The PJ (poor joke) above might no longer remain a PJ if banana peel is replaced by a typical problematic situation one encounters in daily routine. The question remains unanswered then: Why do some people find it difficult to act beyond cure? They do think 'Prevention is The Best Cure' though! I was no different from them! But now my journey is gathering speed, hopefully in the direction that the blog is supposed to drive towards. Checkout my other blogs and work at http://www.worldOFkaizen.com/
Showing posts with label Sense-of-urgency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sense-of-urgency. Show all posts

Wednesday, 25 December 2013

Ant Knocks Elephant Down

Ant knocks elephant down

Fishing trawler hits warship, sinks it's crown

Phishing stinks, makes Naval-vigilance frown

Above MaiKu© is inspired by the News "Fishing trawler sinks after colliding with Naval warship".

It highlights the importance of powerful vigilance using 7-Senses. 

It tells you to keep one eye on long-range vision and the other on shorter-range planning and actions else crisis might strike unannounced.

It tells you to keep one eye on strategy, the other on tactics.

It tells you to keep one eye on telescope, the other on microscope.

©MaiKu Is My-Haiku
Freely ideate it's poetic rhymes
Any objective topic it chimes

Also read a few relevant blog-posts hereunder

Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy
Old-Problems, New-Reasons ! 
Strategise To Achieve Targets Daily 
Why do strategies fail
Comprehensive-Strategic-Audits
Will It Work Here?
Can-changing-thoughts-change-nation?
In-big-problem-wear-hats-to-solve-it
Ridiculous Poison-culture versus Maverick Kaizen-culture
WOW Work-Culture: By Telling or Selling
IQ-EQ-or-SQ: What-is-more-important
Talent-Is-Latent: Enable It!
Judge If It's Paralysis-By-Analysis
Will It Work Here?
Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy
Does recognition really matter
Who Comes First: Consumer Or Customer ?
Treat Root-causes, Not Symptoms !
ABCD of India Shining
Do You Ask Right Questions?
Am I 'Short-sighted' or 'Long-sighted'?

Friday, 28 June 2013

Who's Just, Who's Unjust

Just read about a journalist releasing news sitting over shoulders of a flood-affected villager. He was dismissed from service by the media company as soon as the news broke out. Perhaps the quick action was to tackle public pressure or was to pre-empt competition from enhancing their own TRP by over-publicizing it.

While I am not justifying his 'misdeed', some other questions do remain unanswered in my mind. I tried to capture them in the form of a poem in the end.

Could the journalist have covered the news in the 'depth' that he wished to, by any other means? Perhaps yes as one might tend to think so from the video

But then were other means available to him there? Video tells only part of the story. Under what circumstances and with what facilities was the journalist operating there in order to collect total news in 'depth'?

Anyway having done so, was he 'sitting over shoulders' with an intention of atrocity? And if at all it's a mistake, in retrospect one may find number off them at one's own personal level. 

Let's look at it the other way round. 

If there was an opportunity for the flood-affected villager to earn his bread for that day by helping carry the journalist over his  shoulders, what right do others (be it public, a corporate house or government) get to snatch it from him? Have there not been Human-Rickshaws in Kolkatta earning their livelihood for so long on similar lines?  It has been a socioeconomic need!

If at all one finds the journalist atrocious then there have been many more so far in not providing alternative job opportunities to needy forcing them to resort to inhuman jobs such as Human-Rickshaw pullers.

Likewise if we shift our attention to in-discipline in other disciplines and fields, one might find many such atrocities.

If someone dies in an accident while negotiating a road full of pot-holes that s/he couldn't spot due to non-functional street-lights, are the concerned authorities considered atrocious? Do the concerned authorities such as municipality or electricity-boards, etc. get sued and convicted for dirty-danger-difficult conditions on road?

If a city like Mumbai goes under water due to illegal constructions and hutments in and around nullahs blocking water-flow resulting in colossal loss to lives and properties, are the concerned authorities, goons and politicians supporting them considered as atrocious?

These are realities not 'ifs-and-buts' stories. If one deep-dives into crises or near-miss cases or studies fatalities she reads about each day, 'atrocities' might be found in abundance. 

Who will decide then 'what's right' and 'what's wrong', 'what's an atrocity and what's not one'?

Who will decide 'who's right' and 'who's wrong' in cases such as above?

If the journalist's act was wrong and atrocious then the sense-of-urgency demonstrated by the concerned is commendable. In that case, can decision-makers in other disciplines and fields such as above demonstrate similar sense-of-urgency in awarding justice in case of bigger and criminal atrocities?

Hope to receive your comments on tips covered in here and on the poem titled:

Who's Just Who's Unjust (कोण न्यायी कोण अन्यायी)

कोण न्यायी कोण अन्यायी
अन्यायी जाहले बेलगाम मुक्त
न्यायी मात्र कडेकोटात बंदिस्त

कोण न्यायी कोण अन्यायी
सुस्त बेशिस्त अविचारी स्वधुंदीत स्व:त्वात जे मस्त
की जे विश्वात्मक शिस्तीचे वक्तशीर भक्त

कोण न्यायी कोण अन्यायी
ते, जयांचे शील जाहले स्वस्त
की जे विचारी-परोपकार-करी निवांत

कोण न्यायी कोण अन्यायी
जे अन्यायान्याय सही, परी ना करी व्यक्त
की जे अन्याया-वरी जात्या कृति-शील-शिस्तवान साधूसंत

कोण न्यायी कोण अन्यायी
अन्यायी जाहले बेलगाम मुक्त
न्यायी मात्र कडेकोटात बंदिस्त

Await English version of the poem soon.

