A Leader Should Know How to Manage Failure

Here is an snippet from our former President Dr. A P J Abdul Kalam:

India Knowledge@Wharton: Could you give an example, from your own experience, ofhow leaders should manage failure?

Kalam: Let me tell you about my experience. In 1973 I became the projectdirector of India's satellite launch vehicle program, commonly called the SLV-3. Our goal was to put India's "Rohini" satellite into orbit by 1980. I was given funds and human resources -- but was told clearly that by 1980 we had to launchthe satellite into space.

Thousands of people worked together in scientific andtechnical teams towards that goal. By 1979 -- I think the month was August -- we thought we were ready. As the project director, I went to the control center for the launch. At four minutesbefore the satellite launch, the computer began to go through the checklist ofitems that needed to be checked. One minute later, the computer program put thelaunch on hold; the display showed that some control components were not inorder.

My experts -- I had four or five of them with me -- told me not to worry; they had done their calculations and there was enough reserve fuel. So I bypassed the computer, switched to manual mode, and launched the rocket. In the first stage, everything worked fine. In the second stage, a problem developed.Instead of the satellite going into orbit, the whole rocket system plunged into the Bay of Bengal. It was a big failure.

That day, the chairman of the Indian Space Research Organization, Prof. SatishDhawan, had called a press conference. The launch was at 7:00 am, and the pressconference -- where journalists from around the world were present -- was at7:45 am at ISRO's satellite launch range in Sriharikota [in Andhra Pradesh insouthern India]. Prof. Dhawan, the leader of the organization, conducted thepress conference himself. He took responsibility for the failure -- he said thatthe team had worked very hard, but that it needed more technological support. He assured the media that in another year, the team would definitely succeed.

Now,I was the project director, and it was my failure, but instead, he tookresponsibility for the failure as chairman of the organization.

The next year, in July 1980, we tried again to launch the satellite -- and this time we succeeded. The whole nation was jubilant. Again, there was a press conference. Prof. Dhawan called me aside and told me, "You conduct the press conference today.

"I learned a very important lesson that day: When failure occurred, the leader of the organization owned that failure. When success came, he gave it to his team.

The best management lesson I have learned did not come to me from reading a book; it came from that experience.

Do's and Don'ts during a STROKE

You could save a life.

STROKE: Remember The 1st Three Letters... S.T.R.

My friend sent this to me and encouraged me to post it and spread the word. I agree. If Everyone can remember something this simple, we could save some folks.

STROKE IDENTIFICATION:

During a party, a friend stumbled and took a little fall - she assured everyone that she was fine and just tripped over a brick because of her new shoes. (they offered to call ambulance)
They got her cleaned up and got her a new plate of food - while she appeared a bit shaken up, Ingrid went about enjoying herself the rest of the evening. Ingrid's husband called later telling everyone that his wife had been taken to the hospital - (at 6:00pm , Ingrid passed away.)
She had suffered a stroke at the party. Had they known how to identify the signs of a stroke, perhaps Ingrid would be with us today.

Some don't die. They end up in a helpless, hopeless condition instead. It only takes a minute to read this...

STROKE IDENTIFICATION:

A neurologist says that if he can get to a stroke victim within 3 hours he can totally reverse the effects of a stroke...totally. He said the trick was getting a stroke recognized, diagnosed, and then getting the patient medically cared for within 3 hours, which is tough.

RECOGNIZING A STROKE

Remember the "3" steps, STR . Read and Learn! Sometimes symptoms of a stroke are difficult to identify. Unfortunately, the lack of awareness spells disaster. The stroke victim may suffer severe brain damage when people nearby fail to recognize the symptoms of a stroke. Now doctors say a bystander can recognize a stroke by askingthree simple questions :

S * Ask the individual to SMILE .
T* = TALK. Ask the person to SPEAK A SIMPLESENTENCE (Coherently) (eg "It is sunny out today").
R* Ask him or her to RAISE BOTH ARMS .

If he or she has trouble with ANY ONE of these tasks, call the ambulanceand describe the symptoms to the dispatcher.

NOTE : Another 'sign' of a stroke is

1. Ask the person to 'stick' out their tongue.

2. If the tongue is 'crooked', if it goes to one side or the other that is also an indication of a stroke.

Why Fuel price Soaring??!!

By now it is becoming too obvious that the United States is playing the oil game all over again. And this is the desperate gamble of a country whose economy is neck deep in trouble.Given this scenario, managing prices of oil is central to the US economic architecture. Expectedly, this gamble has been played in a great alliance between the US government, US financial sector and the media.

The repeated softening of the interest rates in the US that has the potency to kill the US dollar; and How the fall in the US dollar suits the US corporate sector, especially its omnipotent financial sector. Naturally, since the past few years, the US financial sector has begun to turn its attention from currency and stock markets to commodity markets. According to The Economist, about $260 billion has been invested into the commodity market --up nearly 20 times from what it was in 2003.

