international trade had opened in
India, Kellogg’s decided to invest US $65 million into launching its number
one brand, Corn Flakes. The news was greeted optimistically by Indian
economic experts such as Bhagirat B Merchant, who in 1994 was the director
of the Bombay Stock Exchange. ‘Even if Kellogg’s has only a two percent
market share, at 18 million consumers they will have a larger market than in
the US itself,’ he said at the time.
However, the Indian sub-continent found the whole concept of eating
breakfast cereal a new one. Indeed, the most common way to start the day in
India was with a bowl of hot vegetables. While this meant that Kellogg’s had
few direct competitors it also meant that the company had to promote not
only its product, but also the very idea of eating breakfast cereal in the first
place.
The first sales figures were encouraging, and indicated that breakfast cereal
consumption was on the rise. However, it soon became apparent that many
people had bought Corn Flakes as a one-off, novelty purchase. Even if they
liked the taste, the product was too expensive. A 500-gram box of Corn
Flakes cost a third more than its nearest competitor. However, Kellogg’s
remained unwilling to bow to price pressure and decided to launch other
products in India, without doing any further research of the market. Over
the next few years Indian cereal buyers were introduced to Kellogg’s Wheat
Flakes, Frosties, Rice Flakes, Honey Crunch, All Bran, Special K and Chocos
Chocolate Puffs – none of which have managed to replicate the success they
have encountered in the West.
Furthermore, the company’s attempts to ‘Indianize’ its range have been
disastrous. Its Mazza-branded series of fusion cereals, with flavours such as
mango, coconut and rose, failed to make a lasting impression.
Acknowledging the relative failure of these brands in India, Kellogg’s has
come up with a new strategy to establish the company’s brand equity in the
market. If it can’t sell cereal, it’s going to try and sell biscuits. The news of
this brand extension was covered in depth in the Indian Express newspaper
in 2000:
The company has been looking at alternate product categories to
counter poor off take for its breakfast cereal brands in the Indian
market, say sources. Meanwhile, the Kellogg main stay – breakfast
cereals – has seen frenzied marketing activity from the company’s end.
The idea behind the effort is to establish the Kellogg brand equity in
the market.
‘The company is concentrating on establishing its brand name in the
market irrespective of the off take. The focus is entirely on being present
and visible on the retail shelves with a wide range of products,’ explains
a company dealer in Mumbia.
As per the trade, Kellogg India has disclosed to the dealers its intention
of launching more than one new product onto the market every month
for the next six months.
These rapid-fire launches were supported with extensive ‘below-the-line’
activity, such as consumer offers on half of Kellogg’s cereal boxes. Although
most of the biscuit ranges have so far been a success with children, due in part
to their low price, Kellogg’s is still struggling in the cereal category.
Although the company tried to be more sensitive to the requirements of
the market, through subtle taste alterations, the high price of the cereals
remains a deterrent. According to a study conducted by research firm
PROMAR International, titled ‘The Sub-Continent in Transition: A strategic
assessment of food, beverage, and agribusiness opportunities in India in
2010,’ the price factor will restrict Kellogg’s from further market growth.
‘While Kellogg’s has ushered in a shift in Indian breakfast habits and adapted
its line of cereal flavours to meet the Indian palate, the price of the product
still restricts consumption to urban centres and affluent households,’ the
study reports.
Kellogg’s tough ride in India has not been unique. Here are some further
examples of brands which have managed to misjudge the market:
Mercedes-Benz. In 1995 the German car giant opened a plant in India to
produce its E-class Sedan. The car, which was targeted at the growing ranks
of India’s wealthy middle class, failed to inspire. By 1997, the plant was
using only 10 per cent of its 20,000 car capacity. ‘Indians turned up their
noses at the Sedan – a model older than those sold in Europe,’ reported
Business Week at the time. ‘Now Mercedes has to reassess its mistakes and
start exporting excess cars to Africa and elsewhere.’
Lufthansa. Germany’s Lufthansa airline joined forces with Indian company,
the Modi Group, to launch a new domestic private airline, Modi-
Luft, in 1993. However, three years later ModiLuft had gone bust and
Lufthansa filed a lawsuit against one of the Modi brothers, claiming he
had used funds obtained from the German company in other ventures.
In return, the Modi Group accused Lufthansa of charging too much and
of producing defective planes.
Coca-Cola. The Coca-Cola company understood that distribution was the
key to building a strong Indian brand. It therefore decided to buy out one
of India’s most successful soft drink companies and manufacturers of
popular soda brand Thums Up. However, although this gave Coca-Cola
an instant distribution network, Thums Up remained more popular than
Coke for many years. Most Indians initially thought that the new entry
to the market wasn’t fizzy enough.
Whirlpool. When Whirlpool launched its refrigerators on the Indian
market, it found the market unwilling to buy larger sizes than the standard
165 litres.
MTV. When MTV India was launched, the aim was to bring Western
rock, rap and pop to the sub-continent. Now, however, the music policy
has shifted to accommodate Indian genres such as bhangra.
Domino’s Pizza. Initially, Domino’s Pizza transferred its Western offerings
direct to the Indian market, but the company eventually realized that it
had to bow to local tastes, as Arvind Nair, chief executive officer at
Domino’s Pizza India explains. ‘Initially, our focus was to stay only in
metropolitan areas, but in the last two years we have felt the need to spread
ourselves into “mini metros” and B-category towns. We have also experimented
with our taste options, especially when we went into smaller
towns. We have focused on more regional flavours now,’ he says. As a result
of this change of strategy, Domino’s came up with localized toppings such
as ‘Peppy Paneer’ and ‘Chicken Chettinad’. This move was greeted with
a wry smile from Domino’s main Indian competitor, US Pizza, which was
the first to offer local topping. ‘In 1995, when we offered tandoori chicken
and paneer toppings, some made fun of us saying, why not offer spaghetti
and pasta toppings? The same companies are now offering chole and spicy
masala pizzas,’ says Wahid Berenjian, the managing director for US Pizza.
He told the Hindu newspaper Business Line that US brands such as
Domino’s made the mistake of thinking that US tastes are universal. ‘You
cannot change the taste buds that were developed more than a thousand
years ago,’ he said.
Citibank. When Citibank entered the Indian market, the firm’s aim was
to target only high-income earners. But, in the words of the Business Line
newspaper, Citibank soon realized that ‘in India it makes sense to go the
mass banking way rather than the class banking way.’
One of the reasons why Kellogg’s and these other brands’ passage to India
was not smooth was because they had been blinded by figures. The Indian
population may be verging on 1 billion, but its middle class accounts for only
a quarter of that figure. However, a 1996 survey conducted by the Indian
National Council on Applied Economic Research in Delhi found that the
sub-continent’s ‘consumer class’ numbers are around 100 million people at
the most, and that buying habits and tastes vary greatly between the Indian
regions. After all, India has 17 official languages and six major religions
spread throughout 25 states.
As a result, only those companies which are in tune with India’s many
cultural complexities can stand a chance. One of the companies which has
managed to get it right is Unilever. However, the conglomerate has had a
head start on those Western companies which entered the market after 1991.
Indeed, Unilever’s soap and toothpaste products have been available in India
since 1887, when the sub-continent was still the crown jewel of the British
Empire. The secret to Unilever’s longevity in India is distribution. Hindustan
Lever Limited (Unilever’s Indian arm) has products available in a staggering
total of 10 million small shops throughout rural India.
As for Kellogg’s, it remains to be seen whether its move into other product
categories, such as snack food, will be able to help strengthen its brand. The
dilemma that it may face is that if it becomes associated with biscuits rather
than cereals, core products like Corn Flakes could become a marginal part
of the company’s brand identity in India.
‘Kellogg’s is caught in a bind,’ one Indian brand analyst remarked in India’s
Business Line newspaper. ‘It realises that cornflakes can make money only in
the long haul, so it needs a product which will give it some accelerated growth
and the tonnage it is desperately looking for. However, its area of strength
worldwide lies in breakfast cereal and not in the snack food category.’
However, other impartial Indian commentators are more optimistic about
Kellogg’s future prospects within the sub-continent. Among those who
believe Kellogg’s will eventually succeed is Jagdeep Kapoor, the managing
director of Indian marketing firm Samiska Marketing Consultants. ‘With
every product offering, Kellogg’s chances improve based on its learning in the
Indian market,’ he says.
Only time will tell.

Lessons from Kellogg’s
Do your homework. Why did Kellogg’s cereals have a tough ride in India?
‘It was just clumsy cultural homework,’ says Titoo Ahluwalia, chairman
of market research company ORG MARG in Bombay.
Don’t underestimate local competitors. Although Indian brands were worried
they would struggle against a new wave of foreign competition following
the market opening of 1991, they were wrong. ‘Multinational corporations
must not start with the assumption that India is a barren field,’ said
C K Prahalad, business professor at the University of Michigan, in a
Business Week article. ‘The trick is not to be too big.’
Remember that square pegs don’t fit into round holes. When Kellogg’s first
launched Corn Flakes in India it was essentially launching a Western
product attempting to appeal to Indian tastes. Globalization may be an
increasing trend, but regional identities, customs and tastes are as distinct
as ever. It may be easy for brand managers of global brands to view the
world as homogenous, where consumer demands are all the same, but the
reality is rather different. ‘There is a bigger opportunity in localizing your
offerings and the smarter companies are realizing this,’ says Ramanujan
Sridhar, chief executive officer at Indian marketing and advertising
consultancy firm Brand Comm.
Don’t try and make consumers strangers to their culture. ‘The rules are very
clear,’ says Wahid Berenjian, the managing director for US Pizza (which
has successfully launched a range of pizzas with Indian toppings) in an
article for the Hindu newspaper, Business Line. ‘You can alienate me a bit
from my culture, but you cannot make me a stranger to my culture. The
society is much stronger than any company or product.’ Brands who want
to succeed in India and other culturally distinct markets need to remember
this.

