Read this beutiful Doha (couplet) from Kabir
Bada Hua to Kya Hua, Jaise Ped Khajoor
Panthi Ko Chhaya Nahin, Phal Lage Atidoor
Here is my attempt at translation for those who don’t understand Hindi:
“Being big (great) like a Khajoor (dates) tree is useless as Khajoor tree is tall but gives no shade to a traveller and it’s fruits are not accessible.”
Last week, I had lunch in New Jersey with Anjan Lahiri (President and Co-CEO, MindTree). We were talking about our families, how he has settled in Bangalore, the school his daughter goes to etc. He talked about how kids learn and how we learn many things from being around them. He narrated a funny story. One day Anjan was watching his wife tie his daughters shoe laces. He realized that the knot was a little different. When he tied the knot the same way, his shoe laces would stay tied. All of us (at least I do), face this problem of the shoe laces coming untied.
Although that was a very small part of our lunch conversation, the thought of tying shoe laces the right way stuck with me all day. I found a Wikipedia article on shoelaces:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoelaces
It has a section on ‘Shoelace Tying’. I use the most common knot; ‘the bow’, which is basically two half knots. There are two kinds of half knots. Two consecutive right over left half knots (or two consecutive left over right half knots) is called a ‘Granny Knot’. A right over left half-knot followed by a left over right half knot (or vice versa) is called a ‘Square’ or ‘Reef Knot’. I (and I am sure; or hope most of you J ) have always used the ‘Granny Knot’. My shoe laces come untied every now and then (about once or twice a day). For the last 4 days I have used the ‘Square’ or ‘Reef Knot’. The shoe laces have not come untied even once.
All you have to change is if you put left side lace over right side lace for your first half knot, put right side lace over the left for your second knot (or vice versa). It is that simple.
Sure, thank me if you face this minor nuisance and I have helped you avoid it. But that’s not the point of this article. How many other minor irritants do we tolerate like this in our daily life; not only in our personal grooming but at our home or at work? How keenly do we observe people, events, and surroundings and learn from it?
‘I want to give myself the best possible chance’ is a common theme I have observed in interviews of committed and outstanding performers. Those who perform at the highest possible level prepare to the best of their abilities.
We get to enjoy the performances but it is a pity that we don’t get to learn about the hard work and the dedication behind them. High performers do everything in their capacity to be at the best of their abilities when the show starts. That involves hard work and sacrifices.
I recently read Shane Watson’s interview on cricketnext.in.com. The full interview is at:
http://cricketnext.in.com/news/watson-credits-booze-ban-for-consistency/35056-13.html
He was one of the top performers in the recently concluded India-Australia cricket series. He was also a star performer in the IPL (Indian Professional League). The early part of his career was hampered by injuries and because of that he was not a permanent member of the Australian team despite being extremely talented. He is now relatively injury-free but his focus has improved as well. In the interview he attributed his performance to saying ‘no’ to alcohol, even during celebration parties.
Here are some quotes from his interview:
“I’m off drinking while playing and training so I’m giving myself every chance I possibly can to be right throughout this big workload especially,” Watson said.
“It’s been since I injured my hamstring in South Africa during the Tweny20 (last September). So the only time I had a drink was after the IPL to celebrate, just a couple of glasses of champagne. But, after that, once I get back into training and playing, I’ve got to give myself the best possible chance to get through games,”
“I definitely celebrate. I’ve made sure it doesn’t take away from celebrations. I’m not isolating myself from the group because I’ve not sat down and just said ‘I’m not going to drink’; I want to make sure I’m still involved and be celebrating and have fun which I always do,” he said.
The all-rounder added: “It just saves me. I know when I wake up in the morning, a few blokes are feeling a bit dusty and I’m fresh as a daisy, a bit tired but fresh.”
