जीवन में एक सितारा था...

This poem is by Dr. Harivansh Rai Bachchan, from Madhushala.

I had heard this first time from Amitabh Bachchan when he was chief guest for a Marathi award function. Since then I was trying to get it somewhere. Finally got it from one of my friends!

Here is the poem:

जीवन में एक सितारा था
माना वह बेहद प्यारा था
वह डूब गया तो डूब गया
अंबर के आंगन को देखो
कितने इसके तारे टूटे
कितने इसके प्यारे छूटे
जो छूट गए फ़िर कहाँ मिले
पर बोलो टूटे तारों पर
कब अंबर शोक मनाता है
जो बीत गई सो बात गई

जीवन में वह था एक कुसुम
थे उस पर नित्य निछावर तुम
वह सूख गया तो सूख गया
मधुबन की छाती को देखो
सूखी कितनी इसकी कलियाँ
मुरझाईं कितनी वल्लरियाँ
जो मुरझाईं फ़िर कहाँ खिलीं
पर बोलो सूखे फूलों पर
कब मधुबन शोर मचाता है
जो बीत गई सो बात गई

जीवन में मधु का प्याला था
तुमने तन मन दे डाला था
वह टूट गया तो टूट गया
मदिरालय का आंगन देखो
कितने प्याले हिल जाते हैं
गिर मिट्टी में मिल जाते हैं
जो गिरते हैं कब उठते हैं
पर बोलो टूटे प्यालों पर
कब मदिरालय पछताता है
जो बीत गई सो बात गई

मृदु मिट्टी के बने हुए हैं
मधु घट फूटा ही करते हैं
लघु जीवन ले कर आए हैं
प्याले टूटा ही करते हैं
फ़िर भी मदिरालय के अन्दर
मधु के घट हैं,मधु प्याले हैं
जो मादकता के मारे हैं
वे मधु लूटा ही करते हैं
वह कच्चा पीने वाला है
जिसकी ममता घट प्यालों पर
जो सच्चे मधु से जला हुआ
कब रोता है चिल्लाता है
जो बीत गई सो बात गई

 

Understanding calendar...

Few years ago I was learning a programming language and was given an assignment to display calendar and tell day of date .

Instead of using library function I wrote the logic to come up with the day of that date. I had worked it out long back when I was in school - when I had read about Shakuntala Devi. I was fascinated by how to do mathematical calculation in head so quickly, or tell day of any past or future date. For mathematical calculations I read some books on Vedic Maths and learnt few things. As for date, I worked it out purely on my own. Don't know if that is how those people do it or some other way. But this method works fine. And its very easy to do, once you understand how calendar works.

Let me explain how.

First few basics about Calendar:

1. There are 365 days in a normal year and 366 in a Leap year.

2. If the year is divisible by 4 (but not by 100) then the year is a Leap year e.g. 1988, 1876, 2024 etc.

3. If the year is divisible by 100 and also by 400 then the year is a Leap year. e.g. 2000, 1600, 2400.

4. If the year is divisible by 100 but not by 400, then the year is NOT a Leap year. e.g. 1800, 1900, 1700, 2100 etc.

Now with these basics we can go ahead to discuss the logic:

Let's understand the concept of 'odd day'. 

The weekdays are Sunday through Saturday. And then the cycle repeats continuously. So if there are exactly 4 weeks then thee is no 'odd day' i.e. extra day. In a 30-day month there are 4 complete weeks and 2 'odd days' (i.e. extra days). In a 31-day month, there are In a leap month (February of a Leap year) there is one odd day.

So lets first see how many odd days are there in each month. (All you have to do is take modulus of 7 for each month...)

January - 3

February - 0 

February in a Leap year - 1

March - 3

April - 2

May - 3

June - 2

July - 3

August - 3 

September - 2

October - 3

November - 2 

December - 3

In a normal year there are 365 days i.e. 52 weeks and 1 odd day. In case of a Leap year there are 2 odd days.

So now we are good to find day of any date. But before that, to make life easy we need a a reference day (it's not mandatory but beneficial).