Know more about SP Jain Interview

2008-01-18T22:40:00.001-08:00

Why and how does SP Jain give interview calls before CAT?
By Apurv Pandit and Sonam Vij
Published: August 17, 2006
Print Email

Mumbai's SP Jain Institute of Management and Research (SPJIMR) Joint Director Prof Sunil Rai answers this and more in a PaGaLGuY.com exclusive interview.

SP Jain is known to send GD-PI calls to candidates even before the CAT is held. Why and how is it done?

We do respect the CAT, which is an entry-level examination for the MBA education. However, how can you have the full idea about somebody’s potential using a two hour test? So we have frameworks using which we can spend more time in evaluating a candidate. How we do it is we use various criteria like good continuous education, versatility and good value system, work experience and more. We look at the candidates’ application forms and categorize them then on S, A, B and C grades. S is Super, A is Good, B is Satisfactory and so on.

So in the good continuous education criterion, all three of your class X, XII and graduation degree should have had good scores and from reputed institutions. If two school education boards and one university have seen you as a consistent performer, for instance if you have 90 in tenth and twelfth and a distinction in your college and that too from reputed schools and college, then we give you an S. Or if you have done well but not from a reputed college then we give you an A.

Second is what is called versatility and a good value system. If you have been put through some adversities in life, it makes you a better suited person. So a single parent child for example, who has seen a single mother or father struggle in life and has himself or herself struggled to complete education, has proved himself or herself in a challenging situation. Then there is the family background parameter where things like honesty are valued, for instance somebody’s father is an academician or the mother is a government servant or the grandfather was a freedom fighter, then you know the person has definitely picked up a good value system. So again, we rate this criterion on S, A, B or C. Same for quality of work experience.

Now that we have so many criteria, we prioritize. To get an interview call you have to be an S at least in one criterion. So if you are a person who plays hockey for the Indian team or have an NCC certificate you have an S. So even you have an academic A, because of this S you will get an interview call. Or if you are an academic S but you are a B in the versatility criterion you’ll get the call. But in any case, you should not be below B in anything and you should be an S in at least one thing. I think it is a very good set (of candidates) we get out of such combinations.

So once we have this shortlist, we interview them. After the CAT results are out, we use their CAT performance to sort this list. Now all the people who are eligible for SP Jain will be sorted in the descending order of their CAT performance. So the CAT is taken as a criterion but not as the primary criterion. You have proved yourself in academics, you have proved yourself in life, you are a good person and you also do well in a test. That is what we are looking at. I think it is the right way of looking at admissions. So you can be an ace in CAT but if you are not a good human being then we don’t need you.

What are the criteria for the interview calls that you send after the CAT results are out?

CAT is also a criterion. If you are an S in CAT then you receive a call. However there is weightage given to the rest of the parameters too, so even if you are a CAT S but you are not at least an A in academics, you will not make it to SP Jain.

How much time do you spend on each candidate’s CV before you take a call on whether he or she is an S or A or B in a parameter?

We have parameterized some things in the online application stage. We already have a list of reputed colleges on our server so when your percentage and college name is selected by you the computer program can pick it up and grade you accordingly.

So the computer already has a database of the good colleges?

Yes, which we keep on updating using the UGC list, the state department, student feedback and from our own experience. So for most of the parameters it is a computer-generated thing. But of course for the value system criterion, we have to manually search the forms.

How many people are roughly short listed for interview in the stage before CAT?

We receive about 15,000 applications each year. We generally shortlist about 60 pc of our total shortlist for the interview stage before the CAT takes place.

And how many of this 60 pc usually get a final call?

A proportionate number.

Can you tell us the dynamics of the two-stage group interview process that SP Jain follows?

There are two panels, which test you in a group interview. It’s about how you perform in a team. If you combine me and him with her and if you are targeting a business and the three of us don’t make a good team then the thing doesn’t happen. Therefore you should know how to perform in a team. That’s why we have a group interview concept.

There are two interview panels that see you. So out of panel A and panel B if both rate you as an S then you are through. But if Panel A says you are an S and Panel B says you are a C then there is a problem. The two panels then discuss about it and you are graded later. Sometimes there is a re-interview in which the same panels sit together or we offer it to a third panel because it is basically a judgmental decision.

How does SP Jain treat work experience before CAT?

We have four streams and of them for the marketing and finance there is no work experience criterion. Even with low work experience or no work experience, if you are excellent in studies and CAT you will still get a call for marketing and finance. Do well in the interview you will get final admission for marketing and finance. But for information management and operations experience is a must. We do not like to take anybody with less than one and a half or two years work experience. The students have to finalize their specialization at the time of applying. We believe that one needs to be focused about what he wants to do later.

How good is the judgment of students in selecting their specialization given that many of them have never worked fulltime before?

As far as marketing and finance is concerned I give it to them, their judgment is fairly good because the youth today is able to make out where they would fit in. Generally outgoing people with good communication skills, who like traveling and meeting people, are the ones who usually choose marketing. People with affinity to numbers take up finance. If people wish to change their specialization after a year they can definitely do that but they have to debate it out with us. The change should be a decision arrived out of logic and not out of frustration of not doing well. The decision should be informed and intelligently taken and not an impulsive decision. It shouldn’t be that your pal is taking finance so you also plan to change your specialization to finance.

SP Jain also asks for SOPs...

This is to check the value system of the people as well as know certain individual traits. For example a person may perform better in teams, he maybe a team player. So I ask him to write three or four of his experiences. However smart the person maybe and whatever coaching classes he must have been through, we are capable to find out the truth and make out the differences.

The SP Jain website mentions about two one-year courses… one is the EMBA and the other is PGDM. How are the two different?

The EMBA or Executive MBA is actually a one and a half year course. The difference between the two courses is that the executive MBA is for working professionals who have not left their jobs. They only come to campus for nine days in three months. In those nine days you are totally with us but the rest of the three months you remain in touch with us online on a weekly and fortnightly basis. Submit your assignments checked by your mentor in your work place to the in-house guide. That way you remain in touch six times in one and a half years. The one year PGDM on the other hand is for working professionals with high experience who have left their jobs to pursue this course.

How does your PGDM compare to ISB’s one year programme?

They are two different products. ISB’s programme is a general MBA whereas ours is a focused MBA. We are firstly focusing on information management in the operational domain and secondly the student focuses on the role he would like to take up. We customize the training according to the role each student wants to do

You have an Entrepreneurship Cell in your campus. Can you tell us how it works?

Every manager has to perform three different functions: that of a leader, a manager and an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurship makes a manager risk-taking, innovative and experimental and that is what is required in fast pace business of today. No risk, no gains. Time will tell how many will actually become entrepreneurs. We just started with the Cell last year. We have also started a program and the first batch is on. Sixteen of them will become entrepreneurs already in some time. I am expecting more and more students to take it up because more ideas are coming up.

Does S P Jain help these students in getting funds for their entrepreneurial ventures?

We have faculty who have experience in the industry, who have worked in their field and now come to SP Jain. We follow the practioners method, like how a doctor is taught by another doctor. Have you seen a surgeon teaching another surgeon who has never performed a single operation? Same is the case here. How can a professor teach students marketing if he hasn’t sold a single soap? Our entire marketing faculty has once been a part of industry for at least five to ten years. Therefore we have practioners on the faculty board including our own Dean. Therefore our students get excellent in-house consulting for auditing of ideas. Were making SP Jain a very good place for incubation of ideas.

MBA calling: How to prepare for the personal interview

2008-01-18T22:20:00.000-08:00

Though there is no dearth of articles on interview etiquette, there is an actual shortage of good articles on the most crucial factor in an interview -- the interviewer's questions and your answers. Many problems candidates have include nervousness and stammering in an interview, which is directly related to the candidate's unfamiliarity with the questions and a general lack of preparation.

TCYonline.com experts present for the readers of Rediff.com, a few of the most commonly asked interview questions. There are no ready-made answers to the questions, instead, the attempt is to try to help you arrive at the correct answer yourself, so that you sound natural and coherent in an interview. Ultimately, an interview is a mirror to see your inner self and a subjective, specific and honest presentation is the key to success.

Q. Tell me some thing about yourself.
This is how most interviews begin and this is one question you cannot afford to be unprepared for.

To frame a good answer it is always helpful to know what is it that the interviewer wants to know about you. An interviewer would like to know.

~ Your educational background
~ Your work experience, if any
~ Your strengths and achievements
~ About your family background
~ About where you are coming from academically, professionally

You should be short and crisp about all the points mentioned above. If the interviewer needs an elaboration s/he will ask you.

MBA calling: How I aced my personal interview

Q. Why do you want to join this institute?
This is one question you should answer honestly and pragmatically. Ideally you should choose an institute based on certain criteria. Such as

~ Ranking/ placements
~ Courses offered
~ Fee
~ Location

It is good to do a little research on the institute, its placements and about certain specialisation(s) it may be known for. An informed analysis of the institute can convince the interviewer that you are sincerely interested. It also helps you in identifying parameters critical for you while choosing the particular institute.

Q. Which other institutes have you applied to?
This is a question that is very much linked to the previous question. For example, if you say that you had chosen IRMA because you have a flair for Rural Marketing and while answering this question you don't mention the name of other institutes known to offer quality course in Rural Marketing you are in trouble. So these two questions are to be prepared simultaneously avoiding conflicts in answers.

Q. How will you add value to this institute if you make it through?
This is an opportunity to showcase your strengths but remember it is essential that your strengths should be supported by related achievements.

Your background and circumstances can also be your strengths and can be used as equally important points in supporting your answer.

Remember, an achievement doesn't necessarily mean a prize. It can also be your successfully coming out of a crisis situation or you managing to run a small project with your friends.