Wednesday, 12 June 2013

Tolerate Once, Twice, Thrice?


Recently I came across a spiritual article on Tolerance that referred to UNESCO's definition: "Tolerance is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world's cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human. It is fostered by knowledge, openness, communication, and freedom of thought, conscience and belief. Tolerance is harmony in difference."

Sometimes it appears difficult to practice some spiritual prescriptions such as above. Such sane characteristics typical of epic-character 'Rama' become impractical especially while dealing with insane 'Kaansaa's kind black behaviors. So I dug into UNESCO's definition further knowing very well that I am too small a fly in front of spiritual Gurus and UNESCO's definition as well that went on to say that, "Tolerance is the responsibility that upholds human rights, pluralism (including cultural pluralism), democracy and the rule of law."

On seeing reference to "the rule of law" in the definition, I was a bit relieved.

How long does one tolerate a given abnormal situation or an abnormal behavior, be it that of self or that of others?

Once, Twice, Thrice? How many times? Everyone faces this dilemma some time or the other.

Epic character Rama in you may tolerate abnormal behaviors limitlessly. However another epic character Krishna 'directed me' to devise my own method to make a judgement.

In any given situation there may be an involvement of man, machine (equipment), material, method (a standard, a process or a procedure to perform act/s) in a typical work environment.

Anything going wrong in any one of these ingredients individually or collectively may create an undesired or a mistakeful outcome that one refers to  as an abnormal situation. It's like an undesired, out-of-tune, out-of-beat, noise instead music getting produced in an orchestra.

The undesired outcome may be due to a collection of mistakes. Role of 'music director' of the situation is to track and trace such mistakes in order to  'orchestrate' prevention of those for producing desired effect in future.

So as a student of Kaizen-school-of-thoughts, in order to prevent making wrong judgement while studying an undesired situation, I identified three categories of mistakes.

1/ Inadvertent mistakes
2/ Careless mistakes
3/ Criminal mistakes

An inadvertent mistake is unintentional. It's not done on purpose. It might just  happen as a result of missing consciousness of one's own mistake or that of others. It is like falling in a given pit or a pot-hole on road for the first time. The cause may be inattention while talking on cell phone. Or it may be that  someone else being on wrong side forced the victim on right (correct) side to suffer.

A careless mistake happens due to missing concern or worry about consequences of a mistake. It might occur as a result of not giving sufficient attention or thought, especially concerning it's avoidance or harm therefrom. It is like falling in a pit second time while talking on cell phone. Mostly fools fall in this category.

A criminal mistake is the one that recurs due to recurring carelessness. It's criminal since there is a resistance to learn from past mistakes. It's criminal if it's done intentionally. In most cases, the criminal himself may not fall but surely makes fellow-beings fall and, if not arrested, repeatedly so. In fact, he ends up pushing them and at times pushing community itself into crises.

Inadvertent and careless mistakes are relatively easy to tackle. But criminal mistakes are the most difficult ones to tackle because they are more to do with wrong intentions and criminal mindsets deployed by-design.

So coming back to the question, "How long does one tolerate a given abnormal behavior?" is like asking "How long does one tolerate mistakes of self or of others? How many times: Once, Twice, Thrice?"

My method is:

1/ Tolerate a mistake one-time while it's Inadvertent. Invest in training and putting Kaizen efforts on errors thus revealed in order to make the process mistake-proof. Establish complimentary SOPs (standard-operating-procedures), rules and regulations to prevent deterioration of the mistake-proof level attained.

2/ May tolerate a mistake second time while it's at Careless-stage. Put in training, Kaizen efforts and complimentary rules & regulations by revisiting the mistakes in order to make the process mistake-proof.

This way the chances are that inadvertent and careless mistakes may get prevented from getting matured into criminal ones especially that concerned with safety, dignity and rightful rights at personal level as also concerned with rightful common goals.

3/ So having given opportunity for structured learning and that of tolerating mistakes once or twice, tolerating it the third-time is being criminal on the part of the tolerates or the orchestrator himself apart from tolerating the so-called criminal making mistake. Because in that case it's the orchestrator who allows a small-mistake to grow into a crime or a crisis or a disaster.

Having established that a mistake falls in criminal-category, it should be dealt with with a sense-of-urgency.

Apart from enforcing rules & regulations used to deal with criminals while 'dealing with criminal mistakes', great leaders deal with 'causes of such intentional behaviors'. Like wrong intentioned poor leaders they don't corner the people making mistakes. That's a separate topic to be dealt with some other time on investing time and efforts in 'behavior-modulation' of the people concerned.