1st January 1900 was Monday

1st January 2000 was Saturday

Note: For any day in 20th and 21st century these 2 reference days respectively are enough)

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

Lets work out some examples:

Example 1. 15th Aug 1947 (India's Independence Day) 

Reference Date: 1st January 1900 was Monday i.e. Day ZERO

Step 1: 46 completed years since 1900. i.e. 46 odd days (1 odd day per year, not counting leap years). This is further equivalent to 7 weeks and 4 odd days

Step 2: There were 11 Leap years between 1900 and 1946 (i.e. 1946-1900 MOD 7). So 11 more odd days. i.e 1 week and 4 odd days

Step 3: Odd days for Year 1947 (till July 1947) are 16 (3+0+3+2+3+2+3) i.e. 2 weeks and 2 odd days

Step 4: As on Aug 15, there was 1 odd day

Adding odd day for Steps 1 through 4 we get 4+4+2+1 = 11 odd days i.e. further equal to 4 odd days.

Since reference day 1st January 1900 was Monday, counting 4 days from that day we get Friday.

So 15th August 1947 was Friday!

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

Example 2. 11th September 2001 (World Trade Center Attack)

Reference: 1st January 2000 was Saturday

Step 1: 0 completed year since 2000. So 0 odd days

Step 2: 1 Leap year since 2000. So 1 odd days

Step 3: Odd days till August 2001 (3+0+3+2+3+2+3+3) are 19 i.e. 2 weeks and 5 odd days

Step 4: As on September 11, there were 4 odd days

Adding odd day for Steps 1 through 4 we get 0+1+5+4 = 10 i.e. 3 odd days.

Since reference day 1st January 2000 was Saturday, counting 3 days from that day we get Tuesday.

So 11th September 2001 was Tuesday!

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

Example 3. 26th November 2008 (Mumbai Attack)

Reference: 1st January 2000 was Saturday

Step 1: 7 completed years since 2000. i.e. 7 days. So 0 odd days

Step 2: 2 Leap years since 2000. So 2 odd days

Step 3: Odd days till October 2001 (3+1+3+2+3+2+3+3+2+3) are 25 i.e. 3 weeks and 4 odd days

Step 4: As on November 26, there were 5 odd days

Adding odd day for Steps 1 through 4 we get 0+2+4+5 = 11 i.e. 4 odd days.

Since reference day 1st January 2000 was Saturday, counting 4 days from that day we get Wednesday.

So 11th September 2001 was Wednesday!

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

Example 4: 25th June 1983 (India's World Cup Cricket Win)

Reference Date: 1st January 1900 was Monday i.e. Day ZERO

Step 1: 82 completed years since 1900. i.e. 82 odd days --> 5 odd days

Step 2: There were 20 Leap years between 1900 and 1982. So 20 more odd days. i.e 2 week and 6 odd days

Step 3: Odd days for Year 1983 (till May 1983) are 11 (3+0+3+2+3) i.e. 4 odd days

Step 4: As on June 25, there were 4 odd days

Adding odd day for Steps 1 through 4 we get 5+6+4+4 = 19 odd days i.e. further equal to 5 odd days.

Since reference day 1st January 1900 was Monday, counting 5 days from that day we get Saturday.

So 15th August 1947 was Saturday!

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

Example 5: Today i.e. 13th February 2010

Reference: 1st January 2000 was Saturday

Step 1: 10 completed years since 2000. i.e. 10 days. So 3 odd days

Step 2: 3 Leap years since 2000. So 3 odd days

Step 3: Odd days till January 2010 are 3 i.e. 3 odd days

Step 4: As on February 13, there were 6 odd days

Adding odd day for Steps 1 through 4 we get 3+3+3+6 = 15 i.e. 1 odd day.

Since reference day 1st January 2000 was Saturday, counting 1 day from that day we get Sunday.

Yes, today is Sunday! :)

Comparing Apples with Red Chillies...because both are red!

The recenly concluded IPL-4 actions was another first for the IPL. It was the first time that the 2-day long auction process was televised LIVE on TV. And many, including myself, watched at least part of it.