Q. What do you consider your biggest failure?
CAUTION: This is not an opportunity to pour out your darkest secrets. This is a question that is best played down. For example, if you are overweight, you may mention -- "I have been trying to shed weight for the last few years but couldn't do it still." The answer should be framed so that it does not reflect badly on your career thus far, or your future career.

Another way of answering would be a smart statement: "I have never allowed failure to drag me down. I just got up, took my lesson and picked my way forward." Here it would help to have a certain experience picked out.

Q. Why have you chosen this career?
This is an area where a mature and realistic answer is expected. People choose their career based on several reasons, such as:

~ What is your aptitude?
~ What kind of a social, professional and personal environment do you desire?
~ What is your background and achievements?
~ What motivates you?
~ What activities do you enjoy?

Q. What is the last book you read?
Many experts would tell you that you should know the ins and out of the books and everything about the author and his writing style. If you know these facts, it can't hurt, but if you are not the kind of a person who would research the background and other facts about books, but read for fun, it is okay to mention it. The only thing is that your answer should be natural, convincing and rational.

Group discussions: Myths demystified

For example, if the interviewer asks you for more detail about the author you may just reply.

"I'm sorry but I haven't read much about the author. But I liked this book because..."

Q. How will your contribute to this campus if we select you?
This is a question that directly relates to your strengths and aspiration. Take this as an opportunity to showcase the various qualities that you possess which may benefit the college, academically, culturally or in any other way.

Q. Where do you see yourself 10 years from now?
This is not when you start throwing in fancy designations. Instead, concentrate on the kind of roles people in those designations are expected to play. If the question specifically asks for your professional goals then stick to it, otherwise it is a good idea to balance it with your personal goals.

Q. Who is your role model?
Your role model can be anyone � a public figure or even someone from your family. It is a good idea to know a lot about the person you would make your role model. It is important to focus on the qualities that inspire you and how you try to inculcate those qualities in yourself. It is always important to tell why s/he is different from her/his peers.

Q. Do your have any questions for me?
"No" would be a bad answer. It is good to have a few questions that relate to the academic and cultural environment of the institution. This will show your enthusiasm.

In a nutshell, an interview just analyses how balanced and rational you are. So, just be yourself! Preparing yourself for the questions listed above will give you the confidence to handle even unexpected questions. You should ideally write down your answer to these questions (but please don't try to mug up answers you think would be 'ideal') and practice giving interviews along these lines with a friend.

Brangelina in India..

2008-01-11T00:46:00.000-08:00

In Pune...

I sometimes pity these guys!!

Madonna in Mumbai

2008-01-11T00:38:00.000-08:00

The New Tata Nano...

2008-01-10T09:48:00.000-08:00

The Tata Nano Launch

Following is an excerpt from an interview with Ratan Tata...

Q: If one would really start at the very beginning, what really was the trigger for the idea?

Basically, just as an Indian, you know, I would be as concerned of my-self as one of the rickshaw pullers in Calcutta running with a rickshaw behind with two people sitting back. It bothered me. My mind will start thinking: Can we put a bicycle there? The same thing bothers me when I visit a plant also. The workers are bending over when the work piece should be raised or maybe they should sit in a pit or what-ever. Because I think human fatigue is something that affects safety.

So in this particular case, you could not help but notice that there were three or four family members on a scooter, the kid standing in the front, the guy driving the scooter and the wife sitting side saddle holding a little kid. And when you're driving a car, you certainly say, Oh my god, be careful, they may slip. Add to that slippery roads and night time too. Any of these reasons can be dangerous for transport. That does not mean that the scooter should not exist because scooters are an evolution of bicycles and it is all the path of prosperity.

And this seemed like a dangerous form of transport. So, I, to be frank if I might go through the process, I asked myself, what if you put two wheels on the back that will give greater stability? If you build a bar over the top could you save the occupant? I will stop there and come back.

Last year, to my surprise I found that BMW had produced a scooter with the same bars that I had thought about with rubber bumpers on the side so that if they (the riders) fell they wouldn't hurt themselves and the seat there had a seatbelt. And I thought, that's exactly what I had thought about. The fact was that BMW had put this out though it was not successful and they had withdrawn it. But, someone else had also thought of the same thing. It had only two wheels not three.

So, I set about thinking, can we make a four wheel vehicle from scooter parts initially and I, in fact, addressed an Automotive Component Manufacturers' Association (ACMA) meeting saying that can we all get together produce an Asian peoples' car. To this I never got very much response. The idea was a really low cost car that Malaysia, Indonesia and India could come together to produce jointly.

We could produce one part, they could produce another part, and each one would exchange and have the rights. In fact, even for the Indica, I went to ACMA. I said can we have an Indian car because no car has been designed in India. That time I was actually criticised. This time I had no response. So, in this particular case I had no response. In fact, the person who showed some encouragement was Brij Mohan Munjal, but we never really took it further.

And then we found that scooter parts were probably a real limitation. So we changed tack and we said let's take a clean sheet of paper and start thinking and conceiving a car. Why a clean sheet of paper? Because we thought that if we had to do something that was different, then we probably didn't want to have a legacy in any way or form and so we thought we should look at everything from scratch. And, initially I thought we could even have a car made from engineering plastics.

But we found that several of these concepts do not lend themselves to either cost or volume manufacturing and have had to move away from that to a more conventional kind of car. So, that led us to configure a small car which would be not a three wheeler but four wheels. It would be a car, a full-fledged car and we started again in an evolutionary manner and we thought, and if I might say so, it really started with being a four wheel rural car.

Do we have rolled up plastic curtains instead of windows? Do we have openings like auto rickshaws have instead of doors or do we have a safety bar? As we went on, we had many early concepts that went that kind of way till we finally decided that the market does not want a half car. The market wants a car.

And if we want to build a peoples' car, it should be a car and not something that people would say, Ah! That's just a scooter with four wheels or an auto rickshaw with four wheels or not really a car and I was reminded of a very interesting concept that Chrysler did many years ago when they developed an Asian car. It was a plastic car and for those who may not know or remember, it was one piece, the whole car from front bumper to back bumper, moulded in one piece of plastic, half of it and the other half. And it was welded together to make the whole car.

The most expensive part of any manufacturing unit is the paint shop. So this car with pigmentation with plastic parts, you didn't have to paint it, but no one liked the car because, in my view (I drove the car) it was very nice, but people wanted a real car and not something that someone would say was not a car, this is half-a-car or three-fourths of a car.

So, with that kind of experience in mind, we decided we would do a car that would really pare the cost of a fair car. It has obviously been a long journey. It has been a longer journey than it should have been. I think we have easily taken two years or 18 months more than it should have been.

A Bigger Brand Idea: SRK or Aamir?

2008-01-10T07:49:00.000-08:00

With both Taare Zameen Par and Om Shanti Om doing well at the box office, a new debate is ensuing the Indian audiences' and brand management team's minds as to who is a bigger brand-SRK or Aamir.

SRK ,with his latest release which he himself,i think, considers not to be a master-piece or for that matter a well scripted movie, is surely having the last laughs . While others need to have good scripts and seasoned actors to achieve success at the box-office, SRK has done it without a good script or actors.Call it s great marketing campaign or anything else but no one can deny he's the King of Bollywood!

Aamir on the other hand has matured as a actor. His recent movies are not your run of the mill movies. Whether it's Lagaan,RDB or TZP he broken new grounds with each movie. And Aamir consistently produces quality movies year after year.

So who is bigger brand.Below is an article from ET. Lets read...

SRK impact visible beyond films

Partha Sinha
Chief Strategy Officer, Publicis
South & South-East Asia

A ‘brand idea’ becomes big when it starts to create an impact beyond the category it operates in. Shah Rukh as an idea impacts much beyond his films. The genesis of brand Shah Rukh lies in the way mainstream urban youth of India started to view themselves. Focused yet happy-go-lucky, politically incorrect, not 100% perfect but at ease with their imperfection and most importantly increasingly recognized as the centerpiece of the society. That was the birth of ‘Rahul’.

Due credit should go to the brand manager Karan Johar for crafting the brand and sustaining it. But ‘Rahul’ was the most marked arrival of brand Shah Rukh. He may have acted in blockbuster movies before that but Rahul made him a strongly identifiable social force. Unlike Aamir, you consume Shah Rukh as Shah Rukh in every movie he acts in. You consume a certain sense of optimism, you consume a disarming charm, you consume a sense of self-confidence. In other words, through brand Shah Rukh, you every time end up consuming the spirit of mainstream urban youth of today’s India.

Well, Rahul has undergone changes –– in brand management cliché ‘the brand has evolved’. There’s a change in the brand management team as well –– Farah Khan has joined the team. But somewhere the core of real urban youth has remained unchanged. In the evolved avatar, brand Shah Rukh has acquired some other traits which are extremely identifiable –– internationally competitive, comfort with global citizenship, the new-found confidence of reverse colonisation etc. In many ways, brand Shah Rukh keeps on reflecting the deeper motivations of today’s young India and the youthisation attempt rest of the country is going through.

The impact of the brand idea Shah Rukh comes alive in the way KBC 2 got reinterpreted. From the awe-inspiring, shudh-hindi speaking, patriarchal Amitabh the show became comfortable, Hinglish speaking and an active encouragement for the participants to go for the biggie. That’s the impact of youthasiation in the society. There’s an active encouragement to go for any goal and brand Shah Rukh embodies the spirit. Shah Rukh doesn’t have a trademark hairstyle, he doesn’t have a trademark voice––the typical things that used to create fan following.

Ask anyone, they can’t pinpoint any reason why they like Shah Rukh. Some will say his dimpled smile, others will say his personality. This actually makes me believe that what people are interested in is the idea and myth of Shah Rukh rather than the physicality of Shah Rukh.

Aamir is the biggest brand idea

Prathap Suthan
National Creative Director, Cheil Worldwide, SW Asia

Aamir Khan is the big, bigger and the biggest brand idea. No questions. Let me give you the full alphabetic Monty. Tried, tested and effective.