Here are some quotes from other famous stars on this subject:
Sachin Tendulkar
‘It doesn’t always happen according to the way you have planned things out but I feel if you have covered most of the aspects, it does help out there in the middle. ‘
‘At least with me, the match starts much, much earlier than the actual match. ‘
Tiger Woods
“People thought it was asinine for me to change my swing after I won the Masters by 12 shots. … Why would you want to change that? Well, I thought I could become better. If I play my best, I’m pretty tough to beat. I’d like to play my best more frequently, and that’s the whole idea. That’s why you make changes. I thought I could become more consistent.”
Excerpt from ’How I play Golf’ by Tiger Woods
Have you seen how Tiger Woods will back away after he putt the ball, and seemingly prepares himself for a victory pump even before the ball reach the hole. How did he know that a shot is going in before it goes in?
In the book, Tiger Woods talked about the importance of preparation.
Tiger learned from his dad the importance of preparation for the game. Before a tournament, he would spend hours analyzing the different holes, visualizing the different scenarios that could happen after each shot. His talent merely brings him in line with the top golfers in the world. Its his preparation that sets him apart from the rest of the field.
Preparation is boring. You do not do any actual stuff. You merely spend hours analyzing videos, brainstorming on different possible scenarios that might occur, and visualizing them. Many of the scenarios will never occur, and you might find it a waste of time.
Indeed, many people prefer to jump straight into a game without preparing for it. Yet it has been proven time and again that the best athletes are the ones that spend an enormous amount of time on preparation.
Tiger Woods is one of them.
Michael Jordan
Phil Jackson once said this about his protégé, “You cannot find anyone that competes as hard in training as in competition”
There is immense knowledge hidden in the scriptures; knowledge that is eternal.
Here is a gem of a shloka (couplet) from Purva Mimansa written by Jaimini many centuries ago (exact timeframe not known).
Purva: Previous Mimansa: Investigation, research or examination
Here it is:
Upakramopasamharo abhyaso-purvata phalam
arthavadopapatti cha lingam tatparya nirnaye
Meaning of the couplet This couplet prescribes a review process. This process should be used to review articles, books, white papers etc.
It says that to analyze, understand, conclude (tatparya nirnaye) and learn from a piece of writing one must look at seven things (lingam).
First, read the beginning (Upakram) and ending (Upasamhar). The beginning and ending tell us the purpose for writing the piece. Understand the purpose first.
Then look for repetition (Abhyas). What is reiterated in this article many times? Make a note of it.
Now look for novelty (Apurvata). Is there anything in the article that is new or unprecedented? Understand that.
Next, look for result expected (Phalam). Find out what will you gain as a result of this article. The author will use sentences like “If you do it this way, ….”, “If this continues, …” in the article look for them.
After this, look for exaggeration or glorification (Arthavad). Leave it aside as that part serves no purpose.
And finally look for logical and appropriate arguments (Upapatti). Look for logically developed arguments, references, relevant examples etc.
Great prescription, isn’t it?
I recently came across a beautiful poem, ‘Two Tramps In Mud Time’ by Robert Frost.
Here are a few lines from that poem:
My object in living is to unite
My avocation and my vocation
As my two eyes make one in sight.
Only where love and need are one,
And the work is play for mortal stakes,
Is the deed ever really done
For Heaven and the future’s sakes
———-
Sitting in my office, staring at my monitor at well past bed time, fighting to meet a deadline, I have wondered many times, “Am I enjoying this? how did I end up in this line of work? Why me? Why?
Yes, I have wondered. I bet you that I am not the only one. I am sure just like me, you have also fantasized about being a painter (replace your dream profession here), working on a masterpiece, locked in a room for days with no sense of time.
Common admit it..
Ok, now that we are on the same page.. let’s talk about ‘Enjoying work you get paid for’.
There are a few people (ok.. really really small population) who knew early on what they enjoy doing and are working in a career of their liking. Good for them.. Most, if not all of us don’t belong to this category, so let’s move on…
Then there are some people, again a small population, who did not start with a career of their liking but who now immensely enjoy the work they do. Again, most of us don’t belong here as well, so let’s move on…
Ok.. let’s talk about the rest of us now. How did we end up here? Some of us were influenced by our family, friends and the social pressure. Think 10′th and 12′th standard and you will know what I am saying. We were all supposed to go to medical college or engineering college (I won’t talk about the sub-caste system, you know.. IIT, then government, then paid seat.. ok.. ok.. I will stop.. painful memories..). If we were not ‘Good Enough’ for admission to medical or engineering colleges, then we were asked to go to commerce. You get the picture.. if not commerce then arts etc..