 

In general, I don't like reality TV (barring a few exceptions), but this Real TV show was different. It's always good to witness change, as it happens! So while the LIVE auction would become a routine in coming years, and participants would 'prepare' themselves for future events (afterall most of them belong to show business in some ways), this was a first for them too. And hence it was more spontaneous/ impromptu (unless they had rehearsed it secretly before in a mock-auction!).

 

After watching the event I was waiting for the reactions/ interpretations by the media and by the readers. And I stumbled upon this Economic Times article - IPL-4 auction: Clash of billionaire egos and a bit of business - and liked it. I was about to write a blog on this auction myself, until I read the following comment on this article.

 

"S.Baskaran Singapore 11/01/2011 at 07:48 AM

What a difference in approach to life between two rich men from the city - Azim Premzi and Mallya both inherited wealth from their parents, of course premzi less. I want some psychology experts take this as case study for MBA course. Let them take such indian cases in stead of wall street money maniacs(who have brought the world to such a mess)."

 

Now this enthused me to write this blog on a completely different topic - not IPL, but how people tend to compare different individuals, genres, concepts, based on their principles and assumptions.

 

It's a bit difficult to compare and contrast (as the person has suggested in his comment) two individuals as diverse as Vijay Mallya and Azim Premji just because - a. they belong to same city (Bangalore), b. they come from similar background (both inherited businesses in different proportions) or c. they both belong to the same fraternity - the businessmen.

 

It's like comparing Shah Rukh Khan with Naseeruddin Shah, just because they both are actors...

What matters in both cases is not to judge them with one single set of rules (there cannot be a common minimum set, that would do justice to both diverse personalities) but analyze and appraise them on set of standards fitting their types, and comparing them with their 'category peers'. E.g. it is more appropriate to compare Vijay Mallya with a Richard Branson (can't think of any Indian name) and Azim Premji with a Rahul Bajaj (both inherited a small legacy and turned it into an enormous entity). 

Or in the latter analogy, Shah Rukh Khan with Amitabh Bachchan (both came from non-film background and are not trained actors) and Naseer with Om Puri or Anupam Kher (trained actors and worked in main-stream commercial as well as off-beat films).

Now coming back to the original comparison, if we judge them by set of parameters relevant for their catagories, I think, both stand out in their own ways. 

 

Vijay Mallya should be judged based on flmboyance, showmanship, ability to make bold and risky business deals (sometimes titlting more towards gambling), and using Saam-Daam-Dand-Bhed to his benefit.

Azim Premji should be judged based on integrity, fairness, media-shy tough decision-making, vision and wisdom and so on.

 

One can discuss and debate the basic parameters and what matters more, or what one regards very highly (and most people in India tend to regard highly the Azim Premji-like qualities, and scoff at Vijay Mayya-like qualities...something very inherent and faulty in Indian psyche/ culture). But it's in vain to compare these two people with the same yardstick...you are bound to do injustice to one and favor the other (depending on what basis you choose for comparison). But maybe it's not an India-specific trait. I remember my Strategy Professor at a British University shuddered when I used Richard Branson as an example in one of the classroom discussions. He was so irritated at the very mention of Branson's name that he refused to discuss my point further :)

 

I have seen such case studies during my MBA and also such discussions/ debates in general that start with wrong premise - by comparing Apples with Red Chillies (not even Oranges)...because both are red - and such debates lead nowhere, or often end up with a preconceived end result (by idolizing one and dismissing the other).

 

How can people compare and rank Lata Mangeshkar and Kishori Amonkar (just because they both are singers)? Or compare Sachin Tendulkar with Vishwanathan Anand (just because they are sportsmen)? You see an example of an Ambani spending millions on his house and immediately you start a discussion about A Narayana Murthy living simple life...but why?

 

You tend to like one over the other because you identify yourself with or you find a connect with characters/ qualities or the nature of that person.

 

So for me, writing or discussing a case study on Vijay Mallya and Azim Premji is an unproductive exercise...doesn't make much sense.

 

I like both Vijay Mallya and Azim Premji, although I value the principles and virtues embodied by Azim Premji a lot more! Vijay Mallya is not my type or nature...but he is good in his 'category'

To quote Abraham Lincoln: "For people who like that kind of book, that is the kind of book they will like." 