Ability: Aamir can act––for brands, and not for himself. SRK unfortunately cannot assume a brand’s genes. He overpowers every brand, and keeps cloning himself. Branding: Something about Aamir reassures me that the brand will come first. Bigger than him.

Communication: Aamir effortlessly connects and touches people every time. It’s a craft that amplifies brands. Dexterity: Aamir can bring alive any advertising character. That’s because he also knows a brand isn’t a stereotype. Sadly, SRK only delivers repetition. Empathy: As consumers warm up more to Aamir, brands get to yank more heartstrings and purse strings.

Friendliness: Aamir effectively removes barriers, while Shah Rukh inadvertently builds them. Consumers must get intimate with brands, not be intimidated. Grace: Aamir is elegance at work. Not sculpted artificiality. Honesty: Aamir is genuine and trustworthy. Not a Botox spectacle. Intensity: As relationships are cardiac, consumers will see a brand’s sincerity in Aamir’s depth. Jest: Aamir has a wonderful lighter side. People love someone who can laugh at himself.

Knowledge: Aamir has grey cells in abundance as most brands hate brawn overdose. Leadership: He redefines benchmarks with every film, and so can he with brands. Machoness: Aamir isn’t about mean moustaches, he overtakes SRK with intelligent muscle. Newness: Aamir refreshes. SRK repeats. Simple. Originality: With constant newness, Aamir brings freshness to advertising.

Patriotism: With unbridled Indianess, Aamir keeps rousing the nation.Quality: Aamir also brings a rare uncommonness. Much like many brands, I don’t ache for mass mediocrity. Respect: As acclaimed by critics, only Aamir can transfer his standing to brands. Softness: As all brands don’t need six packs, Aamir makes brands warmer. Talent: Aamir is multi-dimensional, multi-persona. SRK is monochromatic. How many more dancing brands do you need? Uniqueness. Instead of a rampant SRK, Aamir is as special as any brand.

Value: Carefully under exposed as he is, Aamir is full bang for the advertising buck. Wisdom: Aamir’s marketing acumen and creative judgment are legendary –– right up to the Oscars. X Factor: Aamir is the multiplication factor. Youth: Aamir’s zest defines India’s bristling youth. Zeal. And as brands need to evolve, only Aamir brings that advertising resolve. So who’s the bigger brand idea? Aamir who can become your brand, or Shah Rukh who can only be his own brand?

And that’s why he is a big brand idea. Amitabh’s Vijay was the voice of the marginalised section of the society. Shah Rukh’s Rahul is the voice of the mainstream youth. The youth which has got well accepted in the society and is driving things forward. Rahul undoubtedly is the biggest social brand idea post Vijay.

VJTI Boys Crack the Cat..

2008-01-08T20:26:00.000-08:00

Heres the Times Of India's 9th Jan's article on CAT. In the photo posted below are guys from electronics whom i shared classes with and guys who make VJTI and me proud....Congo to them..One more thing 11 students from VJTI received IIM calls.Truly remarkable!!

COOL CATS OUT OF THE BAG

Mumbai Lad Is One Of 10-Odd Students Across The Country To Top One Of The Toughest Indian Entrance Exams

Hemali Chhapia | TNN

Mumbai: Gourav Bhattacharya of Mumbai has shown what it takes to bell the CAT. He — like only 10-odd other management aspirants all over India — has scored a 100 percentile in the entrance examination to the Indian Institutes of Management (this means that Bhattacharya and the others like him have scored better than everyone else, topping the exam).
On Tuesday, as the Common Admission Test score flashed on his cellphone, Bhattacharya allowed himself a smile. A few other Mumbaikars, who scored above 99 percentile, were smiling along with him but it was Bhattacharya’s feat that was being talked about across campuses. Management coaching centre TIME (Mumbai) director ARKS Srinivas confirmed Bhattacharya was among the 10-odd students across India who scored 100 percentile.
What makes Bhattacharya’s feat even more creditable is the fact that the metallurgical engineering and material science student at the Indian Institute of Technology-Bombay has achieved it without any coaching. “I did not even study specifically for CAT,’’ the 21-year-old, who scored 99.9 percentile in Maths and Data Interpretation and 98.9 in the Verbal Ability section, said. So was it luck? “I took the MBA mock tests and
those helped me a lot,’’ he said. Bhattacharya recently took his GRE, too, and scored an impressive 1590 out of 1600.
Bhattacharya does not feel that management studies are only for engineers. “A management degree lets a company offer a wide range of job profiles to the candidate,’’ he said. This, actually, is one question IIMs ask every engineer they short-list in the personal interview round. So one could say Bhattacharya is half-prepared for his next round. But the 21-year-old was not allowing worries about the group discussion and personal interview to cloud his day.
Following Bhattacharya closely were Amogh Bhole and Srikanth Viswanathan from the electronics engineering department of the Veermata Jijabai Technological Institute (VJTI); they scored 99.96 percentile and 99.5 percentile, respectively. Though both registered themselves with a coaching institute, it helped them little, they claimed. “I feel CAT does not involve learning. You basically need to align how you think,’’ Viswanathan said. Both of them, like many others at VJTI, took the exam in the middle of their final-year semester exam. But they were confident of success.
Ashish Makhija, who scored 99.88 percentile, was another confident IIM aspirant who started preparing for the group discussion and personal interview as soon as the written exams were over. A jubilant Makhija trekked to Siddhivinayak temple in the evening on Tuesday. His parents stay in Iran and he stays in the city with his grandmother. “CAT is one exam that requires more smart work than hard work,’’ he felt.
But some felt help from a coaching class would get you started. Ninad Rajpurkar, a student of Career Forum who scored 99.4 percentile, believed that it was “proper mentoring and clarity of concepts’’ that helped him get to his target. “I also feel the practice tests help tremendously,’’ he added.
WHAT NOW
Candidates who have cracked CAT will get couriers from the Indian Institutes of Management, telling them the date and venue of the group discussion.
The IIMs will release the final list of candidates selected to study in these institutes on April 11. THE OTHER ‘CAT’ COLLEGES
124 other institutions also take in students on the basis of CAT scores. Each of these institutes pays
Rs 75,000 to the IIMs plus Rs 100 for a student’s score-card.

A JOB WELL DONE: Srikanth Viswanathan, Ashish Makhija and Amogh Bhole (left to right) chat after getting to know their CAT scores. All three scored more than 99 percentile

Indian Ads..

2008-01-08T20:09:00.001-08:00

Some of the recent indian ads which have captured audiences' attention. The best thing of these ads is that you remember the product these ads were trying to advertise and what they wanted to convey. Their plus point is they dont use any big stars for promotion(maybe IDEA Cellular which has AB).

The Happy Dent Ad

Another Happy Dent Ad....

The Idea Cellular Ad

A sim card company in India called idea, uses villegers and riots among different castes as a theme to sell their product...featuring leading actor of Bollywood called Abhishek as a political leader of that village.

Nike Indian Ad..

Toast to the Seinfeld....

2008-01-03T01:48:00.000-08:00

Heres a toast to the greatest show ever...

Reverse Engineering...

2008-01-01T23:44:00.000-08:00

I am 6 months from graduation and i still dont feel like an engineer. Yes i have two job offers but im scared shit. Deloitte is offering the position of Associate Analyst with a pay of 4.1 lac(not bad!) but the work is totally out of my league. Im an electronics guy with absolutely no knowledge of software. Hey wait im not exactly an expert in my field.Firstly i dunno wat field is? I knew more about electronics 4 years back than i do now.
I feel that i have literally wasted my 4 years at VJTI. But i too share a part of the blame. I have seem to have become overtly complacent with absolutely no planning for the future. Lets see what could I have been able to accomplish:
1. Atleast one prize in a robotics competition.(People used 2 cal me dexter!)
2. GPA above 8.(Its 7.8 at present)
3. Atleast one scholarship.(Shay)
4. Internship.

I had a perfect resume till junior college.People say 10,12 stds dont yeah well they do.

But i am eternal optimist.
I have made some life long friendships something i value the most, i have learnt a lot from my peers. When i leave VJTI i think im gonna miss my class a lot.
So as i look forward to 2008 i see Deloitte playing a major role in my life.My first job.I hope i can survive in Deloitte. I hope they dont throw me out!

Bhagavad Gita

2007-09-04T01:58:00.000-07:00

Here's a verse from Bhagavad Gita(2-47)

कर्मण्येवाधिकारस्ते मा फलेषु कदाचन ।
मा कर्मफलहेतुर्भूर्मा ते सङ्गोऽस्त्वकर्मणि ॥

Your right is to action alone,
Not to its fruits at any time.
Never should they move you to act,
Or be attached to inaction.

Bhagavad Gita shows us the way to true liberation by integrating the mind,the body and soul. Its difficult to understand concepts like universal soul, what is meant by liberation or what exactly is integrating mind,body and soul.

Its requires the reader to think on an all-together different level,to read with an open and unbaised mind keeping his prejudices aside. This requires the reader to go through it several times before he starts to get an inkling as to what the Bhagavad Gita really means.The Bhagavad Gita is open for interpretations and there are several translations available on net.

Its important that the readers understand the depth of its philosophy and integrate it into their consciousness.

Freakonomics At Play

2007-08-20T09:20:00.000-07:00

There was an interesting article in New York times by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner. In a recent move the US Congress raised the bounty on Osama Bin Laden from 20 million to 50 million dollar. This means that the US Congress believes that there is a farmer in Afghanistan or Pakistan who can differentiate between 20 million dollars and 50 million dollars-"20 million no way....50 million i will think about it." is what he will be thinking according to the US Congress.
One more reason this move wont work is because the informant seriously doubts whether he will really get the money, he feels he will have to share his booty with others .

Brillant!