Coinciding with a weak dollar and this speculative interest of the US financial sector, prices of commodities have soared globally. And most of these investments are bets placed by hedge and pension funds, always on the lookout for risky but high-yielding investments. What is indeed interesting to note here is that unlike margin requirements for stocks which areas high as 50 per cent in many markets, the margin requirements for commodities is a mere 5-7 per cent. This implies that with an outlay of a mere $260 billion these speculators would be able to take positions of approximately $5 trillion -- yes, $5 trillion! -- in the futures markets. It is estimated that half of these are bets placed on oil.

Readers may note that oil is internationally traded in New York and London and denominated in US dollar only. Naturally, it has been opined by experts that since the advent of oil futures, oil prices are no longer controlled by OPEC(Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries). Rather, it is now done by Wall Street. This tectonic shift in the determination of international oil prices from the hands of producers to the hands of speculators is crucial to understanding the oil price rise. Today's oil prices are believed to be determined by the four Anglo-American financial companies-turned-oil traders, viz., Goldman Sachs, Citi group, J PMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley. It is only they who have any idea about who is entering into oil futures or derivative contracts. It is also they who are placing bets on oil prices and in the process ensuring that the prices of oil futures go up by the day.But how does the increase in the price of this oil in the futures market determine the prices of oil in the spot markets? Crucially, does speculation in oil influence and determine the prices of oil in the spot markets? Answering these questions as to whether speculation has supercharged the demand for oil.

The Economist, in its recent issue, states: 'But that is plain wrong.Such speculators do not own real oil. Every barrel they buy in the futures markets they sell back again before the contract ends. That may raise the price of 'paper barrels,' but not of the black stuff refiners turn into petrol. It is true that high futures prices could lead someone to hoard oil today in the hope of a higher price tomorrow. But inventories are not especially full just now and there are few signs of hoarding.'On both counts -- that speculation in oil is not pushing up oil prices, as well as on the issue of the build-up of inventories -- the venerable Economist is wrong.The finding of US Senate Committee in 2006In June 2006, when the oil price in the futures markets was about $60 a barrel,a Senate Committee in the US probed the role of market speculation in oil and gas prices.

The report points out that large purchase of crude oil futures contracts by speculators has, in effect, created additional demand for oil and in the process driven up the future prices of oil.The report further stated that it was 'difficult to quantify the effect of speculation on prices,' but concluded that 'there is substantial evidence that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices. 'The report further estimated that speculative purchases of oil futures had added as much as $20-25 per barrel to the then prevailing price of $60 per barrel. In today's prices of approximately $130 per barrel, this means that approximately$100 per barrel could be attributed to speculation!But the report found a serious loophole in the US regulation of oil derivatives trading, which according to experts could allow even a 'herd of elephants to walk to through it.'

The report pointed out that US energy futures were traded on regulated exchanges within the US and subjected to extensive oversight by the Commodities Future Trading Commission (CFTC) -- the US regulator for commodity futures market.In recent years, the report however pointed out to the tremendous growth in the trading of contracts which were traded on unregulated OTC (over-the-counter)electronic markets. Interestingly, the report pointed out that the trading of energy commodities by large firms on OTC electronic exchanges was exempted from CFTC oversight by a provision inserted at the behest of Enron into the Commodity Futures Modernization Act in 2000.The report concludes that consequential impact on account of lack of market oversight has been 'substantial.'NYMEX (New York Mercantile Exchange) traders are required to keep records of all trades and report large trades to the CFTC enabling it to gauge the extent of speculation in the markets and to detect, prevent, and prosecute price manipulation.

In contrast, however, traders on unregulated OTC electronic exchanges are not required to keep records or file any information with the CFTC as these trades are exempt from its oversight.Consequently, as there is no monitoring of such trading by the oversight body,the committee believes that it allows speculators to indulge in price manipulation.Finally, the report concludes that to a certain extent, whether or not any level of speculation is 'excessive' lies entirely in the eye of the beholder.

In the absence of data, however, it is impossible to begin the analysis or engage in an informed debate over whether our energy markets are functioning properly or are in the midst of a speculative bubble. That was two years back. And much water has flown in the Mississippi since then. The link to the spot markets Now to answer the second leg of the question: how speculators are able to translate the future prices into spot prices. The answer to this question is fairly simple. After all, oil price is highly inelastic -- i.e. even a substantial increase in price does not alter the consumption pattern.

No wonder, a mere 3-4 per cent annual global growth has translated into more than a 40 per cent annual increase in prices for the past three or four years.But there is more to it. One may note that the world supply and demand is evenly matched at about 85 million barrels every day. Only if supplies exceed demand by a substantial margin can any downward pressure on oil prices be created. In contrast, if someone with deep pockets picks up even a small quantity of oil, it dramatically alters the delicate global demand-supply gap, creating enormous upward pressure on prices.

