Do you have a Dream or a Goal?

We all believe it is important to set Goals. Research confirms that those who set goals do better than those who do not, especially if it is self-generated and vivid and regularly monitored. What you may find surprising is that revealing your goals widely (as commonly advised) may actually boomerang in your motivation to meet the goals.

In this article, I explore goals more fully….

When we truly tap that energy within a goal, then only can we and empower oneself. Alive within a goal is a deep purpose that needs to be understood. A desire to see a force of potential. It is only this that inspires and lifts. Ideally, a goal should be replaced by VISION - it is broader! A vision is a direction, like a sketch. When it becomes a clearly defined map, it is disabling. It is like a globe, where Greenland appears larger than Australia, but one must know that it is an illusion (Australia land mass is 3 times that of Greenland). Knowing that goals are itself a perspective, it allows one to traverse the path, with one's own experiences.Goals that give meaning to our lives is a prayer, else it is an albatross!

Research says that once you fix a goal you limit yourself. Take the case of Roger Bannister breaking the one mile run under four minutes. If you know it is under 4 minutes that sets the record in the mind and for years it will act as a constraint. Take the bumble bee. It is not aware of the laws of thermodynamic. Yet it does not know this and it flies!

Goals are Games we Play

Goals are like a 'Finance Plan' - it is a general direction. It is an assumption. It is a plan, it is a commitment to deliver. It is a path forward. it is indicative of progress. It is a journey with stretch. At all times it must be remembered that this 'goal' was based on a foundation of - beliefs, assumptions, values, knowledge and desire to succeed. As such, rigidity to one's goal becomes a burden.

Goals are like pieces on the chessboard. To many there are powerful like queens and knights. Yet, they are all wooden pieces and lie inert in the box when the game is over. All equal. All inert. All lifeless. All meaningless. Only in the game does the player give it life. This is important to remember, that the chess pieces are portent or otherwise, only as per ‘rules defined and agreed’ and by the players, not by itself.

At its best, a goal lifts us up, at its worst it imprisons us to a self-slavery, or worse mortgaged to others. This must be understood. If it becomes a 'duty' or a compulsion, then we no longer enjoy it - we do it mindlessly, as if it is the only thing we have to do. I hear many people say, “What to do? This is my duty so I do it”. I disagree - one should do it only if one enjoys it, not otherwise. when one is aware of what one is doing, fully aware and enjoying what one is doing - then there is a goal.

What is an alternate to sharp Goals?

Rather than goals focus on system instead. If you are a Sports Coach, your Goal is to win the tournament, your System is what your team does at practice each day. If you are a Writer, your Goal is to write a Book, your system is a writing schedule each day. If you are a runner, your goal is to run the marathon, your system is your training schedule each day.If you are an entrepreneur, your goal is to build a Million Dollar Business, your System is Sales and Marketing.

We are all motivated by 'wins' and get depressed by 'losses'. Have milestones along the way, so that you feel you are moving towards something each day. Keep the milestone related to each day and celebrate the small wins. Alcoholic Anonymous focus on staying 'Alcohol Free' each day! That's measurable each day and wins or losses are easily measurable. The trick is not 'avoidance' ( like stop smoking), instead it is about, 'smoke free today'.

Timothy Gallwey, in his book, 'The inner Game of Tennis' shares that we have two selves - Self 1 and Self 2. Self 1 is egoistic and tends to worry, while Self 2 is intuitive. He argues that one should allow for Self 2, and let the game be played by intuition and by the subconscious rather than with an outcome focus. And finally to discover the Self 3, a better human being.

Can we manage without Goals?

It is seductive to hang onto goals. It’s a game we humans play.

Tsu Lao, would have commented, there is no need to journey across to the shore. The shore opposite is here. The beginning exists with the end: the alpha with the omega. When one has a sense of one's full journey, through a vision of his own purpose, there is an inner light that drives him forward. he moves on his own violation – ‘phototropicity’, I think scientist call it. Then there is no need to travel: one moves only in the RIGHT path. One moves intuitively only in the correct ways.

Let me simplify: if one is a great batsman, he needs no targets! he just enjoys batting and is aware each moment. He plays to each ball, he is alive to each moment. Then he knows what to do when a ball comes through: he knows what to do with a full length, good length or short pitch - he acts without targets. He acts only with a vision and purpose and values. He steps forward or back, or sideways. He moves all at once. He is ‘here and now’ – fully aware. The spectators do not see a bowler or a batsman: they see a display of genius. Martina Navratilova, a tennis player when questioned about her age replied that ‘the tennis ball does not know that’.

For when one is in flow, the actor, and the scene disappears - just the act remains, the dancers give way to the dance. Then there is only the dance, no dancers at all. The musician and the flute disappear – just the music remains. Goals, when embraced , without pressure, lift pleasure; when taken on as 'desires' or obligations de-energise. You can life an alternate without goals: attach oneself to an inner purpose. Abandon measures and milestones. They do limit.

Goals belong there - not here! Goals lies in the future: an expectation. A phantasy. Drop Goals: here is. It is here already. It has always been here. No need for a search - that is a desire. Drop the desire, drop the source of the desire, drop goals. This world here is real, with the other: an unreal, never to be realized.

When there is no goal, one relaxes: with nothing to do, the ego disappears. The 'I' disappears. Then acceptance, grace begins.....the Bhagwan within unfolds....Drop all goals! Stay aware!

May I request you to not simply like and move on. Do join me in this conversation. What do you think about Goals?

Rules and Principles - Are they Similar?

Rules and Principles - Are they Similar?

A Rule compels you through threat or punishment to do things others deem right or good.

Principles are guides to respectful living, freedom and being open.

Why do we need rules?

Rules are put out by a community to guide collective action. We do need rules to govern our lives: to play its game. Rules provide a reference point for how a game is to be played out. Imagine a game of soccer or cricket with no rules: it would be chaos. Even in contact sports like boxing you have the queens’ rule. These rules in organisation include code of conduct, compliance guidelines or Company Policy. They are created for consistency, fairness and an opportunity for a level playing field.

Often the rules provide for a handicap, where the forces are unequal or dissimilar in terms of natural endowments. Like in the case of horse racing or golf. These are affirmative actions to create a balance. Same could be said for the reservation policy. We all like rules, it allows for a pattern of order (traffic rules), builds trust and respect around how each person can hoped to be treated. When we bend rules covertly, we signal, unfairness, arbitrary whims and fancies and we end up being distrusted. However, for some of the rich, the powerful, rules are disliked: they wish to find loopholes: through Jugaad. Imagine all of us succeeding through ‘Jugaad’: we never would.

Principles to live by

At and individual level, rules turn to personal principles. Remember, there are no eternal rules: every rule lies in its context, and needs to change once context changes. ‘The old order, changeth yielding place to the new, and God fulfils himself in many ways, lest one custom should so corrupt the world”, write Lord Tennyson.

Our Indian tradition (Dharma) asks for us to be mindful of collective discharge of duties and obligations (rights are not stressed) but also to follow one’s own path (Sva-Dharma). It emphasises that we should be a part of community; but foremost to be individual. It offers the principle of Appadharma to guide through crisis and emergencies.

Rules and Principles

Conceptually, rules come from ‘location’ in context: they are prescriptive, often stale and anachronistic. Uncalibrated, and without reform they become draconian, living in staleness, living corpses of the past, of dead traditions and rituals whose original sense and meaning have been lost to obscurity.