How many of us pursued our dream careers? Ohh. I know the standard answers..”I came from a poor family and I had to first make sure that I get into a career that pays me well”. “It was my grandmother’s dream that I become a doctor”. Before you blame everyone else, please answer this question, “Did you feel passionate about a particular profession?” I thought so.. I don’t think we had enough self-awareness and maturity to have a clarity and focus to know what we wanted to do.
Now, our education system and Indian mindset may be responsible for this but that’s not relevant for this article as it doesn’t help our current situation. :-(
Our work puts bread on the table and we have to do it. But since we don’t really enjoy it, it doesn’t provide us job satisfaction. Can we at this time drop everything and pursue our ‘dream’ profession? The answer for most of us is “No”. We may not have enough financial stability, we may not have enough time because our family needs us, and in most cases we may not have enough grey cells left to train ourselves for a new career. We may have a ‘dream profession’ but it doesn’t mean we have the talent or resources to make a switch.
I am not helping am I? Ok.. so is there no hope for us? Is there a way to enjoy our line of work?
Yes there is.. The key is in our attitude and the way we look at our job. No.. don’t run away yet. I am not toeing the useless management line.. “Just learn to enjoy your work.”. I am presenting a different approach.
Unite your dream job (avocation) and your current job (vocation)
We view the professions as distinct compartments that have nothing in common. Nothing is further from the truth. Let’s take my profession. I am a Senior Manager at MindTree Consulting. I truly enjoy writing, sketching, painting, playing sports, traveling etc.
Now, if I can do things I enjoy at work I will start enjoying my job. Simple? Ok.. not so simple.. but not so difficult either. All I need to do is look at each of my interests and see if I can use them at work.
Take writing. I write numerous emails every day, I write comments in performance reviews, I write design documents, I even write articles for MindTree’s intranet portal. Writing that authors and novelists do when they write books and short stories is not really different. Books have a purpose, a storyline, and characters. So do my design documents and emails.
Ok, now lets take sketching and painting. Is sketching a portrait or a landscape really different than the architectural diagrams, doodling when taking notes, drawing on a whiteboard in a meeting?
Ok you may say that this is too simplistic and will not hold when I will compare 2 professions really different from one another. Lets try..
Lets say you wanted to be a doctor but are stuck in the software industry. Ask yourself why did you really want to be a doctor? what does a doctor do? Ok. So you wanted to help people. You wanted to treat people and make them better. Or you wanted to find new treatments. All right. Doctors need to be good listeners. Doctors must be good at asking the right questions to reach correct diagnosis. Doctors must be good at giving comfort. Doctors must be good problem solvers. We in the software industry face similar issues every day. We solve production problems. When an application/website is down we find the root cause and fix it. We interact with users who need help (I know…some of them are really sick.. 
). We have to ask the right questions to figure out what exactly do they need. If they are screaming, crying we have to show compassion and give them comfort.. Right?
You see it is all in the lens we use to look at the world. What we love doing is applicable in one way or another in every profession. We just don’t realize it. When we unite work we enjoy with the work we do for a living, we get true job satisfaction.
Here is the poem in its entirety:
A short guide to the poem: The narrator who is affluent is chopping wood for fun. Two tramps want to do his job for money and that becomes a conflict. There is both pride and enjoyment in how he was doing the job. Watch for the description that conveys how he is enjoying the task. I could not understand the last 2 lines. So if anyone can provide some explanation I would really appreciate it.
Robert Frost – Two Tramps In Mud Time
Out of the mud two strangers came
And caught me splitting wood in the yard,
And one of them put me off my aim
By hailing cheerily “Hit them hard!”