What is interesting to note is that the US strategic oil reserves were at approximately 350 million barrels for a decade till 2006. However, for the past year and a half these reserves have doubled to more than 700 million barrels. Naturally, this build-up of strategic oil reserves by the US (of 350 million barrels) is adding enormous pressure on the oil demand and consequently its prices.Do the oil speculators know of this reserves build-up by the US and are indulging in rampant speculation? Are they acting in tandem with the US government? Worse still, are they bordering on recklessness knowing fully well that if the oil prices fall the US government will be forced to a 'BearsStearns' on them and bail them out? One is not sure.But who foots bill at such high prices? At an average price of even $100 per barrel, the entire cost for the purchase of this additional 350 million barrels by the US works out to a mere $35 billion.

Needless to emphasise, this can be funded by the US by allowing it currency printing presses to work overtime. After all, it has a currency that is acceptable globally and people world wideare willing to exchange it for precious oil. No wonder Goldman Sachs predicts that oil will touch $200 to a barrel shortly,knowing fully well that the US government will back its prediction. And, in the past three years alone the world has paid an estimated additional $3trillion for its oil purchases. Oil speculators (and not oil producers) are the biggest beneficiaries of this price increase. In the process, the US has been able to keep the value of the US dollar afloat -- perhaps at an extra cost of a mere $35 billion to its exchequer! The global crude oil price rise is complex, sinister and beyond innocent economic theories of demand and supply. It is speculation, geopolitics and much more. Obviously, there is a symbiotic link between the US, the US dollar and the oil prices. And unless this truth is understood and the link broken, oil prices cannot be controlled.

--An article from www.rediff.com

Switching Job? Interesting Article...

This article was sent by my manager... I cannot completely agree to this.. but it has some strong reasons...

Mr. Gopalakrishnan succeeds Mr. Ratan Tata as Chairman of Tata Sons Ltd., the holding company for many of the Tata Bluechips - like Tata Steel, Tata Motors, Tata Power, Tata Chemicals, Voltas, etc. Possibly, he is the first non-Tata person to head the Tata Empire. The below article, written by him, is really interesting!

The grass isn't always greener on the other side!! Move from one job to another - but only for the right reasons. It's yet another day at office. As I logged on to the marketing and advertising sites for the latest updates, as usual, I found the headlines dominated by "who's moving from one company to another after a short stint", and I wondered, "why are so many people leaving one job for another? Is it passe now to work with just one company for a sufficiently long period"?

Whenever I ask this question to people who leave a company, the answers I get are
"Oh, I am getting a 200% hike in salary";
"Well, I am jumping three levels in my designation";
"Well, they are going to send me abroad in six months".

Then, I look around at all the people who are considered successful today and who have reached the top - be it a media agency, an advertising agency or a company. I find that most of these people are the ones who have stuck to the company, ground their heels and worked their way to the top. And, as I look around for people who changed their jobs constantly, I find they have stagnated at some level, in obscurity! In this absolutely ruthless, dynamic and competitive environment, there are still no short cuts to success or to making money. The only thing that continues to pay, as earlier, is Loyalty and Hard work. Yes, it pays! Sometimes - immediately, sometimes - after a lot of time. But, it does pay. Does this mean that one should stick to an organisation and wait for that golden moment? Of course not. After a long stint, there always comes a time for moving, in most organisations. But, it is important to move for the right reasons - rather than superficial ones, like money, designation or an overseas trip.

Remember, no company recruits for charity. More often than not, when you are offered an unseemly hike in salary or designation that is disproportionate to what that company offers its current employees, there is always unseen bait attached. The result? You will, in the long-term, have reached exactly the same levels or maybe lower levels, than what you would have in your current company. A lot of people leave an organisation because they are "unhappy". What is this so-called-unhappiness? I have been working for donkey's years, and there has never been a day when I am not unhappy about something in my work - environment, boss, rude colleague, fussy clients, etc. Unhappiness in a workplace, to a large extent, is transient. If you look hard enough, there is always something to be unhappy about. But, more importantly, do I come to work to be "happy" in the truest sense? If I think hard, the answer is "No". Happiness is something you find with family, friends, may be a close circle of colleagues who have become friends. What you come to work for is to earn, build a reputation, satisfy your ambitions, be appreciated for your work ethics, face challenges and get the job done. So, the next time you are tempted to move, ask yourself "why are you moving" and "what are you moving into"?

Some questions are

• Am I ready and capable of handling the new responsibility? If yes, what could be the possible reasons my current company has not offered me the same responsibility
• Who are the people who currently handle this responsibility in the current and the new company? Am I as good as the best among them?
• As the new job offer has a different profile, why have I not given the current company the option to offer me this profile
• Why is the new company offering me the job? Do they want me for my skills, or is there an ulterior motive?

An honest answer to these will eventually decide where you go in your career - either to the top of the pile, in the long-term (at the cost of short-term blips), or to become another average employee who gets lost with time in the wilderness?
By - Dr. Gopalkrishnan Chairman - TATA Sons.