Rules are to be followed as a general principle but abandoned if dysfunctional. Stake not your life, but your meanings about life, said Pulin Garg, my beloved teacher and Guru. Like goals, they provide direction but are meaningless by themselves. Many of the rules of war and tradition were abandoned in the Mahabharata for instance.

Our principles are with ourselves. Do we drive across a red signal light, because others do it, or if no one is around? Are our principles relative to others or absolute? In our professional career, having competencies are important, but it is our principles that act as a ‘booster rocket’ to take our career upwards. Many careers have been ruined because this has not been understood.

In the end, like a chessboard, the rules create the game! But when the game is over, all the board pieces go back into the same box – inert, equal, same. Rules are ephemeral, principles are eternal.

Where do you sit with this? Join me and comment on post. Please avoid ‘Like’ and moving on. I would love to have you engage.

Hey, it’s Crazy and Sad!

 

Hey, it’s Crazy and Sad!

With the Covid pandemic amidst upon us, it has become a trendy to use the managerial acronym: VUCA, short for volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity, and a catchall for “Hey, it’s crazy out there! So what are the Competencies that allow for employees to be effective in such crazy times?

The law of entropy (the degradation of the matter and energy in the universe to an ultimate state of inert uniformity), a universal phenomenon plays itself out as simple moves to complex, single correlates to multiple, and order to seemingly disorder. The only constant they say is Change. In such times, I would like to share my reflections what are the critical issues employees need to manage in such VUCA times.

For one, Soothsayers are many. Truth is, no one really knows what is out there. For many, the future will not be unknown, some will make it happen. Rather, than crystal ball the impossible, I would urge we develop ‘white water rafting’ skills to navigate our current environment and work our way through the ‘next twenty yards’.

The Metaphor of White Water Rafting

The metaphor throws up many competencies relevant to our times. I shall elaborate on four.

For one, Need for Speed. Almost everything is required to be done in ambitious deadlines. During such times, one cannot cross the chasm in two leaps, and one needs to simultaneously work on both the urgent and the important. Change agents need to work hard, and smart, anticipate issues that would come up, while consolidating gains already made. At these times, discerning the 80:20 will help as well, and to avoid being trapped with ‘busyness’.

Secondly, need to manage ambiguity and uncertainty. Change by definition, means the design elements are changing. I have realised that people are open to change, provided they can be helped through moving out of their comfort zones, feel ‘safe’ in the change process, and if asked to participate. The key is to ensure regular communication at all times: milestones and clear path to destination. In addition, fair set of consistent and fair and sensitive principles, on how people would be managed in such times.

Thirdly, the change champion needs to manage personal frustration. During each day, there would be countless trough and peaks: trials and tribulations. She requires to be balanced and moderate her emotions through this period. Emotional intelligence is the act of using one’s emotion for self and the other. Frustration is the result of ‘what I love is threatened’ and hence the reactivity that follows. Ensuring that thought, emotions and actions are balanced and in harmony is key during such stressful times. Hope and curiosity are two positive emotions that exist in troubled times. Crucial to see the ‘glass half full’.

Finally, during explosive change the change agent needs to manage personal obsolescence. Managing change requires new skills: often drawing from past experience, often crafting new solutions, most often re-inventing oneself. The ability to reflect and learn and be willing to recognise one’s own limitations and lack of knowledge is crucial. Wise is he, who knows that he knows not.

What do you think? What other metaphors come to your mind?

Please Comment and Engage, and let’s start a Conversation, shall we?

Most things Divide, Few things Unite

While most imagined ideas divide us as a society, three things allow us to engage, albeit gain momentum towards collectivity: money, politics and religion.

In-group/Out-group (Apna / Paraya)

Our brains are wired to create psychological boundaries to define what’s in/what’s out. All species mark their territories: what is 'ours' and what is out there, 'not us'. What is 'us' is then a subject of bonding and relationship: the family, the commune, the property we hold, our faith and beliefs. Naturally, to engage with the notion of what is ‘ours’, boundary conditions need to be imposed, be it a tribe or a church or a panchayat.

This bonding defines and overly crystallises a strong culture of who we are and how we do things around us. Culture is essentially then what divides us from others, but allows us to unite us amongst ourselves. The culture within is the power energy within to create the inter connectedness, within, yet it is also the basis for the fragmentation with that outside itself: the 'other'.

The imagined notion creates the tradition, the rituals and the passage of what is the norm: that which is acceptable and that which is frowned. The culture flows from the dominant logic, the DNA of deep seated values over time, and the alignment of multiple infrastructure: Processes, Work systems, rituals, that allow for its prorogation.

Even within the commune, divisions and classes are created to sub-divide so that it helps each one to relate with the other. The very culture that is created meets it antithesis: the rebellious ‘sub-culture’ as its counterpoint. Paradoxically, the rebellion itself is coalesced within a structure such that the 'sub culture' itself is uniquely held. Way back in the 60’s, the US Culture gave way to the rebellious Hippie culture, the sub-set having a clear identifiable whole. Either one or its counterpoint are held in structure: both allow itself to confirm to norms.

Culture and beliefs are not similar

An important distinction to note is the term Culture and Beliefs: they are not the same. A member of a commune may subscribe to a culture, but arrive at it from a belief system quite different to another. Organisations that try to unify 'beliefs' pay the price of frustration, an impossibility. What makes Jack come to work ( perhaps job security) may be quite different to what motivates Jill (the cordial work atmosphere). Clearly, aiming for a ‘Shared Values & Culture’ with a north star of ‘Organisational Purpose’ is enough and can unite. Trying to change the individual belief systems of all of the members to a 'common one' would be fruitless and impossible.

The unknown 'out there' beyond the boundary is treated with suspicion: it is but natural that neighbouring countries would harbour distrust of each other. What is unknown, is distrusted, leading to splitting and projection. Trust in one's own commune and distrust with those outside are the two natural axis of human emotions.

Within the commune collaboration can exist and extend itself on the imagined notion: a tribal chieftain will have tribal members, wealth would be jointly owned or secured through powerful laws and a religion would emerge that would unite the commune. So to, culture within an organisation. Collaboration works best when individual and group interests are conjoint. That's the way it has been for many centuries: a world that belonged to many numerous small worlds.

So what would make one tribe engage with another?

I argue that it would be reasons of money (trade), a feeling of superiority of one's religion over another or a lust to amass more political influence: to have a larger tribe, and soon a kingdom.

It is these forces that have paved the way for global colonisation, that has paved the way for mass religious conversions and where annexation has not been possible then the next best alternate is lucrative trade. Lucrative trade is but a start, akin to the East India Company that gradually harboured ambition for political power of the territory. It is this desire for political power that has created NATO, the Euro, and international federations.

The Imagined Order

The imagined order is what is. Fromm refers to Social Character, Harari uses this term. There is no reality. The imagined order is itself transient and changes with passage of time. The imagined order creates the values and laws for that transition art period of time then it adapts to a ever changing set of values for it to cope and adapt. All values are transitionary and would change. For what is created must change, and eventually die to a new form. That is an immutable law of nature.

