f.art
  1. Don’t do anything today if it can be done tomorrow

  2. Don’t do it, if someone else can do it better…claim that you can do better things especially when those better things are not needed

  3. Don’t do simple tasks, while it is cheap and efficient… Start trying only after it gets dynamic, complicated, costly and inefficient

  4. Don’t try doing anything alone…and coordinate with at least two busy others, around when/where/how to do, till everyone gives up trying, even to coordinate

  5. Start with principle 1 on the new task, and claim expertise in multi-tasking

 

Addendum: there was a sixth principle in contention that all above 5 principles work only with tasks that have a compelling reason/objective/vision for gen-z. from my experience reasons are immaterial ab initio.

Advertisements

5 gen-Z task management principles

Quote
cognoise

2 Research Proposals Submitted

Rolling Up Stories for Decision Making

What is the problem you want to research?

Experiences of individuals and groups within organizations become persistent within cultures in the form of narratives. These narratives augment business intelligence to decision making in several contexts including mergers and acquisitions, strategy making, work process changes, employee engagement, and investments among many other possibilities. Narratives are generally not fully formed, take multiple forms and signified differently by people.

This research seeks to develop methods for narrative listening, collecting, representing for specific decision making needs.

Why is it of interest? For whom?

Complexity science offers the necessary theoretical background, and there are open source methods already developed for such purposes that can be applied. This is of significant interest to industry as more and more independence is given to employees delivering work products in a distributed fashion. Industry’s ability to use the narratives for decision making has to be scalable and provide foresight (not hindsight)

Utility of the research will be for internal business management including R&D, HR and Management

By knowing this, who will this affect?

· Management, Employees and Stakeholders

Organization structure changes and Business outcomes

What is the problem you want to research?

Every organization undergoes periodic reorganization, involving hierarchical and portfolio changes. Intent behind such changes is better internal operations or market alignment leading to better value to the shareholder. Assumptions of an exact correlation between cause (Organization structure changes) and effect (business impact) are not systematically correlated. Once a correlation is made, management can use the framework to propose future changes and predict business impact of a change.

Why is it of interest? For whom?

Changes are frequent and impact of a change is not closely monitored. Questions that this research hopes to answer are

1. Can business impact be measured clearly? Even fuzzy terms like customer happiness, employee job satisfaction, shareholder value?

2. Can organization changes be quantified?

Cost Benefit Analysis ranging from

· Cost of reporting structure changes in systems

· Creation/adoption/training needs on working with the new structure

· Actual impact on business outcomes

These call for quantitative primary research across industries and size of organizations.

By knowing this, who will this affect?

· Leadership/Management teams

· Shareholder

Standard
cognoise

KM for Karnataka Power

I had the opportunity to face a bunch of engineers from Karnataka Power Corporation, which generates most of Karnataka’s power from thermal and hydro sources.

Engineers ranged from Executive category, senior, junior to assistants who are newly commissioned.

The challenges for my session were 2

1. Time given to me was 3 hours post lunch

2. My session was immediately after the regular SECI model dump by non-km practitioners

I used the following model to introduce methods that I have been using over the past 4 years.

Once the framework was clear, we took the most common problem that old systems that still operate always face.

“To repair or replace” and each group’s take on “how to reduce maintenance cost”.

Last part of my session was a regular Social Network Stimulation

Where KM ideas were solicited from the 3 teams, for convenience sake we formed groups on

1. idea collection (how will we know what ideas our fellow employees have on reducing maintenance cost),

2. group action (once we know the ideas, what do we do with them and how),

3. and management support (how can as management we sustain the first 2)

Group formation itself was across hierarchy, plants, departments and roles, so enough variety here.

This was followed by a few rounds of Ritual Dissent which everyone loved.

In the end 2 executive engineers took ownership of the ideas to take forward within their plants.

All in all a decent outcome for a slow afternoon…

Standard
cognoise

What should sebi do with the settlement-fees?

Both the Reliance Group companies have gone to SEBI for settlement using what is called a “consent process”. The Anil Ambani marketing group action is in full swing to do the following

  1. Make case for this “internationally accepted norm” for settlement, in which process we will never get to know the whys of the case
  2. Message that the group has not lost any of its financial/market muscle to do what it does as against what is on the media

In complexity theory there is this concept of “powerful stranger”, one whose action can actually trigger disproportionate downstream impact. In this case it happens to be the “anonymous” complaints received by SEBI on violation of insider trading regulations by the group companies back in 2007 and mis-representation of investments. Interesting thing is, the regulation is in the complicated domain and denies the complex nature of how markets operate. And the current system is taking a non-complex action response through the consent route.

Should SEBI not install probes that act from the field than try to regulate under covers and a fishy process? If the money whatever sum earned by the directors’ trades is never going to reach the investors who lost an equal sum (actually we will never know who), at least the SEBI fine should be spent on installing the probes.

Anyways the markets are for real and it seems to have dumped the stocks, currently trading at 6% lower than the Friday close.

Standard