Monthly Archives: August 2011

When we seriously start thinking about our MBA, we realize that we do not possess the skill sets required for corporate life. For example, handling procrastination, thinking less emotionally, managing relationships etc.  Therefore we realise the need to change.

In the initial stages, we are enthusiastic about the change and go for it with “vim, vigour and vitality.” Over time, this enthusiasm fizzles out and we revert to our comfort zone, and then rationalize our inaction.

What is this comfort zone?

As we develop a habit, neuron paths are created in our brain, as the habit moves from the conscious into our subconscious.  This becomes a convenient path and familiar path, a path of least resistance. The more we use it, the smoother it becomes. The psychological reasons for using this path also become ingrained.

When we change the habit, we are trying to create a new path, through a jungle. we need to cut down trees (overcome resistance from self and others) we need to smooth the path (try the new method enough numbers of times) and become familiar with it.

This is tough, and in most cases we give up, as the other, familiar path is there.

Even if we create a new path, we now have choices. The new, untested one, and the old tested one. We take the old one.

How do we handle this?

1. Before making even the first path, decide if it is the right path. My friends in the IAS say that agreeing to the politicians the first time is tough, but it gets easier. The first time you pay the bribe, you feel bad, and then it becomes easier. A path is created.
2. Create the new path only after you understand the benefits, so that you are motivated to take the new path. Walk on it enough number of times.
3. Close the old path, so that even if you want to go on this path, you are unable to do so.

Take addiction as an example.

1. Decide not to smoke.
2. If you do start and it becomes a habit, then, since smoking is also an emotional desire, you need to find an alternate emotion, that is more powerful than the current emotion.
3. Make sure that your friends and family are supportive and stop you from smoking, reward yourself for not smoking for a certain number of days, etc. Work in a smoke free zone.

When I posted this quote on facebook, I got queries on “how to change the way we think about it?”

I have some comments to make.

The quote simply says, either change what is bothering you or change yourself so that it does not bother you.

Why did we precipitately decide that we can’t change what is bothering us?  Did we make enough effort to change things? If you refer to Mr. Hazare’s agitation, did not a change happen?

Take rules – be it college rules or government rules. Are we saying these cannot be changed, therefore we need to change our attitude towards them?

Did we really try? If we tried and failed, is it because we do not know how to change? Or are we lazy and did not make enough or right effort, or have patience? Either way, suppose we talk about corruption – are we therefore saying we can’t change corruption, so let us change our attitude towards corruption? Are we saying that we cannot change the rules, so we change our attitude towards them?

Let us assuming that we tried to change what is bothering us, be it people, things or ideas. Let us also assuming that we tried different ways, we asked around if others also have the same opinions as us, we gathered support and made an effort to change.

Then comes the second part – changing our attitude or our belief towards what we do not like. to do that, let us first examine our emotions towards what we do not like. What is really causing those emotions? is it the rules or the corruption, or is it our feeling of helplessness? Does the feeling of helplessness come because we have low self confidence, and because we remember past incidents which created such feelings?

This is a root cause analysis of our emotions, to find out the deep-rooted belief that is really the cause of the emotions.  If we do not handle this deep rooted cause of the emotions, we will be dealing with the symptoms, not the real reasons.

So maybe rules in the college remind us of the rules at home or school, which is what we wanted to avoid by joining a college far far away! Maybe these rules remind us of past incidents when we wanted to do things, and other members in a group or other powers of authority prevented us from doing what we wanted? If we do not handle our emotions with respect to those incidents, these emotions will recur.

Our current beliefs are a result of our past experiences and the inferences that we have drawn from them. To change our current beliefs, we need to change the past inferences and our memories of those past incidents.

I know that I have circulated this before to some batches, but I just love this poem so much, although the conditions in which this was written were less than perfect.

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream – and not make dreams your master,
If you can think – and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: “Hold on!”

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings – nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And – which is more – you’ll be a Man, my son!

Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)

If my girlfriend is late  for the movie, I can be anxious if I believe she may be in an accident, or I can be angry if I believe that she does not care for my time, or I can be depressed if I believe that she does not like me any more.

Therefore the same event can cause different reactions based on our beliefs about the event.

Even if I know that my belief is incorrect, why can’t I change my belief?

1. It may be that I get some benefit out of this belief. For example, it justifies my anger or my continued depression.
2. It may be that I do not know how to change this belief.
3. I, subconsciously, may still think that this belief is true. This could be because admitting that I am wrong means admitting that all my previous emotions and actions were incorrect and I may have to correct the impact of those actions on people who were affected. To eat humble-pie in front of all those persons would be terrifying.
4. I am too involved in the emotion and I cannot detach myself from my experiences. It is easy to advise people on what to do, when they have emotional experiences – because you are detached from the problem. But to do the same to myself means detaching myself from my emotions and that is difficult to do.