One astronaut wisely remarked when viewing earth from a shuttle, that the earth was just one unified body Inter related and interdependent on its parts. He could spot no boundaries. All boundaries are man-made. The man himself is a bounded self: arising from a self-notion of what is him and not him. The ego in the self creates the boundaries within man, and around man. Ego is the false self. It does not exist. It is like the shadow that lurks around but is never there. It is the Ahamkara (one of the devolutes in Sankhya Philosophy) of the fusion between Prakriti and Purush. Our projection of ego creates the incessant needs that can never be satiated. Left to ourselves, sans ego, our needs would have been adequately met.

If we are to unite we must become fully aware of the forces within that divide! Like the article picture we are all unique fingerprints - there is no other like us. Our possibilities exist to connect with all unique beings!

What forces do you believe would support us to Unite?

Please join me and Comment on the Post.

We shall Overcome

Status is online

Steve Correa

Executive Coach & HR Consultant Author, The Indian Boss at Work: Thinking Global, Acting Indian

94 articles

We shall Overcome

Soothsayers are having a field day. Has there ever been a time, when we have not been paranoid with the pace of the future? Too much is already said on COVID and the new world of work. Whether Covid or not, the world was inevitably to move from globalisation to polarisation. We saw those trends with each country focussing on ‘Made in Country of Origin’. Polarisation will strengthen (enabled and slowed by technology) but it will give way to ‘universal shared values’ and which comes from a growing consciousness, which would trigger a world of mutual trade and exchange based on the axis of Values.

Why do I say this?

Societies collectively develop Conscious Consciousness. However, even while we collectively develop our conscious intelligence, this varies from individual to individual.

Ken Wilber, a leading thinker, although controversial, posits his version of consciousness – tetra apprehension. He explains how this dynamic interaction may be happening. In this, the ‘previous moment’ is made an object for the subject in this moment, who adds to it, a ‘newness’ of creativity. As the new subject reviews the previous subject, by way of an ‘object’, it includes and enfolds the past, and creates a causality to the present, not just a strict determinism, but with the added newness, it transcend the causality, and creates new possibilities.

By way of an example, the evolution of our human brain has evolved in somewhat this manner: it contains within it, the limbic, reptilian, mammalian, even while the neo-cortex, is the more recent phenomenon. Ken asserts that the Universe has three ultimate’s: the One, the Many and the ‘creative advance into novelty’. As such all phenomenon must include and transcend, and with the newness create a new subject. Through this process, more and more order is built from more and more chaos. This newness is not a random chance, instead the Universe is winding up, with the creative advancing novelty continuing to add to the complexity and sophistication.

In this each individual is ‘growing up’ to a new consciousness. In other words, integral theory posits that evolution is not limited to the exterior forms of reality (of both matter and organisms), but it is also evident in the interior spaces of reality, i.e. development of culture and consciousness. Sri Aurobindo echoed a similar though when he dealt with the ascending planes of consciousness from matter to Satchitananda, but unlike Wilber postulates that consciousness lies outside the four quadrants and only manifests or expresses itself in them.

Communication technology has allowed for us more instant human touch and opportunity to connect. The changes that lie ahead are aligned with the eternal principles of consciousness. We shall overcome! Our path will lie not just in technological advancement, but in human consciousness as well. We will continue to progress, being even more resilient. Of that I have no doubt. I see the young ably capable to lead the future. My world is filled with hope and possibilities.

Many of you click Like and move on. I would love for you to Engage – drop a word or two. Let’s connect.

The Heart never Doubts, the Head never Trusts

Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.

Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, and fabulous?Actually, who are you not to be?

You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world.There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people will not feel insecure around you.We are all meant to shine, as children do. We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us. It is not just in some of us; it is in everyone and as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give others permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others. - Marianne Williamson

Our deepest fear is to doubt ourselves, give credence to all the belief systems we have formulated over the years: some by others, most by ourselves. Do you find yourself in a space where you have started to doubt your beliefs, or have started to believe in your doubts? Bewildered and anxious by actions and prescriptions by people around us, we have adapted self for the sake of others, and lost our own 'original face'. 

Who we really are, we don’t know.

Our doubts (when looked at deeply) contain the deepest fear of total annihilation of our being. Of death. Shakespeare once said, “Cowards die many times before their death, the valiant tastes of death but once”. Our doubts come from the use of our mind to assess the processes of our interiority. That which was a friend to be used outside to manage our world turns foe when we use it internally to assess who we are. The mind is not helpful, it leads to overthinking. The mind is always asking questions. When one answer is provided, another question comes up. The mind is a master – it seeks to stay in control.

We are perfect in every way. Our imperfections as seen by others from time to time are perfect and much required as we evolve. We need to chase no ideals, no goals, no need to be different. No need to be like the other. All we need to do is to be ourselves: we are competent, loveable and compassionate but we have forgotten to trust ourselves. 

Our mind will forever doubt, but our heart will always trust. 

When we drop the 'doing' and realise we are perfect in our imperfections we get to the destination in an instant. I would rather we thrive, rather than forever strive. A little of ‘inferiority’ is great to propel us further, but not if it becomes a complex itself.

We live with doubt, guilt and shame. These are not natural. They are imposed from outside. Stay in your Heart. Stay Trusting. Stay Aware! 

Reflections on the Lost art of Listening

Just today I listened to you,

Share your hope, Your dreams,

your screams of hurt and inattention,

your celebrations, triumphs and success

your world as you see it, expectations and disappointments

You made me realise

In this moment You matter, not I,

To listen to all, said, but you said more,

and I heard that too

and you shortened out some words,

but I could catch that too

To view your world just not in black and white

but in full colour, resplendent of who you are

not just a visual, but to catch the sound

the feel, and most of all,

that ‘lump in the throat’ that is yours

In your sharing you left me a gift

That I could be worth ‘sharing with’

To realise that I can only offer understanding

If I understood myself

While I heard my inner voice listening to you

I realise I must ask of myself

All I have to work on is I

This has been my realisation. Thank you.

Listening is not hearing. Hearing is about what is being said. Listening is being attentive to the speaker. In listening, we are tuned in to what is being said, felt, also said, also unsaid. Listening requires us to be deep connected to the other, offering total presence and with deep awareness. Listening is not about simultaneous evaluation while the speaker is speaking, instead it is about suspending judgements or biases or pre conceptions. Notice the number of times we interrupt, sometimes even rudely. Notice how often we cut across someone else’s conversation.

When one is totally attentive – meditatively attentive, one reaches a flow of connectedness with the other. Bonding through deep listening is stronger than with just words. There is deeper understanding of silence, than that which comes from words. When as coaches we LISTEN, we acknowledge, show respect, display empathy, connect, show presence, and become deeply aware.

Listening is also to be directed to oneself: Our thoughts in our mind (24x7) does not mean we are thinking – far from it! It just means that our thoughts are ephemeral presence that last momentarily, but call us to attention all the time. They have a short shelf life, but make a huge buzz in their lifetime. In fact we are bombarded with our thoughts. Like dust debris that seeps in, they are random, and directionless. They prevent focus. They de-energise over time. Through cultivated mind discipline, ie: stilling of the mind, we can graduate towards Right Thinking. (for further reading refer to Patanjali – Yoga Sutra).

On Mentorship

As I review my current station in life and my role as mentor and coach, I explore the true nature of mentorship. What role does it play and its significance? I explore childhood and the youthful years and offer context.