I knew pretty well why he had dropped behind
And let the other go on a way.
I knew pretty well what he had in mind:
He wanted to take my job for pay.
Good blocks of oak it was I split,
As large around as the chopping block;
And every piece I squarely hit
Fell splinterless as a cloven rock.
The blows that a life of self-control
Spares to strike for the common good,
That day, giving a loose to my soul,
I spent on the unimportant wood.
The sun was warm but the wind was chill.
You know how it is with an April day
When the sun is out and the wind is still,
You’re one month on in the middle of May.
But if you so much as dare to speak,
A cloud comes over the sunlit arch,
A wind comes off a frozen peak,
And you’re two months back in the middle of March.
A bluebird comes tenderly up to alight
And turns to the wind to unruffle a plume,
His song so pitched as not to excite
A single flower as yet to bloom.
It is snowing a flake; and he half knew
Winter was only playing possum.
Except in color he isn’t blue,
But he wouldn’t advise a thing to blossom.
The water for which we may have to look
In summertime with a witching wand,
In every wheelrut’s now a brook,
In every print of a hoof a pond.
Be glad of water, but don’t forget
The lurking frost in the earth beneath
That will steal forth after the sun is set
And show on the water its crystal teeth.
The time when most I loved my task
The two must make me love it more
By coming with what they came to ask.
You’d think I never had felt before
The weight of an ax-head poised aloft,
The grip of earth on outspread feet,
The life of muscles rocking soft
And smooth and moist in vernal heat.
Out of the wood two hulking tramps
(From sleeping God knows where last night,
But not long since in the lumber camps).
They thought all chopping was theirs of right.
Men of the woods and lumberjacks,
They judged me by their appropriate tool.
Except as a fellow handled an ax
They had no way of knowing a fool.
Nothing on either side was said.
They knew they had but to stay their stay
And all their logic would fill my head:
As that I had no right to play
With what was another man’s work for gain.
My right might be love but theirs was need.
And where the two exist in twain
Theirs was the better right–agreed.
But yield who will to their separation,
My object in living is to unite
My avocation and my vocation
As my two eyes make one in sight.
Only where love and need are one,
And the work is play for mortal stakes,
Is the deed ever really done
For Heaven and the future’s sakes
Milind: Kobus is one of the closest friends I have. He sent me this note after reading the recent blog entry on my blog. Here is a glimpse of Kobus for you:
He created a portable laser light show on a wall after watching professionals do it on a mountain face
Created antennas, radios and listen to 911 traffic and ATC-pilot conversations
Cooks really well
Can tear down entire basement, build dry-wall, do electrical wiring, and do plumbing
Buildt computer servers from cratch
Went to India to attend a friend’s wedding (it was my wedding).
Has visited at least 20 countries.
Has camped in the wild in South Africa many times.
He is a Guru in web development and manages a technology team as a Technology Officer.
Kobus is from South Africa and currently lives in New Zealand.
Here is the note from Kobus :
————————————————————————————————————————
Arguably in its essence “excellence” is a measure of quality, state or any other quantifiable value comparative to another. Isn’t excellence then the upper limit of the comparative from the perspective of the comparator or must there be an ultimate truth that defines why one quantity is more or less excellent than another?
I rather subscribe to the notion that a measure of excellence is a perception or simply one’s own point of view as to what makes one measure of excellence higher than another. In demonstration: the execution of jihad with martyrdom attains the ultimate of excellence in one point of view while in another draws scourge and utter condemnation. Another would me Michael Jordan being unhappy with his performance even though he hooped all his shots in a game, claiming that he had to think about it. For me, four out of five would be excellent, but there are more opinions about this than my own and thus: I would theorise that a measure of excellence, beyond individual perspectives, comparative to morals are defined by a collective agreement of families, affiliations (Religious or otherwise), nations, races and possibly even species. As an example: Antony Hopkins thus far in his acting career received more than 60 awards and nominations for excellence in acting. Was it not for the collective agreement on what excellence in acting was, there would have been no Oscars, Saturns, Emmys or Globes.