Marigold Sucks, Simpsons Rule and Chak De Rocks

2007-08-20T00:57:00.000-07:00

Cliched,stereotypical-thats Marigold. One of the 'east-meets-west' movie Marigold flounders in every field.Whether its the script,the direction,the sound track every sucks. It tells the same old cliched story-Girl from west meets boy from east,they fall in love. But whats more embarrasing is the way India is portrayed-people with funny accent, cab drivers who are ought to fool you. I hope noone watches this movie-especially people from the west,because this is not how India really is, because this is not the best cross-over movie(it makes Bride and Prejudice and Mistress of Spice look like Citizen Kane in comparision) for that matter the best movie to come out of the Indian stable.
If people want to know the real India, i suggest people watch Chak De India. Chak De is all what modern India is about-bold,aggressive and daring. And if people want to see what Indian film industry is capable of ,watch Gandhi,My Father-one of the best Indian movies ever made. This is probably the only movie about a controversial subject which didnt land in any kind of controversy and partly the reason is that the movie portrayed the character as they were,the movie didnt try to preach,it let the audience decide for themself.
If you want a dose of laughter then The Simpson Movie is the choice for you.Superably made it clicks with the hardcore fans as well as with people who are watching it for the first time. Great going Matt.

Job Satisfaction

2007-08-15T11:18:00.000-07:00

Jobs are not meant to satisfy us. Jobs are not animate things that have knowledge of who we are, what we are seeking and what our special needs could be. You may say that I am just making a philosophical statement. To the contrary, I believe that it is the most practical and rewarding way of looking at many things in a professional career. When I see scores of successful people around me, I believe that their achievements are largely because of such a perspective. It also occurs to me that developing this perspective is eventually beneficial in every way possible.

Let me go back a century and tell you a story. My grandfather was a medical practitioner in the Bihar of 1920s. He had a brood of children who were orphaned due to his untimely death. Two of my uncles had just about finished high school when he moved on. Their older brothers could not afford to send them to college. The two had to be gainfully employed, somehow, as soon as possible. They were taken to Tata Steel, an hour away from where they lived. Tata Steel and the government of Bihar were the only two employers you could think of in a five-hundred mile radius of my uncles’ hometown. The possible work one could get at Tata Steel was that of a technologist-engineer or of a manual worker. So, what could be done with the two boys with their high school qualifications? They were neither fish nor fowl. “Take them to the lab,’’ someone said. A German technician who ran the place was looking for a few hands. The burly German took a hard look at the two. Then he showed them a broom standing at one corner of the lab and asked them to sweep the floor. By the end of day, one of the two just ran away. To him, it was too much to handle. The one who stayed back retired as a chief foreman of Tata Steel. The difference between the two? The one that stayed on was not trying to seek ‘job satisfaction’. Instead, he focussed on satisfying the job.

The more prosperous the industry, the higher the number of people looking for this elusive thing called ‘job satisfaction’. Similarly, the more qualified some people are, the higher is their need for ‘job satisfaction’. Sometimes, it is as elusive as seeking ‘true love’. There are times when we get lucky deservedly or otherwise. But we also get used to it and conclude that it is the responsibility of the organisation to maintain a continuous supply of job satisfaction.

Whenever I think of job satisfaction, I remember all those who have to work at night—policemen, airline pilots, nurses and doctors, ambulance drivers and hotel staff, and of course the sentinel of the snow and the desert and the mountains. Do their jobs ‘satisfy’ these people or do these people satisfy the jobs with which they have been entrusted? Are jobs living things that can ever ‘satisfy’ us?

In the corporate world, like any other place, when we open the bonnet and look under it, we find a whole bunch of tough, dirty but strategic tasks that must get done for the bacon to come home. Sometimes, they are so tough and so dirty that they overshadow the strategic nature of the job. So, all such jobs have to be ‘sold’ to prospective incumbents. More they are sold, less buyers they attract. Often, the man who takes up the job is either a loser who has no other choice, or someone who just views it as a transit camp. For many potentially high-performance individuals, a false sense of survival, desire for glamour or just the need for creature comforts make these jobs undesirable. “I would rather be in Kolkata than be posted to Mungher.’’ “I rather have the corporate planning job than be collecting bad debts.’’ Or, consider this one here: “Give me a cerebral job, I do not enjoy handling transactions...’’

Few of us ever ask the boss to be rewarded with a tough and dirty job. We only look for the ‘plum’ ones. Yet, there are people, who given a tough and dirty job, make it strategic: they transform the job in unbelievable ways. In a typical career span, there must be at least four such solid stints in one’s life to make the person a solid professional. All the great people I know have been in the trenches for much of their lives, and their inventory of bruises outnumber the commendations they have received. The occasional commendations stay on the wall. It is the bruises that these people carry with pride.

-Subroto Bagchi

Inside the Apple's Iphone.

2007-07-19T09:59:00.001-07:00

COMMACK, N.Y. — Semiconductor Insights' Allan Yogasingam waited in line for 12 hours and braved the elements get ahold of the just-released Apple iPhone. He and his intrepid co-workers kept the cameras rolling as they popped the cover and dove inside what is possibly the hottest consumer device on the planet (click icon for video:). The teardown is a follow-up to the company's teardowns of the latest gaming systems (Opportunities abound in nex-gen gaming platforms) and provides insight into what exactly Apple is doing to make a strong entry into the cell phone market.

Approximately 3 million iPhones were released in the United States at 6 pm local time on June 29th. The mass appeal and interest in the iPhone is a combination of Apple marketing, an interesting and interactive user interface, and the ability to integrate iTunes.

"There are phones available in the market that have better functionality than the iPhone, but much like how there were better MP3 players than the iPod, the iPhone really sets itself apart from its competitors with an interactive touch screen and it's integration of iTunes," stated Allan Yogasingam, SI's supply chain manager. "Not to mention a really slick design. The first thing you say when you see an iPhone is, "Cool".

SI's technical marketing manager, Greg Quirk, equates the iPhone in some ways to the Nintendo Wii () in that the technology inside the system is not altogether remarkable, but Nintendo's revolutionary user interface is what set it apart from the Sony's Playstation and Microsoft's Xbox line.

Going inside, "The first thing that strikes us as SI looked at the insides of the iPhone, are the number of Apple branded components," said Quirk. That makes it difficult to discern what parts make up the iPhone. To get inside the chips, SI resorted to decapping, a process that involves immersing the chips in acid to dissolve the outer packaging and then manually scraping away any residual packaging material.

There were three parts with the Apple logo, and another four that seemed to have a numbering scheme similar to Apple's without any discernable manufacturer markings. "The first Apple branded component is the Samsung processor, which is a three stacked die package containing an S5L8900 and two 512 Mbit SRAM dice," said Quirk. While SI has not seen the S5L8900 marking before, it said the numbering conforms to other Samsung processors found in smart phones and PDAs.

(Click on image to enlarge)

The second Apple branded part is the Broadcom BCM5973A. While there is no information available about this part, but SI believes it provides the I/O controller used for the video interface to the touch screen. Philips designs the third part, with markings that start "with something like LPC2221," said Quirk. Further investigation into the component's purpose is ongoing.

Infineon manufactures two of the six remaining unknown parts. Infineon's PMB8876 S-Gold 2 multimedia engine with EDGE functionality provides the iPhone's baseband. The second Infineon part appears to be the GSM RF transceiver. Another component is the National Semiconductor 24-bit RGB display interface serializer. The other components are more difficult to determine, but it appears that one is a Texas Instruments power-management device, another is a multichip package with STMicroelectronics and Peregrine Semiconductor die markings, and the third has no discernable markings aside from the characters "PMA19".

(Click on image to enlarge)

"What is also interesting are the components that are similar between the iPhone and some of the latest iPod models," added Quirk. "Apple is taking what they learned, and redesigning it into their phone. This surely made the design process easier for them, as they are familiar with the components and how to implement them." For example, Samsung's 65-nm 8-Gbyte MLC NAND flash (K9MCG08U5M) was used in the iPhone. "This is the exact same component that was used in the 8-Gbyte iPod nano," said Quirk. "This memory is used to store things like songs, pictures, and videos. Samsung provides the K9HBG08U1M in the 4-Gbyte version of the iPhone."

The audio codec is the Wolfson WM8758. "This is the same codec that was used in the iPod video, making the sound quality similar to what you experience from your iPod," said Quirk. Other similar components to the iPod, are parts from Linear Technology and Silicon Storage Technologies.

The new components include wireless connectivity and touch screen. The Marvell 88W8686 is a 90-nm WLAN device, the same die can also be found in the Wi2Wi 802.11 + Bluetooth System in Package Solution. The CSR BlueCore 4 ROM is a Bluetooth device that was also used in the BlackBerry Pearl 8100.

Balda, a German company, scored the design win with the touch screen. "Balda is known for making touch screen that are durable and scratch resistant, a common complaint of the screen in iPods," said Quirk. According to Quirk, Balda has worked with Nokia, Motorola and Sony-Ericsson, but this is their most visible design, which should enhance their visibility.

The iPhone also implements Intel wireless flash with 32 Mbytes of NOR coupled with 16 Mbytes of SRAM for code execution. "Interestingly, many in the industry predicted a design win for Intel, but thought it would be for an Intel (now Marvell) applications processor instead of flash memory," said Quirk.

Among the related articles below, Portelligent's David Carey takes issue with some of SI's findings, and found several other iPhone design winners.

Why Nerds are Unpopular

2007-07-01T09:45:00.000-07:00

When we were in junior high school, my friend Rich and I made a map of the school lunch tables according to popularity. This was easy to do, because kids only ate lunch with others of about the same popularity. We graded them from A to E. A tables were full of football players and cheerleaders and so on. E tables contained the kids with mild cases of Down's Syndrome, what in the language of the time we called "retards."

We sat at a D table, as low as you could get without looking physically different. We were not being especially candid to grade ourselves as D. It would have taken a deliberate lie to say otherwise. Everyone in the school knew exactly how popular everyone else was, including us.