Initial Caregiver

As a child, post the initial period, there is a quick realisation that there is a ‘self’ and then there are others. The joyous stage of being 'in the womb' is over.

The initial object of love/hate – the primary caregiver mother, is held with ambivalence. Melanie Klein explains carefully in her object relations theory how infants using defense mechanisms to cope with anxieties from seeing objects (initially breasts) as ‘good or bad’. Klein argues for an ‘integrated ego’ – the depressive position that allows for reparation, a necessary effort in human development.

Other relationships

The child eventually comes in contact with other caregivers: the father, other elders and siblings, and the teacher. Back in the days and the joint family set-up, there was no paucity of mentors and caregivers, and a child had many opportunities to discover the axis of relatedness. There were so many under one roof and relationships with each had a very special quality, based on the relative pecking position of each member, based on an affiliative system that supported status and social hierarchy.

In India, the ‘maternal enthralment’ has more salience than the Oedipus complex. The triangle in the former is the mother, son and daughter-in-law, while in the latter is father, son, mother.

Deep within, the boy child knows, ‘I love mother, but I am not going to be like her, when I grow up’. It does not pay to be ‘momma’s boy’ or ‘sissy boy’ – he discovers very quickly, from his peer set, or early mentors at school. So what does it mean to be like father, he wonders?

Search for a Mentor

Today with large migration of labour, father may be distant either physically or psychologically. Worse, if socially and financially marginalised, he has taken to vice: alcohol or drugs or petty crime. The child is in desperate search for identification with his masculine energy. Who would be his role model? The lament of many has been that ‘my father has sired me, but he does not see me?’. Often the young boy fails to find any other ‘adult’ who is responsible, and who can act as his role model or mentor. In the absence of this he has to discover, ‘ways of thinking, feeling and acting’ from his peer set. As is said, in a kingdom of blind, the one eyed, is superior! Mentorship is not possible from peer set. Peers create tensions to confirm to group behavior: be like us!

No wonder then, any responsible act by any member is frowned by the majority. Young black children in the US were taunted as ‘Being White’ if they demonstrated discipline and commitment to a responsible path of adulthood.

If eventually the youth does find a mentor/teacher, he may end up valuing the fact that this person ‘sees me inside’ but alongside, unconsciously is also a wish, to be ‘fathered’ and to receive ‘love and affection’ perhaps not provided by the biological father. This transference is a reality, and so very often we heap our relationship with a mentor, to be ‘dad’ as well to us. This is worsened if the mentor swallows / introjects this and colludes in doing so.

What mentorship does….

A mentor helps channelize the masculine energies of the youth into creative channels. He is supported to learn discipline and bring in hard work and perseverance. A vision of the future which is compelling, and an ethical sense to distinguish right from wrong. In this there is character building and values.

In the absence of responsible mentoring the young person is left with few role models. On one hand he witnesses first-hand the excesses of an irresponsible father, who frustrated with his own life circumstances, drinks himself to a stupor, beats his wife or children, or who leaves home, with even more ‘irresponsible acts’ in mind. Instead of a mentor, the child is left with a truncated childhood, forced to hold anxieties on behalf of other adult members of the family. A child instead of seeing two loving adults ‘respect and love’ each other witness instead abuse, and havoc, even wondering at an unconscious level, ‘I wonder if I may have caused this?’ In financially weak homes, the child has to even discontinue education, resort to child labour, or early employment, in order to support the family.

It seems to me, that the privilege of man is just simply by birth. There is really no need to work for it. His ‘rights’(patriarchy) are enforced by violence if need be, and by a social system that allows for social hierarchy.

So back to mentorship….

What kind of mentors have we had during our childhood and youthful stage? How has the picture of relatedness with them influenced the way we act as mentors? How has the social context enabled or destabilised mentoring? Does the quality of 'menteeship' determine the overall quality of the mentor?

To me, then, the role of a mentor is to help support and channelise the energies of the youthful self to that point, when it is time for him to take responsibility and guide and mentor others. What do you think?

What feedback has taught me about the other

Add caption

Being an Executive Coach, I use a lot of feedback to help Client discover facets of herself: feedback is received from Peers, Family, her manager, a wider network and direct reports. In addition, I have used psychometric tools, my favourite being Hogan and EUM.

Is feedback about the Client only?

Every frame of reference is from within. In the ultimate analysis, our brains are wired for that which rewards or that which punishes: the pleasure seeking impulse drives our action (See David Rock’s work). Buddha asked us to observe our own thoughts: that which we found ourselves ‘attracted to’ or those we were ‘repulsed’ from. In short, liking or disliking is fundamental to our nature. True bliss lies in equanimity.

If then every frame of reference is personal to the observer, then as J. Krishnamurthy, avers, the observer is the observed itself. We describe others with filters, around lenses we ‘like’ or ‘dislike’. Someone would appear confident or cocky, someone slow and deliberate, while others may view this as tentative and unsure. There is no ultimate reality: only facets of that reality.

Through years of receiving feedback or working with people giving feedback I have learnt, that when one gives feedback to another, one is also providing feedback on the feedback giver itself. It points out to his/ her valuation process. What is it that the feedback values most: in its presence and in its absence.

Reflect back on feedback you received from your boss for instance or a critical stakeholder. Do you recognise that much of the feedback is from his/her lens of what is important for them to see more of/less of. We all have a perceptual canvas, from which we see. Or when you provide feedback to your direct report are you not sharing what matters to you most. Don’t get me wrong: the feedback is about YOU, but it does reveal the interface that would now be required to improve the quality of engagement. Once you recognise this phenomena, you will be able to understand people much better around you. And to cater to their specific needs to improve that engagement.

Feedback is then more about knowing others, rather than just knowing about you. In every comment, there is the said, then the unsaid, and the edited. Are you aware of all three? To every question you are asked, the questioner has already a favoured answer: are you aware of what that is.

Feedback is from expectation from the other: either met or unmet. Expectations always fall short. As long as there is expectation disappointment will follow. As truly, as how Sunrise follows Sunset. Feedback comes from a notion, a phantasy, an imagined. It is only with acceptance that expectations drop. Feedback is about, what is it, that I want to see as an image that I agree with, expect. And from you. Drop expectation, Accept.

Right from birth, we have received feedback, most of it, non-verbally. From the way we were picked up at birth, held, offered gifts and responded to. We unconsciously picked these cues and adhered. What we are, seemed not to matter: what mattered is what was acceptable in us. That lesson we learnt quickly and since then we have adapted. And we have been adapting ever since.

We have learnt to distrust: the advice, ‘Be Yourself.’ Instead, we have created a persona: a special mask for each occasion. Think about this the next time you receive or give feedback: Who is it about?

Does this resonate with your own experience? Do comment, even with a few words.

Leadership Hubris

Hubris (in Greek tragedy) refers to excessive pride or defiance of the Gods leading to nemesis. This fatal flaw, or an error in action (Hamartia) leads to the downfall of the protagonist. For example, Oedipus’s Hamartia is pride, hastiness and anger leading him to make unfortunate misjudgements. For Macbeth, it was his pride and greed. For Richard II, it is his irresoluteness, unwillingness to confront the changing situations. For King Lear it is his inability to strike a balance between his volatile temperament and arrogance. Hamlet’s faltering judgment and Othello’s jealousy. This Hamartia is built into the Hero’s character, even as he has many virtues.  The right type of the tragic hero, according to Aristotle, exists between these extremes, a person who is neither perfect in virtue and justice, nor one who falls into misfortune through vice and depravity, but by some error or frailty (Hamartia) Unlike, a villainous person, his downfall, does not arouse either pity or fear. Hamartia in its broadened context include: Chance, accident, circumstances, and the craftiness of others. Hamartia is not just a flaw in character; but an entire gamut of tragic happenings.