From this principal view one could argue that excellence in a particular comparison, as in the topic of Milind’s Blog, relates to the actors and comparators within scope of that comparison. Thus each comparator will make the comparison based on their own perception over a backdrop of what they believe everyone else’s comparison comes to. As a reiteration of the example, the more individuals that express Antony Hopkins’ abilities as excellent, the closer that measurement appears as an ultimate measure of excellence, in this case for acting. Saying that, one is entirely free to conclude that Antony Hopkins and Sylvester Stallone are on par.
In order to reach a conclusion on what is excellent and what is not, one has to decide what the measurement criteria are, and of course use approximation to compensate for the differential in criteria between individuals, groups and so forth. If excellence was a scientific experiment with predefined, weighted and ordered criteria, defined inputs and outputs and a definition of incremental or diminutive value, the answer would be empirical. In practice however, the criteria used by individuals for judging excellence is far from universally defined, weighted, ordered or un-clouted by personal perceptions of self and others. This of course on a sliding scale of individuals who may be very objective to instinctive or even utterly ignorant.
So could it then be that excellence is the upper limit of a comparison based on the personally attributed, weighted and ordered criteria, approximated to the value perceptions of an individual, superimposed on their perception of the greater criteria and values held by others, comparative to a previously approximated measurement or subconscious intuitive value?
To demonstrate: If two individuals go to a restaurant for dinner, both have individual criteria, which they have built up over their sum of their experiences, for what constitutes the sliding scale of their dining experience. Within the comparative collective (the two diners) each will have unique criteria, but there will also be common criteria which they may have by accident, but most likely acquired from a greater collective (family, affiliations, race, etc). It is safe to assume that both diners would rate the dining experience as non-excellent if the presented food was rotten, which is nearly a universal criterion unless of course you are starving. Even though both diners may have common criteria for judging the excellence of their experience, the weighting of criteria may be totally different. For instance one diner my rate the speed of service more important than the breath of selection on the menu, while the other may not care about the speed but rather that their selection contain every ingredient they desire and none they don’t. In both cases the taste may be utterly satisfactory, but yet the measurement may have two widely differing outcomes in terms of excellence. Case in point, this example shows just how subjective this measurement can be, seeing that the act of eating in its simpler form seems more relevant to the taste of the food.
In order to make comparisons for the sake of determining the excellence “factor” for an approximated set of criteria, one has to have done this before. In the absence of comparative data everything must be excellent. Not entirely true. Because most individuals initially relate highly approximated or esoterically connected criteria as a reference for comparison and can come up with a positive or negative result without having a real second data reference point.
A clear example would be if a teenager drinks beer with their friends for the first time. It is statistically likely that they would rate this experience as excellent even though they have no real frame of reference. In some way they must have inherited this reference in order to make the comparison. In this case it may be easy because teenagers are part of the greater collective where drinking is cool, hence beer is excellent. As the experiences pile up this individual will expand and refine the criteria set that defines their understanding of an excellent drink. Typically the more experiences one has to relate to, the more empirical the result. In the drink example: that may mean that the comparator dissociates the social connection with the comparison and adds aroma, brand, aftertaste, colour and cost to the criteria list. Essentially this behaviour is characterised as being cultured, refined or most of all an expert.
To conclude then on the ultimate meaning of the term excellence, couldn’t one conclude that it is a process by which a single or a collective of individuals strive for new experiences, while changing the “context” and refining the comparison criteria in order to attain the highest approximate excellence value, for their sphere of influence or visibility. Similarly the term “strive” could also imply judgment of others without necessarily striving for excellence one self.
I believe there are four types of excellence. Personal excellence, self comparative excellence, dissociated excellence and collective excellence.
Personal excellence is of course the act of repetitively gaining experience until we cannot detect a perceived positive differential between this and another similar comparisons for ourselves. I would argue that this is a fundamental component of being or doing anything excellent. The excellent factor will ebb and flow as one refines the criteria and changes the context. Ultimately one will have an opinion about one’s own excellence point with diminishing improvements over time. Excellence can of course pertain to one’s abilities as well as one’s physical possessions.