My stock gradually rose during high school. Puberty finally arrived; I became a decent soccer player; I started a scandalous underground newspaper. So I've seen a good part of the popularity landscape.

I know a lot of people who were nerds in school, and they all tell the same story: there is a strong correlation between being smart and being a nerd, and an even stronger inverse correlation between being a nerd and being popular. Being smart seems to make you unpopular.

Why? To someone in school now, that may seem an odd question to ask. The mere fact is so overwhelming that it may seem strange to imagine that it could be any other way. But it could. Being smart doesn't make you an outcast in elementary school. Nor does it harm you in the real world. Nor, as far as I can tell, is the problem so bad in most other countries. But in a typical American secondary school, being smart is likely to make your life difficult. Why?

The key to this mystery is to rephrase the question slightly. Why don't smart kids make themselves popular? If they're so smart, why don't they figure out how popularity works and beat the system, just as they do for standardized tests?

One argument says that this would be impossible, that the smart kids are unpopular because the other kids envy them for being smart, and nothing they could do could make them popular. I wish. If the other kids in junior high school envied me, they did a great job of concealing it. And in any case, if being smart were really an enviable quality, the girls would have broken ranks. The guys that guys envy, girls like.

In the schools I went to, being smart just didn't matter much. Kids didn't admire it or despise it. All other things being equal, they would have preferred to be on the smart side of average rather than the dumb side, but intelligence counted far less than, say, physical appearance, charisma, or athletic ability.

So if intelligence in itself is not a factor in popularity, why are smart kids so consistently unpopular? The answer, I think, is that they don't really want to be popular.

If someone had told me that at the time, I would have laughed at him. Being unpopular in school makes kids miserable, some of them so miserable that they commit suicide. Telling me that I didn't want to be popular would have seemed like telling someone dying of thirst in a desert that he didn't want a glass of water. Of course I wanted to be popular.

But in fact I didn't, not enough. There was something else I wanted more: to be smart. Not simply to do well in school, though that counted for something, but to design beautiful rockets, or to write well, or to understand how to program computers. In general, to make great things.

At the time I never tried to separate my wants and weigh them against one another. If I had, I would have seen that being smart was more important. If someone had offered me the chance to be the most popular kid in school, but only at the price of being of average intelligence (humor me here), I wouldn't have taken it.

Much as they suffer from their unpopularity, I don't think many nerds would. To them the thought of average intelligence is unbearable. But most kids would take that deal. For half of them, it would be a step up. Even for someone in the eightieth percentile (assuming, as everyone seemed to then, that intelligence is a scalar), who wouldn't drop thirty points in exchange for being loved and admired by everyone?

And that, I think, is the root of the problem. Nerds serve two masters. They want to be popular, certainly, but they want even more to be smart. And popularity is not something you can do in your spare time, not in the fiercely competitive environment of an American secondary school.

Alberti, arguably the archetype of the Renaissance Man, writes that "no art, however minor, demands less than total dedication if you want to excel in it." I wonder if anyone in the world works harder at anything than American school kids work at popularity. Navy SEALs and neurosurgery residents seem slackers by comparison. They occasionally take vacations; some even have hobbies. An American teenager may work at being popular every waking hour, 365 days a year.

I don't mean to suggest they do this consciously. Some of them truly are little Machiavellis, but what I really mean here is that teenagers are always on duty as conformists.

For example, teenage kids pay a great deal of attention to clothes. They don't consciously dress to be popular. They dress to look good. But to who? To the other kids. Other kids' opinions become their definition of right, not just for clothes, but for almost everything they do, right down to the way they walk. And so every effort they make to do things "right" is also, consciously or not, an effort to be more popular.

Nerds don't realize this. They don't realize that it takes work to be popular. In general, people outside some very demanding field don't realize the extent to which success depends on constant (though often unconscious) effort. For example, most people seem to consider the ability to draw as some kind of innate quality, like being tall. In fact, most people who "can draw" like drawing, and have spent many hours doing it; that's why they're good at it. Likewise, popular isn't just something you are or you aren't, but something you make yourself.

The main reason nerds are unpopular is that they have other things to think about. Their attention is drawn to books or the natural world, not fashions and parties. They're like someone trying to play soccer while balancing a glass of water on his head. Other players who can focus their whole attention on the game beat them effortlessly, and wonder why they seem so incapable.

Even if nerds cared as much as other kids about popularity, being popular would be more work for them. The popular kids learned to be popular, and to want to be popular, the same way the nerds learned to be smart, and to want to be smart: from their parents. While the nerds were being trained to get the right answers, the popular kids were being trained to please.

So far I've been finessing the relationship between smart and nerd, using them as if they were interchangeable. In fact it's only the context that makes them so. A nerd is someone who isn't socially adept enough. But "enough" depends on where you are. In a typical American school, standards for coolness are so high (or at least, so specific) that you don't have to be especially awkward to look awkward by comparison.

Few smart kids can spare the attention that popularity requires. Unless they also happen to be good-looking, natural athletes, or siblings of popular kids, they'll tend to become nerds. And that's why smart people's lives are worst between, say, the ages of eleven and seventeen. Life at that age revolves far more around popularity than before or after.

Before that, kids' lives are dominated by their parents, not by other kids. Kids do care what their peers think in elementary school, but this isn't their whole life, as it later becomes.

Around the age of eleven, though, kids seem to start treating their family as a day job. They create a new world among themselves, and standing in this world is what matters, not standing in their family. Indeed, being in trouble in their family can win them points in the world they care about.

The problem is, the world these kids create for themselves is at first a very crude one. If you leave a bunch of eleven-year-olds to their own devices, what you get is Lord of the Flies. Like a lot of American kids, I read this book in school. Presumably it was not a coincidence. Presumably someone wanted to point out to us that we were savages, and that we had made ourselves a cruel and stupid world. This was too subtle for me. While the book seemed entirely believable, I didn't get the additional message. I wish they had just told us outright that we were savages and our world was stupid.

Nerds would find their unpopularity more bearable if it merely caused them to be ignored. Unfortunately, to be unpopular in school is to be actively persecuted.

Why? Once again, anyone currently in school might think this a strange question to ask. How could things be any other way? But they could be. Adults don't normally persecute nerds. Why do teenage kids do it?

Partly because teenagers are still half children, and many children are just intrinsically cruel. Some torture nerds for the same reason they pull the legs off spiders. Before you develop a conscience, torture is amusing.

Another reason kids persecute nerds is to make themselves feel better. When you tread water, you lift yourself up by pushing water down. Likewise, in any social hierarchy, people unsure of their own position will try to emphasize it by maltreating those they think rank below. I've read that this is why poor whites in the United States are the group most hostile to blacks.

But I think the main reason other kids persecute nerds is that it's part of the mechanism of popularity. Popularity is only partially about individual attractiveness. It's much more about alliances. To become more popular, you need to be constantly doing things that bring you close to other popular people, and nothing brings people closer than a common enemy.

Like a politician who wants to distract voters from bad times at home, you can create an enemy if there isn't a real one. By singling out and persecuting a nerd, a group of kids from higher in the hierarchy create bonds between themselves. Attacking an outsider makes them all insiders. This is why the worst cases of bullying happen with groups. Ask any nerd: you get much worse treatment from a group of kids than from any individual bully, however sadistic.

If it's any consolation to the nerds, it's nothing personal. The group of kids who band together to pick on you are doing the same thing, and for the same reason, as a bunch of guys who get together to go hunting. They don't actually hate you. They just need something to chase.

Because they're at the bottom of the scale, nerds are a safe target for the entire school. If I remember correctly, the most popular kids don't persecute nerds; they don't need to stoop to such things. Most of the persecution comes from kids lower down, the nervous middle classes.

The trouble is, there are a lot of them. The distribution of popularity is not a pyramid, but tapers at the bottom like a pear. The least popular group is quite small. (I believe we were the only D table in our cafeteria map.) So there are more people who want to pick on nerds than there are nerds.

As well as gaining points by distancing oneself from unpopular kids, one loses points by being close to them. A woman I know says that in high school she liked nerds, but was afraid to be seen talking to them because the other girls would make fun of her. Unpopularity is a communicable disease; kids too nice to pick on nerds will still ostracize them in self-defense.

It's no wonder, then, that smart kids tend to be unhappy in middle school and high school. Their other interests leave them little attention to spare for popularity, and since popularity resembles a zero-sum game, this in turn makes them targets for the whole school. And the strange thing is, this nightmare scenario happens without any conscious malice, merely because of the shape of the situation.

For me the worst stretch was junior high, when kid culture was new and harsh, and the specialization that would later gradually separate the smarter kids had barely begun. Nearly everyone I've talked to agrees: the nadir is somewhere between eleven and fourteen.

In our school it was eighth grade, which was ages twelve and thirteen for me. There was a brief sensation that year when one of our teachers overheard a group of girls waiting for the school bus, and was so shocked that the next day she devoted the whole class to an eloquent plea not to be so cruel to one another.

It didn't have any noticeable effect. What struck me at the time was that she was surprised. You mean she doesn't know the kind of things they say to one another? You mean this isn't normal?

It's important to realize that, no, the adults don't know what the kids are doing to one another. They know, in the abstract, that kids are monstrously cruel to one another, just as we know in the abstract that people get tortured in poorer countries. But, like us, they don't like to dwell on this depressing fact, and they don't see evidence of specific abuses unless they go looking for it.

Public school teachers are in much the same position as prison wardens. Wardens' main concern is to keep the prisoners on the premises. They also need to keep them fed, and as far as possible prevent them from killing one another. Beyond that, they want to have as little to do with the prisoners as possible, so they leave them to create whatever social organization they want. From what I've read, the society that the prisoners create is warped, savage, and pervasive, and it is no fun to be at the bottom of it.