On one hand there are several instances of corporate scams and shenanigans that have led to the downfall of many Corporate Leaders, some who have  served time in prison, and some under who investigation is in progress. Some have fled the country to escape retribution. They hardly arouse pity or fear, although at one point they led ‘king size’ lives, were celebrities and walked proudly in the corridors of power.

In Indian tradition, the role of a leader is to be a Rajshri, a combination of king and a Rishi. When he serves his duty zealously, but forgets to be inclusive and all embracing, he is potentially, exposing his personal Hamartia, with hubris bound to follow leading to nemesis.

I will stop here. Are you able to spot Corporate leaders with Hamartia?

Why the Study of Humans is different?

I have spent over 30 years in the field of HR and involved with Human Process workshops over 20 years. Herein are my reflections on distinctive nature of the function and extended to humans in general.



Unlike most functions, HR does not have a unified coded theory that allows guidance to what one needs to do when influencing and impacting people. It borrows eclectically from many fields: Psychology, Sociology and also from sciences: Maths, Finance (black scholes for ESOP’s) Industrial Engineering, Neuroscience (incentives for manufacturing), etc. It does have a set of rules around compensation benchmarking, and principles around OD designs and learning interventions, but at broad principle levels only.

Not that I am saying, this is a setback. Not at all. It is for this reason that it is fascinating.

Unlike Science which is causal and can be verified by experiments, people practice is different: it is an Art, in service of Business and a Craft – one needs to learn the ABC’s.If you read, 7-8 chapters of any text book, the subsequent chapters become easier. That’s because once a good foundation has been established, subsequent chapters become easier to follow and relate to.

In HR, or to be more broader, in the study of human process, subsequent studies gets even more complex, more astounding, even bewildering at times. In behavioural science as you go deeper, newer insights emerge. I am amused when some amateur Leader remarks, “people are simple: either this or that, or to be seen, by this X axis and that Y axis, as if one or other quadrant make up the entire world. Even worriedly, when someone says, ‘I am an ENTJ (MBTI Type) and he is and ISFP, etc. Interestingly, some even use MBTI as a basis to hire people, the ultimate abomination of ignorance.

Models are akin to maps. The map is not the territory. The maps can be a mere sketch or highly detailed, and as you go deeper, the embellishment is awesome in what unfolds, as if every texture, tone, dimension and element unfold to the keen eye. Almost like Dhyana (full concentration) and Dharana (contemplation) when they come together provides for a wider perspective. In a highly structured analytical world, demand is placed on causality: do this, and the expected phenomena is observed. Every effect has a cause. Not so with human beings, who do not respond to causality. Science is great for interrogation of the material world, but not for the inner world of discovery.

Human behaviour is a function F (I, C), where behaviour is a function of the identity and Self in the location or role. The interaction of these four create multiple forces that enable creative forces, or which leads to mortgage. Identity and its movement, through ‘being and becoming’ is the play of the private self and the public self, while location and roles offers resonance and dissonance and often normativeness around role taking, prescribed by self (thru self injunctions) or by community (a kind of Social Mirror).

As a result no two individuals feel alike, think or act alike. Yet, at the gestalt of all evocations, one sees an array of similar emotions: love, disgust, joy, but the tone, notes, and context, and intensity varies. For example, a woman who discovers her husband is having an affair may not necessarily respond with the expected “ feeling betrayed”, as a large segment would obviously do. A plethora of possible responses can also exist:
Good for him, off my back.
I’ll do the same and get my revenge
That poor thing (referring to the new girlfriend)
I could not care. I like the comfort I am in, so it’s cool

And so on….

The point is, there is no causality: were it so, it would be a science. It would be predictable, made repeatable and lend itself to correlates of validity and reliability quantification.

Another interesting dimension of the world of Human Process study is that learning happens when the events happen: there is no prefix or suffix. The prefix or preface does not accurately reflect the phenomena ahead, nor can the suffix, be the real experience of the event. At best it would be a ‘remembered memory’ not the ‘experienced memory’. Daniel Kahneman, writes quite a bit on this for those interested. All we can recall is the remembered memory, and not the actual experience itself.

Learning takes place within the gestalt of the phenomena. The micro, macro and alter ego looms largely and ever present, exorcising its will over the event. This is the psychodrama, often exaggerated by the ‘shadow’ of the protagonist.

At a phenomenological level multiple substratum’s emerge: initially defined as a problem (eg ‘I am stressed’), seen at the interpersonal level “I have a problem with my boss’), then reflectively, emerges the intra-personal level of self-introjects (‘I can see a pattern of my behaviour as to how I respond to authority’), introjections , splits and projection, of transference and counter transference.

At a intra psychic level (both a sum of personal and collective unconscious), one comes to gain insight of one’s own perceptual filters, and sees the canvas in quite a different way: the observed is the observer himself. Else, there is no observation.

Even deeper is the intra-existential level, the Atmic self; the ‘Brahmi Sthithi’, the true intelligence of the self that sees beyond the absorptive nature of the senses, that is beyond attachment, desire, anger, bewilderment and ignorance and wherein misery awakens. (refer Bhagwad Gita for more on this). Thus, there are multiple depths of exploration.

No two individuals are alike: there is no comparison possible: no better or worse. Each is unique, so how do you compare two unique things – on what parameters? The choice of the criteria’s itself is subjective bias: that is the fallacy. Yet we are always comparing, contrasting, role modelling, aligning with….

No wonder Socrates said, ALL I KNOW IS THAT I KNOW NOTHING.

Please join in and Comment

Quo Vadis?

What is common to humans with other living creatures?

We are common in that we have a desire to Express and Relate. What distinguishes us significantly from most primates is that we have a well-developed neo-cortex, that allows us to reflect ‘back’, and imagine our world Forward, envisioning our future, our possibilities. With this ability for self-reflexivity and imagination, we cannot just see ‘objects’ out there, but we can work with abstractions, imagined worlds, and imagined ideas.

We have compelled our environment to bend before the power of our minds: the discovery and use of fire, the wheel, the steam engine, printing press, the logic of digital ‘0 and 1’ to further AI, neural networks. We see further, and mysteries bend before our persistent gaze. We now have the capacity to explain our world in mathematical equations that would not take even two pages. This has made us proud.

We live in an age of compelling ‘ideas’ which has gripped our imagination. We have found ways to connect and engage with our ideas. We have discovered ways to connect both with ‘head and heart’ and even join in ‘concerted action’.