Self comparative excellence is where one compares one’s own excellence point for a specific comparison to that of another person or group of persons. Depending on state of mind, statistically one is likely to pick highly approximated or even imagined criteria so as to favour oneself or one’s possessions as the more excellent. This self favouring is much harder if the result is empirical, say ‘n boxing match, year end sales result or the BMW model number. Self comparison is a major driving force behind personal excellence and probably the main reason why we “strive” as Milind put it. To me “strive” means with effort, struggle and determination.
Dissociated excellence is the upper value of comparing two individuals, groups or things where the comparator may have a highly approximated understanding of the criteria, and at no point do they include themselves in the equation. For argument sake, any couch potato can conclude that Hopkins is better than Stallone without comparing their own acting skills or that Rolex is better than Casio without owning either.
Last but not least, collective excellence is born from a common agreement that something, some act or someone has attained excellence. In many cases this is handed down dissociated excellence and judgement. On smaller scales it could be relatively refined and precise. For example: Einstein was a genius. It certainly is quantifiably true at MIT, less so on Fox News and much less on MTV, but yet everybody knows it, and for most of us, without having any grounds or skills for evaluating it.
So to get to Milind’s workplace excellence discussion and my view on his thought provoking questions:
1. I agree that excellence is “striven” for. We approach excellence by doing something again and again, every time further refining the criteria, manipulating the context and comparing the result. A better result drives excellence.
2. As I theorised, there are many types of excellence. Self excellence is dissociated from groups or organisations, but individuals within groups or companies may compare themselves with the perceived excellence of others for self comparative excellence. This in turn will drive dissociated and collective excellence to some extent based on the culture and structure of the organization.
3. I believe that excellence is a process, and the apt term “Strive” also hints that it may be unattainable. Once you get there excellence is one improvement away. Luckily for our human ability to approximate and inherent forgetfulness we perceive excellence far more often that we approach it.
4. Everyone can be personally excellent. In fact this is our natural disposition true or not by the facts. Growing up and gaining experience and growing old invariably makes us all personally excellent. Learning to walk, talk, drive a car, flip burgers or cure cancer. Self comparative excellence is harder, although with approximation and pure ingenious imagination we can get through life believing we are special, although we all know that there is someone better out there somewhere. Approaching dissociated or collective excellence is much harder because we may have to work really hard to win, be seen and be lucky enough to get other people to believe one’s own abilities. Or ultimately to have a collective excellence where the reality may well be dwarfed by the collective perception.
5. I believe every living human, and possibly every other living being, can approach personal excellence. At smaller scales, self comparative excellence is approachable for most humans, but at larger scales and contexts become harder, but we are protected by our own sense of superiority. Dissociated excellence is reserved for fewer of us for narrower scopes of comparison, but still common on smaller scopes and scales. Collective excellence is elusive and is approached most of the time people we have no way of judging or at least personally comparing to our own level of aspiration.
6. Workplace excellence is mostly self comparative. We tend to judge excellence by our own abilities, all be it heavily tilted in our own favour. There is of course dissociated and collective perceptions of excellence in the work place, more prevalent at the executive or management end of the scale.
7. Better and outstanding are sliding points on the excellence scale. They are by no means an equivalent or alternative to excellence and hence cannot be compared as the questions states. For argument sake, better and outstanding may just be the point closest to excellence. Better I would argue indicates a positive or negative approach to excellence, while outstanding could indicate an approximated result that falls in the same high end range of success as previous attempts.
In the spirit of this blog, I would like to leave you with my own number of provoking statements:
Excellence is in the mind of the comparator.
There is no ultimate measure of excellence.
Unless the data is universally empirical, excellence is progressively less tied to reality (Loosely defined to avoid another debate)
Excellence is not the secret to personal or company success (Duck for flying tomatoes)
Excellence achieves 20% result for 80% effort