In outline, it was the same at the schools I went to. The most important thing was to stay on the premises. While there, the authorities fed you, prevented overt violence, and made some effort to teach you something. But beyond that they didn't want to have too much to do with the kids. Like prison wardens, the teachers mostly left us to ourselves. And, like prisoners, the culture we created was barbaric.

Why is the real world more hospitable to nerds? It might seem that the answer is simply that it's populated by adults, who are too mature to pick on one another. But I don't think this is true. Adults in prison certainly pick on one another. And so, apparently, do society wives; in some parts of Manhattan, life for women sounds like a continuation of high school, with all the same petty intrigues.

I think the important thing about the real world is not that it's populated by adults, but that it's very large, and the things you do have real effects. That's what school, prison, and ladies-who-lunch all lack. The inhabitants of all those worlds are trapped in little bubbles where nothing they do can have more than a local effect. Naturally these societies degenerate into savagery. They have no function for their form to follow.

When the things you do have real effects, it's no longer enough just to be pleasing. It starts to be important to get the right answers, and that's where nerds show to advantage. Bill Gates will of course come to mind. Though notoriously lacking in social skills, he gets the right answers, at least as measured in revenue.

The other thing that's different about the real world is that it's much larger. In a large enough pool, even the smallest minorities can achieve a critical mass if they clump together. Out in the real world, nerds collect in certain places and form their own societies where intelligence is the most important thing. Sometimes the current even starts to flow in the other direction: sometimes, particularly in university math and science departments, nerds deliberately exaggerate their awkwardness in order to seem smarter. John Nash so admired Norbert Wiener that he adopted his habit of touching the wall as he walked down a corridor.

As a thirteen-year-old kid, I didn't have much more experience of the world than what I saw immediately around me. The warped little world we lived in was, I thought, the world. The world seemed cruel and boring, and I'm not sure which was worse.

Because I didn't fit into this world, I thought that something must be wrong with me. I didn't realize that the reason we nerds didn't fit in was that in some ways we were a step ahead. We were already thinking about the kind of things that matter in the real world, instead of spending all our time playing an exacting but mostly pointless game like the others.

We were a bit like an adult would be if he were thrust back into middle school. He wouldn't know the right clothes to wear, the right music to like, the right slang to use. He'd seem to the kids a complete alien. The thing is, he'd know enough not to care what they thought. We had no such confidence.

A lot of people seem to think it's good for smart kids to be thrown together with "normal" kids at this stage of their lives. Perhaps. But in at least some cases the reason the nerds don't fit in really is that everyone else is crazy. I remember sitting in the audience at a "pep rally" at my high school, watching as the cheerleaders threw an effigy of an opposing player into the audience to be torn to pieces. I felt like an explorer witnessing some bizarre tribal ritual.

If I could go back and give my thirteen year old self some advice, the main thing I'd tell him would be to stick his head up and look around. I didn't really grasp it at the time, but the whole world we lived in was as fake as a Twinkie. Not just school, but the entire town. Why do people move to suburbia? To have kids! So no wonder it seemed boring and sterile. The whole place was a giant nursery, an artificial town created explicitly for the purpose of breeding children.

Where I grew up, it felt as if there was nowhere to go, and nothing to do. This was no accident. Suburbs are deliberately designed to exclude the outside world, because it contains things that could endanger children.

And as for the schools, they were just holding pens within this fake world. Officially the purpose of schools is to teach kids. In fact their primary purpose is to keep kids locked up in one place for a big chunk of the day so adults can get things done. And I have no problem with this: in a specialized industrial society, it would be a disaster to have kids running around loose.

What bothers me is not that the kids are kept in prisons, but that (a) they aren't told about it, and (b) the prisons are run mostly by the inmates. Kids are sent off to spend six years memorizing meaningless facts in a world ruled by a caste of giants who run after an oblong brown ball, as if this were the most natural thing in the world. And if they balk at this surreal cocktail, they're called misfits.

Life in this twisted world is stressful for the kids. And not just for the nerds. Like any war, it's damaging even to the winners.

Adults can't avoid seeing that teenage kids are tormented. So why don't they do something about it? Because they blame it on puberty. The reason kids are so unhappy, adults tell themselves, is that monstrous new chemicals, hormones, are now coursing through their bloodstream and messing up everything. There's nothing wrong with the system; it's just inevitable that kids will be miserable at that age.

This idea is so pervasive that even the kids believe it, which probably doesn't help. Someone who thinks his feet naturally hurt is not going to stop to consider the possibility that he is wearing the wrong size shoes.

I'm suspicious of this theory that thirteen-year-old kids are intrinsically messed up. If it's physiological, it should be universal. Are Mongol nomads all nihilists at thirteen? I've read a lot of history, and I have not seen a single reference to this supposedly universal fact before the twentieth century. Teenage apprentices in the Renaissance seem to have been cheerful and eager. They got in fights and played tricks on one another of course (Michelangelo had his nose broken by a bully), but they weren't crazy.

As far as I can tell, the concept of the hormone-crazed teenager is coeval with suburbia. I don't think this is a coincidence. I think teenagers are driven crazy by the life they're made to lead. Teenage apprentices in the Renaissance were working dogs. Teenagers now are neurotic lapdogs. Their craziness is the craziness of the idle everywhere.

When I was in school, suicide was a constant topic among the smarter kids. No one I knew did it, but several planned to, and some may have tried. Mostly this was just a pose. Like other teenagers, we loved the dramatic, and suicide seemed very dramatic. But partly it was because our lives were at times genuinely miserable.

Bullying was only part of the problem. Another problem, and possibly an even worse one, was that we never had anything real to work on. Humans like to work; in most of the world, your work is your identity. And all the work we did was pointless, or seemed so at the time.

At best it was practice for real work we might do far in the future, so far that we didn't even know at the time what we were practicing for. More often it was just an arbitrary series of hoops to jump through, words without content designed mainly for testability. (The three main causes of the Civil War were.... Test: List the three main causes of the Civil War.)

And there was no way to opt out. The adults had agreed among themselves that this was to be the route to college. The only way to escape this empty life was to submit to it.

Teenage kids used to have a more active role in society. In pre-industrial times, they were all apprentices of one sort or another, whether in shops or on farms or even on warships. They weren't left to create their own societies. They were junior members of adult societies.

Teenagers seem to have respected adults more then, because the adults were the visible experts in the skills they were trying to learn. Now most kids have little idea what their parents do in their distant offices, and see no connection (indeed, there is precious little) between schoolwork and the work they'll do as adults.

And if teenagers respected adults more, adults also had more use for teenagers. After a couple years' training, an apprentice could be a real help. Even the newest apprentice could be made to carry messages or sweep the workshop.

Now adults have no immediate use for teenagers. They would be in the way in an office. So they drop them off at school on their way to work, much as they might drop the dog off at a kennel if they were going away for the weekend.

What happened? We're up against a hard one here. The cause of this problem is the same as the cause of so many present ills: specialization. As jobs become more specialized, we have to train longer for them. Kids in pre-industrial times started working at about 14 at the latest; kids on farms, where most people lived, began far earlier. Now kids who go to college don't start working full-time till 21 or 22. With some degrees, like MDs and PhDs, you may not finish your training till 30.

Teenagers now are useless, except as cheap labor in industries like fast food, which evolved to exploit precisely this fact. In almost any other kind of work, they'd be a net loss. But they're also too young to be left unsupervised. Someone has to watch over them, and the most efficient way to do this is to collect them together in one place. Then a few adults can watch all of them.

If you stop there, what you're describing is literally a prison, albeit a part-time one. The problem is, many schools practically do stop there. The stated purpose of schools is to educate the kids. But there is no external pressure to do this well. And so most schools do such a bad job of teaching that the kids don't really take it seriously-- not even the smart kids. Much of the time we were all, students and teachers both, just going through the motions.

In my high school French class we were supposed to read Hugo's Les Miserables. I don't think any of us knew French well enough to make our way through this enormous book. Like the rest of the class, I just skimmed the Cliff's Notes. When we were given a test on the book, I noticed that the questions sounded odd. They were full of long words that our teacher wouldn't have used. Where had these questions come from? From the Cliff's Notes, it turned out. The teacher was using them too. We were all just pretending.

There are certainly great public school teachers. The energy and imagination of my fourth grade teacher, Mr. Mihalko, made that year something his students still talk about, thirty years later. But teachers like him were individuals swimming upstream. They couldn't fix the system.

In almost any group of people you'll find hierarchy. When groups of adults form in the real world, it's generally for some common purpose, and the leaders end up being those who are best at it. The problem with most schools is, they have no purpose. But hierarchy there must be. And so the kids make one out of nothing.

We have a phrase to describe what happens when rankings have to be created without any meaningful criteria. We say that the situation degenerates into a popularity contest. And that's exactly what happens in most American schools. Instead of depending on some real test, one's rank depends mostly on one's ability to increase one's rank. It's like the court of Louis XIV. There is no external opponent, so the kids become one another's opponents.

When there is some real external test of skill, it isn't painful to be at the bottom of the hierarchy. A rookie on a football team doesn't resent the skill of the veteran; he hopes to be like him one day and is happy to have the chance to learn from him. The veteran may in turn feel a sense of noblesse oblige. And most importantly, their status depends on how well they do against opponents, not on whether they can push the other down.

Court hierarchies are another thing entirely. This type of society debases anyone who enters it. There is neither admiration at the bottom, nor noblesse oblige at the top. It's kill or be killed.

This is the sort of society that gets created in American secondary schools. And it happens because these schools have no real purpose beyond keeping the kids all in one place for a certain number of hours each day. What I didn't realize at the time, and in fact didn't realize till very recently, is that the twin horrors of school life, the cruelty and the boredom, both have the same cause.

The mediocrity of American public schools has worse consequences than just making kids unhappy for six years. It breeds a rebelliousness that actively drives kids away from the things they're supposed to be learning.