The future will allow us to take even further leaps: to co-create on ideas, and to combine thinking, feeling and action. If I know what you are thinking, feeling and modes of acting and you know mine, it would be possible to ‘connect us two’ – to create a third force. I am intrigued that married couples after decades of marriage almost seem to ‘think, feel and act’ almost alike, a kind of synchronicity, if you like. Neuro scientist have already discovered that we have empathy ‘mirror neurons’  that help us stay connected with each other. Despite all the selectively ‘violent’ reports we hear on media of looting, arson, riots, during a crisis, the fact is that humans are primed to act with reciprocity (Caldini / Peter Bloom) and we have a moral and ethical mental structure that allows us to help out each other. In other words, we are a ‘relational and connected world’ and we wish to find commune, both physically and in terms of well-being. Like hedgehogs on a cold wintry night, we huddle for ‘touch’ yet when we come two close get hurt with the ‘spines’ and keep a ‘safe distance’ as well. Our world vacillates between Existential Aloneness and Existential Connectedness.The first step would lie in our evolving to 'CyberHumans'.

We wish to be distinctive from the other, but when we do, we end up comparing: failing to realise, we are unique – that there is no one like us. The world then becomes an Arena and a means to demonstrate our prowess. When we live in communes, we feel stifled and restless, and find the commune suppressing, and we wish to break out – find our freedom. This pendulum swing back and forth – to be a part of and be apart, is characteristic of our times.  

Yesterday, in my article ‘What lies beneath’ I referred to collective unconscious. We are in the age of what Fromm would describe as Social Character, which is Collective Consciousness.  In another article, a day earlier, I referred to ‘East meeting West’ as it is now at a point, when from both sides one discovers – the unknown and starts to grasp at the possibility, that somethings will be unknowable.  

These COVID times have reminded us, that we were the VIRUS that was spreading, destroying our planet. It was nature’s way of resetting the balance.  For many, who have not lost themselves in ‘planned and unplanned zoom calls, webinars’, the uncertainty has allowed us the time and space to reflect on our lives, our livelihood, our relationships, and what is the real source of our joy.  

I aver from our current world of globalisation, the inevitable next step would be polarisation (building firewalls around roles and boundaries for ourselves, however, in some form slowed down, yet on the other hand enabled by digitalisation), leading to alliances for mutual performance and achievement. From there to ‘connecting with meaningfulness and shared intimacy. From there a leap….into holding simultaneity and  multiplicity, but that is for another post.

I  wholeheartedly welcome your comments. Please do join me.  

What lies beneath?

We feel proud that we have unravelled the mysteries of the smallest matter and can explain the laws of the Universe. Yet, the ‘mystery’ of Self within remains elusive. Yet, most of our actions are driven unconsciously. Carl Jung said: “Men’s task is to become conscious of the content that press upward from the unconscious.” The Unconscious is that part of the mind which is inaccessible to the conscious mind but which effects behaviour and emotions. That’s so with the Individual mind – the the Personal Unconscious.


Is there something as a Collective Unconscious? Carl Jung avers that this is the aspect of mind that is not shaped by experience but genetically inherited and common to mankind – something akin to an inherited hard disk. According to Jung, they contain archetypes or universal primordial images and ideas. One form of ‘awareness’ of the collective unconscious is through our dreams, and explored through the design of ‘Social Dreaming Matrix’.


For a nation, the ‘Kaal’ (time), ‘Desh’ (region) and ‘Patra’ (the inherent characteristics) influence the ‘Conscious and the Personal Unconscious as also the Collective Unconscious’. Therefore, it is not just our experience, but the ‘hard disk’ as well that became the ‘ground for how we ‘Think, Feel and Act’.


Through exploration in Human Process Labs and Group Relations Conferences, I have discovered these insights for myself:


1. Collective Conscious is a reality.


2. We unconsciously carry ‘past baggage’


3. I do not see it, does not mean it does not exist.


4. What I see, also what I choose NOT to see, is significant.


5. There is no ‘slip of tongue’ or ‘forgetting’ or ‘coincidence’.


6. Insights come laced as ‘finished products’ yet also contain with it messiness.


7. Our narrative of ourselves or the other can shape ‘group think’.


8. Not just intergroup exploration, but systems level exploration is to be explored.


9. We feel we are being objective yet is always judgement and assessment.


10. Hierarchy exists in the mind.


11. Not just the other, the self can also cause itself to be ‘othered’.


12. Conflict does not have to be scary.


13. Aggression can be explicit, or covert as in ‘holding back and being silent’.


14. Being silent, can impact me and the other.


15. In staying silent, not confirming our ‘Ayes’ or ‘Nays’ we are unconsciously colluding with the system.


Dear Reader, I would love to hear your reflections to this article and any incidents or comments you may wish to share.

Will East meet West?

Swami Chinmayananda explains three universal laws which I guess those with a scientific mind would agree with

· Every effect is on account of a cause

· The effect is the cause itself in different forms

· If one removes the cause, there is nothing that remains

What is Consciousness?

Consciousness, the state of being aware, is a least understood phenomenon. The dominant western thought is that biology and chemistry combine to create the inexplicable awareness, an emergence if you like. There is much to be considered for this line of thinking, the parts are never great than the whole (Holonic principles), and emergence creates ‘new’ forms, that defy logic, as can be seen in neural networks.

Quantum Mechanics and multi-universe have eroded the notion, long popular that the world is material. On one side you have the inflation theory and ‘big bang’ to explain the origins, on the other Michio Kaku firmly believes unwaveringly on String Field theory.

The study of black holes and singularity confirm that ‘total information’ is never lost. While we have discovered and confirmed the Higg’s boson, we are disappointed nothing else was found!

This brings us to the startling fact: What we see is not what is. Mind you, It is not false or a deception – it is illusory. Akin to mistaking a rope for a snake.

What we are discovering…thru Science

If quantum mechanics is to be believed, then the observer himself is entangled with the observation. Jiddu K, shared, ‘The observed is the observer’. It is believed that all (‘particles’ exist when observed, but are waves when unobserved) are in superpositions. In order words, they have the dual property of ‘exist/non-exist’ (Schrodinger), and each (there are exceptions) has a unique spin (one aspect). In the double slit experiment, the Copenhagen experiment explains ‘wave collapse’ when measurement occurs, and in their potential state are infinite possibilities. For it is a fact that the observer is also entangled with the observed world.

They take on mass with acceleration, given their energy potential as Einstein famously clarified – E=MC2 . No doubt, Einstein was troubled with the issue of non-locality (wherein one state knows the other, even if separated by large distances or time). While Einstein alluded to ‘space time’ being warped, he confirmed that both were illusions.

Where I am going with this is that quantum processing generates physical events and ‘illusionary’ reality with the physical world just being an interface.

Thus at both levels: micro and macro as we peek we recognise that there are unknowns that can be known, but there exists too, the unknowable. I am fascinated with ‘existing knowledge giving way’ – like Euclid to Newton, to Einstein to Quantum, even as we search for the Holy Grail – the Grand Unified Theory.

Thus, some truths (or at least knowable truths) are made true by the abstract structure of the world, the pattern in which fundamental properties and relations are instantiated by fundamental particulars, irrespective of the identity of the properties, relations, and particulars. Haecceitism argues properties have a primitive identity – a ‘thisness’. Again, quidditism argues that the fundamental properties are ‘quiddities’ (or suchness).

Do I understand all this?

No one real does….’Nobody understands (quantum mechanics)’ said Richard Feynman. I am excited with modern scrutiny by science: West started with matter, and discover, matter does not exist in the form we think. East started with Consciousness. Kipling will be proven wrong once again – on ‘The East is east and West is west….never shall the twain meet’

East has clarified on brahman (ultimate reality), maya (illusion), trigunas (basic primary particles that constitutes all. With mooldhara (complete balance disturbed), Prakriti (Energy) enjoins with Purush (inert) to create its 24 evolutes. The fundamental difference is that Consciousness precedes all, Not an outcome of.