 

Similarly, those who like living life Kingsize would like Mallya - and there is a lot of Facebook-smitten young crowd out there...

 

On a lighter note, many would like to maintain a public image like Premji and live private life like Mallya :)

 

An interesting example of Organizational Culture...

An interesting example of Organizational Culture...

Organizational Behavior module at my MBA studies was something I liked a lot! Especially the Organizantional Structure and Organizational Culture part, because I could relate to my work-experience directly. It's difficult to make out Culture since its is subtle and intangible in nature. But the Culture often shows up in certain ways.

Recently iGate a relatively small US-based IT services firm (run by ex-Infosys executive Phaneesh Murthy) bought Patni Computer Services, a mid-sized IT services firm for close to $1.22 billion. Patni is more than double the size of iGate and iGate could buy Patni only with the help of financing from a consortium (i.e. through debt). 

I was reading an interview of Phaneesh Murthy when this Culture aspect caught my attention. Here's an excerpt:

Though this is a huge buy and you will take a while digesting it, are you looking at other companies with a "for sale" sign?
Not at all. I am basically a conservative, middle-class south Indian Brahmin. As it is, we don't like debt, and I am very uncomfortable with a $700 million (around Rs. 3,180 crore) debt.

Now the highlight here is, even though iGate is a US-based IT commpany and is supposed to be Global, the CEO of that organization owes his Business decisions to his roots - he being a middle-class Brahmin. And then it drives the organization's future and thus the Culture. So when a newly appointed executives talks of bringing about a change in the culture what he means is, to borrow from his background, experience and nature and apply that to the organization. So is there something called as Organizational Culture or is it a mere reflection of the Top executive? The answer is Yes and No.

In case of smaller organizations, the culture is dictated by the executives or top leadership. An organization with 100-odd employees (or a few thosand in case of IT companies, because that is 'small' for the industry) gets a new CEO, and since he is a conservative Brahmin who doesn't like debt would not go for more acquisitions. Had he been a Marwadi, or a Punjabi or a Gujrathi the organization's future course could have been different.

But in larger organizations (and not just size but how long the company has been in the business), a new CEO would not be able to make a dent in organization's culture. Think of IBM or a Unilever. Or a Tata group company or ONGC in Indian context. Leadership style may vary, few processes would change, but it's unlikely that there is a paradigm shift in organization's Culture.

 Another aspect of looking at Murthy's comment is: the impact of your previous organization, especially when you have spent significant time with it. In this case Phaneesh Murthy would not name Infosys, his previous organization where he served 10 years, helped grow it phenomenally and where he was finally asked to resign because of a sexual harassment litigation against him. Murthy glinks his conservative, risk-averse Business mind to his Brahmin roots, which is true, but what is also true is that his previous organization, Infosys has a huge contribution in it too.

Infosys, India's second largest IT-services company is and has been debt-free all along. Analysts often criticize Infosys for not growing inorganically though acquisitions, because Infosys leadership too doesn't 'like to borrow'. Again that could in turn be linked with the founders' brahmin roots... 

But what is also true is, when you are part of an organization for significant time(in senior capacity, of course), you not only are influenced by the Culture but you can also influence or shape up the Culture. L&T's chairman Naik started his career with L&T as a fresher and has been there for 46 years!!! If he starts-up his own venture its obvious that the culture of his start-up would resemble that of L&T's .

Hey, but in the same interview Murthy talked of 'kicking butt' in the marketplace post acquisition - the kind of language that does not go with his middle-class Brahmin background nor resemble the mellowed and always-politically-correct language at his previous organization Infosys. Maybe Phaneesh has a mixed parentage :) (Don't call me Racist, I was refering to his organization's US-based culture and his long tenure in the US!)

Come to think of it...Organizational Culture is to an Organization what Religion is to a Society. The only difference is, you can move to different Organizations if you don't like Culture; but that's not the  case with Religion :( And the worse part is - you don't get to choose the Religion...

Happy New Year 2011...

Hello World!


Happy New Year 2011...