I have some comments on the recent furore over Mr. Hazare’s campaign to bring in the Jan lokpal bill.

There are three levels of corruption depending on the amount of money and the number of persons involved:

1. At the top level (this is opportunistic and gradually becoming systemic),
2. At the department level (this is systemic and the process and ROI is clearly laid out)
3. At the individual level.

I will not focus on the first two; Mr. Hazare and his well wishers are doing that, and I wish them all the best.

Is the individual level of corruption systemic or opportunistic? When a policeman finds fault with my motorcycle papers and demands a graft, do I not pay? Is this not systemic, since every month the policeman needs to fulfill his quota. Is it not systemic, as he has paid a bribe to get a choice posting and he needs to recoup this expense? Are you a victim or is he a victim? Is the government not to blame to raising  prices and not raising the policeman’s salary? Am I not to blame for taking a shortcut of paying the bribe, because I can afford it, my time is valuable, I need to see the movie or reach my destination?

Can this bribe be considered the self-adjustment of the system towards an equilibrium, towards a peaceful co-existence? It is possible that we rationalise the bribe-paying as balancing some inequality of status and opportunity?

When we asked our representative for the freebies he should provide us if he needs our votes, or accepted those freebies, did we not start corrupting our representatives? Did we not rationalise this action?

When Chanakya talked about ‘Daam,’ is ‘Daam’ only about payment for services rendered, be it legitimate or illegitimate? Is it not our thoughts that rationalise and determine legitimacy?

When I consider some act unfair and seeks redress, I believe myself justified in taking any means to correct the unfairness.  We have done this all our life. Our thoughts determine the legitimacy of our act.

When a CEO considers some laws unfair and evades them, we lionise the CEO as being creative. Did we not allow corruption of the laws?

Corruption is inside us. Let us not blame the outside world, the ‘system’, the CEOs as being corrupt and consider ourselves to be pure. When we take short-cuts, cheat, lie, rationalise to ourselves, create beliefs about people and situations, we corrupt ourselves.

Our beliefs lead to emotions and actions. Justified and rationalised beliefs lead to justified and rationlised emotions and actions. We cannot label these emotions and actions as corrupt, and we cannot separate corruption of beliefs from the resultant corrupt thoughts and actions.

Is there some ethical and moral code that we are believe in? As long as our thoughts are selfish, what morality are we talking about? If we justify survival of the fittest and intolerance towards others, are we justified in taking the high ground about morality?

Is it the money that we pay as bribes that we are objecting to, at this individual level, or is it the blackmail?  Is this why Mr. Hazare’s campaign seems to be gathering force, that we can see that we can blackmail the government? The shoe is on the other foot?

Why is this support against corruption gathering force, and other ongoing campaigns not having support? What about Ms Irom Sharmila and her 10-year fast, the fights against systemic corruption in the rest of India like the mining mafia in Goa, Karnataka, Bihar, MP, the dams and the uprooting of people, and the old Bhopal Gas leak tragedy?

Is this a better orchestrated campaign? Is it the drama? Is it our need for instant gratification, where we are seeing immediate results? Is it the tilting at the windmills, cocking our snook at the powers-that-be, showing them that they are not as invincible as they thought? Is Ms. Hazare our new angry “young” man, fighting on our behalf?

There is a certain corruption inside us: our need for gratification, need for excitement, the emotions of self-righteousness, need to be part of history, specially winners. Mr. Hazare’s campaign gives us all this. Which is why long-drawn campaigns lose support. All informal surveys seem to indicate people do not know the difference between the bills, students are enjoying the drama and absence from classes, and everyone is out there, abdicating their duties. Gandhi had the ability to withstand the lathi charges, I wonder how many supporters in this campaign would do so?

We have to look inside ourselves and decide if we have the courage to (a) fight the corruption inside us (b) support other campaigns that too need our help.

Otherwise, this will be a flash in the pan. The press coverage will stop, as people seek a different drama. Even if we get the bill passed, the implementation is fraught with peril for two reasons:

1. The Lokpal will have power, and with all power, comes the opportunity for misuse. Will we need a super-lokpal to check this?  How much time will it take to set up the alternate bureaucracy and the checks and balances.
2. With all the lok-ayuktas, the judiciary, the vigilance committees, the auditor-generals, which were supposed to take care of the second type of corruption; with Anna’s bill taking care of the first type of corruption, who will take care of the third type of corruption? And since the second type of corruption could not be taken care of, despite so many regulatory bodies, what makes us sure this is the right way?

All I say is, let us control the corruption within us, because all external measures will come to naught if we are not ready internally to accept the pain that accompanies incorruptibility. It is not easy.

Some time ago, I had written an article about mind maps.  J Murali’s article on mind maps today

shows a mind map of how to organise a topic for ready reference.

Think of its use just before exams or interviews.