Sabda, according to Nyaya philosophy are drstartha (perceptible objects) and adrstartha (imperceptible objects). Indian philosophy explored realms both of the physical and metaphysical worlds. Indian science has excelled in all areas thousands of years before the West grasped this. She invented the Number system, the Zero was invented by Aryabhatta and the decimal system in 100 BC. In the 5th Centaury Bhaskaracharya correctly calculated time taken for earth to orbit the sun. Gravitation was known before Newton. The value of pi was first calculated by Budhayana, who went on to explain the now well-known Pythagorean Theorem. Algebra, Trigonometry and Calculus from Sridharacharya in the 11th centaury. Ayurveda, is the earliest school of medicine known to humans, consolidated by Charaka 2500 years ago. Surgery was introduced by Sushruta 2600 years ago. Navigation, originating from the Sanskrit word, Navgatih, originated from sea travel across the Sindhu river.

The first university was established in Takshashila in 700 BC, and students included those from other countries as well. Sanskrit, originating in India, is the mother of all European languages All of this has been possible, as India had a matured civilisation in the Harappan culture in the Sindhu valley 5000 years ago, while most cultures in the world were still nomads and forest dwellers. More recently India was the 4th country to almost land a vehicle on moon.

Why East has not delved on the brain?

I have often wondered why no emphasis in East over 7000 years explaining the brain (neuroscience) in great details. Our Sages simply treated the brain as a ‘device’ – a room, if you like to enter and jump out thru a window. It was at best a launchpad. No need to spend time to examine the ‘room’ describe it, arrange it, categorise it, that was simply not the point. Out there lay the opportunity for delving into fundamental science. Through Dharana (concentration) Dhyana (contemplation) Samadhi (dissolution). Patanjali writes with the precision of a scientist. He does not form hypothesis, he states facts you will experience. He writes for many ‘minds’, each of the chapter will have a different appeal to different temperaments. He assures that the ‘science of the material world’ would also be available, but that’s not the point to. His goal is to guide you to ultimate dissolution – being one with reality.

Winding down….

Back to Swami Chinmayananda: who clarifies that the manifest arises from a universal source, ie Consciousness, that is singular, all that exists is the plurality of the source itself, and it is life itself (read energy force) that creates all, which once removed renders the effects non-existent.

I hope dear reader this article has created a curiosity in you on the wonder of Science and Spirituality. I hope you will explore this yourself more fully.

The outer world lends itself to Science, the inner world to search through Yogic means. In the end, we strive towards one thing: to discover the grandeur!

How Society Shapes Our Behaviour

Social Construction of Behaviour – impact of Kaal(time), Desh(region) and Context

For millennials, humans have lived in tribes, communities and societies. Their behaviour has been evolved to best support their survival, against predators – both animals and other tribes, for resources, and for better reproductive success.

Ethologist Michael Chance, studies higher primates and humans and describes two basic modes in which a community is organised and the resultant social interaction: Agonic and Hedonic. Read through the next two paragraphs to determine where do you Indian-ness leans towards?

The Agonic (with anchor in Power) mode is based upon the collective’s perception and experience of threat, power and anxiety, and the group is essentially a source of defence against external threat, call it in-group / out-group. (Apna/Paraya).The intra-group relations are marked by mutual defensiveness and the group has to develop ways to ensure that hostilities are controlled and contained. This could also include submission or appeasement. This would be basis the assessment of the adversary and their ‘relative holding potential’ compared to their own. This results in the creation of the pecking order, compliance and threat of punishment. The bonding is an alliance against a potential enemy. All relationships are determined by the relative positions of people in the hierarchy.

Consequently, the group is organised hierarchically around that individual who has the maximum fighting capability and the intra-group relations are marked by mutual defensiveness. Thus aggression is a valued attribute, and would determine the status and entitlements. Leaders here are expected to be decisive, lead from the front, and courageous.

The Hedonic (with anchor in prestige) mode is based upon playful catching up of attention, prestige and mutual support. Consequently, the focus shifts from negative attention (being potentially harmful) to positive attention (being competent and potentially helpful).Qualities that would enhance social approval such as beauty, intelligence, talents, special skills would be held in higher esteem. The group is seen as a source of mutual confidence and the intra-group relations are marked by interdependency, rather than defensiveness. These communities are characterised by ‘egalitarian values’ – it is more affectional. Maximising positive attention is the goal here. Intimacy, personal relationships are encouraged, and aggression is discouraged in this mode. Focus is on harmony instead, and good relationships. In somewhat similar vein, Gert Hofstede*1 refers to this as ‘Masculine and Feminine Cultures’ and confirms India is moderate on Masculine (the elaboration of which is another post by itself :)). Leaders get pay-off in 'giving/gifting' as such acts earn him a reputation of being good.

Such groups are organised around the individual who has maximum prestige which is derived either through altruistic acts or demonstration of superior skills. The leader is one who emerges with the maximum prestige, which is acquired by acts of altruism or through demonstration of a superior skill. Leaders value dialogue, consensus, and harmony. Much time is spent on building alignment.

Quiz: So what mode does India lean towards?

To cut to the chase, Ashok Malhotra basis his EUM empirical research says that the data (on Indian Managers) reveals that “My inclination is towards hedonic mode, and hence the best I can do to survive and prosper is to modify myself and embrace the agonic mode”*2.

You can readily appreciate that one aspect of India is a ‘collage’ of both traditional and modern influences. There are two simultaneous modes operating in India: primary axis 'relational' and secondary 'competitive' influenced by western education, and 'aping' the west. These create dilemmas in managing polarities, contradictions, and paradoxes. Also, there is 'No one India' - it differs from regions, to class, and income levels. Also, depending on which 'varna' one identifies with, how one is expected to behave in situations may also vary. At Corporate level, the Nurturant Task Leader, or 'Karta' is the most accepted and effective mode. I argue that the 'recommended western leadership models' from the West do NOT work in India, (a subject for another post).

There are several other facets of Indian-ness. Do share if you have found this useful and I will be encouraged to build on other aspects of the dualities, polarities, and paradoxes that constitutes the Indian culture.

Please Like, Comment or Share.

Citations: *1https://www.andrews.edu/~tidwell/bsad560/HofstedeMasculinity.html

*2 Ashok Malhotra, Indian Managers and Organisations – Boons and burdens, Routledge, page 183

Leadership in Crisis

In the story of ‘Odyssey’ one learns about Odysseus is shipwrecked and marooned, while powerful young men in his community back home, run riot in gluttonous, unrestrained and wanton behaviour. The story steers to an undeniable fact, that the quality of life in a human community (and this includes business organisations) depends on the quality of its leaders.

In a democratic world (which includes Business Organisations owned by shareholders) we have the responsibility to choose our leaders with care. We should stay vigilant to ‘camera facing’ leaders who are adroit at managing their ‘charisma’ even while paying scant attention to their leadership style.

In Indian tradition, there was a Yuga (a period) when no leader (king) was necessary. However, when ‘evil forces’ grew, Indra was selected by the Devas to lead them – the first King. What followed, was the coding of Dharma. In today’s time, with our world losing its way to ineffective leadership in crisis, plummeting into dubious practices, and some outright scams and financial impropriety, now more than ever before is the need for the emergence of the Corporate Rishi – a ‘Rajarshi’ Leadership style for our times.