Like many nerds, probably, it was years after high school before I could bring myself to read anything we'd been assigned then. And I lost more than books. I mistrusted words like "character" and "integrity" because they had been so debased by adults. As they were used then, these words all seemed to mean the same thing: obedience. The kids who got praised for these qualities tended to be at best dull-witted prize bulls, and at worst facile schmoozers. If that was what character and integrity were, I wanted no part of them.

The word I most misunderstood was "tact." As used by adults, it seemed to mean keeping your mouth shut. I assumed it was derived from the same root as "tacit" and "taciturn," and that it literally meant being quiet. I vowed that I would never be tactful; they were never going to shut me up. In fact, it's derived from the same root as "tactile," and what it means is to have a deft touch. Tactful is the opposite of clumsy. I don't think I learned this until college.

Nerds aren't the only losers in the popularity rat race. Nerds are unpopular because they're distracted. There are other kids who deliberately opt out because they're so disgusted with the whole process.

Teenage kids, even rebels, don't like to be alone, so when kids opt out of the system, they tend to do it as a group. At the schools I went to, the focus of rebellion was drug use, specifically marijuana. The kids in this tribe wore black concert t-shirts and were called "freaks."

Freaks and nerds were allies, and there was a good deal of overlap between them. Freaks were on the whole smarter than other kids, though never studying (or at least never appearing to) was an important tribal value. I was more in the nerd camp, but I was friends with a lot of freaks.

They used drugs, at least at first, for the social bonds they created. It was something to do together, and because the drugs were illegal, it was a shared badge of rebellion.

I'm not claiming that bad schools are the whole reason kids get into trouble with drugs. After a while, drugs have their own momentum. No doubt some of the freaks ultimately used drugs to escape from other problems-- trouble at home, for example. But, in my school at least, the reason most kids started using drugs was rebellion. Fourteen-year-olds didn't start smoking pot because they'd heard it would help them forget their problems. They started because they wanted to join a different tribe.

Misrule breeds rebellion; this is not a new idea. And yet the authorities still for the most part act as if drugs were themselves the cause of the problem.

The real problem is the emptiness of school life. We won't see solutions till adults realize that. The adults who may realize it first are the ones who were themselves nerds in school. Do you want your kids to be as unhappy in eighth grade as you were? I wouldn't. Well, then, is there anything we can do to fix things? Almost certainly. There is nothing inevitable about the current system. It has come about mostly by default.

Adults, though, are busy. Showing up for school plays is one thing. Taking on the educational bureaucracy is another. Perhaps a few will have the energy to try to change things. I suspect the hardest part is realizing that you can.

Nerds still in school should not hold their breath. Maybe one day a heavily armed force of adults will show up in helicopters to rescue you, but they probably won't be coming this month. Any immediate improvement in nerds' lives is probably going to have to come from the nerds themselves.

Merely understanding the situation they're in should make it less painful. Nerds aren't losers. They're just playing a different game, and a game much closer to the one played in the real world. Adults know this. It's hard to find successful adults now who don't claim to have been nerds in high school.

It's important for nerds to realize, too, that school is not life. School is a strange, artificial thing, half sterile and half feral. It's all-encompassing, like life, but it isn't the real thing. It's only temporary, and if you look, you can see beyond it even while you're still in it.

If life seems awful to kids, it's neither because hormones are turning you all into monsters (as your parents believe), nor because life actually is awful (as you believe). It's because the adults, who no longer have any economic use for you, have abandoned you to spend years cooped up together with nothing real to do. Any society of that type is awful to live in. You don't have to look any further to explain why teenage kids are unhappy.

I've said some harsh things in this essay, but really the thesis is an optimistic one-- that several problems we take for granted are in fact not insoluble after all. Teenage kids are not inherently unhappy monsters. That should be encouraging news to kids and adults both.

- Paul Grisham

The American Fixation

2007-06-25T00:01:00.000-07:00

Why are Indians always so fixated with Indian-Americans who are have made a name for themselves? Im talking about the recent Sunita Williams episode. The Indian media was going hysterical over her return journey,live coverage of the space shuttle plus repeated telecast of people praying for her safety.The media gave an impression that she was the only person aboard space shuttle Atlantis.What abt the other six astronauts?

I would like to clarify that my intention here is not to criticise the media and i am in complete awe of Sunita and all that she has accomplished .But what i cant understand is why Indians try so hard to portray her as an Indian, pretend that she is one of us,that we constantly focus on the small,petty things she likes abt India(samosa and chole). People should accept the fact that she is an American,that her mother is Slovenian, her husband is an American,her favourite baseball team is Boston's Red Sox or that she likes sushi.

Be it Kalpana Chawla,Freddie Mercury or Bobby Jindal Indians try to owe their success to their Indian origins.I can understand Kalpana Chawla being called an Indian-American as she was born here and even did her engineering from Punjab University.

According to me the reason is that India lacks icons,people you can look upto. But there are plenty of people in India who can act as role models. They work away from the limelight and thus we may never come to know them.Its the role of the media to show that we indeed have many heroes amongst ourselves,people whom we can emulate and people who play a role in our nation's success.

Campus Placements

2007-06-23T23:55:00.001-07:00

Campus placement is probably the most important event that takes in a student's life. And especially if you are an undergraduate it is probably your first interaction with industry. Being in one of Mumbai's premier engineering college,VJTI, has many advantages. There is no dearth of good companies when it comes to VJTI-be it a core or software company. But being in VJTI certainly doesnt guarantee you a job.
After being rejected thrice -Siemens,Tata Elxis,Tata SED- I came face to face with reality. That i wasnt good enough. Yes getting good scores in exams in ok but when it comes to technical knowledge most of the people falter. Blame it on the college,profs or the outdated syllabus, the fact remains that several engineering graduates are not fit to be employed. And so the onus is really on the companies to train and transform these graduates from unemployable to employable.I really dont understand as to why we have four years of engineering when all we study during the first year are subjects which are of no practical use-physics,chemistry,maths.I still cant recollect what we studied in physics and chemistry.Instead they should limit the course to three years, so we can atleast start earning an year in advance.Something needs to be done about the state of engineering course in India-of course,except the IITs,NITs,IIITs. But the question is who is going to do it?
So anyways after three rejections, I studied like i never studied before. In 8 days i completed subjects spanning two semesters.Finally getting placed in WIPRO VLSI was a dream come true.
"EXPERIENCE IS A COMB WHICH LIFE GIVES YOU WHEN YOU ARE BALD"
So if you are an engineer(especially an electronics engineer) waiting to get placed and need advice on how to prepare for your technical and HR interview then feel free to ask me.If you have any query just drop in your comment and i will try my best to help you.

LIFE INSIDE GOOGLE

2007-06-23T03:14:00.000-07:00

Lets see how much people really know about the World’s Best Company .

1. How many gourmet cafeterias does Google have at its Mountain View headquarters?

a). 6

b). 8

c). 11

d). 14

2. People at Google have a language of their own. Which Google-ism below has the wrong definition?

a). Noogler: New employee

b). Google 15: Side effect (in pounds) of all the free food

c). Googleplex: Where Googlers work

d). Economic volunteers: Google job applicants

3. Which of these perks is not offered by Google?

a). $ 500 voucher for takeout food after the birth of a child

b). $5,000 subsidy to buy a hybrid car

c). $2,000 bonus for referring a new employee

d). All of the above are offered

Well !! If you want to find out whether you got all three right then read on. Voted as the “Best Companies to work for” by Fortune Magazine in 2007, Google has a work culture that most engineers can only dream of. Headquartered in Mountain View, California the new Googleplex(where googlers work) is a first of its kind.

With 11 gourmet cafeterias and a mouth-watering cuisine to die for its hard to keep your mind off the food. How about

“house-baked spelt bread french toast drizzled with ginger Infused maple syrup and topped with caramelized pinata apples, served with hot coconut-masala muesli, coco-berry granola and crimson gold heirloom apples” or if you are not of the sweet-tooth type maybe you want to try

Shrimp Scampi with Jasmine Rice; Steak Milanese with sauteed mushrooms & shallots, steamed green beans and fried green plantains with honey glaze.”

And the best part is its FREE!!!

With so much free food to lay your hands on it resulted in a side-effect called Google 15(it means a googler on an average gained 15 pounds).So what you do when your employees are getting fatter.Well, you make them sweat. Rock climbing ,swimming pool ,gymnasium and volleyball are provided on campus. Other fun activities at Google include Foosball, videogames, pool tables, ping pong and roller hockey twice a week in the parking lot. And if all this activity is making you dizzy you can opt for a massage(but it will cost you $30 an hour).

(Googlers sweating it out on campus)

Google also offer a lot of perks to keep

their employees happy. $500 voucher

for takeout food after the birth of a child and $2,000 bonus for referring a new employee (who is called Noogler) are just some of the benefits.
Google also likes to inculcate an eco-friendly attitude amongst its employees It offers $5,000 subsidy to buy a hybrid car or a Segway.

(Googler on Segway)

So why does Google spend so much on its employees?

Well,the answer is simple. In this highly competitive field,Google wants to recruit and retain the

Best. No wonder it gets around 2500 resumes per day and has one of the lowest attrition rate.

Google was a basically a postdoctoral extension of the Stanford computer science department, and its founders Larry Page, Sergey Brin wanted to maintain the same college-like atmosphere in Google. So whether its bringing your dog to office or wearing jeans and t-shirts to office,life inside Google is much like life in college.

So if you are not into wearing formals , want a college-like atmosphere then Google’s the place for you. If you want to set your foot in Google, the next time Google comes for campus placemnt make sure that you detail your extra-curricular activities. Google likes to hire people with many diverse interests, prefers team players . Narrow skills are a big turnoff. By the way if I have forgotten to mention you should be damn good at “programming” or like googlers like to say

“ organizing the world's information and making it universally accessible and useful”.