Rajarshi leadership style has been advocated in Indian thought for centuries. The modern mind is too egoistic to admits it illness. Modern day leadership styles and definitions flow largely from Academia, researched with WEIRD participants (western educated, industrialised nations, rich and democratic), which by itself is non-inclusive and undemocratic. Worse still, the notion, ‘sauce for the goose, must be sauce for the gander’ and its belief that it has universal application. We seem to be headed on a slippery slope of ‘technological advancement, with diminishing consciousness’.

All is fair in love and war, is not a mode for Rajarshi Leadership. Our own tradition offer us insights on Appadharma in times of crisis and emergency as well. In a crisis, we need to be even more guarded to protect a few citadels.

For one, Values stand out the most. I applaud a few companies who have gone out of their way to do what is right (increments, continued focus on training, etc) while the majority have responded to the imperatives: down-sizing, lay-offs, work beyond office hours, etc.

The espoused ‘we value our people’ flies against the practiced and the experienced. Employees are ‘burning out’ at home, working longer, are far more stressed, while bosses continue to intrude and violate boundaries of personal time. In some states, even the authorities have colluded to ‘suspend’ labour laws, rather than intelligently modify them. When one suspends the social contract (especially legal contracts), both sides act ‘lawlessly’.

When there are ‘no rights and duties’ from both sides it gives way to use of power, and legitimate authority is undermined. Indeed it is said that ‘The wise build bridges, the foolish build dams’. I leave you to judge which category of actions determine your behaviour as a leader.

The time now is for an Organisation (as a community) to show its humane face, sensitivity, compassion and care. In this leadership is crucial to steer towards the North Star, a code of unflinching principles and values, despite everything. Adaptability is enhanced when there are ‘core’ principles rather than hampered by it. We expect Individuals to get on with their ‘leadership development’ hoping that transformation will emerge from this, yet fail to provide the scaffold to support the transformation within the organisation. The reason that SEALs and other fighting forces (always working in crisis) are so successful, because they train to do just three things: Move, Shoot, Communicate, and they spend a lifetime skilling themselves in all art forms of these. They are individually brilliant, but they hunt in packs! That’s the difference. How can leadership provide the inspiration to ‘fight in formation’ during a crisis? For me, I see new warriors - and they are actually quite different to the folks in black suits! I see warriors in everyday places, in different shapes and sizes who act with leadership. May the tribe increase!

What we need now is humility, compassion, and a newer kind of response. The ‘normal’ has changed. It would be helpful for leaders to remember, that ‘normal leadership’ will be irrelevant to our current times. I am hoping we act as trustees to leave a richer legacy for those that follow us. For each of us, we will be remembered for not just what we did, but what we failed to do.

The Illusion of the Self

Who are you?

These Covid days have left me reflecting on the question.

All responses to the first inevitably relate to ‘my possessions’ (such as titles,), my ‘labelling of myself’ through reductionism (intelligent, funny, sensitive) or in ‘relationship’ terms in society(father, son, spouse, Consultant, etc). In some regions, with leanings more towards Individualism or collectives, the descriptors are more ‘individualistic’ and in others more ‘relational’. Are these responses truly responding to Who are You, or, What are You? It seems the latter, as these are our ‘attachments’(in Indian philosophy) or our ‘identification’ (as Gurdjieff calls it) or ‘Identity’ or Personality as the West would call it.

Many years ago I attended a three day ‘Art of Living’ and we worked in pairs, each one taking turns to respond to this one question: Who are you? repeated once again after every response. It became clear, that I was subsisting, my notion of What I am, to offer a responses to “Who am I’. In a ten day Vipassana programme, I came to an awareness, that I am not just my body, nor am I my thought. Both are identified by me as ‘I’. The wisest of Indian sages, maharishi Ramana, has advised, ‘Simply ask the question, Who is asking, Who am I?’

In a world, so filled with etching out an existence, combating innumerable adversities and challenges, we experience what Buddha calls ‘Dukkha’ (or sadness). One sees the world in one which when you delve deeper springs up with existential aloneness. There seems to be no release from this ‘existential pain or angst’ that always confronts us.

Some more fortunate to reflect ask themselves: What is the meaning of Life, what is my purpose? Does being born, offer me a purpose for my existence. Who is there to respond to this question? With our birth to a family, region, one is usually provided a 'religion' as well.

We chase after ‘solutions’ and are offered a ‘belief system’ in return. Each of these belief systems (call it Religion if you like or a spiritual philosophy) have a dogged conviction, that it has discovered the Truth (the Holy Grail). One would claim, that “I am the Way, I am the Light’ another ‘There is no god, but God’ or another may claim, “I am That’. Often unsatisfied with one ‘belief system’ we switch to another. For in a belief, the truth is not known: it is to be believed. You are reading this post: that is ‘known’ to you, but you have to believe or have belief in something, of which you are unsure. This includes a belief in God, in Life after death, and so have you. It is a belief.

Some belief systems would have you ‘enhance the self’ – to work on your SELF, (an Ego if you like with moral and conscience) so that you are a ‘responsible citizen. It holds the assumption that if Man was left to himself, ‘natural forces’ would unleash itself, as Hobbes would share that would create jungle like chaos. Thus, Social and Moral laws and Governance is a must.

Some belief system rejects the SELF, and wishes for it to be dissolved. It holds the notion that Ahamkara (the ego) needs to be dissolved with the viveka of Buddhi, to get in touch with a Mahat (intelligence) the ‘first born’ of the co-joining of Purush (inert) and Prakriti (dynamic energy) to recognise that we are finally, divinity and part of the cosmic Brahman (Sankhya Philosophy).

This tradition rejects the notion of the western concept of Self, and confirms that true reality is not possible because of Avidya (ignorance) of failing to recognise the transitionary nature of life: Asmita (ego), raga (attachment), Dvesha (aversion) and Abhinivesh (fear of death). True bliss is when one is in touch with Sat(truth) Chit Ananda – the ultimate bliss of self. In the absence of this, there is suffering and pain.

There are many other schools of philosophy..... and 'pundits, priests, and God-Men' to explain this to you.

Replete in any school is the striving to move away from ‘suffering, and pain’ and seek ‘happiness’. Some seek it in materialism, some spiritually. With so many philosophies, which one steers to the truth? Indian philosophy avers that “The Truth is One, but the Wise speak of it in many ways’. What is Truth was a rhetorical question Pontius Pilate asked of Christ, and promptly then condemned him to be crucified.

What is Truth is a question that has been on our lips, and our thoughts over the millennial of man’s existence.

It is the right for each one of us to choose a philosophy by which we affirm our being and our lifestyle, even if it includes ‘Carvaka’ (Atheism) , Monotheism or Polytheism.  Any path will do as long as one is steadfast. For this, we also have to ‘live’ with the others ‘right to choose’ else we may label them as infidels, heretics, non-believers, and sinners.

Comparison of one with another is like a game of cricket and baseball: there are many similarities, but so what? They are two different games. So why compare? In the end, each one of us have the responsibility to journey on our own, within, to explore our notion of Truth. For most, the ‘busyness’ of life is more important and these questions seem interesting, but not practical.